Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga -(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida

SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ Vilnius University Research areas: Lithuanian accentology, dialectology, onomastics, and educational science. VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS Vilnius University ORCID id: orcid.org/0000-0001-9451-5993 Research areas: Balto-Slavic historical accentology, comparative grammar of the Baltic languages, Prussian studies, and Latvian studies. DOI: doi.org/10.35321/all91-04 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ACCENTUATION OF LITHUANIAN VERBS WITH THE SUFFIX −(I)UOTI Accentuation History of Lithuanian Verbs in −(i)uoti ABSTRACT The article examines the development of the accentuation of Lithuanian verbs with the suffix −(i)uoti, comparing data from present-day dialects, the standard language, and accented old texts with the reconstructed proto-language state. In the present-day language, derivatives with the suffix −(i)uoti characteristically bear suffixal stress, while instances of non-suffixal stress mentioned in sources attest to the gradual disappearance of this stress and the establishment of suffixal stress. Some instances of non-suffixal stress may be regarded as preserved archaisms (e.g., derivatives from nouns of accentuation class 1), while others arose later, e.g., verbs of the lūkuriuoti or baltuoti types (with a root circumflex serving an iconic function for extended action). The latter type is characterized by especially great diversity of accentuation types in the dialects, to whose survey most of the article is devoted. In the western dialect area (especially Lithuania Minor), non-suffixal stress is also possible in other verbs, e.g., onomatopoeic and other expressive verbs, Germanisms, and formations remodeled from derivatives with the suffix −(i)uoti. Straipsniai / Articles 77 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS KEYWORDS: Lithuanian, historical accentology, suffixed verbs, accentual type, acute, circumflex, accentual dominance, iconic function, metatony. ANNOTATION The article deals with the accentuation history of Lithuanian verbs in –(i)uoti by comparing data from modern dialects, the standard language, and accentuated old texts with the reconstructed state of affairs in the proto-language. In modern Lithuanian, verbs in –(i)uoti are characterized by stress on the suffix, while various attested cases of non-suffix stress testify to the gradual disappearance of this type of accentuation and the establishment of suffix stress. Some cases of non-suffix stress can be considered archaisms (e.g., derivatives from nouns of accentual paradigm 1), while others could be of a later origin, e.g., verbs of the types lū́kuriuoti and báltuoti (with root circumflex as an iconic marker of prolonged action). The latter type is characterized by a large dialectal variety of accentual types, and most of the article is devoted to the study of this variety. In the western area of dialects (especially in Lithuania Minor), non-suffix stress is also possible in other kinds of verbs, e.g., onomatopoeic and other expressive verbs, Germanisms, or remodeled verbs in –(i)oti. KEYWORDS: Lithuanian, historical accentology, suffixed verbs, accentual type, acute, circumflex, accentual dominance, iconic function, metatony. 1. INTRODUCTION (THE PRESENT SITUATION) § 1. In Standard Lithuanian, the verbal suffix –(i)uoti is assigned to the class of dominant strong suffixes1: its derivatives generally bear suffixal stress, regardless of the verb’s derivational type, meaning, or the accentuation of the base word, e.g., kain-úo-ti (← kaĩn-a 1), bals-úo-ti (← bal̃s-as 4); raudón-úo-ti (← raudón-as 1/3), gyv-úo-ti (← gýv-as 3); važ-úo-ti (← vež-ti) etc. (cf. Stundžia 2014: 168). § 2. Exceptions are perhaps constituted by some verbs with extended variants of the suffix (most often deverbal formations with –ul-iuoti, –ur-iuoti), which under current norms may be stressed either in the suffix or in the root (the base stem), e.g., nyk-ul-iúo-ti / nỹk-ul-iuo-ti; lū́k-ur-iúo-ti / lū̃k-ur-iuo-ti; snyg-ur-iúo-ti / snỹg-ur-iuo-ti. In the root-stressed variant, the root intonation is generally a circumflex—it may be inherited from the base word (e.g., nỹk-uliuo-ti ← nỹk-ti), metatonic (e.g., lū́k-ur-iuo-ti ← láuk-ti), or newly arisen in a lengthened vowel (e.g., snyg-ur-iuo-ti ← snìg-ti). In isolated denominative formations, ¹ For the accentological terms used in the article, see, e.g., Rinkevičius 2010; 2015: 34, 47–52. 78 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida usually in archaisms, the preserved acute of the root of the base word is also possible, e.g., varpuč-iuo-ti / várpuč-iuo-ti ← várput-is 1. In older normative works (e.g., Laigonaitė 1978: 79² or earlier editions of DLKŽ), only root stress is indicated for such words, whereas variant accentuation was codified only in the last few decades (beginning with the seventh edition of DLKŽ³; cf. also the recommendations of VLKК 2005 and 2013), so an evident tendency toward the establishment of suffixal stress can be observed. 2. ARCHaisms OF NON-SUFFIXAL STRESS AND THEIR ORIGIN § 3. There can be no doubt that in ancient times root stress (more precisely, stress on the base stem) was considerably more frequent in derivatives with the suffix –(i)uoti than in the modern language. For example, Mikalojus Daukša still stressed: apijuok-uo-ti, ášar-uo-ti, ˈmėlyn-uo-ti, ˈpánč-iuo-ti, ˈraudon-uo-ti, perhaps also vákar-uo-ti⁴ (cf. Skardžius 1935: 230ff. [1999: 266ff.])⁵. In Friedrich Kurschat’s Lithuanian–German dictionary (Kurschat 1883), we still find: áuks-uo-ti, áušč-iuo-ti, čiùlb-uo-ti, gąšč-iuo-ti, páik-iuo-ti, páin-iuo-ti, pánč-iuo-ti, pǘl-iuo-ti, rùìšč-iuo-ti, sódž-iuo-ti (i.e. sṓodž-iuo-ti), tvỹč-iuo-tis, žìng-iuo-ti, žiáuk(š)č-iuo-ti; bált-uo-ti, gẽlt-uo-ti, juód-uo-ti, márg-uo-ti; áugal-uo-ti, býdel-iuo-ti, búter-iuo-ti, dárgan-uo-ti, ébel-iuo-ti (and (h)ével-iuo-ti), gárban-uo-ti, priẽsgyn-iuo-ti, pǘder-iuo-ti, šérpet-uo-ti, úkan-uo-ti; gẽlton-uo-ti, gõmur-iuo-ti, grõmul-iuo-ti, maňgal-iuo-ti, márgal-iuo-ti, mėlyn-uo-ti, pýpel-iuo-ti, plũdur-iuo-ti, raũdon-uo-ti, skar̃mal-iuo-ti, svam̃bal-iuo-ti, viñzel-iuo-ti, výtur-iuo-ti (alongside výtur-iav-imas); ášar-uo-ti, kãtur-uo-ti (and kãtul-iuo-ti), prãkait-uo-ti, prãvar̃dž-iuo-ti, traškãn-uo-ti, vákar-uo-ti, vàsar-uo-ti; čìvyr-uo-ti⁶, ² And even Laigonaitė 2002: 105. ³ Some former root-stressed archaisms (e.g., grúod-uo-ti) are not included at all in the newer editions of DLKŽ. ⁴ The attested past passive participle form priwákarawufis does not make it possible to determine whether this is a derivative with –uoti or –auti. ⁵ M. Daukša’s spelling does not make the intonation of the roots in the words ˈpánč-iuo-ti, ˈmėlyn-uo-ti, ˈraudon-uo-ti clear. For the presumed acute of the first of these, cf. pántis, pánčioti. The intonation of the other two is less obvious: at least mėlyn-uo-ti is attested in the dialects with both possible intonations (see §§ 19–20). ⁶ Alongside čivyr-úo-ti (cf. § 31 and footnote 50). Straipsniai / Articles 79 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS grėvez–uo–ti, išgašč–iuo–ti, kăbar–iuo–tis, kăkal–iuo–ti, kămaš–uo–ti, kliūper–iuo–ti, lėket–uo–ti, mạdar–uo–ti, mùster–uo–ti, tālaž–uo–ti⁷ In addition to the examples already mentioned (and those to be mentioned in § 15), LKŽ also attests from various sources, for example: gyv–uo–ti ‘to shout “gyvi gyvi” (about a drunk person)’, grū́od–uo–ti, kárp–uo–ti, miél–uo–ti, mìlt–uo–ti, mýl–uo–ti, rēm–uo–ti, snárgl–iuo–ti, spéig–uo–ti⁸, súp–uo–ti, tùlk–uo–ti, séil–iuo–ti, vėj–uo–ti; jómark–uo–ti, pléiskan–iuoti⁹, šéker–iuo–ti, šiū́pel–iuo–ti; ė́kel–iuo–ti; pùsryč–iuo–ti etc.¹⁰ § 4. On the basis of the usual patterns in the development of the accentuation of suffixed words in the Baltic and Slavic languages, it may be assumed that initially root (base-stem) stress was characteristic of derivatives from fixed-stress (accentually strong-stemmed) base words (e.g., vėj–uo–ti ← vėj–as 1), while suffixal stress was characteristic of derivatives from mobile-stress (weak-stemmed) words (e.g., kelm–úo–ti ← kélm–as 3). In other words, the suffix –uo–ti, like other verbal derivational suffixes, is to be derived from the Balto-(Slavic) class of non-dominant strong suffixes. Later, the principle of dependence of derivative accentuation on the accentuation of the base words ceased to be observed because of the universal tendency toward the ascendancy of dominant suffixes (i.e. suffixes determining uniform accentuation of derivatives), while the choice of the suffixal-stress type for generalization was determined by the fact that in some words, after stress shifted by Saussure’s law from a non-acute root to an acute suffix (e.g., *parš–uo–ti > parš–úo–ti), the number of cases with suffixal stress increased disproportionately (cf. Dybo 1981: 201; Rinkevičius 2015: 47–52). According to the development scenario discussed, non-suffixal stress could have survived only in acute monosyllabic base stems (e.g., áuks–uo–ti), as well as on the final syllable of polysyllabic base stems, regardless of intonation or quantity (e.g., dárgan–uo–ti, á̄sar–uo–ti, pùsryč–iuo–ti). In old denominative formations, such primary root (base-stem) stress could only be possible in derivatives from nouns of accentuation class 1 (strong stems). ⁷ Cf. also the following examples given by Kurschat as uncertain (i.e. in square brackets): [mérg–uo–ti; čiėpč–iuo–ti (čiėpčiuju); sviñbal–iuo–ti, žaìbar–iuo–ti]. ⁸ Without the indicated source, LKŽ. ⁹ A proofreading error in LKŽe: peí̯škanuoti (cf. pléiskan­iuoti LKŽ X 127). ¹⁰ The list is not exhaustive. It was compiled only preliminarily by reviewing the LKŽ list of words ending in –uoti and checking the accentuation of the –(i)uoti verbs attested in F. Kurschat’s Lithuanian–German dictionary against the LKŽ data. Among the inaccuracies noticed, one might mention, for example, that the žirgliuoti cited in LKŽ (KI120, i.e. Kurschat 1870: 120, s. v. aufspreizen) is erroneous—the original source actually has žirgliuoti accented (the circumflex was apparently mistakenly taken from the synonym žirgŀinti, which Kurschat mentions immediately there). Cf. also footnote 50. 80 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida § 5. A considerable proportion of the non-suffixally stressed verbs attested in the sources mentioned above have base words that are indeed nouns of accentuation class 1, e.g., api­juoka 1, ąšara 1, ãuksas 1/3, dãrgana 1/3ᵃ, grūodas 3/1, išgąstis 1 (alongside išgąstỹs 3ᵇ), kãrpa 1, miẽlas 3 (←1)¹¹, mãlas 3 (← *1)¹², mìltai 1, pãntis 1, plẽiskana 1, prãkaitas 3ᵇ/1, priešgyna 1, pūlis 1, pūšrytìs 1 (alongside pusrytỹs 3ᵇ), rẽmas 1, sėilė 1/3(/4), spėigas 1(/4), súodžiai 1, šérpeta(s) 1, tràškana (and traiškana) 1, úkanaĩ 1/3ᵃ, vãkaras 3ᵇ/1, várputis 1, vėjas 1, vùngis 1(/2). For preserved root stress in derivatives from accentuation-class-1 adjectives denoting colors, see § 23. Some such non-suffixally stressed verbs may be preserved old archaisms inherited from the period before Saussure’s law, while others may have been formed somewhat later, without contradicting the general pattern that non-suffixal stress is possible only in acute monosyllabic base stems and on the final syllable of polysyllabic base stems. In some of the listed base nouns (e.g., vãkaras), accentuation class 1 may also be secondary¹³, occurring only in some dialects (but precisely those in which the corresponding non-suffixally stressed verb is also recorded). For only a few verbs, the expected class-1 accentuation of the base words is unattested in dictionaries: snarglys 3/4, áugalas 3ᵃ, pravardė 3ᵇ (or pravardas), skarmalas 3ᵇ. 3. NEW CASES OF NON-SUFFIXAL STRESS § 6. In addition to the preserved archaisms associated with accentuation class 1 of the base nouns, in the period after Saussure’s law a considerable number of new non-suffixally stressed verbs arose in Lithuanian, often with a root circumflex, whose accentuation was already determined by causes other than the accentual value of the base stem. Their accentuation varies considerably in present-day or relatively recent dialects. Several groups of such verbs can be distinguished, differing from one another in meaning, circumstances of formation, and the geographical distribution of accentual types: a) lūkuriuoti type; b) bal̃tuoti type; ¹¹ Cf. M. Daukša’s dat. sg. masc. miél-am (see Skardžius 1936: 141 [1999: 105]) and the tendency toward the establishment of mobile stress characteristic of underived adjectives (see Rinkevičius 2015: 39ff.). ¹² Cf. 1a. mìl̃s, pr. nom. pl. mìlai, Sl. *mílъ a. p. a. ¹³ The word vãkaras should most likely be regarded as an old mobile-stress word (cf. Sl. *věčerъ a. p. c.), but in the western Lithuanian dialect area, especially Lithuania Minor (where the root-stressed verb vakar–uo–ti is attested), fixed-stress forms or, respectively, signs of root accentual strength also occur in derivatives, cf. vãkaras 1 (LKŽ: Trk), Friedrich Wilhelm Haack’s dictionary and grammar adv. (instr. pl.) Wákarais, F. Kurschat’s nom. pl. vakarãì, verb vãkar–au–ja. Straipsniai / Articles 81 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS c) onomatopoeic and similar verbs; d) Germanisms or derivatives from Germanisms; e) derivatives with the suffix -(i)oti. The origin and development of the accentuation of the verbs in each of these groups, as well as the diversity of accentuation types in the dialects, are discussed separately below. Most attention is devoted to the second (balтuoti) type, characterized by the greatest accentual diversity in the dialects. 3.1. The Lūkuriuoti type § 7. The aforementioned derivatives of the –ur–iuoti, –ul–iuoti type (see § 2), generally deverbal formations denoting a non-intensive continuous action or state (cf. LKG II 250ff.) and having a circumflex in the root (primary, metatonic, or arising through vowel lengthening), should by origin be regarded as extended forms of the –ur–ti, –ul–ti derivatives with the same meaning (i.e. lũk–ur–iuo–ti ← lũk–ur–ti). The latter are sometimes considered denominative in origin (e.g., lũk–ur–ti ← lũk–ur–ỹs 3ᵇ, cf. Skardžius 1943: 551), although theoretically the deverbal origin of the corresponding nouns is also possible. Derivatives with other extended suffixes may have arisen from –ur–ti, –ul–ti derivatives as well—in them, too, the root generally has a circumflex, cf. lũk–ur–iau–ti, lũk–ur–o–ti, lũk–ur–io–ti, lũk–ur–no–ti, lũk–ur–nė–ti. § 8. The circumflex (in other words, the “continuous” intonation, cf. Girdenis 2003: 273) and vowel lengthening in –ur–ti, –ul–ti derivatives (or in their nominal bases) perform an iconic function: they reinforce the impression of an extended, slow action (cf. Stundžia 1985: 135). From these verbs, the circumflex (or, respectively, root stress and vowel lengthening) was transferred to all the aforementioned extended derivatives, i.e.: lũk–ti → (lũk–ur–į →) lũk–ur–ti → lũk–ur–iuo–ti, lũk–ur–iau–ti etc.; snỹg–ti → (snỹg–ur–į →) snỹg–ur–ti → snỹg–ur–iuo–ti, snỹg–ur–o–ti etc. The opposite process is seen in verbs with instantaneous meaning containing –ter–ti, –tel–ti and their extended variants, in which root acute (“abrupt” intonation) or a short vowel predominates, cf.: snaũs–ti → snũs–tel–ti → snũs–tel–ė–ti; tẽmp–ti → t̃mp–tel–ti → t̃mp–tel–ė–ti; láuk–ti → lùk–tel–ti → lùk–tel–ė–ti. § 9. According to LKŽ and dialect dictionary data, root stress occurs throughout almost all of Lithuania, whereas suffixal stress is possible only in its eastern part (mainly in the eastern Aukštaitian dialects, and locally also in the western or southern Aukštaitian dialects¹⁴) (see Map 1). Even within a single dialect, different accentuation of different derivatives with the same suffix may be attested, e.g., plũd–uruoti: lũk–uruoti, snũd–uruoti (LKŽ: ¹⁴ There is insufficient data on the southern Aukštaitian dialects, but words such as PPAŽ snygulióti could indirectly attest to the possibility of suffixal stress also in derivatives in –uruoti, –uliuoti. 82 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida Srv); lūk–uriuoti: snyg–uriuoti, snūd–uriuoti (VdškŽ); snąg–uriuoti: snyg–uriuoti (LKŽ: Ėr). MAP 1. Stress of derivatives with the suffixes –ur(i)uoti, –uliuoti in Lithuanian dialects: lūkuriuoti: LKŽ (Kur, Srv); plūduriuoti: LKŽ (Lzd); Znž (Grš); snyguriuoti: LKŽ (Ut, Ob, Švnč, Ėr); VdškŽ; snyguliuoti: LKŽ (Mtl); snūduriuoti: LKŽ (Srv); VdškŽ; snūduliuoti: LKŽ (Ad); lūkuriuoti: LKŽ (Grz, Alk, Skr); KzRŽ (KzR); ZnŽ (Nm, Lkč); VdškŽ; plūduriuoti: LKŽ (Skr, Nmk, Srv, Šll); K; Sch15; ŠVŽŽ (Ged, Lu); KrtnŽ; VaigŽ; KzRŽ (KzR); plūduruoti: LKŽ (Ms, Užv, Rdn, Krš); Dunž (Dr, Varp, Krš, Vds); snyguriuoti: LKŽ (Škn, Yl, Jrb, Dkš, Pv); KzRŽ (Bbr, KzR); KltŽ; snygūruoti: LKŽ (Jž, Skp, Kp, Rš); KpŽ (Skp, Kp); snyguliuoti: LKŽ (Bsg, Krok, Lkč; Alv, Mrs); ZnŽ (Lkč); snūduriuoti: LKŽ (Mžk, Krkl, Grk, Jrb, Dkš, Mrj, Krs, Dbk, Ds); KrtnŽ; VaigŽ; KzRŽ (Gvlt, KzR); snūduruoti: LKŽ (Rdn); KpŽ (Kp, Ppl); snūduliuoti: LKŽ (Plv; Ds). 15 See Schleicher 1857: 171 (the intonation is unclear from the spelling: plūduriavo). Straipsniai / Articles 83 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS § 10. In the present-day language, as mentioned (see § 2), suffixal stress is becoming increasingly established. 3.2. The Bal̄tuoti type 3.2.1. General overview § 11. Among all the attested non-suffixally stressed derivatives in -(i)uoti, a compact group of verbs stands out, united by their semantics and (at least in some dialects) by the intonation of the root—circumflex. These are derivatives from adjectives denoting color (or other similar properties), most often having a stative derivational meaning, i.e. “to be or appear such as is expressed by the base word” (cf. DLKG 393)16, e.g., balt-uo-ti ‘to be white, to appear white’ ← adj. bál­t-as. The root circumflex may be either metatonic (e.g., bālt-uo-ti ← bālt-as) or inherited from the base word (e.g., gēlt-uo-ti ← gēlt-as). Derivatives from adjectives with short or positionally long root vowels apparently do not belong to this group—they are generally attested with suffixal stress in all sources17, cf. rud-uo-ti, rus̄u-uo-ti, žal-iuo-ti¹⁸, žāl-uo-ti¹⁹. § 12. Unlike derivatives of the lū̄kuriuoti type, circumflex root stress in these verbs is not inherited from links in an intermediate derivational chain (i.e. láuk-ti → [lãkur-i →] lúkūr-ti → lúkūr-iuo-ti), but arises in the formation of the -uoti derivatives themselves (i.e. bált-as → balt-uo-ti), and therefore does not occur in other derivatives from color names (cf. balt-é-ti, bál­t-in-ti)20. 16 In other words, denoting “the expression of the property expressed by the base word, its existence as a process” (cf. LKG II 248). 17 Cf. in the same sentence: sã-ko | pãpučǫ. dú-mu. | taį tą pudrà pajūdūoją | parudõją (ZnŽ: Br). 18 It is unclear only how reliable the accentuation of žāl-iuo-ti mentioned in LKŽ is (BŽ; see Baronas 1932: 175, s. v. зеленѣть). This may also be a case of hypercorrection: the dictionary also stresses, for example, juódoti, although root stress is otherwise not expected in the dialect of the Biržai speaker Jonas Baronas (cf. §§ 17, 21 and Map 3). 19 Most likely merely because of the rarity of the examples, root stress is unattested in LKŽ for a pair of verbs of the type under discussion with long roots, e.g., bér-uo-ti (Rdm—only one accented example, moreover from a dialect where suffixal stress is entirely expected, see § 21), palv-uo-ti (not a single accented example). 20 F. Kurschat gives the form [gėlton-au-ti] in square brackets (thus unknown to the author), and it was most likely mechanically accented according to the synonymous gėlton-uo-ti written beside it. ZnŽ marg-au-ti is most likely a remodeling of mãrg-uo-ti (the latter is absent from ZnŽ). 84 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida 3.2.2. Development in the 20th–21st centuries § 13. Root stress in verbs of the type under discussion was normative at the beginning of the formation of the standard language. Various normative works of the 20th–21st centuries reflect the gradual disappearance of root stress, or, respectively, the establishment of suffixal stress. § 14. In his 1936 work Bendrinės lietuvių kalbos kirčiavime, Pranas Skardžius stated that “the verbs baltuoti, juoduoti, marguoti, mėlynuoti, raudonuoti [...] are to be stressed in the root, not in the suffix” (Skardžius 1999: 381, cf. also p. 379), and included verbs such as baltuoti, geltonuoti, juoduoti, marguoti, mėlynuoti, palšuoti, pilkuoti, raudonuoti in the sample dictionary (pp. 391–421). In reviewing Alfonso Kalnius, Zigmas Kuzmickis, and Jurgis Talmantas’s Lietuvių kalbos rašybos vadovėlį su kirčiuotu žodynu, he stated that “the following are accented incorrectly: [...] geltonuoti [...]. Much more widely used, and therefore better suited to the standard language, is: [...] geltonuoti (cf. pilkuoti, raudonuoti, etc.)” (Skardžius 1998: 660). Similarly, when reviewing Jurgis Šlapelis’s (a Kupiškis native)21 1920–1922 dictionary booklet, Kazimieras Būga criticized the form pilkuoja used there as an easternism unsuitable for the standard language; in written language it is matched by pilkuoja. According to Būga, “in written language they also pronounce: juoduoja, marguoja, baltuoja, mėlynuoja, raudonuoja” (see Būga 1959: 144).22 § 15. The first DLKŽ editions published in the second half of the 20th century already indicate twofold accentuation for most verbs of this type: root and suffixal (e.g., baltuoti / baltúoti), while for some, rarer verbs they indicate only suffixal stress (e.g., gelsvuoti). In cases of twofold accentuation, the first edition (1954) gives the root-stressed variant first (i.e. baltuoti / baltúoti), while the second (1972) gives the suffixally stressed variant first (i.e. baltúoti / baltuoti)³. In the third edition (1993), only suffixal stress is indicated for most verbs (e.g., baltuoti, but still pilkuoti / pilkuoti), whereas in the newest editions (beginning with the seventh, 2012), all verbs are already given with suffixal stress. Cf. the evolution of codification: 21 Cf. Zinkevičius 1992: 317. 22 Because of the limited scope of J. Šlapelis’s 1920–1922 dictionary booklet, a verb of the type under discussion occurs in it only once (pilkuoja), and even then only as an example of the use of a completely different word (akmenynas). In Šlapelis’s other dictionaries, the headwords of the corresponding verb entries indicate twofold accentuation: baltúoti / baltuoti; geltonuoti / geltonúoti; juoduoti / juodúoti; raudonuoti / raudonúoti (see Šlapelis 1921; 1929; 1940). 23 Moreover, for unclear reasons, in the second edition the verb gelsvuoti is given with twofold accentuation, while in the root-stressed form of the verb juoduoti an acute appears for some inexplicable reason (most likely a proofreading error). Straipsniai / Articles 85 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS DLKŽ¹, 1954 (= DLKŽ²ᵃ, 1962) DLKŽ²ᵇ, 1972 Variants | Suffixal stress baltuoti / baltúoti gelsvúoti geltonuoti / geltonúoti geltuoti / geltúoti giedruoti / giedruoti juoduoti / juodúoti keršúoti marguoti / margúoti mėlynuoti / melynúoti melsvúoti palšuoti / palšúoti pilkuoti / pilkúoti raibúoti raudonuoti / raudonúoti rausvúoti Variants | Suffixal stress gelsvúoti / gėlsvuoti geltonuoti / gėltonuoti geltúoti / gėltuoti giedruoti / giėdruoti juoduoti / ju̇oduoti keršúoti marguoti / mar̃guoti mėlynuoti / mėlynuoti melsvúoti palšuoti / palšúoti pilkuoti / pilkúoti raibúoti raudonuoti / raudonúoti rausvúoti DLKŽ³, 1993 (= DLKŽ⁴, 2000) DLKŽ⁷, 2012 (= DLKŽ⁸, 2021) Variants | Suffixal stress baltúoti gelsvúoti geltonúoti geltúoti giedruoti / giėdruoti juodúoti keršúoti margúoti / mar̃guoti mėlynúoti melsvúoti palšúoti pilkúoti / pilkuoti raibúoti raudonúoti rausvúoti Variants | Suffixal stress baltúoti gelsvúoti geltonúoti geltúoti giedruoti juodúoti keršúoti marguoti mėlynúoti melsvúoti palšúoti pilkúoti raibúoti raudonúoti rausvúoti 86 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida 3.2.3. Distribution of accentuation types in the dialects § 16. Great diversity in the accentuation of verbs of the type under discussion is possible in the dialects. § 17. In the case of derivatives from non-suffixed (i.e. having monosyllabic stems24) adjectives, three types of accentuation are possible: • suffixal stress (balt-úo-ti); • root stress with the acute of the base adjective preserved (bált-uo-ti ← bált-as); • root stress with a (metatonic) circumflex (bált-uo-ti ← bált-as). In derivatives from adjectives with a non-acute root (gelsvuoti, gel­tuoti, melsvuoti, rausvuoti), root acute does not occur. Maps 2–5 show the geographical distribution of the accentuation types of the more characteristic verbs of the type under discussion attested in LKŽ and dialect dictionaries (baltuoti, juoduoti, marguoti, pilkuoti). As can be seen, the suffixal-accent type (balt-úo-ti, juod-úo-ti, marg-úo-ti, pilk-úo-ti) is more characteristic of the eastern dialect area (the eastern and southern Aukštaitian dialects, the Lithuanian islands in Belarus), whereas root accent is characteristic of the western area. Retained root acute (bált-uo-ti, juód-uo-ti, márg-uo-ti, pílk-uo-ti) is more characteristic of the northern part of the western area (the northern Žemaitian dialects), whereas the metatonic circumflex (bált-uo-ti, juód-uo-ti, márg-uo-ti, pílk-uo-ti) is characteristic of the southern part (the southern Žemaitian dialects, Lithuania Minor, the Kauniškiai dialect). In the eastern area (except for the border zone with the western area), the metatonic circumflex is attested in only one source (Ds, according to K. Būga’s data). The boundaries of the areas, of course, do not necessarily coincide exactly with the dialect boundaries of the scholarly classification25. In some places, different accentuation types are also possible within the same area or even in the same subdialect (cf. the Kauniškiai accentuation of juoduoti, see Map 3 and §§ 25–27), but this does not invalidate the general picture of the geographical distribution of accentual types. 24 For the sake of simplicity, hereafter adjectives are called nonsuffixal not only when they are morphologically unanalyzable, but also when they contain consonantal suffixes (e.g., gel-sv-as), whereas nonsuffixal adjectives are understood to be only those containing vocalic suffixes (e.g., gelt-on-as). 25 In this article, when referring to the areas where the accentuation types under discussion are distributed, the adjectives western, eastern, northern, southern are used (e.g., western area, northern Žemaitians), while when referring to the units of the standard dialect classification, the genitives of the nouns of the west, of the east, of the north, of the south are used (e.g., eastern Aukštaitians, northern Žemaitians). Straipsniai / Articles 87 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS MAP 2. Accentuation of the verb baltuoti in Lithuanian dialects: • baltúoti: LKŽ (MIt; Bsg; Rm; Lp, Lš; Arm); DvŽ (Rm, Žž); DrskŽ, PPAŽ (Knv, Mrc, Rud, Zrv); ZtŽ; ZnŽ (Grš); • báltuoti: LKŽ (Krtn, Brs, Trk); KrtnŽ; ŠVŽŽ (Prlg, Srp, Žbr); DūnŽ (Dr, Vds); ZnŽ (Slv); • baltuoti: LKŽ (Vkš, Šts; Brt; Gs); K; KzRŽ (KzR); ZnŽ (Grš, Lkč, Lkš, Šk); KBūg (Ds). 88 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida MAP 3. Accentuation of the verb juoduoti in Lithuanian dialects: • juoduoti: LKŽ (Dglš; Gs, Lp; Ėr, Pš, Srv, Šd; Pc; Trg; Žr); KpŽ (Skp, Šmn, PnmR, Plvn, Pnd, Slm); VdšKŽ; DvŽ (Gr, Mlk26); DrskŽ; PPAŽ (Mrc, Mst); ZtŽ; ZnŽ (Snt, Lp1, Jnk, Grš); • juoduoti: LKŽ (Brs, KlvrŽ, Šts; Skr); ŠVŽŽ (Įp, Yl, Ylk, Lyk, Ms, Nsm, Srpt, Vab, Že); KrtnŽ; • juoduoti: LKŽ (Tl; Vvr; Šk, Žvr; Gs; Ds); K; ZnŽ (Br, Grš, Jnk, Lp1, Lkš, VšR, Snt, Žvr); KBūg (Ds). 26 If it should be emended, from M1 (see DvŽ: s. v. juoduoti). Straipsniai / Articles 89 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS MAP 4. Accentuation of the verb marguoti in Lithuanian dialects: • margúoti: LKŽ (Rk; Ėr; Drsk, Lp); VdškŽ; DrskŽ; PPAŽ (Mrc, Mst); ŠVŽŽ (Lu); • márguoti: LKŽ (Lk, Šts; Slnt; Krš); KrtnŽ; DūnŽ (Dr, Krš); KBūg (Als, Slnt); • marguoti: LKŽ (Jdr; Br, Dkš, Klvr, Mrj, Skr); K; KzRŽ (KzR); KBūg (Ds). 90 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida MAP 5. Accentuation of the verb pilkuoti in Lithuanian dialects: • pilkuoti: LKŽ (Pc; Šts); PPAŽ (Rud); • pilkuoti: LKŽ (Plt; Krš); ŠVŽŽ (Ged); KrtnŽ; DūnŽ (Dr, Krš); • pilkuoti: LKŽ (Grg; Užv; Br, Skr); KzRŽ (KzR); KBūg (Ds)?²⁷. § 18. In derivatives from suffixal (i.e., having disyllabic stems²⁸) adjectives, in the case of nonsuffixal accent, both stress on the first syllable of the base stem, i.e. the root, is possible (gėl̃t-on-uo-ti), as is stress on the second syllable (i.e. the adjective suffix) (gelt-õn-uo-ti, gelt-õn-uo-ti). Depending on the accentuation of the adjectives—suffixal (e.g., gelt-õn-as, raud-õn-as) or root (e.g., mė́l-yn-as)—the accentuation of the verbs derived from them also varies. § 19. Adjectives with circumflex-origin roots gelt-õn-as, raud-õn-as (cf. gẽlt-as, raũd-as) have the stress on the suffix. Since the suffix is acute, i.e. capable of attracting stress according to Saussure’s law, historically only this accentuation is expected. Fourfold accentuation is possible in derivatives of these adjectives: • stress on the verbal suffix (e.g., gelt-on-uo-ti); ²⁷ It is not entirely clear from K. Būga’s formulation (see the quotation in § 14 and the note immediately following it: “(the Dusetiškiai also say so).”) whether in Dusetos the circumflex is possible only in the words juõduoja, mẽrguoja, bãltuoja, mẽlynuoja, raũdonuoja, or also in pilkuoja. ²⁸ Cf. note 24. Straipsniai / Articles 91 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS root stress with a circumflex (e.g., gẽlt-on-uo-ti); the stress position of the base word retained, with an acute accent in the suffix (e.g., gelt-ón-uo-ti); the stress position of the base word retained in the suffix, but with a metatonic circumflex (e.g., gelt-õn-uo-ti). The geographical distribution of the accentuation types can be seen in Maps 6–7. As in the case of derivatives from nonsuffixal adjectives (see § 17), stress on the verbal suffix (gelton-úo-ti, raudon-úo-ti) is more characteristic of the eastern dialect area, whereas stress on the base stem is characteristic of the western area. In the northern part of the western area (the northern Žemaitian dialects), the stress position of the base adjective is retained (on the suffix –on-). In part of this area (in the north and northwest), the suffix acute is also retained (gelt-õn-uo-ti, raud-õn-uo-ti), whereas in the other part (in the south and southeast) metathesis occurs (gelt-õn-uo-ti, raud-õn-uo-ti). In the southern part of the western area (the southern Žemaitian dialects, Lithuania Minor, the Kauniškiai dialect), the stress position of the base adjective is not retained—the root is stressed (gẽlt-on-uo-ti, raũdon-uo-ti). In isolated cases, stress on the base stem is also attested in the eastern area (among the eastern Aukštaitians). It is not entirely clear how reliably the suffix intonations are recorded here (in the zone of pronounced intonation leveling): gelt-õn-uo-ti (1x), but raud-õn-uo-ti (2x). A circumflex-stressed root (gẽlt-on-uo-ti, raũd-on-uo-ti), as in the case of derivatives from nonsuffixal adjectives (see § 17), is attested only in works by authors from the first half of the twentieth century, without examples from living speech. K. Būga mentions this accentuation in his native Dusetos29 (which does not coincide with the suffixal accentuation in the Ds form given in LKŽ išraudonávo) and Anykščiai30, while A. Baranauskas uses it in the R5 (i.e. Kupiškėnai) dialect, accenting a poetic text written by its female representative31. 29 Būga 1959: 144 (raudonųoja Ds), 480 (raudonųoti Ds). 30 Būga 1959: 480 (geltõnuoti An). 31 “[…] Jou n’abalińksmūs wisi m’adėlei, Kàd gãlțuoja žali lăpelė. Bàe jawũ dỳki wisi łoukėlei. […] Urszulà Tamosziūnàiczа. 1880. m. Łapkrico 21. d. Pajūodupyje” (Baranowski 1920: 438–439). 92 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida MAP 6. Accentuation of the verb geltonuoti in Lithuanian dialects: • geltonuoti: LKŽ (Ėr, Jnšk, Pn; Dkš); KpŽ (Alz, Slm, PnmR, Plvn); VdškŽ; KltŽ; DvŽ (Sr, Šlt;); DrskŽ; PPAŽ (Mrc, Rud, Žr); LzŽ (Dnr); ZtŽ; • geltónuoti: ŠVŽŽ (Kdž, Ms, Nsm, Pal, Vin, Šek, Žbr); KrtnŽ; • geltonuoti: LKŽ (Kt); K; KzRŽ (GvIt); ZnŽ (Grš, Lkš, Žlt); KBūg (An); ABar (R5); • geltonuoti: LKŽ (Als, KlvrŽ, Šts; Jnšk; Pl); DūnŽ (PvnR32, Vrp); Būga (Kv). 32 The recording of one of the two presumed PvnR cases with the abbreviation PnmR (not explained in the list of abbreviations in DūnŽ) should most likely be regarded as a typographical error. Straipsniai / Articles 93 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS MAP 7. Accentuation of the verb raudonuoti in Lithuanian dialects: • raudónuoti: LKŽ (Ldk; Ds, Krd, Lel, Trgn; Dglš, Klt; Bd, Dbč, Lp, Smn, Vlk; Kli; Ėr, Lnkv, Rm; Bsg, Pc; Alk, Dkš, Šn, Srd); KpŽ (Skp, Slm, Šmn); VdškŽ; KltŽ; KB ūg (Lkm); DvŽ (Dvr, Mc, Žž); DrskŽ; PPAŽ (Kb, Mrc); LzŽ (Dnr, Psl); ZtŽ; DkšŽ; VaigŽ; • raudónuoti: LKŽ (Brs, Ggr, KlvrŽ, Lpl, Trk, Vgr, Vkš, Šts; Rš, Smal); ŠVŽŽ (Dauk, Drk, Ged, Kra, Kern, Kul, Med, Ms, Pal, Trkn, Šek, Vin, Žė, Žbr); KrtnŽ; • raūdonuoti: LKŽ (Dov, Grg, Kl, Rt, Vž; Sg; Kv, Šv, Up; Nmnk, Rs; Grl, Jrb, Skr; Grz; Smn); K; DkšŽ; KzRŽ (KzR); ZnŽ (Jnk, Grš, Lkš, Lkč, Snt, Slv, Žlt); KB ūg (Ds); • raudónuoti: LKŽ (Rdn; Krš, Užv); DūnŽ (Dr, Krš, PvnR). § 20. The adjective mél-yn-as (and the variants mél-in-as, mél-en-as) has an acute root, which is stressed in most dialects, but stress shifted to the suffix also occurs (cf. mél-ýn-as DūnŽ: Pkš, Krš)—most likely by analogy with gelt-ón-as, raud-ón-as. Fourfold accentuation is possible in derivatives with –uoti: • stress on the verbal suffix (mėlyn-úo-ti); • the stress position of the base adjective and the acute intonation in the root retained (mėl-yn-ūo-ti); 94 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida the stress position of the base adjective retained in the root, but with a metatonic circumflex (mėl-yn-uo-ti); the stress position of the base adjective retained, with an acute intonation in the suffix (mel-ýn-uo-ti) (in dialects where the adjective form melýnas is used). See Map 8 for the geographical distribution of the accentuation types. As in the case of the derivatives discussed earlier, stress on the suffix -úo-ti (mėl-yn-úo-ti, mėl-in-úo-ti, mėl-en-úo-ti) is characteristic of the eastern dialect area, whereas stress on the base stem is characteristic of the western area. The retained acute of the root of the base stem (mėl-yn-uo-ti, mėl-en-uo-ti) is attested only in the far north of the western area, whereas the metatonic circumflex (mėl-yn-uo-ti, mėl-en-uo-ti) is found throughout the remaining area. Stress on the suffix of the base stem (mėl-ýn-uo-ti) occurs only where the suffixally stressed adjective mėl-ýn-as is also used, i.e. in the northeastern corner of the southern Žemaitian area (DūnŽ: Drv, Pkš). (It is interesting that stress on the suffix of the base stem is also characteristic of verbs in gelt-õn-uo-ti, raud-õn-uo-ti in this area, but unlike the case of mėl-ýn-uo-ti, circumflex metathesis occurs in them; see § 19). In the area of the eastern Aukštaitians, the metatonic root circumflex (mėl-yn-uo-ti) is once again attested only by K. Būga in Dusetos (but cf. LKŽ numelýnãvo Ds). Straipsniai / Articles 95 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS MAP 8. Accentuation of the verb mėlynuoti and its variants in Lithuanian dialects: • mėlynúoti: LKŽ (Ds, Lel, Mlt; Ėr, Lnkv; Prng; VIk, Srj; Pc; Brš, Klvr); KpŽ (Pnd); VdškŽ; DvŽ (Dv, MIk); DrskŽ; PPAŽ (Knv, Mrc); LzŽ (Dnr); ZtŽ; ZnŽ (Grš, Snt, Šk); mėlinúoti: DvŽ (Dv, Šlt); mėlenúoti: DūnŽ (Krš); • mėlynuóti: ŠVŽŽ (Erk, Kra, Ms, Nsm); mėlenúoti: ŠVŽŽ (Srpt); KBūg (Ms, Slnt); • mėlynuoti: LKŽ (Ar, Jrb, Pgg, Skr, Smln, VIk; Gs); K; KzRŽ (KzR); ZnŽ (Lkč, Lkš); KBūg (Ds); mėlenuoti: LKŽ (Šts, Rdn; Gršl, End; Prk; Varn, Vds, Pvn); DūnŽ (Užv, Vkšn); • mėlynuoti: DūnŽ (Dr, Pkš). § 21. A generalized picture of the accentuation of all the verbs discussed is presented in Map 9, which shows that three principal accentual types characteristic of –uoti derivatives from color terms occur in three fairly clearly emerging geographical areas: • eastern area (chiefly the eastern and southern Aukštaitians)—stress on the suffix –uo–ti (balt–úo–ti, juod–úo–ti, marg–úo–ti, pilk–úo–ti, gelton–úo–ti, raudon–úo–ti, mėlyn–úo–ti); • northwestern corner of Lithuania (the northern part of the Žemaitian dialects)—stress on the base stem and the acute of the base word retained: 96 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida in the root (bált–uo–ti, juód–uo–ti, márg–uo–ti, pìlk–uo–ti) or in the adjective suffix (gelt–ón–uo–ti, raud–ón–uo–ti, mėlyn–uo–ti); • southwestern area (the southern part of Žemaitians, Lithuania Minor, the western Aukštaitian Kauniškiai)—stress on the base stem and a circumflex: metatonic in the root (bált–uo–ti, juód–uo–ti, márg–uo–ti; pìlk–uo–ti; mėlyn–uo–ti) or in the adjective suffix (gelt–ón–uo–ti, raud–ón–uo–ti), as well as arising in the root when stress is shifted there from the adjective suffix (gẽlt–on–uo–ti, raũd–on–uo–ti). Within the boundaries of the distinguished areas, transitional zones with different accentuation types are possible. For example, both suffix –uo–ti stress and circumflex root stress are frequent in the western Aukštaitian Kauniškiai dialects (probably also in the Šiauliškiai dialects), sometimes with both variants in the same subdialect. The possible earlier broader distribution of circumflex root stress in the eastern area is evidenced by relics of this accentuation mentioned in early twentieth-century sources for the eastern Aukštaitians (cf. also the broader distribution of the root stress of verbs of the lūkuriuoti type in this area, see § 9). Isolated cases of other minor deviations from the geographical distribution discussed also occur, but they do not essentially distort the overall picture of the distribution of accentuation types. MAP 9. Accentuation of –uoti derivatives from color terms in Lithuanian dialects (summary) Straipsniai / Articles 97 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS § 22. The attested material is insufficient to establish a clearer geographical distribution of derivatives from nonsuffixal circumflex-root adjectives (gelsvas, gėl̇tas, rausvas, melsvas, pilkšvas etc.). As might be expected, suffix stress is attested in the eastern area or its border zones (gelt-uo-ti Ds, rauso-uo-ti Šd), and circumflex-root stress in the southwestern area (gėl̇uoti K, Gs). Unfortunately, it cannot be stated clearly what occurs in the northwestern area most relevant from this perspective, i.e. the area of stressed acute roots. All attested examples come from a transitional area or localities where varied accentuation is possible; cf. suffix stress gelsv-uo-ti (Šts³³) alongside root stress gelsv-uo-ti (Als³⁴, Pln), rausv-uo-ti (Ggr). 3.2.4. Origin and development of circumflex-root stress § 23. Circumflex-root stress, which contradicts Saussure’s law, cannot be old in derivatives with the acute suffix –(i)úo–ti. That this is a late phenomenon of Lithuanian itself is also shown by the absence of any traces of similar metathesis in analogous Latvian derivatives, cf. 1a. balt-uo-t ← balts; mėl̇n-uo-t ← mėl̇ns; sãrkan-uo-t ← sãrkans. Meanwhile, the acute-root stress attested in the northwestern area of Lithuanian dialects should most likely be regarded as a retained archaism in derivatives from accent-class 1 adjectives (cf. § 4). For all the aforementioned acute-root adjectives denoting colors whose earlier accentuation can be established, an older accent class 1 can be reconstructed: • bál̇tas: cf. Žemaitian nom. sg. fem. bál̇t-a³⁵, nom. pl. masc. bál̇t-i³⁶; nom. sg. pronom. bál̇t-as-is³⁷; adv. bál̇t-ai³⁸, ³⁹; dial. bál̇t-um-as; Latvian baļts; • júodas: cf. Žemaitian nom. sg. fem. júod-a⁴⁰, nom. pl. masc. júod-i⁴¹, adv. júod-ai⁴²; júod-ym-ė 1, júod-ym-as 1, dial. júod-um-as; Latvian subst. júods ‘the evil one, devil’; ³³ Cf. Šts: balt̄–uo–ti, mėl̇-en-uo-ti; gelt-ōn-uo-ti: júod-uo-ti, márg-uo-ti, raud-ōn-uo-ti: pilk-uo-ti (see also § 27). ³⁴ Cf. Als: gelt̄–ōn–uo–ti: márg–uo–ti. ³⁵ Girdenis 2008: 58 (note 112 [bã.ltā]), 87 (note 239). ³⁶ Girdenis 2012: 88 (note 189 [bãltē]). ³⁷ KrtnŽ; ŠVŽŽ. ³⁸ Girdenis 2008: 58 (note 112 [báltą]); 2012: 88 (note 189 [baltą]); KrtnŽ. 38. ³⁹ Cf. Būga 1961: 73. ⁴⁰ LKŽ (Ms, KlvrŽ, Slnt); KrtnŽ; ŠVŽŽ. ⁴¹ Girdenis 2008: 73 (note 180 [jôudė]), 87 (note 244 [jô.udė]); 2012: 133 (note 378 [jôudė]). ⁴² Girdenis 2008: 58 (note 112 [jôudâ]), 73 (note 180 [jôudâ]); LKŽ (KlvrŽ). 98 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida • pilkas: cf. Žemaitian nom. sg. fem. pilk-a, nom. pl. masc. pilk-i, adv. pilk-ai⁴³; • mėlas → mėlynas, mėlinas, mėlenas: cf. Latvian mėļš ‘blue, violet’, mėļns ‘black’. It is somewhat more difficult to reconstruct the accentual value of the circumflex roots gelt-, raud-, but the suffixal adjectives geltonas, raudonas containing them in the northwestern Lithuanian area relevant to us likewise belong to accent class 1 (see LKA II Map 112). Thus, the accentuation of their derivatives gelton-uo-ti, raudon-uo-ti can also be regarded as regular. § 24. The root circumflex (“continuous” intonation) apparently arose as a derivational feature serving an iconic function (cf. § 7). It began to mark a stative meaning (an action in progress, see § 11), contrasted probably with a change-of-state meaning (i.e. “to become that or such as is expressed by the base word,” cf. DLKG 390f.⁴⁴) and/or a causative meaning (i.e. “to make something or someone that or such as is expressed by the base word,” cf. DLKG 387f.⁴⁵), e.g., *bált-uo-ti ‘to be or appear white’: *bált-uo-ti ‘to become white’ and/or ‘to whiten’ (⇒ balt-uo-ti: balt-úo-ti). § 25. In present-day dialects, all possible accentuation types are used mainly with stative and change-of-state meanings. If several different accentuation types are possible in a subdialect, they usually no longer depend on the lexical meaning of the derivative, cf.: • baltuoti: baltúoti ‘to be or appear white’ (ZnŽ: Grš), báltuoti ‘same’ (ZnŽ: Slv); • juóduoti: juodúoti ‘to be or appear black; for something black to move, swarm’ (ZnŽ: Lpl); pajuóduoti: pajuodúoti ‘to become black, darken (also figuratively: to become angry, enraged)’ (ZnŽ: Grš); juóduoti ‘to be or appear black’ and ‘to blacken, make black’ (ŠVŽŽ); • pilkuoti ‘to be or appear gray’ and ‘to become gray, turn gray’ (LKŽ: Grg); išpilkuoti (LKŽ: Plt); išpilkúoti ‘to become gray’; • geltonuoti ‘to be yellow, look yellow’, pageltonuoti ‘to become yellow’ (LKŽ: Als); • raudonuoti ‘to be, appear red’ and ‘to redden’ (ŠVŽŽ); • mėlynuoti ‘to be or look blue’: pamėlynuoti ‘to become blue’ (ZnŽ: Lkč) • etc. § 26. The verbs under discussion are attested with a causative meaning rather rarely. The only cases recorded in LKŽ are: marg-úo-ti (NdŽ, Ėr), gelton-úo-ti (NdŽ), raudon-úo-ti (NdŽ, Srd, Ėr), mėlyn-uo-ti (Ėr, Pc, Lnkv). In all these ⁴³ ŠVŽŽ; Girdenis 2008: 87 (note 244); NdŽ. ⁴⁴ Or “the meaning of the emergence of the property expressed by the base word” (LKG II 249). ⁴⁵ Or “the meaning of giving someone the property described by the base word” (LKG II 249). Straipsniai / Articles 99 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS in these cases, only suffix stress is found⁴⁶. In the eastern dialect area, verbs with this meaning do not differ in accentuation from verbs with other meanings, cf.: • marguoti ‘to become variegated, become mottled’: pamarguoti ‘to make variegated, variegate’ (LKŽ: Ėr); • paraudonuoti ‘to become red’: suraudonuoti ‘to stain red’ (LKŽ: Ėr). § 27. In the few cases where several accentuation variants of the same verb with different meanings are attested in one source, circumflex-root stress is generally characteristic of the stative meaning, whereas stress on the verbal suffix is characteristic of the change-of-state or causative meaning⁴⁷, cf.: • juóduoti ‘to be, appear black; for something black to move, swarm’: juodúoti ‘to become black’ (ZnŽ: Snt⁴⁸; cf. also NdŽ); • marguoti (= margaliuoti ‘to shimmer in a colorful, multicolored interplay, to have a colorful appearance’): margúoti (= márginti ‘to make colorful, color brightly, interweave with colors’), marguotis (= márgti ‘to become colorful, take on various colors’) (NdŽ); • pilkuoti (and pilkúoti?⁴⁹) ‘to shimmer gray’: pilkúoti (= pilkėti ‘to become gray, turn gray’) (NdŽ); • geltonuoti ‘to shine yellow, shimmer yellow’: geltonúoti (= geltóninti ‘to color yellow’) (NdŽ); • raudonuoti ‘to appear red’: raudonúoti ‘to redden, become or be red’ (DkšŽ). An interesting case is found in Šatės (in the contact zone of the northwestern and southwestern areas), where the stative verb bãltuoti ‘to be white, appear white’ is recorded with a metatonic circumflex, whereas the change-of-state verbs occur with a retained acute (apsijúoduoti, užjúoduoti ‘to become black’, pamárguoti ‘to become variegated, become mottled’) or suffix stress (išpilkúoti ‘to become gray’). § 28. The root circumflex, as a marker of stative meaning, arose both in roots that had been stressed with an acute from ancient times (i.e. in derivatives from accent-class 1 adjectives, e.g., báltas *1 → *bált-uo-ti ⇒ balt̃-uo-ti, cf. § 4), and in circumflex-origin ⁴⁶ Išskyrus nebent raudonuoti attested in NdŽ, where both accentuation variants (raudonuoti and raudonúoti) are given together and all three meanings are indicated without relation to accentuation (unlike in the cases of geltonuoti, juoduoti, marguoti, pilkuoti), but this is most likely merely an editorial inaccuracy. ⁴⁷ Priešingas atvejis matomas nebent A. Baranausko užrašuose literatūriniuose tekstuose: Kàd g'àttonuoja žali lapėlei (change of state): Dõ g'àttonuoja plõtai kwietẽlū (state) (the author of both texts is the same representative of the R5 [Kupiškėnai] dialect from Pajuodupis; cf. note 31; Baranauskas apparently added the accent marks at his own discretion), see Baranowski 1920: 435, 439. ⁴⁸ Bet plg. tos pačios šnektos pajúoduoti ‘to become black, darken’ (ZnŽ: Snt). ⁴⁹ Iš NdŽ užrašymo neaišku, ar užrašymas pilkúoti applies only to the change-of-state meaning, or also to the stative meaning. 100 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida in roots of circumflex origin: after previously losing their stress because of Saussure’s law (e.g., gẽl̃tas *2 → *gẽlt-uо-ti > gelt-úo-ti ⇒ gẽlt-uo-ti or *geltónas 1 → *gelt-ón-uo-ti ⇒ gẽlt-on-uo-ti), and perhaps also in roots that had long been unstressed, if the verbal suffix received stress in the derivatives (i.e. gẽltas *4 → *gẽlt-úo-ti ⇒ gẽlt-uo-ti; *geltónas 3 → *gelt-on-úo-ti ⇒ gẽlt-on-uo-ti, cf. § 19). § 29. It is likely that, having arisen at some point within the area of Lithuanian usage and subsequently spread throughout the remaining area, the phenomenon under discussion never reached the northwestern dialectal area. Here, the archaic accentuation of the balt-as → balt-uo-ti and geltón-as → geltón-uo-ti type has survived to this day (perhaps also the regular accentuation of the gelšv-as → gelsu-úo-ti type, although the data are insufficient to assert this firmly; see § 22). In the transitional area between the southwestern and northwestern regions, various formations of secondary origin are also possible, for example, the introduction of the circumflex not into the root but into the adjectival suffix preserving the old accentual position (*geltón-uo-ti ⇒ gelt-õn-uo-ti), as well as combinations of different accentuation types within the same subdialect, depending on the particular verb and/or its derivational meaning (cf. Šts: balt-uo-ti, mėl-en-uo-ti, gelt-õn-uo-ti: juod-uo-ti, márg-uo-ti, raud-õn-uo-ti: pilk-úo-ti; Als: márg-uo-ti: gelt-õn-uo-ti). Meanwhile, in the eastern dialectal area, circumflex root accentuation in verbs of the type under discussion was probably formerly widespread (as in the case of formations of the lūkuriuoti type, see § 9), if not throughout the entire area, then at least more widely than today, but it disappeared early (earlier than in formations of the lūkuriuoti type). Its disappearance was apparently caused by the increasingly established suffix accent of -(i)uoti formations and by the disappearance of the need to distinguish verbs meaning a state from verbs meaning a change of state and/or a causative meaning, as formations with other suffixes became established with the latter meanings (e.g., balt-ėt-i, balt-in-ti). From this area, this accentuation spread throughout Lithuania and today has already been codified as the only possible pattern in the standard language. 3.3. Other cases § 30. Besides the two types discussed, various other formations with nonsuffixal accentuation of the suffix -(i)uoti have also been attested. They cannot be regarded as old archaisms reflecting the accentual class 1 of the base words, but generally do not contradict the inherited regularity. They usually have an acute-accented root (in monosyllabic base stems) or the final syllable of polysyllabic base stems accented. Root (base-stem) accentuation is attested almost exclusively in the western dialectal area of Lithuanian (mostly in Lithuania Minor), often alongside variants with suffix accentuation. If the words are also used in the eastern area, they generally have suffix accentuation there only. Straipsniai / Articles 101 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS § 31. Among such verbs, various onomatopoeic, interjection-derived, or similar formations with expressive meanings should first of all be mentioned, cf. čiulb-uo-ti (K; cf. čiulb-uo-ti Pn, Plš, Dv), gyv-uo-ti ‘to chirp’ (of a tit) (Alk; cf. gyv-uo-ti Tvr, Ar); čiuvyr-uo-ti (K, Sch⁵⁰; cf. čiuvyr-uo-ti K⁵¹), grėvež-uo-ti (K⁵², Erž, Up; cf. grevež-uo-ti J), kàbar-iuo-ti (K, NdŽ, Nt, Erž; cf. kabar-iuo-ti Ds, Ktk), kàkal-iuo-ti(s) (K, Gs, Skr, Brt, Įrb, Vdk, VŠR, Rs), lėket-uo-ti (K; cf. leket-úo-ti Dbk, Dgl, An, Kp), màdar-uo-ti (K, Pžrl; cf. madar-úo-ti J, KDonel, Vj), tàlaž-uo-ti (K, NdŽ, Prk, Sg); vìnžel-iuo-ti (K), etc. § 32. Root accentuation is also unsurprising in various Germanisms or formations derived from Germanisms, particularly abundant in Lithuania Minor, e.g., býdel-iuo-ti, búter-iuo-ti, ėbel-iuo-ti, jómark-uo-ti, púder-iuo-ti, šéker-iuo-ti, šiūpel-iuo-ti, tůlk-uo-ti; màgal-iuo-ti, pỹpel-iuo-ti, ėkel-iuo-ti; kliùper-iuo-ti, mùster-iuo-ti. Here it may first of all reflect the root accentuation of German words, while in cases where the verbs can be treated as formations of Lithuanian itself, the base words are generally class-1 nouns and thus conform to the inherited regularity; cf. býdelis 1, búteris 1, ėbelis 1, jómarkas 1/3ᵃ, màngalis 1 (and mangalỹs 3ᵇ), púderis 1, šiūpelis 1, tůlkas 1(/2), kliùperis 1, mùsteris 1⁵³. § 33. Some of the -(i)uoti verbs attested by F. Kuršaitis may be derived from -(i)oti verbs (arising from the confusion of the vowels o and uo characteristic of the dialects of Lithuania Minor, cf. Zinkevičius 1994: 34), from which they may also have inherited the acute root accent fairly common in these, especially iteratives (cf. Stundžia 2014: 178), e.g., áušč-iuo-ti, gãšči-uo-ti, páik-iuo-ti, páin-iuo-ti, rùišč-iuo-ti, týč-iuo-tis, žiáuk(š)č-iuo-ti (cf. the aušč-uo-ti, gãšči-o-ti, páik-io-ti, páin-io-ti, rùišč-io-ti, týč-io-tis, žiáukšč-io-ti of other dialects and/or the standard language)⁵⁴. ⁵⁰ See Schleicher 1857: 224. The root accent is erroneously attributed to P. Ruigys’s dictionary (R) in LKŽ as well. In fact, suffix accentuation is attested in this dictionary and, perhaps, a different suffix, i.e. Cžiwirója (see Ruhig 1747: 243). ⁵¹ See Kurschat 1874: 24, s. v. Lerche. ⁵² The source K is not indicated for this word in LKŽ, apparently because in Kuršaitis’s dictionary it is attested under the headword grévežoti (see Kurschat 1883: s. v.). ⁵³ The general tendency is not distorted by the sole form attested by Kuršaitis only with mobile accentuation, pỹpelỹs 3ᵇ, if we relate the verb pỹpel-iuo-ti directly to German dialectal pîpeln (cf. LKŽ: s. v.). ⁵⁴ Cf. also the variants: pánč-iuo-ti: pánč-io-ti; súp-úo-ti: súp-o-ti; dárgan-úo-ti: dárgan-ó-ti; gárban-iuo-ti: gárban-ó-ti; úkan-uo-ti: úkan-ó-ti; ãšar-uo-ti: ãšar-ó-ti; vãkar-uo-ti: vãkar-ó-ti; vãsar-uo-ti: vãsar-ó-ti; grėvež-uo-ti: grėvež-o-ti. Their root accent can often also be explained by other causes discussed in the article (the accentual class 1 of the base word, onomatopoeic origin, etc.). 102 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida 4. SUMMARY § 34. The following principal processes can be identified in the history of the accentuation of Lithuanian formations with the suffix –(i)uo-ti: 1. At the earliest reconstructable stage, the suffix functioned as a non-dominant strong suffix: formations from fixed-accent (strong-stem) base words received accentuation on the root (base stem), whereas formations from mobile-accent (weak-stem) words received accentuation on the suffix. 2. In formations from strong nonacute stems (more precisely, those having a nonacute final stem syllable) of words (e.g., nouns of accentual class 2), after the accent was shifted from the root (more precisely, the final syllable of the base stem) to the suffix by Saussure’s law, nonsuffixal accentuation remained possible only in formations from words with acute base stems (more precisely, those having an acute final syllable or a nonfinal syllable of any intonation and quantity) (e.g., nouns of accentual class 1). 3. As the principle of accentual dominance became established in the accentuation of derived words, the predominant suffix accent also began to be generalized among the remaining formations with nonsuffixal accentuation. This process has essentially ended in the modern standard language, but cases of preserved nonsuffixal accentuation in formations from nouns of accentual class 1 are still attested in the texts of M. Daukša, F. Kuršaitis’s dictionary, early prescriptive works, and modern dialects. 4. After Saussure’s law had operated in Lithuanian, new verbs with circumflex root accentuation began to arise, in which the circumflex performed an iconic function: it marked a slow, prolonged action or state. There were two types of formations of this kind: lūk-ur-iuo-ti and balt-uo-ti. 5. Formations of the Lūkuriuoti type arose through expanding the suffix –(i)uo-ti in formations with the suffixes –ur-ti and –ul-ti, which had been characterized by a root circumflex as a marker of prolonged action/state meaning. Circumflex root accentuation was also transferred to the –uo-ti formations and formations with other suffixes derived from them (e.g., lūkūr-iau-ti etc.). According to twentieth-century sources, circumflex root accentuation is widespread across almost the entire area of Lithuanian usage, but in many parts of eastern Lithuania suffix accentuation has already become established alongside it. 6. In verbs of the Bālţuoti type, that is, formations from adjectives denoting colors (and similar other properties), the root circumflex probably arose in order to distinguish verbs meaning a state (prolonged action) from verbs meaning a change of state and/or a causative meaning. This accentuation is chiefly widespread in the southwestern Lithuanian dialectal area. It apparently never reached the northwestern area, while in the eastern area suffix accentuation had almost displaced it by the twentieth century. Straipsniai / Articles 103 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS 7. Prescriptive works of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries attest to the gradual disappearance of circumflex root (base-stem) accentuation and the establishment of suffix accentuation in both types of verbs. In the standard language, nonsuffixal accentuation has already completely disappeared in formations of the baltuoti type, whereas in formations of the lūkuriuoti type it is still possible as a secondary accentuation variant. 8. In the western dialectal area, which has better preserved nonsuffixal accentuation, the latter may also have arisen in words of more recent origin, generally without violating the inherited regularity that accentuation is possible only on the acute syllable of a monosyllabic base stem or on the final syllable of a polysyllabic base stem. These may be verbs imitating sounds from reality (e.g., čivyr-u̯o-ti) or denoting expressive action (e.g., tālaž-u̯o-ti), Germanisms or formations derived from Germanisms (e.g., býdel-iu̯o-ti), or remodeled formations of -(i)oti (e.g., páin-iu̯o-ti). ABBREVIATIONS (Unless otherwise indicated, the source of the abbreviations is LKŽ) Ad – Adutiškis, Švenčionys district Alk – Alksnėnai, Vilkaviškis district Als – Alsėdžiai, Plungė district Alv – Alovė, Alytus district Alz – Alizava, Kupiškis district An – Anykščiai Ar – Ariogala, Raseiniai district Arm – Armoniškės, Varėna district, Grodno region, Belarus Bbr – village and vicinity of Bebruliškės (KzR) Bd – Būdvietis, Lazdijai district Br – town and vicinity of Barzdai (ZnŽ) Brs – Barstyčiai, Skuodas district Brš – Birštonas, Prienai district Brt – Bartninkai, Vilkaviškis district Bsg – Baisogala, Radviliškis district 104 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida Dauk – Daukšiai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Dbč – Dubičiai, Varėna district Dbk – Debeikiai, Anykščiai district Dgl – Daugiliai, Utena district Dglš – Daugel iškis, Ignalina district Dkš – Daukšiai, Marijampolė district Dnr – Daunoriai (Dauroniai), Vilija district [Belarus] (LŽŽ) Dov – Dovilai, Klaipėda district Dr – Dirvonėnai, Šiauliai district (DunŽ; not to be confused with LKŽ: Dr – Darbėnai, Kretinga district) Drk – Derkinčiai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Drsk – Druskininkai Ds – Dusetos, Zarasai district Dv – Dieveniškės, Šalčininkai district Dvr – Dvariškės, village in the vicinity of Dieveniškės (DvŽ) End – Endriejavas, Klaipėda district Ėr – Ėriškiai, Panevėžys district Erk – Erkšva, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Erž – Eržvilkas, Jurbarkas district Ged – Gedrimai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Ggr – Gegėnai, Plungė district Gr – Grybiškės, village in the vicinity of Poškoniai (DvŽ) Grg – Gargždai, Klaipėda district Grk – Girkalnis, Raseiniai district Grl – Garliava, Kaunas district Grš – Griškabūdis, Šakiai district Gršl – Grušlaukė, Kretinga district Grz – Gruzdžiai Gs – Geistarai (Didvydžiai), Vilkaviškis district Straipsniai / Articles 105 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS Gvlt – village and vicinity of Gavaltuva (KzRŽ) Yl – Ylakiai, Skuodas district Ylk – Ylakačiai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Įp – Įpiltis, Kretinga district (ŠVŽŽ) Jdr – Judrėnai, Klaipėda district Jnk – Jankai, Šakiai district Jnšk – Joniškėlis, Pasvalys district Jrb – Jurbarkas Jž – Južintai, Rokiškis district Kb – Kabeliai, Varėna district Kdž – Kadžiai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Kern – Kernai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Kl – Kuliai, Plungė district Kli – Kliukščionys, Pastovys district, Vitebsk region, Belarus Klt – Kaltanėnai, Švenčionys district Klvr – Kalvarija, Marijampolė district KlvrŽ – Žemaičių Kalvarija Knv – Kaniava, Varėna district Kp – Kupiškis Kra – Krakės, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Krd – Kirdeikiai, Utena district Krkl – Karklenai, Kelmė district Krok – Krokiškialaukis, Alytus district Krs – Karsakiškis, Panevėžys district Krš – Kuršėnai, Šiauliai district Krtn – Kretinga Kt – Keturvalakiai, Vilkaviškis district Ktk – Kuktiškės, Utena district 106 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida Kul – Kuliai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Kur – Kurkliai, Anykščiai district Kv – Kvėdarna, Šilalė district KzR – Kazlų Rūda (Kazlai), Marijampolė district Ldk – Lyduokliai, Ukmergė district Lel – Leliūnai, Utena district Lyk – Lyksūdė, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Lk – Luokė, Telšiai district Lkč – Lekečiai, Šakiai district Lkm – Linkmenys Lkš – Lukšiai, Šakiai district.Linkm Lnkv – Linkuva, Pakruojis district Lp – Leipalingis, Lazdijai district Lpl (1) – Lieplaukė, Telšiai district Lpl (2) – village of Liepalotai (Lukšiai vicinity) and surroundings (ZnŽ; not to be confused with LKŽ: Lpl – Lieplaukė, Telšiai district) Lš – Liškiava, Varėna district Lu – Luknės, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Lzd – Lazdijai Mc – Maciūčiai, village in the vicinity of Dieveniškės (DvŽ; not to be confused with LKŽ: Mc – Kazimieras Macius [...]) Med – Medsėdžiai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Mlk – Milkūnai, village in the vicinity of Milkūnai, (DvŽ; not to be confused with LKŽ: Mlk – Malkava, Mstislavl district, Mogilev region, Belarus) Mlt – Molėtai Mrc – Marcinkonys, Varėna district Mrj – Marijampolė Mrs – Miroslavas, Alytus district Ms – Mosėdis, Skuodas district Straipsniai / Articles 107 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS Mst – Musteika (PPAŽ) Mtl – Meteliai, Lazdijai district Mžk – Mažeikiai Nm – Kudirkos Naumiestis, Šakiai district Nmk – Nemakščiai, Raseiniai district Nsm – Nuosamai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Nt – Notėnai, Skuodas district Ob – Obeliai, Rokiškis district Pal – Paluknė, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Pc – Pociūnėliai, Radviliškis district Pgg – Pagėgiai Pkš – Pakšteliai, Šiauliai district (DūnŽ) Pl – Palėvenė, Kupiškis district Pln – Plungė Plš – Palušė, Ignalina district Plt – Plateliai, Plungė district Plv – Pilviškiai, Vilkaviškis district Plvn – Panevėnėlė, Kupiškis district Pn – Panevėžys Pnd – Pandėlys, Rokiškis district PnmR – Panemunis, Rokiškis district Ppl – Papilys, Biržai district Prk – Priekulė, Klaipėda district Prlg – Prialgava, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Prng – Paringys, Ignalina district Psl – Pasaliai, Vilija district [Belarus] (LzŽ) Pš – Pašvitinys, Pakruojis district Pv – Pivašiūnai, Alytus district 108 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida Pvn – Pavandenė, Telšiai district PvnR – eastern part of the vicinity of Pavandenė (Telšiai and Kelmė districts) (DūnŽ) Pžrl – Paežerėliai, Šakiai district R5 – Mundart R. 5 (= Rytėčzai penktėji) [parishes of Kupiškis, Skapiškis, and Čedasai] (Baranowski 1920: 1–31) Rdm – Rudamina, Lazdijai district Rdn – Raudėnai, Šiauliai district Rk – Rokiškis Rm (1) – Ramygala, Panevėžys district Rm (2) – Rimašiai, village in the vicinity of Poškoniai (DvŽ; not to be confused with LKŽ: Rm – Ramygala, Panevėžys district) Rs – Raseiniai Rš – Rimšė, Ignalina district Rt – Rietavas, Plungė district Rud – Rudnia, Varėna district Sg – Saugos, Šilutė district Skp – Skapiškis, Kupiškis district Skr – Skirsnemunė, Jurbarkas district Slm – Salamiestis, Kupiškis district Slnt – Salantai, Kretinga district Slv – Slavikai, Šakiai district Smal – Smalvos, Zarasai district Smln – Smalininkai, Jurbarkas district Smn – Simnas, Alytus district Snt – Sintautai, Šakiai district Sr – Siaurimai, village in the vicinity of Poškoniai (DvŽ; not to be confused with LKŽ: Sr – Feliksas Sragys […]) Srd – Seredžius, Jurbarkas district Srj – Serijai, Lazdijai district Straipsniai / Articles 109 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS Srp – Serapinai, Kretinga district (ŠVŽŽ) Srpt – Sriauptai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Srv – Surviliškis, Kėdainiai district Šd – Šeduva, Radviliškis district Šek – Šekai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Šk – Šakiai Škn – Šakyna, Šiauliai district Šil – Šilalė Šlt – Šaltiniai, village in the vicinity of Dieveniškės (DvŽ) Šmn – Šimonys, Kupiškis district Šn – Šunskai, Marijampolė district Šts – Šatės, Skuodas district Šv – Švėkšna, Šilutė district Švnč – Švenčionys Tl – Telšiai Trg – Tauragė Trgn – Tauragnai, Utena district Trk – Tirkšliai, Mažeikiai district Trkn – Truikinai, Skuodas district Tvr – Tverečius, Ignalina district Up – Upyna, Šilalė district Ut – Utena Užv – Užventis, Kelmė district Vab – Vabalai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Varn – Varniai, Telšiai district Vdk – Viduklė, Raseiniai district Vds – Vidsodis, Kelmė district (DūnŽ) Vgr – Vegeriai, Akmenė district 110 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida Vin – Vindeikiai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Vj – Vajasiškis, Zarasai district Vkš – Viekšniai, Mažeikiai district Vkšn – Viekšnaliai, Telšiai district (DūnŽ) Vlk – Valkininkai, Varėna district Vlkv – Vilkaviškis Vrp – Varputėnai, Šiauliai district (DūnŽ) VšR – Višakio Rūda, Marijampolė district Vvr – Veviržėnai, Klaipėda district Vž – Vežaičiai, Klaipėda district Zrv – Zervynos (PPAŽ) Žbr – Žebrokai, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Že – Žemytė, Skuodas district (ŠVŽŽ) Žlt – village and vicinity of Žaltynai (ZnŽ) Žr (1) – Žarėnai, Telšiai district Žr (2) – Žiūrai (PPAŽ; not to be confused with LKŽ: Žr – Žarenai, Telšiai district) Žvr – Žvirgždaičiai, Šakiai district Žž – Žižmai, village in the vicinity of Dieveniškės (DvŽ; not to be confused with LKŽ: Žž – Žiežmariai, Kaišiadorys district) CONVENTIONAL SIGNS >, < – phonetic development ⇔, ⇐ – nonphonetic development (change due to analogy, etc.) →, ← – direction of derivation Straipsniai / Articles 111 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS ŠALTINIAI A Bar – Antano Baranausko tarmių tekstai (žr. Baranowski 1920: 435, 439). BŽ – Jono Barono žodynas (žr. Baronas 1932). KBūg – Kazimiero Būgos raštai (žr. Būga 1959: 144, 488). D kšŽ – Daukšių krašto žodynas, aut. V. Labutis, Vilnius: Alma littera, 2002. DLKŽ – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas, įvairūs leidimai, e. variantas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Prieiga internete: https://ekalba.lt/dabartines-lietuviu-kalbos-zodynas/. DP – Mikalojaus Daukšos Postilė, 1599 (pavyzdžiai cituojami pagal: Skardžius 1935). DrskŽ – Druskininkų tarmės žodynas, aut. G. Naktinienė, A. Paulauskienė, V. Vitkauskas, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1988. DūnŽ – Šiaurės rytų dūnininkų šnektų žodynas, aut. V. Vitkauskas, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1976. DvŽ – Dieveniškių šnektos žodynas 1–2, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2005–2010. J – Antano Juškos žodynas ir nespausdintos dalies rankraštis (cituojama pagal LKŽ). K – Frydricho Kuršaičio žodynai (žr. Kurschat 1870–1874; 1883). KDonel – Kristijono Donelaičio tekstai (cituojama pagal LKŽ). KltŽ – Kaltanėnų šnektos žodynas, aut. A. Vilutytė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2008. KpŽ – Kupiškėnų žodynas 1–4, aut. K. Vosylaitė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2007–2014. KrtnŽ – Kretingos tarmės žodynas, aut. J. Aleksandravičius, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2011. KzRŽ – Kazlų Rūdos šnektos žodynas 1–2, aut. A. Pupkis, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. LKŽ(e) – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas 1–20 (1941–2002), e. variantas, red. kolegija G. Naktinienė, J. Paulauskas, R. Petrokienė, V. Vitkauskas, J. Zabarskaitė, vyr. red. G. Naktinienė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2008 (atnaujinta versija, 2018). Prieiga internete: https://ekalba.lt/lietuviu-kalbos-zodynas/. LzŽ – Lazūnų tarmės žodynas, aut. J. Petrauskas, A. Vidugiris, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1985. 112 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida N d Ž – Wörterbuch der litauischen Schriftsprache. Litauisch-Deutsch / Lietuvių rašomosios kalbos žodynas. Lietuviškai-vokiška dalis 1–5, bearb. / sud. M. Niedermann, A. Senn, F. Brender, A. Salys, Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitätsverlag, 1932–1965. PPAŽ – Pietinių pietų aukštaičių šnektų žodynas 1–2, aut. A. Leskauskaitė, V. Ragaišienė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2016–2019. R – Pilypo Ruigio žodynas (žr. Ruhig 1747). S ch – Augusto Schleicherio darbai (žr. Schleicher 1857). Š V Ž Ž – Šiaurės vakarų žemaičių žodynas 1–2, aut. R. Vanagienė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2014–2015. V aig Ž – Dabartinės Vaigu vos šnektos žodynas, aut. I. Švarcaitė, Vilnius: Versmė, 2023. V d š Ž – Vidiškių šnektos žodynas, aut. Ž. Markevičienė, A. Markevičius, Vilnius: Lietuvos edukologijos universitetas, Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2014. Z n Ž – Zanavykų šnektos žodynas 1–3, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 2003–2006. L I T E R A T Ū R A B a r a n o w s k i A n t o n 1920: Litauische Mundarten 1: Texte, Leipzig: Verlag von K. F. Koehler. B a r o n a s J o n a s 1932: Rusų–lietuvių žodynas, 2-as leidimas, Kaunas: Sakalo bendrovė. B ū g a K a z i m i e r a s 1959: Rinktiniai raštai 2, Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla. B ū g a K a z i m i e r a s 1961: Rinktiniai raštai 3, Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla. D L K G – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika, red. V. Ambrazas, 4-oji pataisyta laida, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 2006. D y b o V l a d i m i r A. 1981: Slavjanskaja akcentologija. Opyt rekonstrukcii sistemu akcentnych paradigm v praslavjanskom, Moskva: Nauka. G i r d e n i s A l e k s a s 2003: Teoriniai lietuvių fonologijos pagrindai, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. G i r d e n i s A l e k s a s 2008: Žemaičių dzūkai. Tekstai su komentarais, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. G i r d e n i s A l e k s a s 2012: Šiaurės žemaičių Skuodo zona. Tekstai su komentarais, Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla. Straipsniai / Articles 113 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS Kurschat Friedrich 1870–1874: Deutsch-littauisches Wörterbuch 1–2, Halle: Verlag der Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses. Kurschat Friedrich 1883: Littauisch-deutsches Wörterbuch, Halle a. S.: Verlag der Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses. Laigonaitė Adelė 1978: Lietuvių kalbos akcentologija, Vilnius: Mokslas. Laigonaitė Adelė 2002: Lietuvių kalbos akcentologija, Vilnius: Gimtasis žodis. LKA II – Lietuvių kalbos atlasas 2: Fonetika, ats. red. K. Morkūnas, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1982. LKG II – Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 2: Morfologija, vyr. red. K. Ulvydas, Vilnius: Mintis, 1971. Rinkevičius Vytautas 2010: Kai kurie teoriniai morfologinės akcentologijos koncepcijos aspektai. – Baltistica 56(1), 9–43. Rinkevičius Vytautas 2015: Baltų ir slavų kalbų kirčiavimo istorija 1, Vilnius: Vilniaus universitetas. Philipp Ruhig 1747: Littauisch-Deutsches und Deutsch-Littauisches Lexicon, [Königsberg:]: J. H. Hartung. Schleicher August 1857: Litauisches Lesebuch und Glossar, Prag: J. G. Calve’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung. Skardžius Pranas 1935: Daukšos akcentologija, Kaunas: VDU Humanitarinių mokslų fakultetas. Skardžius Pranas 1943: Lietuvių kalbos žodžių daryba, Vilnius: Lietuvos mokslų akademija, Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Skardžius Pranas 1998: Raštai 3, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. Skardžius Pranas 1999: Raštai 5, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. Stundžia Bonifacas 1985: Lietuvių bendrinės kalbos kirčiavimo sistema, Vilnius: Petro ofsetas. Stundžia Bonifacas 2014: Bendrinės lietuvių kalbos akcentologija, Vilnius: Eugrimas. Šlapelis Jurgis 1920–1922: Lietuvių kalbos žodynas, išverstas rusiškai, lenkiškai ir vokiškai, Vilnius: „Žaibo“ spaustuvė. Šlapelis Jurgis 1921: Lietuvių ir rusų kalbų žodynas, Vilnius: M. Šlapelienės knygynas, „Žaibo“ spaustuvė. Šlapelis Jurgis 1929: Lenkiškas lietuvių kalbos žodynėlis, Vilnius: „Rucho“ spaustuvė. 114 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių su priesaga –(i)uoti kirčiavimo raida Šlapelis Jurgis 1940: Kirčiuotas lenkiškas lietuvių kalbos žodynas, antroji laida, Vilnius: M. Šlapelienės Lietuvių Knygynas, spaustuvė „Raida“. VLKK 2005: Valstybinė lietuvių kalbos komisija. Rekomendacija Dėl kai kurių priesaginių veiksmažodžių kirčiavimo, 2005 m. gegužės 5 d., Nr. R–8 (k–15). VLKK 2013: Valstybinė lietuvių kalbos komisija. Protokolinis nutarimas Dėl Valstybinės lietuvių kalbos komisijos 2005 m. gegužės 5 d. rekomendacijos Nr. R–8 (k–15) „Dėl kai kurių priesaginių veiksmažodžių kirčiavimo“ pakeitimo ir papildymo, 2013 m. spalio 3 d., Nr. PN–10 (k–15.1). Zinkevičius Zigmas 1992: Lietuvių kalbos istorija 5: Bendrinės kalbos iškilimas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla. Zinkevičius Zigmas 1994: Lietuvių kalbos dialektologija, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla. Accentuation History of Lithuanian Verbs in –(i)uoti SUMMARY In the accentuation history of Lithuanian verbs in –(i)uoti, the following processes could be observed: 1. In the earliest reconstructible stage, the suffix –(i)uo– functioned as a non-dominant strong one: verbs derived from accentually immobile words were stressed on the root (derivational base), e.g., vẽj–uo–ti ← vẽj–as a. p. 1, while verbs derived from mobile words were stressed on the suffix, e.g., kelm–úo–ti ← kẽlm–as a. p. 3. 2. In verbs derived from immobile non-acute words (more precisely, words with a non-acute stem-final syllable, e.g., a. p. 2 nouns), the stress shifted from the root (i.e. the last syllable of the derivational base) to the suffix due to Saussure’s law, e.g. *par̃š–uo–ti > parš–úo–ti (← par̃š–as a. p. 2), making non-suffix stress impossible save in verbs derived from immobile acute words (i.e. words with an acute stem-final syllable or a stressed non-stem-final syllable regardless of tone/quantity, e.g. a. p. 1 nouns). 3. With the spread of accentual dominance in derivatives, suffix stress came to be generalized to verbs that had retained their non-suffix stress after Saussure’s law. This generalization has already been largely completed in today’s standard Lithuanian, but instances of retained non-suffix stress in verbs derived from a. p. 1 nouns are attested in Mikalojus Daukša’s texts, Friedrich Kurschat’s dictionary, early normative dictionaries, and modern dialects. Straipsniai / Articles 115 SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ, VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS 4. In the period after Saussure’s law, new verbs with a stressed circumflex root began to appear, in which the circumflex had an iconic function: it marked a slow, prolonged action or state. There were two types of such verbs, exemplified by lūk-ur-iuo-ti and balt-uo-ti, respectively. 5. The lūkuriuoti type is the result of the extension of the suffix -(i)uoto verbs in -ur-ti and -ul-ti, which were characterized by root circumflex as a marker of attenuate durative meaning. Root circumflex was transferred from these verbs to -(i)uo-ti verbs, as well as to other suffixal verbal formations (e.g. lūkur-iau-ti etc.). According to 20th-century sources, this circumflex root stress is shared by almost all Lithuanian dialects, albeit, in much of eastern Lithuania, it is attested alongside suffix-stressed forms. 6. In baltuoti-type verbs, i.e. derivatives from adjectives denoting colors (and similar qualities), the root circumflex has probably emerged as a means to distinguish essive verbs from fientive and/or factitive verbs. This accentuation type (i.e. circumflex root stress) is mainly found in southwestern dialects. It has probably never existed in north-western Lithuania, where the inherited form balt-uo-ti is still in use, whereas, in the east, it was almost totally displaced by suffix stress (i.e. balt-úo-ti) in the 20th century. 7. The normative works from the 20th and 21st centuries testify to the gradual disappearance of circumflex root stress and the spread of suffix stress in both types of verbs. In standard Lithuanian, non-suffix stress has completely disappeared in baltuoti-type verbs, while it is still possible in the lūkuriuoti-type verbs. 8. In western Lithuanian dialects (especially in Lithuania Minor), non-suffix stress may also appear in various other verbs of more recent origin, usually without violating the inherited principle that stress is only possible in acute monosyllabic roots or non-final syllables of multisyllabic derivational bases. These can be onomatopoeic (e.g. čivyr-uo-ti) or otherwise expressive verbs (e.g. tālaž-uo-ti), recent Germanisms (e.g. bȳdel-iuo-ti), and remodeled verbs in -(i)oti (e.g. páin-iuo-ti). Įteikta 2024 m. birželio 25 d. SANDRA LUKŠAITĖ-RAMONIENĖ Baltistikos katedra Vilniaus universitetas Universiteto g. 5, LT-01131 Vilnius, Lietuva [email protected] [email protected] VYTAUTAS RINKEVIČIUS Vilniaus universitetas Baltistikos katedra Vilniaus universitetas Universiteto g. 5, LT-01131 Vilnius, Lietuva vytautas.rinkevič[email protected] 116 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI