Kamojų apylinkių (Baltarusijos Pãstovių raj.) baltarusių šnektos lituanizmai

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXX (1993) PERIFERINĖS LIETUVIŲ KALBOS TARMĖS Elena GRINAVECKIENĖ Lithuanianisms in the Belarusian dialect of the Kamojys area (Pastavy District, Belarus) I. Introduction Until recently, annual studies of the dialects along the Lithuanian-Belarusian linguistic border have continually yielded new data on contacts between the two languages, supplementing and refining them in many respects (particularly in terms of localization) with valuable linguistic material recorded for the first time in those places. In May 1989, a joint dialectological expedition of linguists from the Lithuanian Language and Literature Institute of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Linguistics of the Belarusian Academy of Sciences, and the Institute of Slavic Studies of the Republic of Poland, which worked in the Pastavy1 district, also brought something new to Lithuanian dialectology. In the small town of Kamojys2, located about 11–13 km south of the Lithuanian border near Adutiškis, most local residents speak Belarusian among themselves. Their passports all identify them as Belarusians, but, being Catholics, they consider themselves Poles. They usually speak Polish only when reciting prayers and singing in church. They know neither Belarusian nor Polish traditional folk songs, and most often sing Russian songs from the Civil War. The secondary school here is Belarusian-language. Some of the people who have moved here speak Belarusian, although Russian was also heard quite often. The records office of the state farm keeps its documents in Russian, and during our stay, the sowing and potato-planting rates and results were announced in Russian over its local loudspeaker. The inscriptions and epitaphs on tombstones are usually written in Polish (sometimes in Russian letters), but there are also Belarusian and Russian inscriptions. People, especially children, do not know the Latin alphabet, and priests themselves copy out the catechism in Russian letters for those studying the articles of faith in Polish3. In general, the national question seemed to matter little to the residents of the small town, as though it were a thing long since faded away, while the Lithuanian language 1Officially, the district is called Паставы in Belarusian, but we have heard older local Lithuanians living in the areas around Adutiškis (Lithuania), Ramaškonys (BR, Рамашканіч), and Įūravas (BR, Еўда, 8 km east of Adutiškis) use its Lithuanian singular forms in everyday speech (singular nominative Pašta'vis ~ Paštovis, singular illative Pašta'vin ~ Paštovin). 2Lithuanians from the surrounding areas officially use the name Коман таріа Kamojys (Kamāj's) for the small town. We also happened to hear its plural illative form — Kama'jųsun ~ Kamojysan'i (Kamojės). 3An entirely analogous case was recently documented in Lithuania as well, in the Švenčionėliai parish. See MK, 24. 113 it has now completely died out. At that time, as far as we know, only an 88-year-old local woman knew Lithuanian, the wife of Romano Klundukas, who was suffering from an illness. When we spoke to her in Lithuanian, she understood everything but was unable to answer us in Lithuanian or in any other way. Local residents—R. Klunkas (1902–1990), Juzefā Rimša (usually Рымшиха, born 1903), Česia Bučel’ (born 1928), and others—said that their mothers had spoken Lithuanian4. People remember that long ago many people here spoke Lithuanian. The priest Budrā, who served here around 1920 and did much for Lithuanian identity, is still praised by everyone and remembered fondly. About 7 km west of Kamojys, near the Lithuanian border, in Ramaškonys and Sokūnai (Сакунь), Čičiū (Чьчели), and neighboring villages, Lithuanian is still spoken not only by older local residents but also by most of the younger generation. 2. Lexical Lithuanianisms in the dialect The church town has many place names and surnames of Lithuanian origin; most names of the surrounding villages are also Lithuanian names that have been Belarusianized. During our study of the dialect, we heard and recorded a considerable number of words of Lithuanian origin. Most of them are used throughout the Lithuanian-Belarusian border region, and their Lithuanian origin has been examined more than once by more than one researcher. We present all the words of Lithuanian origin that we recorded here, together with their variant forms and nuances of meaning. абрындашча ‘to thaw’ ⇐ Lithuanian brindotis ‘to thaw’ (see брындулі, p. 113). адліга5 ‘thaw’ (: During the thaw they made balvans) ⇐ Lithuanian atlyga ‘same meaning’. акоца (usually in the plural: каплоче акоца) ‘spiky’ ⇐ Lithuanian akūočiai ‘something with prickles’. аксні ‘chaff’ ⇐ Lithuanian ākstys, ākstinai. апікула ‘blockhead’ (: Апікула-гэта няудачнік, доўбня, крэпка тупы) ⇐ Lithuanian apýkula ‘same meaning’. аруд ‘granary’ (: Аруды чы засекі – тое самае) ⇐ Lithuanian aruódas. асвер (свер) ‘lever’ ⇐ Lithuanian svirė ‘pole’; compare also svāras ‘lever’. ашака ‘1. chaff; 2. husks’ (: There is a lot of chaff in the sieve; you can make kisiel from 3 measures of chaff) ⇐ Lithuanian āšakos ‘grain husks’. ато́сы ⇐ Lithuanian atāsijos. ато́жалы ⇐ Lithuanian dialectal atāžalos. баланда ‘any kind of soup’ ⇐ Lithuanian balanda ‘a kind of weed’. барловы ‘grain siftings’ ⇐ Lithuanian bėralas. 4 According to statistical data from the mid-19th century, the entire Kamojys parish was Lithuanian. Even before the First World War, Lithuanian sermons were still delivered and Lithuanian was still sung in Kamojys. During the German occupation (from 1942), 12 Lithuanian schools operated in the Kamojys area, and 823 peasants had registered as Lithuanians there (only 263 as Poles). At that time, Lithuanian place names accounted for 57.9% here. See ML, 701. 5 The Lithuanian explosive g is represented here by Belarusian г; for example, the Belarusian fricative г is rendered with the Latin letter h. 114 бразгуны ‘bells, ornaments on harness’; бразгуночкі ‘little bells, ornaments on harness’ ⇐ Lithuanian brazgūnai ‘same’. бродзень ⇐ Lithuanian bradìņys. брунта (of both masculine and feminine gender: брунта дзераўяны ір дзве брунты) ⇐ Lithuanian dialectal brūntas ‘a clasp’; брунтачкі ‘small logs used instead of buttons’ ⇐ Lithuanian dialectal brūntas ‘a clasp’ + Belarusian -ачкі. брынды ‘fringes’ ⇐ Lithuanian brìndos (see брындулі, p. 113). бурбалка ‘an air bubble in the rain’ ⇐ Lithuanian bur̃balas + Belarusian -ка; бурубульваць ‘to gurgle (of a stream)’; ‘to mumble (of a person)’ ⇐ Lithuanian burbuliuoti ‘same’. буч ⇐ Lithuanian būčius. цапуль (ціпуль, ціпулёнак) ‘a newly hatched chick’ (: My little chicks, you little Jews, you youngsters, jump about, your feathers are already growing — I will not feed you, masters, with eggs alone; My chicks, my little chicks, where are you jumping off to, oh you rascals: don’t sit in the chicken coop—you want to go scratch the earth; don’t jump about, my children) ⇐ Lithuanian capùlis, cipùlis ‘same’. дулька ‘dust raised while scutching flax’ (: One sackful of dust came up) ⇐ Lithuanian dùlkės ‘small fragments, particles’. дзёгаць ‘1. tar; 2. medicine made from tar’ (: They treated [them] with tar for worms) ⇐ Lithuanian degùtas. дзірван ⇐ Lithuanian dirvónas. гль ‘bumblebee’ ⇐ Lithuanian g̃lỹs ‘same’; гіляваць ⇐ Lithuanian gyliuoti. гірца (гірца) ‘chaff’ ⇐ Lithuanian dialectal gìrsa ‘chaff’. грэйтполька ‘a fast polka’ ⇐ Lithuanian greitpolkė ‘same’. гульта ‘a pig’s lying place’ ⇐ Lithuanian gùlta ‘a place to lie down’. іксва ‘vetch’ (: Іксва рѫжыць рукі як нажом, а маладую елі коні) ⇐ Lithuanian viksva. інгірчнік ⇐ Lithuanian vingiarýkštė. юдра ‘weed in flax and barley’ ⇐ Lithuanian judrà ‘weed in flax’. какарачык/кукарэчкі (: Сёла на какара́чкох/на кукарэчкі ‘squatted down on their heels’) ⇐ Lithuanian kaùkaras + Belarusian -ачкі/-эчкі. каснічкі ‘ribbons’ ⇐ Lithuanian kasnỹkas + Belarusian -ički. кёлзаць ‘to bridle’ ⇐ Lithuanian (dial.) gelžti (cf. LLT, 56). кятурка ‘fastening of men’s trousers’ ⇐ Lithuanian ketùrka ‘the same’. кіндзюк (клундзюк, кіндюк) ‘skilandis, a thick sausage stuffed into a pig’s bladder or stomach’ ⇐ Lithuanian skilandžiukas (see LLT, 56–58). кірапла (кірапліха, карлапа — the latter by metathesis) ‘a clumsy, slovenly person’ (: Кірапла пашоў ніяк; кірапліха на абмыйць сама сябе; І ходзіць як карлапа) ⇐ Lithuanian kerėpla ‘the same’. кліш ‘crab’s legs’, клыша ‘a person who walks with splayed legs’ ⇐ Lithuanian klišė ‘a crooked, splayed leg; crab’s claws’, klišis, -ė ‘a bow-legged person’. княжыць ‘to teem’ ⇐ Lithuanian knežėti ‘the same’. койш ⇐ Lithuanian kaũšas. крэйка ‘rascal’ ⇐ Lithuanian kreikas, kraikas ‘the same’. круўня ‘a pile of stones at the edge of a field’ ⇐ Lithuanian krūsnė ‘the same’. 115 кукуць ‘piglet’ (: Кукуць ты маленькі, ты расці, будзь здаровенькі: ухо̂ тваё вялікае) ⇐ Lithuanian kūkutis ‘same’ куль ⇐ Lithuanian kūlys. кумпячок ‘smoked pork ham’ ⇐ Lithuanian kumpis + Belarusian -ячок. курмель ‘dace; does not grow large’ ⇐ Lithuanian kurmti ‘to burrow’; kùrmis (cf. also Laum., 97-98; Zink., 259). лагáci ‘yellow thistles’ ⇐ Lithuanian dialect lagėsiai, standard Lithuanian legėsiai ‘same’. лало́ўнікі ‘singers beneath windows at Easter, who receive gifts in return for their songs’ ⇐ Lithuanian lalāunkai ‘same’. ляпшок (dialectal лапшук) ‘a kind of mushroom; a withered old person’ ⇐ Lithuanian lepšiukas ‘same’. лаўжо ‘a pile of firewood (usually in the forest)’ ⇐ Lithuanian laužas ‘pile’. лӯпы ‘thick, protruding lips (usually of a horse)’ ⇐ Lithuanian lūpos; лупа́ты ‘thick-lipped’ ⇐ Lithuanian lūpos + Belarusian -átn (or perhaps from Lithuanian lūpotas); крывалу́пы ‘crooked-lipped’, cf. Lithuanian lūpa, кабūlinų лӯпы ‘a kind of edible mushroom (in Lithuanian called “cow’s/bull’s tongues”)’, cf. Lithuanian lūpa. мяўкаць ‘to meow’ ⇐ Lithuanian miaukti (miaukoti). мӯта ‘a dumpling of steamed oat flour’ ⇐ Lithuanian miltai. мӯмы ‘lice’ ⇐ Lithuanian mūmai ‘same’ (in children’s speech). нашмуляць ‘to rub raw (the heel)’ ⇐ Lithuanian šmùlinti ‘to rub’, šmùlas ‘smooth; without horns, without a wreath’, (cf. Лауч. 35, 136). нёмарасць ‘restlessness’ ⇐ Lithuanian nērimastis (due to metathesis). па́кула ‘tow; made of tow’ ⇐ Lithuanian pãkulos. парсючок ‘piglet’ ⇐ Lithuanian pãšas + Belarusian -ючок. па́стка ‘trap’ ⇐ Lithuanian pãstkai ‘same’ піло̄ты ‘newly hatched chicks’ ⇐ Lithuanian pylùčiai ‘newly hatched ducklings’. пласко́ні (пласкані́) ‘fish scales’ ⇐ Lithuanian dialect plaiskānės, standard pleiskānės (cf. also pleiskēnės ‘same’). по́йсаць ‘to beat off the awns’ (: Ячмень по́йсаюць на малата́рні) ⇐ Lithuanian paisyti ‘same’ по́шар ⇐ Lithuanian pašaras. абхе́ргаць ‘to straddle, to get on (a bicycle)’, пераже́ргаць ‘to step over (a fence, puddle, etc.)’ ⇐ Lithuanian žergti, apžergti, peržergti. прысвіро́нак ‘porch’ ⇐ Lithuanian priesvirnis; сві́ран ⇐ Lithuanian svìrnas. прыўня ‘bathhouse vestibule’ ⇐ Lithuanian dialect pryvenė (prievenė) ‘vestibule’. пу́тра ‘thick soup’ ⇐ Lithuanian putrà ‘same’ ра́гі ‘streaks of water drops running down a windowpane; streams of sweat’ ⇐ Lithuanian ráugtis (riáugtis) ‘to become overcast’. рагучы ‘sledges’ ⇐ Lithuanian dialect rãgutės. раўге́ня ⇐ Lithuanian raugienė. рэйсты ⇐ Lithuanian raistai. рэгіні ⇐ Lithuanian rėzginės. ру́нкілі ⇐ Lithuanian runkeliai. 116 сцімбӯр ‘stalk, dry stalk (of sorrel, nettles, beets)’ ⇐ Lithuanian stémburas ‘stem, dry stalk, stalk’. скварсты́ (скварста́, feminine) ‘a wedding feast’ ⇐ Lithuanian sker stuvės (zero metathesis—due to the regressive displacement of the -v- syllable to the word-initial syllable). стоць налава́й (hybrid) ‘headlong’ ⇐ Lithuanian stačiai + Belarusian налава́”. шашо́к ⇐ Lithuanian šėškas. шва́рка (indeclinable) ‘long men’s fur coat’ (: Шва́рка на кажуху́ апцягна́ла) ⇐ Lithuanian švarkas ‘part of a suit covering the vest’, Latvian svārki ‘clothes, overcoat’. шклю́т ‘broad-bladed hewing axe’; snub-nosed ⇐ Lithuanian skliūtas ‘hewing axe’. шу́ла (indeclinable) ⇐ Lithuanian šūlas. шӯ́рпа (шӯ́рпики) ‘of this breed’ (with ruffled feathers) hens (: Куры шӯрпы, шӯрпики — скрученная перя ў трубу, і ходзяць такія) ⇐ Lithuanian šūrpa ‘same’; шурпа́ценьки ‘covered with short prickles’ (: Ключнки ‘primroses’ ад кашлі, люточни шурпаценькія) ⇐ Lithuanian šiurpotas, šiurpėtas ‘same’; тапа́й (feminine) ‘a side bay in a threshing barn’ ⇐ Lithuanian tárpas ‘space between things’. вара́нь ploughs are gathered ⇐ Lithuanian vagóti ‘same’. ва́гела ⇐ Lithuanian vėgėlė. ва́пла (ва́пла) ‘fool’ ⇐ Lithuanian vėpla; ва́плава́ты (ваплава́ты) ‘absent-minded’ ⇐ Lithuanian vėpla + Belarusian -аты. ви́рціна (варціна) ‘a small rope usually braided into a figure eight’ ⇐ Lithuanian virtinė ‘something strung on something’. ви́юны ‘fish of this kind; houseplants of this kind that twine’ ⇐ Lithuanian vijūnai ‘fish of this kind’, cf. also Lithuanian vytis ‘to curl, to coil’. зӯрза ‘grumbler’ ⇐ Lithuanian zùrza; зурзецъ ⇐ Lithuanian zùr zti; зурзлівы ‘one who grumbles’ ⇐ Lithuanian zùrzlius + Belarusian -івы. жагары́ ⇐ Lithuanian žagarai. жэгини ⇐ Lithuanian žaginiai. жвірок ‘small gravel’ ⇐ Lithuanian žvyras + Belarusian -ók and so on. It should also be noted that a few Lithuanianisms are recorded here that have so far gone unheard elsewhere in Belarusian dialects, are rarer, or are not recognized by others, as well as meanings or forms of words of Lithuanian origin identified earlier that were previously unknown. Among these, the following may be mentioned: acáki ‘stubble’ (: Аца́кі астаюцца ў kúрах). It should be noted that this lexeme is used alongside another, more usual (and undoubtedly older) Lithuanianism of the same meaning, аксны́ ‘stubble’ (⇐ Lithuanian akstinai ‘same’). The word acaki is derived from Lithuanian ašakos, while its meaning was taken over from аксны́ through contamination arising from the factual similarity in meaning of the lexemes Lithuanian ašakos [LKŽ 1² 333] and Belarusian аксны́ ‘stubble’ (cf. also Lithuanian akspinai ‘stubble, small fish bones’ [LKŽ 1² 85]). Thus the loanword acáki represents an instance of a late Lithuanian substratum, showing that the Lithuanian language has not yet been entirely forgotten in the dialect under study, and that, along with the loss of the language, 117 the connection between a word’s form and its meaning is also lost. The form of the Lithuanianism is not fully Belarusianized: it retains the plural characteristic of Lithuanian. Балда́ ‘chatterbox, windbag’ (: Балда́ — като́ры тpýліш языко́м). Until recently, the lexeme балда ‘chatterbox, wanderer, simpleton; club, cudgel, large hammer’ was found in Belarusian, Russian, and Ukrainian dialects [Даль, 42; СРНГ, 2, 79; СБГ,1, 57; РБС, 43]. Some etymologists suppose it to be a loanword from the Turkic languages балта ‘axe’ [ЭСЯ, 114]; later scholars have tried to cast doubt on this and tend to recognize it as a native East Slavic polysemous derivative with the suffix -da, related to Ukrainian báла ‘cudgel, stump’⁶ [Шанс, 34; ЭСБМ, 292]; others consider its origin unresolved, treat the meanings ‘chatterbox, wanderer, fool’ and ‘club, large hammer’ as unrelated, and accordingly distinguish two homonymous балда word families [ЕСУМ, 126]. We also recognize as unequivocal cognates of балда the dialectal Belarusian forms балдзі́ць ‘to speak, say’, балдзе́с ‘scatterbrain, idler’, балдзе́, балдзі́ха, балдзі́чка, балдзі́на, балдзі́шча, бульду́іна, балду́й, абалду́іна ‘scatterbrain’ [Бяльк., 81; 3 народ. слоўн., 287; Народ. словатв., 156; Юрч., 49]. Despite their complexity, the available etymological explanations are merely conjectures and do not in fact solve the problem of the origin of East Slavic балда, since they make no attempt to prove or disprove whether this lexeme is a Turkism or a Slavic word that arose naturally on Slavic soil and is clearly connected in meaning, expression, and derivation with other Slavic words. In our view, there is also no sound basis for treating the two meanings of балда—‘chatterbox, wanderer, fool’ and ‘club, cudgel, large hammer’—as homonymous, if only because they are fairly clearly motivated by one underlying meaning and share a common component. That common component of their meanings, which is fairly easy to discern, is a certain sound produced by the action of the objects they denote, associated with making a racket, banging, and noise (cf. chatterbox ‘someone who talks a lot and unnecessarily’, wanderer ‘someone who wanders about, bashes around’, fool ‘someone who babbles nonsense’, hammer ‘a tool used for loud pounding’, club ‘a thick stick for hitting and beating’, and the like). This connection between the meanings must therefore be recognized as their link, although the meaning ‘chatterbox, wanderer, fool’ is newer and metaphorically motivated by the older (undoubtedly primary) meaning ‘hammer, club, cudgel’. It follows that all the meanings of the lexeme балда are most likely cognate, and that they share a common form. This is precisely one of the principal conditions for etymological identification. The claim that a word’s basic meaning is especially important in explaining its origin makes it possible to interpret Slavic балда more realistically and reliably as well, and offers the possibility of bringing it into the context of the Baltic languages. This view is essentially supported by what are most likely its unequivocal, numerous cognates in form and meaning, used in the Baltic languages, for example: Lithuanian balda ‘banging, clattering’, baldas ‘a stick or spike used to scare fish’, savo báldu ‘with one’s own mind’, báldyti(s) ‘to bang, wander, roam’, baldukas, bildūkas ‘one who bangs about, makes a rumble;’ 6 Ukrainian бала, however, is also associated—though with reservations—with either Ukrainian бала ‘prattle’ or Turkic бала ‘boy’ [ЕСУМ 121]. 118 imp, little devil’, baldūs ‘shaky’, balsas ‘sound; news, rumor’, baldaštaras ‘large person’, balduonis ‘night wanderer’; belsti(s) ‘to rumble; to recount or speak loudly and animatedly; to bustle noisily about’, byla ‘speech; sound, voice’, bilda ‘awkward, ungainly person, oaf’, bildas ‘something that makes a rumble’, byloti ‘to chat, speak’ [LKŽ I² 589, 591, 592, 601, 739, 741, 815, 816, 817, 820]; Latvian baldzināt ‘to gossip about’, baldurēt ‘to make a noise’, balstīt ‘to beat’, bālziens ‘a heavy blow’, belzins ‘an instrument for beating’, belzt ‘to beat, strike’, belzēt ‘to wander about’, bilst ‘to say, speak’ [ME 253, 278, 296]; Old Prussian billīt ‘to speak, say’ [SV 151]. In our view, there are no formal or semantic obstacles to the possibility—and indeed plausibility—of such a relationship between balda and Baltic words with the bal(d)-/bel(d)-/bil(d)- root. This readily supports the idea that these related words belong to an etymologically coherent group of Baltic-origin vocabulary. Брындулы ‘dried clumps of manure stuck to a cow’s sides’ (: брындулы вісіць у каровы каля хваста). The word is an unmistakable Lithuanianism, etymologically belonging to the Lithuanian brind-, brend-, brand- root family⁷; cf. brandà ‘scab; drying’, brandinti ‘to dry, harden’, brandūs, brendūs ‘dry, hard’, bréndėti ‘to swell, puff up, become bloated, soak’, bręsti ‘to dry, become dry, grow thick’, brindos ‘thick, hard seams, lace, pleats; abdominal suet’ [LKŽ I² 993, 995, 1029, 1030, 1031, 1050-1051, 1059]. Compare also other Belarusian Lithuanianisms from the same root that preserve the basic meaning of Lithuanian brind-, brend-, brand-, for example, брандушка ‘horsefly’ (which is usually swollen), брандола ‘chatterbox’, брандоліць ‘to chatter’, брында, брындала, абрындала, брынд ‘idler, loafer, sloven’, брындаць, брындзіць ‘to idle, wander about’, брынды, брынджы, брынжы ‘lace, pleats, tatters, broad folds, torn clothes; loafing about; spread-out portable carders’, брындзёлка ‘the hem of a skirt’, брындулы ‘lace’, брындзялі ‘rags’ [Бялк. 92-93; Сцяшк. 1972, 60; 3 народ. словаў. 293; Народ. лекс. 40, 170, 193; Жыв. слова 60; Народ. словаў. 7, 41, 86-87, Юрч. 62; СБГ 1 212-213, 228]. 7 In СБГ 1 228, брындулы in other borderland Belarusian dialects, with the same meaning, are quite reasonably compared with one of the numerous Lithuanianisms from the brind-, brend-, brand- root that we identified earlier, брындлы ‘tatters, lace’, and the like ← Lithuanian brindos ‘same’ [LT 168-169]. However, this Lithuanianism is considered insufficiently substantiated because Russian data were not used and the relationship between its meanings ‘vagabond’, ‘abdominal suet’, and ‘knitwork’ was not explained [Лауц. 138]. The requested addition does not invalidate our conclusion but confirms it. This is clear from a comparison of the meanings of Russian and Lithuanian lexemes from this root. The relationship between the meanings (and this is what matters most) ‘vagabond’, ‘abdominal suet’, and ‘knitwork’ is present, and is clear and readily discernible. The component common to all of them is swelling, expansion, protrusion, sagging, and spreading out. This is unquestionably the link between their meanings: for example, abdominal suet is a porous layer of fat covering the entire lower abdominal cavity; knitwork consists of puffed-up, porous knitted edging on a garment or fabric; a vagabond is a person who leads a disordered life, disregards generally accepted moral or ethical rules, and undermines them. This common component of the meanings of Lithuanian brind- is also clear in Russian words with the root брынд-. For instance, the Russian [Даль 133; СРНГ 3 218-219] бры́нда meaning ‘lazy woman’, and the related бры́ндать, бры́ндить ‘to idle, wander about aimlessly’ are undoubtedly counterparts of Lithuanian brinda ‘sloven, untidy person’, brindzaitis (with an inserted non-etymological z, cf. susizgribti ‘to come to one’s senses’) ‘idler’; the meaning ‘slovenly woman’, as well as брында ‘wide sleeves of festive clothing, patches, something that spreads out as it weeps’, have direct Lithuanian counterparts brinda ‘hanging skin under a cow’s neck’, brindos ‘the widened blade edge produced by someone who does not know how to peen a scythe; knitwork, pleats, protruding abdominal suet, patches’; brindžios ‘pleats in sleeves or a skirt’, brindotas ‘having folds of fat around the neck’, apsibrandėti ‘to sag, with a shirt hanging down to the knees’, brįsti ‘to become loose, slack’; the meanings of брында ‘someone capricious, conceited’ and брындеть, брынить ‘to act capriciously’, as well as брындла ‘conceited person’, брынчук ‘swollen finger’, and others, have indisputable Lithuanian counterparts: брįsti ‘to swell, puff up, grow thick, expand, become inflamed’, brandà ‘scab’, brandinti ‘to harden, enlarge’, subrendėti ‘to stiffen, become rigid’, subrūsti ‘to become overgrown, swell up’. All this, in our view, constitutes irrefutable and solid evidence for the Lithuanian character of Slavic derivatives in брынд-. 119 бу́рта ‘a piece’ (: Цѣлюю бу́рту са́ла адваліū). In Br., Russian, and Ukrainian dialects, the words бу́рт, бу́рта ‘pile, heap, stack, embankment, rick’ [Даль 144; Сящик. 1972 63; СБГ 1 244; Бяльк. 95] have hitherto been unanimously considered by etymologists to be Germanisms that came via Polish (← German Borte, Bord ‘edge, border, margin’ [ЭСРЯ 1 247; ЭСБМ 420; ЭСУМ 304]). However, this derivation is in fact impossible: semantics argues against it—бу́рт, бу́рта actually denotes not an ‘edge, margin, border’ of something, but the ‘pile, heap, abundance of objects, a piece of a solid object’ itself, and thus could have no semantic connection whatsoever with German Borte, Bord. In asserting such an etymological connection, it is necessary to demonstrate and substantiate this semantic transformation, but none of the proposed etymologies does so. And indeed, this is difficult to do. Thus, the source proposed for the origin of бу́рт, бу́рта is certainly not the right one. Br. бу́рта is considered a standard-language word [БРС 204], while in their dialects this lexeme is used with several other meanings, e.g. ‘a heap of potatoes or beets, a pile of trousers, a large piece of something, a spinning top (a kind of toy)’ [СБГ 1 244; Сящик. 1983 69], and it has quite a number of other derivational relatives of its own, e.g. бу́ртаваць ‘to pile up’, бу́ртаўшчык ‘one who piles things up’, бу́ртачка, бу́ртка, бу́ртучо́к ‘an elongated rectangular wooden button’, бу́рту́ль ‘a large, thick worm’, бу́рту́лі ‘a pile of wet clothes’, бу́рту́к ‘a cucumber beetle’, etc. [СБГ 1 244; Народ. слова 107; Народ. лекс. 15; Юрч. 66; БРС 204]. СБГ 1 244 justifiably compares бу́рт, бу́рта with Lithuanian bùrta ‘a rectangular piece of wood’. Neither the word’s semantics nor its phonetics poses any obstacle to such a comparison or, consequently, to recognizing these lexemes as unequivocal Lithuanian loanwords. Lithuanian bùrta, which has a rich family of words with the same root (e.g. bùrys ‘crowd, pile’, bùrti ‘to gather into a pile; untangle; throw; kick’, bùria ‘in greater numbers’, bùrystė ‘multitude’, bùrytis ‘to gather in groups, become cloudy, grow angry’, bùriuoti(s) ‘to gather into a group, become overcast’, burtelė, burtikė ‘a slip of paper bearing a certain text’, burtena ‘a tangle of tangled threads’, bùrtikas ‘a cut-off piece’, bùrtotas ‘lumpy’, bùrtuotas ‘checkered’, burtuklis, burtukšlis ‘a fat person’ and others [LKŽ 12 1185-1188, 1200-1201, 1203]), is precisely the lexeme borrowed not only by related Latvian dialects, e.g. būra ‘pile, heap’, būris ‘multitude, pile’ [ME 358], but also by all the East Slavs. бу́жалкі (жу́жалкі) ‘tadpoles’ (: Бу́жалкі аж кнежаць у бало́це; Жу́жалкі выводзяць жабу́). In the neighboring area of Miegūnai (Br. dialect of Maryūnai), žūžalki already means ‘little frogs’ [СБГ 2 154], while the Belarusian dialect of the Trakai area also has a third name for tadpoles—гу́жалкі [СБГ 1 498]. It would probably be wrong to suppose that these three names for the same object, used in parallel, so to speak, and differing in irregular phonetics while sounding very similar, are unrelated to one another—that is, that they are not distorted forms of one and the same word. In every case, irregular distortion of forms is caused by the loss of the connection between a form’s sound and its meaning (and it is the form that suffers as a result). The clearest and least distorted of them is бу́жалкі, whose initial form was most likely provided by Lithuanian bùožgalviai, on the basis primarily of its semantics (which is in no way contradicted by its geographical distribution or morphology) and its phonetic similarity. In adapting it to Belarusian, they would first have given it a Slavic diminutive suffix 120 -ki (cf. a similar case: Lithuanian mentė ⇒ Br. мянташка, etc.). Later, as бу́хгалвки continued to become Slavicized, it replaced the consonant clusters -жг- and -лвк-, which are not very usual in Slavic languages, with -ж- and -лк- for ease of pronunciation, and monophthongized the unusual diphthong to у [cf. LKB 128]. Thus Lithuanian buožgalviai, adapting to the structure of Belarusian, would have turned into the Belarusian бужаклкі. The same likely happened with Br. гу́жалкі ⇐ Lithuanian buožgalviai [see LKB 128]. Undoubtedly, the development of the forms under discussion, жүжалкі, from Lithuanian buožgalviai must have been similar, except that here their initial δ- may possibly have been irregularly replaced by ж through regressive assimilation to the -ж- in the second syllable, or perhaps for other reasons. búžkė ‘metal socket for the head of a scythe’ (: Бужка — у цѣпа — там і рѣмень, прыбчана шапаўка). This is a rare Lithuanian loanword, derived from Lithuanian buožakys ‘small ring by which the scythe is attached’ [LKŽ ¹² 1169], with the same meaning, and having acquired its present form on Belarusian dialectal soil. On the Lithuanian root buož- ⇒ būž- see LKB 128. цѣупала ‘fool, simpleton, blockhead’ (: Цѣупала ана, нѣсурдзіна, пашайнешка) ⇐ Lithuanian čiaupà ‘a gaping, open-mouthed person, a gawker’; cf. also čiaupynė (čiaupynė), čiaupytinė ‘someone who constantly purses their lips, makes faces’, čiaupytis ‘to make faces’. гўгаль (гўгуль, гуголь) ‘field horsetail while still in the ear’. These are forms that most likely arose through contamination of Lithuanian gigėlis (gegėlis) ‘horsetail while still in the ear’ and Belarusian ку́каль (х́укуль, куко́ль) ‘corn cockle’ [СБГ 2 561]. Contamination is possible here. Both referents have recently been rapidly disappearing from use (or have disappeared) as a result of advances in agriculture, and are little known or heard of by local people (especially younger ones). As the referents have disappeared, the names of the rather similar-sounding Lithuanian gigėlis and Belarusian ку́каль would have blended into one: gigėlis would have transferred its meaning to it, along with both Lithuanian voiced root consonants g (which also make it amenable to etymological analysis). And thus a new, unusual, distinctly Belarusian word, common to both referents, came into being: гўгаль (гўгуль), which clearly broadened its meaning and acquired the meanings of both referents—‘corn cockle’ (: Гугаль — зрякі чэрныя, ядавіты; Гуголь збіралі па жыта ў альтку; Гугуль вішнёвым цвіцець) and ‘horsetail’ (: Гугаль вясной — галёўка такая — авечкі ядуць; Гугуль шыбачкамі расцець; гуголь перш расцець, а пазней — ёлачка). This clearly shows that contact between Belarusian and Lithuanian dialects in this area was very active, brief, and clearly directed toward Belarusian, and that it formed in the dialect under study new contaminational elements rarely heard elsewhere. палучкі ‘knitted woolen slippers’ (: Палучкі — таланкі дзецям з нітак). A relatively rare diminutive formation with the suffix -ki- ⇐ Br. палучі ‘slippers made of straw or thread’, etc. Br. палучі is now somewhat more frequent in dialects bordering Lithuania [СБГ 3 466]. An old Russian form по́пучи ‘footwear’, derived from Turkish papuč ‘shoe’ [ЭСРЯ 3 203], could not be a phonetic relative of Br. палучі, палучкі (Russian -ч- is retained in Belarusian, only hardened [РГБ 406, 408]). Undoubted relatives of the Br. lexemes палучі, палучкі are Lithuanian dialect forms papučiai, papūtės ‘slippers knitted from thread or cord’ [LKŽ 9 391] < papūti, with the nasal in the root lost; cf. Lithuanian pãpas of the same origin [LEW 536]. 121 паша́йпėška ‘someone who is mocked or ridiculed by others’ (: Яна была пястўн, цёцулала, нясура́зна, паша́йпе̇шка) ⇐ Lithuanian pašáipa ‘someone everyone makes fun of’. сма́гли ‘pleasant; energetic; quick, agile’ (:Нявялічкая, цёпененькая, но сма́гля, пры судзе сакратарша; Заявіўся сма́глы кавалёр, но вірлавокі ‘cross-eyed’: Сма́глая кароўка: к вечеру справілася ‘calved’: Жалязянка ‘iron snake’ blisčýčia, сма́гля — самая красная). The lexeme сма́гли ‘beautiful; quick; slender; strong’ and its other relatives with similar meanings, used quite widely also elsewhere in Belarusian dialects along the border, are, in our opinion, rightly regarded as Lithuanian loans and, undoubtedly, legitimately compared with Lithuanian smagūs ‘cheerful; strong’ [СБГ 4 496–497]. This conclusion was prompted by the identical semantics of these similarly sounding Lithuanian and Belarusian lexemes. This is also the essential criterion that rules out regarding Polish smagły ‘dark, swarthy’ as related. It is most likely a homonym. As for the Polish smagły meaning ‘flexible, supple, elastic’ (Karł. 6 234), in our opinion, it too can only be a borrowing from Lithuanian smagūs ‘agile, flexible’. стабда́ ‘wort’ (: Стабда́ кі́ніць і робіцца раўе́ння. Поўная дзе́шка стабды́) ⇐ Lithuanian stabdà ‘same meaning’ стóцaваць (яйкамі на Вялікдзень) ‘compete, vie, knock eggs together to see whose shell holds’ ⇐ Lithuanian stačiuoti ‘same meaning’ шакалі́ ‘kindling, brushwood’ (: Надзе́ла́й шакале́ў падпаліваць печку). The meaning and phonetics of the lexeme allow it to be derived only from Lithuanian šakalai (from šakelė one would expect шакалы); cf. Lithuanian loanwords of the same meaning used in other Belarusian dialects: шакалёк, шакалок, шакалък, шакаліна, шакаль [СБГ 5 451–452]. The irregular alteration of the suffix (-ели ⇒ -ялі) most likely shows how, along with the loss of the language, the connection between individual word-forming elements and the form in the original source has also been lost. шнипе́ць ‘hiss; be angry’ (: А што там на сто́ле шнипі́ць (about a kettle); Я с не́й шнипу́). This is a Lithuanian loanword derived from šnýpšti. 3. Lexical calques of Lithuanian origin In addition to lexical Lithuanian loanwords, the dialect also contains lexical calques of Lithuanian origin. Their identification has relied chiefly on their word-formation patterns, which are atypical of the Belarusian linguistic system (and those of its neighbors, Polish and Russian) but characteristic of Lithuanian, on the absence of words suspected of being calques from the five-volume TGBM, and partly on the author's linguistic intuition. чартало́ўка ‘polka frenzied’ (: Чартало́ўку танцава́ў і прысабі́ўся на яе). This is a Belarusian adaptation of Lithuanian pasiùtpolkės (cf. also pasiùtėlė ‘polka frenzied’, pasiùtės, pasiùtėlis ‘also a devil’). The lexeme is also an ethnographic borrowing from Lithuanian in the dialect under study: to our knowledge, this dance is not danced elsewhere in Belarusian dialects, and we do not know of another Belarusian name for it. павало́чка ‘petticoat’ (: Павало́чку адзе́ўшы дзюрка́бану — і владзь), cf. Lithuanian pàvilkinė, pavilkinỹs, Belarusian спо́дняя спа́дніца. 122 пяньцы ‘drunkards’ (: У рейсах пяньца, чарніца, бабуннік смярдзючы). This is an obvious calque from Lithuanian drunkards. Elsewhere in Belarusian, their own word буякі is used for drunkards. The calque from Lithuanian pijanicy is also used in borderland Polish dialects. Elsewhere in Poland, their own word łochyni is used for this purpose. по́лька с ро́шками ‘polka with little horns’ (: До́хленская была, а по́льку с ро́шками пе́рвая выбыла́), cf. Lithuanian pólka su ragúčiais. Because of its Lithuanian origin, this is also an ethnographic borrowing; to our knowledge, it is not danced (at least in earlier times) or known elsewhere in Belarus. ві́ляні ‘lodged, flattened grain crops’ (: Адні ві́ляні ў жыта), cf. Lithuanian išgulos ‘the same’, Belarusian вяллянае збо́жжа. за́йцавыя гр ыбы ‘hare’s boletuses, greenish boletuses’ (: За́йцавыя гр ыбы кро́пка зелене́юць, уку́сныя; Ба́бам кажу́: бярце́ зайцавыя гр ыбы), cf. Lithuanian kiškiabaravykiai ‘the same’, Belarusian сінякі ‘the same’. жаляза́нка ‘iron snake’ (: Пашлі ў малі́ны, і аж разу жаляза́нка бліску́чая), cf. Lithuanian geležinė ‘the same’, Belarusian мядзянка ‘the same’. 4. Semantic Lithuanianisms of the dialect In the Belarusian dialect under study, we also heard Belarusian words with new meanings unusual for them (not listed in ТСБМ), borrowed from certain Lithuanian words. These meanings in fact demonstrate the receptiveness of the Belarusian dialect’s semantics and its ongoing formation, artificially extending its boundaries. We believe that these meanings were adopted from Lithuanian out of the need to express, using the resources of the Belarusian dialect, all the everyday realities and ethnography of the Lithuanians who had lived in this territory (including those who became Belarusian). Through them, the Lithuanian language leaves one of the clearest traces of its existence here. быва́ць ‘live, reside’ (: Зімой я быва́ю ў Лі́нтупы; Я быва́ю тут лета́мі, býdu зіма́ваць; Мы быва́ем у Мягу́нах), cf. Lithuanian būti ‘live, reside’ (: I stay with my daughter in the city). цві́цець ‘bloom (of rye)’ (: Ста́ла жыта цві́цець), cf. Lithuanian žydėti, Belarusian красава́ць. нала́ва ‘rake head’ (: У гра́блі злама́лася нала́ва), cf. Lithuanian That is a handy rake: its head is quite light. In Belarusian, нала́ва does not have this meaning. нала́ўны ‘head-shaped, shaped like a head’ (: нала́ўны сахар у тую вайну прадавалі; нала́ўныя сала́ты сало́ткя), cf. Lithuanian galvinis ‘the same’ (: Head-shaped sugar; head-shaped lettuces). нало́йка ‘mushroom head, mushroom cap’ (: нало́йка баравіка кре́пкая, а но́шка — черві́вая), cf. Lithuanian grybo galvūtė. наўно́ ‘someone good for nothing (of a person with a poor appearance, a loser)’ (: Вышла замуж за наўно́), cf. Lithuanian She married a piece of shit. 123 kalėsų ‘cart’ (: Пазьічь мне калёсаў да дохтара звезці), cf. Lithuanian rātai ‘cart’. The dialectal word kalėsų is not Belarusian (быть колы), but borrowed from Russian. This most clearly demonstrates the dialect’s continued lack of autonomy and the vitality and vigor of Lithuanian semantics (it does not matter into which language the Lithuanian meaning is transferred; what matters is that it alone is preserved). It should also be added that the construction Пазьічь мне калёсаў is undoubtedly a clear syntactic Lithuanianism; see p. 123. kazā, kazēl ‘a flaw in weaving’ (: Зрабіла казу ў кроснах: Зноў казёл выскачыў у кроснах), cf. Lithuanian ožkà, ožỹs ‘same meaning’ kazēlak ‘grasshopper’, kazēlčyk ‘little grasshopper’ (: Казялкі зялёныя, ножкі дубёненькія; Казёлчык шуміць на дошчы), cf. Lithuanian ožēlis, ožīukas ‘same meaning’ krūčany ‘cunning, deceitful’ (: Мы некручаныя людзі — усё робім ад сэрца), cf. Lithuanian sūktas ‘same meaning’ mēisca ‘embryo sac, afterbirth’ (: Воды сышлі, а мейсца ня выходзіць), cf. Lithuanian vietà ‘same meaning’ naiñčia ‘be born, appear’ (: Брату сын нашоўся), cf. Lithuanian Jám atsirādo duktē. nahadžīčia ‘appear; arise’ (: Чарніца ўжо находзіцца; Мурашкі находзяцца — на дошч; На Вінгре́ ве́дер халодны находзіцца; У дзяцюка страх находзіцца), cf. Lithuanian Jau jõgdi atsirāda; Laukiõs véjas atsirānda; Bātmē atsirānda and so on. nedalāko ‘near, close’ (: Была недалёка адзіная тата). Under the influence of Lithuanian, the lexeme is used here as a preposition (elsewhere in Belarusian it functions as an adverb [ТСБМ 3 360]. Phonetic variants of недалёко are also used with prepositional meaning in other Belarusian dialects bordering Lithuania [СБГ 3 204]. плыўчы ‘to float, to flow (of grain)’ (: Сеяла па мала ра́на плыўчы жыта, і пшаніца плыве́ць), cf. Lithuanian Plaukia rugiai, Belarusian каласіцца жыта. прапускаць ‘to accompany’ (: Сына прапускаюць да машыны), cf. Lithuanian Praléisti seną žmõgų iki vartų. прапусціць ‘to let pass, to squander’ (: Я ўсё ўтраціў прапусціў), cf. Lithuanian Praléidau visus príngus. ро̄пка ‘part of a wheel, turnip’ (: Ро̄пка ў караўло́це; да ро̄пкі шпуля прыкрэплена), cf. Lithuanian rōpė ‘same meaning’: The Belarusian lexeme under consideration acquired a diminutive form through Belarusianization. зуб ‘tooth of a rake’ (: Устаўіў тры зубы ў грабель), cf. Lithuanian dantìs ‘tooth of a rake’. во̄ка ‘water-filled hollow’ (: Каро́ўца ўвалілася ў во̄ка), cf. Lithuanian akìs ‘a hole in a bog’. 5. Lithuanian dialect place names There are quite a few Lithuanian-origin (and Lithuanian-formation) place names in the dialect under study. Ačiūliukė ‘name of a meadow’. The root is most likely related to Lithuanian asỹs ‘rough horsetail’ (which grows in wet places) and the Lithuanian suffix -iškė. The form of the place name is also 124 un-Slavicized: it has retained the singular form (Lithuanian place names generally become plural when Slavicized, e.g.: Paštovis ⇒ Паставы, etc.). Cf. also Belarusian Асіпішча, from the same root, ‘name of a marsh’ [MB 21]. Баброўшчынкі ‘name of a plot of arable land in the neighboring village of Filipaucai’. The place name most likely derives from a Slavic surname; cf. Belarusian Баброўскі, Бабровіч, Ukrainian Бобровець, Polish Bobrowski (this surname may also have been borne by local Lithuanians; cf. Lithuanian Babrauskas, Babra vickas, Babravičius — LP 1 148), and it has a Lithuanian suffix. Бўчавічі ‘name of a village’. This is a patronymic-derived name whose form is considerably Slavicized: the affricates are pronounced as hard sounds. Lithuanian-speaking people in Ramaškonys and Jūravos call this village Būčiavičiai. In our opinion, the form should be transposed into standard Lithuanian as Būčiavičiai ‹ Lithuanian Bučys, Būčius, Būčas + Slavic -evič. Бучэлі ‘name of a village’. This is a purely Lithuanian name ‹ Lithuanian, e.g. Bučys, Būčas, and also Bučelis. Чычэлі ‘name of a village’. The old local Lithuanians still call it Čičiai (rt.). Translation of a form into a diminutive is also a fairly common way of Slavicizing a place name; cf. the stream form Kamaja ~ Kamōja used by Lithuanians in Ramaškonys, pronounced Kamáika in the Belarusian dialect under study, etc. Дварцѐны, (Дварча́ны) ‘name of a village’. The Lithuanians in the surrounding area call this village Dvarčianis ~ Dvarčionys; cf. Lithuanian village names Dvarčiai, Dvarčėnai, etc. [LATS 69]. Дзяўгуны (the middle generation uses the more Slavicized form Дзяўгунцы) ‘name of a village’. The Lithuanians in the surrounding area call this village Džaugūnai ~ Džiaugūnai; cf. Lithuanian village names Džiaugėnai, Džiaugiai, etc. [LATS 70]. Гірвіды ‘name of a plot of arable land and pasture’. Local people’s memories preserve the account that this plot of land was owned by Girvydas; cf. Girvydiškė, Girvydiškės ‘names of villages’ [LATS 87]. Гórbiški ‘name of a village’. The suffix of the name is Lithuanian. Гродзя возера ‘name of a lake in the neighboring village of Sokūnai’. The name derives from the Lithuanian surname Grúodis, pronounced Grúodzis in the local Lithuanian dialect, genitive Grúodžia [on Lithuanian uo › Belarusian o, see LKB 125]. Гудзішкі ‘name of a village’. The name is a Slavicized variant of the Lithuanian dialectal Gudziškė ~ Gudiškė; cf. Lithuanian village names Gūdiškiai, Gudiškė [LATS 95]. Едупцы ‘name of a village’. The name is a Slavicized variant of the form Juodupiai used by Lithuanians in neighboring villages [on Lithuanian (i)uo › Belarusian ë, see LKB 125]. Янкішкі ‘name of a village’. The suffix of the name is Lithuanian. Караліўця ‘name of a village’. This may be a Slavicized form of the Lithuanian name Karalyčia; cf. the Lithuanian village name Karalyčia [LATS 122] ‹ Karalyčia. Ка́ра ‘a ditch through which a springlet flows’ (: Kára — канаўка — ізбёг крыніца). Most likely, this is the Lithuanian name of a stream (which is no longer considered a stream) *Kėre. Perhaps it could have arisen from the snags or driftwood that were on its banks or bed; cf. also Būga 952. 125 Кольнская нара̃ ‘name of a hill’. The name is associated with Lithuanian kálnas ‘mountain’, while its palatalized l most likely indicates that the closest related form is Lithuanian kálnė ‘summit’; hapá, in our opinion, may have been added later to reinforce the meaning of kálnė, when it began to be forgotten. Words of the same meaning are sometimes used side by side in speech, one Slavic and the other Lithuanian, or vice versa—for example, Žinau, ale bet nesakysiu (Jurbarkas), Nežadėjo, ale bet vienok atėjo (Laukuva). Крапішкі ‘name of a small plot of arable land in the village of Filipaucai’. The name is associated with Lithuanian Krapiškis ‘name of a village’ [LATS 139], which, in our opinion, could also be dialectal, from *Kruopiškis; cf. also Lithuanian Kruõpiškis vs. [LATS 143]. Лапуні́ ‘name of a village’. The Lithuanian-speaking inhabitants of Jūrava call this village Lapúnai; cf., for example, Lapúnas [PŽ 2 25] ← Lepúnas ← lepúnas. Ло́би ‘name of low-lying places, usually wet’. The toponym is genuinely Lithuanian Lóbai ← lóbai ‘low-lying places (valley, slope, riverbed, marsh)’. Ло́пучи ‘name of a village’. The suffix -yи- is the Lithuanian dialectal diminutive -učiai ~ -učiai. Its root may be associated with the Lithuanian village name Lópaičiai (which is undoubtedly related to lópȳti ‘to patch’, cf. also lopuóčius ‘someone who is patched up’). And if its o corresponds to Lithuanian uo [cf. LKB 125], it could be related to Lithuanian Lúopas ‘surname’ ‹ lúopas ‘clumsy person, gawker, oaf’, cf. lúoputė ‘same’. Лóvкica фytapń ‘name of a field’. The name derives from the surname Laũkis, Laukùs ‹ latkis, lakas ‘bald patch’. Мягу́ны ‘name of a village’. It is purely Lithuanian. The local Lithuanians of the Jūrava area call this village Miegūnai (pronounced Me'gūnai). In the village of Filipaucai near Kamojai, local Belarusians pronounce it Магу́ны. The name is associated with miegas, miegóti ‘sleep, to sleep’, as well as mie_gonas ‘sleepy’, miegónys ‘drowsiness, dozing’ and others; cf. the village names Miegénai, Miegónys, Miegūčiai [LATS 182]. Мíрклиuki ‘name of a village’. The entire name is Lithuanian. It is most likely nickname-derived; cf. the surname Mirklys ‹ mirklys ‘someone who constantly blinks’; cf. also ‘the village name Mirkliai [LATS 187]. Particularly significant is the fact that the stressed diphthong -ip- in the toponym is clearly pronounced here with a falling accent, and its first component is lengthened just as in the surrounding Lithuanian dialects. Cf. also p. 122. Прыка́рак ‘name of a level, spring-fed area’ (: Прыка́рак - крыніца, раўніна). The name is connected with the name of the ditch (and spring) Ку́ра (see). Прыка́рак is a place beside *Кере̇ — *priekeris (*priekerė). Русáлішki ‘name of a farmstead in Filipaucai village’. The name has counterparts in Lithuania, for example, Rusáliškė ‘name of a village’ [LATS 268]. These place names are probably related to Lithuanian surnames ‹ to scratch ‘to scratch oneself’, a person who constantly scratches ‘one who constantly scratches’, to live ‘to live poorly, in straitened circumstances’. Самані́ца ‘name of a forest in the village of Gudiškiai’. The name is Lithuanian Samanyčia ‘name of an area with many marshes’ ‹ sãmanos; cf. also Samanynė, Samaniškė(s) and other village names [LATS 271]. 126 Свіраны ‘village name’. The Lithuanians of Jūravo village call it Syriónýs (cf. Svi-ráni’s), while its Belarusians call it Свіраны. In the Kamojys dialect, the place name is more Slavicized, with its r hardened before the preceding iā. The name is probably related to Lithuanian svyris ‘an ancient wooden door fitting’. Шва́кшты ‘village name’. The name is related to Lithuanian švókšti ‘to speak indistinctly’; cf. also the village name Švókštoniai [LATS 312]. Тра́пшаўскае поле ‘field name’. The name derives from the Lithuanian surname Trepšys, Trepša < ‘to tread’. Тымулейшчына ‘field name’. The name is related to the Lithuanian surname Tumùlis; cf. also the surnames Tumėlis, Tūmas. Варкáцiшки ‘village name’. The name is undoubtedly associated with the Lithuanian village name Varkutónys [LATS 336], the surname Varkulis, and the like. Ві́нгра ‘river name’. This is also the name of the Vingra River, which flows through Lithuania. It is associated with vingis. Бóni ‘forest name’. The name is associated with Lithuanian olai ‘caves’. The Lithuanian form may also have had an epenthetic v at the beginning of the word. Жу́кишки ‘village name’. A place name of surname origin (Žukas), with a Lithuanian suffix. 6. Phonetic, accentological, morphological, and syntactic Lithuanianisms in the dialect In addition to lexical Lithuanianisms, the dialect under study also uses several preserved Lithuanian features in phonetics, accentuation, morphology, and syntax that we have observed. Lithuanianisms (mostly place names) have preserved the original long Baltic a intact (standard Lithuanian o), as in neighboring Lithuanian dialects, e.g., Дварці́ны (Дварча́ны) ← Lith. dialectal Dvarcáni’s ~ Dvarčiõnys, Свінці́ны ← Lith. dialectal Švincáni’s ~ Švenčiõnys, Свіраны ‹ Lith. dialectal Svi’rán’i’s ~ Svi’rāni’s ~ Syriónýs, Шва́кшты ← Lith. dialectal Švākšta’s ~ Švókštos, etc.; cf. also dialectal Lith. bagáči ~ bagóti ‘rich’, brá’lai ~ brólai, dabája ~ dabója ‘protects’, pānu ~ pōna, sa’dās ~ sėdõs, etc. (Adūtiškis — LKT 351-352). This shows that the assimilated Lithuanian dialect was a continuation of the žadininkai dialect. The standard Lithuanian diphthongs an, en in the surviving Lithuanianisms have changed to un, in, as in the nearest Lithuanian dialects, e.g., бру́нты ← Lith. dialectal bruñtas ‘branktas’, бру́нтачки ← Lith. dialectal bruntel’iai ‘branktėliai; wooden buttons’, клу́ндзук ← Lith. dialectal *skilundz’ū.kas ‘skilandis’, Лі́нтупь ← Lith. dialectal Laĩtupis ~ Lẽitupis, Свінці́ны ‘Švenčionys’, сцимбу́р ← Lith. dialectal scimburas ~ stėmburas, etc.; cf. also dialectal Lith. uñt ~ añt, luñku ~ lañka, etc. (Adūtiškis — LKT 351-352). These phonetic features show that the Lithuanian dialect of these places belonged to the puntininkai. It is also important to mention that the stem e of the archaic Polonism krągły ‘round’ [cf. Karl. 2 552] (pronounced like en) is likewise rendered as in here, e.g., крѝнглы ліст. 127 This demonstrates how widespread this change characteristic of Lithuanian was: an, en > un, in operated not only while Lithuanian was spoken here, but also later. The consonant l before e-type vowels in the Lithuanianisms used here (as elsewhere in the eastern Aukštaitian Lithuanian dialects) is hard, while e has changed to a, e.g., лагэ̇с’и ← Lith. dialectal lagės’ai ~legės’ei, пласконі (пласкані) ← Lith. dialectal plaiškānes ~ pleiškānes, and also Лѝнтупь ← Lith. dialectal Lāntupis ← Lith. dialectal Lāntupis (cf. the neighboring eastern Dzūkian dialect’s lədas ~ledas, as well as lə’ks’ù ~ léksiu, kãbl’ə ~kiãblė, dži.dėl’ə ~didelė — LKT 353, 354, 394). The consonant n (both hard and palatalized), when preceding the velars k, g, is pronounced here, as throughout Lithuanian, with a distinct velar coloring (this coloring is also present in all Slavic words, e.g., беленьки ‘whitish’, цёненькая ‘thin’, дохленькая ‘very emaciated’, ингречник ‘willow twig’, карбоченьки ‘very short’, каленьки ‘joints (e.g., of straw)’, красненькая ‘little red ones’, Літвінкі ‘village name’, рыженьки ‘reddish’, рункип ‘beets’, сладзеньки ‘very sweet’, шурпаченьки ‘rough’, валерьяника (варэліанка) ‘valerian’, Вѝнгра ‘river name’, здоровеньки ‘healthy’, жалязнѝнка ‘iron snake’, жѝрненьки ‘fat’, etc. This pronunciation of n shows that the substrate of the present-day Belarusian dialect was indeed Lithuanian; cf. also Turska 75, 90, 94-95, 108, 111, 215-216, 2 193-194. The phonetic system of the dialect’s Lithuanianisms also fairly clearly reflects the first feature of Dzūkian pronunciation in the now-extinct Lithuanian dialect—affricates č, dž > c, dz before a- and u-type vowels—a feature characteristic of the neighboring eastern Dzūkian Lithuanian dialects (cf. LKT 352, 353, 394; LKA 94-96, map 80). Lithuanianisms such as акоця ‘awns’, Бўвачич ‘village name’, цёупала ‘fool’, Дзідзясёль ‘Didžiasalis’, Дзятугўны ‘village name’, Гродзя возара, Саманіца ‘name of a marsh’, Свінцяны, стўбаваць ‘to beat eggs from atimtinių’ and others show that they must have arisen from forms used by speakers of the local Lithuanian dialect: *akuočiai, *Bùc’aviec’ai, *c’aúpala, *Dz’augūnai, *Grúodz’a ‘lake’, *Samanič’a, *Švinčani’s, *stac’úoc, etc., which gradually became their present forms as the speakers shifted to Belarusian. The second feature of Lithuanian Dzūkian pronunciation—č, dž > c, dz before i, ie—must also undoubtedly have been present in the extinct Lithuanian dialect (our research data confirm this on the basis of data from the neighboring Lithuanian dialects of Jūravo and Ramaškonių, e.g., pajilgūoci ‘to lengthen’, scipinai ‘spokes’, sėdzi ‘sits, crouches’; cf. also LKT 394), but nothing can be concluded about it from the phonetics of the available Lithuanianisms because it coincides with this type of Dzūkian pronunciation characteristic of Belarusian. Among the Lithuanian features of accentuation, it is essential to mention the clearly audible Lithuanian acute accent in the mixed diphthongs of the dialect’s Lithuanianisms. Here, as in neighboring Lithuanian dialects, the first component of such diphthongs is lengthened, e.g., Цыбульскі (surname), дўлька ‘dust’, Літвѝнкі ‘village name’, Мі.рклішкі ‘village name’, Мў.нцавіч ‘village name’, Рѝ.мша (surname), Рѝ.мшиха (surname), Свѝркі ‘name of a village in Lithuania’; cf. Lith. dialectal svì.rka’s ~ Svirkos, Ві.нгра ‘river name’, etc. In syllables with the Lithuanian circumflex accent, analogous lengthening of the second component cannot be heard in the Lithuanianisms, e.g., Брўнта, бӯрбалки, Лѝнтупь, etc. 128 Most likely under the influence of the Lithuanian language, three nouns in the dialect have the same gender or number as the corresponding Lithuanian words, e.g., грабель, cf. Lithuanian grėblýs, other Belarusian dialects and their standard language храблі; печані, cf. Lithuanian kepenys, other Belarusian dialects and their standard language печань; тысячы (два, masculine), cf. Lithuanian tūkstantis, Belarusian тысяча. Among the syntactic elements of Lithuanian origin, mention should be made here of certain Lithuanian constructions that are actively used and are unknown in other Belarusian dialects and their standard language. First and foremost, this is the Lithuanian partitive genitive, e.g., Ма́чеха аве́чак купі́ла; Прошлы нот я́надай было́; Есць у мяне насу́канных нітак, cf. Lithuanian Pifko avių, Belarusian Купі́ла аве́чкі. Characteristic of this dialect is also the construction with the genitive of indefinite quantity, whose object is limited by a duration of time (for a short time), e.g., ПазЫ́ч мне калёсаў; Дай мне нажа́. This construction appears to be unknown in Slavic languages generally. In all cases it is replaced there by the accusative, e.g., Belarusian ПазЫ́ч мне суке́нку. However, it is entirely analogous to the construction widely used in eastern Lithuania, of the type Paskolink mán peilio (arklio, kirvio), cf. LKG 24–25. This dialect also uses the genitive of goal, which is clearly of Lithuanian origin, e.g., Прышоў каня; Прыехаў бычка (каро́вы, каня), cf. Lithuanian Atvažiávo búlvių, Belarusian Прышоў на каня (за канём), etc. Also noteworthy are the compound past-tense constructions of verbs, actively used here in the function of the nominal part of the predicate, e.g., Я засну́ўшы быў; Быў пашоўшы ў школу; Прыро́шы быў языко́к; Яна была прыве́шы пяць кі́ль; Та́та быў аба́біўшы скурай, etc. The constructions were most likely adopted from a Lithuanian dialect that has disappeared here. They are still actively used in Lithuanian, whereas in Slavic languages they have been replaced by perfective forms. In our opinion, the fact that these are translations of corresponding Lithuanian constructions could also be confirmed by the expression heard here: Я вайка не відзеўшы, а шашка́ то — відзела: як кот, which is a syllable-by-syllable repetition of the purely Lithuanian sentence, recorded by us in the Lithuanian village of Jūravo: Viłka aš neasù mát’us, a šėškù mat’áo — kaip kačinas [cf. also Balt. 63]. The Lithuanianisms preserved in the dialect have not become fixed. They are constantly changing and becoming Belarusian; their semantics gradually become imperceptible, erode and become distorted, and the number of Lithuanianisms declines. The diphthong uo, foreign to Belarusians, is most often rendered here as o (: Гро́дзя возяра, ако́цыя), and sometimes as y (: ару́д, бу́жалка, бу́жжа); Lithuanian au as oy (:Ло́ўкіца футары), as a (:карака́чкі), or as y (:кукару́чкі); the diphthong ai as a (: плашкані, плашконь); ei as э (: грэполка), and so on. Influenced by Slavic phonetics, some consonants become hardened (бу́чавічы, Свіра́ны, ру́стя). Alongside the lexeme кпиши, members of the middle generation also say кпі́ша; alongside вяпла, вяплава́ты, вірчі́на, ляпшу́к, one hears ва́ла, ваплава́ты, варді́на, лапшу́к just as often, if not more so, and so on. Some already pronounce the Lithuanian village name Мягу́ны in the Slavicized form Мягу́ны, while sedge, meadow saffron and traps are universally referred to here only as иксва́, ингі́рчник, ла́стка. Sometimes two lexemes of different genders and meanings merge into one with both meanings (гу́галь « гігель and ку́каль); sometimes, one forgets 129 the lexeme’s original meaning, and it acquires the meaning of another word (ačaki < Lithuanian *ašakos is used in the sense ‘shoots’), etc. All this shows that, as these dialect borrowings move closer to the Belarusian language system, they increasingly diverge from their original source, and the connection becomes weaker or breaks off altogether. 7. Conclusions The features of the Belarusian dialect of the Kamojys area discussed in this article are important to Lithuanian studies in several respects. 1. The Lithuanian-origin lexicon used here is most closely connected with the lives, production, everyday activities, customs, and culture of peasants in the neighboring Lithuanian territories. Undoubtedly, all of it forms part of the shared lexicon of this Belarusian dialect and neighboring Lithuanian dialects. It is widespread throughout the zone of Slavic dialects along the Lithuanian-Belarusian linguistic border and is a living witness confirming the Lithuanian substratal foundation of the present-day dialects of these territories. In addition, several new Lithuanianisms are identified here that have not been recorded elsewhere in Belarusian dialects bordering Lithuania. These include ача́кі ‘ends’, брыдулы ‘dried manure cakes on a cow’s flanks’, бу́дта ‘piece’, бу́жакі ‘tadpoles’, бу́жжа ‘metal fitting for the head of a scythe’, чу́пала ‘simpleton’, папуці ‘woollen socks knitted from yarn’, пашайпе́шка ‘something mocking’, стаба ‘wort’, шыпе́ц ‘to sniff’, ху́жалкі ‘tadpoles’, and others. All this indicates that the Belarusian dialect under study here developed on a Lithuanian substratal foundation. 2. The lexical and semantic calques of Lithuanian origin recorded in the dialect, e.g., по́лка с ро́шками ‘polka with little horns’, жалезна́нка ‘iron snake’, цві́це́ць ‘to blossom (of cereals)’, кі́даць ‘to throw (potatoes); to lose (teeth)’, пла́ўцы ‘to swim (of cereals)’, and others, which also reflect ethnographic features of people’s lives, confirm traces of a Lithuanian substratum. 3. A considerable number of the place names used here—hydronyms, village names, minor toponyms, as well as anthroponyms, e.g., Едуцці ‘village name’, Гірві́ды ‘field name’, Лоўйца фута́ры ‘field name’, Ка́ра ‘ditch name’, Саманца ‘forest name’, and others—indicate that Lithuanians lived here. This claim was also confirmed by some dialect informants, who acknowledged that their parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents had spoken Lithuanian. 4. Some elements characteristic of Lithuanian phonetics have survived in the dialect’s phonetic system to this day. Thus, the Baltic long ā has been preserved intact here; the Lithuanian velar pronunciation of the stem diphthongs an, en > un, in and of consonant n before k, g occurs not only in Lithuanianisms but also in Slavic words. Lithuanianisms clearly preserve the falling accent on mixed diphthongs, accentuating their first component, as well as some remnants of Lithuanian morphology and syntactic constructions. All this undoubtedly indicates that the assimilated Lithuanian dialect in this territory belonged to the eastern Dzūkian dialect of the eastern Highlanders’ puntininkai and žadininkai subdialects. 130 Literatūra Balt. – Гринаве́цкене Э. И., Мацкевич Ю.Ф. Некоторые необычные микросистемы в диалектной структуре белорусского говора окрестностей Опса // Baltistica, 1979. Т. 15 (1). P. 52-65. БРС – Беларуска-рускі слоўнік. Мінск, 1988. Т. 1. Būga – Būga K. Rinktiniai raštai. V., 1961. T. 3. Бяльк. – Бялькевіч І.К. Краёвы слоўнік усходняй Мар’ёўшчыны. Мінск, 1970. Даль – Даль В. Толковый словарь живого великого русского языка. Москва, 1955. Т. 1. ЭСБМ – Этымалагічны слоўнік беларускай мовы. Мінск, 1978. Т. 1. ЭСЭЯ – Фасмер М. Этимологический словарь русского языка. Т. 1. М., 1964; Т. 3. М., 1971. ЭСУМ – Этымалагічны слоўнік української мови. Київ, 1982. Т. 1. Юч. – Юрчанка Г.Ю. Народнае вытворнае слова. А–Л. Мінск, 1981. Kart. – Kantowicz J., Kryński A., Niedźwiedź-ki W. Słownik języka polskiego. Warszawa, 1902. T. 2; 1915. T. 6. LATS – Lietuvos TSR administracinio-teritorinio suskirstymo žinynas. V., 1976. D. 2. Лауч. – Лаучюте Ю.А. Словарь балтизмов в славянских языках. Ленинград, 1982. Laum. – Laumane B. Zivju nosaukumi latviešu valodā. Rīga, 1973. LEW – Fraenkel E. Litauisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Heidelberg-Göttingen, 1955-1962. LKA – Lietuvių kalbos atlasas. V., 1982. T. 2. LKB – Grinaveckienė E., Mackevič J. Kai kurios baltarusų lituanizmų fonetikos ypatybės // Lietuvių kalba ir bilingvizmas. V., 1988. P. 123-131. LKG – Lietuvių kalbos gramatika. V., 1976. T. 3. LKT – Lietuvių kalbos tarmės (Chrestomatija). V., 1970. LKŽ – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas. T. 12. V., 1968; T. 9. V., 1973. LLT – Grinaveckienė E. Buivydžių apylinkių (Vilniaus raj.) lenkų šnektos lituanizmai // 131 Lietuvių leksikos ir terminologijos problemos. V., 1991. P. 47-64. LP — Lietuvių pavardžių žodynas. T. 1. V., 1985; T. 2. V., 1989. LT — Гринавеckене Э., Мацкевич Ю.О., Романович Е.М., Чеберук Е.И. Бытовая лексика литовского происхождения в западной Белоруссии. //Lietuvių terminologija. V., 1975. P. 163-202. МБ — Мікратапанімія Беларусі. Мінск, 1974. МЕ — Mülenbachs K. Latviešu valodas vārdnīca. Papildinājis, rediģējis, turpinājis J.Endzelins. Rīga, 1923. T. 1. МК — Mūsų kalba. V., 1989. Sąs. 5. МЛ — Kviklys B. Mūsų Lietuva. Lietuvių enciklopedijos leidykla. Čikaga, 1964. Народ. лекс. — Народная лексика. Мінск, 1977. Народ. слова — Народнае слова. Мінск, 1976. Народ. словатв. — Народная словатворчасць. Мінск, 1979. ПГ — Польские говоры. Минск, 1973. Т. 1-2. РБС — Русско-белорусский словарь. Минск, 1982. Т. 1. РЯБ — Русский язык в Белоруссии. Минск, 1985. СБГ. — Слоўнік беларускіх гаворак паўночна-заходняй Беларусі і яе пагранічча. Мінск, 1979-1986. Т. 1-5. СРНГ — Словарь русских народных говоров. Ленинград, 1966. Вып. 2; 1968. Вып. 3. Сцяшк. — Сцяшковіч Т.О. Матэрыялы да слоўніка Гродзенскай вобласці. Мінск, 1972. Сцяшк. 1983 — Сцяшковіч Т.О. Слоўнік Гродзенскай вобласці. Мінск, 1983. SV — Endzelīns J. Senprūšu valoda. Rīga, 1943. Шанс. — Шанский Н.М. и др. Краткий этимологический словарь русского языка. М., 1971. ТСБМ — Тлумачальны слоўнік беларускай мовы. Мінск, 1977-1984. Т. 1-5. Turska — Turska H. O powstaniu polskich obszarów językowych na Wileńszczyźnie. Wilno, 1939. Zink. — Zinkevičius Z. Lietuvių kalbos kilmė. V., 1984. T. 1. З народ. слоўн. — 3 народнага слоўніка. Мінск, 1975. Жыв. слова — Жывое слова, Мінск, 1978. 132 ЛИТУАНИЗМЫ В БЕЛОРУССКОМ ГОВОРЕ ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ КОМАИ ПОСТАВСКОГО Р-НА БЕЛОРУССИИ Резюме 1. В говоре употребляемая лексика литовского происхождения является неотъемлемой частью лексики соседних литовских говоров, находящихся как на территории Литвы, так и Белоруссии. Она тесно связана с жизнью, бытом, обычаями и культурой восточно-аукштайтского литовского села и, кроме прочего, говорит о том, что языковая система исследуемого белорусского говора здесь образовалась на основе литовского субстрата. 2. В статье изучаемые литовские лексические и семантические кальки говора отражают также неоспоримые следы литовского субстрата. 3. Немалая часть исследуемых собственных имен - названий деревней, гидронимов, урочищ, также фамилий носителей говора - являются литовского происхождения и подтверждают мнение о том, что на исследуемой территории сравнительно в недавнем прошлом жили литовцы. Данное положение подтверждает и некоторые местные информанты говора, признающие, что проживавшие здесь их отцы, деды и прадеды говорили по-литовски. 4. В языковой системе говора до сих пор сохранились также и некоторые элементы литовской фонетики, акцентуации, морфологии и синтаксиса. На основе исследуемого богатого материала в статье делается предположение, что субстратный литовский говор, на основе которого сформировался исследуемый белорусский говор, был литовский говор восточно-аукштайтов пунтининников жадининников дзуков. LITUANISMEN IN DER BELORUSSISCHEN MUNDART DER GEGEND VON KAMOI (BEZIRK PASTAVI, BELORUSSLAND) Zusammenfassung Es werden die in der Mundart von Kamoi vorliegenden lexikalischen bzw. semantischen Übersetzungslehnwörter sowie einige phonetische und grammatische Elemente litauischer Herkunft untersucht. Sie zeugen davon, daß dieser Mundart als Substrat der litauischer ostaukstaitische Dialekt (der der Puntininkai - Žadininkai - Dzūkai) zugrunde liegt. 133