Go to originalLocalized version was produced by AI. It may contain inaccuracies.
Preparing document pages…
Page 1
LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXXIV (1994)
LIETUVIŲ KALBOS TARMĖS IR JŲ TYRINĖJIMAI
Kazys MORKŪNAS
ON THE PRE-DZŪKIAN DIALECT AND ITS BOUNDARIES
In his study “Lithuanian Accentuation” (1899), and later in the posthumously published “Grammar of the Lithuanian Language” (1911–1916), Kazimieras Jaunius, identifying the principal Lithuanian dialects, distinguished, alongside the other (Western and Eastern) Highlander dialects, a Central Highlander subdialect1. Antanas Salys was the first to discuss in greater detail the principal features of this subdialect (which he termed the Central Highlander dialect) and its differences from the Western and Eastern Highlander dialects. The Central Highlanders differ from the Western Highlanders in hardening the consonant l before ė (and e, ei), and from the Eastern Highlanders in preserving the vowels ą, ę (as well as -a, -e < *-ān, *-ēn) and the diphthongs am, an, em, en (as do the Western Highlanders). A. Salys also indicated quite precisely the extent2 (boundaries) of this subdialect. In a Lithuanian dialectology course taught at Vytautas Magnus University, he also added: “As elsewhere, so too along the borders of the Central Highlander area there are places where neighboring features break through; these are called sporadic features”3. A. Salys illustrated this observation with a single, but probably the most characteristic, example—the southern corner of the aforementioned Highlander area.
A. Salys called the southern corner of the Central Highlander area, which shares certain features with the Dzūkians, the pre-Dzūkian dialect. This term is still used fairly often in the works of Lithuanian linguists, but its meaning is not understood in exactly the same way by everyone. For example, the concept pre-Dzūkian dialect is defined as “the dialect of the southern Central Highlanders, which has features of the Dzūkian dialect”4; “the area of the Western and Central Highlander dialects adjoining the Dzūkian area”5; “in K. Jaunius’s and A. Salys’s classification of Lithuanian dialects, the pre-Dzūkian dialect is the part of the Central Highlander subdialect that, while resembling the Dzūkians in certain features, does not itself exhibit Dzūkian features (between Alytus, Balbieriškis, Jieznas, Užuguostis, Butrimonys”6. Sometimes this concept (pre-Dzūkian dialect) is also given a less precisely defined geographical meaning: the fringe of the neighboring Highlander area adjoining the Dzūkian dialect area, or the like.
1 Cf. D r o t v i n a s V., G r i n a v e c k i s V. The Linguist Kazimieras Jaunius. V., 1970. P. 66–68, 165.
2 Plg. S a l y s A. Kelios pastabos tarmių istorijai // Archivum Philologicum. K., 1933. Kn. 4. P. 28—29 ir žemėlapį; S a l y s A. Raštai. Roma, 1992. T. 4 (Lietuvių kalbos tarmės). P. 109—114 ir žemėlapi.
3 S a l y s A. Writings. Vol. 4. P. 113.
4 Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas (II leidimas). V., 1972. P. 607. Iš esmės toks aiškinimas liko ir šio žodyno III leidime (V., 1993. P. 598), plg.: ”pietinių vidurio aukštaičių šnekta, turinti dzūkams būdingų kalbos ypatybių”.
5 Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language. V., 1976. Vol. 10. P. 631.
6 G a i v e n i s K., K e i n y s S. Dictionary of Linguistic Terms. K., 1990. P. 157.
84
Page 2
A. Salys, as mentioned, called the pre-Dzukian dialect the southern corner of the Central Aukštaitian area, or the territory “where only some features of the Dzukian dialect are manifested”7. What territory did he assign to the pre-Dzukian dialect, and which Dzukian features “manifested” in that territory did he consider the most important?
In A. Salys’s Lithuanian dialectology course, taught at Vytautas Magnus University, the following more important settlements within the pre-Dzukian area are listed: Balbieriškis, Jieznas, Prienai, Punia; in the later article “Lithuanian Dialects,” Birštonas and Daršūniškis are also included8.
Among the features bringing the dialects of the area in question closer to those of the Dzukians, A. Salys first pointed to the change of vowels ą, ę into u·, i·. In fact, this change is not consistent everywhere. For example, in Jieznas one says grã·stas ‘drill’, but ižgr’í·šk ‘drill (it) out’; between Alytus and Balbieriškis — grū·stas, gru·ž’í·tie ‘to beautify’, žu·s’is ‘goose’; one also hears k’i·s’lie ‘to suffer’, ku·s’n’i·s ‘a bite’ alongside ká·s’l(ie) ‘to bite’, kā· ‘what’, tā· ‘that’. “Here, the following pronunciations are heard fairly widely: ti·s’l(ie), sūki·s, sūki, man’í, tav’í~ tęsti, sūkes, sūkę, manę, tavę (manęs, manė, tavęs, tavė)9”; and in place of tę, tenai(s), in many places also t’í·, t’i·nai(s).
Later studies of the Central Aukštaitian dialects mentioned above and neighboring dialects substantially refined the evidence for the change of ą, ę into u·, i· in various word positions, as well as for other isophones: data recorded mostly in the 1950s for the Atlas of the Lithuanian Language, recent dialectological expeditions10, and descriptions of individual dialects in diploma theses11.
Instances of ą, ę changing into u·/u, i·/i occur across a much larger southern corner of the Central Aukštaitian area than A. Salys indicated (admittedly, only approximately). On the basis of the intensity of the change, this corner can be further divided into three parts (zones). 1. In various word positions, ą, ę regularly change into u·, i· (in unstressed position, into u, i) in the surroundings of Gegužinė, Kaungonys, Palomenė, and Paparčiai on the left bank of the Neris. On one side (to the southeast), this area borders the Western Dzukians; on the other (to the northeast), it borders Eastern Aukštaitians; see Fig. 1. In these surroundings one says: ú·žalas/ú·žolas ‘oak’, grū·stas ‘drill’, kus’n’ė·l’is ‘a little bite’, žusū· ‘of geese’, š’v’í·s’t ‘to celebrate’, gr’í·žimas ‘drilling’, anū· ‘that’, tū· ‘that’, báltu ‘white’, kár’v’į ‘cow’, dá·r’is ‘having done’, dá·r’į ‘having done’. The same pronunciation is most common in the Padaigiai and Upninkai areas on the right bank of the Neris, although there one also hears á·žulas||ú·žulas ‘oak’, ža·s’is ‘goose’ || žū·s’is ‘geese’, kā·||kā· ‘what’, k’i·tall|k’i·tu12 ‘another’.
7 Cf. A. Salys’s letter to W. R. Schmaltieg, dated March 11, 1972, published in this volume of “Questions of Lithuanian Linguistics.”
8 Cf. S a l y s A. Writings. Vol. 4. P. 113, 303.
9 S a l y s A. Writings. Vol. 4. P. 304.
10 The 1991 dialectological expedition of Vilnius Pedagogical University students in the Žasliai area (led by Associate Professor D. Mikulėnienė); the 1992 dialectological expedition of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language in the Balbieriškis area (participants: E. Grinaveckienė, L. Grumadienė, D. Mikulėnienė, K. Morkūnas, V. Pranskūnaitė, A. Vidugiris).
11 Š v e n č i o n y t ė B. The Žasliai Dialect. Diploma thesis (manuscript). Vilnius University, 1956; G r e n d a Č. The Palomenė Dialect. Diploma thesis (manuscript). Vilnius University, 1957.
12 The areas of Čiobiškis and Gelvonai on the right bank of the Neris, which A. Salys assigned
85
Page 3
2. Starting approximately from Naujieji Kietaviškės (Kaišiadorys District) and extending farther south, the isophone of the regular change of vowels ą, ę to u·, i· coincides with the boundary of the western Dzūkian dialect (as opposed to the isophone of the pronunciation č, dž and t, d before i, y, į, ie as c, dz). West of this isophone, in a narrow strip of the Central Aukštaitian dialect (see Fig. 1)—Pakertiškės (Kaišiadorys District), Gripiškės, Užuguostis (Prienai District), Mer̃giškės (Trakai District), Butrimonys, Kriauniai, Punia, Žagarai (Alytus District)—u·, i· occur irregularly, though fairly often, instead of stressed and unstressed ą, ę in the word stem, e.g., ú·žuolas, kú·s'n'is/ku·s'n'i·s ‘a morsel’, sú·spara/su·spara ‘a joint’, grū·štas, trū·stas ‘a log’, tū·so ‘he/she stretches’, žū·si·s ‘geese’, u·žuolė·l'is, u·žuolin'i·s, gru·št'ė·l'is, ru·st'ė·l'is, uštu·si·tas ‘stretched out’, žu·s'ė·k·e·s, g'i·sta ‘is fading’, gr'i·ža ‘he/she drills’, n'ek'i·s ‘will not endure’, sk'i·sta ‘is drowning’, gr'i·žimas ‘drilling’ and á·žuolas, ká·s'n'is/ka·s'n'i·s, ká·s't'l ‘to bite’, grā·stas, rā·stas, šā·la ‘is cooling’, žā·si·s, dra·sumas ‘courage’, dra·sūs ‘brave’, br'ė·sta ‘is ripening’, g'ė·sta, gr'ė·ža, sk'ė·sta, gr'e·žimas. At the ends of words (except for the nominative singular and plural forms of masculine past-tense participles), ą, ę are usually retained here, e.g., anā· ‘that one’, tā· ‘that’, v'iena· kartā· ‘one time’, bálta· s'iena· ‘a white wall’; kā·t'e· ‘a cat’, p'ė·la· ‘a mouse’.
3. Farther west of the places mentioned above (see Fig. 1)—Darsūniškis, Kaišiadorys, Kalviai, Kruonis, Žiežmariai (Kaišiadorys District), Balbieriškis, Birštonas, Jieznas, Nemajūnai, Prienai (Prienai District), Ūdrija (Alytus District)—u·, i· occur very rarely in the word stem instead of ą, ę, e.g., su·sparā ‘a joint’ (Kaišiadorys), gr'i·ža ‘he/she drills’, gr'i·žimas ‘drilling’ (Birštonas, Darsūniškis, Kalviai, Kruonis, Žiežmariai), sú·sparal|sá·spara, gr'į·št'l ‘to drill’, gr'į·ža (Prienai), gr'į·št'l, k'ė·st'l ‘to endure’ (Nemajūnai). Most commonly, people here say: á·žuolas, ká·s'n'is/ka·s'n'i·s, ká·s't'l, sá·sparal/sa·sparā, grā·stas, rā·stas, šā·la, ža·s'is, br'ė·sta, sk'ė·sta, gr'ė·ža, gr'ė·št'l, k'ė·st'l, š'ū·ė·st'l.
In this area, e regularly changes mostly to i·/i·, but only at the ends of certain word forms. These include, above all, the nominative singular and plural forms of masculine active past simple participles, e.g., b'ijó·ji·s/b'ijó·jis ‘having feared’, g'ir'd'ė·ji·s/-is ‘having heard’, mā·t'i·s/-is ‘having seen’, įžgūlb'l·s/-bls ‘having lain down’, b'ijó·ji·/-i ‘having feared’ (plural), g'ir'd'ė·ji·/-i ‘having heard’ (plural), mā·t'i·/-i ‘having seen’ (plural), įžgūlb'l·/-bl ‘having lain down’ (plural). Only at the westernmost edge of this area are the forms of the participles mentioned pronounced in two ways, e.g., b'ijó·ji·, but more often būv'e·s, jó·je· (Kruonis), jó·jis, b'ijó·ji, būv'i, k'ė·blu ‘having lifted’ alongside dā·r'es, (pa)mā·t'es, rā·s'es (Žiežmariai), užāug'i·s, užāug'i· and (it seems, less often) užāug'e·s, užāug'e· (Balbieriškis), g'im'i·s, tur'ė·ji·s, jó·ji·, p'r'iprā·t'i· alongside the rarer n'e-b'ėig'e·s ‘having not finished’, apv'ėrt'e·s (Ūdrija).
with the Central Aukštaitians (see the works mentioned in footnote 2), in fact, both in the pronunciation of the diphthongs am, an, em, en (which become um, un, im, in) and in other vocalic features (e.g., reduction of word-final vowels), they coincide with the East Aukštaitians in the neighboring areas around Pabaiskas and Širvintos; cf. Morkūnas K. Rytų aukštaičių pietinės tarmės fonetika // Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai. V., 1960. T. 3. P. 8 tt.; Zinkevičius Z. Lietuvių dialektologija. V., 1966. P. 53 tt., 96 tt., žemėl. Nr. 1; Lietuvių kalbos atlasas. T. 2 (Fonetika). V., 1982. Žemėl. Nr. 6, 68–72.
86
Page 4
The endings of the past frequentative participles (e.g., būdovęs, būdovę) should also be pronounced in the same way, but these participle forms have not been recorded everywhere.
As with the past-tense participle forms in -i’s/-is, -i’/-i, adverbs (or particles) t’iː<t’ę are used in all three of the aforementioned parts of the southern Central Aukštaitian corner (in some places also t’iːnai/t’iːnãi, t’iːnaĩs ‘there, over there’) and s’íː<sę (the latter adverb has not been documented everywhere). At the southwestern edge—in the areas around Balbieriškis and Prienai—t’iː and t’ęː are sometimes confused even among people from the same village (t’ęː is more often used by members of the younger generation).
Local residents of Balbieriškis and the surrounding area who say t’iː (and s’íː) call their neighbors to the west and northwest, who pronounce t’ęː, t e k- š i a i. Cf. the observations of local people:
We used to go to the Prienai side and cut wood || we would say a lot | in_’t’iː | in’_t’iːnãi | and on the Prienai side| in’_t’ęː| in’_t’enãi || father [said to me] | in’_t’iː| and mother from Prienai| in’_t’ęː|| mother from Tekšiūnai|| mother from Medvišiai| Kunigiškiai [Medvišiai, Kunigiškiai—villages in the northwestern part of the Balbieriškis area] || they are Tekšiai | beyond Balbieriškis, about six kilometers away || Mardosai | Pūtrišiai | Rūdžiakampiai | Žagariai [Mardosai, Pūtrišiai, Rūdžiakampiai, Žagariai—villages south of Balbieriškis] not Tekšiai || (Juozas Marčiulynas, born in 1920 and lives in Pūtrisiuose).
kun’ig’iš’k’uos’e | vartuosė [Vartai — Balbieriškio apylinkės šiaurės vakarų dalies kaimas] š’n’ęːka k’it’ėp | gr’iːnaĩ l’ietuv’iškai | t’ekš’ɛi || (Paprūdžiai, Balbieriškio apyl.).
This nickname for characterizing the speech of neighboring communities has also been heard more widely: tekšiai (nominative singular tekšys) around Alytus and Krākialaukis, tėkšiai (nominative singular tėkšis) around Kruonis and Simnas.¹³
A. Salys also notes the forms man’iː~ manę, tav’iː~ tavę, widely heard in the southern Dzūkian area and used instead of manęs, manė, tavęs, tave14. However, these forms, whose origin is not entirely clear15, are characteristic not only of the southern Central Aukštaitian corner but of a much larger area of these Aukštaitian dialects, extending northward into the East Aukštaitian area—around Jonava, Šėta, and elsewhere. It is true that in some places these forms are used with both genitive and accusative singular meanings, while elsewhere they express just one of these cases; see Fig. 1.16
A. Salys, and occasionally other linguists, also mention another phonetic feature of the southern Central Aukštaitian corner: the change of uo to ua or even va, e.g., dųáda ‘gives’, dųãna/doàna ‘bread’, kųãlas ‘a stake’, dųanùk’ė/dvanùk’ė ‘a little loaf’, vandųã/vandòv ‘water’. It may be added that ie is also pronounced here instead of
13 Cf. Lietuvių kalbos žodynas. T. 15. V., 1991. P. 1134.
14 S a l y s A. Raštai. T. 4. P. 304.
15 Cf. Z i n k e v i č i u s Z. Lietuvių dialektologija. P. 298—299.
16 For further discussion of the genitive and accusative singular forms man’iː, tav’iː of non-gendered pronouns, cf. Lietuvių kalbos atlasas. T. 3 (Morfologija). V., 1991. P. 78—79 and maps nos. 72—73.
87
Page 5
(not equally pronounced by all) iea/i̯e, e.g., ṗiėanas/ṗi̯ėnas/ṗj̇ėnas ‘milk’, štėanas/šj̇ėnas/šj̇ėnas ‘wall’. However, this more distinct pronunciation of uo, ie is characteristic of only a small area—the environs of Jieznas, Užuguostis, Nemajūnai (Prienai district), Butrimonys, Pivašiūnai, Punia, and Žagariai (Alytus district). As one moves in every direction away from this “center,” the broadening of the endings of uo, ie weakens and becomes harder to distinguish by ear¹⁷.
A. Salys also pointed out one or another morphological (morphonological) feature shared by the southern corner of the Central Highland dialects and the Dzūkians: past simple forms mat’ū ‘I saw’, v’ed’ū ‘I led’ (without affricates, in contrast to matė, vedei, mātė, vėdė), and conditional forms bū·tau ‘I would be’, bū·tai ‘you would be’ (more recent research shows that in these dialects the accent of conditional forms with an acute root becomes circumflex, i.e. they are pronounced bū·tau, bū·tai¹⁸). Some linguists also tend to regard the northwestern isomorphs of the latter forms and of the genitive plural of ē-stem nouns d’ē·d’ū· (d’ē·d’ū·) ‘uncles’, g’i·vā·t’ū· ‘snakes’, which arose under the influence of other cases, as the northwestern boundary of the pre-Dzūkian area¹⁹.
In fact, the isomorphs of these first-person singular past simple forms (mat’ū/mat’ēi, v’ed’ū/v’ed’ēu), first-person singular (n’ēštau/n’ēštāu) and second-person singular (n’ēštai/n’ēštāi) conditional forms do not coincide²⁰. Moreover, none of those (three) isomorphs covers the entire southern corner of the Central Highland dialects, where the masculine singular and plural forms of active past simple participles are -ęs, -ę > -i·s/-is, -i·/-i, and t’ē· is pronounced instead of tė. On the other hand, those isomorphs cover a smaller (mat’ū/mat’ēu and n’ēštau/n’ēštāu) or larger (n’ēštai/n’ēštāi) southeastern fringe of the Western Highland dialects; see Fig. 1.
The aforementioned genitive plural forms without affricates are not used entirely consistently even by the Dzūkians themselves, and even less so beyond their area²¹. It is therefore harder to establish the precise northwestern isomorph of their distribution. One or another form of the gaid’ū· ‘roosters’, b’it’ū·/b’i·t’ū· type has been recorded outside the Dzūkian area, for example, in the environs of Balbieriškis, Čiobiškis, and Upninkai (Padaigai village).
Thus, the distribution of almost every feature discussed differs to a greater or lesser extent, i.e. they do not form a bundle of wholly coinciding isoglosses (isophones, isomorphs). Nevertheless, which of those isoglosses should be considered the northwestern boundary of the pre-Dzūkian area?
One of the most important vocalism features of the Western Dzūkian dialects, distinguishing them from their nearest neighbors, the Central (and, naturally, Western) Highland dialects, is the change of vowels ą, ę to u·, i·. The area beyond the northwestern boundary of those Dzūkian dialects, with more or fewer relics of this feature, should probably be regarded as the pre-Dzūkian area. Far-
¹⁷ Cf. Z i n k e v i č i u s Z. Lietuvių dialektologija. P. 86—87; Lietuvių kalbos atlasas. T. 2. P. 77—82 ir žemėl. nr. 66, 67.
¹⁸ Cf. the accentuation of the III a. forms of the conditional mood of two-syllable verbs: Lietuvių kalbos atlasas. T. 2. P. 128 ir žemėl. nr. 109.
¹⁹ Cf. V i d u g i r i s A. Svarbesnieji pietinės Lietuvos Panemunių tarmių bruožai // Panemunių dzūkai. V., 1970. P. 44—45.
²⁰ Cf. Lietuvių kalbos atlasas. T. 2. Žemėl. nr. 80; T. 3. Žemėl.nr. 103—105 ir p. 107—109.
²¹ Cf. Lietuvių kalbos atlasas. T. 2. P. 95—96.
88
Page 6
Fig. 1. The Priedžkis area. 1 — eastern boundary of the Western Aukštaitian dialect (according to A. Salys), 2 — western boundary of the Eastern Aukštaitian dialect, 3 — western boundary of the Dzūkian dialect, 4 — eastern boundary of the Central Aukštaitian dialect (according to A. Salys), 5 — larger Priedžkis localities mentioned by A. Salys, 6 — g. is most commonly used in various word positions, 7 — v. and g. “inconsistently” (not consistently everywhere) only in the singular and plural nominative endings of past-tense active participles, 9 — matėu (matė), vedėu (vedė) instead of mačiau, vedžiau, 10 — ne estei, ne eisiu, nesiau, 11 — este, ne’ėsta; ne’ėsta, 12 — singular genitive man’į; maręs, tavęs — 13 — singular accusative man’į; tav’į; manė, tavė.
89
Page 7
The outermost edge of the Priedžūkis area is where the singular and plural nominative forms of past simple active participles occur with the endings -i s/-is, -i̇ /-i. The pronunciation t'i', t'i'nai also ends there.
This area, which should be assigned to the Priedžukis, is somewhat larger (extending farther to the northeast) than the one approximately indicated by A. Salys. However, like the area indicated by A. Salys, it borders almost entirely on the Central Aukštaitian dialect; in the southwestern outskirts of Marijampolė District, among the Western Aukštaitians, only alongside jō'je's, g'ir'dė'je's, t'ė', š'ė', one can occasionally also hear jō'ji's, g'ir'dė'ji's, t'i', š'i'. (Gelčiai, vicinity of Gudeliai.)
The concept of the Priedžukis, naturally, is not found in the new system for classifying Lithuanian dialects and naming them. The authors of this classification, A. Girdenis and Z. Zinkevičius, first took account of vowel-system characteristics and divided the Aukštaitian dialect into three principal subdialects: Western, Southern, and Eastern Aukštaitian. The Priedžukis area discussed above is divided between two of these principal subdialects: its northern part (Gegužinė, Palomenė, Žasliai) was assigned to Southern Aukštaitian (formerly Western Dzūkian), while its larger southern part (Balbieriškis, Jieznas, Užuguostis, Žiežmariai), like all the other Central Aukštaitian area, was assigned to Western Aukštaitian. At the same time, this southern (Priedžukis) part is a typical peripheral speech variety of the Kaunas subdialect of Western Aukštaitian, with many transitional features of the Southern Aukštaitian subdialect, whereas the northern part is a peripheral speech variety of the Southern Aukštaitian subdialect with some features of the Eastern Aukštaitian Širvintiškiai subdialect (e.g., shortening of unstressed long vowels).
Comprehensive studies of the history of this region, which also shaped changes in its linguistic situation, may in the future help us better understand the formation of the speech varieties of the Neris (lower reaches) and Nemunas interfluve and the distribution of various linguistic phenomena (isoglosses). Many factors have shaped changes in the speech varieties of this region in recent decades as well. In addition to all the causes that have influenced or continue to influence changes in Lithuanian dialects, a very important circumstance is that a rather marked change in population (migration) took place between the Neris and Nemunas because of the construction of the large Kaunas, Elektrėnai, and Kruonis power plants (entire villages disappeared, and a new, large urban-type settlement, Elektrėnai, grew up). Many features of the speech varieties of this region are also disappearing under the influence of Standard Lithuanian. Consequently, in recent years some of the features distinguishing the Priedžukis have been heard only among older local residents.
The Priedžukis and nearby inhabited localities
(see Fig. 1)
No. of inhabited locality (point)
Name of inhabited locality*
District
Local administrative unit
497
Betėgala
Jonava
Kulva
498
Padaigai
”
Ūpninkai
499
Gegužinė
Kaišiadorių
Žūbiškių
500
Mančiūšėnai
Širvintų, Jonavos
Gėlvonų (Širvintų r.),
* The numbers and names of populated places (localities) are as in the Atlas of the Lithuanian Language (V., 1977—1991. Vols. 1—3). The administrative affiliation of some localities may have changed somewhat by now.
A.Salys designated the southern part of the subdialect of Middle Aukštaitian (which K.Jaunius distinguished from the other Aukštaitian subdialects) as Vordzukisch (priedzukis). Other linguists also often use this term, but do not always give it the same meaning. According to A.Salys, Vordzukisch is the territory (comprising the settlements of Balbieriškis, Birštonas, Darsūniškis, Jieznas, Prienai, Punia) “where only some features of Dzukian occur.” Of these features, he mentioned above all the change of the vowels ą, ę (though not always regularly) to u·, i·, e.g. grã·stas / grū·stas “drill”, s·kė·sta / s·kī·sta “sinks.” Later research has refined the geography of this phenomenon. According to the intensity of the change of these vowels, the southern corner of Middle Aukštaitian can be divided into three zones: 1) ą, ę are mostly regularly changed to u·, i· in all positions, e.g. grū·stas, kàu·žì Akk. “the cow.” This is the territory of Gegužinė, Kaugonys, Palomenė, Paparčiai (according to the new classification of Lithuanian dialects proposed by A.Girdienis and Z.Zinkevičius, this area belongs to Southern Aukštaitian); 2) u·, i· are pronounced irregularly instead of ą, ę, e.g. á·žuolas “oak,” s·kė·sta “sinks,” and ú·žuolas, s·kī·sta. This phenomenon covers the following settlements: Pakertiškės, Gripiškės, Užuguostis, Merģiškės, Butrimōnys, Kriauniai, Punia, Žagariai; 3) i· instead of e· is pronounced only in the forms of the preterite participle, e.g. bijójes, bijóje > b'ijó·ji·s/-is, b'ijó·ji·/-i “frightened,” and tę, šę > l'ę·, s·i· “those, these.” The area includes Balbieriškis, Birštonas, Darsūniškis, Jieznas, Kaišiadorys, Prienai, Žiežmariai (according to the new classification of dialects, the dialects of the second and third zones belong to the West Aukštaitian of Kaunas). Thus, the isophone of the participles ę > i·/i should be considered the western boundary of Vordzukisch.
A.Salys pointed out the same phonomorphological features as those of Dzukian that are used in the southern subdialects of Middle Aukštaitian, e.g. mat'ų “I have seen,” bū·tau “I would be,” bū·tai “you would be” (some later considered these to mark the boundary of Vordzukisch). The isomorphs of these forms, however, cover different territories of the subdialects; they do not coincide with any isophone of the change of ą, ę to u·/u or i·/i.
