Die Vermittlungsrolle des Hochlettischen bei den altrussischen und litauischen Entlehnungen im Lettischen

Acta Linguistics Lithuanica LV (2006), 89 - 106 Die Mediation role of the High Latvian in the ancient Russian and Lithuanian Loans im Latvian! Inga A. SERGEANT Lietuviy kalbos institutas In this article it is argued that most Latvian borrowings from Old Russian must have entered the language through Proto-High-Latvian, whence they were borrowed into Proto-Middle-Latvian. This would explain their phonetic shape, particularly Middle Latvian uo as the reflex of Old Russ. 1” [u:] in borrowings like suoma (OR. coyma), flour (OR. ora), presumably through Proto-High-Latvian *siima, *miika with subsequent substitution of [uo] for [u:] according the pattern sound to correspondences between the of dialects. This assumption would also account for manyother cases where Middle Latvian forms diverge from those of Old Russian (and Lithuanian), cf. Middle Latvian baznica with broken tone on a suffix usually bearing sustained tone Cnica). This broken tone cannot be be due to to the Old Russian pronunciation and must reflect the High Latvian glottalization of internal syllables containing original i or a. 1. DIE LOAN AUS DEM SLAVIC 1.0.1 It is known that the modern Latvian high language of the Middle Latvian Dialect underlying. Das Distribution area of this Dialects can be very rough as ,,in der Mitte Latvia” are described, whereby the Mitte ' Fir die Review of my work as well as the numerous valuable tips I liked Herrn Prof. Sergei Themes (Vilnius, LKI) this an Thank you very much. Likewise I joined Woman Everita Andronova (Riga, St. Petersburg) who sent me an electronic List of in ME listed Borrowings from the (Old) Russian 2u Verfigung placed and thus the Search for such high in Mafe has relieved. 89 ILja SERZANT auf die Linie von West nach Ost bezieht. Die moderne lettische Sprache possesses a number of borrowings of different ages from Russian and Weirussian dialects. Since the Middle Latvian dialect had no points of contact with the East Slavic dialects in historical time (and has none to this day), the borrowings from the East Slavic dialects must have reached the Middle Latvian through the mediation of the High Latvian / Latgalian dialect. This trivial consideration allows us to explain the sound form of many borrowings from Old Russian and Lithuanian, which has remained unnoticed until now. 1.0.2 In this context it is important to emphasize that the provisions of § 1.1 discussed equivalent ostslav. [u:] versus lett. uo has so far been interpreted as a reproduction of the Proto-East Slavic pronunciation, which the Latvian borrowings are supposed to have preserved (as Kiparsky 1952: 74; ders. 1963: 80-81; Ko&kin 2006: 36 et al.). In the following, this will be opposed, since this assumption is unrestricted. The explanation of such a non-direct equivalent is not to be sought in East Slavic, but —as with a number of other borrowings— in Latvian soil, namely in the mediating role of the proto-High Latvian dialect. 1.0.3 In this thesis, we consider exclusively non-Russian borrowings, which are presumably from the period from the 10th to the 12th century. Jh. into the Latvian-- speaking area. The lower limit (10th century) is based on the assumption that the borrowings connected with the Christian mission could not have been borrowed before the official proclamation of Christianity as the state religion of the Rus’. Note, since it is a rough number of terms related to the mission, which can serve as a guideline for dating the borrowings. Also the upper time limit (12th century) is only safely set. Since the 13th. Jh. The strengthening of the Teutonic Order in the west of Latvia changed the geopolitical situation, which made the Russian influence less significant. Finally, the linguistic characteristics of a loanword, which is classified here as non-Russian, are mentioned: 90 Die Vermittlungsrolle des Hochlettischen ... —the retention of the reduced vowels in the weak position and the Reproduction of the strong reduced Vowels with their original Sound value, i.e. altruss. »> lett. u,.> lett. and; the — Maintenance of the Vocal quantity, i.e. Urslavic long vowels are also pronounced long in Latvian. The East Slavic Loans that this Not meeting the criteria are considered as later borrowings. 1.0.4 The oldest East Slavic borrowings that in Urhochlettische probably originate from the Dialect of Kriviéi, who with some Variation im alten Novgorod, Pleskau and Smolensk was spoken. Apart from the immediate geographical Near this ancient Russian Dialect zu Letgalien speak dafiir another A number of other Arguments. The East Latvian Area was also located some Time after the Arrival of the German Knights of the Order of the Cross im Scope of the Novgorod city state. So is known, es da im 12. Jh. the City Novgorod the Great Tribute rights in Letgalien an ihre Daughter city Pleskau had ceded, which um 1224 also contractually by the Order has been confirmed (Nazarova 2002: 592-593). Zu mentioning is also the later on all Russian-related name mittellett. krievs, with which zundchst certainly only the Krivi¢i were meant. There are still some linguistic arguments: Some old Borrowings from the East Slavic show (where, wo es is necessary) Novgorod-Pleskau people Dialect typical Apparitions, in first Line das Cokanje (Semenova 1959: 599): See. hole 'Faf from altruss. *buoy (cf. modern dial. pleskauisch Goua (POS, 136 s. v.)) (ME, 344)"; c’iesk’i adv. ‘haufig, oft’ (Zvirgzdine, Pilda, Bérzgale, Baltinava (EH, from 269)) *road <— adj. *cests (from aruss. uacrn / uacts, SREZN,, 1475); riicis (gen. s.g. 2 Here lies the urslav. Group *-tjvor. This group also has the cokanje, cf. xom and xouw (to xorkru altnovgoroder im Dialect s. Zaliznjak 1995: 677). Im subordinate can lett, dial. buca no way have experienced influence from the equivalent muca, since the latter itself can be explained by the influence8 of the former muf (ME,, 657-658). Furthermore points me $. Themes (Vilnius) kindly in kroat. mouth Bottle. I can the Croatian Form not yet erkldren, shows the modern plesk. Form boéa thereupon, da& at the presupposed altruss. *sxna there is a case of cokanje. 91 Tusa SERZANT riéa) aus altruss. poysan, poysnn (SREZN,,, 199), tyuc’s aus altruss. Royya, ceista from altruss. unero, candle from altruss. cxkua, fold out of the other. naeue/naewe (Semenova 1959: 600; Rekéna 1962: 371, 399); upright. cinét,‘peeling potatoes’ from altruss. suanutu (Laumane 1977: 74)3. 1.1. East Slavic -oy-> Latvian -uo1.1.1 The root syllable The biological equivalent of the altruss. oy ist lett. uo, cf. bluéda < altruss. sawao; stiogis < altruss. coyaun, (altkirchensl. sawas, exauu), slods (altruss. coyan, altkirchensl. cxan). Since the Latvian tiber has an i-sounding, we would ask why this zu Borrowing words not **blida, **silk / **saigis lauten. This can be explained by the transmission of the high Latvian dialect, namely as follows: The ancient Russian word sawao mu8 in the high Latvian dialects is expected to be *bjiida, das Wort altruss. coyas as *siids (this is also documented in Kalupe, cf. Rekéna 1962: 473), since the ancient Russian (at least originally) accented long vowels in the high Latvian dialects are also represented by a long vowel, cf. roocs < *rads < altruss. Paan, Sliiops < *slaps < altruss. caasn (Rekéna 1962: 26). During the subsequent further migration of the now Proto-High-Lettish lexicon to the west, for example *siids, the speakers of the Proto-Middle-Lettish dialect substituted the corresponding own sounds for the Proto-High-Lettish sounds, which they also substitute for borrowings. Vgl. dazu Hermann Paul (1995: Cap. XXII §284): "Therefore, a from a related Dialects recorded Word quite usual in the nominal Sound form, which would es have acquired, if from the time of the es former language unity had been preserved.” Here, the Speakers of Proto-Middle Latvian Dialects das Behavior of ° Also some deeper borrowings show the cokanje preserved to this day in the Pleskau dialects: cdrnica < russ. dial. vepxuya,- ‘Blueberry’ (Llaumane panis from russ. 1977: 73); weckox (cf. lit. éesndkas), kanés aus russ. konwux Kalupe (Rekéna 1962: 371, 399). These were later introduced into Upper Latvian by settlers from the Pleskau area. 92 Die Vermittlungsrolle des Hochlettischen ... about urmittellett. food to urhochlett. riika as a pattern. He therefore turns the sound substitution upside down. *i —urmittellett. *uo an’. This fact also explains: Juoti and altruss. awrs, pudsts and altruss. walnuts. Regarding the word suogis mu8, it should be noted that at the time of the borrowing of this word from Old Russian the phoneme g was probably pronounced as *d’ in High Latvian, cf. Serzant 2006, as it is still in north-east Latvia today (Abele 1940: 213). The vocalism of these two forms seems to be explained by the transmission of High Latvian alone. This assumption is already made in Rekéna (1962: 31). That's a mess. The word coyaun/coyAsn was also borrowed into Lithuanian and has there the regular vowel 3, cf. lit. siidZia vs. lett. siiogis and lit. stidas vs. lett. siiods, lit. blitidas vs. lett. bluoda. Other examples are: suolit (lit. sitilyti, altruss. coyanrn), dudma (lit. dima, altruss. asyma), udma (lit. timas, altruss. oy), riiobs /ruiobit from altruss. poysurn, skiops (altruss. cxoyn), auBerdem mudka from altruss. moyxa, pudga aus altruss. Noyrusnya/noyrnga /noyru (SREZN,, 1723), skiiops from altruss. cxoyns, riiobeZa from altruss. poyseas (SREZN,, 179), sudma altruss. coyma, got. (aeben regulaérem kdms), dial. also kuoms (lit. kimas, alt. koyava) (ME,, 336). 1.1.2 The suffix syllable Furthermore, in some cases it seems that mittellett. suffix -uoebenfalls here to go, cf. mittellett. karuogs from altruss. yopoyrm- /xopoyrnsb, kaltuons (dial.) corresponds to russ. commyn < altruss. *Koaroywn, kazokus altruss. somoyy (examples from Endzelin 1899: 294). 1.1.3 Later borrowings usually have a short -u-, see e.g. dial. suma zu russ. cyma, dial. budka zu russ. 6ydxa (Endzelin * It would be conceivable that in some cases the loanwords really migrated from east to west, from one place to the next. On the line West — East, correspondingly, different stages of the transition uo > @ are documented (cf. DA: S4a., 55e.), which was probably also the case in a longer period. As *blada migrated further westward, the vowelism changed from d (in the eastern part of the country) to uo (in the west), depending on the pronunciation of the phoneme in question in the respective place. In this way, the sound form of the words of the type bjuéda can also be explained. 93 ILsa SERZANT 1899: 306), what on the Abbreviation of the Vowels im Russian is to be celebrated. 1.1.4. Die Interpretation of Kiparsky Some of the above (§ 1.1) mentioned Examples are after Kiparsky, (1952: 74) who, however, due to the Latvian (and in some fall also the Baltic Finnic in languages existing) to the conclusion that here is in the uo Latvian friither be borrowed as ins Lithuanian, that in almost all Loans of this an Place a has. Als Proof dafiir, da factually lett. uo goes back to uo/é, with others Words, da these Correspondence not as Peculiarity of the Latvian is explainable, celebrates the er Borrowings from the Swedish and Middle Low German, where the in Did a swedish. or medium low. 6 [6] or d@ [ii] with Latvian and be reproduced, cf. uo & mndt. emphasis ’turnpike’. — booms. Now appears this Interpretation of Kiparsky from several Crying unbearable. (a) The Middle Low German and Swedish Lehnwärter hate directly the in Medium or high Livish-Lettish have come, whereby the Livonic Dialect (,,Libyan dialect*) vom Middle Latvian in Reference to the Vocal quality frither (as today) hardly any difference. Diese borrowings were therefore not made by another Latvian Dialect changes, da& here so phonetic equality was present. Die situation regarding the East Slavic borrowings is in principle different they were — first made by the High Latvian recorded, the dlterer in Time one A series of had undergone sound changes (cf. the relative Chronology in SerZant 2005: 84). (b) Die Pronunciation of urruss. *x as *uo or *6 appears from the following Grieving unlikely: as far as I know, ~ there is es in the present day Dialects and their Mouthpieces none Indications of a earlier Pronunciation of altruss. oy as {uo}; 94 Die Vermittlungsrolle des Hochlettischen ... — For urostslav. *q from urslav. *on and *un indirectly speak the eastern Lithuanian Mundarten. Die Nasal vowels are im East Slavic still before Beginning of written tradition disappeared (cf. the Table in Kiparsky 1963: 150). Im High Lithuanian are the Nasal vowels generally preserved, cf. lit. rankd. Now it is long known that the da Nasal vowels im East Lithuanian under the Influence of the East Slavic languages have been preserved, their Vocal quality but have changed (Zinkevitius 1987: 69). So are here about im 9.-10. Jh. the Call on, q, am zu y, un, and um en, em e, zu j, in, im (Zinkevitius 1966: 96; Less. 1981: 94 and 1987: 69). This indicates that the da relative Chronology of Wandel's original slave. *on > ostslav. u went as follows: urslav. *on > *one > y: (altbulg. ») > altruss. oy [u:]. Die Intermediate level **uo is therefore unlikely. Uberhaupt st68t Kiparskys Assumption on relative-chronological Difficulties: On the one hand, an ancient pronunciation of oy/ postulated, x on the other hand, is Confluence of the two proto-Slavic Vowels (x > oy) provided a — This process, as already mentioned, had taken place shortly before the East Slavic written tradition. Due to the Combined of both Phoneme in den Borrowings can therefore hardly be expected from a high Age to be spoken; — when Parallel case ostslav. - It's uncomfortable. - I- (s. u. § 3) is one such Declaration the — East Slavs had here pronounced ie iiberhaupt not — conceivable, here some ostslav. da - Nauf Urslav. *i back. An eastern slave. Development *i > *it is not demonstrable; Furthermore speak for the — original Sound value of the altruss. oy also the Borrowings into the Upper Latvian (as well as in the Lithuanian), which do not Middle Latvian have been incorporated. In kiukdl’i (Kalupe, Rekéna 1962: 405, See. altruss. koykoyan (SrEzN, is 1362)) the Antiquity through the Wandel upright. *ii > upright. iu/ yu, one of the relatively-chronologically oldest Sound changes of the High Latvian iiberhaupt (SerzZant as 2006: 44-47 well as 84), secured. * Thus the view of Kiparsky (loc. cit.) must be revised. ’ kiikaji Baltinava, ViJani (ME,, 342) is a technically reconstructed Middle Latvian form for *kiukaJi /*kyukaJi made by the dictionary, in which all dialectal forms are entered in the Middle Latvian pronunciation. 95 ILJA SERZANT 1.2. East Slavic -1n-> Latvian -iAnother loan, rushed. capoys zu mittellett. syrup (ME,,, 848), 1a&t sounds only through the Mediation of the Explain high Latvian dialects. Daf die denial old be mu, testifies the Vowel of the first Syllab, the one Correspondence of the otherwise reduced risk Vowels + in represents a weak position; im spiteren Russian was this Reduction vowel syncopated, cf. neuruss. cpy6. The ancient Russian reduced Vowel had a Sound value [ti] (iihypercures [u]). The ancient Russian Word became his sound form according to in the High Latvian as *syriibs (where y one to the modern russ. ti-sound-- similar loudly reproduces) borrowed. In almost the same Form is this Lexem also in "Kalupe obložena, vgl. syrups, gen. s.g. Syruba (Rekéna 1962: 459). Here was the middle Vowel abbreviated, so *ti u®. > The Middle Latvian -isiruobs in is therefore a Substitution of the high Latvian Lautes -y-. Die Adoption of a direct Entlehnung durch das Middle Latvian had the Substitution -ifir altruss. -xcannot explain. 1.3. East Slavic languages -n- > Latvian - IAnalog of zu in § 1 represented Enstprechung (Ostslav. -u- > Easy. -uo-) behaves the Correspondence for the palatal Correlate. Die Explanation of this Correspondence is also based on the old Monophthongation mittellett. ie > upright. i. We therefore assume that the East Slavic Lehnwérter in das High Latvian also were taken with i iibernete and only then the sound ie > substitution in reverse direction (as in § cf. 1, Paul 1995: Cap. XXII §284). This resulted in the mittellett. ie as Corresponding to the East Slavic and u Urhochlett. *i. The following examples prove this Development: the Name of the Tribes of the Altiplano. spuenus, so upright. *critically > easy. Russian, das im Latvian to this day as Name of the Russians applies; It's gone. Peace be < with you. mup u. a. Es mu here probably the im Latvian widely used Suffix -(i)nieks be placed, that the in Rule one professional persons. The... ° In this Dialect become the unemphasized Length of the more frequently shortened, cf. iizuls (< hochlett. elsewhere asylum), (< uobuls uplifted. uobiils) u. a. (Rekéna 1962: 39). 96 Die Mediation role of the Upper Latvian ... ses Suffix that has no old Parallels im Lithuanian has, under mu East Slavic influence, (here -nu«s) the corresponding Baltic It became a suffix. *-iniks, lit. (regular) -ininkas replaced. Das Invasion of the East Slavic Form of the Suffixes was by numerous Loans that this Suffix enthielten, méglich, cf. lett. wizard "Beekeeper" and erupted. BRPTHHKS. 1.4. East Slavic languages -1- > Latvian - IOthers apply for messengers. siérs, that frith from the Russian (for Intonation vgl. down § 3) was borrowed: Altruss. cups could im High Latvian only with *sirs be reproduced, the Russian da Vowel w in diesem case is stressed and therefore its Long retained or perceived as long, so not with letgal. y could be substituted — you needed a long Vocal. AuSerdem is sometimes also found the in Pleskauer Denkmilern des 15. Century one ,,Prescription“ [d. h. deviation from the then orthographic Norm], the one Confusion of altruss. «1 and can # witness (Karinsky 1909: 176). Conceivable wire so also a on East Slavic Ground entered Alignment of [51] an [u]. Today Form *sirs im High Latvian has existed, proves the Form seirs in Jaunroze,,,, Jaunlaicene,,., Veclaicene,,, (Abele & Lepika 1928: 39), wo which ei regularly arises from an old one i (Endzelin 1951: 146-147; Sergeant 2005: 44-47). Also other examples prove the Substitution of altruss. «1 by upright. i, See. upright. skein’e (Kalupe, Rekéna 1962: 460) < *skrin’a < altruss. cxpumia / cxpuuia, furthermore the only letgalian im Area spread Lending side sits < standartlett. (= batch) "Sat of russ. hearts (ME, Die 855). Form *sirs went westward and by occupying the Intermediate stages of the Ubergangs mittellett. ie -> upright. i riickwarts passed through, it became zu siers, cf. top § 1.3. Ahnlich also high-lettered. wedges Kalupe (Rekéna 1962: 404), that on urhochlett. *kilis zurtickgeht, from eastslav. ‘1tan’. 7 Strictly speaking, these are Loans probably a little spiiteren Originally as z. B. alruss. Expoys. siruobs, da here the Vowels » and 1 in w not as *ui /*ui (as in the 4th Loans such as z. B. muita and urostsl. wwre) can be reproduced. 97 ILsA SERZANT LITERATURVERZEICHNIS Azete, A. & M. Lepika 1928: Par Apukalna izloksném. Filologu Biedribas Raksti 8, 19-49. Axxsnis, M. 1932: Kraslavas izloksne. Filologu Biedribas Raksti 12, 26-48. Buea, K. 1925: Die litauisch-weiSrussichen Beziehungen und ihr Alter. Zeitschrift fiir Slavische Philologie 1, 26-55. Enozeuin, J. (I. Suq3enuns] 1899: Jlarsimckia 3anMCTBOBAaHiA M3b CABAHCKUXD ABbIKOBb. Kuean Cmapuna. KypHast o pycckom o.tbKsope u mpaduyuonHou kystemype 3, 265-312. Enpze.in, J. 1913: Weiteres zu den lettischen Intonationen. Indogermanische Forschungen 33, 104-118. Enpzeuin, J. 1922: Zur Intonation der lettischen Lehnwérter aus dem Russischen. Slavia 1, 206-207. KarinskiJ, N. 1909: Aseuc IIckoea u ezo o6nacmu 6 XV ebxe. (Zanuck UctopuKo- @usonoruyeckaro Wakynbreta Mmnepatopcxaro C.-Ilerep6yprekaro Yuupepcuterta. Yacts XCIIL.) Kiparsky, V. 1952: The earliest contacts of the Russians with the Finns and Balts. Oxford Slavonic Papers 3, 67-79. Kiparsky, V. 1963: Russische historische Grammatik. Bd. I. Die Entwicklung des Lautsystems. Heidelberg: Carl Winter. KoSxin, I. 2006: Antone Bpeligaxc — Baiqaioujiica naTbluickHii a3biKoBeg. In: Antons Breidaks, Darbu izlase I. Riga: LU Latvie3u valodas institiits, 33-37. Krys’ko, V. B. 1994: 3ameTKH 0 ApeBHEHOBrOposCcKOM JMaseKkte. Bonpocwi A3b1Ko3Hanua 1994 [5], 28-45. Laumane, B. 1977: Jlexcuueckuit MaTepHa AMaleKTosorM4eckoro aTsaca J1aTBILICKOFO ASbIKa, OTpaxaIouMit MaTbIUICKO-pyccKo-GenOpyccKO-NOsbCKHe KOHTAKTHI. In: Konmakmbl ambuuckozo aspica. Riga: Zinatne, 48-95. Leur-SpLawiNnski, T. 1918: Slady dawnych réznic intonacyjnych w jezykach ruskich. (Z powodu prac Szachmatowa, Rozwadowskiego i Endzelina.) Rocznik Slawistyczny 8, 250-263. 104 Die Vermittlungsrolle des Hochlettischen ... Luspen, A. 1980. Mittelniederdeutsches Handwérterbuch. Nach dem Tode des Verfassers vollendet von Christoph Walthner. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Nazarova, E. L. 2002: Ickos nu JImBonua B 40-90 rr. XIII B. In: Civitas et Castrum ad Mare Balticum. Baltijas arheologijas un véstures problémas dzelzs laikmeta un viduslaikos. Rakstu krajums — veltijums LZA istenajam loceklim Prof. Dr. habil. hist. Andrim Caunem 65 gadu dzives jubilejd. Riga: LU Latvijas véstures institiits, 591-609. Paut, H. 1995: Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. 10., unveranderte Auflage. Studienausgabe. Tiibingen: Niemeyer. Rexéna, A. 1962: Kalupes izloksne. Fonétika. Morfologija. Leksika. Kandidata disertacija. (Unveréffentlicht.) Roxe-Dravina, V. 1964: Die Expansion der russischen Buchweizenbenennungen nach Westen. Scando-Slavica 10, 107-131. Semenova, M. F. 1959: Tlo nopogy aByx (oHeTH4eCKUX ABJIEHHit pyCCKHX Mi aTbILckux roBopos JIatrase. In: Rakstu krajums. Veltijums Akadémikim Profesoram Dr. Ja@nim Endzelinam vina 85 dzives un 65 darba gadu atcerei. Riga: Latvijas PSR Zinatnu Akadémijas Valodas un Literatiiras Institiits, 595-606. Serzants, I. 2003: Intonationen in den suffixalen und Endsilben im Lettischen. Synchronie und Diachronie. Baltu filologija 12 (1), 83-123. Serzant, L. A. 2005: OrHocntesIbHad XPOHOJIO‘A OCHOBHBIX (POHETHYeECKHX H3MeHeHHM B MCTOpHH BepxHesaTHILICKOro AMasexKTa. Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 53, 39-89. Serzant, I. (im Druck): OrHocuTenbHad xpoHOsIorHA Npouecca ap@pukaTusayyn B BepXHeJIaTBILUICKOM. Zauiznyak, A. A. 1995: J[peene-noezopodckuii duanexm. Mocxsa: PoccniicKan Axagemua Hayx. Mncrutyt Cnapanopegenna u BaikaHicTuKH. Zinxevicius, Z. 1966: Lietuviy dialektologija. Lyginamoji tarmiy fonetika ir morfologija. Vilnius: Mintis. 105 ILJA SERZANT Zinkevicius, Z. [3. 1. 3unKkaBnayc] 1981: K BOIIpOcy O JheesHce JIMTOBCKHX JM texts. In: po6ema smnozenesa smnuyeckoti u ucmopuu Gatmoe. Te3ucet k1ad06. d Mapm, 1981. Bunpuioc: Akagemua Hayk JIuToscKoli CCCP, 93-95 Zinxevicius, Z. 1987: History of the Lithuanian language, Bd. I. Until the first growth. Vilnius Science. Ilya A. SerZant Lietuviy languages Institute P. Vileizio [email protected] 106