Samogitian Dialect - Linguistic Differences Between Samogitian and Standard Lithuanian

Linguistic Differences Between Samogitian and Standard Lithuanian

Samogitian differs from Standard Lithuanian in phonetics, lexicon, syntax and morphology.

Phonetic differences from standard Lithuanian are varied, each Samogitian subdialect (West, North and South) has different reflections.

Standard Lithuanian → Samogitian

  • i → short ė, sometimes e;
  • u → short o (in some cases u);
  • ė → ie;
  • o → uo;
  • ie → long ė, ėi, ī (y) (West, North and South);
  • uo → ō, ou, ū (West, North and South);
  • ai → ā ;
  • ei, iai → ē;
  • ui → oi;
  • oi (oj) → uo;
  • an → on (an in south-east);
  • un → on (un in south-east);
  • ą → an in south-eastern, on in the central region and ō or ou in the north;
  • ę → en in south-eastern, ėn in the central region and õ, ō or ėi in the north;
  • ū → ū (in some cases un, um);
  • ų in stressed endings → un and um;
  • unstressed ų → o;
  • y → ī (y), sometimes in;
  • i from ancient ī → ī;
  • u from ancient ō (Lithuanian uo) → ō, ou, ū(West, North and South)
  • i from ancient ei (Lithuanian ie) → long ė, ėi, ī (West, North and South)
  • č → t (also č under Lithuanian influence);
  • dž → d (also dž under Lithuanian influence);
  • ia → ė (somewhere between i and e);
  • io → ė (somewhere between i and e);
  • unstressed ią → ė (somewhere between i and e);

The main difference between Samogitian and standard Lithuanian is verb conjugation. The past iterative tense is formed differently from Lithuanian (e.g., in Lithuanian the past iterative tense, meaning that action which was done in the past repeatedly, is made by removing the ending -ti and adding -davo (mirtimirdavo, pūtipūdavo), while in Samogitian, the word liuob is added instead before the word). The second verb conjugation is extinct in Samogitian, it merged with the first one. The plural reflexive ending is -muos instead of expected -mies which is in standard Lithuanian (-mės) and other dialects. Samogitian preserved a lot of relics of athematic conjugation which did not survive in standard Lithuanian. The intonation in the future tense third person is the same as in the infinitive, in standard Lithuanian it shifts. The subjunctive conjugation is different from standard Lithuanian. Dual is preserved perfectly while in standard Lithuanian it has been completely lost.

The differences between nominals are considerable too. The fifth noun declension has almost become extinct, it merged with the third one. The plural and some singular cases of the fourth declension have endings of the first one (e.g.: singular nominative sūnos, plural nom. sūnā, in standard Lithuanian: sg. nom. sūnus, pl. nom. sūnūs). The neuter of adjectives is extinct (it was pushed out by adverbs, except šėlt 'warm', šalt 'cold', karšt 'hot') while in standard Lithuanian it is still alive. Neuter pronouns were replaced by masculine. The second declension of adjectives is almost extinct (having merged with the first declension)—only singular nominative case endings survived. The formation of pronominals is also different from standard Lithuanian.

Read more about this topic:  Samogitian Dialect

Famous quotes containing the words linguistic, differences and/or standard:

    The most striking aspect of linguistic competence is what we may call the ‘creativity of language,’ that is, the speaker’s ability to produce new sentences, sentences that are immediately understood by other speakers although they bear no physical resemblance to sentences which are ‘familiar.’
    Noam Chomsky (b. 1928)

    The differences between revolution in art and revolution in politics are enormous.... Revolution in art lies not in the will to destroy but in the revelation of what has already been destroyed. Art kills only the dead.
    Harold Rosenberg (1906–1978)

    If the Revolution has the right to destroy bridges and art monuments whenever necessary, it will stop still less from laying its hand on any tendency in art which, no matter how great its achievement in form, threatens to disintegrate the revolutionary environment or to arouse the internal forces of the Revolution, that is, the proletariat, the peasantry and the intelligentsia, to a hostile opposition to one another. Our standard is, clearly, political, imperative and intolerant.
    Leon Trotsky (1879–1940)