Priedzūkio tarminių ypatybių rekonstrukcija horizontaliajame ir vertikaliajame kontinuume: Kauno marių dugno atvejis

ŽYDRŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS Institute of the Lithuanian Language ORCID id: orcid.org/0000-0001-5763-6921 Research areas: geolinguistics, Lithuanian language dialectology. DOI: doi.org/10.35321/all89-10 PRIEDZŪKIO TARMINIŲ YPATYBIŲ REKONSTRUKCIJA HORIZONTALIAJAME IR VERTIKALIAJAME KONTINUUME: KAUNO MARIŲ DUGNO ATVEJIS The Reconstruction of the Priedzūkis Dialectal Features in Horizontal and Vertical Continuum: the Case of the Bottom of the Kaunas Lagoon ANNOTATION The article examines the horizontal and vertical continua of the area flooded by the Kaunas Lagoon and the dialectal zone along the lagoon. The research material was collected in Rumšiškės (LKA536) and Šlienava (the Márgininkai (LKA553) point). Informants originating from the bed of the Kaunas Lagoon were interviewed, and the speech of two families (residents of different generations) was compared. The research territory is an area of the Western Aukštaitian Kaunas subdialect in which features of the Priedzūkis transitional area were expected to be found. This assumption was confirmed: although, theoretically, manifestations of Priedzūkis are most pronounced on the right bank of the lagoon and southward in the vicinity of the Nemunas, it was established that they are vigorous on both banks, right beside the lagoon. This also implies the distinctiveness of the dialectal area. The article also highlights the significance of the vertical continuum: a clear correlation between dialectal features and the informants’ age was established. When age typology is viewed anew—without adhering to the customary division into three generations—vertical fragmentation is revealed through deeper analytical distinctions. Straipsniai / Articles 211 ŽYDŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS The older informants (who, according to the traditional division into three generations, would belong to the same generation as the younger ones) have retained more features of Priedzūkis. KEYWORDS: Western Aukštaitian Kaunas subdialect, Southern Aukštaitian subdialect, horizontal continuum, vertical continuum, Kaunas Lagoon. ANNOTATION The article analyses the horizontal and vertical continuum of the territory flooded by Kaunas Lagoon and the coastal dialect zones. The study material was collected in Rumšiškės (LKA536) and Šlienava (Margininkai (LKA553 point)). The informants once lived at the bottom of the Kaunas Lagoon; the language of two families (inhabitants of different generations) was contrasted. The study area is the Western Aukštaitian subdialect of Kaunas area, where Priedžiūkis dialectal features were expected to find. This assumption was confirmed: although theoretically, the manifestations of Priedžiūkis are the clearest on the right bank of the lagoon and the vicinity of Nemunas toward the south, the findings show that the manifestations can be found on both sides of the lagoon, close to the lagoon. At the same time, it implies the distinctiveness of the area. The article also highlights the significance of the vertical continuum: a clear correlation between dialectal characteristics and the age of informants was established. With a new approach to the typology of age, breaking away from the usual three-generation division, the vertical fragmentation is revealed in deeper cross-sections. The older informants (who, according to the traditional three-generation division, would belong to the same generation as the younger ones) have retained more of the Priedžiūkis features. KEYWORDS: Western Aukštaitian subdialect of Kaunas, Southern Aukštaitian subdialect, horizontal continuum, vertical continuum, Kaunas Lagoon. INTRODUCTION Dialectology in the second half of the 20th century generally confined itself to the horizontal continuum. It was assumed that linguistic phenomena were distributed across a certain territory. Research sought to define the points of the “Atlas of the Lithuanian Language” (hereinafter—LKA). At the beginning of the 21st century, when geolinguistics began to be developed in Lithuania and it was recognized that “there are many transitional variants” between dialects and the standard language, the sociolinguistic generation variable was also incorporated into the methodological toolkit of linguistic analysis. This and other sociolinguistic variables enable the study of the vertical continuum—the gradual distribution of variables characterizing informants 212 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXIX Reconstruction of Priedzūkis Dialectal Features in the Horizontal and Vertical Continua: The Case of the Bed of the Kaunas Lagoon —their distribution (Willemyns, Bister 1989: 541; Berruto 2010: 235–236; Aliūkaitė, Mikulėnienė 2014: 39). The interaction between local dialectal variants and the standard language was brought into focus in 2018–2020, when researchers from the Institute of the Lithuanian Language’s Centre of Geolinguistics¹ investigated the linguistic situation in Kaunas District, and in 2020–2021, when data were collected and supplemented for the future Dialectal Database². At that time, the fragmentation of the horizontal and vertical Pakaunas area was discussed using geolinguistic methods (Bakšienė 2021: 73). In conducting these studies, attention was paid to the environs of the Kaunas Lagoon, which the author of this article also visited in 2020 while collecting terminological material: people who had lived in the Nemunas Valley until the 1950s were sought; after it was flooded, the Kaunas Lagoon was formed in 1959 (see Šidlauskas 2021: 37–57 and the literature cited there for more detail). Displaced from their places of residence, the dug-dwellers³ generally migrated to nearby areas, so it is likely that they and their descendants may have preserved (or may have preserved) authentic local linguistic features that were also characteristic of the villages flooded by the Kaunas Lagoon. In Lithuania, this is the first dialectological-reconstructive study encompassing the destruction of a residential territory and forced displacement. In 2020, 53 informants were interviewed and approximately 50 hours of conversations were recorded. The research material for this article consists of audio recordings lasting 2 hours and 34 minutes, in which two informants from different generations of the same family—parents and children—speak. The article is based on four informants aged 66 to 100; two families were selected whose older members are the oldest of all the informants interviewed. A theoretical model was developed on the basis of the four speakers; later (in further research), it will be applied to all respondents. Thus, the object of this article is the speech of people originating from the bed of the Kaunas Lagoon (and their descendants); see Table 1. ¹ The research was partially funded by Kaunas District Municipality. The research supervisor was Prof. Habil. Dr. Danguolė Mikulėnienė. ² The project “Creation of a Database Model of Local Lithuanian Language Variants,” supervised by Dr. Agnė Čepaitienė. Funded by the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language (Programme for the Use, Standardization and Dissemination of the State Language). Available online: https://tarmynas.lki.lt/ (access requires an account). ³ This is the established designation for people who lived in the Nemunas Valley before the flooding (in the present bed of the Kaunas Lagoon) (information provided by Ramunė Mikitiejėva, senior specialist at the Visitor Centre of Kaunas Lagoon Regional Park; interview with the author on 2020-09-14, recording preserved in the Dialect Archive of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language’s Centre of Geolinguistics). Straipsniai / Articles 213 ŽYDRŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS TABLE 1. The informants’ families and their places of residence⁴ Informants | Duration of audio recording | Place of origin | Current place of residence First family | Rumš_M_1930 | 1 h 11 min 0 s | Rumšiškės | Rumšiškės | Rumš_V_1954 | Second family | Šlie_V_1920 | 1 h 23 min 19 s | Dvareliškės | Šlienava | Šlie_M_1951 | The informants live on opposite banks of the lagoon. Before the flooding, the current (resettled) residents of Rumšiškės lived in the old town of Rumšiškės, while the residents of Šlienava originate from Dvareliškės (a village formerly located between Rumšiškės (both the old and current settlements) and Šlienava)⁵. At present, Rumšiškės belongs to the Rumšiškės eldership, Kaišiadorys District, while Šlienava belongs to the Samylai eldership, Kaunas District. These are two LKA points—the Rumšiškės (LKA536) and Mārgininkai (LKA553) points (see Fig. 1)⁶ The composition of the informants follows a mirror principle: a mother (Rumš_M_1930) and son (Rumš_V_1954), and a father (Šlie_V_1920) and daughter (Šlie_M_1951), were interviewed. They may be described as settled; only the son, Rumš_V_1954, works in the city of Kaunas. For the linguistic (dialectal) characterization of the informants, see Chapter 4, “Characterization of the Respondents’ Speech.” The analysis of the material selected for this article also helps achieve the stated aim—to reveal the distinctiveness of the horizontal and vertical dialectal language of the bed of the Kaunas Lagoon and the area along the lagoon. Since the age difference between the oldest and youngest informant is 36 years (see Fig. 2), the collected dialectal material reveals linguistic tendencies not only in real time but also in apparent time, which further strengthens the vertical axis of the study. To achieve this aim, the following objectives were set: (1) to examine the linguistic features of the older and younger residents interviewed in 2020, belonging to two families; (2) to characterize the dialectal zone of the bed of the Kaunas Lagoon and the area along the lagoon at the vertical (cross-generational) level. ⁴ The informants are encoded as follows: place abbreviation, sex, year of birth. E.g., a woman living in Rumšiškės, born in 1930: Rumš_M_1930. ⁵ For the distribution of residential places in the bed of the Kaunas Lagoon, see Valdas Urbanavičius’s map narrative. Available online: https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=c55688a269934e1f95d90bee099467c5. ⁶ Based on the Dialectal Database data, Šlienava falls within two points: the larger part belongs to the Armališkės point (LKA534), and the smaller part to Mārgininkai (LKA553). The informants in this article live in the Mārgininkai point (LKA553). 214 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXIX Reconstruction of Priedzūkis Dialectal Features in the Horizontal and Vertical Continuum: The Case of the Bed of the Kaunas Lagoon FIG. 1. LKA points under investigation Research methodology. As already mentioned, informants from different generations were selected for linguistic analysis. Thus, the traditional NORM criterion is not followed⁷. This practice had also been followed earlier in Lithuania, although it was applied to studies of multilingual families (see Mikulėnienė, Pocevičiūtė 2018 for more detail). Selecting informants from the same family makes it possible not only to identify the linguistic features of the informants but also to avoid accidental (or individualized) instances of their use. It is particularly desirable to avoid such instances when attempting to reconstruct a local language variant. The relatively small number of respondents makes it possible to model features of the local language, and this model can later be supplemented with data from other informants. 1. SPECIFIC FEATURES OF THE AGE TYPOLOGY OF THE SUBJECTS As already mentioned in the Introduction, the horizontal and vertical dimensions with respect to the informant provide not only the possibility of recording linguistic facts in real time but also ⁷ English: non-mobile older rural male. This criterion is associated with a static view of the dialect. From the NORM perspective, a suitable informant is an elderly, settled rural man (Aliūkaitė, Mikulėnienė 2014: 32). Straipsniai / Articles 215 ŽYDRŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS access to apparent-time data, i.e. dialectal features of different age groups. The apparent-time perspective is strengthened by the fact that the actual research period (the interviewing of informants) was 2020, i.e. a century after the oldest informant’s birth and 61 years after the displacement from the flooded Nemunas Valley (see Fig. 2). FIG. 2. The informants’ years of birth from the perspectives of real and apparent time According to the typology of the 2011–2014 project, at the time of the flooding of the Nemunas Valley (1959), the informants belonged to the middle and younger generations (or had not yet been born)⁸. In 2020, at the time of the interviews, all of them (including several descendants of the dug-dwellers who were interviewed) had already become representatives of the older generation—that is, they were over 50. There are no longer any surviving people who belonged to the older generation in 1959. However, as mentioned, the age difference between the oldest and youngest informants is sufficient to reveal possible dialectal differences (or similarities) between parents and children⁹. The parents were assigned to the older generation regardless of age, and the children to the younger generation. Such a typology reflects generations not only sociolinguistically but also demographically, thus allowing the possible change of the local subdialectal variant—its strengthening or weakening—to be determined by analyzing apparent-time data. ⁸ “Contemporary Geolinguistic Research in Lithuania: Optimization of the Point Network and Interactive Dissemination of Dialectal Information” (VP1-3.1-ŠMM-07-K-01-028). Supervisor: Prof. Dr. (HP) D. Mikulėnienė. Funded under the EU programme “Support for the Scientific Activities of Researchers and Other Investigators (Global Grant).” ⁹ Age typology in research may vary depending on demographic and other factors (Bakšienė 2021: 74). In developing the Dialectal Database model, which is planned to be applied in future studies of the entire Lithuanian-language area, the generational component was also adjusted: informants over 60 years of age were assigned to the older generation (instead of 50), while those aged 31–59 were assigned to the middle generation (Bakšienė 2021: 74). 216 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXIX Reconstruction of Priedzūkis Terminological Features in the Horizontal and Vertical Continuum: The Case of the Bed of the Kaunas Lagoon 2. RESEARCH TERRITORY The emergence of the Kaunas Lagoon turned part of the Pakaunas area into a specific field of research. Because local residents were displaced from the Nemunas Valley (the future bed of the Kaunas Lagoon) during hydroelectric power-plant construction in the 1950s, most people moved to neighboring areas; consequently, in 2020 their greatest concentration was recorded along the lagoon. As mentioned, two of the article’s subjects, dug-dwellers, live in Šlienāva (Samylai eldership, on the left bank of the lagoon), assigned to the Piliuona–Samylai area (this area is described as a center of standard–dialectal language (Bakšienė 2021: 81). The other two live in Rumšiškės—on the right bank of the lagoon (see Fig. 3). FIG. 3. Informants’ locations and directions of displacement Judging from all classifications of Lithuanian dialects, territorial continuity may be expected (see Chapter 3). On the other hand, material from different periods Straipsniai / Articles 217 ŽYDRŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS reveals discrepancies among certain dialectal features and a Priedzūkis feature suggesting possible transitionality. Thus, at the horizontal level, the territory is not entirely homogeneous: it is an area of Western Aukštaitian containing dialectal features characteristic of Southern Aukštaitian. 3. TIRIAMOJO PLOTO TARMĖS YPATYBĖS The dialectal characterization of the research area has preserved the classification of dialects according to phonetic features characteristic of the Neogrammarians: at the end of the 19th century, Antanas Baranauskas assigned this area to the Easterners, the First Southerners (Baranovskij 1898: 49–51; see also Geržotaitė 2016: 48), in the first half of the 20th century Antanas Salys assigned it to the Central Aukštaitians (Salys 1933: 21–34; Salys 1992: 109–114), while in the second half of the 20th century Zigmas Zinkevičius and Aleksas Girdenis assigned it to the Western Aukštaitian Kaunas subdialect (Zinkevičius, Girdenis 1966: 139–147). Linguists have recorded features of Priedzūkis on both sides of the Nemunas—this is a transition between the Western Aukštaitian Kaunas and Southern Aukštaitian varieties. The larger centers of Priedzūkis are identified as Balbieriškis, Prienai, Birštonas, and Kaišiadorys (Bacevičiūtė, Mikulenienė, Salienė 2005: 114–116). Representatives of this area are distinguished by fairly pronounced phonetic features: (1) as peripheral Western Aukštaitians, they sometimes pronounce i (i:•) instead of the vowel e (formerly nasal ę) (e.g., teñ – ti-, išsigandęs – isigãndis) (Salys 1933: 31; 1992: 113; Zinkevičius 1966: 82 et seq.; Bacevičiūtė, Mikulenienė, Salienė 2005: 116); (2) ų instead of ą (e.g., ąžuolas – ūž́uolas, grąžtas – grū́štas) (Salys 1992: 113; Morkūnas 1994: 85–86 et seq.); (3) they realize word-initial e as a (e.g., eketė – aketė, ešerys – ašerì·s) (Zinkevičius 1966: 121–122, 449; Bacevičiūtė, Mikulenienė, Salienė 2005: 114); (4) as in a large part of the Aukštaitian subdialect, they often lengthen the first components of falling diphthongs i, u (e.g., dirbti – dìrpt, stumti – stūm·t) (Zinkevičius 1966: 107 et seq.; Bacevičiūtė, Mikulenienė, Salienė 2005: 114); (5) they harden the consonant l (e.g., lėdas – lạ̄das, lėisti – lái·st) (Zinkevičius 1966: 160–161; Salys 1992: 109–111; Bacevičiūtė, Mikulenienė, Salienė 2005: 116); 218 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXIX Reconstruction of Priedzūkis Dialectal Features in the Horizontal and Vertical Continuum: The Case of the Bed of the Kaunas Lagoon (6) they may pronounce more open vowels ė and o (bėga – bė́ga, tóks – tks) (Zinkevičius 1966: 71, 74–75; Bacevičiūtė, Mikulenienė, Salienė 2005: 116)¹⁰. The following morphological features should be mentioned: (7) the singular dative ending of masculine nouns may be -u (e.g., pónui – pó­nu) (Zinkevičius 1966: 248; Bacevičiūtė, Mikulenienė, Salienė 2005: 116); (8) in prepositional constructions—the ending may sometimes be -i (iki dangi̇̀ – iki dangui̇̃ (iki dangaũs), iki kreigi̇̀ – iki kraigui̇̃ (iki kraigo) (Bacevičiūtė, Mikulenienė, Salienė 2005: 116); (9) the illative may be used (e.g., viduñ, šliūbañ) (Zinkevičius 1966: 200, 209–210; Bacevičiūtė, Mikulenienė, Salienė 2005: 116); (10) another feature of Priedzūkis is the replacement of the noun ending -uo with -uva (e.g., sesuõ – sesuvà, vanduõ – vanduvà) (Zinkevičius 1966: 86–87; Salys 1992: 113; Morkūnas 1994: 87); for more on Priedzūkis, see (Salys 1933: 28–32; 1992: 113; Morkūnas 1994: 84–92; Bacevičiūtė, Mikulenienė, Salienė 2005: 114; 116). In this article, the speech of the dug-dwellers is characterized on the basis of a theoretical model grounded in ten dialectal features of Priedzūkis. 4. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE RESPONDENTS’ SPEECH An examination of the speech of the four informants interviewed in 2020 established that features of Priedzūkis are present along the lagoon. The material—recorded conversations lasting 2 hours and 34 minutes with two informants from Rūmiškės (LKA536 point) and two informants from Šlienāva (Márgininkai (LKA553) point)—was compared with the maps and commentaries of the “Phonetics” volume of the 1982 “Atlas of the Lithuanian Language” (LKA). In this way, the use of Priedzūkis features was verified from an apparent-time perspective. According to the data of the Dialect Archive of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language’s Centre of Geolinguistics, data in Rūmiškės ¹⁰ These examples are presented as indicated in the cited sources (the Copenhagen transcription customary in Lithuanian dialectology). When characterizing the informants’ speech, the examples will be written using the symbols of the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA), which will gradually come into use. For more on the IPA, see Bakšienė, Čepaitienė 2017; Bakšienė 2018. Straipsniai / Articles 219 ŽYDRŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS at the point (LKA536) were collected in 1953, while at the Márgininkai point (LKA553) they were collected in 1954¹¹, i.e. before the flooding of the Nemunas Valley¹². Relatively few LKA maps correlate with the material collected in 2020. Since Priedzūkis is called a transitional, or niche, area in terms of dialect classifications, there was no attempt to describe it extensively in the collective monograph either (Mikulėnienė, Meiliūnaitė, eds., 2014). First, two distinguishing features should be mentioned—the realization of the vowel e (ę) as į (į) and the realization of the vowel ą as u (ų). 4.1. Realization of the vowels e (ę) and ą In 2020, the vowel e (ę) realized as į (į) occurred infrequently and was associated with the informants’ age: both oldest informants (Šlie_V_1920 and Rumš_M_1930) realized the vowel e (ę) as į—they pronounced ²tʲį (with the meaning ‘te(n)’). The informant born in 1951 (Šlie_M_1951) pronounced e three times as i in other words: žmõnes, sóduose, namuose (¹³monʲis, ²sodʲusʲi, na¹muosʲi). These features were not found in the speech of the youngest informant (Rumš_V_1954). Thus, differences exist in the vertical continuum. In territorial terms (in the horizontal continuum), there is no fragmentation—e (ę) is realized as į (į) on both banks of the Kaunas Lagoon. The 1982 LKA “Phonetics” maps show a different reality. Along the lagoon, the realization of vowel e (ę) as i (į) is mapped, but different words reflect different tendencies. Thus, Map No. 17 records the openness of vowel e in the singular inessive and instrumental endings and in adverbial forms (LKA II 35). As can be seen, over a large area around the lagoon the vowel e predominates—as in the standard language (see Fig. 4)—but farther from Rumšiškės (LKA536), in Kaišiadorys, the unstressed ę of open endings is already realized as į; see Fig. 5 (LKA II 66–67). ¹¹ The LKA “Phonetics” volume was published in 1982, but material for it began to be collected in 1950 (LKASMRK—the book is preserved in the Dialect Archive of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language’s Centre of Geolinguistics)—“the first dialectological expedition was organized in 1950, and the first edition of the ‘Programme for Collecting Material for the Atlas of the Lithuanian Language’ was published in 1951” (Mikulėnienė 2022: 126). ¹² The 1982 LKA “Phonetics” maps reflect the entire territory of Lithuania at the end of the material-collection period. 220 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXIX Priedžūkio tarminių ypatybių rekonstrukcija horizontaliajame ir vertikaliajame kontinuume: Kauno marių dugno atvejis FIG. 4. Fragment of Map No. 17 of the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map: e in open endings FIG. 5. Fragment of Map No. 50 of the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map: unstressed ę in open endings The second distinguishing feature—the realization of the vowel ą as u̯—was not found in the informants’ speech in 2020. The 1982 LKA “Phonetics” maps also record, along the lagoon and in at least part of Kaišiadorys, the pronunciation of ą and ę characteristic of the standard language (LKA II 61–63). Straipsniai / Articles 221 ŽYDRŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS The 1982 LKA “Phonetics” maps No. 44 and No. 45 are associated with both distinguishing features—the aforementioned realization of vowel e (ε) as į (iː) and the realization of vowel a as y (uː)—see Figs. 6 and 7. FIG. 6. Fragment of Map No. 44 of the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map: stressed ą, ę in the stem FIG. 7. Fragment of Map No. 45 of the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map: unstressed ą, ę in the stem 2 2 2 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXIX Reconstruction of Priedzūkis dialectal features in the horizontal and vertical continuum: the case of the bed of the Kaunas Lagoon There are also other 1982 LKA “Phonetics” maps (Nos. 46, 47, 48, 68, 69), in which the realization of the vowel q as (u:) is mapped; all show the aforementioned tendency—q is not realized as (LKA II 63–65, 83–86). When the data collected in 2020 and the data from the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” maps are compared, continuity is evident: in both periods and on both banks of the Kaunas Lagoon, pronunciation is the same (the vowel q is not realized as ). 4.2. Realization of word-initial e Another tendency is the realization of vowel e as a at the beginning of a word. Along the lagoon, at points LKA553 and LKA536, variants of the pronunciation of the verb ito were recorded (LKA II 28). In 2020, the feature (in the word ėlės and in various forms of ito) was found in three of four cases: it was used by two residents in Šlienava (at the Márgininkai (LKA553) point) and by one resident in Rumšiškės (LKA536). Only the youngest informant pronounced it non-dialectally: einant (see Table 2). 8 LENTELE. Realization of word-initial e as a Informants | +/− | Examples Šlie_V_1920 | + | ǁǁrǁdǁavoǁ (x 5); ǁrt (x 2); nǁe ǁpaǁdǁina; ǁ ǁǁ ǁros Rumš_M_1930 | + | ǁrǁ s (x 2) Šlie_M_1951 | + | ǁrǁdǁavoǁ; ǁrǁna; ǁrǁnent Rumš_V_1954 | − | This is the second case in which the dialectal feature is found in the speech of all informants except Rumš_V_1954. The data in the vertical (age) continuum are more differentiated than those in the horizontal (territorial) continuum. Moreover, the (non-)realization of vowels suggests that the dialectal features of parents and children may not coincide—that is, different speech may be used within the same family. The realization as u is recorded both on LKA “Phonetics” maps Nos. 9 and 10 (see Figs. 8 and 9) and in the speech of the interviewed dug-dwellers on both sides of the Nemunas (although Map No. 10 (Fig. 9) shows a different situation near the analyzed Márgininkai (LKA553) point). Straipsniai / Articles 223 ŽYDŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS FIG. 8. Fragment of Map No. 9 of the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map: word-initial e FIG. 9. Fragment of Map No. 10 of the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map: word-initial ei The data of Map No. 9 of the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map are mainly represented by the words élnias, éngti, érkė, erškėtis, erzinti (LKA II 27). In 2020, one case of realization of eu was found: in Šlienava (at the Márgininkai (LKA553) point), e was realized as a in the word eurūš (e.g. ¹ rūs). The 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map No. 10 224 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXIX (see Fig. 9) also represents the words eiti and eilė—that is, the diphthong ei is realized as ai. It should be noted that the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map records two kinds of pronunciation on the left bank—the vowels are both realized and not realized in the relevant way. According to the 2020 data, on the left bank, in Šlienāva, at the Mārgininkai point (LKA553), cases of ei being realized as ai are even more frequent than on the right bank. Moreover, neighboring points (e.g., Armāliškės, LKA534) had no influence. 4.3. Lengthening of the first components i, u of falling diphthongs All informants lengthen the first components of falling diphthongs. The greatest number of examples was found in the speech of the informant Šlie_M_1951 (except for the conditional verb nedirbtų, pronounced once with a short i); see Table 3. TABLE 3. Lengthening of the first components i, u of falling diphthongs This case demonstrates strong vertical and horizontal continuity. It may be assumed that both before and after the displacement the residents belonged (and belong) to the same dialectal area. On the other hand, this example weakens the previously highlighted association between dialectal character and generation. The 1982 LKA “Phonetics” maps show that the first components of falling diphthongs were likewise lengthened on both banks of the lagoon; see Fig. 10 (LKA II 38–39). Straipsniai / Articles 225 ŽYDŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS FIG. 10. Fragment of Map No. 20 of the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map: stem i, u in falling diphthongs Map No. 20 of the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map essentially reflects two horizontal levels—the continuity of the area from a synchronic perspective and, when compared with the 2020 data, also from a diachronic perspective (from the apparent-time perspective). 4.4. Hardening of consonant l Another fairly pronounced feature along the lagoon is the hardening of consonant l. In 2020, the feature was found on both banks of the lagoon; see Table 4. TABLE 4. Hardening of consonant l Informants | +/− | Examples Šlie_V_1920 | +/(−) | ṅɛpaˈlaɪdoː; paˈlaɪdoː (x 2); nʊˈlaɪdʲi; ɪˈlaɪdʑe; paˈlaɪdʊ (shots); ṅɛpaˈlaɪdʊ; leɪˈdʲɪma; leɪˈdʲimoː; ˈlasʲnɛm (a hen) Rumš_M_1930 | + | ɪˈlʲɛːləs (x 2); kʲɛˈʊslas; ɛʊˈɛlas; lɛnʲˈtʲɪnoːs; ˈlɛnʲtʲɪnʊ Šlie_M_1951 | | – Rumš_V_1954 | +/− | bʊˈlʲaɛːləs 226 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXIX Priedžūkio tarminių ypatybių rekonstrukcija horizontaliajame ir vertikaliajame kontinuume: Kauno marių dugno atvejis The informants interviewed in 2020 harden the consonant l in various positions. Three of the four informants harden the consonant l, though not consistently (exceptions occur). Judging by the abundance of examples, l is hardened most often in the speech of informant Šlie_V_1920; however, in the words iškėlė, neįskėlė, atkėlė it is pronounced as a palatalized l. Only informant Rumš_M_1930 hardens the consonant throughout. As in the cases of vowel reflexes, the importance of generation again emerges: it is noteworthy that the informant born in 1951 did not harden the consonant l at all, whereas the informant born in 1954 did so only once. The hardening of the consonant l is mapped in more than one 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map. Thus, No. 15 shows stem e, ei after the consonant l (e.g., lėdas, léisti); see Fig. 11, while map No. 72 shows stem n after l; see Fig. 12. On the left bank (and thus in Šlienava—the Márgininkai (LKA553) point), both e(i) and a(i) are recorded, whereas on the right bank (in Rumšiškės, LKA536) only a(i) is recorded (LKA II 33–34). Thus, in Rumšiškės l before e(i) was always pronounced hard. The 2020 tendencies have been preserved: in Šlienava (the Márgininkai (LKA553) point), hardening occurs less often than in Rumšiškės (LKA536). One more case of hardening the consonant l should be discussed—the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map No. 72 (see Fig. 12). Unlike map No. 15 (Fig. 11), it records stem en after l (LKA II 88–89). In 1982, clear hardening was mapped on both banks; however, Šlienava (the Márgininkai (LKA553) point) should be regarded as the boundary from which the consonant l begins to be hardened after en. In 2020, this feature was found only in the speech of informant Rumš_M_1930, in the word lentýnos: l̇n¹ʲᵃ¹ti̇ṅȯs; ˈl̇n¹ʲᵃ¹ti̇nu̇ (see Table 4). It is therefore hypothesized that the standard-language variant (the palatalized consonant l before en) may have become established on the left bank all the way to the lagoon. The hardening of the consonant l was mapped not only in the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” maps but also in the 2014 monograph (Mikulėnienė, Meiliūnaitė, eds., 2014); see Fig. 13. This 2014 material is based on 1982 LKA “Phonetics” maps Nos. 15 and 28; it states that “the area of use of the consonant l has remained the same as it was in the second half of the 20th century,” yet this phonetic feature is identified as disappearing and best preserved in the speech of the oldest generation (Bakšienė, Geržotaitė, Leskauskaitė 2014: 255). Another Dzūkian-borderland feature—more open pronunciation of the vowels ė and o—did not occur in the speech of the informants interviewed in 2020. The 1982 LKA “Phonetics” maps for Rumšiškės (LKA536) and Šlienava (the Márgininkai (LKA553) point) likewise do not represent more open pronunciation of ė and o (for more on the pronunciation of ė and o, see: LKA II 44–58). Straipsniai / Articles 227 ŽYDRŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS FIG. 11. Fragment of 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map No. 15: stem e, ei after consonant 1 FIG. 12. Fragment of 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map No. 72: stem en after 1 2 2 8 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXIX Reconstruction of Dzūkian-borderland Dialectal Features in the Horizontal and Vertical Continua: The Case of the Bottom of the Kaunas Lagoon FIG. 13. Fragment of map X: stem e, ei, ė after consonant l 4.5. Morphological Features Considering the phonetic features, it may be stated that the local dialectal variant has not disappeared completely; however, the morphological data show a drastic change in the vertical continuum, or in the time scale under observation. The morphological examples are particularly related to the informants’ age. Although the two oldest informants theoretically belong to the same generation (the age difference is a decade), the dialectal data are not homogeneous. Three morphological features were heard in the speech of the oldest informant, one in the speech of the informant ten years younger, while no morphological Dzūkian-borderland features occurred in the speech of the younger informants; see Table 5. Straipsniai / Articles 229 ŽYDRŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS TABLE 5. Morphological features of the informants’ speech Informants Singular dative ending of masculine nouns –u Illative The noun ending –uo is replaced by –uva Šlie_V_1920 u'ie¹'nɑm ¹'suːnɔ mʲ'ʃ'kʲæʎ'in s'ęsʋa Rumš_M_1930 j'ęʋ'nɪmʊ - - The morphological feature—the noun ending –uva instead of –uo—can be associated with one 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map, No. 67 (LKA II 82–83); see Fig. 14. Table 5 shows that the feature was found in Šienava (the Márgininkai (LKA553) point). FIG. 14. Fragment of LKA map No. 67: stressed uo in an open ending Since the ending –uva is abundantly recorded on 1982 LKA “Phonetics” map No. 67, this feature should be regarded as disappearing¹³. In 2020, the ending –i in prepositional constructions was not found at all when residents were interviewed; this was not surprising, since other researchers likewise indicate that it occurs only occasionally (Bacevičiūtė, Mikulėnienė, Salienė 2005: 116). ¹³ On LKA “Phonetics” map No. 67, the ending –uva is mapped on both banks of the lagoon; however, at the Márgininkai (LKA553) point, only the word šuva was recorded. 230 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXIX Priedžūkio tarminių ypatybių rekonstrukcija horizontaliajame ir vertikaliajame kontinuume: Kauno marių dugno atvejis As with the phonetic features, the use of morphological features cannot be associated with a specific location of residence. 4.6. Distribution of Dialectal Features in the Vertical Continuum See Fig. 15 for the arrangement of the dialectal features found according to frequency in the vertical continuum. FIG. 15. Presence (or absence) of dialectal features Figure 15 shows the decline of the distinctive Dzūkian-borderland features: the word-initial vowel e is realized as a in three of the four cases, while the second distinctive feature—the realization of the vowel ą as y (ų)—is not heard. The Dzūkian-borderland basis is strongest in the speech of the oldest informants. In the speech of their children born in the 1950s, the features are rarer and occur alongside standard-language variants; the fewest features occur in the speech of the youngest informant (Rumš_V_1954). On the other hand, it should be mentioned that he still hardens the consonant l, unlike the informant Šlie_M_1951, who is three years older. Since the salient features vary in the informants’ speech (sometimes independently of both location and generation), it may be assumed that dialectal markers, rather than dialectal features, are already becoming established (for the concept of a dialectal marker, see: Mikulėnienė 2019: 60). Straipsniai / Articles 231 ŽYDRŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS At the territorial level (in the horizontal continuum), there are no systematic phonetic differences. Thus, the inhabitants of the two locations at the bottom of the Kaunas Lagoon—Dvareliškės and Rumšiškės—must have spoken alike. CONCLUSION The article foregrounds two geolinguistic levels—location (horizontal) and generation (vertical). At these levels, the informants’ linguistic features were examined on the basis of a theoretical model grounded in ten Dzūkian-borderland dialectal features. In the horizontal continuum, the phonetic Dzūkian-borderland features are used fairly evenly—on the left and right banks of the Kaunas Lagoon—in Šlienava (the Márgininkai (LKA553 point) and in Rumšiškės (LKA536), no major (or systematic) dialectal differences were found. On both banks, the vowel e (ę) is realized as į (įː), the vowel e is realized as a word-initially, the first components of falling diphthongs i, u are frequently lengthened, and the consonant l is hardened. The fragmentary nature could be suggested by the morphological features (more of them were found on the right bank), but their use is more likely associated with the informants’ age. From the perspective of apparent time, the data (features still found in the informants’ speech) essentially coincide with the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” maps (in 2020, dialectal features occur in (also) other words than those indicated on the 1982 LKA “Phonetics” maps). There is diversity in the vertical continuum. All the people from the bottom lengthen the first components of falling diphthongs i, u. Three of the four (except the youngest informant) realize the word-initial vowel e as a. Everyone except the second-youngest informant hardens the consonant l. Three oldest informants pronounce the vowel i (iː) instead of e (formerly nasal ę). Some features were not found (it may be assumed that they have disappeared or are disappearing): not a single case of ą being realized as ų (uː) occurred; none of the respondents pronounce the vowels ė, o more openly. Older inhabitants generally retain more dialectal features—this tendency is particularly evident in the use of morphological features: three morphological features were found in the speech of the oldest informant (b. 1920): the singular ending -u of masculine nouns (dʼi̯eˈnamˈsuːno), the illative (mˈi̯ˈkʲeˈlʲin), and the noun ending -uva (sˈe̯soˈva). In the speech of the informant ten years younger, only the singular ending -u of masculine nouns was heard (jˈe̯s nʲimʲu). No dialectal morphological features were found in the speech of the informants born in 1951 and 1954. It may be stated that Dvareliškės and Rumšiškės belonged to the same dialectal territory—the Dzūkian-borderland area—before the relocation. The places to which the people from the bottom were relocated 232 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXIX Reconstruction of Dzūkian-borderland Dialectal Features in the Horizontal and Vertical Continua: The Case of the Bottom of the Kaunas Lagoon (Šlienava—the Márgininkai (LKA553) point—and Rumšiškės (LKA536 point) should likewise be regarded as a single Dzūkian-borderland dialectal territory. Having developed a theoretical model based on Dzūkian-borderland features, the article analyzed the speech of two families. Subsequently, on the basis of this model, a reconstruction of the local language variant of the study area will be carried out. LITERATŪRA Aliūkaitė Daiva, Mikulėnienė Danguolė 2014: Geolingvistika: ideologija, teorija ir metodai. Pagrindinės sąvokos. – XXI a. pradžios lietuvių tarmės: geolingvistinis ir sociolingvistinis tyrimas (žemėlapiai ir jų komentarai), sud. D. Mikulėnienė, V. Meiliūnaitė, Vilnius: Briedis, 29–47. Bacevičiūtė Rima, Mikulėnienė Danguolė, Salienė Vilija 2005: Vakarų aukštaičiai kauniškiai ir Klaipėdos krašto aukštaičiai, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Bakšienė Rima, Čepaitienė Agnė 2017: Tarptautinės fonetinės abecelės taikymo lietuvių tarmių garsams galimybės. – Baltistica 52(1), 105–135. Prieiga internete: https://www.baltistica.lt/index.php/baltistica/article/view/2303/2270 [žiūrėta 2023-05-29]. Bakšienė Rima, Geržotaitė Laura, Leskauskaitė Asta 2014: X žemėlapis ir komentaras. – XXI a. pradžios lietuvių tarmės: geolingvistinis ir sociolingvistinis tyrimas (žemėlapiai ir jų komentarai), sud. D. Mikulėnienė, V. Meiliūnaitė, Vilnius: Briedis, 255. Bakšienė Rima 2021: Kauno rajono kalbinis variantiškumas – „Tarmyno“ modelio kūrimo pagrindas. – Respectus Philologicus 39(44), 73–88. Prieiga internete: https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/respectus-philologicus/article/view/21920/23210 [žiūrėta 2023-05-30]. Bakšienė Rima 2017: Lietuvių patarmių transkripcija TFA simboliais: vakarų aukštaičiai šiauliškiai. – Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 77, 237–254. Prieiga internete: https://journals.lki.lt/actalinguisticalithuanica/article/view/837/928 [žiūrėta 2023-06-08]. Baranovskij Antonij J. 1898: Барановскій, Антоній Я. Замѣтки о литовскомъ языкѣ и словарѣ [Zamětki o litovskom’ jazyke i slovarė], Санктпетербургъ: Типографія Императорской Академіи Наукъ [Sanktpeterburg’: Tipografija Imperatorskoj Akademii Nauk’]. Berruto Gaetano 2010: Structure and Dynamics of a Language Space: 13. Identifying dimensions of linguistic variation in a language space. – Language and Space. An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, vol. 1: Theories and Methods, Straipsniai / Articles 233 ŽYDRŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS Handbücher zur Sprach Handbücher zur Sprachund Kommunikationswissenschaft, ed. by P. Auer, J. E. Schmidt, Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 226–241. Geržotaitė Laura 2016: Lietuvos tarmių klasifikacijos tyrimas geolingvistiniu aspektu: daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. LKA II – Lietuvių kalbos atlasas 2: Fonetika, aut. E. Grinaveckienė, A. Jonaitytė, J. Lipskienė, K. Morkūnas, M. Razmukaitė, B. Vanagienė, A. Vidugiris, atsak. red. K. Morkūnas, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1982. LKASMRK – Lietuvos TSR MA Lietuvių kalbos institutas, Lietuvių kalbos atlasui surinktos medžiagos registracijos knyga (pradėta 1952 m.). Saugoma Lietuvių kalbos instituto Geolingvistikos centro Tarmių archyve. Mikulėnienė Danguolė 2019: Tarmiškumo bruožų nomenklatūra: nuo tarminių požymių prie tarmiškumo žymenų. – Respectus Philologicus 35(40), 51–62. Prieiga internete: https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/respectus-philologicus/article/view/12716/11395 žiūrėta [žiūrėta 2023-05-30]. Mikulėnienė Danguolė 2022: Lietuvių kalbos instituto istorija 2: kalbotyros aneksija, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Mikulėnienė Danguolė, Meiliūnaitė Violeta, sud., 2014: XXI a. pradžios lietuvių tarmės: geolingvistinis ir sociolingvistinis tyrimas (žemėlapiai ir jų komentarai), Vilnius: Briedis. Morkūnas Kazys 1994: Dėl priedužkio ir jo ribų. – Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 34, 84–92. Prieiga internete: https://journals.lki.lt/actalinguisticalthuanica/article/view/1465/1559 [žiūrėta 2023-06-07]. Salys Antanas 1933: Kelios pastabos tarmių istorijai. – Archivum Philologicum 4, 21–34. Salys Antanas 1992: Raštai 4: Lietuvių kalbos tarmės, Roma: Lietuvių katalikų mokslo akademija. Šidlauskas Žydrūnas 2021: Rekonstrukciniai Kauno marių dugno tarminio ploto aspektai. – Lietuvių dialektologijos profiliai: XXI amžiaus pradžios regioniniai variantai, jų santykiai ir perspektyvos, sud. V. Meiliūnaitė, A. Čepaitienė, D. Dambrauskienė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 45–70. Prieiga internete: http://lki.lt/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Lietuviu-dialektologijos-profiliai-1.pdf [žiūrėta 2023-05-30]. Urbanavičius Valdas 2020: Žemėlapio pasakojimas. Kauno marių dugno šimtmečio istorija. Prieiga internete: https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=c55688a-269934e1f95d90bee099467c5 [žiūrėta 2023-05-30]. 234 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXIX Priedžūkio tarminių ypatybių rekonstrukcija horizontaliajame ir vertikaliajame kontinuu­me: Kauno marių dugno atvejis Willemyns Roland, Bister Helga 1989: The Language Continuum as a Pluridimensional Concept. – Status and Function of Languages and Language Varieties, Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 541–551. Zinkevičius Zigmas, Girdenis Aleksas 1966: Dėl lietuvių kalbos tarmių klasifikacijos. – Kalbotyra 14, 139–147. Zinkevičius Zigmas 1966: Lietuvių dialektologija: lyginamoji tarmių fonetika ir morfologija, Vilnius: Mintis. The Reconstruction of the Priedžukis Dialectal Features in Horizontal and Vertical Continuum: the Case of the Bottom of the Kaunas Lagoon SUMMARY The article presents the specifics of the age typology of the subjects from the perspective of apparent time. Generational issues are introduced. The residential area of the informants is contextualised, and directions of migration of the population evicted from the bottom of Kaunas Lagoon are provided. The dialectal characteristics of the study area are discussed. Taking into consideration that the study area is a transitional area between the Western Aukštaitian subdialect of Kaunas and the Southern Aukštaitian subdialect (and is to be considered to be Priedžukis subdialect area), a theoretical model based on ten Priedžukis dialectal features is developed. Based on the developed theoretical model, the language of the informants (two families) is characterised. Dissemination of dialectal data in the horizontal and vertical continuum is shown. Data, collected in 2020, is compared to the linguistic facts of the maps in Phonetics (LKA 1982). The material from different periods is homogenous in most cases – the shifts in the use of dialectal (phonetic) features are small. Based on the data at the time of apparent, a reconstructive framework to understand the local variation of the subdialect at the bottom of the Kaunas Lagoon is created. Įteikta 2023 m. rugpjūčio 9 d. ŽYDRŪNAS ŠIDLAUSKAS Lietuvių kalbos institutas Petro Vileišio g. 5, LT–10308 Vilnius, Lietuva [email protected] Straipsniai / Articles 235