Словарь современного русского литературного языка. М.; Л., 1957. Т. 6 Тлумачальны слоўнік беларускай мовы. Мінск, 1979. Т. 3. Финско-русский словарь / Сост. Й. Вахрос, А. Щербаков. М., 1975. Чешско-русский словарь / Под ред. Л. В. Копецкого, Й. Филипа, О. Лепки. М.; Прага, 1973. Т. 1.

PRONUNCIATION OF HARD r INSTEAD OF SOFT r IN THE SAMOGITIAN DIALECTS

1. Hardening of the consonant r before front vowels is a regular phonetic feature of some eastern and southern Aukštaitian dialects. It has been described in detail by Z. Zinkevičius (1966, pp. 165—166, 519) and Ž. Urbanavičiūtė (1970, pp. 61—65; 1971, pp. 55—69); see LKA II, map 87.

Some variation between hard and soft r is also found in Samogitian dialects. This is in fact a phenomenon of quite a different kind from the “hardening” or “softening” in the Aukštaitian dialect, since Samogitian dialects exhibit so-called jotin r-softening, followed by the replacement with hard consonants of consonants that have thus been softened.

This phonetic phenomenon in the Samogitian dialect has already attracted the attention of our dialectologists (Зинкявичюс, 1973, pp. 93—97). Z. Zinkevičius cites many specific examples, also seeking to indicate their geographical distribution (Zinkevičius, 1968, pp. 153—156). V. Grinaveckis writes similarly about it, giving more attention to the pronunciation of soft r and the geographical distribution of this rule, and adducing many examples that show various analogies / dràu-ks — drìaugas “friend”, ùždraude — ùždraudė “forbade”, etc. / (Grinaveckis, 1973, pp. 313—316), while emphasizing that in some places it is “undoubtedly a new phenomenon” (Grinaveckis, 1973, p. 316). A. Girdenis has now also taken an interest in this phonetic issue, drawing particular attention to the frequent pronunciation of hard r in the northeastern Samogitian (dūnininkai, Varniškiai) dialects, where “such a completely regular [emphasis by A. Girdenis] phenomenon can only be of phonetic origin” [emphasis by A. Girdenis] (Girdenis, 1980, p. 34). It is regrettable, of course, that the “Atlas of the Lithuanian Language” did not investigate this phenomenon; no such question was included in its program (individual words trobà, riogsóti may not reveal the geographical distribution of the rule’s operation in sufficient detail).

2. While compiling the “Dictionary of the Northeastern Dūnininkai Dialects” (Vitkauskas, 1976) and in the course of studying the southern Samogitian dialect more generally, quite a large number of examples accumulated in which the stem sound sequences *rìa, *rìau, *rìu, *rìū, *rìo, unlike in Standard Lithuanian, the Aukštaitian dialects, and even other Samogitian dialects, have become ro, rau, ru, rū, ruo in many of the dialects studied, rather than rio, riau, riu, riū, rio. Here I examine how Samogitian Dūnininkai (Varniškiai) speakers in the Kuršėnai (Šiauliai district), Vidsodis, Užventis (Kelmė district), Pāvandenė, and Vie kšniai (Telšiai district) dialects, which have been studied in greater detail, pronounce many such words.

The following forms were recorded: braũ.nà Krš, Užv, Vds || brãũnà Pvn, Vkšn “edge, ridge”, gráu-t'į Krš || grã.ut'ė Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “to demolish”, graus't'in'is Krš || graus't'l.n'is Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “thunderstorm, thunder”, grúov'im's Krš || grúov'ems Užv, Vds || grúov'ė.ms Pvn, Vkšn “demolition”, gruy'iėsà Krš || groy'ėsà Pvn, Vkšn “ruins”, grú.t'i Krš || grú.t'e Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “to collapse”, gruy'in'let'į Krš || groy'e-n'let'e Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “to crumble”, grúov'i:s Krš || grúov'i:s Pvn “ditch”, karùm'en'i Krš || karùm'en'e Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “army”, older generation

208

k’eturiol’eka Krš || k’etərñol’eka Pvn, Vkšn¹ “fourteen”, kraũ.nas Krš, Užv, Vds || krãṇas Pvn, Vkšn (and b’r’ė’it’krãun’is Pvn, Vkšn) “ridge” (“deer ridge”), krãukšlas Vkšn “clod, knobbly lump”, kraũ.š’us Krš || kraũ.š’os Užv, Vds || krãũ’os Pvn, Vkšn “pear, slope”, kraũš’it’i Krš || krauš’it’e Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “to beat, shove” (cf. kriaũšyti LKŽ VI 569–570), kruok’in’t’i Krš || krũo-k’in’t’e Užv, Vds || krũok’.n’t’e Pvn, Vkšn “to make a sound like rushing water, to make someone cry”, kruõk Krš, Užv, Vds || krũok Pvn, Vkšn “it roars, cries”, kruõkšena Krš, Drv “crying”, kruók-l’ i’s “crybaby”, krukš’iet’i Krš || krǫks’iet’e Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “to squeal”, krùks’i Krš “piglet, pig”, krū-kt’i Krš || krū-kt’e Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “to grunt, complain, groan, squeal”, loanword krãk’is Krš || krù.k’is Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “crook”, krã. uklã Krš || krã. uklã Pvn, Vkšn “shells” (and pakrã. ukl’e || pakrã. ukl’ė “shell fragments”), ruõg’l’in’iet’i Krš || ruõg’l’en’iet’e Užv, Vds || rũõg’l’en’iet’e Pvn, Vkšn “to stroll about, walk around”, ruokšuot’i Krš || ruokšuot’e Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “to lie about, be sprawled”, ruõg’l’en’t’i Krš || ruõg’l’en’t’e Vds, Užv “to lounge about”, skraũ.dà Krš, Užv, Vds || skrãudã Pvn, Vkšn “injustice, harm”, skraũ.s’t’i Krš || skraũ.s’t’e Užv, Vds || skraũs’t’e Pvn, Vkšn “to wrong, harm” (and nù.skrauda Krš “injustice”), srùba Krš || sròbà Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “soup”, srup’č’uot’i Krš || sròp’č’ùot’e Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “to sip soup”, srupšnuot’i Krš “to sip soup”, srũ.p’t’i Krš || srũ.p’t’e Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “to sip, drink”, srub’in’iet’i Krš “to sip repeatedly, drink little by little”, srũ.p’s’n’is Krš || srũ.p’s’n’is Pvn “a drinker”, traũ.š’is Krš || traũšis Pvn, Vkšn “horsetail”, trūkšmas Krš || trũ.kšmas Drv || trǫ.kšmas Pvn, Užv, Vkšn, Vds “noise”, trukšma.ut’i Krš || trukšina.ut’i Drv || trokšma.ut’e Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “to make a noise”, loanword trūšis Krš || trū.šis Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “rabbit”, trūšiena Krš || trǫš’iena Pvn, Vkšn “rabbit meat”, triš’t’i Krš || trǫ.š’t’e Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “to crumble, break apart”, trūš’k’in’t’i Krš || trǫš’k’in’t’e Užv, Vds || trǫš’k’i.n’t’e Pvn, Vkšn “to crush”, and a few others.

Many of the words given here with hard r are also pronounced in numerous other Dūnininkai dialects (Grinaveckis, 1973, p. 313). For example, krũokt’e “to cry”, kruokl’is “crybaby”, grũt’e “difficult”, srũ.p’t’e “to sip”, trǫš’k’in’t’e “to crush”, trūš’k’is “rabbit” — Vainūtas (Šilutė district); grã.um “it demolishes”, triš’t’i “to crumble”, skrãud “it harms”, gruov’is “ditch”, ruõg’l’in’t’is “to lounge about”, srũ.p’č’uo’t’i “to sip soup” — Žvingiai (Šilalė district); bra.ung “edge, ridge”, krãṇas “ridge”, krũoka.ut’e “to cry and wail”, grov’en’iet’e “to crumble”, trǫkšmas “noise”, trokšma.ut’e “to make a noise” — Pajūris (Šilalė district); ruokšoje “it was lying about”, grǫ.va “it collapsed”, grov’iesã “ruins”, krũok “it roars, cries”, srũ.bā.ut’e “to sip soup”, sròp’č’ùot’e “to sip soup” — Varniai (Telšiai district); krũokāva “it cried, shouted”, grǫ.va “it collapsed”, srũb “he/she sips soup, drinks” — Švėkšna (Šilutė district), and so on.

2.1. The phenomenon is characteristic also of some Dounininkai (Northern Samogitian) dialects. For example: grã.ut’e “to demolish”, b’r’ė’it’krãun’is “deer ridge”, krũo-kt’e “to roar, cry”, krũokš’ena “roaring, crying”, nũ.grovas “landslides”, srũ.p’t’e “to sip”, srũ.p’t’enã “sipping, having sipped” — Raudėnai (Šiauliai district); skraũs’-

¹ The younger generation has already learned at school to pronounce soft r: Keturiol’eka || k’etərñol’eka, keturõleka, keturõlektas. These forms are not included in LKŽ.

14. 1880

209

rę, nu'skrūada “a misfortune,” trū:kšmas “noise,” rūogl'en'iet'e “to crawl,” grọ.va “collapsed” — Tryškiai (Telšiai district); grọv'en'ė “is collapsing,” trọ.š'k'ena “crushed,” nutrọš'.ė.ms “collapse,” krū:k “grunts, squeals,” krọ.ks'e “squealed, pig,” rūogl'en'ė “is crawling” — Kaunatava (Telšiai district); kriọks'ena “wailing, crying,” krūok'l'i:s “crybaby,” grọv'en'ė “is collapsing,” graust'į.l'n'is “thunder,” nutrọ.ša “collapsed,” trū.š'is “rabbit,” krū.k'is “grunt,” k'eturio-l'eka “fourteen” — Luokė (Telšiai district); strop'ė'ot'e “to sip,” sū.grova “a pileup, a crumpled thing,” krūokč'ioje “was sobbing, weeping” — Janapolė (Telšiai district), and elsewhere. In a brief conversation with several people from Eigirdžiai (Telšiai district), I heard two forms: kruọk'ę “cried,” nutrọ.ša “collapsed,” but it is now difficult to say whether the phenomenon described here is regular there or not: that is a task for further research. Indeed, almost nothing has been written in our dialectological literature about this hard pronunciation of r in the Dounininkai (Northern Samogitian) dialects. Thus, the Dounininkai (Northern Samogitian) dialects are by no means uniform in their pronunciation of r and r' in this respect; they do not form a single area. One or another example can be found only in the anthology Lietuvių kalbos tarmės: krọkė:s “with sobs” Žr(LKT87), kruọks'o “I’ll sob, I’ll cry” Lk(LKT84). This is probably all that was known about the phenomenon in the Dounininkai dialects.

2.2. This phonetic feature is also characteristic of the Donininkai Samogitian dialects around Saugos and Šilutė: krā.ušės “pear,” krọ.k'l'i:s “crybaby,” grū.n “collapses,” grā.un “demolishes,” srā.ub “sips, slurps” (Saugos, Šilutė district), krọ:k “wails, cries,” the village krọ:k'išk'ai, grā.ut'e “to demolish,” rọ.gl'in't'e “to crawl” (Šilutė), but compare kr'ō.k'l'in'is “crybaby” (Dovilai, Klaipėda district), gr'ō:vę “demolished,” kr'ā.ušė. (Priekulė, Klaipėda district), and elsewhere. The influence of German has softened this feature of the Donininkai dialects, but differences remain and are clearly perceptible: northern dialects still have r'o-, r'au- in certain cases, whereas southern dialects have almost exclusively ro-, rau-, and so on.

The word sur'.p't'įl|sor'p't'ę “to suck” and its derivatives sūr'p'č'ūot'į Krš, sūt'b'iel'ė Dnv ||sor'b'iel'ė Pvn, Vkšn, sor'b'l':s Pvn, Vkšn likewise do not have jotized softening; compare the same phenomenon in the Laukuva, Vainutas, Pajūris, Žvingiai, Varniai, Viešvėnai, Raudėnai, and even Seda and Varduva dialects (similar examples can be found in the writings of S. Daukantas and M. Valančius, and in A. Juška’s dictionary: kurs krauja surba, bus surbūklis). Here su- < *sū- (Standard Lithuanian su- < *sū), although one might also consider analogy with the srūbti, srubčioti root and its derivatives (cf. siurbčioti and sru bčioti).

3. This hard pronunciation of the consonant r undoubtedly arose because of the early loss of *i, since, as A. Girdenis correctly conjectures, in these dialects “r | < *rj| de palatal(i)za)cization could have occurred only in a system in which palatalization of r before front vowels was alien” (Girdenis, 1980. P. 34); consequently, when i was lost from *grąunėt'i, *trūkšmaut'i, *siurbtėi [and Samogitian had a certain tendency toward this, cf. the old Samogitian dialect law *tj, *dj>t, d: *jautjei>jautėi||jaun'e, *žadja>žūdė||žūodę], grāuti, trukšmauti, sūr bti, and others arose. Apparently a similar conjecture had already been made somewhat earlier (Виткаускас 1974, p. 39–40); the more varied dialect data collected since then, as well as A. Girdenis’s more recent research and conclusions and brief notes in various articles concerned with other issues than the pronunciation of the consonant r, merely confirm this.

3.1. Later, strong analogy clearly operated in the Samogitian dialects, as loanwords krūkis, trūšis began to pattern, as we have seen, with rog-sóti, trūšti (also šrūps ~ šrā-

210

bas, krūks ~ krūgas, krau.čius || krauč'os “tailor,” and, occasionally, ra- is pronounced instead of re-, especially around Švėkšna: rā:p'l'es “pliers,” rap'l'ek'es “small replicas” (Grinaveckis, 1973, p. 315²); compare also krā:psas Krš, Vds, Užv “basket,” krāsnā Krš, Vds, Vkš “stout, a spark,” krā:s'i Krš || krā:s'e Užv (compare even Western Aukštaitian krā:s'e Škn), krā:t'ė.ls Pvn “scraper,” truń.ksmas Krš || trō:nksmas Pvn, Užv, Vds, Vkšn “crash” [might hard r have arisen before an>un || on, which could indicate a somewhat earlier origin of the phenomenon?], and so on (Vitkauskas, 1976, p. 148–139). For reasons that are difficult to explain, this ra- || re- is irregular, since there is also variation: kr'ė:s'i || kr'ė:s'e, kr'ė:t'ė.ls are often said. Sometimes in this case r is pronounced softly before the old diphthong ai, which develops into ei: kr'ei.t'is Krš || kr'ėit'is Pvn “dowry,” rei.bul'ut'i Krš || r'ėibol'ūt'e Pvn “to ripple,” kr'ei.ks Krš, Vds || kr'ėiks Pvn “roofing” (Vitkauskas, 1976. P. 150, 300). This is as if a retreat from the hard-r pronunciation transition that dialect speakers seem to perceive, or perhaps the influence of neighboring Dounininkai (Paplė, Judrėnai, Nevarėnai) and Western Aukštaitian (Šiauliai, Gruzdžiai) dialects is at work here.

In word endings, in á.u — dariau “I did,” var á.u “I drove,” r had not hardened because of the constraints of the ē-stem paradigm (Girdenis, 1980, p. 34), and perhaps here -iau < *eu, where there would be no i, so the ending in its form did not conform to *riau-, *rįa- and other similar ancient sound sequences.

3.2. This older consonant, which is not entirely regular and is still subject to analogy, must be transcribed with great care, while keeping dialect forms authentic. The volumes of LKŽ show that linguists have interpreted this as the same hardening as in the Dzūkian and Eastern Aukštaitian dialects; consequently, Samogitian dialect krā.udkla· Krš became kriáuklais (LKŽ VI 561), kruóksu Krš became krióksiu (LKŽ VI 606), krāūkslas (Luokė) was rendered as kriaukšlu (LKŽ VI 564), pagrō.vos'ō (Luokė) as pagrīūvusiu (LKŽ III 624), griōv'ims (Kaltinėnai) as griovimu (LKŽ III 617), rā.ukčios (Laukuva) as riáugčios (LKŽ XI 512), etc. On the other hand, it is likewise inappropriate to transcribe Dounininkai r'au as rau- (for example, Darbėnai r'āušis was needlessly given as raušis — LKŽ XI 324) or to include it in a general entry with words that have hard r (for example, Grušlaukis transcribed riaūšis ended up under the entry raūšis — LKŽ XI 324). Such transcription greatly obscures a dialect phonetic phenomenon important to language history.

3.3. It should also be added that along the border with Western Aukštaitian dialects (the villages of Pakšteliai, Rūveliai, Ivoškiai, and others in Šiauliai district), hard r is increasingly replaced by soft r; thus one can hear there even b'r'ā.ut'is ~ briáuties, gr'ā.uš't'i ~ griáužti, kr'ā.ut'i ~ kriáuti, kr'ūva ~ kriūva, iš'r'āu.da ~ išriaūdo, and even gr'eib'īt'i ~ greibyti and iš gr'ei.p't'i ~ greibti? / and so on. This is the result of dialect contact in a narrow strip along the dialect boundary, since neighboring Western Aukštaitian speakers also most often have soft r in this case, e.g.: gr'ā.ušt “to gnaw,” gr'ā.ut “to demolish,” kr'ā.ut “to load,” r'o·kso·t “to loom,” kr'āužo·les “bloodwort,” s'r'iūoga “bunch,” s'r'āūnus “rapid,” b'r'iet-

² Only there could the stem vowel a of the word rakibūolas mentioned above have arisen from something other than ei, since otherwise one would expect the pronunciation ra'k' ribā.ls, as in rar'īr'is, rakal'ī.nks, r'e'k'ėję, and others; compare also Kuršėnai rakī·balc, since in this eastern Varniai dialect the diphthong ai remains unchanged in the stem.

14*

211

kr'āūnis “a stony slope,” s'r'ūtas “slurry,” etc. (Šakyna, Šiauliai district; information from philology candidate A. Jonait/P/ytė)³.

Ideophones r'ūkt “thump,” kr'āu.kšt || kr'āūkšt, t'r'āu.kšt || t'r'āūkšt are used throughout the dialect area described here, apparently to imitate sounds. Ideophones in general very often “do not obey” phonetic laws, and therefore entirely specific sounds occur, for example tprūs' “a word used to drive cows” — this is connected with sound imitation, so no influences can be discerned here.

The opposite phenomenon—almost absolute palatalization of r in analogous cases in most Dounininkai (Northern Samogitian) dialects and in the southernmost Dūnininkai dialects (Tauragė, Gaurė, Eržvilkas, Nemakščiai, Viduklė, Raseiniai)—has been described in detail by V. Grinaveckis, and requires no comment here. These Samogitian dialects have almost no words in which a hard r occurs in the root in the sound sequences rau, ruo < rō < *rā, rọ < ru (except for the words trūōbā, trū·kt'e, trū·k'is, rūod'īt'e and a few others).

3.4. Soft r also occurs in similar cases in Latvian dialects bordering on Northern Samogitian (Grinaveckis, 1973, p. 316).

4. Some evidence of the mixing of r and r' /?/ can also be observed in the Prussian language: grenfings = greufings; greus- = *grauz- (Mažiulis, 1981, p. 174; Топоров, 1978, с. 302–304); compare also crausy, crausios “pear” (Mažiulis, 1981, p. 281), raples “scraper” (Mažiulis, 1981, p. 307), although no firm conclusions can be drawn from inconsistent spelling and isolated examples [perhaps also grauws “side, Seyte” Топоров, 1978, с. 293–294].

Thus Samogitian forms with r and r' before au, o, ū, u /-ū/ must be transcribed according to how they are pronounced in the respective dialects, because complex laws of historical phonetics are intertwined here, analogy has operated, and the influence of various languages and dialects has been at work. That this is not an entirely new phenomenon is shown not only by Latvian and perhaps Prussian, but also by our old written monuments: in M. Mažvydas’s writings the word neūgrūtu is used (Mažvydas, 1974, p. 238); compare also the word sugruti, written in the book “Margarita Theologica” (1600) by S. Vaišnoras, a native of Varniai (Gerullis, 1927, p. 185). There are many such examples in the writings of L. Ivinskis (1811–1871), a Samogitian from Užventis: grūvesai LKŽ III 681, rogsoti LKŽ XI 814, sugrāutė “to demolish” ISPL1978, atsiroglintė ibid., sugrōwimas ibid., sugruwimas ibid., sugrāutas ISPL1979, etc.; compare also S. Daukantas’s krokant B130, krokdama B164 (but griauti B164), graudamijs B197, etc.

The earlier emergence of this phenomenon is indicated by its geographical distribution: the isogloss of the phenomenon, beginning east and north of Kuršėnai, running north of Raudėnai and Tryškiai, turning toward Eigirdžiai and Žarėnai, and then following the boundary between Dūnininkai and Dounininkai and crossing the Donininkai (Western Samogitian) dialect north of Saūgai, suggests that the phenomenon may already have been developing before the Klaipėda region came under German rule. The distribution of the phenomenon and the Donininkai (Western Samogitian) area’s common border with Dūnininkai show precisely that here *rj<r, when no administrative boundaries or borders separated these dialects.

4.1. In general, it is also unclear why j disappeared after r, what caused the dialect variants suŕbti and siuŕbti to arise. We can now only state and ex-

³ Atskirų faktų iš tos vietos (sriūtos, sriūnūs ir kt.) yra pateikta (Zinkevičius, 1966, p. 154).

212

to show that this change from the siurb- root to surb- occurs precisely in the area where *rjau-, *rjā-, *rju-, *rjuo-, *rjō- became rau-, ro-, ru-, ruo-.

4.2. The siulp- and sulp- parallels should also be added to this verb. In the same locations, one hears sōl’p’t’e Pvn, Vkšn, Užv || sul’.p’t’i Krš, Drv (but compare s’ō’l’p’t’e in Judrėnai, Rietavas, Tryškiai, Seda), sūl’p’s’t’i’t’i Krš || sō.l’p’s’t’i’t’e Užv, Pvn, Vkšn (but s’ō.l’p’s’t’i’t’e in Tryškiai, Seda, Mažeikiai, etc.). It is now difficult to say what happened here, which root was formerly dominant among the Samogitians (dictionaries of the standard language record mainly sūlpstyti, sulpti, sūlpauti), or what the development of the consonant s was (perhaps this is the softening of consonants in Northern Samogitian under the influence of the analogy of čiulti). The geographical distribution of the sulp- root is also poorly known, so everything in this case is hypothetical: this verb, rarely used in everyday speech, happens to find its way into the notes of linguistic dialectologists and is therefore recorded unevenly across Lithuania. In Dzūkian dialects (Druskininkai, Ratnyčia, Kabeliai), sul.pc has been heard, but here it is obscured by a different type of consonant hardening, unrelated to the old į.

Vytautas Vitkauskas

ABBREVIATIONS NOT FOUND IN LKŽ

B = [S. Daukantas] Budą Senowęs Letuwiu Kalnienu ir Žamajtiu iszraszę pagal Senowęs Rasztu Jokyb’s Laukys, Petroplije, 1845. Drv = Dirvėnai, Šiauliai district. ISPL = Iwinski. Słownik Polsko-litewski. [About 1849–1854]. Vds = Vidsodis, Kelmė district. Vkšn = Vieksnaliai, Telšiai district.

Б. ВИТКАУСКАС

ON THE PRONUNCIATION OF HARD CONSONANT r INSTEAD OF SOFT r IN THE ŽEMAITIAN DIALECTS OF THE LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE

Резюме

In Lithuanian dialects, depalatalization of soft r is widespread (among some Eastern Aukštaitians and some Southern Aukštaitians).

Hardening in the sequences *r’ia, *r’iau, *r’iu is known in Samogitian dialects (an isogloss is presented here for the first time: the line runs east and north of Kuršėnai, north of Raudenai, Tryškiai, Žarėnai, Kvedarna, Švėkšna, Saugos, and the Curonian Lagoon, south of Vainutas and Šilalė, through Kražiai, and reaches Tytuvėnai), e.g., kriōk instead of standard Lithuanian kriōkia ‘cries’, gri’n instead of standard Lithuanian griūna ‘topples, topple; falls, fall’, krainas instead of standard Lithuanian kriaũnos ‘stalk’, triūksmas instead of triūksmas ‘noise’, etc.

Such facts are found in Latvian dialects and are recorded in Old Prussian texts.

The hardening of the soft consonant occurred as a result of the disappearance of the consonant į in the aforementioned sound sequences, a development already reflected in the writings of L. Ivinskis (1811–1871), who came from this region. On the basis of this phonetic law, the pronunciation of hard r in Samogitian dialects is also extended by analogy to borrowed words, e.g., šir’ps (in other dialects širibas) ‘wing’, trū’ba (standard triūba ‘trumpet’), etc.

213

In dialects in contact with the Aukštaitian dialect (in some villages near Kuršėnai), the palatal pronunciation of r is observed in the aforementioned sound combinations [gr’ī’n, kr’ūok, kr’āi.nas], and even in cases where hard r is pronounced in the standard language: kr’ū’vā, standard krūvā ‘heap’, gr’ā.uš’t’i, standard grāužti ‘to gnaw’, and so on.

V. VITKAUSKAS

ON THE PRONUNCIATION OF THE HARD CONSONANT r INSTEAD OF THE SOFT ONE IN THE ŽEMAČIAI DIALECTS OF THE LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE

Summary

In Lithuanian dialects, depalatalization of the soft r is widespread (partly in the East Aukštaitian and some South Aukštaitian dialects).

In the Žemaičiai dialects, hardening in the combinations *riā, *riau, *rin is well known (the isogloss is presented here for the first time: the line runs eastwards and north of Kuršėnai, north of Raudėnai, Tryškiai, Žarėnai, Šilalė, Kražiai, and approaches Tytuvėnai), for example: kruōk instead of standard Lithuanian kriōkia ‘cries’, grū’n instead of standard Lithuanian griūna ‘falls’, kraīnas instead of standard Lithuanian kraīnos ‘handle’, trūksmas instead of trūksmas ‘noise’, and so on.

Similar facts occur in Latvian dialects, they are also recorded in the Prussian writings.

Depalatalization of the soft r appeared as a consequence of the disappearance of the consonant j in the above mentioned sound combinations which is already reflected in the works by L. Ivinskis (1811–1871), who by birth is from this region. On the basis of this phonetical law pronunciation of the hard r in Žemaičiai dialects is analogically transferred on loanwords, for example: šrū’ps (in other dialects šriūbas) „screw“, trū’ba (the standard Lithuanian triūba „tube“) and others.

In the dialects which are in contact with the Aukštaičiai dialect (in some villages near Kuršėnai) pronunciation of the mentioned sound is observed in combinations (gr’ī’n, kr’ūok, kr’āi.nas) and even in such cases when in the standard Lithuanian the hard r is pronounced: kr’ū’vā, the standard Lithuanian krūvā „heap“, gr’ā.uš’t’i, the standard Lithuanian grāužti „gnaw“ and others.

LITERATŪRA

Gerullis J. / par./. Senieji lietuvių skaitymai. K., 1927.

Girdėnas A. Žemaičių dūz̆kavimas: dabartinė padėtis ir istorija // Baltistica. 1980. T. 16. sąs. 1. P. 32–44.

Grinaveckis V. Žemaičių tarmių istorija. V., 1973.

Mažiulis V. Prūsų kalbos paminklai. V., 1981. T. 2.

Mažvydas M. Pirmoji lietuviška knyga. V., 1974.

Urbanavičiūtė Ž. Kietieji ir minkštieji priebalsiai lietuvių literatūrinėje kalboje ir tarmėse // Baltistica. 1970. T. 6, sąs. 2. P. 61–65.

Urbanavičiūtė Ž. Priebalsių kietinimas lietuvių kalbos tarmėse // Kalbotyra. 1971. T. 23, sąs. 1. P. 55–69.

Vitkauskas V. Šiaurės rytų dūnininkų šnektų žodynas. V., 1976.

Zinkevičius Z. Lietuvių dialektologija. V., 1966.

Виткаускас В.-А. И. Морфофонематические диалектизмы в говорах жемайтов дунинников: Автореф. дис. … канд. филол. наук. Вильнюс, 1974.

Зинкявичюс З. К истории палатализации согласных в балтийских языках // Latvijas PSR zinātņu akadēmijas Vēstis. Rīgā, 1973. T. 4. P. 93–97.

Топоров В. Н. Прусский язык. Е–Н. М., 1979.

214