Lietuvių tarmių kaita XXI a. pradžioje: Lenkijos lietuvių šnektos

LTŠioje kolektyvinėje monografijoje aptariamos itin reikšmingos lietuvių kalbos tyrimams Lenkijos lietuvių šnektos. Iki šiol išlaikiusios daugybę archajiškų ypatybių, jos aktyviai sąveikauja su kita kalba, todėl jgyja vis daugiau fonetinių, sintaksinių ir kitokių inovacijų. Monografijos autorės, pasitelkusios tradicinius ir šiuolaikinius geolingvistinius bei sociolingvistinius metodus, atskleidžia objektyvią periferinių Punsko ir Seinų lietuvių šnektų situaciją ir tarmines vietinės bendruomenės nuostatas. Šis tyrimas sistemiškai įsikomponuoja į lietuvių tarmėtyros diskursą. [Anotacija knygoje]

ENMuch has been written about Lithuanians living throughout the ages on the periphery of the former Lithuanian ethnographic region, namely a part of present-day Poland. Analysis of the Lithuanian local dialects attested in Poland has been comprehensive but frequently rather descriptive. On the basis of NORM (non-mobile older rural male) criteria, widely applied in studies on Lithuanian dialectology, only phonetic (phonological) features of the local dialects have been considered and compared within the system of a dialect. The present monograph focuses on the Lithuanian local dialects in Poland and their sociocultural context at the beginning of the 21st century. By relying on data from previous studies as well as the latest research, the aim of the current study is to provide a full account of the peripheral Lithuanian local dialects in Poland. The following tasks reflecting the comprehensiveness of the monograph have been set: 1) to collect data illustrating the sociolinguistic situation and regional variation of the local dialects of Puńsk and Sejny at the beginning of the 21st century; 2) to define the historical and sociocultural context of the local dialects under study; 3) to explore the changing boundaries of these regional varieties and design their map by adopting modern geolinguistic methods; 4) to investigate and describe the sociolinguistic situation of the local dialects by employing sociolinguistic methods; 5) to identify and analyse the archaic and new features of the dialectal varieties, found at different levels of language, and compare them with the linguistic features of the adjacent southern High Lithuanian (Lith. Aukštaitian) local dialects; 6) and to carry out prognostic studies into the Lithuanian local dialects in Poland.The language varieties attested in the region of Puńsk and Sejny have been explored by employing a multidimensional prognostic model used in studies on dialectology and not widely adopted in Lithuania yet. The model made it possible to analyse the selected linguistic features of the local dialects as well as their linguistic context and to generalise the respondents' ranking of the local variety (or varieties). The monograph on the Lithuanian local dialects in Poland covers several important aspects. It explores the impact of Polish and standard Lithuanian on the peripheral local dialects of Puńsk and Sejny, thus depicting the sociocultural situation of the region. The study draws on the latest empirical data and provides the map of the Lithuanian speaking Polish areas of the beginning of the 21st century, in which native speakers of the local dialects are found. Attention is also devoted to the system of the local dialects, their dialectal features unnoticed before or interpreted differently, and the differences and similarities between the dialectal varieties of Puńsk and Sejny. This study complements research into the Lithuanian dialects of the beginning of the 21st century and is undoubtedly crucial to outlining the future of the Lithuanian local dialects in Poland and further dialect studies. In terms of methodology, it also contributes to the studies that provide a general account of the Lithuanian dialects of the beginning of the 21st century and their new formations. In order to achieve the aims mentioned, in the years 2014-2016 several expeditions were made to Puńsk, Sejny and Szypliszki. Over 190 hours of regional speech from 26 places were recorded; 115 socio-linguistic questionnaires were designed; 46 mental maps were drawn; and 262 photographs were taken. Data illustrating regional variation were obtained from questionnaires and interviews. [...]. [From the publication]