Dar kartą dėl „eksperto“, „koncerto“ ir panašių žodžių kirčiavimo

BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ALDONAS PUPKIS DAR KARTĄ DĖL EKSPERTO, KONCERTO AND SIMILAR WORDS I dedicate to the memory of dear friend Aleksas Girdenis. KEY WORDS: common language, pronunciation, norms codification, accent marking, expression of whims. INTRODUCTION It will be more than half a century since the discussion of accentology and phonetics specialists about the pronunciation of international words ekspertas, koncertas, nervas, rezervas, etc., is constantly renewed: whether to accept the current official notation of the accentuated syllable of such words with the left accent (i.e., ekspèrtas, koncèrtas, nèrvas, rezèrvas and assign such words to the 1st accent), or to return to the pre-war practice and mark the strong accent (i.e., ekspe tas, konce tas, ne vas, reze vas and consider them words of the 2nd accent). It is particularly important to emphasize that the accent (prefix) determines the pronunciation of those words and the conditions of application of the penultimate syllable rule. To an outsider, this dispute may seem rather trivial, perhaps even trivial, or it may be surprising why some want to change the tradition of recent decades. But if you go deeper into this question, it will turn out that the discussion is not someone’s private whim – it is a fundamental question related to the system of language and its structure, which without solving remains a lot of uncertainties in usage, disturbing the practical work of pronunciation and stumbling the spelling skills of public speakers – radio and television presenters and journalists, actors, teachers, etc. Especially this issue becomes particularly relevant when the new and current usage reflecting the General Dictionary of Lithuanian language is published. It should be emphasized that here we are referring to a certain type of international and otherwise borrowed words and we want to clarify at least two things: 1) to review the history of accent marking (norming) of this type of words, 2) to establish the systematic relationships of the pronounced syllable of such words in the whole system of common Lithuanian prosody. The third task is to provide reasoned recommendations for the codification of the common language and practical activities. ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again about the pronunciation of words expert, concert, etc. | 2 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 HISTORY OF KILLING MARKING Data on the pronunciation of foreign (and (or) international) words and the marking of pronounced syllables with certain accent marks are available from the 19th century dictionaries of Friedrich Kurschat. There are no traces of spoken type words being pronounced with the left accent, but there are no more precise data that would allow to identify such several cases of pronoun žodžių priegaidės kilmę. Antai vokiečių–lietuvių kalbų žodyne (Kurschat 1870) galima aptikti pronunciation: Kellner – ke neris I 681, Nerv – nérva II 90, Reserve – rezérvai ke meris „free peasant“ II 130. Lietuvių–vokiečių kalbų žodyne (Kurschat 1883) pateikti skoliniai iš vokiečių kalbos 177, ércikis (with derived words) „duke“ 177, and erbas „herb“ Pranas Skardžius, „we cannot make a 107 paliktas nekirčiuotas. Taigi kokio aiškumo tuose žodynuose nematyti ir, kaip yra sakęs definitive decision about the pronunciation of the Lithuanian language only from Kuršaitis’ grammar and dictionaries“ (Skardžius 1999: 289). To speak more extensively on this subject, we can start with Jonas Jablonskis, who laid the foundations for the standardization of many areas of the Lithuanian language, as well as confirmed the foundations of Lithuanian accentology. According to Arvydas Vidžiūnas (1997: 147), the first indication of the pronunciation of such words can be found in Petro Avižonis’ Lithuanian grammar written in 1892, which prompted Jablonskis to prepare and publish the well-known Lithuanian grammar in 1901 (see Piročkinas 1977: 144–145). On page 10 of that grammar, the word “term” is spelled strongly (presumably by the efforts of Jablonski). This authenticity of Jablonski's pronunciation is confirmed by the text read by Jablonski in Jurgis Gerullis's dialectology study book: it pronounces te minu (Gerullis 1930: 7). More information about the pronunciation of spoken words is in Vidžiūnas (1997) monograph Jono Jablonskio accentologija. Having studied the issues of Jablonski’s pronunciation, the author claims that, having in mind the pronunciation of some international nouns (borrowings), “it is possible to guess that not a single international word with pronounced diphthongs i, u, o, e + l, m, n, r, which today are usually firm beginnings, could have had a firm prefix in Jablonski’s language” (Vidžiūnas 1997: 147– 148). This is also suggested by the pronunciation of Jablonski's successor Benjamin Sereiskis he cogas, konce tas, te minas. In fact, Sereiskis was Jablonski’s secretary in 1926–1928, and Jablonski himself has given a positive review of his proficiency in the Lithuanian language (“Sereiskis, being not a Lithuanian, brings shame to many Lithuanians with his proficiency in the Lithuanian language.” – Juozas Senkaus testimony, see Atsiminimai 2010: 357). These examples are quoted from Sereiskis’ Systematic Lithuanian Language Guide, published in Russian in Kaunas in 1929 (see Sereiskis 1929). ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again about the pronunciation of words expert, concert, etc. | 3 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 There is also an introduction in Sereiskis’ textbook, which discusses some aspects of Lithuanian spelling, pronunciation and other matters. It separately explains that “[a]ll Lithuanian words are pronounced from one dialect – the western dialect of the Pannonian dialect, which today forms the basis of the written language” (Sereiskis 1929: V). For this purpose, the author checked the words from several reliable representatives, and mostly heard from Prof. Jablonski. Foreign words are pronounced by the representatives of this schnekt as follows: ke neris, fe čeris... te minas, he cogas, ene gija, gube nija, ine cija, kome cija... (ten pat). P. VII dar primenama, kad reikią kirčiuoti konce tas, remoñtas, ne kòncertas, rèmontas. Savaime spórtas, kurórtas, pórcija, <...>, he bas, be gas, <...>, it is understood that the words we are concerned with here are pronounced according to the first (if the third syllable from the end of the supporting syllable is pronounced, except for the term – 3b) or according to the second (when the second syllable from the end is pronounced) accent. Thus, all examples are presented according to one system without any exceptions, and although this is called dialectal (Jablonski dialect) pronunciation, it provides the basis for the emerging general model of pronunciation of foreign and/or international words. In fact, this takes into kalbos polinkį svetimus žodžius, paimtus į mūsų kalbą iš slavų (gudų, lenkų) kalbų, kirčiuoti account the living strong-pronounced (with small exceptions; some Slavic borrowings from the earliest times, e.g. bažnyčia, lénkas, výskupas, sv etas, etc., are pronounced strong-pronounced), while the German borrowings are mostly acute (see Skardžius 1999: 31–36). Most of the international words originating in ancient Greek or Latin came into Lithuanian through intermediate languages, but in older usage that original origin had little significance. With the spread of culture, borrowing from French, as well as from Spanish, Italian and other languages, began to gain importance, and in our time we are increasingly borrowing from English. Therefore, it becomes relevant to take into account the latest ways of creating words and combine them with the tradition of borrowing words from older times. Several spelling textbooks were also published in Lithuania during the interwar period. In some of them (Būtėnas 1931, Skardžiaus 1936) there are also data about the pronunciation of the words we are interested in. In 1931, Peter Būtėnas published a comprehensive textbook of pronunciation with phonetic basics, where this concerning issue was perhaps explained in more detail for the first time. In its 124th paragraph it is written about the pronunciation of foreign words: “Usually Lithuanians pronounce foreign words in the same way as Lithuanian or borrowed words, e.g.: 1) áltas, álgebra, buhálteris <...>; kre seris, ke neris, fe čeris; ene gija, he cogas, gube nija, ine cija, kome cija; "1931" (1931). In the middle of the same paragraph, it is added that “other words are pronounced differently by Lithuanians today, as in the languages from which they are taken, e.g.: hìmnas, kîneris, hèrcogas, enèrgija, inèrcija, komèrcija, pr ncipas, cil nderis, recènzija, sntaksė, audièncija, konferèncija, tèrminas” (Būtėnas 1931: 113–114). Furthermore, when looking at the suffixes of foreign words, ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again about the pronunciation of the words ekspertas, koncertas, etc. | 4 that the ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 pronunciation diktàntas, praktikàntas, muzikàntas, -òntas, audièncija, konferèncija, koncèrtas is dialectal (trm.; see Būtėnas 1931: 114). This suggests that the phrase is a commonly used expression in the common language. Non-standard pronunciation variants are described in a very contradictory way. First of all, it is unclear why “other Lithuanians” pronounce them in the same way as in the languages from žodžiai. Kas čia su tais žodžiais paimta – kirčio vieta ar priegaidė? Ar galima iš priegaidžių neturinčių (neskiriančių) kitų kalbų transponuoti savo priegaides? Taip pat nieko nesakoma, ar which they are borrowed, or whether they are borrowed from Germanic languages. On the other hand, it is not clear which dialects the author has in mind, where it is pronounced, for example, diktànt and so on. Maybe this refers only to a different pronunciation of the diphthong – diktántas (compared to diktañtas)? Thus, the different pronunciation of the first syllable (marked by the left accent) is not clear here, because the author probably confused the place of the accent with the prepositions of the pronounced syllable and applied prosodic signs in one case, and the so-called mores theory in another, where gravis is the mark of the first accent, and the circumflex of the second (cf. kàltas: ka tas, sk rtas: ski tas; see Girdenis 1981: 196). So, wasn’t Butenis the first to start the confusion of pronunciation of spoken 1 international words in our language? The most authoritative textbook of interwar accentology was Pranas Skardžius's General Lithuanian Pronunciation (1936). It says about foreign words that they are pronounced as Lithuanian words by the respective speakers, but among their examples we do not find words of interest to us (see Skardžius 1936: 22–23). However, another such example is given in Chapter III of the book, “Pronounced Words”, in a short glossary of pronounced words. That dese p. 47, expe tas 49, he bas 53, konce tas 58, mode nų 64, reze vas 73. Kitaip, kairiniu kirčio ženklu, kirčiuojamų words of this type were not found. Thus, it can be concluded that in this work of Skardžius, perhaps following the opinion of Jablonskis and Sereiskis, a rigid pronunciation of syllables of international words with the diphthong er is clearly established. The same rule applies to words with a diphthong e. The other closely related vowels em and en are pronounced only strongly. This is also confirmed in the Lithuanian language spelling textbook published in 1938. In the preface it is said that there was much trouble spelling foreign words. “When spelling them, we tried to adhere to the following principle: those that we, especially the people, know from pre-war times, are spelled as they are pronounced, and the new ones according to the laws of our language” (Lietuvių kalbos rašybos vadovėlis 1938: 4). The examples given for this provision do not contain the words we are interested in, but we find them in the dictionary attached to the textbook. In this book of Būtėnas 1 there are also other, especially phonetic, issues involved (see Pupkis 1968). ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again, regarding the pronunciation of the words ekspertas, koncertas, etc. | 5 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 konce tas 118, konse vas 118, pe sikas 147, reze vas 160, te minas 189, bet desértas 81, kélneris 112, nérvas 136, as well as sèlteris 166. The right slash might be supported by a true tariama tų žodžių germaniška ar romaniška kilme, bet sèlterio kirčiavimas yra aiški išimtis iš kad or-as-you-understand system. In reviewing this dictionary, Skardžius (1938) pointed out a number of various shortcomings, and among those reproaches was the interesting idea that it is necessary to pronounce dese tas rather than desértas, and therefore a comparison is made with the pronunciation of the word konce tas and so on (Skardžius 1938: 94–95). This criticism will be very useful for further discussion of other cases of this kind of spelling in Skårderud. Information on the pronunciation of spoken words is also found in interwar bilingual dictionaries and vocabularies. In one of the largest dictionary of the Lithuanian written language, which was 2 published at that time, and which was pronounced by Alfredas Sennas (for the pronunciation “only one A. Senn’as is responsible”, p. XI), there are roughly equal numbers of words of this type pronounced in the strong accent (right accent) and in the strong accent, e.g., enérgija 152, enérgiškas 152, herbas 219, hyperbolė 220, hyperbolinis 220, hyperboliškas 220, inércija 255 and fe čeris 155, fe dfebelis 155, fe dšeris 155, ke neris 459, kle kas 491, kome cija 506, kome cinis 506, kome ciškas 606, konce tas 507, konce tinis 507, konse vai 508. Only a few examples have a left-handed accent: celtic 93, hèrcog 219, fèrma 155. It is clear that the speller had not yet thought about everything in a coherent way, and the left-handed accent appears to be a kind of exception. Skardžius (1999: 289) has also stated that the pronunciation of this dictionary cannot be trusted without scrutiny. The dictionary of Jonas Baronas (1932) and the spoken words in it are very important for our topic. Although Skardžius (1999: 632–639) criticized the pronunciation of Baron’s dictionary in his review, the author was quite consistent in his pronunciation of the words of interest to us: he marked most of the words with a straight accent and only a few with a right accent. Thus, the strong-long consonants are: he bas 94, he cogas 94, dese tas 114, dese tinis 114, ine tingas 186, ine 208, konce tas 209, ne vas 290 (2x), pe las 364, pe lamotė 364, pe linis 364, reze vas 488, cija 186, kome cija 207, konse vai te minas 588. Only three words have a firm preposition: déltė "delta" 112, férma 594, férmeris 594. The reasons for the separation of these three words from the general group are not clear. The left-handed accented words were not detected. Later, apparently, with a better sense of the system and a more sensitive distinction between prepositions, words with left accent appear less and less in various dictionaries. For example, in the Lithuanian-Polish dictionary by J. K. Zablockis and Č. Kuleša, the following words with left accent are included: 2 Some larger bilingual dictionaries (for example, Benjamin Sereiskis’ Lithuanian-Russian Dictionary (1932), later Vilius Pėteraitis’ Lithuanian-English Dictionary (1948) and others) were not pronounced, and in the pronounced dictionaries of Jurgis Šlapelis international words were avoided, so we do not find the cases we need in them. ALDONAS PUPKIS. Dar kartą dėl eksperto, koncerto ir pan. žodžių kirčiavimo | 6 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 or not one word hyperbole 45. About 10 words in it are pronounced in the strong accent: cisternà, -os (2) 23, ekste nas 34, ene gija 35, fe čeris 36, he bas 45, konce tas 69, konse vai 70, mode niškas 88, reze vas 137, te minas (3b) 176 and just a few words are pronounced with the right accent: déltė „delta“ 27, desértas 28, nérvas 96 (Zablockis, Kuleša 1940). Or in this small dictionary of K. Tamutis (1940) the strongly pronounced fe čeris 32, he bas 44, ne vas 83 are given; pharmacèutas has the left accent mark marked, although the pronunciation is indicated as second (2). The word čerkesas 20 is left unpronounced, but the first accent is indicated next to it, i.e. the first syllable is pronounced. In the general terminology of pedagogy (Šalkauskis 1991), discussed in April 1940. In the terminology section of the Lithuanian Language Society, whose president was Pranas Skardžius, the word is written enérgija, mode nų, not vas. 3 One can also look at the pronunciation of Balčikonio edited volumes I and II of the Great Lithuanian Dictionary. Interestingly, in volume II (1947) a number of words of this type, some of which we could call international, are left unpronounced at all, e.g., felčeris, ferma, elmė, energija, and several borrowed words are marked with a strong-vowel suffix: fe nicas (and férnicas), e keris „alkierius“, e kierius „t. p.“, e mentas, e strikas, one another and strongly joined: féršas, élskis. It was not possible to identify words with left accent, so it can be concluded that Balčikonis was very careful with international words and was not consistent with other foreign words. Thus, it can be concluded that in the pre-war period there was a clear tendency to pronounce most international words with accentuated syllable diphthongs el, er with a strong accent, less often (according to the source of the word loan?) with a right accent. Left-pronounced words should be regarded as certain rare exceptions. These tendencies, which had only recently become apparent, were enshrined in the Lithuanian Spelling Dictionary, published in 1948. A large part of this dictionary was written by the well-known linguist Alfonsas Kalnius (Pupkis 2010: 250–251), including sections on pronunciation. Since this dictionary was prepared in the wartime at the Lithuanian Language Institute, edited by Antanas Salis and already started to be printed but stopped due to war action, pakraipos darbu. Į tai reikia atsižvelgti toliau nagrinėjant kalbamų žodžių kirčiavimo norminimo it is considered the history of Salis lexicography and accentology. In the pronunciation section of this dictionary there is no mention of the pronunciation of foreign (international) words, so you have to translate the dictionary itself and look for examples of pronunciation in it. The dictionary found only a few words with left accent: fèrma 201, fèrmeris 201, hèrcogas 3 Apie vėliau Skardžiaus pasinaudotais terminologijos sekcijoje apsvarstytais Šalkauskio terminais žr. 1950: 13. ALDONAS PUPKIS. Dar kartą dėl eksperto, koncerto ir pan. žodžių kirčiavimo | 7 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 215. In view of the jumping of the cross, only fèrma (1) 201, plèura (1) 301 remains relevant. Most of the other words in this dictionary are pronounced in strong Spanish: ale gija 153, be gas 170, dese tas 188, dive sija 191, ekspe tas 198, ekste nas 198, ene gija 199, fe čeris 201, he bas 215, ine cija 218, ine cinis (ine tinis) 218, kome cija 245, konce nas 246, konce tas 246, konse vai 246, reze vas 316, se teris 324, terapeũtija 354, te cija 354, termà, -õs 354, te minas 354, te mosas 354. Several words have a right accent: hyperbole 215, kélneris 235, pérsas 297, sterlingas 338, and nérvas 281 has a secondary variant not vas. Perhaps the difference in the accents could be judged by the origin of the words from Slavic or Germanic languages? But otherwise, clearer motives are not very visible. A summary of the pre-war practice can be seen in the Lithuanian Language Handbook (LKV) published in Germany in 1950 by Pranas Skardžys, Stasys Barzdukas and Jonas Martynas 4 Laurinaitis. Although this is a collective work, it was edited and spelled by Skardžius, and it is also noted that the 1948 Lithuanian spelling dictionary was used (it is also mentioned in the list of sources at p. 20). There are differences with the pronunciation of the spoken words in that dictionary, but they are not fundamental and sometimes difficult to explain. The only enèrgies 248 are interspersed with a left-handed accent, and in the 1948 dictionary the words fèrma, hèrcogas, plèura are replaced by férma 254, he cogu 281, pleurà, pleũros 439. In addition to these 5 examples, there are only a few words pronounced differently: in 1948 – Be gija 388 (and be gas 170), Pe sija 414 (but pérsas 297), sterlingas 338, in 1950 – Bélgija 201, Pérsija (and pérsas) 430, ste lingas 517. In other cases, and there are nearly 20 of them, the pronunciation of both dictionaries coincides, most of them with a riest accent and a few with a right accent. The difference in the pronunciation of the word is not shown by the actual or supposed origin of the international word from one or another source. Nevertheless, it can be concluded that the period at least from 1929 (if we do not mention the pronunciation of Kuršaitis) to 1950 is characterized by a gradually establishing uniform system leaning towards the rigid pronunciation. International Tikra šios srities žodžių kirčiavimo revoliucija buvo padaryta 1951 m. išleistame Dictionary of Words. It is a work translated from Russian, the “work of applying the material to the Lithuanian language was done” (TŽZ 1951: 4) by Chackelis Lemchenas, so he spelled everything. In the preface of the Lithuanian edition it is stated that "the title words are spelled according to the most common spelling habits in Lithuanian today" (TTŽ 1951: 4). Perhaps the most common pronunciation habits were taken into account in many places, but in our group of spoken words such habits were ignored at all – almost everything was pronounced with a left accent that could 4 Sunku tikėti, kad geležinės uždangos sąlygomis tame Vokietijoje išleistame darbe pateiktos normos būtų have some influence on the language norms established in Lithuania. 5 Maybe the different meanings of the word were the reason: in the 1948 dictionary the meaning of this form is not specified (as with other words), and LKV means “order (in construction)”? ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again, regarding the pronunciation of the words ekspertas, koncertas, etc. ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 with the sign | 8, without excluding the pronunciation of the previously established word 6 terminas, – at least in this respect we tried to act systematically, except for perhaps one other word, e.g., pe las. Such spelling cannot be called anything other than a revolution – neither has anything been said about it in the preface of the dictionary, nor has it been discussed publicly or 7 at least mentioned in the press. Thus, without any consideration, such a pronunciation passed into the 1954 Dictionary of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language (hereinafter – DŽ) and continued to go from dictionary to dictionary, entered bilingual dictionaries, encyclopedias and now, in our time, at least until 2003, when the State Lithuanian Language Commission (hereinafter – VLKK) began to publish pronunciation recommendations, it can be said that it is predominant, if we do not mention the numerous exceptions and impossible to explain strangeness of pronunciation, practical problems of pronunciation. It is true that not one or two linguists have opposed such a pronunciation for many years and still do, publishing their arguments, but the editors of the dictionaries did not take them into account. However, the discussion with the reform of the TJZ in 1951 did not cease for a decade until our days. It involves not only the practical pronunciation of the diphthongs el, er, but also the question of the phonetic identity of the diphthong e ([ẹ]). After the revolution had been carried out in practice, the theoretical (ideological) grounds for justifying such an action were quickly sought. Janina Dambrauskaitė (Urbelienė), a professor of French at the Vilnius Pedagogical Institute (now the University of Education), was probably the first to speak about the independence of the vowel [ẹ] in foreign or international words in 1957. In her article on the phonetic system of Lithuanian vowels, she relied on the Peterburgas) fonetikos mokyklos kūrėjo Levo Ščerbos mokymu (1948 m. išėjusioje jo Prancūzų methodology of “prepositions” described in language phonetics). Although she acknowledges that the international [ẹ] and the Lithuanian [e] are “completely indistinguishable from each other” (Dambrauskaitė 1957: 222), but having devised the pairs èstų: stų, kabinètas: kabin tas, kadètas: kad tas, as well as sti: èsti=škas and not having found any 8 change with the long vowel [e.], she declares “the right to assign the non-Lithuanian e to the independent vowels. For example, TŽŽ 1951: 665 interspersed the term, but TŽŽ 1969: 753 already, TŽŽ 1985: 487, TTŽ 2000: 581, TŽŽ 2013: 811 as 6 Gal šio žodžio kirčiavimas ir nebūtų visai informatyvus (žodynuose dabar tvirtagališkai ir tekirčiuojama), bet well. It is interesting that in TTŽ 2000: 581 another proper word of the same origin (Latin termus) appears, but in TŽZ 2001: 737 it is already crossed with a left crossword – Tèrminas „such an ancient Roman god”; This is also pronounced in Interlex, TŽŽ 2013: 811. However, in some places the real name is pronounced in a strong accent (LTE XI: 273; VLE XXIII: 688, Kuzavinis 2007: 1050, and AMŽ 1996: 274 and TŽŽ 2007: 1090 are ). 7 We could not deny that this was a deliberate or at least subconscious attack on the whole Lithuanian language. As is known, Lemchen translated Lenin’s writings into Lithuanian after the war, prepared a Russian-Lithuanian dictionary (published in 1949; unpronounced), so his constant relationship with the Russian language may have had a direct or indirect influence on his decisions on Lithuanian accentology. 8 In fact, these pairs indicate the opposition of short and long, but not the phonemic independence of the vowel [ẹ]. ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again, for the pronunciation of the words expert, concert, etc. | 9 phonemes, ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 although next to that we must emphasize the minimal role of this sound” (Dambrauskaitė 1957: 224). Bronius Svecevičius (1960: 30), a professor of English at the same institute, disagreed with this opinion, because in practice, in his opinion, we do not feel any difference between the two e-shades of the vowel. A more precise theoretical determination of the vowel phoneme system of Lithuanian language was necessary in preparation for writing the first academic grammar of Lithuanian language. For this purpose, in the second half of the 1950s and the first half of the 1960s, Valerija Vaitkevičiūtė, a researcher at the Institute of Lithuanian Language and Literature, carried out some phonetic studies and published their results in the collection of research papers Issues of Lithuanian Linguistics. The results of this work, somewhat refined, were later transferred to the academic grammar of the Lithuanian language, to the phonetic section included in its first volume (1965). Vaitkevičiūtė correctly described the principles of phonetic and phonological evaluation of speech sounds. Based on the statements of the then Leningrad school of phonetics, she wrote that the phoneme is “considered the smallest sound unit that distinguishes the meanings of words or morphemes” (Vaitkevičiūtė 1957: 5). “Phonemes are historically formed sound types that distinguish (Vaitkevičiūtė 1961: 19). Prireikus nustatyti foneminę kalbos sudėtį naudojamasi vadinamųjų words, their forms or morphemes, and whose pronunciation does not depend on their phonetic position in the word.” The methodology of minimal pairs and those procedures are shown in fonemas: l s : l s, m s : mès, mãno : màno ir t. t. Bet prireikus aptarti trumpąjį balsį [ẹ], vartojamą Vaitkevičiūtė’s aforementioned articles. For example, the length and shortness of the vowels allows to distinguish between long and short vowels only in international words, no minimum pair is specified, only it is said that the Lithuanian short vowel [e] differs little from the Lithuanian short vowel, the shades are generally vague, only the phoneme of international words is more closed and “differs from it by nature” (Vaitkevičiūtė 1961: 21): both pronounced and unpronounced are short, and 9 Lithuanian pronounced long, unpronounced short (cf. m ta: metù, lsa: lesù). In these reasonings there is a confusion of phonetic and phonological levels, a strict non-separation of these levels, the application of absolute, not relative scales 10 (Girdenis, Žulys 1973: 207, 208). For these reasons, there is a theoretical error: the vowel [ẹ] used only in international words is considered an independent phoneme of the common language. Supporters of this view rely mainly on phonetic signs that the vowel [ẹ] of international words is more closed, narrower than the vowel [e] of Lithuanian words. Elzbieta Mikalauskaitė (1975: 17) states that the difference is a more difficult thing to perceive; in dialects this difference is smaller. With this statement Vaitkevičiūtė contradicts her own definition of 9 phoneme, which states that sound types of phoneme do not depend on their phonetic position in the word. 10 Both Jonas Kazlauskas and especially Aleksas Girdenis have repeatedly criticized the Leningrad school of phonetics in our conversations for frequent cases of phonetic and phonological confusion. ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again for the pronunciation of words expert, concert, etc. | 16 double accent ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 markings. Antanas Pakerys presents èl, èr as the fact of the legalization of these diphthongs in 15 dictionaries and encyclopedias, and his arguments are mainly extralinguistic, including empirical, educational, pragmatic. Turning to the systematic issues of spoken bilingual pronunciation, it could be recalled that modern language planning theory also raises important issues of the codification of language norms (see Cooper 1989), and the criteria mentioned in norming theory – empirical, educational, pragmatic, linguistic and others – are taken seriously, and all factors are taken into account when codifying language phenomena (see Daneš 1979). However, linguistic or systemic arguments are never lost sight of. They are not to be dismissed in these cases, only it should be noted that here we must have in mind systemic linguistic rather than systemic graphic relations (Protokolai 2015). One thing is to talk about linguistic arguments – the dual expression of the preposition of the substantive in the diphthongs el, er and eu, and another thing is to mark their accents in dictionaries, encyclopedias and elsewhere. A review of the sources shows that in both 16 cases there are significant gaps in the systemic assessment in current practice. For the author of this article, linguistic (systematic) issues, at least in the field of phonetics and prosody, seem to be the most important. In fact, the three-length diphthongs el, er and eu do not fit into the system of diphthongs and diphthongs of the common language in any way, they are its foreign bodies, especially in view of the Western nature of the common dialect. In fact, the 17 practice of modern dictionaries and encyclopedias legitimizes the only two-fold expression of the prepositional form in the system of common language. It is impossible to understand with common sense why only those three are excluded from the whole system of diphthongs and diphthongs, and the others – first em, en, then and ei – are left different, i.e., they are given mainly as strong consonants. We can also recall that Būtėnas placed the latter diphthongs and diphthongs alongside other examples of the spoken type, cf. jo kre seris, ke neris (kèlneris), konferèncija (Būtėnas 1931: 113–114). Why are hundreds of international words and other borrowings with the diphthong ei marked with a riest (rarely right) accent, and terapèu already with a left accent? Why are the unpronounced diphthongs el, er pronounced in international words as in Lithuanian words (cf. Girdenis 1981: 126; 2000: 136)? We could even argue that the left accent here brings us back to those old times when some linguists tried to treat the accent of short pronounced syllables as a short suffix. In fact, the prosody of doubles is characterized only by the difference in the strong-pronounced and strong-pronounced prepositions, realized by different accents. Proponents of another opinion, based on Kuršaitis 15 To ask whether there are three types of strong-started syllables in the words dárbas,, egas (see Pakerys 1993: 6) is not correct, because these syllables belong to different classes of diphthongs. 16 The protocols can be consulted at the State Lithuanian Language Commission. 17 The three-fold expression of whims is not characteristic of Lithuanian dialects either. ALDONAS PUPKIS. Dar kartą dėl eksperto, koncerto ir pan. žodžių kirčiavimo | 17 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 The tradition of using the left-handed accent to mark the strong-started prefix in the diphthongs il, im, in, ir, ul, um, un, ur and ui, and in the double-started el, er calls the left-handed accent representative of the strong-started prefix. But then it becomes unclear why the same diphthongs el and er, at the same time (cf. kéltas: kéltas: ke tis, Bèrnas: bérnas: be tas), being firm-started, differ in vowels of different lengths, which cannot be said about the cases of Kuršaitis’s notation of diphthongs (there is not one example of l: l: i). It is not correct to look at diphthongs with the short vowel o: such diphthongs, “as well as 18 diphthongs of secondary origin, have nothing to do here, because in them a vowel is pronounced consistently, never coinciding with any “own” vowel” (cf. 2000 (2nd ed.). pp. 362. Thus, assuming a hypothetical opinion about the supposed diphthongs èl, èr, we would create the following inventory of mixed diphthongs (see Table 1). TABLE 1. Types of bilingual pronunciation in the 19 common language l type r type m type n type a type ál: àl*: a ár: àr*: a ám: àm*: a án: àn*: añ e type él: èl*: e ér: èr*: e ém: èm*: e én: èn*: eñ i type l: l*: i: r*: i m: m*: i n: n*: iñ u type ùl: úl*: u ùr: úr*: u ùm: úm*: u ùn: ún*: uñ o** o** o** oñ** o type òl: ól**: òr: ór**: òm: óm**: òn: ón**: From table 1 it is clear that the diphthongs of the ul, il type with a firm beginning have been marked with a left-handed accent since the time of Kuršaitis, and graphically it would be unusual to mark them with an acute úl, l. Whoever pronounces not the general spòtas, with the long o (or elongated vowel o) spórtas, pronounces also raj nas, rajõnas, biol gija, biolõgija, etc. Some old borrowings, such as mõrka, tõlka, are sometimes pronounced with a strong o, o, in colloquial language, but are not the norm in general language. To associate the latter words with the minimum pair órlaivis: spòrtas is not a goal because of the secondary origin of the airplane diphthong. Koñtrimas, Moñtvydas, Moñtvila appears quite strange due to the more commonly heard Kòntrimas, Mòntvydas, Mòntvila; since the first variants are dialects established in the common language and encyclopedias may have adapted generic equivalents to them 18 (Kañtrimas, Argumentas, kad reikalaudami skambėti fermà, turėsime leisti skambėti ir formą, only shows the prosody of that nuomonės šalininkų neraštingumą. 19 One star indicates unusual or impossible cases of accentuation, two stars indicate diphthongs that are possible in common language, but are exceptional or non-normative. ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again about the pronunciation of words expert, concert, etc. | 18 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 Mantvydas) pronunciation. There is no clear definition of the name in the Lithuanian language. Koñtrimas, Moñgirdas, Moñtrimas, Moñtvilas, Móntvyda. Čia niekur nebūna atvejų, kad The name is derived from the two distinctive pairs of vowels:. Moñtvila: Mòntvila only has different vartojimo vietų tartis. In addition, the opposition of long [o.] and short [ɔ.] is not in doubt and the minimal pair õtas: Òtas, jótas: jòtas, etc. only confirms the phonemic independence of these vowels in common language. 20 We could not deny that in current usage, the narrow short vowel [ẹ], similar to the [e] of Lithuanian words, cannot be heard in international words. An obvious example is the talk of LNK television news presenter Gintaras Deksnis. Antanas Salys did not deny that some people pronounce it like this, but he considered such pronunciation not Lithuanian, but a creature of foreign languages. We could also hear this voice in the speeches of some other public figures, especially those whose speeches are quite clearly marked by a levelling of whims. However, in general usage, the rigidity of these two-sided agreements prevails, and this requires a review of their current codification. Old Lithuanian radio presenters and actors have told that in the 1950s they were quite insistently taught to pronounce the vowel [e] in international words “different” than in Lithuanian words. The Lithuanian ear was not able to catch the strangeness of that different vowel, so eventually they began to pronounce hard the consonants going against that voice. This is how the words nεgra, progrεsas, chεmia, etc. appeared and spread widely, and were used by some of the old intelligentsia (teachers, etc.). Kazimieras Ulvydas had called this vowel the pustyninis [ε] and like others made a lot of efforts to get rid of it. This was successful, but the introduction of the vowel [ẹ], which is not inherent in Lithuanian, into general usage has not been successful. It must be assumed that since the 1950s or 1960s it was probably being implemented and Vilnius Pedagogical Institute (now University of Education), and elsewhere. But how is it then that decades of implementing such a pronunciation still fail to systemize it. The results of the survey on the use of the widely used bilingual èl, èr are not confirmed by the results of the survey on the use of spy television staff (see Table 2). TABLE 2. Ratio of the use of er, el, eu, er, èl, èu, eũ 36 – 16,8 % 213 – 83,2 % įvairių televizijos kanalų kalboje 20 This does not contradict the usage of western Kaunas highlanders, cf. òpa, òpstais, òtgi, Audrònė and others. ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again about the pronunciation of words expert, concert, etc. | 19 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 Šiam reikalui kurį laiką (2016 m. balandžio 14 – gegužės 3 d.) buvo specialiai klausoma The case study examines the pronunciation of the double-pronounced el, er, eu (especially popular words ekspertas, energija, koncertas, nervai, etc., older and newer real names Gerda, Velsas, Bermanas, Eltonas, Melburnas, (Angela) Merkel, etc.), as well as em, en, ei (only a small part of these are recorded; the pronunciation of the words korespondentas, reidas, as well as Jasonas, Reinas, etc., is marked). Most of the data was recorded from the pronunciation and pronunciation of the following people: Eglė Bučelytė, Gintaras Mariaus Jantas, Andrius Kavaliauskas, Rita Miliūtė, Deksnio, Ugnės Galadauskaitės, Gintarės Grikštaitės, Edmundo Jakilaičio, Viktoro Jakovlevo, Jolanta Paškevičiūtė, Goda Pečiulytė, Rokas Petkevičius, Rasa Tapinienė, Arūnas Valinskas, Mariaus Žiedas (their pronunciation can be checked in LRT Mediateka and in the audio and video archives of other televisions). The accent of these speakers is clearly dominated by a strong accent: 83.2% (out of 213 cases, 12 cases were pronounced according to the penultimate syllable rule (at the ending), 10 cases with a degressive accent; vaguely pronounced cases are assigned to the èl, èr, èu group). The number of cases of strongly pronounced diphthongs increases even more when we take the strongly codified diphthongs em, en, ei – up to 93.7%. Of course, if we examined the use of other sources, the results would be slightly different, but it would hardly fundamentally change the relationship of the data given here. In some countries, language norm-setters sometimes include authority criteria among other criteria for codification. Our practice also often relies on the opinion of authoritative linguists. In this article the opinions of Jon Jablonski, Antanas Salis, Pranas Skardzis, Aleksas Girdenis, Antanas Pakeri and others were mentioned. It is necessary to speak separately about the reliance on Skardzis's opinion. As already mentioned, Skardžius was one of the first to codify the pronunciation of words of this type, which is characteristic of the general nature of the Lithuanian language. Perhaps it was not entirely clear to him how in foreign words the strong-end and the strong-start prepositions should relate, but he did not suggest that the left accent mark should be considered the only accent mark for such words. This opinion was clearly confirmed in both the pre-war pronunciation textbook and the post-war Lithuanian language textbook. In his pronunciation of Lithuanian in 1968, nothing is said about international words (perhaps it was thought that their codification was not yet fully betkokio normalizacijos tikslo“ (Skardžius 1999: 474). To pasirodė reikiant dėl to, kad dabar established) and, as it is written, “abstained from ‘the question of the fate of the whole Lithuanian language abroad arises’ and ‘any stricter standardization pronunciation directives would hardly achieve their goal’ (ibid.). Perhaps for this reason in the first half of the 1970s Skardžius fundamentally changed his previous opinion and decided to rely on the pronunciation practice of dictionaries published in Lithuania: in the book Lietuviški ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again, for the pronunciation of the words expert, concert, etc. | 20 international ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 words equivalents (1973) marked almost all spoken-type words with a left accent and attached a reference to the 1st accent to all of them. It is true that there are also differently spelled words, but they are only a few: férma 33, te minas 61, maybe one more. Skardžius also applied the practice adopted there in the remaining manuscript of the Literary Dictionary of the General Lithuanian Language, written about 1974 (the manuscript is in the Manuscripts Department of the Vilnius University Library, f. 118–134). This change of opinion of Skardzis would be understood if he or any of the other accentologists or phonetic specialists had published some important works on this subject, irrefutable evidence that it is necessary to switch to the left slash mark, etc. But at that time neither Kazlauskas’ and Girdenis’ opinions were revoked, nor did two articles by Antanas Salis, published in the Lithuanian Encyclopedia in the mid-1960s, which clearly stated the opinion on the pronunciation of spoken words. Apparently, in this case there were some moral or political motives to rely on Soviet linguistic practice rather than the already formed pre-war tradition. Thus, after considering some aspects of this accent notation and based solely on the systematic lingvistiniais kriterijais turime konstatuoti, kad tarptautinių žodžių balsis [ẹ], vartojamas kai ones, in the language of which people, [e] is only a phonetic variant of the vowel of Lithuanian words and should not be considered a separate phoneme for the following reasons: 1) it does not perform a distinctive function, 2) the notation with the left accent marks falls out of the Lithuanian diphthong system, and while being in it demonstrates an impossible in Lithuanian language triangular case of accent notation, a dual expression of the firm preposition. These findings allow us to draw up the following inventory of vowel phonemes of the common language (see Table 3). TABLE 3. Common Vowel Phoneme System Rear Line vowels Anterior Rising Upper /i/ /i·/ vowels /u/ /u·/ line vowels Lower /a/ elevation /a·//e/ /e·/ Variable /a/ /a·//e/ /e·/ vowels Lower Variable elevation vowels /uo/ /ie/ ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again, regarding the pronunciation of the words expert, concert, etc. | 21 Here it ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 should be added that the efforts of some phoneticists to rely on the symmetry of the phoneme system are not confirmed by the data of this phenomenon in other languages – there are constantly empty cells in the system. Therefore, this argument cannot be used to support the need for a short correspondence [ẹ] for the long vowel [·] in the vowel phoneme table. As we saw earlier, the principle of symmetry is also denied by the current formal (graphic) practice of placing spoken doubles. One of the most important arguments of the supporters of the other view is pragmatic: how do you now process many bilingual, especially terminological dictionaries, encyclopedias, where the left-handed interjection is almost universally used. But when looking at the practice of universal legalization, it is not the universality that often comes to the surface, but in some places a real eclecticism, which often forces us not to be guided by the sense of the 21 language system, but to learn to pronounce individual words. By leaving the current practice of accent marking, we would only further force users to learn the pronunciation of individual words, further leveling their psycholinguistic ability to automatically generate pronunciation types. Another argument is the question of belief: to recognise or not to recognise [ẹ] in international words is a matter of belief (see Protokoll 2015). If we use faith for scientific purposes, then there can be no serious scientific discussions. CONCLUSIONS The question of the phonemic character of the vowel [ẹ] in foreign and/or international words and the consequent double accentuation of el, er and eu is not only a phonetic issue, but also one of accentuation – it concerns the application or violation of the penultimate syllable rule. The long-standing history of accentuation of foreign and international words in the Lithuanian rodo, kad nuo pat 1929 m. nuosekliai eita prie tvirtagalio kalbamų dvigarsių žymėjimo ir tos language was finally established in the Lithuanian spelling dictionary of 1948. It quite accurately implements the accentuated ideas of Jon Jablonski, Pranas Skardzis, Antanas Salis. Later he was supported by Adelė Laigonaitė, Jonas Kazlauskas, Juozas Senkus, Aleksas Girdenis and other linguists. The revolutionary accentuation of spoken diphthongs (but only el, er and eu) with a left-handed sign in the International Dictionary of Words, pronounced by Chackelis Lemchen in 1951, can be regarded as a direct attack on the system of the Lithuanian language, the dismantling of that system, the destruction of systematic pronunciation provisions in the consciousness of common language users. In a broader sense, it is the second half of the 20th century 21 See the data of the article by Rita Miliūnaitė published in this volume of General Language (http://www.bendrinekalba.lt/Straipsniai/89/Miliunaite_BK_89_straipsnis.pdf). ALDONAS PUPKIS. Dar kartą dėl eksperto, koncerto ir pan. žodžių kirčiavimo | 22 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 Valerija Vaitkevičiūtė’s theory of elite pronunciation, where the pronunciation of foreign words is oriented not to the natural adaptation of foreign words to the system and tendencies of the language that receives them, but to the pronunciation of those words in the borrowing languages. That essentially segregational pseudo-theory, in which the pronunciation of the diphthongs èl, èr, èu with a left-hand accent is part of its legacy, should in principle be alien to a democratic society and its codification of linguistic norms. Accepting that in foreign or international words, in the use of some representatives of the common language, the vowel [ẹ] may be pronounced narrower than in Lithuanian words, we cannot recognize it as a true representative of the phoneme /ẹ/, because we do not have clear data confirming its distinctiveness. In order to definitively resolve the phonological status of this vowel, it is necessary to take into account the various cases of its functioning, including both syntactic and paradigmatic relationships. The present cases of double accentuation of el, er and eu imply a double expression of the prepositional preposition, completely alien to the common language and dialect systems. On the other hand, the current practice of accentuation eliminates from the diphthong microsystem many foreign or international words with pronounced diphthongs em, en and ei, which in the common language system play exactly the same roles as the diphthongs el, er and eu. We must not forget the data of the usage itself – it is markedly dominated by the systematic expression of spoken double-faced adverbs. Even if we acknowledged the partial phonemicity of the vowel [ẹ], we would still not be able to draw it into the general inventory of phonemes, because from a psycholinguistic point of view the phoneme /ẹ/ does not generate the vowel [ẹ] of already normalized words (not only with em, en, but also with eu, ei, cf. ehuras, re das, many newly arrived or coming words, e.g., Be nis, Re ganas, etc.) – the Lithuanian [e] is pronounced here even by people who consistently use [ẹ] in other positions. The only way to eliminate these distortions of the common language system would be to move consistently everywhere to the notation of the double accent spoken with a strong accent, understood through variants, but the first, the main, always keeping the strong accent – the beginning was made in the 2003 and subsequent recommendations terminų, dvikalbiuose žodynuose, enciklopedijose ir kitur tėra leksikografinės technikos, o ne of the VLKK. Pronunciation of spoken words is a matter of language science. ŠALTINIAI AMŽ 1996 – Antikos mitologijos žodynas, Kaunas: Šviesa. DLKG 2005 – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika. Ketvirtoji pataisyta laida, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. ALDONAS PUPKIS. Dar kartą dėl eksperto, koncerto ir pan. žodžių kirčiavimo | 23 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DŽ 1954 – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas, Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla. LE – Lietuvių enciklopedija 1–38, Bostonas, 1953–1966, 1969, 1985. Lietuvių kalbos rašybos vadovėlis. Su kirčiuotu žodynu. Mokyklai ir visuomenei. Sud. A. Kalnius, Z. Kuzmickis, J. Talmantas, Kaunas: Sakalas, 1938. Lietuvių kalbos rašybos žodynas. Tartis, skyryba, kirčiavimas, lyčių vartojimas, lietuvių kalbos tarmės, žodynas. Red. K. Gasaravičius, N. Grigas, J. Lazauskas, K. Ulvydas ir A. Žirgulys, Kaunas: Valstybinė enciklopedijų, žodynų ir mokslo literatūros leidykla, 1948. Lietuvių kalbos vadovas (LKV). Tartis ir rašyba. Kirčiavimas. Kalbos dalykai. Žodynas. Sud. P. Skardžius, S. Barzdukas, J. M. Laurinaitis, Bielefeld: Lietuvių tremtinių bendruomenė, 1950. Lietuvių pavardžių žodynas 1–2. Ats. red. A. Vanagas, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1985–1989. Lietuvių rašomosios kalbos žodynas [1] / M. Niedermann’as, A. Senn’as, F. Brender’is. Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung, [1932]; [2] / M. Niedermann' as, A. Senn’as, A. Salys. Ten pat, [1951]; [3] / A. Senn’as, A. Salys. Ten pat, [1957]; [4] / A. Senn’as, A, Salys. Ten pat, [1963]; [5] / A. Senn’as, A, Salys. Ten pat, [1968]. LKŽ – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas 1–2. Red. J. Balčikonis, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 1941; Vilnius: Valstybinė enciklopedijų, žodynų ir mokslo literatūros leidykla, 1947. LTE – Lietuvių tarybinė enciklopedija 1–12, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1976–1984. TŽŽ 1951: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas. Vertė O. Katinskaitė, Ch. Lemchenas, J. Talmantas. Lietuviškąjį leidimą redagavo Ch. Lemchenas, Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla. TŽŽ 1969: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas. Lietuviškąjį leidimą redagavo Ch. Lemchenas, Vilnius: Mintis. TŽŽ 1985: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, Vilnius: Vyriausioji enciklopedijų redakcija. TŽŽ 1999–2000: Vaitkevičiūtė V. Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas 1–2, Vilnius: Žodynas. TŽŽ 2001: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, Vilnius: Alma littera. TŽŽ 2007: Vaitkevičiūtė V. Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, Vilnius: Žodynas. TŽŽ 2013: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, Vilnius: Alma littera. VLE – Visuotinė lietuvių enciklpopedija 1–25, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas (centras), 2001–2014. ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again about the pronunciation of words expert, concert, etc. | 24 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 LITTERACY 2010: Memories of John Jablonskis. Sources. South. G. Čepaitienė, L. Lapinskienė, Vilnius: Gimtasis žodis. A v i z o n e s P. 1992: Lithuanian grammar. Manuscript (VUB RS f. Lr 6842). B a r o n a s J. 1932: Russian-Lithuanian Dictionary. The second newly written pronounced dictionary, Kaunas: Sakalo bendrovė. B ū d a V . 1982: Nelietuviškų tikrinių vardų kirčiavimas. Metodikos nurodymai, Vilnius: Vilnius Institute of Civil Engineering. B ū t ė n a s P. 1931: A Dictionary of the English Language. School and Life, Kaunas: "Sakalo" company's publication. C o p e r R. L. 1989: Language Planning and Social Change. Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK University Press. D a m b r a u s k a i t ė J. 1957: Determination of the phonemic vowel system of Lithuanian language. – Vilnius State Pedagogical Institute Scientific Papers 3. History and Philology, 221– 240. D a n e s F. 1979: Pastures and value criteria in codification. – Current issues of language culture in socialist society. Prague: Academia. G e r u l l i s G. 1930: Lithuanian dialect studies, Leipzig. G i r de n i s A. , Ž u l y s V. 1973: [Rec. kn.:] A Dictionary of the English Language. I, Vilnius, 1965; II, ibid., 1971. – Baltisica IX(2), 203–219. G i r de n i s A. 1981: Phonology, Vilnius: Mokslas. G i r de n i s A. 2000–2001: Kalbotyros darbai 1–3, Vilnius: Institute for Publishing of Science and Encyclopedias. G i r de n i s A. 2003: Theoretical foundations of Lithuanian phonology. 2nd revised and supplemented edition, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. J a r o s l a v i n ė J. 2015: Quantity and quality standards of short and long vowels in Lithuanian language. – Common language 88. 2008. pp. 88. www.encyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/articles/88.html. K a z la u s k as J . 2000: Rinktiniai raštai 2. Sud. A. Rosinas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir K u r s c h a t F. 1870: Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language 1–2, Halle: Verlag der Buchenhandlung des Orphenhauses. ALDONAS PUPKIS. Again about the pronunciation of the words expert, concert, ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– BENDRINĖ KALBA 89 (2016) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 K u r s c h a t F . 1883: Littauisch–deutsches Wörterbuch, Halle: Verlag der Buchenhandlung etc. | 25 des Waisenhauses. K u z a v i n i s K. 1971: International Law. – Our Language 5, 11– 22. K u z a v i n i s K. 2007: Latin-Lithuanian dictionary. 2nd revised and supplemented edition, Vilnius: Institute of Science and Encyclopedia Publishing. L a g o n a t i o n A. 1959: Pronunciation of Literary Lithuanian, Vilnius: State Political and Scientific Literature Publishers. L a g o n a t i o n A. 1978: A Study of the English Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. M i k a l a s s k a i t ė E. 1975: A Dictionary of the English Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. P a k e r y s A. 1986: Phonetics of Lithuanian Common Language, Vilnius: Mokslas. P a k e r y s A. 1993: The 100 Most Important Things. – Current issues of common understanding. Thesis of the seminar. Vilnius: State Lithuanian Language Commission to the Republic of Lithuania Seimo, 6–9. P i r o c k i n a s A. 1977: The Origins of Common Language, Vilnius: Mokslas. Minutes 2015: Council and Pronunciation Subcommittees of the State Lithuanian Language Commission protokolas Nr. EP-62. P u p k i s A. 1968: A book about the artistic word. – Language Culture 15, 83–85. P u p k i s A. 1980: Language Culture, Vilnius: Mokslas. P u p k i s A. , St u n d ž i a B. 1987: A look at the pronunciation dictionary from the point of view of codification and usage. – Language Culture 53, 44–58. P u p k i s A. 1999: Common language norms and their codification. – Native Language 5, 1–5. P u p k i s A. 2005: Language Culture Studies, Vilnius: Gimtasis žodis. P u p k i s A. 2010: Andrius Ašmantas: life and work, Vilnius: Trys žvaigždutės. S a l y s A. 3rd edition: 1985. Various articles, Rome: Lithuanian Catholic Academy of Sciences. S e n k u s J. 2 00 6: Linguistic services. D. Mikulėnienė, R. Senkutė-Kašėtienė, Vilnius: Lithuanian Language Institute. S e r i s k is B. 1929: A systematic guide to the study of the Lithuanian language. Part I, Kaunas: Spaudos fondas. S k a r d ž i u s P. 1936: Pronunciation of the Common Lithuanian Language. Theory with practical examples, Kaunas. S k a r d ž i u s P . 1938: [Rec.:] A. Kalnius, Z. Kuzmickis, J. Talmantas. Lietuvių kalbos spelling manual <...>. – Mother tongue 6 93–96.