Mišrieji dvigarsiai „am“, „an“, „em“, „en“ ir balsiai „ą“, „ę“ K. Širvydo raštuose

LIETUVIŲ KALBOS GRAMATINĖ SANDARA LIETUVOS TSR MOKSLŲ AKADEMIJA MIXED DIPHTHONGS am, an, em, en AND THE VOWELS ą, ę IN K. ŠIRVYDAS’S WRITINGS K. MORKŪNAS The precise place of origin of K. Širvydas—one of the most prominent representatives of early Lithuanian writing—is unknown. It is inferred mainly from dialectal features, of which there are many in his writings—the two-part collection of sermons (“Punktai sakymų”) and the first Lithuanian dictionary (“Dictionarium trium linguarum”). It is therefore clear how important it is to explain every dialectal feature of his writings, and especially to localize it (determine its distribution in present-day Lithuanian dialects). Linguists have long noted that many dialectal features of both of the aforementioned seventeenth-century monuments of Lithuanian are characteristic of the Eastern Highlanders. In addition, the mixed diphthongs um, un, im, in and the vowels u, i instead of am, an, em, en and ą, ę indicate that the author of these works came from that part of the Eastern Highland area where the so-called Puntininkai dialect is spoken. Cf. the words and forms in K. Širvydas’s writings: umžinas1 SP I 78, SD² I 96, 192, III 477, krumta SP I 269, pakumpes SP I 108, sumtis SD I 190, III 102, 470; unglis SD I 189, III 468, dungus SP I 7, duntis SD I 183, 205, III 513, nemundagus SD I 96, III 204, kunkley “kanklės” SP II 57, punčiu SP I 38, tūkius [=tunkus] SP II 5, zunduo SP I 72, 110, SD I 55, 90, busiunčios SP II 36, szaukiučio [=szaukiunčio] SP I 69, werkiunčias SP I 42; pimpe SD I 17; apdingimas SD I 110(2×), byndras SP I 27, tyngwa SP I 51, nindre SP I 43, II 163; drusus SD I 20, 170, III 412, gružtas SP I 271, SD I 177, III 429, kusnis SP I 271, musto SP I 50, busius “busiąs” SP I 75, darus “darąs” SD I 97, III 21, 39, singular accusative gatu SD I 22, 60, 93, III 48, singular instrumental kaktu SD I 18, kadu SP I 39; apigrįžiu SD I 213, kisd amas SP I 23, numiris SP I 10, pakietys SP I 53, suszaty SP I 330, singular genitive manis SP I 9, singular accusative meity SP I 58, su galiby SP I 15, kokiamy SP I 42, raszty3 SP I 13. 1 In Širvydas’s writings, some graphemes have been altered: s is written instead of ∫, sz instead of β, and a single letter—ž—is written instead of the several graphemes denoting the consonant ž. 2 The illustrative material was collected from K. P a l k a l k a’s “Register of Lithuanian Words in Konstantinas Širvydas’s Dictionary ‘Dictionarium trium linguarum’” (Institute of the Lithuanian Language and Literature of the Lithuanian SSR Academy of Sciences, 1964, typescript). 3 For the final vowel of the plural inessive ending (-e, rarely -i) in K. Širvydas’s writings, see “The Morphological Structure of the Lithuanian Language and Its Development,” Vilnius, 1964, pp. 145 ff. 139 However, both “Punktai sakymų” and the dictionary contain words and forms with am, an, em, en; ą (a), ę (e). These cases are often regarded not as features of K. Širvydas’s dialect, but as evidence of other dialects or of the literary language that was beginning to take shape at the time. Is this view correct in every case? Another question arises: do both parts of “Punktai sakymų” and all editions of the dictionary contain cases with the mixed diphthongs am, an, em, en and the vowels ą, ę with the same frequency? After all, other people were involved to a greater or lesser extent in preparing Part II of “Punktai sakymų” and the three editions of the dictionary published after K. Širvydas’s death4. A more precise answer to these questions can be provided by statistics on all occurrences of the diphthongs and vowels mentioned, as well as by comparing facts characteristic of K. Širvydas’s writings with the corresponding data from present-day Eastern Highland dialects5. Words and forms in K. Širvydas’s writings with am, an, em, en can first be divided into two groups: (1) those in which these diphthongs occur consistently in both parts of “Punktai sakymų” and in all editions of the dictionary; (2) those in which am, an, em, en occur inconsistently, usually in only one part of “Punktai sakymų” and not in all editions of the dictionary. Words and forms consistently containing ą, ę are not found. 1. am, an, em, en occur consistently in several cases. a) em, en occur in the infinitives and their derivatives of verbs in which, in the present or simple past tense, or in both of these tenses, the diphthongs split, that is, the first component becomes part of one syllable and the second part of another. The following words and forms in K. Širvydas’s writings have these em, en: paremti SP II 98, paremt SP II 98, iremti SP I 343, II 65, pasiremti SP II 97(2×), pasirėtu [=pasirėmtu] SP II 97, paremtas SD III 488, paremta SP II 98; iszsemti SP I 277, iszsemt SP I 209, SD III 494, Sembite SP I 214, sem tu SP I 209, ne yszsemtu SP I 209, ižsemtas SP II 212, neižsemtas SD I 97; aptemti SD III 523, sutems SP I 331; attremt SP I 158, ižtremt SP II 56, 61, atatremdawo SP II 58, ižtremtas SP II 56, ižtrėtas [=ižtremtas] SP II 69, isz t remtas SD III 496, ižtrėta [=ižtremta] SP II 138, plural nominative ižtremti SP I 254; ižwems SP I 382; nugabent SP II 87, neižgabentu SD III 3; nopgierdentas “unproclaimed” SD III 208; giwenti SP I 174, 244, giwent SP I 17, 44, 72–73, 353, II 27, 228, pagiwent SD III 323, pragiwėt [=pragiwent] SD III 359, giwendawo SP I 254, giwens SP I 244, 311(2×), 360, giwensime SP II 241; giwentu SP I 154, 206, 207, II 241, 4 Cf. K. Pakalka, “From the history of K. Širvydas’s dictionary ‘Dictionarium trium linguarum’,” “Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai,” vol. 3, Vilnius, 1960, pp. 277 ff.; K. П а к а л к а, Первый литовский словарь, автореф. дисс., Вильнюс, 1964, pp. 4 ff. 5 The most important cases in which am, an, em, en and ą, ę occur in K. Širvydas’s writings were identified, and some words and forms containing these diphthongs and vowels were catalogued, by F. Specht; see Sirwyds Punktay sakimu (Punkty kazań), Teil I: 1629, Teil II: 1644, litauisch und polnisch mit kurzer grammatischer Einleitung herausgegeben von Dr. Franz Specht, Göttingen, 1929, pp. 14*–16*. This article seeks especially to draw attention to the inconsistencies in K. Širvydas’s writings that can be accounted for by the Eastern Highland dialects themselves. 140 giwendamas SP I 137, 149, II 17, 47, 49, giwendama SP I 94, giwendami SP I 284, giwentoias SD I 103, III, 239, 271, giwėtojas [= giwentoias] SD III 115, giwentoio SD III 371, singular instrumental, giwentoiu SP I 152, II 72, giwendoiey SP I 125, II 100, 154, 241, SD III 60; pasenstu6 SD III 479. The mixed diphthongs em, en are also found in forms of this type occurring in the anonymous catechism of 1605, likewise written on the basis of the Eastern Aukštaitian dialect: isztręmtiey AK 59; giwent AK 100, 101, Giwéndamas7 AK 30. Very few words or forms in K. Širvydas’s writings have im, in instead of em, en. These are present-tense forms sinstu (1 — a proofreading error, with t intended) SD III 422, sinstu SD V 352, timsta SD I 81, 83, III 36, 171, ażutímsta SD III 515; the half-participle sutímstunt SD III 171; derivatives of the verb lemti: netymtas SD I 27, 36, 39, 91, III 77, plural nominative netymti SP I 125, netymtiby ‘misfortune’ SP I 114. In present-day Eastern Aukštaitian dialects, the aforementioned em, en are pronounced differently. Throughout the westernmost edge of this dialect area, approximately as far as the Saločiai—Pasvalys—Panevėžys—Ukmergė—Širvintos line, they have been preserved intact; thus the following are pronounced here: rēmti, rēndavo, rēms, rēnk, pārėmtas; sēmt, sēmsit, sēnkit, sēmdamas, pasēmtas; tēmt, tēmsta, tēms, gyvėnt, gyvėndavo, gyvėns, gyvėnk, gyvėntum (gyvėntum), gyvėndamas, gyvėntojas; sēnt, sēnsta, pasēns, pasēnk, sēndamas. Among puntininkai, this pronunciation is also found among inhabitants of the Siesikai, Ukmergė, Pabaiskas, Gelvonai, and Musninkai areas. Across most of the puntininkai dialect area (as in the entire Eastern Dzūkian dialect area), the aforementioned diphthongs em, en change to im, in: sīmt, sīmsit (sīmsta), sīmkit, sīmdamas, pasīmtas; tīmt, tīmsta, tīms; gyvīnt, gyvīndavo, gyvīns, gyvīnk, gyvīntum, gyvīndamas, gyvīntojas (Karsakiškis, Vabalninkas, Salamiestis, Kamajai, Kuktiškės, Tauragnai); rīmt, rīmdavo, rīms, rīnk, pārīmtas. (Vabalninkas8). In the forms of the type described, the mixed diphthongs em, en in Punktay Sakymu and Dictionarium trium linguarum are undoubtedly a feature of the native dialect of the author of those publications. Since these publications also contain a few forms with im, in (though in occurs only in later editions of the dictionary), K. Širvydas’s place of origin must, it seems, have been near the aforementioned isoglosses marking the change of em, en to im, in. Geographically, that isogloss may, of course, have differed somewhat between K. Širvydas’s time and the present. b) an is found in the conjunction idant, which is almost unused in present-day Lithuanian dialects, but occurs quite frequently (I — 141, II — 92) in K. Širvydas’s Punktay Sakymu. Only in Part II of this book does the aforementioned conjunction occur twice with un: idūt [= idunt] 29, idunt 47. In the dictionary it has an: idant III 1, 3, idāt [= idant] III 3. The conjunction is somewhat rarer in Punktay Sakymu— 6 F. Specht also assigns to this group ben ‘at least’ SP I 65, pen [in the text: pan] ‘also’ SP II 186 (see the work cited above, p. 15*). 7 Cf. also ben AK 87(₂×). 8 In other Eastern Aukštaitian dialects, the verb remti is most often replaced by spirti ‘to place a prop’. Likewise, in many areas the verb senti has also been replaced by the newer derivative senėti or the phrase eiti senyn. 141 tukas adant (I — 24, II — 72), in which an has everywhere changed to un (adunt); an occurs only once (Adant II 29). c) am, an, em, en in proper and common nouns of non-Lithuanian origin: lampa “lamp” SD III 92, 148, lampas SP I 228, SD III 304, Lampas SP I 228 (₂×), lampomis SP I 227; Samsonas SP II 10, 256 (₂×); adamantu “diamond” SP I 381; Alexandrios SP II 102; Andrieius SP II 104, Andrieiaus SP II 107, Andrieium SP II 107; Angelu SP I 32, Angelay SP II 1, Angelamus SP II 1; Anglia SP I 345, Anglios SD III 119; elefantas “elephant” SD III 409, elefanto SP I 184; ewangelia SP I (₅₁×), II (₂₆×), Ewangelista SP I 126, 133, II 61, 73, Ewāgelista [=Ewangelista] SP II 234, Ewangelistas SP I 225; inflantay “Livonia” SD III 90, inflantčikas “inhabitant of Livonia” SD III 89, inflancikas SD IV 62; kanclieria SD I 51, kancelaria SD III 94, kanclierius SD I 51, III 95, gen. sg. kanclerious SD III 168, kanclerios SD IV 110, kancleriste SD III 95 (only: padkunclerius SD III 308); Kastantinam ieste “Constantinople” SD III 27; koriandras “a plant, coriander” SD III 121; mātelis [=mantelis] “cloak” SD III 298, mantelu SD III 298; Niderlantay “the Netherlands” SD III 200; paganku “sg. masc. pagan” SP I 232; pantaplia “shoe” SD I 119, pantaflos SD III 284, pantaflinikas SD III 284; adwentas SD III 1, Aduento SP I 1, 32, 69, 122; Amen SP II 224; diamentas SD I 20, diamento SD I 20; elefanto SD III 409 (₂×), 410; elementu SP I 62; fundamentas SD I 40, III 77, fundumentu SD I 40; instrumentas SD III 39, 109, 144, instrumentay SP I 29, instrumentu SP I 96 (₂×), instrumentus SP II 163, instrumentays SP I 337; kalendarius SD I 50, kalendorius SD III 92; Klemės [=Klemens] SP II 212; mentelelis “little cloak” SD III 298; momentu SP I 134; referendorius SD III 375; sakramentas SD III 15, 397, sakramento SD III 179, 371, SP I (₄₃×), II (₄₃×); talentas SP I 51, SD III 440, talentu SP I 51, talentus SP I 51, talentaus SP I 51; testamentas SD III 443, testamento SP I 74, 156, 197, 224, II 208, SD III 60, 123, 443, Testamēto [=Testamento] SP II 131, testāmēto [=testāmento] SD III 12, testamentu SP I 73, SD III 63, 99, 443, testamenti SP I 216 (₂×), Testamenti SP II 209, Testamenty SP II 23, Testamēti [=Testamenti] SP II 5, testamenty SD III 526, testamentadaris SD III 443. In older borrowings (Slavisms), the diphthongs žemčiūgas ir lenčiūgas (lenčiūgas) em, en have changed to im, in (or un): žimčiugay SP I 354, žimčiugu SP I 29, 186, 189 (₂×), 354, žimčiugus SP I 85, 291, žimčiugays SP I 186, 366, žimčiugais SP I 217, žimčiugieli SP I 187; lynčiugu SP I 38, lynčiugus SP I 38, lynčiugays SP I 39, 127, linčiugays SP I 161, tynčiugays SP I 363, II 70, tunčiugays SP I 374, tynčiuguosna SP I 373. The exception here is the form žemčiuguose SP II 179. Instead of an, the Slavism attuncawoi SD III 254 also has un. d) Diphthongs of secondary origin am, an (also found in present-day Eastern Aukštaitian dialects), for example: sg. dat. kaltam SP I 10, kitam SP I 12, pačiam SP I 1; pl. dat. kiettuwaems SP I 105, tarnams SP I 214; pamažam “gradually” SP II 64; man SP I 112 (₂×), 120, 195, mān SP I 194, man SP II 142 53, 108; sg. acc. aran SP I 26, Ežeran SP II 42, kitan SP I 11, kunan SP I 88. 2. Inconsistently, in individual words or forms am, an, en occur more frequently, and ą, ę. very rarely. a) In place of mixed diphthongs an, en, whose second element is an insertion in the present-tense stem, K. Sirvydas’s writings generally have un, in: apiunku “I get confused” SD III 264; iszkuneku SD I 22, III 47; pripruntu SD I 87, 90, 151₍₂ₓ₎, 152, papruntu SD III 190, supruntingauys SP I 16; runda SP I 39, 208₍₂ₓ₎, 308, II 44, 73, 100, 106, 209, 210, SD I 90, rundasi SP I 12, 28, 81, etc.; susztumpu [<*sušlampu] SD I 83, szlumpu SD III 178₍₂ₓ₎; tumpa [<*tanpa] SP I 25, 89, 107, 108, etc., tumpi SP I 102, tumpu SD I 34, 174, III 20, 31, etc.; ginda SP I 95, II 7, gindaus SP I 80; tinka “is due” SP I 322, netinka SD I 93, III 217, 398, etc. However, several forms of this type also occur with the diphthongs an, en: suprantus SD III 52 (alongside: suprat “having understood” SD III 317, supratus SD IV 221), randasi SP I 128, iszrandu SD III 109; giendunčieys SP II 207, patenka SP II 178. Also to be mentioned here are the forms szalu SD I 216, suszalu SD I 77, perszalu SD IV 247, occurring alongside the more common forms: szutu SD I 77, 215, suszutu SD I 209, III 155, szuta SP II 63. In present-day Eastern Aukštaitian dialects, the fate of an and en in forms of the type mentioned above varies: apparently all Eastern Aukštaitians pronounce en (gėnda, prasmeńga), while an (supranta, raũnda) is found mainly along the western edge of the area covered by these dialects. Among the puntininkai, this an is preserved most fully in the vicinity of Siesikai, Ukmergė, Pabaiskas, Gelvonai, and Musninkai. In nearly all the remaining puntininkai area, suprũnta, ruũnda is pronounced, although the pronunciation of analogous forms of other verbs also varies here; cf.: šlùmpa (Karsakiškis, Kuktiškės, Tauragnai), ažũnka (Kamajai, Tauragnai), and šlãmpa (Vabalninkas, Salamiestis, Skapiškis⁹), užãńka¹⁰ (Karsakiškis, Vabalninkas, Salamiestis, Skapiškis). Thus, in locating K. Sirvydas’s birthplace on the basis of present-day dialect data, of all the forms given above we can rely with greater confidence only on the present-tense forms of the verbs (su)prasti, rasti. Comparing these with the corresponding forms in “Punktų sakymų” and “Dictionarium trium linguarum,” we may suppose that the author of those publications was born on the edge of the area where suprũnta, ruũnda is pronounced. b) In both parts of “Punktų sakymų” and in the dictionary, en occurs fairly often in the word šventas and all other derivatives of this root. However, words from this root containing the diphthong en do not occur uniformly throughout K. Sirvydas’s writings: some- ⁹ Skapiškis is also sometimes reported to have šlùmpa. ¹⁰ This variation may have arisen under the influence of other forms: the present-tense stem vowels u or i may have been replaced by a and e (or a and e before the infix n may simply have been retained in some places) by analogy with forms such as šlapti, šlapo; gesti, gėdo. Moreover, it is possible that the infix n did not arise at the same time in all dialects and in the present-tense forms of all verbs; cf. nusėnka (Karsakiškis, Vabalninkas, Kamajai), nusańka (Salamiestis, Skapiškis, Tauragnai), and nūsaka (Kuktiškės). 143 On some pages there are more of them, while on others there are fewer or none at all. This is particularly evident in “Punktų sakymai”¹¹. The aforementioned root en also occurs several times in the dictionary (sżwentarius I 15, sżwentuiu I 78, sżwentay III 429), but far more frequently as in (ssżwyntorius III 36, sżwyntas I 177, III 297, 333, etc.). There are few forms with the root ṡwes-; only the form sżwesta SD I 39 has the vowel e, while all the others have i (paṡwisto SP I 147, paṡwistas SP I 156, sżwystu SP I 277, Sżwisk SP II 71, sżwystas SD III 483). c) There are almost no other words and forms inconsistently containing am, an, em, en, ą, ę in Part I of “Punktų sakymai” (the only forms from this part not yet mentioned are tanko 16 and Kadag 96, instead of the more common form kadung SP I 147, 287, etc.); few such forms also occur in the dictionary: amžiu III 422, kampas IV 215, samditiniai III 90, tamsokus III 360, dantu III 46, dantims III 104, kandziuotas III 178, tankas III 63, nekątringas [=nekantringas] I 24, nožusimerkienčiu III 242, pusantras I 152, ižengimas III 473, wogte ‘vogtė’ III 127, 455. Somewhat more words and forms of this kind occur in Part II of “Punktų sakymai”: amžinu 36, amžiney 168, amžino 178, amžinos 180, 181, 188, amžinoy 189, amžiu 204; singular adessive iamp 132 (alongside: iumpi SP I 30, 62, iump SP I 172, etc.); apitamsėmis 142, patamsoy 142, tamsibessa 243; tampidamies 179; brangiu 176, 207, brangibes 213; dāgaus [=dangaus] 178; kantribes 169; attankisiu 179(₂×), attankitume 182, attankit 183; prabangiey 75, prabangi 175, prabangiu 176; singular genitive randu 141, rando 168; ranku 183; surantitu 219, surantitas 220; Wando 189(₃×), wandeni 188, 189, wandeniu 189, wādenio [=wandenio] 190; žandu 74; ižžandasi 141; su ia 143; nessag [<nesang] 248; ne bėdrautumite [=ne bendrautumite] 168; užudenktu 18, apsidentumite 175, apdenktumime 182, apdengiete 182, apdengieme 182; niopkenčia 142; from nendres 99, niendri 166, niandri 166, 199; prirenhamia 172; nutrekimu [=nutrenkimu] 34; nužengėči [=nužengianči] ‘nužengianči’ 70, užženге 243; ne prytankt 171, pasitankie 183; stankṡti 179; singular instrumental (?) draugie 31, 60, 64 (possibly singular locative draugė < ‘in a friend’12). 11 For almost half of Part I of this book (up to p. 174), the words and forms of this root, numbering nearly 90, have only in (švint-), whereas from p. 174 onward they have both in (40) and en (76). The pages on which the various forms with in and en occur are distributed as follows (a numeral in regular type indicates the page containing a form with švint-, and a numeral in bold type indicates the page containing a form with švent-): 174, 175, 177(₄×), 178, 178(₂×), 179, 179, 180(₂×), 181(₂×), 183, 189(₃×), 190, 192, 194, 195, 198(₂×), 199, 200, 203, 203, 205(₃×), 208, 210, 212, 213, 221, 222, 226, 227, 231, 232(₄×), 233, 239, 242, 251, 251(₂×), 252, 256, 268, 275, 278, 280(₃×), 284(₂×), 287, 288, 289, 290(₂×), 292, 299(₂×), 300, 301, 301, 302(₂×), 305(₂×), 307(₂×), 309, 313, 314(₂×), 315, 320, 323, 326, 329, 331, 333, 336, 337, 337(₂×), 341, 342, 344(₄×), 344, 346, 347(₂×), 352, 354, 354, 364(₂×), 365, 367(₂×), 368, 369(₂×), 374, 376; in Part II of “Punktų sakymai” (with in — 108, with en — 73): 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11(₂×), 13, 14, 15, 17(₂×), 18, 19, 19, 20, 24(₂×), 25, 28(₃×), 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 42, 47, 53(₃×), 55(₂×), 58, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 77(₂×), 78, 81, 81, 83, 84, 84, 85, 87, 89 90, 91, 92, 93(₆×), 98, 102, 111(₃×), 112(₃×), 113, 114(₂×), 115(₅×), 116, 117(₃×), 119, 121, 128, 129, 131(₃×), 132, 134(₂×), 136, 141, 142, 148(₂×), 149(₂×), 151(₃×), 155, 156, 157, 160, 161, 162(₃×), 164, 167, 170(₂×), 172(₂×), 176(₃×), 177(₂×), 178, 179, 181(₂×), 183, 189(₃×), 190(₄×), 191(₂×), 197(₂×), 198(₂×), 199, 200, 201, 202(₂×), 207, 208, 209(₂×), 211, 212(₂×), 213(₂×), 214(₂×), 215, 216, 219, 220, 223, 228, 229, 229, 231, 239(₃×), 241(₂×), 243, 245, 251(₂×), 252, 253, 254, 255, 258. 12 Cf. Širvyds Punktay sakimu (Punktų kazan), p. 16*. 144 It is interesting that the aforementioned forms, like those with en in the root švent-, are not equally frequent throughout the book. In sequence, they occur on the following pages of Part II of “Punktų sakymai”: 18, 34, 36, 70(2×), 74, 75, 99, 132, 141(2×), 142(3×), 143, 166(2×), 168(3×), 169, 171, 172, 175(2×), 176(2×), 178(2×), 179(4×), 180, 181, 182(4×), 183(3×), 188(2×), 189(6×), 190, 199, 204, 207, 213, 219, 220, 243(2×), 248. As can be seen, most of these forms occur on pp. 166–190 (25 pages contain 3/5 of all forms of this kind found in Part II of “Punktų sakymai”). A survey of the mixed diphthongs am, an, em, en and vowels ą(a), ę(e) found in K. Širvydas’s writings, and especially some statistical data, allow us to draw the following conclusions: 1. In addition to secondary-origin diphthongs am, an (e.g., singular dative kitam, singular illative kitan), which are also found in other East Aukštaitian dialects, em, en in forms of verbs such as semti, gyventi should also be regarded as features of K. Širvydas’s native dialect. Comparing the latter forms, as well as the forms runda, suprunta, with the corresponding forms of present-day East Aukštaitian puntininkai provides some evidence for further interpreting and refining the location of K. Širvydas’s origin. 2. In other cases, the occurrences of am, an, em, en; ą(a), ę(e) indicate to some extent the influence on K. Širvydas of the Lithuanian literary language then taking shape, other dialects, and other factors. It is interesting that in Part I of “Punktų sakymai,” as well as in the first edition of the dictionary, the only consistent users of these diphthongs are proper and common nouns from other languages; of the diphthong an, the conjunction idant; and of the diphthong en, derivatives of the root švent-, which occur fairly frequently. In later editions of the dictionary, published after K. Širvydas’s death, and especially in Part II of “Punktų sakymai,” more words and forms occur that inconsistently contain the aforementioned diphthongs and vowels. This suggests that later publishers and editors, who came from other parts of Lithuania, contributed most to the appearance of these diphthongs and vowels. DIPHTHONGAL COMBINATIONS am, an, em, en AND VOWELS ą, ę IN THE WRITINGS OF K. ŠIRVYDAS К. МОРКУНАС Abstract An important dialectal feature of two 17th-century written monuments of the Lithuanian language — „Punktay sakimu“ and „Dictionarium trium linguarum“ — is the diphthongal combinations um, un, im, in and the vowels u, i, used in place of am, an, em, en; ą, ę. This feature indicates that the author of the aforementioned works, K. Širvydas, was a representative of the so-called punktininkai dialect (more precise information about K. Širvydas’s birthplace is not yet available). However, in some cases the diphthongal combinations am, an, em, en and the vowels ą(a), ę(e) also occur in K. Širvydas. Of particular interest are em, en in forms of verbs such as semti ‘to scoop’, gyventi ‘to live’, which are pronounced by speakers of the modern punktininkai dialect 10. Lietuvių kalbos gramatinė sandara 145 in two ways: sėmt, gyvėnt (in the vicinity of Šešuoliai, Ukmergė, Pabaiskas, Galvoniai, Musninkai) and simt, gyvint (throughout the rest of the punktininkai dialect area). Since K. Širvydas also knows the form timsta (<temsta) ‘it is getting dark’, it may be assumed that his native speech variety territorially bordered on a variety in which em, en in the forms of these verbs were pronounced im, in instead. Interestingly, the diphthongal combinations em, en in forms of this type are also preserved in the anonymous 1605 catechism, which was likewise written in the East Aukštaitian dialect. In addition, the diphthongal combinations am, an, em, en occur regularly in K. Širvydas in other contexts as well, namely: a) an in the conjunction idant; b) am, an, em, en in words of foreign origin, e.g.: lampa, talertas; c) secondary (of secondary origin) am, an, e.g.: kitam ‘to another’, singular illative kitan. The diphthongal combination en occurs very frequently in the word šventas and other words with the same root (in Part I of „Punktay sakimu“, approximately 130 forms have in and 76 have en; in Part II: 108 have in, and 73 have en). However, other individual words and forms with am, an, em, en and ą(a), ę(e) occur somewhat more frequently only in Part II of „Punktay sakimu“ and in the third to fifth editions of „Dictionarium trium linguarum“. This is explained by the fact that other people—representatives of different speech varieties—also took part in preparing these editions for publication after K. Širvydas’s death.