J. Balčikonio pažiūros į paveldėtąją leksiką

LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE SANDARS STUDY OF MAI LITHUANIAN LINGUISTICAL QUESTIONS, XXVI (1987) VYTAUTAS VITKAUSKAS J. BALČIKONIS’S VIEW ON THE INHERITED LEXIC Prof. J. Balčikonis has not specially set out these views, as well as many other theories he was guided by: they need to be collected grain by grain. We must start with memories. In 1954, during various vacations, I wrote down more than 200 words and presented them to the professor. These notes were examined, and a few days later the professor made remarks, which words are good, which LKŽ are unnecessary- ?. What was not learned from the parents (what triviality: krd.utuvie rūda trivkuma), it was inappropriate and bad: "For the dictionary, for science, the words and forms that come from the country houses are important." In the summer of 1954 I had to be near Žvirgždaičiai, from there I also wrote something. In the autumn everything was submitted to the professor. He puts one leaf aside and says, “Did you really hear? It's a different kind of word and differently pronounced." We talked about the noun „tundra“: the elderly man from Suvalkai certainly said „tundra“, it was different from Žemaitija’s „dudra“; I found this spelling very strange, so I wrote it as a news. “In the village, people learn everything from the radio and newspapers, they tell it for the time being, but this is not dialect wealth, not learned from parents”. This is what he has been learning all the time in the special course of lexicography in the autumn semester of 1953: historically valuable words and forms used since ancient times (i.e. inherited). The lexicographer A. Lyberis recalls that Prof. J. Balčikonis always rejected leaflets even with such novel sentences (1985.V.28). This attitude to dialectal lexicon the Professor maintained throughout his life. The first two volumes of the first edition of the LKŽ show this — here you can not find dialect novelties, temporary, momentary facts. This approach is evident from the Professor’s speeches at the dissertation defences. In RR 1 299 it is directly stated that hospitāla, stikliņa, dienpinigiai, juodlubės, līdzsvara, savūmokslė, savimeila, p. 300 afitspauda, filma, kombdina, p. 301 krautuvė, pamoka, stalius are not words of the Mituva river dialect, but words obtained from the outside and not suitable for the analysis of the dialect morphological structure. The song also has a few similarities with the song "I'm Not Alone" by the same singer, but the differences are that the lyrics are different, and the song's vocals are different. For example, the usual words for this dialect are motulė, motka, but the word motina is more foreign to it, and it is pronounced differently: mdcina, mocina, motina, etc. The reader will notice other things that are foreign to the dialect." J. Balčikonis prepared two volumes of LKŽ and provides the inherited lexicon used by at least several dialect generations (only minor exceptions are army —LKZ I 252, tar —LKZ I 253). 1 Mūsų kalba, 1985, No. 1, p. 28. 13 111, biblia —LKZ I 657, cefitas —LKZ II 7, cémentas —LKZ II 7, fabrikaritas Gs —LKZ II 847, pheasant Gs „taks paukštis“ —LKZ II 848, ferma Slm —LKZ II 849; other exceptions at least dnstolis Mrj —LKZ I 124 and dntstols LKZ I 141 „teismo tarnautojas“, dtmusas „fotografija“ Smn —LKZ I 330 with certificate neol., biznis Kp with certificate sv. —LKZ I 711, banka and banka with certificate ger., sl. 526, baikieta and bdnkietas with certificate p. —LKŽ I 526, bankruptcy from Gs with certificate p. —LKZ I 527, file with certificate neol. Kn — collection of writings of the clergy, etc.). J. Balčikonis- 's LKZ was a collection of the vocabulary of spoken language (dialects). The vocabulary had to be inherited, at least several generations had to use it in the spoken language. The historicity of the vocabulary is very suitable for various studies, because only inherited vocabulary has isoglosses and is more important for science (historical grammar, etymology, history, ethnogenesis, etc.). In fact, J. Balčikonis understood perfectly the situation of dialect vocabulary, he always emphasized that in addition to the vocabulary learned from parents, i.e. inherited, dialect-speaking people can say a lot of words, forms and constructions learned from newspapers, radio, village and district papers, meetings. In his dictionary, he avoided these novelties in every way, considering them not as a dialectic wealth, a temporary phenomenon. Finally, even the jargon, the poor language of the rural intelligentsia or the common language*, etc., affect the rural discourse. We have a major and important problem here. Should we record the whole talk, or respect historicalness, inheritance? For a rural person who speaks a dialect, everything is one-sided — he needs a word, and he uses it. Is it to declare everything, what we hear in talks, how to interpret everything? There are two opinions. Some publish everything they can record. This is the case, for example, with the Latvian dialect dictionary. E. Kagainės and S. Ragės „Ergemes vardnica“ (vols. 1—3)3, now published by Polish lexicographers in the „Stownik gwar polskich“: absolucja (1.1, 25), absolutnie (1.1, 25), absolwent (1.1, 25), abonament (1.1, 24), abstynent (1.1, 26), administrator (1.1, 35), adiu (1.1, 34), adiutant (1.1, 34), agresja (1.1, 48), agrotechnika (1.1, 54), algebra (1.1, 94), balansowac (1.2, 308), balustrada (1.2, 308), 318) ir t.t. * The LKZ, conceived and initially published as a dictionary of the spoken language, published the inherited lexicon of the spoken language. Since volume III, the type of dictionary has changed slightly (the thesaurus principle is strictly followed- ), all the lexicon is added, and the facts about dialects have also changed. —V., 1972, p. 9. * In this volume, the synonymous terms literary language and common language are left as they are used by the authors of the articles. - Red. College. * For more information, see Vitkauskas V. (Rec.) —Baltistica, 1981, t. 17, p. 102—104; Rekéna A. (Rec.) —Latviešu valodas kultūras jautājumi, —Riga, 1978, 14 laid. 217—223. 4 On the inadequacy of such words for dialect dictionaries because of their momentum, lack of history see p. Ounan O. Ilpoerxr "CiuoBaps pycCKHX HAPOAHBIX roBOpoB- ". —M., 1961, c. 34. (Folk distortions of international words are increasing in the volumes of LKŽ, see ramdtas, raperdcija and others.) 14 The number of words and forms that are present only in speech, not in speech, i.e. things that are not inherited, has increased (especially since volume VI). When they are presented alongside the old and inherited ones (and without any certificates), researchers who are less familiar with the words of a certain Lithuanian dialect can be confused (and sometimes they are!). In particular, everyone can be confused by the belief that the dictionary contains compound dialects, i.e. inherited words. Etymology is based on the geography of words: baldas, baldai "furnishing items" in the meaning of the sentence from Prienai Toks stalas sulūžėlis —nereikia baldas —LKZ I? 589. Almost all of Lithuania uses newly in this way (bdldai, baldai — see also from newness- ). The word baldai was only used in the Samogitian language (this is shown by the writings of S. Daukanto, M. Valančiaus and the examples given in LKŽ I 481 from Krtn, Grg, Vkš). The new Zml, Prn facts have come from bk., therefore there are not snakts, but snak things, which can greatly mislead the etymologists and historians of that word. In dialects, it is used in this way, but quite newly, and it had to be noted. The word „fakelis“ in LKŽ II 248 is presented as a neologism (Professor, witness of the strengthening and formation of the common language, knew these things very well), and in LKŽ II? 366 is already written as the fact of Viekšniai Schneckt. Maybe from bk. viekšniai so say, but so, without any certificates presented, quite makes think various researchers. The history of the meaning of the word "torch" is as follows: neol. —snicket- 's mouth. If you forget to note this novelty, the history of the word suffers. 1934, 85), LKŽ VIII 291 presented with a sentence from Viekšniai: Nevalgyk sausos mėsos, dėk i mišrainės. This is a completely new word in the dialect (checked in spring 1984), a cultural term, without any evidence LKŽ can completely confuse language historians. Now almost all of Lithuania uses the new mixed drink, even Švendūbra village south of Drūskininkai, but this is already a fact of talk, not a snitch. mūgė, meaning „the last big market before Easter” —LKŽ VIII 382, now means a large market in general bk. People of dialects also know this word, but they usually use it only in conversations with bk. consumers. The sentence from Skr (LKŽ VIII 381) probably shows that, but without seeing any evidence (nj or similar), it is possible to start thinking anyway and by researching to damage the history of that word. After the war, Naujadaras loan was widely spread throughout Lithuania, even the pronunciation (loan) was changed. When the LKŽ IX 487 is not marked its historicity, complete novelty, it stands in one line with the inherited words of the šneki. This is not a great truth. It is highly doubtful to write "disrupt, confuse" from the Shnekts (Užp, Kps). The southern snickets of the western Highlanders are energetically, I would say, drawing to themselves the jargon (to cool down, to find themselves, to get lost, etc.), so here too there will be a novelty from the cities, presented without comment; it can mislead and even confuse many people (cf. LC VIII 68). J. Balčikonis himself has always corrected this misused use, and K. Ulvydas has repeatedly denounced this meaning on the radio. Since DZ! 515 pasimesti in this sense, so it began to spread rapidly, even J. Baltušis and other writers began to use it. 15 \ am. <A ¢ LKZ XI 164 from Jurbarkas presents the word rankeniikas, a modification of A. Salio newly created rankinukas®, and this is only a coincidental fact, interesting at least sociologically. The neologism should be written Brs and presented in LKŽ XI 387 as a dialect word. Its novelty (old people even now do not know, questioned do not tell) had to be somehow marked. All Lithuanians now use the newly invented words match, clock, school, letter, but the origin of these words is known to us, it is also known to Baltists or Lithuanianists of other countries (it should only be added that the mokjklé given in LKŽ VIII 320 from Šilutė is incorrect: in German they are pronounced /and after it a somewhat contradictory a is supported as a manifestation of the stem ė). Not marking the novelty here is not a big flaw (although it would also be useful). From the writings the verb ruoštis (pronounced ruostéis, rūošti's with unchanged phonetics) came to the Samogitians, here the preposition was changed (remember the words of K. Būga about such a "metatonia" —RR III 789). LKŽ XI 974—980 riosti without any evidence from KI, Lk, Lc, Všv, Prk are completely new things, not evaluated here (rudšininkas, -ė Užv —LKŽ XI 974 —is some sort of occurrionalism, because it was impossible to hear and hear even in the same Talainiy k., where it is written: there is not even rudstis, only apyvokq goes, Zyginojas, and the noun to describe such a worker could not be heard, and the intelligentsia of the local rise did not hear it). Or, say, the whole sentence from Padubysis: Such a fisherman strips naked — LKŽ XI 451. There is neither refigtis nor niogo in that land — it is from bk. coming words, not dialect wealth, not heritage. The draft with the new "metatonia" draft, written from Pp, VIkS (and without any marking), can produce various thoughts to etymologists, dialectologists. The list could go on and on. This is also the case for dialectal words that have been lost at random: bifras in Užv (LKZ I 958; LKZ I* 1172), zem. keilis to Ignalina region (LKZ VI 837), krūpis to Kapsukas and Ukmergės regions (LKZ VI 716), kriūpis to Rokiškis region (LK ŽZ VI 652), some Žemaičių nibré to Kapsukas and Krakės (LKZ VIII 769), Vysočian šnektų animal rūpūžė to Kaltinéns (LKZ XI 837). This is a separate issue that should also be examined. Most of it will be the work of students who wanted to please the Professor. in/—The same is true of many facts of pronunciation (and word use in general). For example, the word dudra of the new pronunciation tundra LKŽ I 375 did not give at all. In the second edition, the storm (4) is given only from DŽ, and this is quite correct (we all know that the pronunciation of the word šneka in many places from bk. has already a terminal pronunciation, but for historical studies it is hardly important — this is a Zinotine thing for sociology, for the future of accentology). Art has no new variants (LK Ž 11% 222) —urban art, ddilé; yda (LKZ IV 7) — urban yda; kdrdas (LKŽ V 271—272) — city sword; Bucket 2 (LKŽ V 725) — urban bucket; lažintis (LKŽ VII 216—217) —to wager; lažiniūkas (LKŽ VII 216) — city / slaughterer; Expenditure (LCS VII 381) — municipal funds; hiomas (LKZ VII 691) — urban /udmas, etc. In other cases, there is a great deal of fluctuation. Here dda (1), that word in Žemaičių and Prussian Lithuanian, has a specified variant from the dialects oda (4) Skr, Plv, Gs (without any markings, it seems, š Salys A. Rinktiniai raštai. —Roma, 1976, vol. 1, p. XIX. 16 that it has been used for centuries as well as in Samogitian and Prussian Lithuania, and may confuse researchers, especially those less familiar with the current phenomena of language change). By the way, the derived words leatherworker, édaraugis and others are only tvirtaprade root (LKZ VIII 994 ir kt ). Dar plg. žodį préga, nuo seno 1 kirčiuotės žodį, dalis bk. users pronounce according to accent 4. This is a fairly new thing, in dialects counted in another decade, therefore the examples given without certificates progės Krž, proga Škn, Pv —LKZ X 785 can make every historian of accentology, etymologist to break his head a lot. species (1): ground and Prussian Lithuania riššė Lk, Pvn, Pgg, species Sv, Sg —LKZ XI 1029—1030; (nj.) species (4) Sb, Žln; It was necessary to signal about this, so that there would be no difficulties in etymologizing what, describing the history of the word (sorting in general is a novelty, and it was necessary to reduce examples from dialects, especially from Ig, Ar and other places). tin: from the old Sint, Krš, Sv (Pls unexpected example); tin Rs (kitchen tool is GK 1934, 86 rework) —here a mark was absolutely necessary, because it is important for ethnography and other branches of science (derivative word skdrdas has only one variant). price, that old word of the Žemaites and the border Highlanders, happily entered the bk., now when who spells price. LKŽ V 57 from Als gives the price (J. Jablonski's notation- ?), but this also has no historical value, or perhaps it is a failure to listen to the broken prelude, when the fraction part also falls to the second diphthong sandus (this is known to every researcher of the Žemaičių dialektas). There are more examples. Dialects have learned a lot from cities and towns, but this is not entirely the dialect's property. It is impossible to imagine a closed dialect, and so it must be, but such novelties must be characterized (like the LKŽ I 368 postcard, which is called a neologism), then everything becomes clear and convenient for researchers. (The LKŽ has refused to mark new words that have been introduced into the Lithuanian language, so this is no longer noted.) For all these examples of pronunciation, the words of K. Būga are appropriate: “Our intelligents pronounce words (dudra, auklėti, dail, etc.) inhumanly, i.e. they put accent where the folk language does not have it” (K. Būga RR III 785). It does not matter how we look at the historicity of dialectal facts (each of them is important in its own way), but anyway the historical LCZ must always indicate the nature of the word, the construction, the novelty. Today, the facts of dialects are often presented as facts of one time: both inherited vocabulary, and new from bk. coming vocabulary is presented in the same way. Our dialects are now as if common languages over-soaked in soup, their vocabulary is very varied (the old, inherited one is noticeably shrinking) —bk. The layer of borrowed words, if I may say so, is large, so it is only to be glad when the abbreviation nj. begins to appear in the LKŽ volumes, e.g., next to the word candy (LKŽ XII 62), which will show the scholars the true position of the words, their history. In the absence of this, what helmet (nj.), armor (nj.), bow (nj.), etc., we can all hold for unknown. The number of novelties in the library increases extremely quickly: even good collectors have recorded Žemaičių and Pažemaitės Siduré from Kg, Kpč, Švnč, Vrn, etc., where only recently there were winters (seni and now say). And the hay (K. Gaivenis- ’s new product), spring, sandwich, butter, etc. — all the fibers. Lexicographers must be skillful dialectologists, skilled in dialect representation. 17 v's listen to some novelty age. Rural people always tell the truth, so lexicographers must warn the users of the dictionary about the novelty of a fact. J. Balčikonis always looked at the truth of facts, the accuracy of dialect data (now the LKŽ is quite lagging behind in this, because the kartoteka is decreasing, the knowledge of dialects is decreasing, schnekts are being used). The LKZ should mark the novelties of the šnekti more firmly and consistently, as already done in volumes XII—XIII. Today, dialectal facts must be assessed historically everywhere. If not, we'll discover whatever we want in the conversation. J. Balčikonis B3rJsabl 10 has always sought to treat the historical facts of dialects. BAJIbYMUKOHHUCA HA YHACJIENOBAHHYIO JIEKCHKY Pe310oMe Barus: HO. Banibunkonuca Ha YHacJIej[- OBAHHYIO JIEKCHKY HHTJIe He OLUJIK MM YeTKO chopmyJIMpOBAHbI, OJHAKO OH BCeIJa VYUKJI, YTO HAJ0 HCCIEHOBATH H 3AINHChIBATb TOJBKO Te (daKTLI JMAJIEKTHLIX CHCTEM, KOTODEIC SBISIOTCH VHACJIIEJJOBAHHLIMH OT IIOKOJICHHS K IIOKOJIEHHIO. O6 3TOM MOXHO CYJ[KHTb IIO ETO JIEKLHSM, CTATbAM, ONYOJIKKOBAHHbIM B „H36paHHbIxX COHHHERHSAX“, IIO peĮIaKTHDOBAHHIO MEPBHIX TOMOB CJIOBADA JIATOBCKOTO $3bIKa H IO NPHHIHIAM COCTaBJICHHS €ro KapToTekd. [Ins HM3yueHHs S35IKA B JHAXPOHHYECKOM ACIEeKTE (JSTHMOJIOTHA, HCTOpHA A3bIKa H Ap.) HeoOXomuMa (uKcamys HCKOHHOM, YHAC/ICIOBAHHOM ĮMAJIEKTHON JIEKCHKH, Tak Kak 00/BIIOe KOJIKYECTBO CJIOB JIMTEPaTyPHOTO; 35IKA (OcOGeHHO CJIOB, 0603Havatommx chepy KyJIbTYpbl) IOCTOSSHHO BTODraeTCS B OMAJIEKThI, TAKHE CJIOBA, KaK IIDAaBHJIO, HMEIOT HEJIABHIOO (HECKONBKO NECATKOB HJIH HECKOJILKO JIET) HCTODHIO YIIOTDEOJIEHHS H NMO3TOMY UACTO HCKAXKAIOT NIpaBHIbHOE INpejicTaBJIEHBHe OO H3JaBHA CJIOXHBINMAXCA apeajiax. DTO —NPOXOJsAIee SBIICHHE; HAJIMYKE TaKHX CJIOB B IHAJIEKTe HE NpeACTaBiseT COOOH (GakT s3bIKA, OHM Yallle BCETO HCIIOJIb3YIOTCS B pa3TOBODpe C MPHE3XHMH „KYJIDTYDHLIMH JIIOJbMHK- “,. [To3TOMYy C IHEJIBIO INEpeJIauKH HCTHHHOTO ITOJIOXKCHHMS JMAJIEKTHONH CHCTEMBI H BO H3OexaHHe KAKOH-JIKOO IryTAHHIIbI JIEKCHKA, HE ABIISIONIASICA YBACIIeJOBAHHONH MIA JMAJIEKTOB, NOJDKHA B ciioBapsxX (B CJIOBAape JIKTOBCKOTO HBbika H ĮĮMAJIEKTHLIX COOpHHKAX) KHajNeJjIATbCA OCO0OH YKA3aTEJILHON IIOMETONH.