Pietų aukštaičių ir rytų aukštaičių vilniškių priežastiniai veiksmažodžiai žodynuose

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI XXXVII (1997) LEKSIKOGRAFIJOS IR LEKSIKOLOGIJOS PROBLEMOS Gertrūda NAKTINIENĖ CAUSATIVE VERBS IN DICTIONARIES OF THE SOUTHERN AND EASTERN HIGHLANDERS OF THE VILNIUS DIALECT 1. Difficulties in presenting causative and acquisitive verbs in the academic “Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language” (hereafter LKŽ) prompted a closer examination of their use in the Southern Highlander and Eastern Highlander Vilnius dialects. Particularly problematic are derivatives in the suffixes -(d)yti, -(d)inti in these dialects. Some of them are unjustifiably regarded as causative, e.g.: užremdyti Pls (LKŽ XI 427), or even as acquisitive, e.g.: apleisd yti Rod (LKŽ VII 243), atsakydyti Grv (LKŽ XII 22), nusėmyti Grv, Rod (LKŽ XII 356–357), priimdyti Dv, Rod, Knv, Arm (LKŽ IV 66). It is therefore of interest to examine which causative (and acquisitive?) verbs are included in the “Dictionary of the Lazūnai Dialect” (hereafter LzŽ) and the “Dictionary of the Druskininkai Dialect” (hereafter DrskŽ), and to compare their data with those of LKŽ and with the works of various authors. All verbs included in LzŽ and DrskŽ that have the formal and semantic features of causative (acquisitive) verbs, and base words recorded in these dictionaries or in the “Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language,” were selected. 2. Unlike LKŽ, LzŽ and DrskŽ generally do not link causative verbs to their base words. As stated in the introduction to LzŽ, the use of grammatical labels for verbs was abandoned “because the characterization of many of them does not differ from that in the standard language” (LzŽ 11), and -dyti and certain other suffixes may have more than one meaning, depending on context; therefore, “without a more extensive analysis, such a characterization can only be misleading” (LzŽ 11). DrskŽ contains only a few isolated cases in which causative verbs are linked to base words: a) several causative verbs are marked with grammatical abbreviations, e.g., migdyti caus. migti (DrskŽ 210); b) the periphrases “to make [something happen]” and “to make (someone do something)” are used a few times, e.g.: šiūgždyti, -o, -ė “to make a rustling sound” (DrskŽ 377), (DŽ₂ – caus.), 2 pūdyti, pūdžia, -ė “to make [something] rot” (DrskŽ 285), plukdyti, plūkdo, plūkde 1. “to teach, make [someone] swim” (DrskŽ 274). To limit the size of the dictionaries, certain methods of presentation were chosen in which words are compared with standard-language equivalents given in DŽ₂. LzŽ uses “as in the standard language” after words whose meaning and form match those in DŽ₂, and “as in the standard language, sense 1” after words whose form differs in some respect but whose first meaning matches the one given in DŽ₂. DrskŽ follows a similar approach. When linking words to the equivalents given in DŽ₂, it uses the following cross-reference forms: “as in the standard language,” “as in the standard language, meaning,” and “as in the standard language.” 154 “meanings.” That a verb is considered causative in these dictionaries can generally be inferred only indirectly. For example: lipdyti, lipdo, lipdė “as in the standard language” (DrskŽ 193) – cf. lipdyti, lipdo, lipdė 1. caus. lipti 1 (DŽ₂ 372); skandyti, skanḋo, skandė “with meanings as in the standard language” (DrskŽ 327) – cf. skandinti, -a, -o 1. caus. skęsti 1 (DŽ₂ 704). The same applies to definitions by synonyms, e.g., mirkdyti, -ina, -ino “to wet” (DrskŽ 212) – cf. šlapinti, -a, -o “to make wet” (DŽ₂ 817); that is, “to make [something] [adjective]” is the conventional periphrasis for causative verbs derived from adjectives. Such imprecise definitions of meaning, and the omission of illustrations for the sake of brevity, make the picture of the vocabulary unclear and often render research into meaning and usage impossible. It is not always possible to determine whether the meanings of causative verbs correspond to those of their base words; sometimes the base word is not even included. 3. Primary verbs with a different vowel-grade alternation differ least from the standard language. Although they are not treated consistently, dictionaries (DŽ, DŽ₂, DŽ₃, LKŽ) and theoretical literature classify them as causative (Jablonskis 1957: 289; LKG II 25; Paulauskienė 1994: 286–287). That they are also considered causative in these dialect dictionaries can only be inferred from their presentation, e.g., plėšti, -ia, -ė “as in the standard language, sense 1” (LzŽ 200) – cf. plėšti, -ia, -ė caus. plyšti. 1. “to tear, peel off from a surface” (DŽ₂ 573). Only an occasional form differs from the standard-language equivalents. The verb gráuti, -na, gróvė “to overthrow” (LzŽ 84) is noteworthy alongside griūti, griūna, griūvo (LzŽ 87), as is the present tense, 3rd-person singular variant kėla alongside kėlia (DrskŽ 146). LzŽ does not record meanings that would make it possible to directly link the verbs džiáuti (LzŽ 68), tráukti (LzŽ 269), veisti (LzŽ 284) with the verbs džiūti (LzŽ 68), trūkti (LzŽ 271), viršti (LzŽ 288). It is unclear whether these meanings are absent from the dialect or were simply not recorded by the lexical data collectors. 4. LzŽ has a fairly large number of causative verbs formed with the suffix -inti, -ina, -ino. Most coincide with the corresponding standard-language verbs, e.g.: báltinti, -ina, -ino “as in the standard language” (LzŽ 31): báltas (LzŽ 31), báltį (LzŽ 31); rūginti, -ina, -ino “as in the standard language” (LzŽ 225): rūgti (LzŽ 226), and so on. Analogous derivatives with the suffix -inti are found in Dieveniškės, e.g.: reik’a pa-val’ginc’ (to feed [someone]) children (Lipskienė, Vidugiris 1967: 207). Among the causative verbs listed in DrskŽ, the subtype of this type -yti, -ina, -ino stands out for its particular abundance. In the Druskininkai dialect, as in other Southern Aukštaitian dialects, verbs with the suffix -inti have shifted to verbs with the suffix -yti. Although the alternation between these suffixes has not been sufficiently investigated, it is also known more widely, e.g., šlapinti || šlapyti Ukmergė (LD 198). The infinitive suffix -yti probably arose by analogy with new future-tense forms without n, which developed through the operation of the phonetic law in/s>y 155 (Endzelynas 1957: 181; LKG II 265). The suffix -inti is entirely absent in the Druskininkai dialect; therefore, DrskŽ gives the infinitive with -yti as the headword for these verbs. This differs from LKŽ, which presents data from many dialects and subdialects together. Here, infinitive variants with the same root, when the present-tense and simple past-tense forms coincide, are included in a single dictionary entry. In LKŽ, the infinitive suffix -yti is given as a variant of the suffix -inti, e.g.: saušinti(-yti), -ina, -ino Drsk, Grv (LKŽ XII 217–218). The verbs in this subtype display: a) accentual variants, e.g.: džiovyti, -ina, -ino (DrskŽ 82), ilsyti, -ina, -ino “to weary” (DrskŽ 119), juokyti, -ina, -ino “as in the standard language” (DrskŽ 129); b) semantic variants, e.g.: nugeibyti, -ina, -ino “to kill” (DrskŽ 97), gyvyti, -ina, -ino “to revive” (DrskŽ 104), grýnyti, -ina, -ino “to make poor”: cf. grýninti, -a, -o “to make pure” (DŽ 187). 5. Compared with the standard language, the causative verb formation type -yti, -o, -ė is rare in the Southern Aukštaitian and Eastern Aukštaitian Vilnius dialects. Only an occasional example is found in LžŽ and DrskŽ, e.g.: jūnkyti, -o, -ė 1. “to wean (a child) from suckling,” 2. “to teach” (DrskŽ 127): jūnkti (DrskŽ 128), gesyti, gėso, gėsė see gesinti (LžŽ 79). 6. The formation subtype -dyti, -o, -ė, using the variant -dyti of the suffix -yti, is highly productive. Many verbs in this subtype are the same as in the standard language, e.g.: 1) gýdyti, -o, -ė “as in the standard language” (LžŽ 79): 1 gýti (LžŽ 81), migdýti, migdo, migdė “as in the standard language” (LžŽ 163): migti (LžŽ 163), tildyti, -o, -ė “as in the standard language” (LžŽ 267): tilti (LžŽ 267), and so on; 2) klupdyti, klūpdo, klūpdė “as in the standard language” (DrskŽ 159): klūpti (DrskŽ 159), tupdyti, tūpdo, tūpdė 1. “to make someone sit” (DrskŽ 422): tupėti (DrskŽ 422); želdyti, -o, -ė 1. “to make something grow” (DrskŽ 474): želti (DrskŽ 474), and so on. In the Druskininkai dialect, cases have been observed of o-stem verbs shifting to the įa-stem, e.g.: girdžia (DrskŽ 102) “he/she gave to drink,” migždžia (DrskŽ 210) “he/she puts to sleep,” pūdžia (DrskŽ 285) “he/she makes rot,” etc. J. Kardelytė has described the shift of o-stem forms of these suffixed verbs to the įa-stem in the Gervėčiai dialect, e.g.: girdz’a~ girdžia “he/she gave to drink,” ródz’a~ rodžia “he/she shows,” unšildz’a ~ anšildžia “he/she heats up” (GrvT 82–83). According to Z. Zinkevičius, įa-stem forms of causative verbs with the suffix -d- have been observed in many Eastern Aukštaitian dialects. “The uniform past tense probably initiated the alternation; cf. gýdo, gýdė and snaudžia, snaudė” (LD 344). 7. Few causative verbs of the formation subtype -dyti, -dina, -dino were found (their present-tense and simple past-tense forms are usually given in dictionaries without -d-), e.g.: šokdýti, -ina, -ino 1. “to make someone dance” (DrskŽ 383), trukdýti, -ina, -ino 1. “to waste time, to hinder” (DrskŽ 420), and so on. 8. Only two words with the forms -yti, -ija, -ijo – bályti, -ija, -ijo (LžŽ 31): báltas, bálti (LžŽ 31), and the Slavic-root word čýstyti, -ija, -ijo “to clean” (LžŽ 48), were found in LžŽ; they are altogether atypical formations within this system. 9. For the causative verbs of both dialects—the Druskininkai and Lazūnai dialects 156 characteristic variation. In LzŽ, variants occur between -inti, -ina, -ino and -(d)yti, -o, -ė verbs, e.g.: gesyti, gėso, gėse see gesinti (LzŽ 79): gesinti, -ina, -ino (rt.) “as in standard Lithuanian” (LzŽ 79), pirktdyti, pirikdo (pirikdžia), pirikdė see pir kandidti (LzŽ 195): pirkdinti, -ina, -ino “to buy” (LzŽ 195), saldyti, -o, -ė see saldinti (LzŽ 228): saldinti, -ina, -ino “as in standard Lithuanian” (LzŽ 228). The variants -(d)yti, -o, -ė are quite reasonably referred to -inti, -ina, -ino as the basic forms: the latter are the most frequent of all the causative verbs recorded in LzŽ. In the Druskininkai dialect, as in other Southern Aukštaitian dialects, these derivational types and subtypes are even more mixed and exhibit numerous competing variants. Since it is most often the present and simple past forms that vary, they are usually given in the same entry, e.g.: gydyti, gydžia (-ina, -ino), -ė (-ino) “as in standard Lithuanian, meaning” (DrskŽ 99), girdyti, girdžia (-ina), -ė (-ino) 1. “as in standard Lithuanian, meaning” (DrskŽ 102), migdyti, -ina (migdžia), -ino (migdė) (DrskŽ 210), žūdyti, -ina (-o), -ino (-ė) see žudyti (DrskŽ 484): žudyti, žūdo, žūdė (nj.?) “as in standard Lithuanian” (DrskŽ 484), etc. Such mixing, in which forms with a-stem are used instead of forms with -ina, and vice versa, is quite widespread in Southern Aukštaitian dialects. In Z. Zinkevičius’s view, “the mixing may have originated with the infinitive, which varies widely between forms with -yti and -inti” (LD 344). Thus, the phonetic law that changed the future-tense form caused the infinitive to change, and this change mixed the derivational types of causative verbs. The uniform past tense, which prompted the ia-stem to encroach on the present tense of the a-stem, further increased the number of variants. 10. Derivatives with the suffixes -(d)yti, -(d)inti in Southern Aukštaitian and Eastern Aukštaitian Vilnius dialects, as in standard Lithuanian (cf. LKG II 262), but more frequently, can denote not only causative action, but also a) a simple action (usually of indefinite duration), e.g., audýti, audė, audė “to put on footwear,” b) an action associated with a sound, occurring repeatedly or continuously, e.g., knibždýti, knibždo, knibždė “to rattle” (DrskŽ 360). c) a repeated action of indefinite duration (iterative-durative), e.g., vesdýti, vėsdo, vės dė see vesdinėti (LzŽ 285). According to the compilers of LzŽ, iterative-durative verbs in -dyti, -inti are fairly widespread in the Lazūnai dialect (LzŽ 8). P. Arumaa had already written about durative derivatives in -d- in the Dieveniškės, Gervėčiai, Lazūnai, and Žietela dialects (Arumaa 1930: 57–58, 63, 68, 78). In the Ródūnia and Lazūnai dialects, the suffix -dyti was found to be used instead of, or alongside, -(d)inėti with the same meanings (Vidugiris 1961: 224, 227). The use of the iterative suffixes -dyti, -(d)in(ė(dy)ti was analyzed in the Gervėčiai dialect (GrvT 77, 82–83). The lexical explanations often found in dictionaries indicate that it is not always possible to specify precisely the nature of a verb’s use in a particular sentence. E.g.: imdyti, imdo, imdė “to take, to be taking repeatedly” (LzŽ 92), sukdýti, 157 sūkdo, sūkde “to twist, to bend” (DrskŽ 355). A similar phenomenon has been noted in descriptions of the Ramaškonys and Žietela dialects. Verbs with the suffix -dyti in these dialects need not express the repetition of an action (Šukys 1960: 183; Vidugiris 1961: 223–225). In the Dieveniškės dialect, the suffix -dyti “can denote both a repeated action (often one recurring over a certain period of time) and a single, extended action, its duration” (Lipskienė, Vidugiris 1967: 206). The form (a), sentence structure (b), and often also the semantic compatibility of their elements are similar in these verbs and in standard-language and other dialectal causative and procurative verbs. For example: piirkdinti, -ina, -ino 1. cur. pirkti 1: Dirbysiu žagrelę, pirkdysiu jautukus, kaldysiu noragėlius Klp (LKŽ IX 1089) – 2. “to buy”: Landžioja vaikai po tvoras, kelines palupa, rubašką palupa, ir tu pirkdin’ vel Lz – (LKŽ IX 1089); nurenǵdinti cur. nurengti 1: Bloko raštvedys juos nurengdino B. Sruog (LKŽ XI 445) – nurengdyti “to undress”: Paporino, kap ragana seselę pagr iovė ir nurengdė Žrm (LKŽ XI 445). In presenting instances of these meanings in use, inaccuracies in lexicographic treatment occur. The abbreviation cur. is appended to the entry for the verb rengdyti without support from any examples, although all its prefixed verbs are correctly defined by standard-language equivalents without the suffix (LKŽ XI 445). The verb nusėmdyti, for example, should not have been classified as procurative: Pastatčiau per didelį sagona, vandenio daug – nusemdžiau kiek Rod (LKŽ XII 356–357). The verb užremdyti caus. užremti 1 should not be considered causative: Užremdom duris ir esim gult Pls (LKŽ XI 427). This is most likely an example of an iterative-durative meaning. Procurative verbs that meet all the criteria for this category (such as standard-language áusdinti, kál dinti, siū dinti) were also not found in the dialect dictionaries LzŽ and DrskŽ. The two instances of the abbreviation cur. in DrskŽ are incidental: mirkýti, -ina, -ino cur. mirkti 1. “to keep immersed,” 2. “to pour water over” (DrskŽ 212); myždyti, myždo, myždė cur. myžti (DrskŽ 213). The base verbs of both are intransitive, and the deep structure of the sentences does not match the complex structure of sentences with procurative verbs [(initiator subject + action directed by that subject)→ (subject performing or mediating the action + that subject’s specific action)→(object + change in its state or action)]. The resemblance of the verb dirbdyti, dirbdo, dirbdė “meaning as in the standard language”: pridi.rbd(’i)e patagràpiju. † turė’s’u pakì mirs’u (DrskŽ 68) to dirbdinti, -a, -o prp. dirbti 2 (DŽ₂ 122) is merely superficial. Lexicographic treatment poses somewhat fewer problems in cases where verbs with the aforementioned dialectal suffixes -(d)yti and -(d)inti have other lexical meanings. For example: nutvódyti “to thrash”: [Linų galvutes] kultuve tvója ir nutvódo Grv (LKŽ XVII 329) – nutvódinti cur. nutvoti 1: Rykštėmis nutvodina S. Dauk (LKŽ XVII 329). However, here too an occasional inaccuracy may occur. It should not have been abbrev- 158 in the headword cur. for a verb with a lexically changed meaning priimdyti cur. priimti. 1. “to take for oneself or into one’s care”: Viedma vaiką priimdė savo globon (ps.) Dv [...], 2. “to entertain”: Svečius priimdė ir pyragu, ir noragu Rod [...], 3. refl. “to take to heart; to remember”: Ką kas sako, aš ir prisimdau Arm (LKŽ IV 66). These usage examples can be compared with the genuine causative verb nuimdinti cur. nuimti I: Vyresnybė nuimdino stogą M. Valanč (LKŽ IV 66). The abbreviation cur. should not be added to the headword leisdvti, since the illustrative examples for not all its prefixed verbs can be treated alike. It is open to discussion whether the verb įleisdvti in the sentence Aš įleisdyčiau šviesią saulę KlvD 115 (LKŽ VII 243) should be considered causative or merely curative. However, the data from Gervėčiai, Pelesa, and Ródūnia do not indicate curativity, e.g.: Išgaląstą peilį sulėsdė pė diržą, kad aštresnis būt Gry (LKŽ VII 244). 11. The usage patterns of the suffixes -(∂)yti, -(∂)inti in the Southern Aukštaitian and Eastern Aukštaitian Vilnius dialects attest to the long-recognized proximity of 1) causative and curative meanings and 2) iterative, frequentative, and durative meanings. Kauzatyvinių veiksmažodžių kilmės iš iteratyvinių hipotezę (Delbrück 1897: 119) laikė galima ir B. Serebrennikovas, remdamasis dažnai pasitaikančiu šių priesagų ir jų reikšmių artumu (Serebrennikov 1974: 175–176). Atitinkami ide. kalbų vediniai vadinami iteratyvais-kauzatyvais (Meje 1951: 191). Analizuojant lietuvių kalbos iteratyvus-kauzatyvus, nustatytas vedinių reikšmės priklausymas nuo pamatinio žodžio reikšmės. “Jei pamatinis žodis reiškia aktyvų į objektą nukreiptą veiksmą, tai vediniai - arba iteratyvai (kartotinė reikšmė dažnai gerokai išblukusi), arba kuratyvai. Jei pamatinis žodis reiškia judėjimą ar kokį kitą savaiminį procesą, tai jo vediniai turi priežastinę reikšmę” (Kaukienė 1994: 204). This relationship is also evident in the use of Latvian verbs with the suffix -inā- (related to the Lithuanian denominal suffix -inoti). In Latvian, verbs with the suffix -inā-, sometimes also containing the formant -d-, although usually causative in meaning, may also have a) an iterative nuance, e.g.: grabināt “to strum, rattle, make a clattering sound”, skubināt “to urge, encourage, drive, chase”, or b) an iterative meaning, e.g.: luncināt (asti) “to wag (one’s tail)”, purināt “to shake, stir; loosen”. Verbs such as audināt and šūdināt denote either a durative action (a process lasting for a long time) or the same as their base verbs aust, šūt (MLLVG 339). In the Southern Aukštaitian and Eastern Aukštaitian Vilnius dialects, a feature common to the meanings of these suffixes stands out: continuity of action (durativity). All the verb meanings under discussion—1) iterative, frequentative, durative and 2) causative, curative—share the feature of extended duration. They express actions that are more complex in temporal terms than those of the base verbs. In these dialects, the suffix -(d)inėti is widely used to express iterative, 159 repeated, and durative actions; it often has an imperfective aspectual meaning, as in the Slavic languages (Vidugiris 1961: 228–229). It is possible that proximity to the Slavic languages also helped preserve the durative meaning of the suffix -dyti (-dinti). Whatever the causes of this phenomenon, verbs such as atsakydyti, nusemdyti, priimdyti, užremdyti, and others, although seemingly similar to curative verbs, merely denote an action expressed by the base word that lasts longer. This suffix was not adapted to express an even more complex situation. Its derivatives did not become curative verbs that presuppose the presence of an intermediary subject (agent) at the deep, and sometimes also at the surface, level of the sentence. Compare: atnešdinti 1. cur. atnešti 1: Plaučiūns daug... ragaišių per tarnus atnešdino kūmams K. Donel (LKŽ VIII 702); Baltazaras atnešdino aukso ir sidabro indus I (LKŽ VIII 702). – atnešdyti 1. “to bring”: Tu, sūneli, prauskis – aš tau čia valgytie atnešdysiu Aru 11 (Grv) (LKŽ VIII 703). 12. Conclusions. 12.1. Causative verbs of the Southern Aukštaitian and Eastern Aukštaitian Vilnius dialects are not always presented appropriately in dictionaries. Descriptions of meanings and grammatical-lexical categories are insufficiently precise. The scarcity of illustrative sentences makes the picture of dialectal lexis incomplete and hinders research into semantics and usage. 12.2. Dialect dictionaries offer more data for researchers of form. The primary causative verbs belonging to a different vowel-grade alternation are most similar to their standard-language equivalents. There are differences in the use of suffixal verbs. In the Lazūnai dialect, the most numerous derivational type of causative verbs is -(d)inti, -ina, -ino; in the Druskininkai dialect, it is -(d)yti, -o, -ė. The infinitive suffix -inti is entirely absent in the Druskininkai dialect. The Southern Aukštaitian suffix -yti, which arose by analogy with new future-tense forms lacking n, led to a blurring of derivational types. In the present tense, analogy with future-tense forms gave rise to cases of o-stem forms shifting to ia-stem forms. These causes led to a proliferation of variants. 12.3. Derivatives of the suffixes -(d)y̌ti, -(d)inti in these dialects may express not only causativity but also a simple (usually durative) action, or iterativity and durativity. Verbs with these suffixes often have lexical meanings different from those in the standard language. Inaccuracies in lexicographic treatment can be explained by the misleading similarity in form and syntactic environment between iterative-durative and curative verbs. All the meanings of derivatives with these suffixes—1) iterative, frequentative, durative and 2) causative, curative—are united by the shared feature of e x t e n d e d d u r a t i o n. In the Southern Aukštaitian and Eastern Aukštaitian Vilnius dialects, these suffixes did not acquire curative meanings. Thus, knowledge of facts from linguistic geography can help guard against errors in lexicographic treatment. 160 LITERATURE AND SOURCES A r u m a a P. 1930: Litauische Mundartliche Texte aus der Wilnaer Gegend, Dorpat: Postimees. D e l b r ü c k B. 1897: Vergleichende Syntax der indogermanischen Sprachen 1, Strassburg. DrskŽ – N a k t i n i e n ė G., P a u l a u s k i e n ė A., V i t k a u s k a s V. Dictionary of the Druskininkai dialect, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1988. DŽ₂ – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas, Vilnius: Mintis, 1972. E n d z e l y n a s J. 1957: Baltų kalbų garsai ir formos, Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla. GrvT– K a r d e l y t ė J. The Gervėčiai dialect, Vilnius: Mintis, 1975. J a b l o n s k i s J. 1957: Rinktiniai raštai 1, Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla. K a u k i e n ė A. 1994: Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžio istorija 1, Klaipėda. LD – Z i n k e v i č i u s Z. Lithuanian Dialectology, Vilnius: Mintis, 1966. L i p s k i e n ė J., V i d u g i r i s A. 1967: The Dieveniškės dialect. – Questions of Lithuanian Linguistics 9, 183–222. LKG II – Grammar of the Lithuanian Language 2, Vilnius: Mintis, 1971. LKŽ III–XVII – Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language 3–6, Vilnius: State Publishing House of Political and Scientific Literature, 1956, 1657, 1962; 7–9: Mintis, 1966, 1970, 1973; 10–15: Mokslas, 1976, 1978, 1981, 1984, 1986, 1991; 16–17: Publishing House of Science and Encyclopedias, 1995, 1996. LzŽ – P e t r a u s k a s J., V i d u g i r i s A. Dictionary of the Lazūnai dialect, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1985. M e j e A. 1951: Obščeslavianskij jazyk, Moskva: Izdatel'stvo Inostrannoi literatury. MLLVG – Grammar of Modern Latvian Literary Language 1, Rīga: Publishing House of the Latvian SSR Academy of Sciences, 1959. P a u l a u s k i e n ė A. 1994: Lietuvių kalbos morfologija, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla. S e r e b r e n n i k o v B. 1974: Probabilistic Foundations in Comparative Linguistics, Moscow: Nauka. Š u k y s J. 1960: Būdingesnės Ramaškonių tarmės ypatybės. – Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 3, 177–189. V i d u g i r i s A. 1961: Veiksmažodžiai su priesagomis –inėti ir -dinėti Zietelos tarmėje. – Lietuvos TSR MA Darbai, Serija A, 2 (11), 219–231. THE SOUTHERN AUKŠTAITISH AND EASTERN AUKŠTAITISH VILNIUS SUBDIALECT CAUSATIVE VERBS FOUND IN DICTIONARIES Summary It is not always that Southern Aukštaitish and Eastern Aukštaitish Vilnius subdialect causative verbs are properly presented in dictionaries. The descriptions of their meanings and separate grammatical-lexical groups lack precision, the illustrative materials are not sufficient, which does not allow to form an exhaustive picture of dialectal vocabulary and makes investigation into its semantics and usage more difficult. In the Lazūnai subdialect the formative type of causative verbs (-(d)inti, -ina, -ino is most numerous e.g. rüginti, -ina, -ino (LzŽ 225), in the Druskininkai subdialect it is -(d)yti, -o, -ė type e.g. skanýti, skañdo, skañdė (DrskŽ 327). The Druskininkai subdialect does not have the infinitive suffix -inti. The Southern Aukštaitish suffix -yti, which found its way into the dialect by analogy with new forms of the future tense 161 without ‘n’, caused word-formation type mixing. Cases of the o-stem change into the ja-stem in the present tense, by analogy with future tense forms, have been observed, all this giving rise to abundance of variants, e.g. gýdyti, gýdžia (-ina, -o), -ė (-ino) (DrskŽ 99). The derivatives of the suffixes -(d)yti, -(d)inti in these subdialects can denote not only causativity, but also a common action, iterativity or durativity e.g. imďýti, imďo, imďe ‘imti, imineti’ (LzŽ 92). There are no curative verbs at all. Inaccuracies in lexicographic interpretation can be accounted for by the misleading similarity of the forms of the iterative durative verbs and the curative verbs and their syntactic environment. 162