Palatvijys XX a. pab. – XXI a. pr.: Joniškio šnektų kalbinė raiška (nuo sintaksės iki ekspresijos)

Collection:
Mokslo publikacijos / Scientific publications
Document Type:
Straipsnis / Article
Language:
Lietuvių kalba / Lithuanian
Title:
Palatvijys XX a. pab. – XXI a. pr.: Joniškio šnektų kalbinė raiška (nuo sintaksės iki ekspresijos)
Alternative Title:
Case study: the linguistic expression and syntax of local dialects spoken in the cross-border region of Joniškis (late 20th century – early 21st century)
Authors:
Švambarytė-Valužienė, Janina
In the Journal:
Subject Category:
LT
Joniškis; Lietuva (Lithuania); Sintaksė / Syntax; Tarmės. Dialektai. Dialektologija / Dialects. Dialectology.
Summary / Abstract:

LTStraipsnio tikslas – pateikti Joniškio šnektų sintaksinių ypatybių aprašą, parodant šnektų stabiliąsias sintaksines (morfosintaksines, gramatikos ir sintaksės, leksikos ir sintaksės, semantikos ir sintaksės) ypatybes, taip pat atkreipiant dėmesį į baltų kalbų kontaktus palatvijyje. Straipsnyje apibūdinta šio arealo kalbinė ir kultūrinė situacija, pateikti Jõniškio šnektų sintaksinės sistemos apmatai, kurios atitikmenų ieškoma Mato Jono Slančiausko surinktoje pasakojamojoje tautosakoje. Straipsnyje taip pat aptartos baltų kalbų kontaktus atspindinčios sinktasinės ypatybės. [lvb.lt]

ENThe research focuses on the local dialects spoken in and around Joniškis in northern Lithuania. These variants belong to the Western Aukštaitian subdialect of Šiauliai and are in close proximity to the Latvian border in the north. Up until the Soviet occupation in 1940 a number of villages within this area were home to a large Latvian diaspora. This is evident in the local dialects of Žagarė, Skaistgirys and Joniškis, all of which are characterised by peculiar and diverse syntactic expression resulting from regular contacts between the two Baltic languages. Studies conducted in these cross-border areas show that up until the early 21st century the oldest generation of respondents retained in their consciousness the self-esteem shaped by certain historical consequences (the period of the Courland Governorate). This is demonstrated by cautious assessment of specific historical events, a somewhat critical view of fellow Lithuanians but a positive approach towards the Latvians. To some degree the development of the local dialects of Joniškis is also reflected in the manuscript collections of folk narratives compiled by Matas Jonas Slančiauskas and his assistants over 170 years ago. Combined with local dialect recordings obtained between 1998 and 2003, the data illustrates the main features of the dialectal syntactic system in the area. It should be noted that the syntax of Lithuanian dialects, subdialects, local dialects and variants (tarmės, patarmės, šnektos, pašnektės) has not been extensively researched. Apart from certain isolated (unconventional) syntactic phenomena identified by dialectologists Aldona Jonaitytė, Aleksas Girdenis and Aušra Kaikarytė, most of the smaller (and more numerous) features of syntactic expression in local dialects (lexical and syntactic, semantic and syntactic, grammatical and syntactic) have not been researched before.However, the current situation is not very favourable for such studies as the previous research did not take into account the national self-identification of respondents or where their family members (parents, grandparents, great-grandparents) were originally from/resided at the time. Furthermore, reflections of contact amongst the Lithuanian dialects are also evident in the local variants of Joniškis, but they do not always indicate linguistic influence. Contacts between the two Baltic languages (Lithuanian and Latvian) are best reflected in the local dialects of Joniškis by certain universal (morpho)syntactic phenomena, such as the use of perficientive, possessive, and optative mood, both active and passive participles, as well arthroid. The above-mentioned features were also recorded in the collections of folk narratives compiled by Matas Jonas Slančiauskas and his assistants over 170 years ago. Subject, object, time and place are usually expressed by the dative, genitive or accusative case. The most widely-used constructions are the genitive case with prepositions ligi, par, pri, tarp and the accusative case with prepositions į, ligi, pagal, par, pas, po, pro. In addition to expressing subject, object, time or place, the above constructions can also be used to convey cause, manner or purpose. The use of the nominative, instrumental or locative case is considerably less frequent, while the prepositional constructions of the instrumental case with sulig and valug are considered especially rare. The afore-mentioned expression by using case and prepositional constructions is a characteristic feature of the local dialects of Joniškis but it is not very stable. Therefore the way subject, object, time and place are being expressed may gradually change, but these changes are expected to be only partial (the usage and popularity of the dative case is not expected to decline).Retaining the postpositional usage of attribute is also likely due to the usage of attribute in Latvian. Coordinate clauses are connected by conjunctions a(r), i(r), n(e)i in the local dialects of Joniškis. Coordinate clauses are often simple and not extended; instead, they are linked by describing a specified action, condition, etc. differently Subordinate clauses are linked by conjunctions ka(d), kada, kas, kiek, koks, kur. Object clauses are most commonly found in narratives, while subject and attribute clauses or adverbial clauses of cause, time, place and quantity are used slightly less frequently. A distinguishing feature of the Joniškis local dialects, which did not form without the influence of Latvian, is the use of clauses describing the possibility and conditionality of action. As shown by the research material, the unique linguistic expressive means of local dialects which also reflect the natural creative capabilities of local communities, were strongly present in the late 20th century. However, the characteristic means of expression are expected to continue declining throughout the 21st century, as life habits and interpersonal communication are changing: “Such is the current fashion: the young communicate with the young, the old communicate with the old” [Žagarė (LKA Nr. 7)]. The link between linguistic expression, generational creativity and natural continuity is on the verge of breaking completely. Only the informational expression remains. Therefore, any remaining expressive dialectal constructions should be carefully preserved and promoted as a means of self-expression and creativity. [From the publication]

Subject:
Kalbotyra / Linguistics
Related Publications:
Permalink:
https://www.lituanistika.lt/content/110477
Updated:
2024-09-17 21:01:43
Metrics:
Views: 7
Export:
Download