LIETUVIŲ KALBOS GRAMATINĖ SANDARA

LIETUVOS TSR MOKSLŲ AKADEMIJA

ABOUT ONE CASE OF NON-RETRACTION OF STRESS IN THE NORTHWESTERN DŪNININKAI AND SOUTHWESTERN DŪNININKAI DIALECTS

B. ROKAITĖ ir V. VITKAUSKAS

Much has been written about stress retraction in the Žemaitian dialects, its nature and variation; fairly precise isoglosses for stress retraction were established long ago¹. However, continued dialect research under the program of the Atlas of the Lithuanian Language has uncovered cases of stress retraction or non-retraction that had hitherto gone unnoticed and unrecorded. The present paper discusses one case of non-retraction of stress in a particular part of the Žemaitian dialect area.

The dialects of the Judrėnai, Veiviržėnai, Rietavas, and Švėkšna environs, as is well known, belong to the zone of general stress retraction: in them, stress is usually retracted from both short and circumflex endings. In recent years, however, research on these dialects has shown that stress is not retracted in disyllabic words from a short ending onto a long root. For example: eˈtė (a dâˈr vės eˈtė malóudâˑms²), la.ukòs (viˈtâˑuc [a small stream] b́ieg pa.r tôs la.ukòs), maˈrtė (mėˈšùos maˈrtė na-dôud) – Judrėnai, Jocių village; nadeˈrlė leisa, maˈšòs (iˈsediejaˑu maˈšòs âˑusˑte), meˈrgà (dėktėˑ meˈrgà bọ.va navėsprūote), šeˑltà truobà (šeˑltà truobà-siedo žėimūoms trūobūo), šˈveisa (ēˑt reivˈjūota šˈveisa, maclˈaų) – Judrėnai, Lėlėnai village; ọˈntrà deinà (ọˈntrà deinà kãˈp nier nómėi), kˈa.ulės (kˈa.ulės dãˑ ėzdyasˈnse), pę.lnà (pę.lnà šõlėˈne võˈnldėˑnc), žmuogòs (pašę.mėre žmuogòs tėˑp stãˈgėˑ) – Veiviržėnai, Upitėnai village; ga.lvà (apsę.ṣok ga.lvà sọ tãˑs klã.usęnėˑs), kˈa.ušlòs (žọ.ncuˑn kˈa.ušlòs ṣọriˑnks), kiˈmbòs (tãs īˑ tioks kiˈmbòs, jõuc), miˈnkštà (miˈnkštà meˈsė.ke bọ.va), stọ.ngàs (stọ.ngàs [hay] nupljãˑusˑte e palėˈda), žọ.nlcės (aš tioks bọvãˑu kãˑp žọ.nlcės), žmuogòs (važėˈva žmuogòs sọ šlãˑudūˑn vėžėmò) – Rietavas, Kadagynai village (although in this case stress was also heard to be retracted a few times, for example: glọudėˑnc īˑ ẹˑlks, lėišˈtė lėiz ọ.nc; ka.lbà (la īˑ vėjo ka.lbà), slę.nkṣl-člòs (pa.r slę.nkṣl-člòs kiˈk às priˈšežàˈrgūojo), vaˈkọs (pa.r vaˈkọs gavãˑu lėjuos nuˑ tėva) – Švėkšna, Skomantai village; darˈbọs (darˈbọs vˈrs ba gãˈla), maˈsà (sa-nọˑm žmuogùˑ maˈsa našvaˈk), pę.lnė (priˈskiˑd pę.lnė la.ukãˑ vėštãˑlo), puˈròs

¹ „Archivum Philologicum“, t. 4, Kaunas, 1933, p. 33; V. Grinaveckis, Šiaurės vakarų dūnininkų kirtis, LKK, t. 1, Vilnius, 1957, p. 109; Kirčio atitraukimas ir nukėlimas lietuvių kalbos tarmėse, LKK, t. 4, 1961, p. 117—119.

²Examples are given in sentences so that the overall system of stress retraction and non-retraction in these dialects can be more clearly seen. The symbol (ˑ) marks consonant softness.

10*

147

(purõs kõ·r siesė – slā·pes dė·rvas), sta·gò, še·rdės (sta·gò merė, raše še·rdės anõ im plì·ša) – Švėkšna, Būdviečiai village.

A similar phenomenon has also been recorded in the southernmost dialect of Pajūris (Šilalė district), within the zone of general stress retraction. There, stress retraction from a short ending onto the long root of a disyllabic word has not been observed (for example: ka.lbà ė·t, ka gerà ė·sas; tuorà stẽprà ėš mi·to), although stress is retracted fairly often from a long ending onto any kind of root, and from a short ending onto a short root (for example: aš patė padarìsu·t; žal·uos mė·šuos pǫšė kelìuograma dã·vę).

The rule mentioned above does not apply to polysyllabic words: in these words, stress is always retracted from a short ending onto a long root. For example: jáuni·s'lė (jáu-ni·s'lė nieka navà·z), krù·mal·òs (sma·kstà·u kà·r|vę puo tõs krù·mal·òs) – Švėkšna, Būdviečiai village; ìlerokọ (kõ·n aš ėšvė·rso tuok·ọ mažọ pap·jūovęs ìlerokọ), kà·r|vekės (vė·do kà·r|vekės gãnieu si·k·ọ) – Judrėnai, Lėlėnai village; brọ·nges·nė (soselã·kė vėsė, lā·uke k·ọ·l brọ·nges·nė [grain] bū·s) – Veiviržėnai, Upitėnai village; mė·lžūo-nės (tuoks ka.imì·nc ir mė·lžūonės), žė·r|n·ọkọs (ànà vė·rp ę vės kọ·nd tõs žė·r|n·ọkọs) – Rietavas, Kadagynai village.

How, then, can it be explained that in the dialects mentioned, stress is not retracted from a short ending only onto the long root of disyllabic words?

One might suppose that this is one of the variations found in peripheral dialects of the zone of general stress retraction. Various irregularities in stress retraction occur along the southern margins of the northwestern dünininkai dialect area³, and in the southern part of Kuršėnai⁴; irregularities in stress retraction have also been observed south of Užventis. In those areas, however, variations in stress retraction (especially around Kuršėnai, Šaukėnai, and Užventis) affect polysyllabic words, and stress is by no means left on short endings; in the case mentioned above, by contrast, stress is not retracted only in disyllabic words (with a long root), and only from a short ending.

Thus, although dialects outside the zone of general stress retraction may have had some influence on the retention of ending stress in the dialects described, there may nevertheless be other causes of this phenomenon, all the more so since the area in which stress is not retracted from a short ending onto the long root of a disyllabic word is fairly extensive and lies considerably northwest of the stress-retraction boundary.

One possible cause, it seems, may be the lengthening of the first component of pre-accentual diphthongs in the dialects mentioned⁵. For example: ge.ltūona, la.ukà·les, pa.r pėc·òs, pra.us·s, žė.l·vė.tes (Judrėnai), ata.ugì·n·te, sọtru.m·pėje, spro.n·dė·les, va.ik·lọkà (Švėkšna), ga·lvūoja·u, ka.rtọ·ma, la.ukà·ms, napsoga.l·vios, pę.rkà·u, še·r|gė·ms (Veiviržėnai). Lengthening occurs similarly in the Pajūris dialect, located near the boundary of general stress retraction (for example: b'ja.urì·bę, kal·vì·s'lę, ma.r·tė·le), and in the Vainutas dialect, where stress is never retracted (for example: a.lgà, pa.r·nọgara, ža.n·ciena). This

³ V. Grinaveckis, Šiaurės vakarų dünininkų tarmių fonetinės ypatybės ir jų raida, „Vilniaus Valstybinio pedagoginio instituto Mokslo darbai“, t. 11, 1960, p. 46.

⁴ Vyt. Vitkauskas, Kuršėnų tarmės kirtis ir priegaidė, LKK, t. 3, Vilnius, 1960, p. 64.

⁵ Long pre-accentual vowels remain long in the dialect, and in this case they are apparently somewhat longer still.

448

Lengthening of the diphthong component in pre-accentual syllables, which apparently occurred before accent retraction (as shown by the same lengthening in the dialects of Saūgai and Ramučiai in Šilutė district, cf. dra'ugūs, me'rgą, sa'ugās, va'ikų, and in the Vainutas dialect, which does not retract accent at all), probably as a result of equalizing the length of post-accentual and pre-accentual syllables, may also have determined the failure to retract accent from the short ending of disyllabic words.

The dialects of Švėkšna, Judrėnai, and Veiviržėnai, which received the impulse for accent retraction latest and already had a lengthened pre-accentual syllable, were content with that lengthening alone.

Thus, this case of failure to retract accent in the southwestern Samogitian dialects would show that, in addition to general rules governing accent retraction or non-retraction, dialects also have patterns of accent retraction characteristic of only a particular dialect or group of dialects.

ON ONE CASE OF PRESERVATION OF WORD-FINAL STRESS IN THE DIALECTS OF THE NORTHWESTERN DŪNININKAI AND SOUTHWESTERN DŪŪNININKAI

B. ROKAITĖ and V. VITKAUSKAS

Abstract

In the Samogitian dialects around Judrėnai, Veiviržėnai, Rietavas, and Švėkšna, which belong to the zone of general accent retraction, stress in disyllabic words is not retracted from a short ending to a long root. The article suggests that one of the main causes determining this phenomenon may be the lengthening of the vowel in the pre-accentual syllable.

149