Panevėžiškių fonetikos raida abipus Latvijos sienos

ACTA LINGUISTICA LITHUANICA XLVII (2002), 9-18 Development of phonetics of the people of Panevėžys on both sides of the Latvian border In the article an attempt is made to reconstruct the main features of the phonetic development of the Panevėžiškiai dialect on the basis of place names and personal names recorded between the 16th and 18th centuries. Attention is paid to: the narrowing of long stressed |a:/; the treatment of nasal vowels and diphthongs; the broadening of unstressed /i/, /u/; stress retraction; depalatalisation of /I/ before e-type vowels; lengthening of short stressed vowels; shortening of long unstressed vowels; monophthongisation of [ie], /uo/, change of fronted unstressed |a/, Ju/to [i/; reduction of /i|, lu/, /el, /a/in final syllables; vowel insertion in clusters ending with /l/, |r/, Im], In/, Iv/. 0. IVADAS In Latvia and northern Lithuania between Klaipėda and Biržai, the accent is generally removed and the short vowels at the end of the word are reduced. In the Latvian border between Papile and Wrocław, the intersection is usually no longer distinguishable, so this phenomenon may have been caused not by the influence of Latvian, but by the influence of Finns through the Curonian, Zimgalian languages. For about 200 years, Lithuanians who moved from the south lived alongside them, having taken over from the native inhabitants the retraction of the slash, the reduction of the limbs and some other characteristics of the Shnekts. In the northern part of the country there is a mixture of northern and southern mountainous terrain. The isophones of dialects show that between Šiauliai and Žagarė there was an intensive expansion of the Middle Highland dialects, which separated the dialects of Panevėžys and Telšiai by a wedge. The old border of the Žemaičiai and the Altai could go along the Lygumai. The parish archives show that the slight deflection of the stem and the very rare reduction of the limb in the Panevėžys dialect could have begun in the 16th century, when the influence of the Ziemgalis was already small, and especially intensified in the 17th century (deflection of the stem) and in the 19th century (reduction of the limbs), when the Ziemgalis were completely assimilated. Thus, the influence of the Wintergalls developed with the disappearance of their language. The aim of the article is to try to determine the origin of the most important phonetic features of the native north-western Panevėžys dialect based on written sources. The author thanks his Teachers prof. A. Girdenis and akad. Mr. Zinkevičius. 10 | KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA m. This is a very difficult task, because the sources written in Polish and Latin do not accurately reflect the Lithuanian language. There are no scientific articles on the development of phonetics in northwestern Panevėžys. It lies in the western part of the Eastern Highlands and is an intermediate dialect between the Lowland and Highland dialects. There is no unified opinion on the development of the phonetics of these dialects. For example, in 1971 Prof. A. Girdenis (2000: 209) wrote that the Žemaičių dialect separated from the Altai dialect earlier than in the middle of the 15th century, and in 1998 — no later than in the 7th century (Girdenis, Pabrėža 2000: 7). A. Salys (1992: 364) moved this phenomenon 1000 years later — to the 16th century. pab. —XVII a. BC During the preparation of this article, about 3000 place names and 1000 surnames were studied in the 16th-18th century baptismal and marriage books of the churches of Linkuva, Pakruojis, Klévainiy, Joniškis, Joniškėlis, Vaškai, Pusaloto. A number of hypotheses can be made from dialect texts written in the last 150 years (see Garšva 2000: 173-174). Most of the data is from the 17th century archive of Linkuva parish. The spouses are recorded from a large part of the north-western Panevėžys dialect area (Mūšos river) from Pasvitinis to Pasvalis, from Lauksodis to Klovainiai, so the archives bear witness to the speaking of about 10 neighboring parishes. They are almost indistinguishable from each other. Beyond the Latvian border remained the parishes of Brūnava, Būdberga and parts of the parishes of Zeimelis, Joniškis, Nemunėlis and Radviliškis. Church historical books are the only monument of the dialectic writing. Their records are not accurate, because the words are applied to the articulation of Slavic languages. The priests usually did not speak Lithuanian, so, for example, vns is written. ward. de Giefe ‘Degesiai’ (three times, LNKV KI No. 1, 2° 87*", 1677, 1711 — slightly significant variants are not distinguished), de Wonogalie ‘iz Zvanagalos' (83*), de Isznory ‘iz Norių' (Lithuanian prefix written together, 1671, 92°). Most often the Lithuanian place names were accompanied by the Slavic prefix s (perhaps dictated to the writer by a Polish-speaking “translator”): de Skizerij 85* “from Kyzeriy’, de Smiciski 80* “from Miciškių’, de SNakiski 23* ‘from Nakiskiu’ (three times, 23*, 17; 82*), de Stitanij 74" "from Titoniai', d. Sturczyn 4° "from Tuiciny', z Zudek 98" "from Udeku', de Szudaki 97° "from Udeku', de Zwaldeyki 60" "from Valdeikiy', etc. 1. In the 16th and 17th centuries, many of the present villages were established in the region of Mūšos and the Narrow Western Panevėžys dialect, its dialects, including the central Linkuva dialect, were formed. The pronounced long vowel *a@ in the Pralietuvių dialect was narrowed to 0 as early as the 16th century: Rimeikonis 1555, Puknioniu, Titoniu 1599 JNš (years of writing are marked with numbers, abbreviation —parapija) KI Nr. 1, 5*. In the 17th century, the vowel 0 was mostly written in the suffixes -oniai, -onys, -orai: Blekonie (5 times), Jawidony, Junelony, Juszkony, Gaylony, Kurniony, Mieguciony (6 times), Meilony, Labory (5 times), Mosczony, Puknioni (5 times), Rymszony (2 times), Titonie (30 times), Tryszkony (3 times), Wisgonie, Woronie (4 times), etc. A Lithuanian Language Institute Historical Place Names Database. Numbered sheets (a — first half, b — second half). Place names were collected from sources by Rimas Garliauskas and the author of the article. The pages of the source are listed when it is first mentioned, they are not repeated with other examples from the same source. Some example sheets and pages are not specified; in such cases, only the place and the year of recording shall be indicated. DEVELOPMENT OF PHONETICS OF PANEVĖŽIS | 11 Instead of the suffix -on, the suffix -un is often used, e.g. : Blakuny ‘Blekoniai’, Gailunie ‘Gailioniai’ (and Kapciony ‘Kapcitunai’), Leyszkuny ‘LaiSkoniai’, Mieguny ‘Miegoniai- ’, Miegociuny ‘Megucioniai’, Narykuny ‘Nereikoniai’ (and Planiuny ‘Plonénai’), Ropuny ‘Roponiai’, Sterkuny ‘Starkoniai’, Tituny ‘Titoniai’, Titkuny ‘Titkoniai’, Tryszkuny ‘TriSkoniai’, Wayniekunie ‘Vainekoniai’ (about 15 place names). Instead of the vowel 0 is often written a: Daunari ‘Daunoriai’, Jowidany ‘Javidoniai’, Labary ‘Laborai’, Mieguciany ‘Megucioniai’, Saban ‘Saboniy’, Pukniany ‘Puknioniai’, Ropanis ‘Ruponiai’, Tryszkany “TriSkoniai’, Tvtany “Titoniai’ (the vowel ė is sometimes written i, cf. 1676) 1676 – Benedict XVI, Pope (b. In the suffix -(i)ūnai the vowel u is retained (13 place names) or in the same place names marked o (10 forms): Buciuny /Buciony (3 k.) “Bučiūnai’, Butitani /Butniony ‘Butitaniai’, Gayzuny (17 k.) /Gaiziony (6 k.) ‘Gaizunai’, Gedziony “"Gedžiūnai', Kapciuny /Kapciony "Kapčiūnai', Katkuny ‘Katkunai’, Pikciuny / Pikcionie "Pikčiūnai', Podziuny /Podziony ‘Puodziunai’, Tautkuny “Tautkūnai', Ziniuny “Ziniūnai'. There may also be two different variants of the same place name with suffixes -(i)ūnai and -(i)oniai. The other side of the bridge could have been damaged. The parallel form of the suffix is not written for some place names only because they are mentioned 1-2 times. The two variants (confusion) of some suffixes in place names could be partly indirectly supported by the middle 20th century surnames of the Linkuvia, which, for example, were pronounced Gasiliūnas, Pečeliūnas, but officially written Gasiulionis, Pečelionis. Inventories record authentic older forms of place names: Linkawa 1618 (JNš KĮ 218?) (in conversation used to this day, officially Linkuva), Janiszkiey (= Janiskiai) 1669 ‘Joniskelis’. Some local names have been used with and without a newer suffix, e.g. : Balsiai (Balsie 1677) —Balsiškiai (Bolszyszkiu), Barysai (Barysy) —Barysoniai (Borysany 1676), Kalpokai (Kolpaki 1677, 1712) —Kalpokiskiai (Kolpakiszki 1672, 1676), Lumbiai (Lumbie 1673) —Lumbeliai (Lumbele 1679), Masniai —Masnelés (Mesznele 1676), Plikiai (originally Plikiu 1675, 1678) —Plikéliai (Plikiele), Sidaugai (Sidawgie, Sydaukis 1677) —Sidaugiskis (Sydaugiszkis), Šikšniai (Szyksznie) —Siksnioniai (Sixniany 1677), Triciai (Trycze) —Tricianai (Tryciuny 1674), Turciai (Turcze 1676) —dab. "Turkey - Zeytinburnu". 2. SUBWOOFER The diphthongs am, an, em, en began to narrow in this region, probably in the 16th century, narrowed most intensively in the 17th century and this process may have ended in the 18th century, cf. Montovtovi¢, Minkunovi¢ 1555 (LNKV), Jankunow 1599 (INS KI No. 1) and Jonkunow 1604 (53%), Krampiu 1612 /Krompiu 1600, 1617 /Krumpiu 1599 (JNS KI, Pociūnai). Similar opinions are also expressed by Prof. Z. Zinkevičius (1994: 51, 65; the narrowing of the isophone of an-type compounds reached the inhabitants of Panevėžys from the east only six centuries later). In Šiaulių $nekta the diphthongs am, an, em, en are retained, so in some sources these vowels are narrowed for other reasons (glorification, influence of neighboring Lithuanian dialects, etc.). In the second half of the 17th century, there were more narrowed doubles. For example, in the extinct oikonime *Sangailiskiai 1671-1679 an is preserved in 7 records, 12 || KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA o narrowed —8. In this case, on is written 5 times and —un 3 times. In 1668-1771 the diphthong of the name Jomantai was retained twice and narrowed seven times (4 times on and 3 times un). In the Zigmantic an is marked on and un three times. But plg. Bancze 1666 and Boncze 1678 (KLov), Domontaytys ‘Domantaitis’ 1671 (LNKv KI No. 1, 29%), £onguenaytys ‘Lengvinaitis’ (24°), Ponkaycia ‘Pankaite’ (27%), Wapraytis ‘Vanpraitis’ (1677, 87°), Punkraytys ‘Pankraitis’ 1671 (24%), Szwumbarys ‘Svambarys’ (28), Walunciunas ‘Valančiūnas’ (1°). In Siauliskiy and panevezyskiy $nektose of the 17th-18th centuries the nasalization of vowel 4 disappeared and it narrowed, cf. Dranseikia 1612 /Draseikiow ‘Draseikiy’ 1616 (INS), Szoszgale “Žąsgaliai' 1673 (LNKV KI No. 1, 96*), Zaysynaytis 1672 (36*). At the end of the 18th century, the diphthongs an, am, probably and en, em were also narrowed in the parish of Lygumai. This is evidenced by the forms Jokontyczia, Monszaycie, Montjurgie, Narmontas, Pronckunas, Vismonty and others, recorded in 1763-1781. These diphthongs narrowed at least until the middle of the 18th century, as shown by the diphthongs that are not pronounced: Jokans 1776, Preymans 1784. At that time, the double vowel an was already narrowed even more in some places, cf. 1765. However, the origin of the forms Andreszunas 1773, Antanaytis, Frantskunas 1782, Stankuns 1784, Walancius 1764, Walantyns 1780, Tamkayte 1782, Stambras 1782 (and Stombrayte 1781 /Stumbraite 1780) is not entirely clear. Some of these forms may have been spelled incorrectly or inaccurately (Antanas, Walantynas /Walontinas was also written in 1860), it may have been influenced by the Slavic names Anton, etc. ; but plg. Endre(a,y- )szunas, Endreszuniene 1778, Wenslajunas 1772 and so on. The second component of the diphthong ei, i, could have been omitted as early as the 17th century, cf. : Nareykany 1700, Narekany 1700, 1701 (JNSK) ‘Nereikoniai’, Benoraicią 1609, 1611 / Beinoraicjęu 1614, 1616 (JNš) ‘Beinoraičiai'. Diphthongs en, in used in the 17th-18th centuries: Endresiunow 1605 (63?), Endruszkayciu 1601 (22*), Senkunu 1601 (JNš KI No. 1), Gendrotaycia 1672 (LNkv KĮ No. 1, 30*), Wenckunas 1671 (25*), Indrunas 1671 (28*), Swiadrozyntis 1671 (27*) “"Šventažentis? *, Endrelunas, Endrysziunas, and Endresiunas 1772. In the place name Viendžindžiai at the end of the 17th century en (< ien) is marked 9 times, ien 7 times (the vowel i was probably added only because of Polish spelling), —in 6 times. Joniškis parish (Šiaulių dialect) sounds ie, uo possibly translated e, o/u as early as the 16th century: Lepaikiu 1599, Leparow ‘Liepory’ 1613, Szlestykow 1599 / Szlostiku 1603 / Stustikiov 1613, 1616 / Szluostikiu 1604 ‘Sluostikiy- ’. The real names in Panevėžys dialect with ie, uo correspondences were written in the 17th century: Iudmisewicz, Dewaytys (but Awizienutis). The diphthongs ie and, apparently, uo, which were not pronounced by the Ligurians, could have been retained or monosyllabicized: Motiejuns /Motejuns 1777—1783, Urniezicia /Urnezicia, Usienis /Usenis 1767-1781, Jodpetrayte ‘Juodpetraité’, Jozenie ‘Juoziené’, Judicie 1776 “Juodyčia' (the diphthong uo, marked with the letter o, could have been retained — syllables marked and pronounced as such). 3. UNPRONUNCED VOWELS i; u, 0 Unpronounced vowels i, u from the first XVI sources a. occasionally distributed ne only in Panevėžys, but also in Šiauliai area: Dwilaiciu 1601 /Dwelaiciou 1600, 1606, 1611, Dwilia DEVELOPMENT OF PHONETICS OF PANEVĖŽIS | 13 /Dweliu 1616 JNš, Szperakiu 1615, Melwidziu 1613, 1616 (Satkūnai), Juszkayciu 1599, 1612 /Joszkaiciu 1610, also see. : Noraiciu 1600 /Nuraiczu 1613, 1615 (JNš KI). In the 17th century, these vowels were perhaps more rarely used than they are today. The name Girbutkiai (< Girbučiai) in the records of Linkuva parish is written 25 times Girbutki and 16 times —G(i)erbutki, Zimbiškiai —30 times Zymbiszki and only 8 times Zembiszki, Diržiai —20 times Dyrze and only 5 times Derzie. Other rare examples of the distribution of the vowel i are: Katenu 1675 (102°) “Katiny”, Lencow 1676 (73°) ‘Linkava’, Skierele 1675, 1678 (22°, 60°) ‘Skireliai’, Wiesiejkow 1675 (101°) “Višeikių’, Typiony 1672 (32°) ‘Stipinai’ (LNKV), Weldunij 1671 (KLov KI No. 3, 48°) “Vildūnų"', Andrelunas 1677 (LNkv KI No. 1, 87%) ‘Andrelitinas’, Melenaytys 1671 (27°) ‘Mélinaitis’, Ziegaytys (25°) ‘Zigaitis’, Boteles 1671 (92°) ‘Butelis’, Garnes 1671 (28°) ‘Garnys’, (but Pintolis (26°) ‘Pintulis’, etc.). Similarly common and un-accented vowel u: Gostanie —1672 (95°) ‘Gustoniai’, Boywieniu 1676 (103°) ‘Buivény’, Trompanie 1672, 1678 (16°) “Trumpénai’, Androtaycia ‘Andriulai- ¢ia’, Androtaytys (twice), Indrotaycia ‘Indriulai¢- ia’, Bodreonis ‘Budrionis’, Dargoziunas ‘Darguzitnas’, Janotaycia ‘Janulaicia’, lesolunas ‘Jasiuliinas’, Matosaytys ‘Matusaitis’, Plokaycia “PlūkaiCia- ’, Plokaytys ‘PlukaitisTM, also see. : Puntokany 1701 /Pontakany 1699, 1700 (JNSK 10°, 18°, 25°) ‘Pantakoniai’. The books of the parish of Lygumai show that many of the features of the north-western Panevėžys dialect (and of the Lygumai and neighbouring dialects) were formed in the late 18th century. Data collected from books from 1763-1786. Short vowels i, u were distributed in €, 0, for example: Miszkuns | Meszkuns 1777, 1780, Sireykie | Sereikie 1776-1785, Syreikiele | Sereikiele 1765-1783, Szikszcie | Szekscie 1764—1780 (the sound e is marked with the letter e), Kusztayte | Kosztycia 1764-1780, Jasionaycie 1764 “Jasiūnaičia', Jordaycie “Jurdaičiai', Lukoscions /Lukoszaytis /Lokoszaytis 1774, Mantjurgie /Montjorgie 1764, Jorgaycie 1764 ‘JurgaiCiai’, Gutjurgaite | Godpetriene 1764, 1777, Puczayte | Poczayte 1780-1783, Stumbrayte | Stombrayte 1780, etc. Not only were the prefixes, but also the consonants, distributed, but they are less common in the language, p.g. Melvelene 1776 'Milviliené'. The 1860 Lauksodis parish list highlights the same features of the north-western Panevėžys dialect as in the 18th-century Lygumų parish books. There are names and surnames with expanded and contra-cortical (Tamolonis, Kunegunda) and post-cortical (kunegs, Narbotas, Motiejes, Marcions, Pintolis) vowels u, i. Sometimes these positions are not expanded (as is the case now —Ludviks, Kleryks, Nikodims, Wilips). plg. Beinoraiciu 1616 /Benuraicia 1599, 1613 (INS KĮ), Nurgielu 1600, Petrošunu 1600, 1673 /Petrusunu 1673. Oniūnai village name 12 times written with the old vowel (10k. suo and 2 k. with a) and three times —with u (another 2 k. with i), Tolminiai —14 times with o and 3 times —with u. Roponiy village name written only o (9 k.) and a (5 k.), also see. : Dowidu /Duwidu 1679, Truszkuni 1711 and so on, Jonaytys, Jonetaytys, Moteiunas, Powilaytys, Simonaytys 1671, Atkuciunas "Atkočiūnas", Grutaicia “Grotaičia"', Junaicia ‘Jonaičia- ', Junaitys ‘Jonaitis- ’, Junitaytys, Tutoraycia “Totoraičia' 1671.? In the opinion of Prof. A. Girdenis, the signs e, 0 could also be used to write the more open vowels i, u. 14 | KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA In the 18th century in the parish of Lygumai the unpronunciated vowel o (probably also €) was also retained or reduced to a narrower vowel u (ė > i), cf. Juwayszayte 1778 ‘Jovaišaitė', Tamoszaytiene | Tamuszayte 1782, Tomkiene 1779, Tumkicie 1765. In 1860, in the parish of Lauksodis, there were more examples with the narrowed consonant o: Bajurionas, Jokubas | Jukubas, Lukuscions, Lukuszewicze, Petruszunene. Especially many in the writings of this period are the vowel i in the form of the prefix u: Bėjewiczis, Gelažis, Izidoris, Karalis, Lukoszis, Motiejis | Motiejes, Monkowiczis, Narkewiczes, Tamoszis, etc. Many such forms are also found in texts written by A. Baranauskas at the end of the 19th century. From the 18th century onwards, the transformation of the 4, # after the soft consonant into the i, cf. : Wiejas /Wiejis “Vėjas' 1763-1782, Urnezis “Urniežius- '. “ciuciuko' 1674), but most often —preserved (Paziuraytis, Stasiutaytys, Stasiulonis, Ziukaytys 1671). Following the example of the Zimgalian, the vowels e, i were occasionally inserted among the consonants: Ianiszekiel “Joniškėlis’, Senurelow ‘Snitreliy’ 1700 (JNSK 17°, 19°, 27%), Kivedery 1671 ‘Kvedarai’, Posiwityn 1671 ‘Pasvitinys’ (for more on the anaptics of the Zimgalian see Šliavas 1996: 11-12; Zinkevičius 1999: 87; Girdenis 2000 b: 268-271). 4. REQUIRED Correspondents. Priebalsis /XVII c. may have been hardened before e-type vowels: Gialaziunas 1675 (62°) “Geležiūnas', Siefaykanij 1674, 1677 (53%, 86°) ‘Sileikoniai’ (Vaškų, Alksniupių aps.), Szytaykonis 1678 (8°) ‘Sileikonis’. In the second half of the 17th century, lbe, Ide I began to harden: in the place name Valdeikiai (aStuoniskart written Waldeykany) I is marked 20 times as soft (Waldeyki) and only twice as hard (Waldaykie) (21°, 42%). But plg. Greycinis 1677 (85%) (now would be Graitinis). Recorded forms are Dewiniargie (7 k.) and Dewinelgi (5 k.), Daunory (6 k.) and Dalnoris (2 k.), Datgaylicia 1677 (Pautarakas 1671 would show a rare confusion of the sounds r —/, u —I, which has survived to this day). One other form could have been written by chance. In the 18th century oikonymies were somewhat confused and consonants k —č, plg. : Mikiškiu 1678 “Mičiškių"', Valdajeziu 1673 /Valdajkiu 1677 “ Valdeikių" (LNKV KI, p. 20%, 42%). In the second half of the 17th century, the bridge could already have been removed. This would be shown by the forms Typiony < Stipione ‘Stipinai’ 1672 (32%), Garnes < Garnes ‘Garnys’ (28*), Siuxnaytis < Sioksnaitis (cf. šokšn “šikšna’) “Šikšnaitis’ 1672 (35), reduced long endings (-iai marked y or e, etc.). Then the short vowels i, u, e, a were prolonged and pronounced, and the unpronunciated long vowels i-, u, e-, 0“, e-, a" were abbreviated. 5. REDUCED SHORT TERMINAL VOWELS According to the reduction of the short vowels of the word ending, six eastern Baltic areas are distinguished: 1) northern Panevėžiškiai, who throw out almost all the short endings, 2) Latvians, who retain the i and u stem vowels, cf.: bralis, medus (northern Panevėžiškiai bro-l's', insertion bra-!' “broli', mėds'medus'"), 3) Biržiškiai and Panevėžiškiai's peripheral schnektos, 4) northern Žemaičiai, who retain the remains of the endings: (a) which may have a cross- DEVELOPMENT OF PANEVĖŽIŠKŲ PONETIKOS | 15 menuose (see act “akis’), b) shortened vowels, derived from long ones (varn’ ‘raven’) and c) vowels between 2-3 consonants, if they would form more difficult to pronounce sound combinations (bas’s ‘bass’, kakl’s ‘neck’), 5) western (middle) Highlanders, who do not pronounce the remains of short vowels, and 6) Utenis, Vilnius and others, who throw out the short vowel in common, etc. (cf. dZ'u-t' “to dry”). | In the 1600 Joniškis baptism record book the name Petrosiuns “Petrošiūnas' (p. 10°) would show an old tendency to reduce the short vowels of the end. The mentioned Petrošiūnas is related to the disappeared village of Užtupės and Petrošiūnai, located between Linkuva and Pakruojis. In the 17th-century archive of Linkuva parish, the surnames have endings, except for the only one Gulbins (1678, p. 17*). Inscriptions of names and surnames in Lauksodis church in 1860 (Jonas /Jons, Motiejis | Motieis, etc.) testify that the reduction of the short vowels of the closed ending intensified in the first half of the 19th century, but then it covered only about a third of the endings (Garšva 2000: 166). In the parish of Pakruojis, about 30 km to the south, in 1858, out of 200 real names, only 3 were marked with the reduced vowel a. The theory of the "murmuring vowels" is based on three arguments — the presence of consonants before the final -s: 1) the consonant f before -s is not africate c, e.g.: bats 'bats' (but ka-tes' /ka-t's' | ka-c's' 'katés'), 2) the consonants b, d, g before -s do not dull, e.g.: dgs. gal. bo-bs ‘bobas’; ba-ds ‘hunger’, blo-gs ‘bad’ (but the whole paradigm helps these consonants to survive, e.g.: bob ‘boba’ —bo-bos, ba-d "badui" —ba-da, blo-g ‘bad’ —blo-ga ‘bad’, daū.g ‘a lot’), 3) consonants š, Z, s with -s do not merge into one consonant of the same length, e.g.: la-Ss ‘las’, la*žs ‘las’, lass ‘lesus’ (las ‘lesa’, but these last consonants are also supported by other forms of the same word, e.g.: vns. origin. la*ša, la-Za; la-ses' ‘leses, lesusi’, etc.). A certain argument for this theory could be the fact that strong vowels with sonates do not form strong-origin diphthongs, e.g.: kal ‘kala’ (and ka--lam ‘kalame’, kd.lns ‘mountain’, kal /kal “kalū’). When the short vowels of the end of the word fall out, the Žemaitian consonants before -s become muffled (e.g.: raks ‘horn’, baūps ‘baub’), the combinations £ + s, d + s become c (bac ‘hunger’- ), secondary diphthongs are formed (véi /véi ‘weed’). It is not possible to demand that this is also the case in other dialects (e.g. Panevėžys dialect), because the distribution of the vowels i, u and other things differ in these dialects as well (e.g.: Telšių aš lopo “aš lupu", tė lūpi “tu lupi', ons lop jis lupa’; Northern Panevėžys as lop, to lop, jos lip). The above mentioned two word endings are also typical of Šiauliai (e.g.: draūgs ‘friend’, lads ‘ice’; daržs ‘garden’, saūss ‘dry’, kaušs ‘bucket’- ), but the “murmuring vowel” is not offered to them. This can be explained by the unusual sampling of consonants, the preservation of consonant sharpness, and the opposition of short and long s. A scientific hypothesis cannot ignore contradictory data. Firstly, mainly only in Panevėžys dialect after soft consonants (often —and after vowels of the front row, cf.: kd.r'ves' ‘karvés’, but sidė-s ‘sédés’, nakti.m ‘for nights’) there is a soft final -s'. The softness of the final consonant -s' of the pairs ar.kels “arklas' —ar'kel's ‘horse’, ka-len's' ‘prisoner’ —ka-len's' ‘prisoner’ can also be explained by the fact that it is after the soft consonant. But, if the theory of the “murmuring vowel” is accepted, -s should be interpreted as softening after the “murmuring vowel” of the front row (or before it, because the pronunciation cannot determine- 16 | KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA to find out where the “murmuring voice” should be). According to the consonant, then synchronically we should transcribe ka-len's's 'keep' —ka-len's- 's 'prisoner' (soft final consonant), jaiiČos'o 'I feel' —jaūč'os 'I felt', and diachronically (as is usually done) — ka-len's's —ka-len'ss', jaiic'os's —jaūč'ose, etc. After the soft consonant in the words gal ‘gal’, nor’s’ ‘nors’ we should also write the front-line,,murmamaji’ vowel, although it is not clear how it could have “appeared” here. The "S" in the name is still in use today. In some places (Linksmūčiai, Straaudiniai, Zeimélis) this consonant is still pronounced softer than in the rest of the dialect area. 1 a. barčes' /barč'os 'bar¢iaus', 3 a. bartos' | bartus 'bartųsi'; past participle 1 a. bar'os' /bar'os ‘bariausi’ and so on. Contrary to what is claimed, at the end of a word the consonants j, v turn into, ų, showing that there is no more vowel after them, e.g.: koi ‘foot’, ko-is’ ‘foot’, vé'is’ ‘foot’, lou ‘bed’, kl'a-us ‘maple’, téus ‘teves’, l'on.kau ‘Linkava’ (the analogy of other forms requires the mentioned consonants and Cia to be retained- ). In the samples of consonants s, š, b, p. d, g, kir of the sonant l, r, m, n, v, which are difficult to pronounce, the vowel e (o) (after the hard consonant) or e (after the soft consonant) is inserted at the end of the word, e.g.: gai.sers ‘fire’, vapsev ‘vapsva’, kabel's' ‘hook’, basel's' ‘bass’, tr'ū.kSems ‘trickSmas’, du.gens ‘bottom- ’, dogen’ ‘bottom- ’, etc. If there had been a “murmuring vowel” here, the new vowel would not have to be inserted. In 1850, only about 3096 short vowels were reduced (completely discarded) in Lauksodis district, in 1930 — about 50%, in 2000 — 99%. The minimal pairs sometimes prove not phonological, but only somewhat phonetic differences between them. The muffled vowels of the northern Panevėžys dialect have disappeared in the last 300 years in most of the area of the dialect (except for the outskirts) and should be regarded as a diachronic category rather than a synchronic one. 6. CONCLUSIONS The article discusses 3000 place names and 1000 surnames in the 16th-18th century church books of Linkuva, Klovainiai, Joniškis, Joniškėlis and other churches. The Polish and Latin texts did not reflect the dialect quite accurately. Conclusions from this can be drawn only approximately and cautiously. The pronounced long vowel *a in the Panevėžys dialect may have been narrowed to o as early as the 16th century. Diphthongs am, an, em, en, nasal g, ¢ narrowed, apparently, XVI-XVIII a. Unpronounced vowels i, distributed already in the old XVII texts. a. Voice o (and, apparently, €) then only began to narrow, cf. Oniuni /Uniuni “Oniūnai'. Then the unpronunciable univocal vowels ie, uo. Unscrambled sometimes u forced i, o occasionally inserted vowels e, i between consonants (e.g.: laniszekiel “Joniškėlis’, Posiwityn “Pašvitinys’), omitted second component of diphthong (Nareykany ei | Narekany "Nevermore". Prefix / hardened in dialect most likely XVII a. Incidence in Panevėžys dialect In the a. second half of the 17th century, plg. : Typingny < Stipione ‘Stipinai’, Garnes < Garnes ‘Garnys’. Narrower (central) dialect range — The ir detailed phonetic — development of the adjacent dialects of Linkuva could have been as follows: DEVELOPMENT OF PHONETICS OF PANEVĖŽIS | 17 1) Nar¢zing of 4, ¢, an, en type sounds around the 16th century, cf. : Montovtovi¢, Minkunovic 1555 (based on church archives- ); 2) the narrowing of the accentuated long a" to oiki XVI-XVII c., cf. : Rimeikonis 1555, Labaris /Laboris 1679; 3) consonant /hardening before e type vowels and in compounds lbe, Ide about the 17th century: *lanta < lenta, Waldeyki 1677 > in Valdaike “Valdeikiai'; 4) deduction of the accent around the 17th century, cf. *lanta > *lonta > lont(a); 5) elongation of pronounced short vowels i, u, e, a; 6) abbreviation of unpronounced long vowels i+, u-, é-, 07, e”; 7) expansion of the vowel i to i e: Zembiski 1674, Gierbutki 1676, Pezenis 1765; 8) narrowing of unpronounced ie, uo to ė, 0 (more common in the southern part of the dialect): Wiendzindzie /Wendzindzie 1677, Woytekunas 1738, Binkiawiczene 1793; Tolminij 1677, Tulminy 1711, Truszkuny 1711; 9) transformation of unpronounced u, a into i (see serb'ala ‘sirbélé’, vėlnis' ‘devil’). The second stage of the development of the šnekta continued after the plague of 1708-1711 (based on numerous šnekta texts): 1) qualitative reduction of the short i, u, e, a in the final syllable in the 18th-20th centuries (in the names and surnames of Lauksodis parish written in 1860, a third of the short vowels had already fallen out); 2) insertion of vowels e, e/o in consonant combinations before /, r, m, n, v in the 19th-20th centuries; 3) the further spread of the vowel e (< i) to ¢ before the hard consonant in the 19th-20th centuries. This is a hypothesis that will encourage further research*. There is a lack of data to fully justify earlier changes. Some of the oldest features of the dialect can be explained by the substrate of the Wintergalician language. The Latvian (Curonian) border had little influence on the traditional schnekta. It only encouraged interaction between languages. 2000: The 2000-01 season of the NHL was named "The 2000-01 NHL Draft" by the National Hockey League (NHL) and the National Hockey Association (NHA). GIRDENIS, A. 2000 a: Kalbotyros darbai 1, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. GIRDENIS, A. 2000 b: Kalbotyros darbai 2, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. According to Professor A. Girdenis, some of the changes in sounds mentioned in this article had to have occurred much earlier. 165-175.