LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXVIII (1989)

KALBŲ RYŠIAI IR SĄVEIKOS

ELENA GRINAVECKIENĖ

NEW LITHUANIAN LOANWORDS IN BELARUSIAN DIALECTS

Lexical research on Belarusian conducted over the last two decades (1965–1986) makes it possible to assert that the problem of Lithuanian loanwords in Belarusian dialects remains relevant, and that not all words of Lithuanian origin used in them have yet been identified. A considerable number of previously unrecognized Lithuanian loanwords are continually being discovered, and efforts are being made to identify and substantiate their phonetic reflexes, which took shape in different Belarusian dialects and at different times. Our research shows that old Lithuanian loanwords with a/¹o/ y vocalism occur here, originating from Lithuanian words with (i)uo and (i)au vocalism, e.g., akóma ‘awn’ < Lith. akuotas; Лок, лох “field name” < Lith. Laukas ‘same’; < Lith. laukas; ебо́ба ‘elm’ < Lith. guoba; са́мка ‘large fringed shawl’ < Lith. siaústė ‘same’; бужа́лна ‘flail head’ < Lith. buožė, buoželė ‘same’; куку́ць ‘clay whistle’ < Lith. kaukútis ‘same’, and so on [Grinaveckienė₁; Grinaveckienė₂]. The search for Lithuanian loanwords also encounters difficulties when a Lithuanian word with a particular vocalism, borrowed by different Belarusian dialects, has yielded not only different reflexes of that vocalism but has often also undergone many various consonantal changes and displays derivational diversity. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to identify and prove the true Lithuanian source of such a Belarusian word. For example, the Belarusian dialect words какапу́чки, како́ушки, капа́кучки, капко́ушки, ко́каушки, ко́киушки, ко́ркиушки, ко́пнуики, кукаpúчки, kúkiушки, кукарз́чки, kúрачки, куркиушки, куро́пачки, kúрпиушки, kúртачки, kúрчьки, kúрчюки, meaning ‘bones of the feet’, as well as каккру́чки ‘shoulders’ and ко́кашы “bones of the feet; legs” [Слоўнік, т. 2, 364, 365; Народнае, 169; Жывое, 155]³, despite the fact that they are for the most part dissimilar in sound, are related to one another—they are dialectal hybrid variants of the same word, genetically related to Lith. kaukaras (kùkardi, kùkuras), kaùkoras, kaùkara ‘hump’, cf. also the same-origin kaùkas ‘pride, growth’.

Of these lexemes, the etymologically most transparent and least altered are kaka-púčki, кукапу́чки and кукаpúčki. According to the sound law Lith. au > corresponds to Belarusian a (e.g., Лажо́к “name of a valley and road” < Lith. Lauž- + Belarusian -ok [Мікратапанімія, 136] какапу́чки would have arisen from Lith. kaukar- and the Belarusian diminutive suffix -ечкі [Сцяцко, 260]. The origin of Кукаpúчки and кукаpúчки could be phonetically twofold. They may have arisen directly from Lith. kùkarai, kùkuras ‘knob’; they may also have developed from Lith. kaùkaras according to the sound law Lith. au > Belarusian y (cf. the куку́ць mentioned above < Lith. kaukútis). There is no

¹The sign / in the article indicates that sounds (and forms) are used in different Belarusian dialects.

²The Belarusian dialects’ plosive z (usually found in loanwords) is not distinguished in the text from their fricative z.

³That ‘knob’ and ‘hump’ are semantically identical referents is also shown by their shared name kánžas, e.g.: galvós kánžas and kójų kánžas (LKŽ. T. 5. 446).

162

completely clear кукара́чуки has я in the stem instead of the expected а. Could that я have arisen here from а? Thus, кукара́чуки could have developed into кукара́чуки. Cases in which a hard consonant in Lithuanian loanwords in some Belarusian dialects becomes palatalized do occur, e.g., Lith. klùmpės, klùonas > Belarusian клу́мбы | клю́мбы, клу́ня | клю́ня, and so on [Слоўнік, т. 2, 479–480; Дыялекталагічны, 791–797, карты № 235, 236]. On the other hand, perhaps кукара́чуки may also have originated from some other Lith. kaĩkaras, kùkarai... variant, for instance kiãukerė and the like.

The closest relative of these lexemes, but one that is already more altered—having undergone syncope of the medial -ka- syllable—is ку́рачки < *кукара́чки (cf. analogous cases of syncope: калану́ха < калаха́ну́ха ‘bird cherry’, мана́рка < марына́рка ‘jacket’ [Слоўнік, т. 2, 366; т. 3, 29]). And *кукара́чки, as is clearly evident, < Lith. kukar- (kadukar-) + Belarusian -ачкі.

The lexeme karáкуčki is also very close to kака́ručki. It may have originated from *кака́-pyčki through metathesis of the consonants in the medial (-кару-) syllables, i.e., through the interchange of k and p: -кару- > -раку- (for a possible similar consonant interchange, cf. прае́рх < прапе́х “scion,” радзюга < дзярыга “coarse blanket,” “rough sheet” [Слоўнік, т. 4, 76, 441]). And the beginning of *кака́ručki may have been supplied by Lithuanian kaukar- + Belarusian -učki. Kapáručki has its closest counterparts, despite being almost unlike them at first glance, in the lexemes kакóuki, kókiuški, kókaшы, kókaшки, kу́kiuški and the place name Kакóшы луг [Мікратapanімія, 119]. They may have developed from the forms *карако́uki, *kópakiuški, *kóраkaшы, *корakaшки, *кураkiuški, *каракошы through syncope of the medial -pa- syllable. Thus, their phonetic development has taken them even farther from the original source than the lexeme karáručki—the forms with *какар-|*кокар-|*кукар-, derived from Lithuanian kadukar- (kukar-) and Belarusian suffixes.

The Belarusian original forms of the words каркóuki, каркýuki, kórkiuuki, куркíuuki may be *какрóuki, *какрýuki, *ко́крышки, *кукрышки, altered through metathesis of the consonant cluster -кр- (for кр- becoming рк-, cf. ко́блик < ко́лбик “a gudgeon, a small loaf” [Слоўнік, т. 2, 493]). The latter, probably for ease of pronunciation, derive from longer forms, *какарóuki, *какарýuki, *ко́карыушки, *кукарыушки, by dropping the medial syllabic а (for a possible similar deletion, cf. калма́-ишка < калама́йка “a type of cart” [Слоўнік, т. 2, 366]). And these forms, *какар-|*кокар- according to Belarusian а|о < Lithuanian au, arose from Lithuanian kaukar-; *кукар- arose both from Lithuanian kukar- and (according to Belarusian у < Lithuanian au) from kukdar-.

The development of the lexemes kópнуčki and kurpíuuki must have been similar to that of kóпkiuški, куркíuuki (see above), except that their medial -n- arose from -k- after the semantic connection with the underlying source had faded (cf. an analogous case kартанóсы < каркано́сы < Lith. karkanósis ‘upturned-nosed’ [Слоўнік, т. 2, 424]). Thus, kópnučki, курпíuuki < *kóпркуки, *ку́рkuшки < *ко́круки, *кукру́ки < *кокарyuki, *кукарыuки < Lith. kadukar- (kukar-) + Belarusian -уишки, -ишки. The lexemes kýrmački, kýrpički, kýrčki developed analogously to the latter forms, their medial consonants -m-|-p-|-č- having arisen in place of -k-. Thus, kýrmački, kýrpički, kýrčki < *kýrkački, *kýrkički, *kýrkiki < *kúракаčki, *kúpakički, *kúpakički < *кукара́чки, *ку́какичики, *ку́карыки < Lith. kadukar- (kukar-), kaukorkai, and so on (for a possible analogous alternation of some consonants in Belarusian dialects, cf. their батлашка < баклажка,

11*

163

кобачка < копачка “a small hollow beneath the breast,” дръмотник < дръмотник, krypъtnik < trypūtnik, кузсūрка < туžurka, and so on [Слоўнік, t. 1, 154, 491; t. 2, 493, 545, 558]. Lexemes of this type are the oldest, have undergone the greatest change, and are furthest removed from their principal source.

The lexeme курóпачki may also be very old. It may have undergone the following course of phonetic change: курóпачki < *куро́качки < *кукора́чки < Lithuanian kukar- (kav-kar-) + Belarusian -ачki.

Sometimes it happens that the precise Lithuanian equivalent of a suspected Belarusian dialectal Lithuanianism cannot be determined. For example, there is no doubt that their place-name Бажышки ‘a pasture in the village of Saltoniškės, Varanava district’ [Мікратанімія, 23] is a Lithuanianism, but it is unclear whether the root a derives from Lithuanian au, or uo, since at some point both diphthongs in certain Belarusian dialects yielded the same a reflex, e.g., Лакінікі < Lithuanian Laukininkai and габа < Lithuanian guobà, etc. Thus it is unclear whether the Lithuanian equivalent of Баж- is Bauž-, or Buož-; cf. Lithuanian Baužiškiai ‘a village in Radviliškis district’ and Бюžiski ‘a village in Biržai district’ [LTSR adm., t. 2, 30–44].

Similar difficulties arise with Belarusian dialect words suspected of being Lithuanianisms, such as па́зі, паžáбы, паžáйды, паžáлы, лага́ры, паго́йцы, паýžáн, пýžыўш, супу́зі, супу́зі, which share the meaning “a streak, flow of water or tears, furrow, runlet,” and паziсmų, meaning “striped, spotted” [Слоўнік, t. 2, 603; t. 4, 235, 236, 237, 333; t. 5, 20, 21, 229; Сцяшковіч, 397, 412; Rūdninkai, Akmenynė].

Because of its stop /r/ (more characteristic of Belarusian borrowings), its geographical distribution, and its isolation, the lexeme pázi was suspected of being a Lithuanianism [Арашонкава, 128; Грыневецкене, 187], but so far it has not been possible to identify its actual Lithuanian source. Now that Belarusian dialect dictionaries and manuscript sources have recorded more other, indisputable relatives of pázi in meaning and phonetics, there is reason to continue seeking their Lithuanian counterparts.

If we accept that Belarusian a < aý (< Lithuanian au) arose in the root of the lexeme pázi⁴ (that is, pázi < *páyzi), there is reason to believe that the genetic relationship among the roots of lexemes with equivalent meanings pázi, pýžыўш, пау́ган (паž-, pýž-, páyž-) is sufficiently clear, and that they all derive from páyž-. The lexemes pagáзы, pagáйды, pagáлы, pagójцы likewise undoubtedly have the same páyž- > pag- root (but with different derivational stem elements); so too does лага́ры, which arose through metathesis from pagáлы (through the interchange of the consonants in the edge syllables pa- – -лы, i.e., their pronunciation as ла- – -ры; cf. also the analogous Belarusian ляндэрак ‘a plane with a handle’ < Polish rądelek ‘the same’ [Слоўнік, t. 2, 717]. These lexemes, all with one meaning, may have originated in Lithuanian words of related semantics and phonetics with the root raug-, for example ráugtis (riáugtis) ‘to become overcast, to gather (of clouds)’, ráugas ‘a gloomy person’; cf. also apsiráugė (užsiráugė) ‘it became overcast’, kad tu prasraugtái ‘may you disappear’, užráugti ‘to abandon, to smoke out’ bees with smoke; with root-vowel alternation: rūgà, rūgýs ‘prolonged rain; damp weather’, rūgas ‘a rainy, overcast day’, rūgala, rūgalas

⁴ It should be noted that the Belarusian word pázi is used in the Lazūnai dialect (Vyjos district, BTSR) as a borrowing from Belarusian and is pronounced rõ’g’e’s (because Belarusian a > Lithuanian a; in borrowings from Slavic languages, compare the Belarusian borrowing in that dialect му avóga ‘caution’ < Belarusian амбае́ца ‘the same’, учхво́тай ‘a catch’ < Belarusian ухва́ты ‘the same’ [Lazūnai].

164

“rainy weather”; compare also: Žiulvin, Žiulvin, Žiulvineli, gyvas būsi – pienu rūgsi, “you will flow, stream,” and if you are not alive, you will flow in blood; the dead livestock lay rotting, and from them an indescribable stench spread in all directions, flowing “streaming, spreading,” and so on [LKŽ, t. 11, 281, 286—288, 523, 883, 892, 905]. Thus, as we can see, the semantic component “to flow, become covered, run,” and so on, in Lithuanian rūgštis (rūgti) and related words is precisely identical to the meaning of Belarusian pázi and its other relatives; accordingly, the kinship of the Belarusian words under consideration with the Lithuanian words cited cannot be denied.

Nemažų abejonių dėl giminy stės tiek su br. pázi (ir kt.), tiek ir su lie. rūgštis (rūgti) kelia vienareikšmių su pázi leksemų cupáei, cupýei formos. Jų šaknys, sprendžiant iš panašaus su pázi skambėjimo, ypač bendros reikšmės, turėtų būti -pazi, -pyzi (-pyzi galėtų būti arba tiesiog siejama su lie. rūg- šaknies kalbamosios reikšmės žodžiais, arba laikyti išsirutuliojusį iš *-payzi > *-pŏyzi > *-pyzi; dėl tokio virtimo plg. br. kykýub „molinis švilpukas“ < lie. kakū́tis „t. p.“). Tai pripažinus, jų giminy stė su pázi galėtų būti visai pamatuota ir galima. Tačiau kaip aiškinti jų abiejų žodžio pradžios cy-? Tai, jei būtų ir priešdėlis, jis naujos reikšmės žodžiams neteikia. Tas cy- čia dėl žodžio reikšmės išblukimo galėtų būti atsiradęs ir iš pridėtinio c- bei įspraustinio (dėl lengvumo tarti) y. Kad analogiško priebalsių pridėjimo atvejų šnektose (ypač jų skoliniuose) pasitaiko, gerai rodo ir br. свя́сла „ryšys“ < вя́сла „t. p.“, плі́шта „aprumbas, apmušalas“ < le. listwa „t. p.“, lie. skrúpčioti < krūpčioti ir d. kt. [Слоўнік, т. 4, 14, 403; LKŽ, t. 12, 1101]. O kad kartais po c (ar kito priebalsio), susikaupus priebalsių grupei, gali būti įspraudžiamas y ar kitas kuris balsis, matyti iš tokių br. šnektų žodžių, kaip жарало|журало|жырало́|жэрэло́ „šaltinis, versmė“ < le. źródło „t. p.“, скляроз „sklerozė“ < склероз „t. p.“, скру́так „ryšulys“ < скрутак „t. p.“ ir kt. [Слоўнік, т. 2, 140, 174; t. 5, 14, 16]. Panašų balsiu u (ar net ą!) įspraudimą gerai rodo ir kai kurie lietuvių (taip pat ir prūsų) skoliniai, pvz., suliūbas, sąliūba, sąliūbas „santuoka“ < le. ślub „t. p.“ (plg. pr. salūban „t. p.“), sunevoga „įžeidimas, apšmeižimas“ < le. zniewaga „t. p.“, sūmislas „išmonė, sumanymas“ < le. zmysł „t. p.“, suvodba „vestuvės“ < ru. свадьба „t. p.“ [LKŽ, t. 12, 81; t. 14, 137, 148, 151, 250]. Galėjo čia tas cy- ir visas būti pridėtas prie žodžių *pazi, *pyzi, paklustant jiems br. kalbos darybos dėsniams ar prisitaikant prie jos sistemos. Panašių darybinių atvejų pasitaiko ir lietuvių tarmių skoliniuose, pvz., sūsmislas „sumanymas“ < le. zmysł „t. p.“, suvada „vaidas“ < br. вада „t. p.“ <le. zwada „t. p.“ [LKŽ, t. 14, 230, 246].

If this conjecture of ours proves well-founded and plausible, then the Lithuanian origin of Belarusian pázi, cupáei and other lexemes related to them may very well have been precisely of this kind*.

ABBREVIATIONS

Akmenynė

— Akmenynė dialect (Šalčininkai District), notes from E. Grinaveckienė’s 1981 expedition.

Арашонкава

— Арашонкава А. У., Грынаเวцкене А. І., Кавальчук І. П., Манкевіч Ю. Ф., Рамановіч Я. М., Шаталава Л. Ф. З лексікі беларускіх

*Regarding some “Lithuanianisms,” the members of the editorial board hold a different opinion.

165

гаворак заходняй зоны // Весці Акадэміі Навук БССР. Серия грамадскіх навук, № 4, 1969. С. 123—134.

Дыялекталагічны — Дыялекталагічны атлас беларускай мовы. Карты і каментарыі. Мінск, 1963.

Grinaveckienė, — Grinaveckienė E., Mackevič J. Some phonetic features of Lithuanianisms in Belarusian dialects // Lithuanian Language and Bilingualism. V., 1988. P. 123—131.

Grinaveckienė, — Grinaveckienė E., Mackevič J. Reflexes of the Lie, (i)au vocalism in Belarusian Lithuanianisms // Baltistica. 1989. Vol. 3 (supplement 1). P. 70—80.

Гринавеckене — Гринавеckене Э., Макевич Ю. Ф., Романович Е. М., Чеберук Е. И. Everyday vocabulary of Lithuanian origin in western Belarus // Lithuanian Terminology. V., 1975. P. 163—195.

Lazūnai — Lazūnai dialect (Vyvijos District), notes from E. Grinaveckienė’s 1959 and 1972 expeditions.

LTSR adm. — Lietuvos TSR administracinio-teritorinio suskirstymo žinynas. V., 1976. T. 2.

LKŽ — Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language. V., 1968. Vol. 1; V., 1969. Vol. 2; V., 1956. Vol. 3 et seq.

Мікратанімія — Мікратанімія Беларусі. Мінск, 1974.

Народнае — Народнае слова. Мінск, 1976.

Rūdninkai — Rūdninkai dialect (Šalčininkai District), notes from E. Grinaveckienė’s 1980 expedition.

Сцяшко — Сцяшко П. У. Народная лексіка і словаўтварэнне. Мінск, 1972.

Сцяшковіч — Сцяшковіч Т. Ф. Слоўнік гродзенскай вобласці. Мінск, 1983.

Слоўнік — Слоўнік беларускіх гаворак паўночна-заходняй Беларусі і яе пагранічча. Т. 1—5, Мінск, 1979—1986.

Жывое — Жывое слова. Мінск, 1978.

NEW LITUANISMS IN BELARUSIAN DIALECTS

Abstract

Researchers of Belarusian dialect vocabulary constantly encounter loanwords of Lithuanian origin that have not yet been identified. Loanwords with the root vowel a /o/ u, which developed over the centuries from Lithuanian words with the vowels (i)uo, (i)au, attract attention; for example, аба ‘elm’ < Lith. guoba ‘etc.’, гужалкі ‘tadpoles’ < Lith. buožgalviai ‘etc.’, сатка ‘large shawl with tassels’ < Lith. sijūstė ‘etc.’, Лох ‘name of a field in the Novogrudok District of the Byelorussian SSR’ < Lith. Laukas ‘name of a field’ (<Lith. laukas ‘field’), кукуў ‘clay whistle’ < Lith. kaukiūtis ‘etc.’. These loanwords often also conceal certain changes in consonantism and exhibit a variety of word-formation patterns. It is therefore sometimes relatively difficult to establish the authentic Lithuanian sources of such lexemes.

The article examines the numerous forms of the word какарачкі ‘heel bone; legs; shoulders’ and motivates and substantiates the origin of each separately from Lith. kākaras (kūkaras) ‘hump’. Since the root a in Belarusian borrowings could have developed from either the Lithuanian diphthong au or uo, it is effectively impossible to determine the exact Lithuanian source of the Belarusian toponym Бажышки: it could have arisen equally from the Lithuanian toponym Vaižškis or Buožškis.

The article attempts to establish the Lithuanian source of the lexemes рагі, рэўгішы, раўган, сургіі and others, meaning ‘streaks, trickles of sweat, water, tears’, which have long been considered Lithuanianisms. On the basis of the meaning of the segment ‘to flow, run, drag on, become covered’ and the likelihood of the Belarusian law а < Lith. au (cf. раўган, рэўгішы), it is concluded that these lexemes may have derived from Lithuanian words with the root aug-(riaug-, rīg-) and the same meaning. The roots of the lexemes сургіі, сургіі are -раг-, -руг-, while their first syllable су-, which does not give the words a new meaning, is a prefix, just as the syllable su- is analyzed as a prefix in the Lithuanian borrowing sūvada ‘quarrel’ < Belarusian вада ‘same’ < Polish zwada ‘same’

166