Kalbinės situacijos raida pakraščių šnektose

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXVIII (1989) KALBŲ RYŠIAI IR SĄVEIKOS KAZIMIERAS GARŠVA THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LINGUISTIC SITUATION IN BORDER DIALECTS The former Lithuanian-language area (114,000 km²) shrank by 23,000 km² between 1572 and 1861, and by a further approximately 26,000 km² over the following century (Pakštas 1968, 449). Language assimilation proceeded from the periphery of the area toward its center, and the Lithuanian-speaking enclaves that survived longest are now mostly outside the republic’s borders. Moving from west to east and south, in Latvia one can identify 10 isolated areas of autochthonous Lithuanian speech (their centers are Vadaktis, Ūkrai, Skyrōnys, Nėretos, Aknysta, Garšvinė, Subāčius, the southern environs of Daugavpils, Ciskodas, and Uodegėnai), in Belarus 8 (Apsas, Kamojys, Gervėčiai, Lazūnai, Zietela, Varenavas, the environs of Pelesos—Rōdūnios, and Pėrvalkas), and in Poland 2 (the environs of Seinai—Punskas and Vižainys). Most of the inhabitants of Lithuania Minor (East Prussia, 9,000 km²) withdrew or were displaced in 1944 to what is now the Federal Republic of Germany, as well as the German Democratic Republic; but as long as there are Lithuanian-speaking people in Kaunas who speak these dialects, at least near Smalininkai (Jurbarkas District), it cannot be said that they, too, have disappeared. Linguists of various nationalities have been interested in the border dialects of the Lithuanian language for a century. Owing to their geographical location and more active contact with other languages, these dialects exhibit both archaic features and innovations. In addition, peripheral dialects should be studied because they “are rapidly disappearing; in many places only the elderly know Lithuanian, so Lithuanian dialectologists face the important task of managing to record data from these dialects that are very much needed for scholarship” (Zinkevičius 1978, 82). The dialects of Lithuania Minor were described as early as 1843 by F. Kuršaitis and in 1882–1885 by A. Becenbergeris (the earliest texts are J. Bretkūnas’s writings published in 1579, etc.). The Lithuanians of Belarus were studied by E. Volteris in 1886, 1888, and 1893–1896. After K. Būga recorded texts in the environs of Ciskodas in 1911, the Lithuanians of Latvia were not studied further until 1977; the Lithuanians of Poland, not until 1963 (A. Uždila’s diploma thesis, etc.). To date, about 50 linguists have studied the Lithuanians of Belarus, 15 those of Lithuania Minor, and 10 each those of Poland and Latvia. Dialect descriptions up to about 1960 may not have been entirely accurate because recordings on magnetic tape and instrumental and statistical studies were used only to a limited extent. Not all dialect levels have been described in detail, and some areas have been little or not at all studied: remnants of Lithuanian dialects in Latgale, Āina, Obōlci, the environs of Narūčio, Alšėnai, Žiup­rėnai, Smurgāiniai, Vyšniavas, and elsewhere; in present-day Kaliningrad Region; and in Gaurai, Germanovičiai, Dimanova, Sofejsko, Litvinka, and many other Lithuanian colonies. Speakers of the Klaipėda dialect can still be found in Šilutė District. Much more could have been accomplished if linguists from Klaipėda had studied these areas more actively, and Lithuanian speakers in Latvia had been studied by linguists from Šiau- 12 liai, Riga, and Daugavpils, as well as by students. While there is still time, people from various professional backgrounds could record texts on magnetic tape. A considerable amount of data is already available on some border dialects. The Lithuanian press wrote about them extensively, especially in 1905–1913 and 1956–1967. A separate study would be needed to synthesize those scattered, fragmentary data. According to the current distribution of the Lithuanian language, four types of peripheral dialects can be distinguished: Lithuanian is spoken by 1) most of the population (Punskas, Gervėčiai), 2) a large proportion of the population (Pelesà), 3) a minority of elderly people (Āpsa, the environs of Daugavpils, Subāčius, Aknysta, Nėretos, Skyrōnys, Lazūnai), and 4) a few people may still speak it (Uodegėnai, Zietela, Ciskodas). In the first group, and partly in the second, young people and children also know Lithuanian; here, and sometimes in the third group as well, the native language is better known than the second language, and official documents state Lithuanian nationality. Representatives of the fourth dialect type have generally not spoken Lithuanian even at home for several decades and identify themselves as Polish, Belarusian, or Latvian. As the domains in which the native language is used continue to narrow, the older generation no longer passes its language on to the younger generation. Of approximately 7,000 long-established Lithuanians in Latvia who knew their native language, about 150 remain: over 50 in the southern environs of Daugavpils, 10–20 each around Subāčius, Aknysta, and Nėretos, and 2–5 each in the environs of Ciskodas, Krāslava, Skyrōnys, Ūkrai, and Vadakstis. Comparing the data from O. Chominskis’s 1928–1933 map with approximate figures today shows that over 50 years the number of local residents of the Belarusian SSR who speak Lithuanian has fallen from 2,000–4,000 around Āpsa to about 300; from 300–500 around Kamojys to 10; from 3,000–5,000 around Gervėčiai to 1,500; from 1,500–2,000 around Lazūnai to 10; from 390 around Zietela to 2; and from 5,000–7,000 around Ródūnia, Pēlesa, and Varenāva to just over 1,0001. I. THE MAIN CAUSES OF THE DECLINE OF THE LITHUANIAN-LANGUAGE AREA 1. The Germanization of Lithuania Minor In foreign states, Lithuanians lacked the conditions necessary to maintain their national identity and native language; the administration often even sought to eradicate it. Power and wealth belonged chiefly to people of other nationalities (Poles and Germans): for example, in the Vilnius region occupied by Poland from 1919 to 1939, Poles owned 91% of the estates (883 out of 969). A Lithuanian who acquired a manor farm, shop, or mill did not want to differ in language from the majority of the gentry either. The poorest, illiterate, and most oppressed strata spoke Lithuanian; the less resilient among them, seeking to escape hardship, abandoned their native language. In church, too, the “language of the gentry” was spoken first and foremost—that is, Polish or German. The largest Lithuanian-speaking areas declined in the 17th–19th centuries, especially from 1861 to 1904 (in Vilnius Region, until 1939), as capitalist relations prevailed over the traditional community, and after Lithuanian-language instruction was banned in Russian schools in 1865 and in German schools in 1866 and 1872, among other causes. 1 Based on data from A. Vidugiris, the foremost researcher of Lithuanian dialects in Belarus. 13 Over a period of 300 years (from the 16th century to the mid-19th century), the Lithuanians of Lithuania Minor developed their culture most fully, and this had a decisive influence on the development of our nation. The first Lithuanian book (1547), grammar (1653), hymnbook (1666), poem (1818), newspaper (1823), and songbook (1825) were published in Lithuania Minor. After Lithuanian publications in Latin script were banned in Russia, 1,840 Lithuanian publications were issued in Lithuania Minor, with a print run of 5.5 million copies (all this helped Lithuanians choose the standard language we have today). The Prussian authorities were the only foreign rulers to publish official state documents in Lithuanian as well as German: at least 108 such documents appeared between 1578 and 1831 alone. In the offices and courts of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, only Polish had been used since 1697. German statistics counted as Lithuanians those inhabitants of Lithuania Minor who considered Lithuanian their native language (the language that “is easiest to use” and in which one thinks). Many Lithuanians who had attended German schools and served in the army knew German no less well than Lithuanian, so it was easy to register German as their “native” language. In Prussia, 139,780 Lithuanians were recorded in 1858, 139,428 in 1861, 152,000 in 1864, 146,000 in 1867, 117,637 in 1890, and 106,230 in 1900 (cf. Pakarklis 1935, 8–10). As late as 1890, the majority of inhabitants in 237 villages and 8 estates in Klaipėda County considered Lithuanian their native language (German: 45 and 35, respectively); in 124 villages and 10 estates in Šilutė County (German: 60 and 13); and in 126 villages and 9 estates in Tilžė County (German: 83 and 35). Thus, in these three counties, there were 2.6 times as many Lithuanian-speaking villages, but 2.2 times fewer estates: in estates and towns, the German language used by the gentry, administration, church, and school (Polish in the east) was adopted more quickly. On Tetzner’s 1902 map, the Lithuanian-language area included the Klaipėda region and the environs of Labguva, Pakalnė, Tilžė, Ragainė, Pilkalnis, Stalupėnai, and Įsrūtis. As late as the beginning of the 20th century, older inhabitants of Greater Lithuania answered the question “Who are you?” by saying “I am a Catholic,” while in Lithuania Minor they said “I am a Lietuvininkas,” “I was baptized in Lithuanian and went to a Lithuanian school” (Pakarklis 1935, 6). It is known that in 1309, by order of the master of the Order, the Prussians were forbidden to speak their native language, and those who did not know German were forbidden to marry. The social and political inequality of Lithuanians was confirmed in the 17th–18th centuries: they were forbidden to settle in towns, engage in trade, or learn crafts; hired laborers were paid less, and Lithuanian serfs had to work four days longer than German colonists, among other things. As early as 1739, by order of the King of Prussia, German was to be introduced in Lithuanian and Polish schools. Colonists were forbidden to learn to speak Lithuanian, while teachers were paid “allowances” for Germanizing. German priests, teachers, and officials, who did not know Lithuanian—a language foreign to them that made it harder to perform their work properly—believed that Lithuanian impeded “cultural progress” and therefore had to fall out of use. From 1873, Lithuanian could be taught only as a religious subject in the lower grade of primary school; in 1876, German was proclaimed the sole official language of Prussia, to be used in school meetings and correspondence, as well as at municipal and village assemblies. The culture of the Lithuanians of Lithuania Minor was essentially destroyed over eight decades (1862–1944). If, because of the plague of 1709–1711, the population of Lithuania Minor died out 14 about half (150,000) were Lithuanians, and after Lithuanian schools were banned, the number of Lithuanians according to official data alone fell by more than half (78,000) between 1864 and 1925 (Кушнер 1951, 194–278). Judging by the decline of Lithuanian-language services, a territory about 100 km long and 50 km wide was largely Germanized between 1719 and 1902. The requests by Lietuvininkai not to persecute their native language, sent to the king and the minister of education up to 1904 (signed by 27,773 people in 1869), did not make the plans of imperialist Germany any easier (in 1879 and 1895, more signatures were collected in Tilsit County alone than in Klaipėda and Šilutė counties). In 1930, in Lithuania Minor there were 450,000, or three-quarters, of persons of Lithuanian origin, of whom only a third still spoke Lithuanian in 1825. In the northern part (Klaipėda, Šilutė, and Tilsit counties, where 95% of the population was Lithuanian in 1736), the absolute number of Lithuanians began to decline from 1890 and fell from 50 to 38% (1.3 times) between 1825 and 1910; in the central part (Ragainė, Lankos, Labguva, and Pilkalnis counties), having declined from 1858, it fell from 42 to 10% (4.2 times); and in the southern part (Gumbinė, Darkiemis, Stalupėnai, Įsrutis, and Gėldapė counties), from 15 to 0.6% (25 times) (Tarybų Lietuvos enciklopedija 1987. Vol. 3. P. 27; Vileišis 1935, 149–153, 165). The proportion of pupils who spoke Lithuanian at home in the northern part fell from 53 to 47% between 1886 and 1911, and in the central part from 22 to 10%. Between 1736 and 1837 (over three generations), 36% of the total population became Germanized. Women became Germanized less often; consequently, in 1890, among every 1,000 inhabitants whose native language was Lithuanian, there were about 70 more women than men (Vileišis 1935, 149–153). 2. Polonization a. Polonization, 1387–1687 Polish priests came to baptize Lithuanians; they did not know Lithuanian and usually did not wish to learn it. From as early as 1408, the bishops of Vilnius were usually Polish. At the first Synod of Vilnius in 1526, it had already been decided that religious instruction in parish schools should be given in Lithuanian and Polish. There was also constant opposition to Polonization (largely to prevent the subject being taught from suffering). The fourth Bishop of Vilnius, Motiejus of Trakai (1421–1453), had ordered priests to learn the language of the people. From the beginning of the 16th century, nobles building churches often required that Lithuanian be used in them (in Žiežmariai, Alytus, Eišiškės, and elsewhere). Between 1593 and 1644 this was also supposed to be the case in Stakliškės, Punsk, Pajevonys, Prienai, Rūdninkai, and Lavoriškės. In 1685, it was proposed in Vilnius that church benefices be granted only to Lithuanians. Until 1569 (and in practice until 1697), the government of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania strictly restricted Polish colonists, as it did other foreigners: it admitted only clergy, who did not form families, and a small number of artisans. A special Article 9 was included in Chapter IV of the First Lithuanian Statute (1529), prohibiting relatives who married noblewomen off to men in Poland from assigning estates as dowries, so that these would not pass into the ownership of the Polish szlachta. The Third Lithuanian Statute, adopted in 1588 (Chapter III, § 12), therefore contradicted the Union of Lublin (§ 14). 15 Among the names of the nobles of Slavicized 16th-century Vilnius, Trakai, Ašmena, and Maišiagala districts, genuinely Polish ones were still rare. 17th–18th-century inventories and the records of church visitations in 1828 continued to note that in the parishes of Šalčininkai, Medininkai, Lavoriškės, Buivydžiai, Nemenčinė, Dubingiai, and others (as far as the Nemunas), “people speak Lithuanian; children and women do not know Polish” (cf. Pakarklis 1987, 384). b. Polonization, 1687–1863 Over time, Polonization penetrated the churches ever more deeply. Between 1737 and 1900, the Lithuanian language disappeared from the churches of Vilnius. Lectures at Vilnius University were given in Latin until 1812; thereafter, until its closure in 1832, the institution also became a center of Polish nationalism between 1803 and 1812. The university supervised many of the region’s schools. Peasant children who gained entry to those schools were forced to “attach a Polish ending to their surname or simply adopt a Polish surname belonging to another family” (VVLKB, 36; 18–42). In primary school, if children accidentally spoke Lithuanian, the teacher hung a special board around their neck to indicate that the punished child spoke Polish poorly. Priests and nobles regarded Lithuanians as Polish subjects; consequently, peasants who rose into the upper strata concealed their “lowly” origins: “all tried, twisting their tongues, to chatter in Polish, and only those who knew none at all remained silent, lips pressed shut” (VVLKB, 18–20, 28). c. Polonization, 1863–1919 The natural and forced assimilation of the eastern and southern margins of the Lithuanian-speaking area intensified further after the 1863 uprising, when tsarist officials intensified the policy of Russifying Lithuanians and imposing Orthodoxy on them (cf. Garšva, Gudavičius, Nikžentaitis et al. 1987, 5). The chief task of the church, administered by Poles, became the spread not of the faith but of Polishness. In contrast to the Orthodoxy of the Eastern Slavs, the Catholic faith came to be called polska wiara, the Polish language katolicki język, and Catholics were regarded as Poles, although a large proportion of Lithuania’s “Poles” did not know Polish or spoke a mixture of Belarusian, Polish, and Lithuanian (po prostu, po prostemu). In December 1905, Bishop E. Ropp established the so-called Catholic Democratic Party, which “sought to turn Lithuanians and Belarusians into Poles,” and published a Polish daily and two weeklies (VVLKB, 56). As a struggle for influence began between tsarist officials, who promoted the Russian language and Orthodoxy, and clergy and landowners of Polish orientation, Lithuanian peasants were doubly oppressed. In this situation, many Lithuanians chose to use Belarusian in public, as a language of contact through which they could communicate with Polish priests and landowners as well as Russian officials. In 1906, Polish was used in many churches east of Gelvonai and Jiežnas (in Kliukščionys, Gervėčiai, Lazūnai, Žirmūnai, Benekainys, and between Ašužia and Paričė). Bishop Ropp then ordered that no one alter the order and language of church services without his written consent (until then, Lithuanian priests, when necessary, had also used the parishioners’ native language). When Polish priests wrote articles against Lithuanian priests in pan-Polonist newspapers, Polish priests were transferred to the formerly Lithuanian-speaking parishes of Kaišiadorys, Gelvonai, Kernavė, Maišiagala, Butrimonys, Varėna, Kliukščionys, Benekainys, Asava, and Rodūnia (VVLKB, 58–126). After 1904, as Lithuanians became more concerned with the rights of their native language and began using it, the Poles in Asava, Gervėčiai, Butrimonys, Varenavas, Bene- 16 kāinyse ir kitur kėlė muštynes (1906, 1910, 1911, 1913, 1915, 1925 m.). Daugiausia jas kurstė lenkai kunigai ir dvarininkai, šlėktos. Pavyzdžiui, Videniškio klebonas lietuviams klausytojams iš sakyklos skelbė: „Jeśli wy, chamy, nie chcecie słuchać polskiej cywilizowanej mowy, to idźcie z kosciola“ (LKLB, 17, 23). Lietuvių kalba vadinta „pagoniška“, „barbarų, be kultūros“, „chamų“, kurios dievas neklausas; dėl to viešai lietuviškai kalbėti valstiečiai gėdijosi. Lenkomānai paprastus žmones daug kur kurstė rašytis lenkais, meluodami, jeigu ir toliau paliksią lietuviški pamokslai, caro valdžia sugrąžinsianti baudžiavą, bažnyčias paversianti cerkvėmis (kaip Šumske, Paberžėje, Dūkštose) ir t. t. Villagers, compelled to choose either their religion or their parents’ language, leaned more toward religion under the influence of the priests. The parishioners of Asava—3,000 Lithuanian speakers and 1,000 who had become Belarusian-speaking—swore not to speak Lithuanian any more, even in their own homes (VVLKB, 100, 112). The dean of Ródūnia, Gintautas (Gintowt), removed the Lithuanian language from the churches of Ródūnia, Nočia, Butrimonys, Varenãvas, and Asavõs (VVLKB, 92, 110, 114; 78, 82, 98). In the above-mentioned areas (as well as Eišiškės, Kernavė, N. Vilnia, Vileika, and elsewhere), the instruction issued to the Diocese of Vilnius in 1909, requiring both languages to be used in mixed parishes, was also ineffective. A circular in 1911 already permitted the use not of the language people spoke at home, but of the language they preferred. In the former Vilnius Governorate, the number of Lithuanians kept declining (63% in 1861, 24% in 1897, 10% in 1916, 7% in 1919), while the number of “Poles” increased (12, 8, 30, and 54%, respectively) (Makowski 1986, 17—22). According to the 1897 census, Lithuanians made up 69% of Trākai County, 43% of Švenčionys County, 32% of Vilnius County, 14% of Lida County, and 7% of Ašmena County. Poles predominated only in the city of Vilnius (83%); the rest of that county was inhabited by Belarusians (46%) and Lithuanians (40%), while Poles made up only 14% (cf. VVLKB, 48). d. Polonization, 1919—1939 The most important means of Polonization were the church and the manor; during the occupation of bourgeois landowner Poland, the state, compulsory schooling, the army, and the press were added. Poles in the borderlands of Lithuania, Belarus, and Latvia emerged mainly in the second half of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century from among Lithuanians, who had often previously adopted the Belarusian language. Because this was a recent development, the local Polish language did not have time to split into dialects: it is a variety of standard Polish with elements of Lithuanian and Belarusian dialects. Local Poles also lack their own folklore (not translated from the original language), and their surnames are often of Lithuanian origin: Bolądz, Boyszis, Bumbul, Butrim, Czywil, Dowgiallo, Gaidel, Garnisz, Gintowt, Gražul, Norkun, Sabas, Songailo, Tarwid, Trinkun, Voiszel, Vojsznis, and so on. Through the efforts of local Lithuanians and branches of the St. Casimir and “Ryto” societies, after 1920, 12 private Lithuanian primary schools were established in what is now the Breslauja district, 1 in the Paštovai district, 12 in the Aštravas district, 3 in the Yvija district, 37 in the Varenãvas district, and 1 each in the Zietela and Garždinas districts (67 in all). From 1925 to 1938 (mostly from 1927 to 1936), the Pilsudski supporters closed 195 private Lithuanian schools in the Vilnius region. In 1936, about 150 Lithuanian reading rooms still remained in their place. The “Ryto” society’s little school in the village of Zabārninkai (Breslauja district; it had 50 pupils each year) operated from 1925 to 1932; the school in Miciūnai 2. 678 17 (Aštravas district, up to 80 children)—1912–1932; Pelegrinda (up to 40 children)—until 1933; Rimdžiūnai—1915–1932; Bieliūnai (Varėnavas district, 20–25 pupils)—1926–1933; Biliai (more than 25 pupils)—1928–1931; and the schools in Paliūnai (Suvalkai Voivodeship, 70 children) and Žagariai (35 children)—1928–1933, and so on (Lietuvių mokyklos Vilniaus krašte 1934, VI–XI). In the 1934/35 school year, the state-run Polish primary schools in Gervėčiai municipality were mostly one-class schools. They operated in Galčiūnai, Gėliūnai (2 classes, 105 pupils), Gervėčiai (3 classes, 185 pupils), Girios, Pelegrinda, Petrikai, and Rimdžiūnai; around Ródūnia, in Biliūnai, Sen. Druskininkai, Dubiniai, Pelesa (2 classes, 113 pupils), Plikiai, Paditvys, and elsewhere. In their first grade, instruction was still permitted in Lithuanian (cf. Makowski 1983, 237–240). In 1936, there were 43 branches of the St. Casimir Society in Lida County, 30 in Suvalkai, 26 in Breslauja, and 19 in Gardinas; they still maintained Lithuanian reading rooms and small libraries. In 1939, the Soviet authorities opened a Lithuanian seven-year school in Pelesa (150 children, teacher V. Krečius), and four-grade schools in Dubiniai, Pavalakė, Paditvys, Plikiai, Ramaškonys, and so on. In state-run Polish schools, Lithuanians were persuaded that they were Poles. As a result, even those who did not speak Polish around Ródūnia, Ąpsas, and elsewhere still often register as Poles, thereby reducing the number of Lithuanians and Lithuanian speakers in official statistics. The church succeeded in establishing remarkably tenacious traditions of Polonization in Latgale as well, although it had not belonged to Poland for 200 years and was governed by its own authorities. Lithuanians in southeastern Latvia and in the cities more often became Polish-speaking before becoming Latvian-, Belarusian-, or Russian-speaking. Census takers were not always able to distinguish Lithuanians from Poles; in 1925, only 2.8% of Latvia’s Poles had come from Poland and the Vilnius region, which belonged to Poland, while 13.4% came from Lithuania (mostly from the Lithuanian counties of Telšiai, Šiauliai, and others). In the municipalities of Daugpilis, Rėzeknė, and Ilūkšta, which had once been part of the Lithuanian–Polish state, 11,579, 4,655, and 4,148 Poles, respectively, were recorded in 1935 (in 1860, 5,023 Lithuanians and 3,828 Poles were recorded in Ilūkšta County; by 1897, the figures were 6,986 Lithuanians and already 11,380 Poles). e. Support for the Polish language after 1939 After the Vilnius region was liberated from landowner Poland, some Lithuanians continued to register as Poles and speak Polish because they were “of the Polish faith,” had previously lived in “Poland,” had attended Polish schools, wished to retain the possibility of emigrating to Poland, wanted to avoid the ridicule of those around them, and so on. Only now did Polish begin to take firmer root in everyday life among some younger Lithuanians and Belarusians, under the influence of schools and their surroundings; for this reason, linguists today also identify a postwar period of Polonization (see Vidugiris 1983, 58). In 1942, many Lithuanians still lived in the municipalities of Vidžiai (24%), Kiemeliškės, Varionys, Kučionys, Grąužiskės, Surviliškės, Geranainys, Trakeliai, and Žirmūnai (Pakštas 1968, 445). From 1942 to 1947, between Gervėčiai and Pelesa, Lithuanian people were robbed, beaten, and killed by Polish “partisans” of the White forces (“armija krajowa”). A. Jakavonis, the former priest of Gervėčiai, was also killed for supporting the Lithuanian language. Many Lithuanians who were subjected to terror then began speaking Polish or at least Belarusian, and calling themselves Poles (cf. Чекмо-нае 1988, 45–52). From 1945 to 1958, about 8,000 Lithuanian-speaking people emigrated to Poland 18 people: from the Lazūnai area—approximately half (400–500 persons); from Zasečiai village in Žietela district—about 50 (48 remained), etc. The Vilnius diocese still belongs to the Archdiocese of Łomża. In the Lithuanian–Belarusian borderland, some Catholics fanatically continue to adhere to the Polish language (for example, in Rodūnia), although most parishioners do not understand it. Of all the republics of the Soviet Union, the Polish national minority has the best cultural conditions in the Lithuanian SSR. There are Polish schools, radio and TV broadcasts, press, literature, the Faculty of Polish Language and Literature at VVPI, groups in other specialties, and amateur arts groups. This is of some significance for residents of other republics as well. For example, in 1986, 289 copies of the magazine „Kobieta radziecka“ and 207 copies of the newspaper „Czerwony sztandar“ were subscribed to in Belarus; in 1987, the figures were 304 and 265; 192 and 31 copies, respectively, were sent to Latvia, and in 1987, 144 and 25. In the 1981/82 school year, 2.5% of all pupils in the republic (12,863) studied in Polish in 54 entirely Polish-language schools and some mixed schools. There were 5,411 of them in Vilnius district, 3,111 in the city of Vilnius, 2,835 in Šalčininkai district, 980 in Trakai district, 406 in Švenčionys district, 110 in Širvintos district, and 10 in Varėna district. In the postwar years, Polish schools were established also in some Lithuanian villages (for example, in Jaciūnai village, Švenčionys district and vicinity, and in Rópiškės village, now Strūnaitis vicinity, etc.), where Lithuanian schools and reading rooms had operated even during the occupation by bourgeois Poland (until 1937). In 1953, on the southern edge of Šalčininkai district, between Kalesninkai and Milkūnai, in an area where Lithuanian and Belarusian were spoken, Polish schools were opened in place of Lithuanian ones: in what is now Dainava vicinity—the Dainava seven-year school and the Gilviniškės and Vežionys primary schools; in what is now Gérviškės vicinity—the Gérviškės seven-year school and the Kaniūkai primary school; in what is now Daukšiūnai vicinity—the Daukšiūnai and Didieji Sėlai primary schools and the Butrimonys seven-year school; in Dieveniškės vicinity—the Jurgelionys seven-year school; in Pabarė vicinity—the Miežionys primary school; in Poškonys vicinity—the Dailidžiai primary school; in Milkūnai vicinity—the Šarkaičiai seven-year school and the Pagaujenai primary school2. Some pupils ignored Lithuanian lessons: partly for this reason, in 1979 only 11.1% of the republic’s Poles spoke Lithuanian fluently. In 1979, 247,000 (7.3%) residents of Soviet Lithuania identified themselves as Poles, compared with 403,000 (4.2%) in Belarus and 63,000 (2.5%) in Latvia. Most Poles lived in Vilnius, Šalčininkai, Trakai, Astravas, Ašmena, and Varėnavas, as well as in the southern parts of Daugavpils and Krāslava districts. For a century, Polish has been used as a native language along the border of Vilnius and Švenčionys districts, between Paberžė, Nemenčinė, and Pabradė. Elsewhere it is usually only a second language—an inter-dialect—among Belarusians, Lithuanians, and Latvians (Studia nad polszczyzną kresową 1982, 19–145). 2 Information from A. Vidugiris. 19 II. FUNCTIONING OF THE NATIVE LANGUAGE 1. Lithuanian dialects in Latvia The contacts between the two living Baltic languages—Lithuanian and Latvian—are most clearly manifested there. In southeastern Latvia, Lithuanian can also be studied under conditions of maximal multilingualism: only there does our language function amid the languages of all four neighboring republics—Latvian, Belarusian, Russian, and Polish. For a long time, the long-established (autochthonous) Lithuanians in Latvia were almost unstudied, on the assumption that only recent settlers remained there. The reason was that most Lithuanians moved to Riga, Liepāja, Jelgava, and other places in Latvia in 1880–1914: 26,033 were recorded in 1897, ~95,000 in 1914, 25,588 in 1920, 23,192 in 1925, 25,885 in 1930, 22,913 in 1935, 32,383 in 1959, 40,589 in 1970, 37,818 in 1979, and 34,630 in 1989. As early as 1925, half of Latvia’s Lithuanians had been born in Lithuania and were not considered Latvian citizens, while many of the others had parents who had moved there (cf. Garšva 1984, 83–91; 1985a, 118–126; 1985b, 38). A. Bylenšteinas (1892, 13–459), apie 1924 m. K. Būga (1961, 563–583) aprašė daug vietovių Latvijoje, kur lietuvių iš seno gyventa ar tebegyvenama. 1921 m. vedant respublikų sieną, Ilūkštos, Aknystos, Skyrionių, Ūkrų ir kitos apylinkės (290 km²), anksčiau priklausiusios Kauno gubernijai, buvo iškeistos į Palangą ir pajūrio ruožą (182 km²), 1819 m. caro valdžios priskirtą Kuršo gubernijai. In the west, until the 18th century, Lithuanians apparently lived in Liepāja district between Rucava, Nīca, and Bārta: Latvians called the inhabitants of those areas leitiši, leitišnieki, that is, Lithuanians who had become Latvians. In the 17th century, the border of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania ran along the Bartuva River (50 km north of the settlement of Šventoji). Lithuanians were still present between Rucava and Būtingė at the beginning of the 20th century. From the 13th century, Ūkrai (now in Dobele district) officially belonged to Lithuania; from 1473, so did Skyrionys and neighboring villages in the Brunava area of Bauska district. On Lithuanian maps until 1914, the Breslauja and Aknysta protrusions to the north are marked. The Ūkrai, Skyrionys, Aknysta, and other areas belonged to Kaunas Governorate and the dioceses of Vilnius and, subsequently, Samogitia; from August 1919 to October 1920, they belonged to the Republic of Lithuania. In 1889, there were 30 Lithuanian farms and about 100 Latvian farms established after 1850 in Aknysta parish. The ethnographic boundary ran along the Suseja River. A part of the Juodupė area (Rokiškis district) also formerly belonged to Aknysta parish. As late as about 1913, the Russian-language Aknysta school offered several Lithuanian lessons. A Lithuanian primary school operated around 1920–1944. At about the same time, branches of the Lithuanian associations „Šviesa“ and „Rūta“ held parties and performances, had choirs, and even published a small newspaper. As the younger generation dispersed and spoke Lithuanian ever less, the traditional dialect is now preserved only in a few villages in the Aknysta area: Liūobai (the homesteads of K. Urbonavičius, born 1903, and J. Mačiukas, born 1902; there used to be seven farms here), Riušai (P. Mikėnas, P. Mikėnienė, born 1904), Skardupys (L. Mūrelienė, born 1909), Krančkalys (S. Mikėnienė, S. Čečis), and around Aknysta (A. Urbonavičienė, A. Gasiūnienė, born 1906, O. Šinkūnienė, E. Neniškytė) (cf. 20 Garšva 1985, 119–123, Masytė 1987). Tai pačiai uteniškių šnektai priklauso ir toliau į rytus esančios Garšvinės, Subäčiaus apylinkės. The largest Lithuanian dialect area in Latvia lies southwest of Daugavpils, between Kálkuonė, Kučcumas, Mėdumas, and Grendža. Most Lithuanians lived in Papušinė (2 km south of Kálkuonė; in 1979, 33 of the 66 inhabitants were Lithuanians: E. Barčienė, born in 1913, L. Barčytė-Lapkovska, born in 1926, H. Įsedienė, born in 1910, M. Malinienė, Tranienė, and others), Vasaríškiai (2 km north of Mėdumas: J. and A. Smilginiai, born in 1926 and 1932, and the Puranai), Vānagiškiai (J. Bagdonavičienė, born in 1906, the Juneliai, the Masėnai, Vanagaitė-Vasiliauskienė, born in 1914, R. Vānagas, born in 1928, and others), and Mėdumas (V. Čiblaitė, E. and H. Jūnelienės, A. Liskinys, born in 1911, A. Plūcienė, E. Švilpa, born in 1908, A. Vėrdanienė, born in 1908, and others), as well as in Kálniskiai, Žvirbliškiai, and other villages (cf. Vaicekauskaitė 1988). The settlement of Papušinė may have been founded only around the 18th century: it is remembered that the village’s name derives from a pine tree that once grew there. The most interesting Lithuanian-language enclaves are on the right bank of the Daugùva in southeastern Latvia. In the Sakstagalis rural district of Rēzekne District was the most distant Lithuanian-language enclave, or an old colony—Ciskodas: it is 110 km from there to the Lithuanian SSR border. In 1851, 300–400 Lithuanians lived in the villages around Ciskodas (64 homesteads). In 1977, about 10 of the oldest people could still speak Lithuanian; in 1986, only 2. Uodegėnai (in the Īžvalta rural district of Krāslava District) is 60 km from the Lithuanian SSR border. In 1925, 300 long-term residents in the area spoke Lithuanian; in 1988, there were 3 (5). From 1883 to 1925, another 6–9 smaller villages are mentioned alongside Uodegėnai, where people also spoke Lithuanian. Until the mid-19th century, Lithuanian was also spoken on the left bank of the Daugùva between Vārnaviči (Krāslava District) and Ilūkste (Daugavpils District). Thus, the Daugavpils and Krāslava areas were connected to the main Lithuanian-language territory. K. Būga (1961, 565–569) Latvijoje suskaičiavo beveik 800 gyvenamųjų vietų vardų su priesaga -iški3, kurie didžiuliu kyliu (iki Rėzeknės) įsiterpia į rytų Latviją. Manoma, kad iš visų baltų genčių vietovardžius su tokia priesaga turėjo tik lietuviai. Įdomu, kad -iškių pėdsakai daugiausia veda į plotą maždaug tarp Obelių ir Breslaujos: kuo arčiau Lietuva, tuo daugiau šių vietovardžių. The greater part of present-day Daugavpils District, bounded in the north by the line Subäčius—Bebrinė—Dvietas—Kálupe—Malinovka—Kāplava (in 1912, 20–55% of its place names contained the suffix -išk-; cf. Būga 1961, 565), must still have been inhabited by Lithuanians in the 18th–19th centuries. According to J. Safarevičius, where at least 12% of place names contain -išk-, Lithuanian must have disappeared quite recently, while areas with 4–12% indicate the old boundary of the Lithuanian-language territory (cf. Zinkevičius 1987, 58). The places in Latgale inhabited by Lithuanians until recently would then include the wedge-shaped area Kálupe—Silajanai—Malinovka, running along the Daugavpils—Rēzekne road, and the Asūne area in the northeast of Krāslava District; the old Lithuanian-language territory would include many localities as far as Garšvinė, Rubiniai, Dvietas, Ciskodas, Ūozuolmuiža, Īžvalta, Asūne, and Pīedruja. Around the 11th–13th centuries and in the 16th and early 17th centuries, many Lithuanians also settled and spread through assimilation among Daugavpils, Rēzekne, and Verchne dvinsk (Krāslava- 3 In the nearby part of the present-day Byelorussian SSR, where Lithuanians had lived for longer and in greater numbers, only 570 (656 counting repetitions) place names with the suffix -išk- have been counted (cf. Zinkevičius 1987, 57). 22 vos, Ciskodo, Akrõs, Ruõbežniekų and other areas). This is shown by dialect features and Lithuanian-origin hydronyms that have survived to this day (Gintuvas, Subinaitė, etc.), place names (Girnakaliai, Mozovajki, Švedėliai), surnames (Grazul, Matulunas, Žwirblis), borrowings from the old Latgalian dialect, cīrulis ‘lark’, stūrys ‘corner’, and others, which Latgalians now pronounce c’ēirul’s, st’ūr’s. In 1259–1261, 15 km east of Daugavpils, the Lithuanians had Naujenė Castle (in Latvian, Naujene, not *Jaunene). The area around Ilūkste, which is now Catholic, was still Protestant in the 16th century, that is, before the church reform (and the Mėdumas estate was still Protestant in 1787) (cf. Būga 1961, 567, 570–571). Archives contain evidence that in the 15th–16th centuries the Livonian Order settled Lithuanian captives in southern Latgale (Брейдак 1987, 19–29). Lithuanian emigration there was also encouraged from 1561 to 1772, when Latgale belonged to the Lithuanian-Polish state. Lithuanians apparently moved to the right bank of the Daugava mainly in three places: around Daugavpils, Krāslava, and probably Druja. From there they travelled toward Višķi, Dāgda—Āndrupene, and Ruõbežnieki. Judging by the duration of their survival and the records left behind, the old Lithuanian-speaking communities fall into three groups: 1) those assimilated at a time not precisely attested in historical sources (Akrà, Ruõbežnieki, etc.—here the existence of Lithuanians is inferred only from linguistic evidence); 2) those assimilated at a known time, mostly in the late 19th–early 20th century (11 localities around Krāslava, 6 in the Ciskodas area, as well as the areas around Jaunborne, Laukese, and others); and 3) those that have survived to the present day (the areas around Daugavpils, Uodegėnai, and Ciskodas). From 1893 to 1906, Lithuanians from the Daugeliškis—Rimšė area settled in five villages around Indrica (Kālnieši rural district, Krāslava District). In 1930, there were 300 of them in the area; in 1979, 38 (2.3%). Lithuanian speakers still live today in Indrica (M. Valinskaitė-Peciulevičienė, born in 1923), Bindari (E. Matkevičiūtė-Narienė, born in 1906, O. Matkevičiūtė, born in 1927, and others), and Kālnieši (M. and A. Peciulevičiai, born in 1929 and 1932, and their children). After a sizeable group of Lithuanians moved to Latvia between 1880 and 1960, their numbers in various parts of Latvia in 1930 and 1979 were as follows: Number 1930 1979 Zemgale 12627 15363 Riga 6817 6777 Kurzeme 4348 11489 Vidzeme 1140 1461 Latgale 953 2710 Total 25885 37818 Percentage (%) 1930 1979 4.4 2.6 1.8 0.8 1.5 3.3 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.6 1.4 1.5 The percentage of Lithuanians increased between 1930 and 1979 only in Kurzeme (formerly Courland) and Latgale. Compared with 1930, Latgale had slightly more Lithuanians in 1897 (1,290). More Lithuanians came to Latvia for seasonal work in 1929–1931 (16,000–19,000, or 74–87% of all seasonal workers) and, in part, in 1935– 23 In 1936 (14,000, 15,000, or 43–38%). In Zemgale, Lithuanians made up 61% of seasonal workers, in Vidzeme and Kurzeme 19%, and in Latgale 0.7% (Kopėč 1938, 82, 130). In 1930, 27% Lithuanians were recorded in Rūda District, 22% in Neretai, Ritė, and Eikšniai, 19% in Ūkrai, 17% in Aknyšta and Prūdė, 15% in Smilkeriai, Nemunėlis, and Vadakstis, etc. In 1979, most of them (484–182 inhabitants) were in the localities of Vadakstis (38%), Kaleta (37.1%), Ruba (36.2%), Gramzda (33.1%), Neretai (26.4%), Pampaliai (26.1%), Nygranda (25.4%), Ežerė (23.8%), Pilskalnė (23.3%), Kursyčiai (21.6%), Jaunaucė (21.4%), and Ūkrai (21.2%). From 1945 to 1960, most Lithuanians settled between Liepāja and Bauska. In 1979, most of them were in the districts of Riga (8,769, 0.8%), Liepāja (6,630, 2.6%), Bauska (4,281, 5.3%), Saldus (3,176, 2.2%), Jelgava (2,587, 1.5%), Dobele (2,486, 1.8%), and Daugavpils (2,140, 1%). In the postwar years, many Lithuanians settled here because of better living conditions and better jobs; especially many fled here, as they did to the Kaliningrad region, from repression during the years of the cult of personality. From the beginning of the 20th century, Lithuanian organizations and schools that had been established provided some support for the Lithuanian language in Latvia. In 1934, 16 Lithuanian societies (with local branches) and the Latvian Lithuanian Union were active, and two newspapers were published. From 1907 to 1948, Lithuanian was officially taught in at least 21 Latvian schools: in 14, all subjects were taught in the mother tongue, while at least 7 offered Lithuanian-language lessons. In 1939, of 3,500 school-age children, approximately 700, or 20%, attended Lithuanian schools. From 1907 to 1940, a dozen or more Lithuanian periodicals appeared in succession. Because of the influence of the church, school, and foreign state, many borderland Lithuanians rapidly became assimilated. In 1925, about 7,000 long-established residents in Latvia spoke Lithuanian; by 1980, approximately 150 did. In tsarist times, Latvia underwent Russification; from 1930 to 1940, it underwent Latvianization. The Latvian Lithuanian Society is once again organizing Lithuanian schools, etc. Leaving aside communication among Lithuanians themselves, today their mother tongue is used publicly in only about 10 churches in Latvia. As the number of Lithuanians increased, the desired Lithuanian schools and mother-tongue lessons had disappeared. Lithuanian theater and amateur performing groups used to visit a club in Riga. A considerable number of Lithuanians listen to Lithuanian SSR radio. In 1987, 5,600 Lithuanian newspapers and magazines were subscribed to (“Tarybinė moteris” — 1,985 copies, “Valstiečių laikraštis” — 1,813 copies, “Mūsų sodai” — 378 copies, etc.), mostly in the Liepāja (1,028 copies), Riga (996 copies), Saldus (676 copies), and Bauska (668 copies) districts. Unlike in the Byelorussian SSR, Lithuanians in Latvia often hold positions of responsibility, and the administration does not restrict their cultural needs. According to 1979 data, Lithuanians preserved their mother tongue best in Liepāja (88.4%) and worst in Tukums (59%). Knowledge of Latvian as a second language ranged from 60.1 to 18.1% (rural residents of the Kuldīga and Daugavpils districts), of Russian from 56 to 13.4% (rural residents of the Daugavpils and Liepāja districts1), and of Lithuanian from 9.9 to 1.2% (urban residents of the Saldus and Jelgava districts). 24 Table 1. Villages in the Lithuanian SSR where Lithuanians made up 100–30% of the total population in 1979 District | Locality | Village | Population | Lithuanians% Liepāja | Priekule | Duobelžibaliai | 44 | 100 Dobele | Vytiniai | Bungos | 98 | „ Bauska | Svitenė | Kapūna | 28 | „ Saldus | Pampaliai | Akmentiniai | 43 | 80 Bauska | Svitenė | Lygmaniai | 33 | „ Liepāja | Kaleta | Uozuolai | 126 | 70 Saldus | Pampaliai | Auniniai | 45 | 70 „ | „ | Veldrė | 27 | „ „ | Ruba | Matijašiai | 38 | „ „ | „ | Ciniai | 39 | 60 Liepāja | Priekule | Kanepai | 25 | „ „ | Vainiauda | Malkalnė | 89 | 50 Saldus | Jaunaucė | Jaunaucė | 241 | „ „ | Ruba | Veclykupeniai | 112 | „ „ | Nygranda | Dzyros | 90 | „ „ | Kursyčiai | Bruzilos | 101 | „ „ | Vadakstis | Mazdergiai | 42 | „ „ | Jaunaucė | Kalnanai | 41 | „ Dobele | Penkule | Skujaine | 104 | „ Bauska | Brunava | Jatniekai | 78 | „ Daugavpils | Kalkūne | Papušinė | 33 | „ Liepāja | Sikšņi | Sudargai | 48 | 40 Saldus | Ruba | Ruba | 390 | „ „ | Nygranda | Griezė | 29 | „ „ | Vadakstis | Priedula | 71 | „ „ | Nuovadnieki | Pukiukalniai | 31 | „ Dobele | Vytiniai | Putros | 73 | „ Jelgava | Sesava | Avangardas | 357 | „ „ | Ausma | Bandienekai | 57 | „ Bauska | Brunava | Silenieki | 26 | „ Jēkabpils | Lūone | Lūone | 247 | „ Liepāja | Priekule | Mazgramzda | 71 | 30 „ | Embūte | Dinsdurbė | 69 | „ „ | Aizpute | Uozuolai | 33 | „ Saldus | Zirņi | Uozuolai | 28 | „ „ | Nygranda | Kalnai | 351 | „ „ | Ezere | Šarlotė | 34 | „ Dobele | Ukri | Šnikeriai | 249 | „ Bauska | Ceraukste | Mūsa | 483 | „ „ | Gailiši | Ainavos | 46 | „ „ | Vecumnieki | Laimos | 39 | „ 25 2. Northwestern Belarus Lithuanians of the (former Vilnius region) Around the 7th century, the boundary of the compact Baltic and Slavic settlement area probably ran near Minsk, Polotsk, and Pskov; in the 14th–16th centuries, it ran near Grodno, Ščučyn, Navahrudak, Valozhyn, Smarhoń, Pastavy, Breslauja, and Druja (cf. Zinkevičius 1987, 54, 59). By the 14th–17th centuries, many centers of today’s peripheral dialects and their affiliated villages already existed: Rodūnia is mentioned in 1473, Gervėčiai in 1511, the Pelesa parish in 1553, and Apsas in 1569. In the second half of the 19th century, the eastern areas of the Lithuanian language around Vosyliškės, Minaičiai–Belyčia, Lipniškės–Tokariškės (west of Lazūnai), Astravas, Žodiškės, Svyriai, Ikaznė, and Skrudėlynė–Jaunbornė completed their shift to Slavic languages (cf. Fayac, Выдугирис 1983, 26–78, 38, 48). The report of 1905 by Rev. S. Stakelė shows that at that time a small number of Lithuanian speakers were still found in the parishes of Karkažiškiai, Sudervė, Rykantai, Senieji and Naujieji Trakai, Varnionys, Žiūprėnai, Ašmena, Trobos, Yvija, Dūdos, Vyšniavas, Zabrėžė, Gruzdovas–Oborskas, Žirmūnai, and Užbalis. Most people spoke Lithuanian around Lentupis (Švenčionys county), Kazokiškės, Rūdninkai, Vievis (Trakai county), and the parishes of Nemenčinė, Dubujai, Gervėčiai, Videniškiai, and Kernavė (Vilnius county); around Kauleliškės, Geranainys, Subatninkai, Surviliškės, Graužiškės, and Lazūnai (Ašmena county); and Šalčininkai, Šalčininkėliai, Eišiškės, Benekainys, and Varenavas (Lyda county) (Vilniaus žinios 1905. No. 278; LKLB, 55–57). In the first half of the 20th century, especially large Lithuanian-speaking areas disappeared in the Breslauja, Varenavas, and Astravas districts. From 1890, the number of Lithuanian speakers around Lazūnai fell by a thousand over 15 years (2,000 remained), and around Gervėčiai by two thousand over 41 years (about 5,000 remained). Until approximately 1920, most people spoke Lithuanian in Jokintoniai, Sakalačiai, Ažūlaukė, Kalionija, Valeikoniai, Sniegionys, and Gavučiai (Valeika 1988. No. 7). On the Zietela island, 1,156 Lithuanians were recorded in 1886, 500 in 1906, 600 in 1916, 390 in 1933, 40 in 1957, and 2 in 1986. It is thought that the Prussians (Scalvians, Bartians, and Pomesanians), who settled in the Grodno region after 1276, as well as the Yotvingians, who may have arrived in 1280–1283, contributed to the survival of substrate elements in the southern Lithuanian dialects—Zietela and especially Pelesa–Rodūnia (cf. Судник 1980, 186–189; Lietuvių etnogenezė 1987, 225, 228). From the 15th century to the end of the 18th century, the Bartai district is mentioned along the Pelesa and Ditva rivers (present-day Rodūnia district); it expanded into an eldership, which in 1765 included the Pelesa (villages of Pelesa, Pamedė, Paditvys, Pavalakė, Piliūnai, and Leliūšiai), Skalva (Vigonys, Smilginiai, Dubiniai, Skireikiai, Varliai, Paleikiškiai, Kūrkės, and Kargaudai), and Piliakalnis (Sklodonys, Vaikūnai, Paraistė) districts, as well as the more distant Panemunė administrative unit. Sources from 1385, 1387, and other years mention that 800 Scalvians were settled between Rodūnia and Zobalatė (Lithuanians had taken them captive near Ragnit in 1365). But the name of Pamedė village is more likely derived not from the Pomesanian tribe but from the dialect word medžias ‘forest.’ The Yotvingian substrate (the change of the consonant ž to z) might perhaps be discernible even in the pronunciation Žadiškės ‘Žodiškės’, found in the Gervėčiai area. 26 Kivonys △ ↓ VARENAVA ↗ Vaikūnai △ Old Kazokiškės △ Sklodonys ● ↓ VILNIUS 76 km. ← Nočia RODŪNIA Juciūnai ○ Jotūnai ○ Kurkės ⊖ Piliakalnis ○ Kargaudai ○ Mažeikiai △ Vigonys ◐ Plikiai ● Klaišiai ⊖ Old Smilginiai ○ Kemešiai △ ↓ GRODNO Paškovičiai △ Dubiniai ● Tolkunai △ Lipkūnai △ Gudėliai △ ↓ LYDA Leliušiai ⊖ Pelesa ● Pomedė △ Surkantai △ Balčiškis ○ Piliūnai ◐ Pavalakė ● Old Drūskininkai ● Paditvys ○ 1 ● 5 ○ 2 ◐ 6 △ 3 ● 7 △ 4 ⊖ Diagram 2. Linguistic situation in the Pelesa–Rodūnia area. Villages where Lithuanian could be spoken in 1987: 1 — 60–70% of the population, 2 — 40–48%, 3 — 27%, 4 — 10–18%, 5 — 1–5%. Villages where people had stopped speaking Lithuanian: 6 — in the first half of the 20th century, 7 — in the 19th century. Sources: Povilait ytė 1970, 1–10, Vidugiris 1988, 21–34, etc. In 1890, Lithuanians made up 70% of the population in the Rodūnia area and 82% in Pelesa (1,421 out of 1,723 residents). Until 1914, Lithuanian was spoken by three-quarters to two-thirds of the population in the Varenava, Rodūnia, Nočia, Asava, and Armoniškės parishes; one-third to one-half in Benekainys, Geranainys, and Kaulėliškės; and one-quarter to one-third in Trakėliai, Žirmūnai, and Zobalatė, and so on. Lithuanian was the main language spoken at home until approximately 1950 between Benekainys and Armoniškės, between Varenava and Kaulėliškės, and around Asava and Nočia; in individual villages in the Rodūnia area until 1975; and in the Pelesa area (Pavalakėjė, Pelesojė, Dubiniuose, Senieji Drūskininkai) to this day. In 1970, Pelesa had 340 residents (253 in 1986), non-Lithu- 27 Lithuanians—only about 35 (Povilait ytė 1970, 3). In some places, the article’s author recorded more Lithuanians (see the map) than T. Sudnik (cf. Vidugiris 1988, 24), apparently because local residents responded in the language in which they were addressed. In the eastern part of Varenavas district, of the 18 villages where Lithuanian was spoken at the beginning of the 20th century (an area approximately 13 km long and 7 km wide), the language has been better preserved in Stanišiai, Tūsamonys, Ramaškonys, Navasedai, and Bieliūnai, and among individuals in Biliai, Pārabiškė, Cesliūkiškė, Dainava, Romūčiai, and Padvariškės. Of the 8,000–12,000 people able to speak Lithuanian in 1928–1933 (cf. Vidugiris 1988, 29, 27–32), 1,234 Lithuanians were officially registered in Varenavas district in 1970, and only 939 in 1979 (563 (60%) considered the language of their nationality their mother tongue, 351 (37%) Belarusian, and 24 (3%) Russian). Of these, 313 (33%) spoke Belarusian fluently as a second language, 307 (32%) Russian, and 78 (8%) the language of their nationality. In Āstravas district there were still at least 6,000 Lithuanians in 1930. In 1970, 2,120 were registered (6% of the total population), and in 1979, 1,655. Of these, 1,448 (87%) considered Lithuanian their mother tongue, 172 (10%) Belarusian, and 35 (2%) Russian; 1,032 (62%) spoke Belarusian fluently, 388 (23%) Russian, and 80 (5%) of those who had become Slavicized spoke Lithuanian. In 1970, there were 177 Lithuanians in Gaždinas district (138 in 1979; 184 in Paštovai district), 73 in Smurgainys district, 52 in Ašmena, 42 in Ščiūčinas, 24 in Lyda, 22 in Yvija, 12 in Zietela, and 10 in Slonimas and Naugardukas, etc. Most of those who registered as Lithuanian here were apparently newcomers. To this day, Lithuanian has been best preserved in the territory of the USSR outside the Lithuanian SSR, in the vicinity of Gervėčiai. This was apparently determined by social conditions—some landowners in the 19th century, and schools, churches, Lithuanian cultural societies, and the press in the 20th century. Even in tsarist times, teachers known as daraktoriai secretly taught in many places. Around 1923, a Lithuanian school began operating publicly in Gervėčiai; in 1925, schools opened in Miciūnai (teachers J. Naminskaitė and J. Kardelytė), Mockos, Gėliūnai, Galčiūnai, Pelegrinda, Girios, Knystuškės, Rimdžiūnai, and Pėtrikai. Branches of the St. Casimir Society were established in Lithuanian villages, and they also had small libraries (about 200 books and periodicals each). At the time, the most widely read publications were „Ūkininko patarėjas“, „Kelias“, „Dirva“, and the writings of Maironis and K. Binkis. A branch of the Cultural Society also operated in Gėliūnai (the society’s publication was „Vilniaus žodis“). In Miciūnai, people performed „Amerika pirtyje“, „Aklą pažins, kvailą supras“, and so on. At that time, the Polish state schools had only 2–6 pupils each. After all Lithuanian schools had been closed by 1933, „Ryto“ Society reading rooms operated in their place from 1934 to 1936. The reading rooms were run by former Lithuanian teachers: in Miciūnai, A. Bubūlis; in Girios, V. Krėčius; in Rimdžiūnai, Selyla; and others (those mentioned were the most active). At the reading-room supervisors’ urging, parents in Girios advised their children to speak less Polish and not sing in the compulsory Polish school, while the children of Miciūnai managed to obtain Lithuanian-language religious instruction at the Gervėčiai school in the 1934/35 school year (Valeika 1988. Nr. 1, 2). Pelesoje lietuviška mokykla veikė 1908–1917, 1922–1932 m. Maždaug 1926 m. Vilniaus krašto lietuvių švietimo draugijos „Rytas“ (jos būstinė buvo dabartinėse Lietuvių kalbos ir literatūros instituto patalpose) mokyklos įsteigtos Dubiniuose, Pavalakėje, Piliūnuose, Druskininkuose, Paditvyjė, Leliūšiuose, Kargau- 28 Table 2. Number of Lithuanians in the larger villages in the vicinity of Gervėčiai No. | Village name | Total population: 1985 | 1987 | Lithuanians in 1985: number |% | number of homesteads 1. Gervėčiai | 479 | — | 128 | 27 | — 2. Girios | 240 | 265 | 195 | 81 | 101 3. Rimdžiūnai | 232 | 231 | 151 | 65 | 80 4. Galčiūnai | 205 | 203 | „ | 74 | 90 5. Mėčkos | 173 | 201 | 148 | 85 | 100 6. Miciūnai | 180 | 195 | 126 | 70 | 60 7. Gėlinai | 128 | 145 | 119 | 93 | 80 8. Knystuškės | 87 | 104 | 80 | 92 | 55 9. Gaigaliai | 73 | 86 | 37 | 51 | 40 10. Pelegrindà | 60 | 65 | 43 | 72 | 35 11. Gudinininkai | 64 | 57 | 28 | 42 | 25 12. Milčėjos | 51 | 48 | 40 | 78 | 23 13. Pėtrikai | 40 | „ | 36 | 90 | 20 14. Kerplasinà | 24 | 28 | 19 | 79 | 12 15. Gibirdė | 7 | 21 | 2 | 29 | — 16. Užupis | 10 | 10 | 6 | 60 | 6 Duomenys imti iš: Romančiuk 1986, 241, Valeika 1988 ir apylinkės Tarybos. duose, Vigonysė, Rackūnuose, Plikiuose, Piliakalnyje, Sklodonyse, Smilgininose. Besides Lithuanian schools, there was also a Polish school in every village. In 1933, schools teaching in Lithuanian were closed here as well, and Lithuanian „Ryto“ reading rooms operated in their place until 1936. Children were taught Lithuanian there illegally (Povilaitytė 1970, 3–7). During the occupation by bourgeois Poland, the church also experienced a complex period in national terms. In the old wooden church at Gervėčiai, Mikas and Kipras Petrauskas and their father, who founded a choir and brass band, had played the organ around 1898–1903. After the 1924 visitation by Bishop J. Matulevičius, services in Lithuanian were introduced alongside those in Polish at Gervėčiai church, and they faced many challenges. The priests who served at Gervėčiai church can be divided, roughly in terms of language, into those who were relatively neutral—that is, spoke both Polish and Lithuanian (A. Dalinkevičius, Buivys, S. Chodyga, and the current priest)—Polonizers (Alšiauskas, and especially Romeika, Malinauskas—„Edikas“, J. Trochimas, and others), and Lithuanianizers (A. Jakavonis, J. Gylys). The spiritual terror of the Polonizers often turned physical, especially from 1927 to 1946. The village of Sakalaičiai was forcibly denationalized by the estate owners, the Struck family: those within its boundaries who spoke Lithuanian were beaten with rods. As early as 1928, Atminis, an 80-year-old resident of Miciūnai, received 25 lashes for this. Consequently, the people of Sakalaičiai—Damučiai, Gudaičiai, Kurmeliai, Maučiai, Skyručiai, Šauliai, Tvoragaliai, and others—switched to Polish and, incited to do so, even took to beating Lithuanian speakers („girgunus“). The vicar of Gervėčiai was involved in this work— 29 The district chief and police commandant established a Polish military chauvinist riflemen’s organization in 1927. On the night of October 4–5, 1927, many Lithuanian activists from the Vilnius region (including Father A. Jakavonis of Gervėčiai) were arrested and imprisoned or deported to Lithuania. In 1930, because of a sermon in Lithuanian, Polish riflemen beat Lithuanians in Gervėčiai church with bamboo sticks, and many of them were imprisoned for resisting, in Vilnius (Lukiškės) and Varnionys prisons. An interdict was then imposed for three years: Polish and Lithuanian sermons and hymns were replaced with Latin ones (Valeika 1988. Nr. 1–2). Unable to secure religious services in their native language, Lithuanians from the former Ródūnia parish (especially the seven villages of Pelesa, Dubiniai, Piliūnai, Pavalakė, Păditvis, Druskininkai, and Leliūšiai) established a separate parish in 1917–1918, and in 1927 began building a separate church in Pelesa. It operated from 1935 to 1950 and played a major role in preserving the Lithuanian language (it was returned to the faithful on October 16, 1988). Today, Lithuanians in the Belarusian SSR can officially receive religious services in their native language in only one church in the republic: in Gervėčiai, about 200 km from Pelesa, and in Pelesa (since 1989). In 1939–1941, Russian and Belarusian were taught in the Gervėčiai area; Lithuanian instruction began in 1942. In the first half of June 1940, the Lithuanians of Ąpsas, Gervėčiai, Pelesa, and others were officially informed that those who wished to do so would be relocated to Lithuania. When most of them had loaded their belongings onto carts, the repatriation was cancelled. In 1942–1943, a Lithuanian progymnasium was opened in Gervėčiai, along with primary schools in Galčiūnai (teacher S. Steponavičius), Močkai (teacher B. Steponavičius), Girios (teacher J. Valeika-Vėleika), Pėtrikai (teacher B. Laurinavičius), Gėliūnai, and Rimdžiūnai. There was a severe shortage of teachers, so more highly educated local residents (including those who had graduated from a vocational school in Vilnius, etc.) were invited to teach. From 1939 to 1944, a Lithuanian school also operated in Pelesa, replacing the Polish one. There were no schools in the other villages at the time because of a shortage of teachers. After the front had passed, teachers from the former Lithuanian schools in the Gervėčiai area (S. Steponavičius, J. Valeika, and student A. Mileišis) went to see Padelis, chairman of the Astravas executive committee (a Lithuanian from Rimdžiūnai village who was temporarily in charge of educational affairs). On hearing that the former teachers wished to continue teaching in Lithuanian, the chairman replied that such “fascists” should be arrested and Belarusians and Russians appointed to teach. After delegations of residents from the Gervėčiai and Pelesa areas had travelled nine times to Moscow, Vilnius, and Minsk to seek a Lithuanian-language school and church, representatives of the education ministry of the BSSR and other institutions first proposed that local people vote not for teaching in the school in their native language, but merely for lessons in it (Valeika 1988. Nr. 3). Thus, in 1956, Russian-language instruction began at Gervėčiai secondary school, Girios eight-year school, and the Rimdžiūnai and Gėliūnai primary schools in Astravas district; and in 1957, at the Pelesa and Paditvis eight-year schools and the Dubiniai and Pavalakė primary schools in Varenavas district. Native-language lessons (Lithuanian or Belarusian, by choice) were introduced from grade III. A. Šironas, A. Grikpėdis, and A. Vaičiulienė taught in Gervėčiai; B. Šaknys, D. Kaltinaitė, O. Augulytė, A. Čiulada, and R. Greimaitė in Girios; J. Riauba, O. Babarskytė, and R. Bugailiškytė in Pelesa; L. Grabauskas in Dubiniai; O. Vileikytė in Pavalakė; and others. 30 As pupil numbers declined, schools were consolidated, native-language teachers were in short supply, and local residents’ needs were insufficiently taken into account, the schools in Gėliūnai, Dubiniai, and Pavalakė were closed between 1972 and 1984; Lithuanian lessons were also discontinued at the primary schools in Pädytvis (from 1981) and Rimdžiūnai (from 1987). They were not introduced either at the secondary schools in Balčiškis, Ródūnia, and Varenāvo, where Lithuanian children study (there are still about 10 of them there, while Belarusian lessons are taught in Girios and elsewhere even to a single pupil in a class). 3 Map. Linguistic situation in the Gervėčiai area. Villages where, in 1985, there were between 195 and 19 Lithuanians: 1 — 90–93%, 2 — 78–85%, 3 — 70–54%, 4 — 65%, 5 — 42,51%, 6 — 27%. Settlements and areas where Lithuanian ceased to be spoken: 7 — in the first half of the 20th century, 8 — at the beginning of the 20th century, 9 — at the end of the 19th century. Sources: Romanciuk 1986, 241; Таунас, Видугирие 1983, 38, 48; Белорусская ССР 1973. 31 In 1978, 162 pupils attended Lithuanian language and literature classes in Gervėčiai; in 1987, 74 (51% of pupils in grades III–X). In 1970, 60 attended in Pelesa, and in 1987, 25 (56%). In the Girių school there were 127 pupils in total in 1943, 156 in 1962, 130 in 1965, and 48 in 1987 (35 of them Lithuanians; 30 pupils, or 88%, studied Lithuanian from grade III). The local administration continues to prohibit Lithuanian-language classes. Surnames of pupils who attended Lithuanian classes at the Pelesa school in the 1970/71 school year (surnames with the same root are not repeated)4: Adamonis, Balnevičiūtė, Čaplytė, Čiūka, Doda, Dudavičiūtė, Galvelė, Geležinytė, Grišeltytė, Ivaška, Kanevičiūtė, Kauzaitė, Kražytė, Kruopys, Mindziulis, Ladišiūtė, Lingė, Pakulis, Rameika, Selyla, Stanišauskas, Šimelionytė, Šimelevičius, Šiškaitė, Tunkelis, Valiukevičius, Varanauskas, etc. Surnames of pupils at the Gervėčiai school in the 1976/77 school year: Aleksa, Atminis, Augulis, Bazytė, Čepukaitis, Gražulytė, Gudaitis, Gulbinavičiūtė, Jankevičius, Jaskaitis, Karmazaitė, Kiškel y tė, Lukša, Lukoit, Mažeika, Meškys, Mileiša, Petravičius, Petrikaitė, Pliauga, Puiša, Pukštaitė, Ravaitytė, Reketis, Remys, Sysas, Skerla, Šėmis, Trepšys, Vaičiulytė, Valeika, etc. The curriculum for the nine-year school provided for 23 weekly classes in the mother tongue (Lithuanian) and literature. In 1987, these were reduced to 18 in Pelesa (with plans to reduce them to 10 by removing Lithuanian literature and designating Lithuanian as a “foreign language”), and to 22 in Girių (four weekly classes remained in grades III–V, and three in grades VI–VIII). In Pelesa, the only teacher found to teach Lithuanian came from a mixed family and had graduated only from the Russian-medium Šalčininkai secondary school. The Gervėčiai secondary school had been left with 28 weekly mother-tongue classes. To obtain a secondary education in their mother tongue, Lithuanian children from the Astravas, Varenavas, and Breslauja districts tried to enroll in the Vilnius boarding school on Dziūkų Street (now the 50th Anniversary of the VLKJS boarding school, with Russian as the language of instruction), as well as in the Marijampolis school in Vilnius district, the Mielagėnai and Tverečius schools in Ignalina district, the Juknėnai school in Utena district, and other secondary schools. At best, they could return home—100 km or more away—only on Sundays. In 1967 alone, there were about 300 such pupils in the Lithuanian SSR: 14 had come from the Girių school, and so on. Many Lithuanians in the Byelorussian SSR watch Lithuanian SSR television and listen to the radio. In the Grodno region alone, 135 copies of the newspaper “Valstiečių laikraštis” were subscribed to in 1987 (about 30 in Girių), as well as 52 copies of “Tarybinė moteris,” and so on. From 1956 to 1960, Girių had an amateur dramatics group and a dance circle; the ethnographic ensembles of this village and Pavalakė village are still active. 3. Lithuanians in Poland (Suwałki Voivodeship) Along the Polish border (near the Lazdijai and Kapsukas districts) there are about 60 localities with relatively concentrated Lithuanian populations, bounded approximately to the west and southwest by the line Budziskas, Veselavas, Klevai, Morkiškė (cf. Aleksaitė 1985, 9). The area is 40 km long and, widening toward the middle, reaches a width of 10–15 km (it lies within the Suwałki Voivod- 4 Data from T. Povilait ytė, a teacher at the then Pelesė school; followed by data from A. Grikpėdis, a teacher at the Gervėčiai school. See also “Atskiroji Lietuva”. V., 1985. Vol. 1,2. 32 4. Map. Lithuanian-language settlements in the Seinai–Punskas region: 1 — 90–100% Lithuanian, 2 — 80–90%, 3 — 70–80%, 4 — 60–70%, 5 — 50–60%, 6 — 40–50%, 7 — 15–30%, 8 — 5–15%, 9 — other settlements; 10 — schools teaching in Lithuanian, 11 — optional Lithuanian-language lessons in Polish schools. 3 678 the Seinai, Punskas, and Šipliškės districts of Poland). Of the approximately 850 residents of Punskas and 4,700 of Seinai, about 680 and 800 (80% and 19%), respectively, are Lithuanians. The largest Lithuanian villages, with no more than one or two Polish families each, are Agurkiai, Burbiškės, Džiūliai, Kampuočiai, Navininkai, Vaitakiemis, and Vidūgiriai; 90–95% of the population is Lithuanian in Dusnyčia, Juodėliškė, Kreivėnai, Ožkiniai, Pristavonys, and Žagariai. In August 1919, when the so-called Suwałki Triangle was separated from Lithuania, the bilingual Lithuanians between Berżniki and Vižainis (in the southern part of the Seinai region) became Polonized, while monolingual speakers, chiefly because of schools and the influence of television sets introduced after 1975, etc., mostly became bilingual. During the Hitlerite occupation, about half of the Lithuanians in Punskas and its environs were relocated to Lithuania (72–90% from the villages of Būbeliai, Burbiškės, Burokai, Didžiuliai, and Paliūnai); after the war, not all returned. In the Punskas district, Lithuanian was again taught as a subject in the 1951/1952 school year at the primary schools in Navininkai, Pristavonys, Vaitakiemis, and Vidūgiriai, and between 1953 and 1959 teaching in that language was introduced. In the autumn of 1956, the largely Lithuanian-language Punskas lyceum opened (parallel teaching in Polish continued through grade 8; thereafter, only Polish language and literature, history, physical education, and military training were taught in Polish). Each year, 20–30 students graduate from the lyceum (by 1985, there had been 525 graduates). In 1967, there were still 9 Lithuanian-language primary schools in the region; in 1978, there were 4 eight-grade schools and 2 primary schools. In addition, Lithuanian was taught as a subject to Lithuanians at 12 schools: in Aradninkai, Klevai, Krasnagrūda, Krasnavė, the Punskas agricultural school, the Seinai lyceum and 2 eight-grade schools, Smalėnai, Suwałki, Šimanovizna, and Žabariškės (in 1967, it was also taught in Juodėliškė, Lumbiai, Paliūnai, Radziūčiai, and Šlynakiemis). Following the consolidation of schools, apart from the lyceum, there are now 4 eight-grade schools teaching in the mother tongue (in Navininkai, Pristavonys, Punskas, and Vaitakiemis) and a four-grade school in Vidūgiriai. In 1957, the Lithuanian Social and Cultural Society in Poland was founded; in 1984 it had 1,800 members and 48 branches: in Suwałki Voivodeship, as well as in Białystok, Gdańsk, Słupsk, Szczecin, Warsaw, and Wrocław, where some Lithuanians from the Lithuanian SSR had relocated between 1945 and 1958. The Society promotes education among its compatriots, has published the journal “Aušra” since 1960, maintains libraries and amateur arts activities, and sustains ties with the Lithuanian SSR, etc. In 1956, a cultural center was established in Punskas. Its groups include the “Dzūkija” choir, the “Punia” vocal-instrumental ensemble, the “Klumpė” village band, the “Jotva” choreographic ensemble, and the “Ulbuonėlės” girls’ ensemble (cf. Encyclopedia of Soviet Lithuania. 1986. Vol. 2. P. 512, 561; 1987. Vol. 3. P. 469, 644–655). Lithuanian is widely used in the public life of the Punskas district, as well as in the churches of Punskas, Seinai, Smalėnai, and Žagariai. In 1904, Lithuanian hymns were briefly sung every other Sunday in Berżniki as well, since at that time Lithuanians still made up half of that parish (3,000 inhabitants), living beyond the town. But the Masurians, who looked down on the Lithuanian language, thought that “Litwa chce zgubić polską wiarę” [“Lithuania wants to destroy the Polish faith”], and immediately “eighteen injured and crippled Dzūki men and women […] were counted, of whom four persons with fractured skulls barely survived” (LKLB, 38). The prevailing view today is that the Seinai–Punskas region was colonized by Lithuanians from the Merkinė–Punios area, and at a relatively late date—in the late 16th and 17th centuries. This view was apparently stimulated to a considerable extent by German scholars between 1921 and 1944, who needed to 34 prove that the Lithuanians of Lithuania Minor, too, were not indigenous inhabitants from time immemorial, but colonists settled there by the Germans themselves after 1422 (the Peace of Melno) (cf. Pakarklis 1935, 44–68). It may be supposed that some Lithuanians in present-day Suwałki Voivodeship have survived there at least since the 10th century. The dialect of the Lithuanians in the Seinai–Punskas region is now divided into two parts in the southeast and northwest: Southern Aukštaitian, or Western Dzūkian (about 40 villages), and Western Aukštaitian Kaunas subdialect (9 villages; the boundary runs south of Ramonai and Gilušiai). In the southeastern part of the dialect area, the Seniškiai (8 villages), who do not palatalize the soft consonants c and dz, are further distinguished from the Punskas speakers (over 30 villages). If these Lithuanians had all migrated from the Merkinė–Punios area only 300 years ago, they would speak a single dialect (and certainly not “Kapsian”). The dialects between Vižainis and Seinai form a continuation of the Lithuanian-speaking area (roughly between Vilkaviškis and Druskininkai). Many of the villages mentioned lie only 1–5 km from the border, which has been drawn right through them. Lithuanians had settled the southern parts of the former Suwałki Governorate and the adjacent area of Łomża Governorate before the Lithuanian wars with the Poles in the 11th–13th centuries (LKLB, 36). And in the wilderness held by the Teutonic Order in the early 13th–15th centuries, “inhabitants remained” (Pakarklis 1935, 12). This may also be attested by Jogaila’s 1418 hunt near Wigry: if no people had lived in the forest (serving the Teutonic Knights and Lithuanians in return for payment), it is unlikely that the Teutonic Knights would have entered it, or that the Lithuanians would have learned of them5. In the view of J. Totoraityis and V. Vileišis (1935, 104–106), from the mid-16th century inhabitants of Lithuania Minor fled to Sūduva. The many Lithuanian-origin oikonyms between Suwałki and the Baltic Sea indicate that this area, extending about 60 km farther south, remained a continuation of Lithuania Minor until the 18th–19th centuries (roughly as far as the Augustów–Olsztyn road). Moving from east to west, there are Szurpiły, Klaipėda, Skaizgiry, Žytkiejmy, Mieruniszki, Motule, Dubeninki, Rogainy, Rogojny, Pluszkiejmy, Jurkiszki, Mažucie, Juchnajcie, Surminy, Straduny, Meldze, Szarejki, Kaliszki, Wydminy, Wierciejki, Grodzisko, Budry, Wajsznory, Galwany, Kiemławki, Warnikajmy, Krelikiejmy, Mołtainy, Gierkiny, Korsze, Łankiejmy, Wozławki, Głajny, Krykajny, Burdajny, and so on. Similar settlement names are also used (with the second component -kiemis, “-village,” etc.). Lithuanians settled early in the northern part of the former Yotvingian territory, as far as the upper reaches of the Biebrza River. As Lithuanian nobles and soldiers were relocated to places of greater strategic importance, Lithuanian-speaking enclaves arose in the present-day Białystok Voivodeship (as far as the Bug), in and around Rajgród, Goniądz (Lithuanian was used in the church from 1501), Knyszyn, Odelsk (a parish was established for Lithuanians in 1492), Tykocin, Supraśl, Białystok, Suraż, Brańsk, Bielsk, Drohiczyn, Kamieniec, and elsewhere; they persisted more strongly until 1520 (Zinkevičius 1987, 229–230). Until the beginning of the 20th century, Lithuanian speakers survived in the Suwałki Voivodeship districts of Berżniki, Giby, Krasnopol, Wigry, Suwałki, Augustów, Jeleniewo, Vižainis, and others (cf. LKLB, 36). 5 Data from J. Vaina, director of the Punskas Museum. 3* 35 III. COMPARISON OF THE LINGUISTIC SITUATION IN PERIPHERAL DIALECTS Of all the peripheral dialects located beyond the borders of the Lithuanian SSR, the Lithuanians of the Sejny–Punsk region have survived best to date. This was apparently due above all to their greater cultural autonomy (schools, associations, press, church, etc.). Young people in this region are much more likely to remain on their parents’ farms and inherit the culture traditionally; the state border curbs migration to the north and east. In terms of the compactness of the Lithuanian population, the environs of Gervėčiai are so far almost their equal. Until 1865, the Lithuanians of Lithuania Minor had the best conditions for maintaining their culture; from 1921 to 1946, the Lithuanians of Latvia (and from 1919 to 1936 and 1939 to 1944, the Lithuanians of Belarus as well); and, from 1953, the Lithuanians of Poland. In terms of both the press and organizations and education, the 9,000 Lithuanians of the Sejny–Punsk region now enjoy conditions similar to those of the 23,000 Lithuanians of Latvia in 1940. At that time, 674 (19%) of the approximately 3,500 Latvian Lithuanian children attended classes in their native language: 107 children studied at the Riga Lithuanian Gymnasium, 446 at eleven Lithuanian primary schools, and 121 attended Lithuanian-language classes at six Latvian primary schools in the border area. In Poland, optional Lithuanian-language classes are likewise available only in the more compact area of the autochthonous population, where 725 children attended classes in 1986: 115 at the Punsk Lyceum, 411 at four eight-year (or primary) schools, and 159 at six primary schools, the Punsk Agricultural School, and the Sejny Lyceum (cf. Paransevičius 1986, 9—12); before the war, 43 children in Latvia also attended two Lithuanian kindergartens, whereas now there is one in Poland. Qualified Lithuanian-language classes—and, in areas of compact settlement (e.g., Giriøse), at least primary-level instruction in the native language—are now also sought by Lithuanians in the districts of Astravas, Varenavas, Riga, Liepāja, Bauska, Saldus, Sovetsk, and Krasnoznamensk (Kaliningrad region). Lithuanian SSR ensembles, poets, and even the press reach abroad—to the Polish People’s Republic—more often than they reach some districts of neighboring republics within the same state. The effect of political, cultural, social, and demographic circumstances on changes in the number of Lithuanian speakers can be seen by comparing the development of the areas around Punsk, Ródūnia, and Ąpsas since 1910. Initially, roughly the same number of people spoke Lithuanian in each of these three areas—about 10,000. Until about 1950, cultural conditions in these areas were essentially alike: at first, they all belonged to tsarist Russia, and later to territory temporarily occupied by the supporters of Pilsudski and the Nazis. Unlike the environs of Ąpsas and Ródūnia, the Punsk region had undergone less Slavicization by the beginning of the century (the only exceptions were the Kadariškės area, which was nearing complete assimilation, and the small areas west and southwest of Punsk—about 6,500 inhabitants in all) (Кушнер 1951, 27—30). In the postwar years, after children began attending schools where Belarusian or Russian was the language of instruction, the Lithuanians in the Ąpsas area and, likewise, around Ródūnia began to undergo Slavicization on a massive scale: only about 1,000 and 300 Lithuanian speakers, respectively, remained there, mostly older people. By contrast, about 9,000 Lithuanians still live in the Sejny–Punsk region. In the former Ilūkšta county in Latvia (between Daugavpils and Nereta), the number of Lithuanian speakers fell over the same period from about 6,000 to 100. After land ownership was abolished 36 in Latvia and Belarus (as elsewhere in the Soviet Union), many inhabitants—especially younger people—moved to cities, and natural population growth declined. For example, at the beginning of the century there were 43 families each in Vaitakiemis (Punsk area) and Uodegėnai (Kraslava area), whereas now Vaitakiemis has 110 inhabitants and Uodegėnai (which was dispersed into individual farmsteads in 1935 and never had a Lithuanian school) has 30 people, of whom only 5 know Lithuanian. Peripheral dialects—extensions of dialects beyond the republic’s borders—are highly significant for research into the structure and history of the Lithuanian language, language contact, and Baltic ethnogenesis. This is why linguists from various countries took an interest in these dialects: E. Volteris, O. Brochas, K. Būga, J. Gerulis, Chr. Stangas, E. Frenkelis, J. Otrembskis, J. Balčikonis, and many others. The dialects of Gervėčiai, Lazūnai, and Zietela have been described in greater detail, whereas those of Vadakštis, Ūkrai, Nereta, Gāršvinė, Subačius, Ciškodas, Kamojai, Pėrvalkas, and Vėžainis have scarcely been studied. The rapidly disappearing dialects must continue to be documented carefully and comprehensively. The remaining Lithuanians should be helped to preserve their culture. ABBREVIATIONS LKLB — On the Polish language in the churches of Lithuania. A Lithuanian petition submitted to His Holiness Pope Pius X and all the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. K., 1906. VVLKB — The state of Lithuanian Catholics in the Diocese of Vilnius and the mischief of the pan-Polonists. A memorial by Lithuanian Catholic priests. Tilsit, 1913. LITERATŪRA Aleksaitė I. Punško šnektos konsonantizmas: VU dipl. (d. 1985). Būga K. Rinktiniai raštai. V., 1961. Garšva K. Lietuvių kalbos tarmės ir jų kontaktai Latvijoje: 1. Lietuvių kalbos tarmių Latvijoje istorija // LTSR MA darbai. A ser. V., 1984. T. 2(87). P. 83—91. Garšva K. Lietuvių kalbos tarmės ir jų kontaktai Latvijoje: 2. Lietuvių gyvenamosios vietos ir kalbų funkcionavimas // LTSR MA darbai. A serija. V., 1985 a. T. 1(90). P. 118—126. Garšva K. Senbuviai Latvijos lietuviai // Mokslas ir gyvenimas. 1985 b. Nr. 11. P. 38. Garšva K., Grumadienė L. Periferinės lietuvių kalbos tarmės: istorija ir dabartis // Veidai—87. V., 1988. P. 213—221. Garšva K., Gudavičius E., Nikžentaitis A., Valikonytė I., Vidugiris A. Lietuvos ir Baltarusijos TSR pasienio lenkų kilmė // Gimtasis kraštas. 1987. Rugsėjo 24. Kopeć B. Wychodźstwo sezonowe z ziemi wileńskiej do Łotwy. Wilno, 1938. Lietuvių etnogenezė. V., 1987. Lietuvių mokyklos Vilniaus krašte. V., 1934. Makowski B. Szkolnictwo litewskie w Polsce w latach 1920—1939 // Acta baltico-slavica. 1983. T. 15. S. 175—241. Makowski B. Litwini w Polsce 1920—1939. Warszawa, 1986. Masy té G. Aknystos šnektos leksika: VU dipl. d. (1987). Pakarklis P. Mažoji Lietuva vokiečių mokslo šviesoje. K., 1935. Pakarklis P. Raštai. V., 1987. Pakštas K. Lietuvių tautos plotai ir gyventojai // Lietuvių enciklopedija. South Boston, Mass., 1968. T. 15. P. 430—450. Paransevičius J. S. Punško licėjui 30 metų // Aušra. 1986. Nr. 3(74). P. 9—12. Povilaitytė T. Pelesos šnektos fonetika ir morfologija: VU dipl. d. (1970). Romančuk A. Lietuvių kalbos funkcionavimas Gervėčių apylinkėse // Jaunųjų filologų darbai. V., 1986. T. 2. P. 238—242. 37 Sakalauskas J. „Nenorėčiau, kad pasikartotų“ // Vakarinės naujienos. 1987. Kovo 24. Studia nad polszczyzną kresową. Wrocław, etc. 1982. T. 1. Tarybų Lietuvos enciklopedija. V., 1986. T. 2; 1987. T. 3. Valeika J. Gervėčių apylinkės istorija, etnografija, kalba (rankraštis) 1988. Nr. 1—9. Vaicekauskaitė D. Latgalos lietuvių šnektos ir jų kontaktai (fonetika ir leksika): VU dipl. d. (1988). Vidugiris A. Dėl kalbų kontaktavimo pietryčių Lietuvoje // Kalbų kontaktai Lietuvos TSR (LKK. T. 23). V., 1983. P. 46—61. Vidugiris A. Iš etnolingvistinių santykių raidos Pelesos ir gretimose apylinkėse // Lietuvių kalba ir bilingvizmas (LKK. T. 27). V., 1988. P. 21—36. Vileišis V. Tautiniai santykiai Mažojoje Lietuvoje ligi Didžiojo karo istorijos ir statistikos šviesoje. K., 1935. Vilniaus žinios. 1905. Nr. 278. Viltis. 1904—1912. Zinkevičius Z. Lietuvių kalbos dialektologija. V., 1978. Zinkevičius Z. Lietuvių kalbos istorija (Iki pirmųjų raštų). V., 1987. Брейдак А. Б. Фонетика латгальских говоров латышского языка: диахрония и синхрония (Машинопись). Даугавпилс, 1987. Гаучас П., Видугирис А. Этнолингвистическая ситуация литовско-белорусского пограничья с конца XVIII по начало XX в. // География. 1983. Т. 19. С. 26—73. Кушнер (Кнышев) П. И. Этнические территории и этнические границы. М., 1951. Судник Т. М. К истории языковой ситуации Пелясы // Балто-славянские этноязыковые контакты. М., 1980. С. 181—191. Чеконас В. Функционирование языков и билингвизм (на материале раманщанских говоров) // Lietuvių kalba ir bilingvizmas (LKK. T. 27). V., 1988. P. 37—53. РАЗВИТИЕ ЯЗЫКОВОЙ СИТУАЦИИ В ПОГРАНИЧНЫХ ГОВОРАХ Резюме Компактная территория литовского языка уменьшалась по мере усиливавшейся германизации Малой Литвы (в восточной Пруссии) в 1864—1876 гг. и особенно по причине полонизации, проводимой католическим костелом, двором, школой, властями. Выделяются четыре периода полонизации: в 1387—1687 гг., до 1863 г., до 1919 г., 1919—1939 г. и после 1939 г. Более благоприятные условия для развития национальной культуры литовцы, проживающие в соседних государствах за пределами своей республики (края), имели до 1864 г. в Малой Литве, в 1921—1946 г. в Латвийской республике и после 1953 г. в Польской Народной Республике (в окрестностях Сейнов—Пуньска Сувалского воеводства). В архаичных периферийных диалектах литовского языка число говорящих дома на родном языке постепенно уменьшается, особенно среди младшего поколения, посещающего школы с преподаванием на неродном языке. Определенное исключение в этом представляют лишь окрестности Сейнов—Пуньска и частично Гервят. Литовские периферийные диалекты представляют ценный материал для изучения структуры, истории, контактов литовского языка, этногенеза балтов, поэтому изучение этих говоров является актуальной и неотложной задачей.