RIMA BAKŠIENĖ

Institute of the Lithuanian Language

ORCID id: orcid.org/0000-0002-6716-0776

Research areas: experimental phonetics, phonology, geolinguistics.

DOI: doi.org/10.35321/all86-07

ONCE AGAIN ON THE TRANSCRIPTION OF THE HIGH LITHUANIAN SUBDIALECTS USING THE SYMBOLS OF THE INTERNATIONAL PHONETIC ALPHABET (SEVERAL CASES REQUIRING CLARIFICATION)

Once More on the Transcription of Aukštaitian Subdialects by the Symbols of the International Phonetic Alphabet (Several Clarified Cases)

ANNOTATION

The article examines issues concerning the transcription of the High Lithuanian subdialects using the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA), and clarifies some symbols and methods of recording sound units from the earlier set of IPA symbols for Lithuanian dialect sounds, presented in 2017. It discusses possible IPA vowel and consonant symbols suitable for recording High Lithuanian sounds, diacritics, and the possibilities and problems of transcribing the prosodic units of the High Lithuanian subdialects (intonations and their allotones) in the IPA. A generalized vowel system of the High Lithuanian subdialects is reviewed (phonemes and their more prominent variants), several more complex cases of consonant transcription in the IPA are analyzed, and examples of transcriptions with diphthongal syllables bearing different intonations are provided. In the future, after more detailed studies of dialect phonology and instrumental phonetics have been carried out and more theoretical works have been synthesized, the transcription of Lithuanian dialects using IPA symbols will require further refinement.

KEYWORDS: phonetics, transcription, International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA), Lithuanian dialects, High Lithuanians.

Straipsniai / Articles

165

RIMA BAKŠIENĖ

ANNOTATION

The article addresses the questions of transcribing the Aukštaitian subdialects of the Lithuanian language by the symbols of the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA), revises certain symbols from the earlier set of the IPA symbols for the sounds of Lithuanian dialects presented in 2017 and ways of transcribing. It discusses the vowel and consonant symbols of the IPA, which may possibly be used for transcribing the sounds in Aukštaitian, diacritical marks, the opportunities and problems of the IPA in transcribing the prosodic units (pitch accents and their allophones) of Aukštaitian subdialects. It reviews the generalized system of vocalism of Aukštaitian subdialects (phonemes and their more prominent variants), analyses certain more difficult cases of consonant transcription by the IPA symbols, gives the examples of transcribing the syllables, which contain diphthongs and bear different pitch accents. After more indepth studies on dialectal phonology are conducted in the future and more theoretical works are generalized, the transcription of Lithuanian dialects by the IPA symbols will be further revised.

KEYWORDS: phonetics, transcription, International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA), Lithuanian dialects, Aukštaitian.

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, specialists in Lithuanian dialectology have increasingly used not only the Copenhagen transcription system but also the symbols of the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) to record dialect sounds. The dissemination of IPA transcription in scholarly works is associated not only with the continually growing need for international applicability but also with the application of a new dialectological model in Lithuanian dialectology (see Aliūkaitė, Mikulėnienė 2014; Mikulėnienė 2020 et al. for a more detailed discussion). With the introduction of a multimodal approach to regional manifestations of language variation and the development and use of modern tools for collecting and analyzing dialectal data by means of computer technologies (see Čepaitienė 2020; Bakšienė 2021; Mikulėnienė, Čepaitienė 2021; Geolingvistikos portalas et al. for a more detailed discussion), the need for IPA transcription is inevitably increasing.

After dialectologists at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language published, in 2017, a set of IPA symbols proposed for transcribing the sounds of Lithuanian dialects (see Bakšienė, Čepaitienė 2017), it was used to conduct studies of the High and Low Lithuanian subdialects, mostly dialectometric ones, based on calculations of linguistic differences in transcriptions made with the Gabmap program (see Čepaitienė 2018; 2019; Bakšienė, Čepaitienė 2020; Vyniautaitė 2021 et al.), as well as an exploratory dialectometric analysis of all the subdialects (see Mikulėnienė et al. 2019). During these years, scholarly publications also discussed the possibilities of the IPA set for recording the sounds of individual Lithuanian subdialects (see

166

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Dar kartą dėl aukštaičių patarmių transkripcijos tarptautinės fonetinės abėcėlės rašmenimis (keletas tikslintinų atvejų)

Bakšienė 2017; 2018; 2018a; 2019; Bakšienė, Čepaitienė 2017a); IPA transcriptions of examples from various subdialects were included in the new instructions for collecting dialectal material (see VTG 2021), and a substantial body of dialectal texts from Kaunas District is being explicated in the Tarmynas under development (see Geolingvistikos portalas). All these works once again raised debatable and problematic issues of IPA transcription, which were summarized in 2021 in a series of seminars organized by the geolinguists of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language¹. Recording Lithuanian dialect sounds using the IPA system is relevant to many dialectology specialists; therefore, it is worthwhile to return to this topic once again and discuss and clarify in greater detail the notation of certain dialectal sound units. It should also be mentioned that during this period an official set of IPA symbols intended for Standard Lithuanian appeared (see VLKK k-25; Kazlauskienė, Bakšienė 2021), so the recommendations proposed there should also be taken into account when recording dialect sounds.

The aim of this article is to discuss the more complex cases of High Lithuanian subdialect transcription highlighted by research in recent years and to present several clarifications to the set of IPA symbols proposed for Lithuanian dialects in 2017. The more specific tasks are: 1) to summarize the vowel system of the High Lithuanian subdialects and discuss the vowel units that are most problematic from the perspective of IPA transcription; 2) to review the notation, using IPA symbols, of certain important features of High Lithuanian consonants; 3) to present possible IPA methods for recording the allotones of High Lithuanian intonations and to discuss the possibilities of transcribing diphthongal / diphthong syllables particularly associated with intonation. The study draws on material from numerous previously published works by dialectologists: descriptions of subdialects and local varieties, and texts recorded using Copenhagen transcription. The methods of scholarly literature analysis and descriptive-comparative analysis were employed.

1. AUKŠTAITIŠKOJI VOKALIZMO SISTEMA IR JOS ŽYMĖJIMAS TFA

The generalized system of High Lithuanian vowel phonemes, recorded with IPA symbols and designated according to IPA terminology (see IPA 2022), is presented in Table 1².

¹ The series consisted of three seminars, in which Dr. Rima Bakšienė, a senior researcher at the Geolinguistics Centre, presented the general principles of transcription to the participants remotely and examined more complex cases of transcribing High and Low Lithuanian dialects using IPA symbols.

² The High Lithuanian vowel system was compiled on the basis of the following sources: Atkočait y tė, Rinkauskienė 2003; LK TCh 2004; Kardelis 2018 and other generalizing works by dialectologists. The table includes only vowel units with phonemic status; the more important phoneme variants are discussed separately. Therefore, for example, the open vowel [æ] (of varying length), which most authors of phonological descriptions regard as merely a phoneme variant, is not included in the table. In general, the opposition of vowels [ɑ]: [ɛ] in Lithuanian

Straipsniai / Articles

167

RIMA BAKŠIENĖ

TABLE 1. High Lithuanian subdialect vowel phonemes

As is well known, High Lithuanian vocalism is characterized by the fact that, within the group of quantitative oppositions, not only short and long phonemes contrast, but also half-long phonemes, which exist in subdialects with the so-called three-phonological-quantity system—Uteniškiai, Kupiškėnai, and parts of Vilniškiai and Anykštėnai (see Jasiūnaitė,

language is weak, and the contrast between phonemes is possible only in absolute word-initial position. The phonemes of e-type vowels are generally not characteristic of many High Lithuanian local varieties. The so-called “two-faced” phonemes are written in parentheses; their existence is often determined by various phonological and extraphonological factors, such as speech rate, style, the particular localization of a local variety within a subdialect, and so on (see Girdenis 2003: 82 for a more detailed discussion).

^³ One front and one back “murmured” vowel are presented in the table; their designation by specific IPA vowel symbols is conditional in this case. The IPA transcription of these vowels is discussed later in the article.

168

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Dar kartą dėl aukštaičių patarmių transkripcijos tarptautinės fonetinės abėcėlės rašmenimis (keletas tikslintinų atvejų)

Girdenis 1996). Recording phonemic quantity with IPA symbols presents no problems: the relevant IPA diacritics are used. It should only be mentioned once again that, in the subgroup of high vowels, long and half-long vowels (shortened long or lengthened short vowels) should be represented by IPA close-vowel symbols (in English close), whereas short vowels should be represented by IPA near-close-vowel symbols (in English near-close), e.g.: [ˈuʲiːrds] ~ vyras, [uʲiˈræːlʲs] ~ vyrelis, [ˈuʲisas] / [ˈuʲisas] ~ visas, [ˈɡruːdas] ~ grūdas, [ɡruːˈdʲæːlʲs] ~ grūdelis, [ˈbuːva] / [ˈbuɔ] ~ buvo, etc. It should be noted that when long y, ū (usually in an unstressed position) are completely shortened, they should nevertheless be transcribed with IPA close-vowel symbols, because they usually differ qualitatively from short vowels, cf.: [uʲiˈrʲæːlʲs], [ɡruˈdʲæːlʲs]. Half-long mid vowels, characteristic of the Anykštėnai and Kupiškėnai subdialects, should also be included in the generalized High Lithuanian phoneme system, e.g.: [ˈmʲeːdʲis] ~ mėdis, [ˈsɔːkɛ] ~ sako. The phonological status of lower (open) half-long vowels in the High Lithuanian subdialects, especially in the Western and Southern High Lithuanian local varieties, continues to be debated by dialectology specialists (for an overview of the problem, see Kardelis 2018: 119–129, 132–136; Bakšienė, Leskauskaitė 2021: 167), but these vowels (especially lengthened a) should also be included in the generalized vowel picture, particularly because of the Eastern High Lithuanian local varieties, e.g.: [ˈmɑːnɑ] ~ mėno, [ɡʲeˈrʲæːsˈnʲis] ~ geresnis, etc.

Among the qualitative phonemic features relevant to transcription, the notably greater degree of openness (lower tongue height) characteristic of the vowels of certain subdialects should be mentioned first. More open i, u (traditionally marked i̞, u̞ in Copenhagen transcription) are most characteristic of the northern part of the Western High Lithuanian Kauniškiai area, while more open ė, o (traditionally marked ẹ, o̞ / ɔ) are used in many Eastern High Lithuanian and some Southern and Western High Lithuanian Šiauliškiai local varieties. More open vowels in all positions, except ą, which is characterized by weaker lip rounding, should be marked in the IPA system with the diacritic written below the vowel̞ (in English lowered), e.g.: [ˈkʲɪtɑ] / [ˈkʲɛtɑ] ~ kitą, [ˈs̞ʊkɑ] / [ˈsɔkɑ] ~ sūka, [ˈbrɔ̞lʲɪs] ~ brólis, [ˈtʲɛvɑs] ~ tėvas. The aforementioned open, less rounded o is written with the same symbol as in Copenhagen transcription, e.g., [ˈbrɔːlʲɪs].

The transcription of the variable vowels ie, uo proposed in 2017 (see Bakšienė, Čepaitienė 2017: 121, 122) should be clarified in the IPA set. High Lithuanian is characterized by variable vowel phonemes with two degrees of diphthongization: clearly diphthongal sounds with strongly changing articulation, ie, uo (traditionally called coincident diphthongs), are used in all subdialects; and more weakly diphthongized sounds pronounced with a less distinct first component (diphthongoids), used mainly in the Vilniškiai, Uteniškiai, and Anykštėnai local varieties of Eastern High Lithuanian. Given that in many subdialects the initial segments of these sounds are acoustically similar to the long vowels y, ū, and only the ending is characterized by articulatory change and variability (see Bacevičiūtė 2002; Girdenis 2009: 239; Jaroslavienė 2010: 7 for a more detailed discussion), as well as in light of the accepted recommendation for Standard Lithuanian (see VLKK k-25;

Straipsniai / Articles

169

RIMA BAKŠIENĖ

Kazlauskienė, Bakšienė 2021: 4), it is proposed that variable sounds be transcribed uniformly in all cases (regardless of stress and intonation), with IPA close-vowel symbols in the first component, e.g.: ['pʲienas] ~ pienas, ['dʲiena] ~ dieną, [dʲie̯na] ~ dienà, ['pʲuodas] ~ pūodas, ['ju̯okas] ~ juõkas, [juo̯'kos] ~ juokùs, etc. Weakly diphthongized ie, uo of various origins should be marked with the same symbols, but a diacritic indicating a very short vowel (in English extra short) should be written above the first component⁴, e.g.: [kɒm pūtęs] ~ kompotas, [kɔtʲ' lʲietės] ~ kotletas, [tʲ'e vʲe̯lʲis] ~ tėvelis, ['lʲuɔpʲi] ~ lapė.

In terms of IPA notation, the reduced vowels of the Panevėžiškiai subdialects of Eastern High Lithuanian remain among the most problematic in the High Lithuanian vowel-phoneme system. Both the Southern and Northern Panevėžiškiai local varieties have one short front vowel and one short back vowel, differing only in quantitative and qualitative prominence: the Southern varieties have less reduced vowels, while the Northern varieties have strongly reduced, so-called “murmured” vowels (see Fig. 1).

FIG. 1. Equivalents of reduced short vowels in the Southern and Northern Panevėžiškiai local varieties

In the earlier 2017 IPA set, it was proposed that the “murmured” vowels of the Northern Panevėžiškiai be transcribed with the additional diacritic̄, indicating inaudible release of the sound (in English no audible release). However, this proposal unquestionably requires clarification. A more detailed analysis of the IPA diacritic system showed that this symbol is intended for variants of plosive consonants in which no clear “burst” is heard, that is, the speech organs do not open or withdraw abruptly from one another but immediately produce an adjacent consonant with a similar articulation (see HIPA 1999: 17). This most often occurs in compounds, e.g.: ['pʲlʲ'ɪgbajɔrʲɪs] ~ plikbajoris, [dʊgʲbʲlʲ'ɪs] ~ daugbal̃sis, and so on (cf. Pakerys 2003: 87). This symbol is not intended to convey vowel features. Therefore, the only appropriate solution

⁴ If necessary, when the second component of ie, uo is less clearly audible—for example, when transcribing texts from Lithuanian local varieties in Belarus—this diacritic may also be written over the second component.

170

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Dar kartą dėl aukštaičių patarmių transkripcijos tarptautinės fonetinės abėcėlės rašmenimis (keletas tikslintinų atvejų)

in this case is to mark the reduced vowels of the Northern Panevėžiškiai with the aforementioned IPA diacritic meaning “extra short” (in English extra short), e.g.: [ˈdunɐ] ~ dúona, [ˈdɔŋɡɔs] ~ dangùs, [ˈkɔːsʲnʲɪs] ~ kąsnis, [ˈtʲɛsʲɐ] ~ tęsia. The corresponding less reduced vowels of the Southern Panevėžiškiai should be marked with the same IPA diacritic indicating a lowered vowel, e.g.: [ˈdunɔ̞], [ˈdʊŋɡɔ̞s], [ˈkɑsʲnʲɪs], [ˈtʲɛsʲɪ].

Among qualitative vowel variants, when transcribing with the IPA system it is advisable to mark consistently the advancement of the back vowels o, ū, u, as well as the first component of uo after soft consonants. Phonetics specialists state that this is one of the most noticeable vowel variants, whose articulation differs particularly markedly from that of the unadvanced basic allophone; it is also proposed for marking in the IPA transcription of Standard Lithuanian (Pakerys 2003: 36; Kazlauskienė 2018: 35; VLKK k-25; Kazlauskienė, Bakšienė 2021: 6). Such vowel advancement should be marked with the IPA diacritic ̟ (in English advanced), e.g.: [ˈjɔ̟kʲo̟] ~ jókio, [ˈsʲu̟sʲu̟] ~ siūsiu, [kʲɛʌ̟ʲu̟] ~ kelių, and so on.

2. SOME CASES OF IPA NOTATION FOR HIGH LITHUANIAN CONSONANTS

Of all the consonants characteristic of the High Lithuanian subdialects, the notation of the fricatives š, ž is the most complex from the perspective of IPA transcription. In the 2017 IPA symbol set, it was proposed that they be marked generally with the IPA postalveolar fricatives ʃ, ʒ, although even then their imperfect correspondence was discussed (see Bakšienė, Čepaitienė 2017: 124). The hard and soft consonants of both Standard Lithuanian and, especially, the dialects differ markedly in their articulatory and acoustic properties. A detailed study of the features of š, ž in Standard Lithuanian establishes that the IPA postalveolars ʃ, ʒ fall somewhere between the Lithuanian hard and soft consonants, but are closer to the soft ones; various IPA notations have also been proposed (see Pakerys 2003: 71–76; Ambrazevičius, Leskauskaitė 2014: 164–168; Kazlauskienė 2018: 47–63; Urbanavičienė, Indričianė, Jaroslavienė, Grigorjevs 2019: 21, 99–125 et al. for a more detailed discussion). In the High Lithuanian subdialects there is not only the classic opposition between hard and soft consonants of this group; in many local varieties that harden consonants, the articulatory and acoustic properties of depalatalized sounds differ even more markedly from those of palatalized š, ž (see the overview in Ambrazevičius, Leskauskaitė 2014: 38–44). Depalatalized consonants are most characteristic of Southern and Eastern High Lithuanian local varieties; therefore, when transcribing their consonant systems using the IPA, different equivalents may be selected for hard and soft š, ž, more precisely conveying their properties. In this case, soft š, ž are recorded with the aforementioned IPA postalveolar

Straipsniai / Articles

171

RIMA BAKŠIENĖ

[ʃ], [ʒ] with the palatalization diacritic, preserving the systematic notation of all soft consonants⁵, e.g.: [ʔʲʒienas] ~ šienas, [kemʲʃʲtʲ] ~ kamšyti, [ʒʲieʲma] ~ žiemą, [ʒʲiba] ~ žiba; whereas depalatalized š, ž are represented by the IPA retroflexes [ʂ], [ʐ], e.g.: [ʔˈʂienas], [kemˈʂʲtʲ], [ʐieˈma], [ˈʐiba]. Some High Lithuanian local varieties, such as Southern High Lithuanian, have very soft, intermediate consonants between soft s, z and š, ž, which should be marked with the IPA alveolar-palatal consonants [ɕ], [ʑ], e.g.: [ˈuɕi] ~ visi, [ɕʲiˈdʲus] ~ slidūs, [ˈʑʲizʲæ] ~ zyžia, [kaˈʑʲis] ~ Kazys⁶. When transcribing the sounds of subdialects with a simpler consonant system, such as Western High Lithuanian Kauniškiai, or when selecting a simplified rather than a detailed transcription variant, the aforementioned generalized IPA symbols [ʃ], [ʒ] may be used in all cases for š, ž (soft consonants additionally marked with the palatalization diacritic ʲ).

The 2017 transcription of affricates using IPA symbols should also be clarified somewhat. It was proposed that affricates be transcribed with two separate symbols joined above by a tie bar: c – [t͡s], č – [t͡ʃ], dz – [d͡z], dž – [d͡ʒ] (see Bakšienė, Čepaitienė 2017: 124, 125). However, the Standard Language recommendation, mainly for practical reasons, chose to mark them with the digraphs [ts], [tʃ], [dz], [dʒ] (see VLKK k-25; Kazlauskienė, Bakšienė 2021: 5); dialect sounds should therefore be transcribed analogously. If the more detailed method of marking consonants š, ž discussed above is selected in the text being transcribed, the fricative components should likewise be marked in affricates, e.g.: [ˈsʲam͡tʲis] / [ˈsamt͡sis] ~ šamtis, [ˈmʲe͡dʲis] / [ˈmʲed͡zis] ~ mėdis, [ˈkʲimʲʃʲtʲi] / [ˈkʲimʃt͡si] ~ kimšti, [ʒʲiˈdʒʲuovʲ] / [ʐʲiˈdʐʲuovʲ] ~ išdžiūvo.

3. THE PROSODIC SYSTEM OF HIGH LITHUANIAN AND THE NOTATION OF DIPHTHONGAL SYLLABLES IN THE IPA

The High Lithuanian prosodic system is somewhat simpler than the Low Lithuanian one, although some local varieties also have varying degrees of stress retraction and distinctive intonation allotones (see Table 2; for a more detailed discussion, see Kazlauskas 2000 [1968]: 5–9; Bakšienė 2016: 50–55 et al.). The recording of prosodic units, especially the dialectal features of intonations,

⁵ The palatalization diacritic ʲ is most needed when performing dialectometric measurements, for example, when analyzing transcription sequences and calculating linguistic distances with the computer program Gabmap (see Nerbonne, Colen, Gooskens, Kleiweg, Leinonen 2011: 65–89; Leinonen, Çöltekin, Nerbonne 2016: 71–83; Snoek 2014: 192–208 et al.). Given the similarity of the articulatory/acoustic properties of Lithuanian soft consonants š, ž to the acoustics of IPA sounds (see IPA 2022), the diacritic could be omitted, but in this case the criterion of systematicity is given priority.

⁶ The same symbols could also be used to record the now rare cases of “šlekavimas” in the northern Šiauliškiai local varieties, as well as the particularly soft š, ž pronounced under the influence of Slavic languages.

172

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Dar kartą dėl aukštaičių patarmių transkripcijos tarptautinės fonetinės abėcėlės rašmenimis (keletas tikslintinų atvejų)

Using IPA symbols undoubtedly remains the most problematic part of the transcription. This issue has already been examined in dialectologists’ scholarly publications (see Bakšienė, Čepaitienė 2017: 126, 127; Bakšienė 2019: 7–27 et al.), but it must be acknowledged that the most suitable transcription variant for adequately conveying the diversity of High Lithuanian intonation allotones is still being sought.

TABLE 2. High Lithuanian intonation allotones^⁷

The proposals made in 2017 for marking Lithuanian dialect intonations using the IPA system unquestionably require clarification. At that time, the IPA diacritics for falling tone (in English falling tone) / rising tone (in English rising tone), ^ and ˅, were presented as the principal intonation symbols. However, after synthesizing more theoretical and instrumental studies of Lithuanian intonations, the researchers’ central idea was confirmed once again: this phenomenon in Lithuanian is not exclusively tonal in nature. Moreover, the prosodic features of intonations depend greatly on the sounds constituting the syllable nucleus, the subdialect system, the accentual position, and many other factors. In High Lithuanian subdialects with a strong intonation opposition, such as Western High Lithuanian Kauniškiai, the aforementioned diacritics might be suitable for recording the intonations of vowel syllables^⁸, but

^⁷ Abbreviation meanings: VA – Western High Lithuanians, PA – Southern High Lithuanians, RA – Eastern High Lithuanians; PK – primary stress, AK – retracted stress; + – characteristic of the entire area and in all positions, (+) – characteristic of only part of the area and / or not in all positions; – – not characteristic.

^⁸ The audio examples of several speakers with vowels bearing a falling or rising tone presented on the website of the International Phonetic Association (see IPA 2022) sound quite similar to Lithuanian intonations.

Straipsniai / Articles

173

RIMA BAKŠIENĖ

they are not universal in the case of other dialects and syllables of a different structure, especially diphthongs / diphthongal syllables, in which prosodic features of a different, non-tonal nature predominate. Therefore, following a unified system with the proposed transcription of the intonations of Standard Lithuanian (see VLKК k–25; Kazlauskienė, Bakšienė 2021: 5), it is proposed that all High Lithuanian acute-derived intonation allotones be marked with the raised digit ^¹, while those of circumflex origin (including the so-called medial^¹⁰, interrupted, and sustained intonations) be marked with ^², e.g.: [¹ʋˈiɾas] ~ ʋyras, [¹ˈkɾuːmas] ~ krūmas, [²ˈkoʃʲe] ~ košė, [²ˈejo] ~ ėjo, etc. The specific quantitative and qualitative features of the sounds constituting the syllables, which depend on the intonations, should be marked with the appropriate sound-length symbols (ː – long, ˑ – half-long) and the necessary IPA vowel symbols. For example, if, owing to the more abrupt circumflex allotones—the medial or interrupted intonation—long vowels are shortened at the end of a word, they should be transcribed by marking the digit for the relevant intonation before the syllable and the half-long-vowel symbol^¹¹: [nʊ ²ˈkuː] ~ na ką, [ʋˈʊ̯enjɔ-²ˈsʲiːk] ~ vienąsýk.

The most complex cases from the perspective of transcription are stressed diphthongal / diphthong syllables of various structures; therefore, the article presents examples of their IPA transcription in various accentual positions (see Appendix 2).

Several points require more detailed comment. The component a should be marked differently in syllables with an acute or sustained intonation and in those with a circumflex intonation; the medial / interrupted intonation is likewise marked differently in stressed diphthongs: in the first case, IPA [d] is written, and in the second, IPA [ɛ]; the first component of the circumflex diphthong (and of one with medial / interrupted intonation) au should be marked with IPA [ɒ] because of strong labialization. The component e (including a that has become fronted) may be transcribed with IPA symbols [æ] or [ɛ], depending on the subdialect system (whether a more open or more closed sound is characteristic), the contextual position (before a hard or soft consonant, word-finally), and other phonetic factors. In High Lithuanian subdialects, the components i, u may occur in various quantitative (short, half-long, long) and qualitative (non-broadened / broadened / having acquired the quality of a long vowel) variants; all of them

^⁹ It is more convenient to write the necessary raised digits not by raising them with the “superscript” option but by selecting the raised symbols directly from the symbol table (see the codes in Appendix 1 of the article); in this way they do not become distorted during typesetting, when transferring text from MS Word to other computer programs, and so on.

^¹⁰ Here, only those syllables in which the medial intonation functions as a circumflex allotone are meant, for example, at the end of a word. In cases where Copenhagen transcription conventionally used to mark the medial-intonation symbol on lengthened stressed vowels, e.g., [sā.ko] ~ sāko, [nẽ.ša] ~ neša, [bū.va] ~ būvo, [ki.tas] ~ kitas, no intonation is marked in IPA transcription.

^¹¹ In IPA transcription, no distinction is shown between medial and interrupted intonation (if the vowel remains half-long in both cases); this must be regarded as a shortcoming and an unresolved issue of the proposed notation. Nevertheless, it should be acknowledged that these are very subtle allotones, and the distribution area of interrupted intonation within the High Lithuanian region is relatively small. In the future, after further research, the transcription of dialect intonations will require additional refinement.

174

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Dar kartą dėl aukštaičių patarmių transkripcijos tarptautinės fonetinės abėcėlės rašmenimis (keletas tikslintinų atvejų)

should be marked with the necessary IPA symbols. The difference between a clear circumflex intonation and its more abrupt allotones—the medial or interrupted intonation—is shown by recording the quantity of the second component: in the first case, the second component should be marked as half-long; in the second, as short, with no quantity symbol written.

When transcribing unstressed diphthongs, no quantity markers are written next to the components either, and the quality of the components is usually similar to that of circumflex diphthongs; therefore, the first component is written with the same IPA symbols, e.g.: [kʲelʲba] ~ kalbà, [u̯e̞rʲˈkʲi] ~ verki; [sʲu̯ˈsʲus] ~ sausùs, [le̞i̯ˈkʲu] ~ laikù, [pʲe̞i̯ˈkʲų] ~ peikiù; [kʲe̞tʲˈlʲes] ~ kiaulės.

In most Aukštaitian subdialects with stress retraction, tones are not distinguished in retracted-stress syllables. Such syllables should be transcribed in the IPA without any tone numerals, marking only the position of stress (if there is secondary stress, it is also marked), while the quality of the components is usually written in the same way as in circumflex or unstressed syllables, e.g.: [ˈu̯e̞lkʊs] / [u̯aɪ̯ˈkʊs] ~ vaikùs, [kelba] / [kalʲba] ~ kalbà; [u̯arʲˈkʲe̞] ~ varškė, [ˈgʲe̞rʲe̞l] ~ gerai. If cases occur in which tones are pronounced more distinctly in a syllable bearing retracted stress (for example, in the northern dialects of the Šiauliai and Panevėžys areas), they should then be transcribed as in syllables bearing primary stress.

From the perspective of transcription, the monophthongization of the diphthongs au, ai, ei, characteristic of some Eastern Aukštaitian subdialects, especially those of Širvintos and Panevėžys, deserves separate mention. In these dialects, the first component of circumflex and unstressed diphthongs (especially in final position) is pronounced weakened; reduction may occur to very different degrees, for example, the diphthong au after a hard consonant: [da²ˈrʊɔ] > [da²ˈrʊɔ] > [da²ˈrʲɔ] / [da²ˈrʊ] > [da²ˈrʊ] / [da²ˈrɔ] / [ˈdarɔ] ~ darai; [ˈdʲirbʊ] > [ˈdʲirbʲɔ] / [ˈdʲirbʊ] > [ˈdʲirbʊ] / [ˈdʲirbɔ] ~ dirbau; the diphthong au after a soft consonant: [tʲi²ˈsʲɛʊ] > [tʲi²ˈsʲɛʊ] > [tʲi²ˈsʲɪʊ] > [tʲi²ˈsʲų] / [tʲi²ˈsʲɔ] / [tʲisʲɔ]¹² ~ tęsiau; [ˈu̯aˈlʲgʲɛʊ] > [ˈu̯aˈlʲgʲɪʊ] > [ˈu̯aˈlʲgʲų] / [ˈu̯aˈlʲgʲɔ] ~ válgiau; the diphthong ai: [da²ˈrɛɪ̯] > [da²ˈrɛɪ̯] > [da²ˈrʲɪ] > [da²ˈrʲɪ] / [da²ˈrɔ] / [ˈdarɔ] ~ darai; [ˈu̯iˈrɛɪ̯] > [ˈu̯iˈrʲɪ] > [ˈu̯iˈrʲɪ] / [ˈu̯iˈrʲɔ] ~ užrai; the diphthong ei: [da²ˈrʲɛɪ̯] > [da²ˈrʲɛɪ̯] > [da²ˈrʲɪ] > [da²ˈrʲɪ] ~ darė; [ˈrɔʊ̯ɛɪ̯] > [ˈrɔʊ̯ɪ] > [ˈrɔʊ̯ɪ] / [ˈrɔʊ̯ɛ] ~ rōvei. Thus, transcription should be based on the specific case, taking into account both the distinctness of the tone (if the diphthongs are circumflex) and the quantity and quality of the components, selecting the appropriate vowel symbols and diacritics.

^¹² Cases in which monophthongization proceeds to a complete monophthong may occur in the northern dialects of the Panevėžys area. In these cases, it is impossible to mark two diacritics under the vowel—both openness and fronting—so vowel openness was regarded as the more important feature.

Straipsniai / Articles

175

RIMA BAKŠIENĖ

SUMMARY

Having reviewed the generalized picture of Aukštaitian vocalism, as well as the most important consonants and prosodic elements, the relationship between dialectal sounds and the IPA symbol system was discussed, and possible IPA equivalents for the sound units of the Aukštaitian subdialects were established. Compared with the earlier 2017 set of IPA symbols intended for Lithuanian dialects, the notation of the variable vowels ie, uo, the “murmured” vowels of the Eastern Aukštaitian Panevėžys dialects, the fricative consonants š, ž, affricates, as well as Aukštaitian tones and their allotones in IPA symbols has been revised most extensively. The latter two sound elements remain the most problematic from the perspective of transcription; their notation in IPA may perhaps be further refined in the future in light of the latest research.

LITERATŪRA

Aliūkaitė Daiva, Mikulėnienė Danguolė 2014: Geolingvistika: ideologija, teorija ir metodai. Pagrindinės sąvokos. – Danguolė Mikulėnienė, Violeta Meiliūnaitė (red.). XXI a. pradžios lietuvių tarmės: geolingvistinis ir sociolingvistinis tyrimas, Vilnius: Briedis, 29–47.

Ambrazevičius Rytis, Leskauskaitė Asta 2014: Priebalsių akustinės ypatybės: palatalizacija ir balsingumas, Kaunas: Technologija.

Atkočaitė Daiva, Rinkauskienė Regina 2003: Lietuvių kalbos tarmių fonetika. Mokomoji knyga, Vilnius: Vilniaus pedagoginis universitetas.

Bacevičiūtė Rima 2002: Lietuvių kalbos kintamųjų garsų ie, uo instrumentinė analizė. – Kalbotyra 51(1), 5–17. Prieiga internete: https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/kalbotyra/article/view/23376/22612.

Bakšienė Rima 2016: Vakarų aukštaičių kauniškių priegaidės: Marijampolės šnekta, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

Bakšienė Rima 2017: Lietuvių tarmių transkripcija TFA simboliais: vakarų aukštaičiai šiauliškiai. – Acta Linguistica Lituanica 77, 237–254. Prieiga internete: https://journals.lki.lt/actalinguisticalithuanica/article/view/837/928.

Bakšienė Rima 2018: Žemaičių patarmių transkripcija TFA simboliais: sudėtingesni atvejai. – Kalbos istorijos ir dialektologijos problemos 5, sud. R. Bakšienė, N. Morozova, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 102–118.

176

Acta Linguistica LXXXVI

Dar kartą dėl aukštaičių patarmių transkripcijos tarptautinės fonetinės abėcėlės rašmenimis (keletas tikslintinų atvejų)

Bakšienė Rima 2018a: Lietuvių tarmių transkripcija IPA simboliais: pietų aukštaičių ypatybių analizė. – Vārds un tā pē t īšanas aspekti 22(1/2), 9–19. Prieiga internete: https://vards.liepu.lv/files/VARDS%20UN%20TA%20PETISANAS%20ASPEKTI_2018.pdf.

Bakšienė Rima 2019: Dėl lietuvių tarmių priegaidžių žymėjimo TFA simboliais. – Linguistica Lettica 27, 7–27. Prieiga internete: https://dspace.lu.lv/dspace/bitstream/handle/7/54159/Linguistica_Lettica_27.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.

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.

Bakšienė Rima, Čepaitienė Agnė 2017: Tarptautinės fonetinės abėcėlės taikymo lietuvių tarmių garsams galimybės. – Baltistica 52(1), 105–135. Prieiga internete: http://www.baltistica.lt/index.php/baltistica/article/view/2303/2270.

Bakšienė Rima, Čepaitienė Agnė 2017a: Lietuvių tarmių transkripcija: tradicija ir IPA. – Linguistica Lettica 25, 203–229. Prieiga internete: https://dspace.lu.lv/dspace/handle/7/54158.

Bakšienė Rima, Čepaitienė Agnė 2020: A Quantitative Analysis of the Eastern Aukštaitian Subdialects of the Lithuanian Language. – Scando-Slavica 66(1), 144–180.

Bakšienė Rima, Leskauskaitė Asta 2021: Vytautas Kardelis. Arealinis tipologinis lietuvių tarmių kompleksiškumas, Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2018, 299 p. [recenzija]. – Baltistica 66(1), 157–170. Prieiga internete: http://www.baltistica.lt/index.php/baltistica/article/view/2425/2369.

Čepaitienė Agnė 2018: XXI a. pradžios aukštaičių patarmių kaita: gretinamasis geolingvistinis aspektas: daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

Čepaitienė Agnė 2019: Pasvalio geo­lektas: tarminės ypatybės dialektometrijos požiūriu. – Taikomoji kalbotyra 12, 39–74. Prieiga internete: https://www.zurnalai.vu.lt/taikomoji­kalbotyra/article/view/17232/16400.

Čepaitienė Agnė 2020: Application of Dialectometric Methods in Research on Lithuanian Dialects. – Lithuanian Dialectology Profiles: Problems and Findings, sud. V. Meiliūnaitė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 217–248.

Geolingvistikos portalas. Prieiga internete: https://maps.lki.lt/.

Girdenis Aleksas 2003: Teoriniai lietuvių fonologijos pagrindai, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.

Girdenis Aleksas 2009: Vadina­mųjų sutaptinių dvibalsių [ie, uo] garsinė ir fonologinė analizė. – Baltistica 44(2), 213–242. Prieiga internete: http://www.baltistica.lt/index.php/baltistica/article/view/1313/1231.

Straipsniai / Articles

177

RIMA BAKŠIENĖ

HIPA 1999 – Handbook of the International Phonetic Association. A Guide to the Use of the International Phonetic Alphabet, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

IPA 2022 – International Phonetic Alphabet. Prieiga internete: https://www.internationalphonetic alphabet.org/.

Jaroslavienė Jurgita 2010: Rytinių kauniškių Prienų šnektos fonologija: daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla.

Jasiūnaitė Birutė, Girdenis Aleksas 1996: Trys rytų aukštaičių uteniškių fonologiniai balsių ilgumai. – Baltistica 31(2), 181–199. Prieiga internete: http://www.baltistica.lt/index.php/baltistica/article/view/369/324.

Kardelis Vytautas 2018: Arealinis tipologinis lietuvių tarmių kompleksiškumas. Aukštaičiai, Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla.

Kazlauskas Jonas 2000 [1968]: Dėl lietuvių kalbos kirčio ir priegaidės pobūdžio. – Jonas Kazlauskas. Rinktiniai raštai 1, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 5–9.

Kazlauskienė Asta 2018: Bendrinės lietuvių kalbos fonetikos ir fonologijos pagrindai, Kaunas: Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas. Prieiga internete: http://ebooks.vdu.lt/eb/1691/bendrinės-lietuvių-kalbos-fonetikos-ir-fonologijos-pagrindai/.

Kazlauskienė Asta, Bakšienė Rima 2021: Tarptautinė fonetinė abėcėlė lietuvių kalbai. – Gimtoji kalba 7, 3–6.

Leinonen Therese, Çöltekin Çağrı, Nerbonne John 2016: Using Gabmap. – Lingua 178, 71–83. Prieiga internete: https://pure.rug.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/37303943/1_s2.0_S0024384115000315_main.pdf.

LKTCh 2004 – Lietuvių kalbos tarmių chrestomatija, sud. R. Bačevčiūtė, A. Ivanauskienė, A. Leskauskaitė, E. Trumpa, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla.

Mikulėnienė Danguolė 2020: New Trends in Lithuanian Dialectology: Multifunctional Research Model. – Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 82, 11–33. Prieiga internete: https://journals.lki.lt/actalinguisticalithuanica/article/view/1022/1397.

Mikulėnienė Danguolė, Čepaitienė Agnė 2021: Tarmyno punkto samprata. – Baltistica 56(1), 81–106. Prieiga internete: http://www.baltistica.lt/index.php/baltistica/article/view/2423/2365.

Mikulėnienė Danguolė, Čepaitienė Agnė, Bakšienė Rima, Geržotaitė Laura, Kardelytė-Grinevičienė Daiva, Leskauskaitė Asta, Meiliūnaitė Violeta, Vyniautaitė Simona 2019: Dialektometrinis tradicinių lietuvių tarmių klasifikacijos pjūvis: žvalgomasis tyrimas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

178

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Dar kartą dėl aukštaičių patarmių transkripcijos tarptautinės fonetinės abėcėlės rašmenimis (keletas tikslintinų atvejų)

Nerbonne John, Colin Rinke, Gooskens Charlotte, Kleiweg Peter, Leinonen Therese 2011: Gabmap – A Web Application for Dialectology. Dialectologia. Special Issue 2, 65–89. Prieiga internete: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228546484_Gabmap_-_A_web_application_for_dialectology.

Pakerys Antanas 2003: Lietuvių bendrinės kalbos fonetika, Vilnius: Enciklopedija.

Snoek Conor 2014: Review of Gabmap: doing dialect analysis on the web. – Language documentation & conservation 8, 192–208. Prieiga internete: https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/24602/snoek.pdf.

Urbanavičienė Jolita, Indričienė Inesė, Jaroslavienė Jurgita, Grigorjevs Juris 2019: Baltų kalbų garsynas XXI a. pradžioje: priebalsių instrumentinis tyrimas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Prieiga internete: http://lki.lt/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Baltu_kalbu_garsynas_XXI_a_pr._2_knyga_2019_v2.pdf.

Vyniautaitė Simona 2021: Terminio požymio statika ir dinamika: žemaičių regresyvinės balsių asimiliacijos atvejis: daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

VLKK k-25 – Rekomendacija dėl tarptautinės fonetinės abėcėlės pritaikymo bendrinės lietuvių kalbos garsiniams vienetams žymėti. Prieiga internete: http://www.vlkk.lt/vlkk-nutarimai/protokoliniai-nutarimai/rekomendacija-del-tarptautines-fonetines-abeceles-pritaikymo-bendrines-lietuviu-kalbos-garsiniams-vienetams-zy meti.

VTG 2021 – Visos tarmės gražiausios...: tarmių medžiagos rinkimo instrukcija, 2-asis patais. ir papild. leidimas, sud. D. Mikulėnienė, V. Ragaišienė, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras.

Once More on the Transcription of Aukštaitian Subdialects by the Symbols of the International Phonetic Alphabet (Several Clarified Cases)

SUMMARY

The article addresses the questions of transcribing the Aukštaitian subdialects of the Lithuanian language by the symbols of the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA), revises certain symbols from the earlier set of the IPA symbols for the sounds of Lithuanian dialects presented in 2017 and ways of transcribing.

Straipsniai / Articles

179

RIMA BAKŠIENĖ

The first part of the article presents the generalized Aukštaitian system of vocalism, discusses the transcription of phonemes and their variants by the IPA symbols. It highlights those Aukštaitian vowel elements, which are most troublesome in terms of transcribing. The reduced vowels of the Eastern Aukštaitian of Panevėžys having the status of independent phonemes are considered such elements. It is especially problematic to appropriately convey the vowels from the subdialect of Northern Panevėžys which have undergone a strong quantitative and qualitative reduction. The article discusses the possible IPA symbols to be used for the transcription of these vowels.

The second part analyses the questions of transcribing Aukštaitian consonants by the IPA symbols. Most attention is paid to the consonants š, ž and affricates. As their articulatory and acoustic properties do not correspond to the IPA equivalents most of all, it is attempted to find as accurate variant for their transcription as possible.

The third part is dedicated to discuss the transcription of Aukštaitian pitch accents and their allophones by the IPA symbols. It also reviews the transcription of the syllables containing diphthongs and gives some transcribed examples. Due to the inconsistencies in the utterance of pitch accents, the syllables of this group have an especially high number of positional variants.

1 PRIEDAS

Aukštaičių patarmių garsams siūlomi TFA rašmenys^¹³

Kopenhaginė transkripcija | TFA | TFA numeris | Unikodas Balsiai [a] | [a] | 305 | 0251 [ɑ̄] | [ɒ] | 313 | 0252 [ɑ] | [ɐ] | 324 | 0250 [e] | [ɛ] | 303 | 025B [æ] | [æ] | 325 | 00E6 [ɛ] | [з] | 326 | 025C [ə] | [ə] | 322 | 0259 [e̞] | [e] | 302 | 0065 [e̞] | [e̞] | 302 + 430 | 0065 + 031E [ɛ̞] | [ɘ] | 397 | 0258 [ɛ̞] | [ɘ̞] | 397 + 430 | 0258 + 031E [i̞] | [i̞] | 301 + 503 | 0069 + 02D0 [i̞] | [i̞] | 301 + 504 | 0069 + 02D1

^¹³ Parengta remiantis bendrinės kalbos transkripcijos TFA rašmenimis rekomendacija (žr. VLKK k-25). Pateikiami tik nuo bendrinės kalbos besiskiriantys priebalsių rašmenys. Pasviruoju brūkšniu atskirti galimi transkripcijos variantai, plačiau apie juos žr. straipsnio 2–ą skirsnį. Jei reikiamas rašmuo yra surenkamas iš pagrindinio simbolio ir diakritiko, nurodyti jų abiejų kodai.

180

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Dar kartą dėl aukštaičių patarmių transkripcijos tarptautinės fonetinės abėcėlės rašmenimis (keletas tikslintinų atvejų)

Kopenhaginė transkripcija TFA TFA numeris Unikodas [i̯] [ɪ] 319 026A [i̯], [ɪ] [ɪ] 319 + 430 026A + 031E [ɪ] [ɪ] 319 + 414 026A + 0320 [bɪ] [ɪ̞] 317 0268 [ɪ] [ɪ] 319 + 432 026A + 032F [o] [o] 307 006F [ɔ] [ɔ] 307 + 430 006F + 031E [ɔ] [ɔ] 306 0254 [u̯] [u̯] 308 + 503 0075 + 02D0 [uː] [uː] 308 + 504 0075 + 02D1 [u] [ʊ] 321 028A [u], [ʊ] [ʊ] 321 + 430 028A + 031E [u] [ʊ] 321 + 432 028A + 032F Priebalsiai ir afrikatos [š] [ʃ] / [s] 134 / 136 0283 / 0282 [š] [ʃ̇] / [ç] 134 + 421 / 182 0283 + 02B2 / 0255 [ś] [ç] 182 0255 [ž] [ʒ] / [z] 135 / 137 0292 / 0290 [ž] [ʒ̇] / [ʑ] 135 + 421 / 183 0292 + 02B2 / 0291 [ź] [ʑ] 183 0291 [c] [s] - 02A6 [č] [ṡ] - 02A6 + 02B2 [č] [t͡ʃ] / [t͡s] - 02A7 / 02A6 + 0322 [č] [t͡ʃ̇] / [t͡ṡ] - 02A7 + 02B2 / 02A8 [ć] [t͡ɕ] - 02A8 [ʒ] [d͡z] - 02A3 [ž] [d͡ż] - 02A3 + 02B2 [ž] [d͡ʑ] / [d͡z] - 02A4 / 02A3 + 0322 [ž] [d͡ʑ̇] / [d͡ż] - 02A4 + 02B2 / 02A5 [ž] [d͡z] - 02A5 [v] [v] 150 028B [w] [β] 127 03B2 [j] [j] 119 014B [x] [x] 140 0078 [h] [ɣ] 141 0263 Kiti ženklai · (ilgumas) ː 503 02D0 · (pusil­gumas) ˑ 504 02D1 a̯ / (a), i̯ / (i)... ◦ 505 0306 (redukcija) ʽ, ʾ („murmamieji“ balsiai) ◦ 505 0306 ˊ / ˋ / ˆ ˀ 421 02B2 (minkštumas)

Straipsniai / Articles

181

RIMA BAKŠIENĖ

Kopenhaginė transkripcija | TFA | TFA numeris | Unikodas ˅ (paskardėjimas) | ˅ | 403 | 032C ˆ (paduslėjimas) | ˙ | 402A | 0325 ˇ (papriešakėjimas) | ˙ | 413 | 031F ˈ (pagrindinis kirtis, trumpasis kirčiuotas skiemuo) | ˈ | 501 | 02C8 ˌ (šalutinis kirtis) | ˌ | 502 | 02CC ˈ (tvirtapradė priegaidė) | ¹ | – | 00B9 ˜ (tvirtagalė priegaidė, taip pat jos alotonai – tęstinė, vidurinė, kirstinė priegaidės) | ² | – | 00B2 ˘ (klitikų šlijimas) | ˘ | 509 | 203F - (skiemens riba tarp dviejų balsių) | · | 506 | 002E | (sintagmos vidinė pauzė) | | | 507 | 007C || (sintagmos pabaigos pauzė) | || | 508 | 2016 ↗ (intonacijos kilimas) | ↗ | 510 | 2197 ↘ (intonacijos kritimas) | ↘ | 511 | 2198

2 PRIEDAS

^{Dvibalsių / dvigarsių transkripcijos pavyzdžiai¹⁴}

Dvibalsis / dvigarsis (bк rašmenimis) | tvirtapradis | tvirtagalis | kirčiuotas tęstine priegaide | kirčiuotas vidurine / kirstine priegaide aū | [¹ɑʊ̯] | [²ɔʊ̯] | [²ɑʊ̯] / [²ɛʊ̯] | [²ɔʊ̯] iau (au po minkštojo priebalsio) | [¹æʊ̯] / [¹ɛʊ̯] | [²ɛʊ̯] | [²æʊ̯] / [²ɛʊ̯] | [²ɛʊ̯]

^¹⁴ Lentelėje pateikti tik dažniausiai galimi atvejai transkribuojant aukštaičių patarmes, iliustruojantys bendruosius transkripcijos TFA rašmenimis principus. Suprantama, kad gali būti ir įvairesnių dvibalsių / dvigarsių variantų, jie užrašytini pagal konkretų tarimą.

182

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Dar kartą dėl aukštaičių patarmių transkripcijos tarptautinės fonetinės abėcėlės rašmenimis (keletas tikslintinų atvejų)

Dvibalsis / dvigarsis (b k rašmenimis) tvirtapradis tvirtagalis kirčiuotas tęstine priegaide kirčiuotas vidurine / kirstine priegaide a i [¹ɑɪ] [²ɛɪ] [²ɑɪˈ] [²ɛɪ] e i [¹æɪ] / [¹ɛɪ] [²ɛɪˈ] [²æɪˈ] / [²ɛɪˈ] [²ɛɪ] u i [¹ʊɪ] / [¹ʉɪ] / [¹ʉ̯ɪ] / [¹u̯ɪ] / [¹uːɪ] [²ʊɪ] [²ʊɪˈ] / [²ʉɪˈ] [²ʊɪ] i e [¹ɪɛ] [²ɪɛ] [²ɪɛ] [²ɪɛ] u o [¹ʊɔ] [²ʊɔ] [²ʊɔ] [²ʊɔ] al, ar, an, am [¹ɑl], [¹ɑr], [¹ɑn], [¹ɑm] [²ɛl], [²ɛr], [²ɛn], [²ɛm] [²ɑlˈ], [²ɑrˈ], [²ɑnˈ], [²ɑmˈ] [²ɛl], [²ɛr], [²ɛn], [²ɛm] el, er, en, em [¹æɫ], [¹æɾ], [¹æm], [¹æŋ] / [¹ɛɫ], [¹ɛɾ], [¹ɛŋ], [¹ɛm], [¹ɛŋ] [²ɛɫ], [²ɛɾ], [²ɛŋ], [²ɛm] [²æɫˈ], [²æɾˈ], [²æŋˈ], [²ɛmˈ] / [²ɛɫˈ], [²ɛɾˈ], [²ɛŋˈ], [²ɛmˈ] [²ɛɫ], [²ɛɾ], [²ɛŋ], [²ɛm] il, ir, in, im [¹ɪl], [¹ɪr], [¹ɪn], [¹ɪm] / [¹ɪl], [¹ɪr], [¹ɪn], [¹ɪm] / [¹ɪl], [¹ɪr], [¹ɪn], [¹ɪm] / [¹ɪm] / [¹ɪl], [¹ɪr], [¹ɪn], [¹ɪm] / [¹ɪɫ], [¹ɪr], [¹ɪn], [¹ɪm] [²ɪl], [²ɪr], [²ɪn], [²ɪm] [²ɪ̯lˈ], [²ɪ̯rˈ], [²ɪ̯nˈ], [²ɪ̯mˈ] [²ɪl], [²ɪr], [²ɪn], [²ɪm] ul, ur, un, um [¹ʊl], [¹ʊr], [¹ʊn], [¹ʊm] / [¹ʉl], [¹ʉr], [¹ʉn], [¹ʉm] / [¹ʉl], [¹ʉr], [¹ʉn], [¹ʉm] / [¹ʊr], [¹ʊn], [¹ʊm] / [¹uːl], [¹uːr], [¹uːn], [¹uːm] / [¹uːl], [¹uːr], [¹uːn], [¹uːm] [²ʊl], [²ʊr], [²ʊn], [²ʊm] [²ʊ̯lˈ], [²ʊ̯rˈ], [²ʊ̯nˈ], [²ʊ̯mˈ] [²ɪl], [²ɪr], [²ɪn], [²ɪm]

Įteikta 2022 m. balandžio 29 d.

R I M A B A K Š I E N Ė

Lietuvių kalbos institutas

Petro Vileišio g. 5, LT–10308 Vilnius, Lietuva

[email protected]

Straipsniai / Articles

183