KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA

Institute of the Lithuanian Language

doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2022.95.07

TRADITIONAL AND NON-TRADITIONAL OIKONYMS OF EASTERN LITHUANIA

KEYWORDS: eastern Lithuania, oikonyms, traditional forms, Slavicized oikonyms.

ANNOTATION

The article examines how traditional Lithuanian forms of oikonyms in eastern Lithuania differ from later, non-traditional Slavic forms. Regional differences among oikonyms are identified, and data are presented on their formation and Slavicization in municipalities from Šalčininkai to Daugavpils. Five ways of Slavicizing Lithuanian oikonyms are distinguished.

ABSTRACT

The article examines the differences between the traditional Lithuanian forms of Eastern Lithuanian oikonyms and the later non-traditional Slavic forms. Regional differences and numbers of oikonyms according to formation, slavization in counties from Šalčininkai to Daugavpils are presented. There are five ways of slavicization of oikonyms of the Lithuanian language.

INTRODUCTION

On October 28, 2013, after draft Law on National Minorities No. 13-335-01 and the Law Amending Articles 7, 14, and 17 of the Law of the Republic of Lithuania on the State Language No. 13-337-01 were registered in the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language stated that those provisions would violate the status of Lithuanian as the state language. A similar draft Law on National Minorities was to be submitted again in 2022, under which “traditional names of residential areas and streets, and topographic signs, in addition to the state language, may, by decision of the representative institution of the relevant municipality, also be written in the language of that national minority.” The oikonyms of Vilnius and Šalčininkai districts had long been written in two languages in these municipalities.

162

BENDRINĖ KALBA | 95

The aim of the article is to determine which oikonyms of eastern Lithuania are traditional (authentic) and which are nontraditional (inauthentic). The objectives are to investigate the origin and formation of traditional eastern Lithuanian oikonyms, to identify the principal criteria for distinguishing traditional from nontraditional oikonyms, and to identify the more significant regional differences in the eastern Lithuanian name stock that may help distinguish the traditional name stock from the nontraditional one. The author is preparing a monograph on this topic; therefore, a more extensive bibliography, overviews of the development of eastern Lithuania’s ethnic composition, the Slavicization of place names, and the origin of Christian names, tables of oikonym structure by rural districts, and so on are not included here. These would duplicate the author’s other works and would unjustifiably distract from the main questions raised here.

To distinguish the Lithuanian traditional name stock from the non-Lithuanian one, it is not necessary here to discuss in greater detail every possible development of those words or hypotheses about their etymology, especially since doing so is difficult, and often even impossible, without extensive historical sources, their syntheses, and preparatory research. In explaining the origins of oikonyms, the author indicates not only personal names but also common nouns from which those personal names may have derived. Occasionally, the oikonyms under discussion may have derived directly from common nouns (rather than through personal names). When the meaning of an oikonym is clear to Lithuanians and Balticists without comment (the word appears in the Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian (DLKŽ 1972)), the etymology of oikonyms is usually not discussed in detail.

The main source for the article is Antanas Salys’s dictionary of the names of settlements (oikonyms) in eastern Lithuania occupied by Poland from 1920 to 1939, with standardized Lithuanian and former Polish forms. It was essentially completed in 1944 by a group of Lithuanian linguists and printed despite difficulties (Salys 1983). Eighty years ago, professional Lithuanian linguists verified the settlement names against the language of local residents and historical documents, and standardized them. Because of the war and occupation, some documentation and notes relating to the standardization of the name stock have not survived. Nor are there detailed survey data from local residents or historical information about earlier forms of oikonyms.

This article describes in detail the origin, motivation, and formation of eastern Lithuanian oikonyms: the roots of Lithuanian oikonyms, compound oikonyms, suffixes, prefixes, and language contacts. A total of 7,455 oikonym forms are examined. These are forms of the names of 3,720 settlements that survived about 100 or fewer years ago in the area roughly between Zarasai and Varėna: 3,720 of the forms were recorded in Lithuanian and 3,735 in Polish. A small number of oikonyms occur more than once, because occasionally the same name was recorded not only for a village (or town) but also for an adjoining old

KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA. Tradiciniai ir netradiciniai rytų Lietuvos oikonimai

163

estate, folwark, and so on. The eastern Lithuanian oikonyms recorded in Polish in the dictionary have hitherto been insufficiently used and discussed. The eastern Lithuanian oikonyms recorded in Lithuanian were included in the Lithuanian Language Institute’s index of place names from living speech and are mentioned in the Dictionary of Lithuanian Place Names.

The study employs the areal, comparative, and descriptive scientific methods. The author seeks new approaches and data for investigating the traditional eastern Lithuanian name stock and endeavors to refine the methodology used by authorities in onomastics.

Straipsnis nuo kolegės Marijos Razmukaitės (1998) vertingos disertacijos skiriasi tuo, kad abiejuose darbuose naudojamasi skirtingais šaltiniais, nevienodas tyrinėjimo objektas, metodai. Autorius plačiau naudojosi bendrosios kalbotyros, dialektologijos, sociolingvistikos tyrimo būdais. M. Razmukaitės disertacijoje tirti ne rytinės, o visos Lietuvos oikonimai ir jie imti iš kito šaltinio – Lietuvos TSR administracinio-teritorinio suskirstymo žinyno (LATSŽ), atspindinčio padėtį po 50 metų, kai dalis oikonimų buvo išnykę. Skyrėsi ir administracinis suskirstymas: vietoj valsčių 1972 m. buvo smulkesni administraciniai vienetai – apylinkės. Nė vienas mokslininkas iki šiol nebuvo smulkiau tyrinėjęs lenkiškai užrašytų rytų Lietuvos vietovardžių, nėra jų gretinęs su autentiškais lietuviškais vietovardžiais. Šį darbą pradėti ir tęsti autorių skatino ir Aleksandro Vanago (1993) straipsnis. Lietuvos vietovardžių žodyno turėtų išeiti 12–15 tomų, o kol kas išspausdinti tik 4 tomai, todėl kitų tomų straipsnyje dar neįmanoma nurodyti.

The article examines eastern Lithuanian oikonyms because the fate of eastern Lithuania in 1920 differed from that of the rest of the Republic of Lithuania and the Republic of Latvia. On October 9, 1920, eastern Lithuania was occupied by Poland, and this was formalized on March 18, 1921, in Riga by the so-called Polish peace treaty with Russia and Ukraine. For 19 years, the former center of the Lithuanian state, with its historic capital Vilnius, had no Lithuanian as a state language and endured the greatest oppression: Lithuanian schools, reading rooms, organizations, and newspapers were shut down; personal names and place names continued to be Slavicized; Lithuanians were forcibly turned into Poles, and those who resisted were imprisoned and killed (see RL 1980; Zinkevičius 1993, 2013; Maceika 2020). Forced Polonization and Slavicization can only partly be described as language contact.

Across most of the Lithuanian-speaking area, the name stock of living Baltic languages was more heavily Slavicized because the official language of record-keeping in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (LDK) from the 14th century onward was the chancery Slavic language. After the Union of Lublin in 1569, another Slavic language—Polish—increasingly took its place in the Grand Duchy. In this article, the principal subject examined from various scholarly perspectives is

164

BENDRINĖ KALBA | 95

the area of Lithuanian ethnic lands that was occupied by Poland in 1919–1939, where all place names were then written in the state language, Polish.

The other Baltic-language area comprises the remaining territory of Lithuania and parts of the neighboring states of Latvia and Belarus with ethnic Lithuanian lands. The distribution of the oikonym suffix -išk- across this entire area is compared with its distribution in eastern Lithuania. The percentage is determined by dividing the number of oikonyms with the suffix -išk- in the districts by the total number of oikonyms in each district.

Some historical documents would suggest that the names of settlements used by larger numbers of people speaking different languages were the first to be officially Slavicized, while Lithuanian forms of residents’ surnames, even given names, and microtoponyms occasionally survived. For example, the 1622 inventory of the Vilnius economy (LVIŠ 2014: 70–128) recorded the surnames Drutelaitis “Drūtelaitis,” Rugielis “Rugelis,” the given names Jonas, Jurgis, the forest of the Norviliškės manor farm Plinakolnis “Plynakalnis,” and the Medininkai farmstead (outlying settlement, zascia nek) Ruklaycis “Ruklaitis” (LVIŠ 2014: 98, 126).

ORIGIN AND STRUCTURE OF OIKONYMS

In every district studied, most standardized oikonyms published in Lithuanian are Lithuanian forms, whereas oikonyms written in Polish were Slavicized in various ways (for examples of place names, see Salys 1983: 571–667).

More than half of the traditional place names among the oikonyms of eastern Lithuania recorded in Polish (except in Rudamina district) retained their Lithuanian origin until 1940: 88.4 percent survived in Maišiagala district, 81.9 in Dūkštas, 76.3 in Nemenčinė, 74.8 in Ignalina, 74.3 in Švenčionėliai, 70.4 in Rūdiškės, 68.6 in Jašiūnai, 68.5 in Trakai, 67.4 in Paberžė, 66.7 in Šumskas, 60.1 in Riešė, 58.4 in Eišiškės, 52.1 in Turgeliai, 51.0 in Mickūnai, and 39.3 percent in Rudamina. A broader analysis of oikonyms and further examples on this subject are presented in another article by the author (Garšva 2022: 4–10).

Oikonyms written in Polish letters often follow the phonological rules of the Vilnius and Southern Aukštaitian dialects: dzūkavimas occurs, the consonant l is hardened, and the diphthongs am, an, em, en are pronounced um, un, im, in. Word stems that coincide completely with Lithuanian are part of the Lithuanian language and help in studying the traditional Lithuanian name stock.

In the Lithuanian-language area, Lithuanian oikonym roots (stems) were used with Slavic suffixes or prefixes added later, as well as oikonym roots (stems) translated into Slavic languages while retaining Lithuanian suffixes

KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA. Tradiciniai ir netradiciniai rytų Lietuvos oikonimai

165

(with prefixes) are a substratum of the Lithuanian language. We consider Polish-written oikonyms in Lithuania to be of Lithuanian origin if they contain at least one Lithuanian oikonym-forming element. We consider Lithuanian-written oikonyms to be Lithuanian if most of their components (root, suffix, prefix, ending) are of Lithuanian origin, i.e. if they are phonologically, morphologically, and lexically integrated into the Lithuanian language. In 1939–1945, place names were well standardized and, once sufficient data had been collected, there might be grounds for revising the forms of only a few of them.

There were five ways of Slavicizing oikonyms—from changing a single morpheme of a word to translating it into Polish or completely replacing the word’s motivation and form with a Slavic word (as in the Kaliningrad region in 1946). Thus, having come under direct Polish administration for the first time and been deliberately Polonized, Lithuania’s toponymy written in Polish letters was of five types: 1) occasionally, through oversight, it remained entirely authentic (cf. Ankšta, dialectally Unkšta—Polish Unkszta; Dumblė, dialectally Dum̄bla—Dումբla, etc.); 2) partially Slavicized, by changing the vowels, consonants, endings, suffixes, prefixes, or roots of oikonyms (cf. Gražtėliai, dialectally Gruštėliai—Grusztеле; Grūodžiai—Grodze); 3) Slavicized (Mekaĩ—Miecho-wo); 4) translated (Naujakėmis—Nowosiółki; Obelynė—Jabłonówka; Paažuoliai—Poddębie; Pabėržė—Podbrzezie); 5) replaced (Perūnai—Dąbrowo) (all these oikonyms are from Paberžė rural district in Vilnius District).

In the Slavicization of oikonyms, the number of forms with the suffix -išk- declined from 6% (Ignalina District) to 13.8% (Vilnius District), derivatives with the prefix pa- declined from 1.3% (Ignalina District) to 9.3% (Vilnius District), and Lithuanian compound oikonyms from 2.9% (Šalčininkai District) to 4.5% (Trakai District). The study of oikonyms established that in Šalčininkai, Trakai, and Vilnius districts, oikonyms with the suffix -išk- and the ending -ės were widespread, whereas from Pabradė to Zarasai and in the ethnic Lithuanian lands of Latvia and Belarus, those with the ending -ė were widespread. In the territory of the Republic of Lithuania north of Pabradė, oikonyms with the suffix -išk- and the ending -ė accounted for 28.9%, and those with -ės for 2.3%; oikonyms with the suffix -išk- and the endings -iai and -is accounted for about 2%.

Kazimieras Būga, Jan Safarewicz, Aleksandras Vanagas, Zigmas Zinkevičius, and other scholars regarded oikonyms with the suffix -išk- as Lithuanianisms and thought that the Lithuanian language had disappeared from those areas only recently (cf. Safarewicz 1956: 15–60; RL 1980: 164–169; Zinkevičius 2013: 221–246, 258–259, 267). According to these data, the oikonyms studied in all the rural districts attest to a territory inhabited by Lithuanians: in Ignalina rural district, 43.7% of the oikonyms recorded in Lithuanian and 35.6% of those recorded in Polish had the suffix -išk-.

166

BENDRINĖ KALBA | 95

; in Maišiagala and Mickūnai rural districts, 34.8% in each (Polish forms: 29% and 26.7%), in Paberžė rural district, 31.9% and 25.8%, respectively; Nemenčinė, 30% and 23.1%; Trakai, 29.6% and 17%; Dūkštas, 29.5% and 23.8%; Švenčionėliai, 25% and 17.4%; Jašiūnai, 23% and 15.7%; Rudamina, 21% and 6.2%; Šumskas, 17.9% and 12.8%. At that time, Varėna rural district had 26% of such oikonyms.

Based on the loss of the suffix –išk– in Polish spellings, three groups of rural districts emerged: 15–12% of oikonyms retaining the suffix –išk– were found in Rudamina and Trakai rural districts; 10–7% in Švenčionėliai, Ignalina, Mickūnai, and Nemenčinė; and 6–4% in Paberžė, Maišiagala, Dūkštas, and Šumskas rural districts. These differences reflect not regional variation but the artificial Slavicization of oikonyms.

The structure of the oikonyms shows that these were in fact ancient Lithuanian ethnic lands, where Lithuanian was spoken and the traditional Lithuanian toponymy was preserved. Oikonyms with the suffix –išk– became less numerous from north to south (with Vilnius District as a certain exception). This is also confirmed by data published in 1974 (LATŠŽ 1974: 42–365): in what was then Zarasai District, 37.2% of oikonyms were recorded with the suffix –išk–; in Ignalina, 33.7%; Švenčionys, 28%; Vilnius, 31.6%; Trakai, 25%; and Šalčininkai, 22.5%. From east to west, oikonyms with the suffix –išk– were even less numerous than from north to south: in Utena District, they accounted for 27.7%, in Vilkaviškis for 18.2%, and in Klaipėda for 7.4%.

In the northern territory of the former Grand Duchy of Lithuania, an area emerged where oikonyms with the suffix –išk– were especially widespread. Today this area belongs to three states—Lithuania, Latvia, and Belarus.

At least three lines can be drawn based on the exceptionally wide distribution of oikonyms with the suffix –išk–. More than 50% of all oikonyms with the suffix –išk– were in present-day Daugavpils (Daugavpils) District, between Skrudėlynė (officially Skrudaliena) and Demenė (Būga 1961: 565). The second area, where more than 30% of oikonyms had the suffix –išk–, extended from Daugavpils to Vilnius (cf. Būga 1961: 565–568; Zeps 1984: 86–560; Salys 1983: 571–660). The third area, with 20% (and somewhat more) of oikonyms having the suffix –išk–, was bounded by a line running through Bebrinė (officially Bebrene, Alūksne District), Malinova (Daugavpils District), Breslauja, Šalčininkai, and Utena (Būga 1961: 565–568; Salys 1983: 571–670; Adamkovich 2013: 100).

KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA. Tradiciniai ir netradiciniai rytų Lietuvos oikonimai

167

These data on traditional Lithuanian settlement names show that Lithuanian-language features became partly more numerous moving from Šalčininkai toward Vilnius and Švenčionys, that is, from the area of ethnic Lithuanian lands in Aukštaitija that underwent the most extensive Slavicization in the 18th–20th centuries toward areas where Lithuanian has survived uninterrupted to this day. From south to north, the Lithuanian character of oikonyms recorded in Polish gradually increases (their roots, prefixes, and partly also suffixes have been preserved). Only the distribution of the suffix –išk– differs somewhat, depending also on the region’s location.

In Pabradė district, as elsewhere, there are oikonyms derived from Lithuanian common nouns or from Lithuanian surnames that originated from common nouns. This is often the case, especially with surnames that were subsequently established as surnames. Oikonyms of this origin in Pabradė district include Bendróvė (Bindrawe, from Lith. bendróvė ‘a common meadow, which everyone mows together and then divides by boundary’; about 150 such place names have been recorded), Darìniai (Darynie, from Lith. darinỹs ‘a thing made, produced, or formed; a kind of sour food; a piece of woven linen’, dariniai ‘paint; what is made or painted’), Gùžiai (Guże, from Lith. *gùžis > *Gùžis, cf. gùžas ‘1. stork; 2. protuberance, lump, bump’), Kóp­ta (Kapta, cf. Lith. kópta ‘ford, crossing; landing place; haystack’ Švnč, kóptai ‘ladder, stairs; scaffolding around a house under construction’ LKŽ 1962: 350), Móliai (Male, from Lith. mólis > surname Mólis), Skar̃džiai (Skardzie, from Lith. skar̃džius ‘tinsmith’, skar̃dus ‘ringing, loud’ > Skar̃džius LPŽ 1989: 731, skar̃dis ‘steep slope’), Spėnglas (Spingla, from the name of the lake Spėnglas, cf. spėngti ‘to ring, roar in the ears; buzz’), Vebliai (Weble, from Lith. veblỹs ‘one who lisps’, personal name *Veblỹs). Pabradė district also had Baláičiai (Bałajcie), Bàliškė (Bolestawowo), Baliùliai (Balule). A dozen or so instances of Baláičiai have been recorded in Lithuania, while Baliùliai was unique. Microtoponyms may be related to Lith. balà ‘a muddy place; marsh, bog; puddle’, whereas the oikonym mentioned above originated from the personal name Baliùlis.

Some Lithuanian oikonyms originated not from personal names that had not yet become surnames, but from common nouns. Settlements in the former state’s central region are attested in historical sources as early as the 14th century (Dievėniškės, Eišiškės, Mėdininkai, and others—see Vanagas 1993: 35–39). Mėdininkai entered the chronicle of the Teutonic Order in 1320, so it was established at least in the 13th century, and perhaps earlier. Lithuanian inhabitants’ surnames could only have begun to form 200–300 years later. Nickname-derived personal names become widespread in documents in the 16th century, when the surnames of noble persons also take shape. Most Lithuanian peasant surnames arose in the 18th century (LKE 2008: 398–399).

An additional factor in determining the origin of a personal name and a personal-name-derived oikonym is its distribution. Most of the oikonyms mentioned are found not even throughout the whole

168

BENDRINĖ KALBA | 95

former Grand Duchy of Lithuania, but only in ethnic Lithuanian lands. For example, the surname Bėčius > Bėčis was recorded in the 20th century along the northern Lithuanian border with Latvia (LPŽ 1985: 2182), where in a retracted-stress position the vowel į becomes ę; cf. Bi.č’s “Bičius” < bičius ‘beekeeper, bee’, singular instrumental pronounced Bėč’ “Bičiū”, plural accusative Bėč’s “Bičiūs”, thereby resembling Bėčių. Bičius was recorded in the western part of the same Lithuanian region of Žiemgala, where the vowel į less often becomes ę. Similar oikonyms, however, were recorded in southeastern Lithuania, where no such surnames had survived: Bėčiai (Pabradė, Vepriai environs), Bėčionys, Bėčiakelniai (Šalčininkai and Ignalina districts). It is difficult to prove the origin of this surname, since its connection with northern Lithuania is doubtful.

In Švenčionėliai district, Lithuanian word roots are reflected in the oikonyms Bùrbos (Pol. Burby < Bùrba < burbėti; the plural nominative ending -os preserves the East Aukštaitian ending), Dėmė (Demo from the river name Dėmė < Lith. dėmė ‘stained place’ (LVŽ 2014: 202), Garnỹs (Giernie < garnỹs ‘a bird smaller than a stork’ > personal name Garnỹs; if the oikonym had originated from a surname, it would more likely be *Garniškė), Lūšnia (Łusznia, cf. lùšnà ‘poor hut’), Sùtrė (Sutryszki < East Aukštaitian sùtros ‘slops, liquid filth, liquid manure’), Šakalaĩ (Szakałe > Šakalỹs < šakalỹs ‘a small stick’).

Compound oikonyms preserved in Pabradė district include Didžialaukė – Dziedzielówka, Gùgaraitis – Gugorojście, Káistupis – Kajstupie, Skaistášilis – Skajstoszyle, while in the former Švenčionėliai district Aukštãgiris was written as Auksztogira (if regularly restored to Lithuanian by sound correspondence, it would be Aukštagirìa; the word root aukšt- is also recorded accurately), Jaunãdaris – Jawnodary, Júodaupis – Jodoupie, Kirtakõjis – Kiertukaje.

In the official Polish language of the time, Lithuanian compound oikonyms were also rendered in five ways. In the first method, Lithuanian oikonyms were conveyed most accurately; it was often possible to understand them and reconstruct their authentic Lithuanian form without special preparation or comparison with the Lithuanian form, cf.: Kajstupie – Káistupis; Auksztogira – Aukštãgiris.

When a compound oikonym was rendered by the second method, one of its components (the first or the second) was more readily adapted phonetically to Polish pronunciation. Its meaning remains unintelligible in Polish, while the “Polish” form can be understood more easily and accurately in Lithuanian by comparing it with the Lithuanian form, cf.: Kiełnobrydzie – Kálnabridžiai Nmč; Dziedzielówka (for speakers of the Dzūkian dialect, reconstructing the first part is easy) – Didžialaukė Pbrd. The third group comprises oikonyms whose first or second component is translated into Polish: Žaliãklonis Jšn – Zielonokłan, Aukszt-

KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA. Tradiciniai ir netradiciniai rytų Lietuvos oikonimai

169

todwory – Aukštadvariai Mšg. In Polish, the Lithuanian vowel a corresponds to o, while Lithuanian o corresponds to Polish and other Slavic a; therefore, the component –kłan corresponds in Lithuanian to klon-, and the Slavic component dwor- corresponds to Lithuanian dvar-. In the fourth group of compound oikonyms, only one word component remains clearly understandable in one language or another, e.g., Ĺiepalaukis Nmč – Lipoławki. The first component (lip(a)) is more understandable to Slavs (but Lithuanians can also “translate” it), while the second component (ławk(a)) is absent from standard Lithuanian and Polish. The fifth group of compound oikonyms consists of more recent names, both components of which were readily translatable into Polish; cf. in Švenčionėliai (and most other districts), Naujākėmis became Nowosiółki, Naujalaukis – Nowy Dzial (Nowopole), and so on. There are also certain regularities in the Slavicization of place names: officials could “standardize” them at least in part, as a result of which place names were Slavicized uniformly in different districts.

The greatest variety is found among suffixal oikonyms. They included numerous roots of Lithuanian common nouns and Lithuanian suffixes. In Pabradė district, the completely Lithuanian names (with a shortened ending and sometimes an adapted vowel) were Ąžuoliškiai (Užaliszki), Būrblìškės (Burbliszki), Čypliškė (Cypliszki), Eitūniškė (Ajtuniszki), Guòbiškiai (Gobiszki), Liaudiškės (Laudyszki), Meleniškės (Mieleniszki), Purviniškiai (Purwiniszki), Šarkiškė (Szarkiszki), Šeršuliškė (Szerszuliszki), Šukeliškė (Szukieliszki), Važelìškė (Ważeliszki). The oikonyms were formed from Lithuanian surnames, which sometimes already had the suffixes –el-, –en-, –in-, –ūn-, –ul- (these were also inherited from the base words). The suffix –išk– was newly added to them.

Compared with the suffix –išk–, all the other oikonym suffixes (–el-, –ėn-, –yn-, –in-, –on-, –ūn-, –ut- and others) are much less common; cf.: Žardėliai (Żar- dele), etc.; Argirdėnai (Orgirdany), Noselėnai (Nasielany), Maleikėnai (Małejkiańce), Skirlėnai (Skirlany); Avietynė (Malinowka), Klevynė (Klonówka), Žvyrinė (Żwirynie); Ešerinė (Oszarynie), Kaṙklinė (Karklina), Lėipinė (Lipowo), Meškerinė (Mieszkrynka), Nauj̇iniai (Nowicze), Šeškinė (Szaszkinie), Trākinė (Trakinie), Ungurinė (Ungoryno); Arníonys (Orniany), Mečiónys (Mieczanka); Kločūnai (Kłaczuny), Magūnai (Maguny); Abejūčiai (Obiejucie), Trobūčiai (Trabucie).

In Švenčionėliai district, similar suffixes occurred in such oikonyms as: Pempėlė (Pimpelka), Žirneliškė (Żarnoliszki); Dubinėliai (Dubinela), Kampuotėlė (Komपocie), Miežionėliai (Miežanele); Dotinėnai (Datuniany), Drūstėnai (Druściany), Laužėnai (Łowżiany); Dėlynė (Dolina), Kumelýnė (Kumielino),

170

BENDRINĖ KALBA | 95

Smėlýnė (Šmielinka); Giriniai (Giryńce), Paešerinė (Podeszerynie), Pągulbinė (Pogulbino), Pakarvinė (Pokarwienie), Pinigìnė (Pinigìnie), Pirktìnė (Pirkcinie), Šaminiai (Szaminie), Teterùinė (Teterwinie), Šiliniškis (Szyliniszki); Matusónys (Matusiańce), Miežiónys (Mieżany), Miežionėliai (Mieżanele); Januliškis (Januliszki), Rudališkė (Rudoliszki), Vytuliškė (Witolino); Maldžiūnai (Maldziuný), Veikūnai (Wejkuny); Raisčiūkai (Rejściuki). In Švenčionėliai district, most suffixal oikonyms also had the suffix -išk-: Biržiškės (Bierżyszki), Čižiškė (Czyżyszki), Daubàriškė (Dowboryszki), Šiliniškis (Szyliniszki), Ùbagiškė (Ubogiszki).

In both districts, a variety of suffixes predominated. In terms of frequency, the suffix -in- was the closest to oikonyms with the suffix -išk-. It is unclear, however, how its meaning differed from that of the suffix -yn- (if both were recorded accurately); cf.: Kaŕklinė and Kleyńnė in Pbrd; Pāeglynė and Pāgulbinė in Švnč.

Prefixes were more varied in Pabradė district, but there, closer to Vilnius, oikonym prefixes were more extensively Slavicized. As many as six oikonyms with the prefix ažu- were used here, but the prefix survived in Polish spellings in only one oikonym: Ažùbalis (Zabłocie), Ažùkampis (Ustronie), Ažùprūdė (Zaprudzie), Ažùrėdis (Zaredzie), Ažùtakis (Zatoka), Ažùpravalis (Ażuprowale). Forms with the prefix be- were used, e.g., Beviŕšė (Ba-wirsza).

Thus, in Slavicizing oikonyms, Lithuanian roots, prefixes, and suffixes were often retained, especially the suffix -išk-, characteristic of eastern Lithuania. K. Būga (1961: 565) wrote that this suffix was foreign in place names not only to Latvians, but also to the Selonians, Semigallians, and Curonians. The linguist J. Safarevičius (J. Safarewicz, 1904–1992), who was born in Daugavpils, agreed with him, although there may be people in Latvia who hold a different view on the matter. The center of this suffix was between the districts of Skrudėlynė (54.8% of oikonyms with the suffix -išk-), Demene (52.2%; cf. Būga 1961: 565), and Ignalina (43.7%). This region of present-day Latvia had formerly been part of the same linguistic area of the Vilnius dialect.

In southeastern Latvia, the oikonym suffix -išk- is most widespread in the triangle Aknyšta – Čiskodas – Sārja. The closer to the Republic of Lithuania, the more such oikonyms there are. In some places, they still account for about half. Between Švenčionys and Šalčininkai, they account for about 29%. Oikonyms with the suffix -išk- have four endings: -ė, -ės, -is, and -iai. In Slavicization, all these endings were merged into -i, an ending that is not possible in this position in Lithuanian. The Daugavpils district also has oikonyms whose stems are associated with Lithuanian: Kumpiniški ~ Kampiniškės, Lintopiški ~ Lentupiškės, Paberži ~ Pabėrže, Papušina ~ Papušinė, Šlapaki ~ Šlapakiai (for more detail, see Garšva 2015: 178–201).

KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA. Tradiciniai ir netradiciniai rytų Lietuvos oikonimai

171

SUMMARY

We consider Lithuanian oikonyms recorded in Lithuanian to be traditional if they first arose in that locality, were used by local inhabitants, and most of their constituent parts (root, suffix, prefix, ending) are Lithuanian. Among oikonyms of ethnic Lithuanian lands recorded in Polish, we consider those of Lithuanian origin to be oikonyms in which at least one part (root, suffix, prefix, or ending) has remained Lithuanian. We consider later-arising oikonyms of foreign origin to be non-traditional Lithuanian oikonyms.

An examination of 3,720 eastern Lithuanian oikonyms (7,455 forms in Lithuanian and Polish) shows that 98 percent of authentic Lithuanian oikonyms and over 60 percent of Slavicized oikonyms retained features of the Lithuanian language. The influence of Slavic languages on oikonyms here began to become more pronounced from the 16th century. The center of Slavicization was the city of Vilnius. Moving from the Daugavpils side toward Vilnius, Lithuanian elements among oikonyms recorded in Polish gradually decrease: they accounted for 79.1 percent in Ignalina District, 70.7 percent in Švenčionys District, 65.5 percent in Vilnius District, and 45.5 percent in the city of Vilnius. Beyond this city, in other directions, Lithuanian forms of oikonyms again became more numerous: they accounted for 69.3 percent in Trakai District and 59.6 percent in Šalčininkai District.

In every rural district, authentic Lithuanian forms of oikonyms can often be recognized among the partially Slavicized ones. For example, in Nemenčinė rural district, Vilnius District, Ąžuolinė was officially written in Polish as Użalino, Darżėliai – Dorżele, Kiaūlamedżiai – Kiewłomiedzie, Rudausiai – Rodowsie, Sántaka – Santoka, Skėrsabaliai – Skiersobole, Šeškučiai – Szaszkucie, Vyžūkalnis – Wiżukalnia. Lithuanian common nouns, dialectal Vilnius-area forms, and compound oikonyms have also been preserved here: Juodė (Joda), Geniai (Gienie), Kvakšiai (Kwaksze), Salà (Soła); Gelėžiai (Giełazę), Klišabalė (Klisza Błoto), Gūdarais tis (Gu-dorojiście) (Maišiagala rural district). These distorted forms of traditional oikonyms cannot be called exonyms, that is, names of geographical features in foreign countries.

Lithuanian place-names written in Polish letters were of five types: 1) preserved completely authentic (cf. Ankštà, dialectally Unkšta – Polish Unkszta, Dumblė, dialectally Dum̄bla – Dumba, etc.); 2) partly Slavicized, with oikonym vowels, consonants, endings, suffixes, prefixes, or roots changed (cf. Grąžtėliai, dialectally Gruštėliai – Gruszele, Grúodžiai – Grodze; 3) Slavicized (Mekai – Miechowo); 4) translated (Naujakiemis – Nowosiółki, Paąžuoliai – Podębie, Pabėržė – Podbrzezie); 5) replaced (Perūnai – Dąbro-wo) (all these oikonyms are from Paberžė rural district, Vilnius District).

172

BENDRINĖ KALBA | 95

ABBREVIATIONS

apyl. – local administrative area

Įšn – Jašiūnai (Šalčininkai District)

lenk. – Polish

liet. – Lithuanian

Mšg – Maišiagala (Vilnius District)

Nmč – Nemenčinė (Vilnius District)

Pbrd – Pabradė (Švenčionys District)

r. – district

Švnč – Švenčionys (Švenčionys District)

všč. – rural district

LITERATŪRA

Adamkovich Aliaksandr 2013: Baltų ir slavų kalbų vardyno kontaktai Vitebsko srityje: daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

Būga Kazimieras 1961: Rinktiniai raštai 3, Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla.

DLKŽ 1972: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, Mintis.

Garšva Kazimieras 2015: Latvijos lietuvių šnektos, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

Garšva Kazimieras 2022: Vilniaus ir Šalčininkų rajonų vietovardžių kilmė. – Voruta 4(878), 4–10.

LATSŽ 1974: Lietuvos TSR administracinio-teritorinio suskirstymo žinynas. I dalis, Vilnius: Mintis.

LKE 2008: Lietuvių kalbos enciklopedija, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras.

LKŽ 1962: Lietuvių kalbos žodynas 6, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos ir literatūros institutas.

LPŽ 1985: Lietuvių pavardžių žodynas 1, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos ir literatūros institutas, Mokslas.

LPŽ 1989: Lietuvių pavardžių žodynas 2, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos ir literatūros institutas, Mokslas.

LVIŠ 2014: XVII a. pradžios Lietuvos vietovių istoriniai šaltiniai, parengė D. Vilimas, Vilnius: Lietuvos istorijos institutas.

LVŽ 2014: Lietuvos vietovardžių žodynas 2, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

Maceika Juozas 2020: Lietuvių būklė Lenkijos Respublikoje 1935–1938, Vilnius: Lietuvos gyventojų genocido ir rezistencijos tyrimo centras.

Razmukaitė Marija 1998: Lietuvos priesaginiai oikonimai: daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas.

RL 1980: Rytų Lietuva 1980, red. A. M. Budreckis, Chicago: Vilniaus krašto lietuvių sąjunga.

Safarewicz Jan 1956: Litewskie nazwy miejscowe na -iszki-. – Onomastica 2(1). Wrocław: Zakład imienia Ossolińskich–wydawnictwo, 15–63.

KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA. Tradiciniai ir netradiciniai rytų Lietuvos oikonimai

173

Salys Antanas 1983: Tikriniai vardai. Raštai 2, Roma: Lietuvių katalikų mokslo akademija.

Vanagas Aleksandras 1993: Pietryčių Lietuvos vietovardžiai. – Lietuvos rytai, sud. K. Garšva, L. Grumadienė. Vilnius: Valstybinis leidybos centras, 30–41.

Zeps Valdis Juris 1984: The placenames of Latgola, Madison: University of Wisconsin.

Zinkevičius Zigmas 1993: Rytų Lietuva praeityje ir dabar, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla.

Zinkevičius Zigmas 2013: Lietuviai. Praeities didybė ir sunykimas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras, Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

Gauta 2022 03 10

Priimta 2022 12 30

KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA

TRADITIONAL AND NON-TRADITIONAL OIKONYMS OF EASTERN LITHUANIA

Summary

Investigation of 3720 oikonyms in Eastern Lithuania (7455 forms in Lithuanian and Polish) shows that 98% of authentic Lithuanian oikonyms and over 60% of Slavified oikonyms have retained the features of the Lithuanian language. The influence of the Slavic languages on oikonyms began to be more pronounced here in the XVIth century, and Vilnius was the centre of slavification. Going from Daugavpils towards Vilnius, the Lithuanian elements of the Polish-written oikonyms were decreasing: in Ignalina district there were 79.1% of them, in Švenčionys district – 70.7%, in Vilnius district – 65.5%, in Vilnius – 45.5%. To the other sides of this city, the forms of Lithuanian oikonyms increased again: in Trakai district there were 69.3% of them and in Šalčininkai district 59.6%.

Authentic Lithuanian forms are often recognized among Slavified oikonyms in every district. For example, in Nemenčinė (Vilnius district), Ąžuolynė was officially written in Polish Uzalino, Darželiai – Dorzele, Kiaūlamedžiai – Kiewlomiedzie, Rudaūsiai – Rodowsie, Šántaka – Santoka, Skersabalai – Skiersobole, Šeškūčiai – Szaszkucie, Vyžūkalnis – Wiżukalnia. Lithuanian common words, dialectal Vilnius forms, compound oikonyms Juodė (Joda), Geniai (Gienie), Kv akšiai (Kwaksze), Salà (Sola); Gelėžiai (Gielaże), Klišabalė (Klisza Błoto), Gūdar aistis (Gudorojście) (Maišiagala district) are also preserved here. These deformed traditional forms of oikonyms cannot be called exonyms, i. e. names of geographical objects of foreign countries.

174

BENDRINĖ KALBA | 95

The Lithuanian proper names written in Polish letters were of 5 types: 1) fully authentic (cf. Ankštà, dialectally Unkštà – Unkszta, Dumblė, dialectally Dum bla – Dumbła, etc.); 2) partially Slavified, changing oikonymic vowels, consonants, endings, suffixes, prefixes, roots (cf. Grąžtėliai, dialectally Gruštėliai – Gruszele, Grúodžiai – Grodze; 3) Slavified (Mekai – Miechowo); 4) translated (Naujãkiemis – Nowosiółki, Pabėržė – Podbrzezie); 5) changed (Perúnai – Dąbrowo) (all these oikonyms are from Paberžė in Vilnius district).

When Slavifying oikonyms, Lithuanian roots, prefixes, suffixes and especially the suffix -išk-, which is especially characteristic of Eastern Lithuania, were often preserved. In South-Eastern Latvia, the suffix -išk- of oikonyms is the most common in the triangle Aknystà–Čiskodas–Sárja (Akniste-Tiskadi-Sarja). The closer the Republic of Lithuania is, the more of such oikonyms are. Now in some places there are about half of them. There are also oikonyms in Daugavpils district, the stem of which is related to the Lithuanian language: Kumpiniški ~ Kampiniškės, Lintopiški ~ Lentupiškės, Paberži ~ Pabėržė, Papušina ~ Papušinė, Šlapaki ~ Šlapakiai.

KEYWORDS: Eastern Lithuania, oikonyms, traditional authentic Lithuanian forms, Slavified oikonyms.

KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA

Lietuvių kalbos institutas Petro Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius [email protected]

KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA

TRADICINIAI IR NETRADICINIAI RYTŲ LIETUVOS OIKONIMAI

S a n t r a u k a

Lietuviškai užrašytus Lietuvos oikonimus tradiciniais laikome tokius, kurie toje vietovėje atsirado pirmiausia, buvo vartojami vietinių gyventojų ir kurių dauguma sudėtinių dalių (šaknis, priesaga, priešdėlis, galūnė) yra lietuviški. Lenkiškai užrašytus etninių lietuvių žemių oikonimus lietuviškos kilmės laikome tuos, kurių bent viena dalis (šaknis, priesaga, priešdėlis ar galūnė) išliko lietuviška. Netradiciniais Lietuvos oikonimais laikome vėliau atsiradusius svetimos kilmės oikonimus.

Rytų Lietuvoje ištyrus 3720 oikonimų (7455 formos lietuvių ir lenkų kalbomis) matyti, kad 98 proc. autentiškų lietuviškų oikonimų ir per 60 proc. suslavintų oikonimų išlaikė lietuvių kalbos požymius. Slavų kalbų įtaka oikonimams čia labiau pradėjo reikštis nuo XVI a. Einant nuo Daugpilio pusės link Vilniaus tarp lenkiškai užrašytų oikonimų lietuviškų elementų vis mažėja: Ignalinos rajone jų

KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA. Tradiciniai ir netradiciniai rytų Lietuvos oikonimai

175

buvo 79,1, Švenčionių r. – 70,7, Vilniaus r. – 65,5, Vilniaus mieste – 45,5 proc. Už šio miesto į kitas puses lietuviškų oikonimų formų vėl daugėjo – Trakų r. jų buvo 69,3, Šalčininkų r. – 59,6 proc.

Kiekviename valsčiuje tarp apslavintų oikonimų dažnai atpažįstamos autentiškos lietuviškos jų formos. Pavyzdžiui, Vilniaus r. Nemenčinės valsčiuje Ąžuolinė oficialiai lenkiškai rašyta Užalino, Darželiai – Dorzele, Kiaūlamedžiai – Kiewlomiedzie, Rudaūsiai – Rodowsie, Sántaka – Santoka, Skeŕsabalai – Skiersobole, Šeškūčiai – Szaszkucie, Vyžukalnis – Wiżukalnia. Čia išlaikyti ir lietuviški bendriniai žodžiai, tarmiškos vilniškių formos, sudurtiniai oikonimai Júodė (Joda), Geniā̃ (Gienie), Kvakšiai (Kwak sze), Salà (Sola); Gelėžiai (Giełaże), Klišabalė (Klisza Błoto), Gūdar aistis (Gudorojsćie) (Maišiagalos vlšč.).

ESMINIAI ŽODŽIAI: rytų Lietuva, oikonimai, tradicinės formos, suslavinti oikonimai.

K A Z I M I E R A S G A R Š V A

Lietuvių kalbos institutas

Petro Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius

[email protected]

176

BENDRINĖ KALBA | 95