Mirosław Jankowiak | Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic (original) (raw)
Uploads
Books by Mirosław Jankowiak
Belarusian dialects in Latvia, Kraslav region. A sociolinguistic study Introduction Belarusian ... more Belarusian dialects in Latvia, Kraslav region. A sociolinguistic study
Introduction
Belarusian dialects which appear within the administrative borders of present Belarus have been the subject of numerous detailed theses. However the problem of Belarusian outside the country is still little or even not examined. The only exception is Belastok and Vilnius regions. Smolensk and Chernihov regions as well as Latgale were an area that was little known and neglected by scholars despite its value.
The territory of Latgale was included in the massif of Belarusian dialects both by J. Karski (Ethnographic Map of the Belarusian Tribe, 1903) and The Moscow Committee of Dialectology on earlier maps. The maps, indicating the boundary of Belarusian settlement of the end of 19th and 20th centuries, made by J. Karski (1903), A. Rittich (1875) and M. Downar-Zapolski (1919) also show that a part of Latgale belongs to Belarusian ethnicity. Only the boundary marked by E. Erkiert in 1863 runs east of the present border, i.e. through Braslav.
The aim of the author was presenting the sociolinguistic situation of Belarusian dialect users who live in Latvia and precisely in three communes of Kraslav region (Kaplava, Piedruja and Indra). The study presents the communicative situations and domains of social life in which Belarusian dialects as well as other languages in this area function. It also indicates the relation between social-historical conditions and the linguistic situation. Multilingualism of the three examined groups: native (Latvian) Belarusians, the Belarusians who had arrived from Western Belarus (in the pre-war period within the borders of Poland) and those who had come from Eastern Belarus was the subject of analysis. Moreover, the system of Belarusian dialect of native population and comers from Western Belarus was discussed and compared.
The research was based geographically on three communes bordering Belarus (Piedruja – 8 villages, Indra – 5 and Kaplava – 13) and the town of Kraslav. The whole researched area belongs to Kraslav region, however it is included in two historical lands – two communes (Indra and Piedruja) and Kraslav are situated in Latgale. The commune of Kaplava is a part of Zemgale.
Kraslav region
A very interesting area for research appeared to be Kraslav region, situated in the south of Latgale, at the border with Belarus. It represents a specific borderland of borderland where the Balts (Latvians, Latgalians, Lithuanians) live together with the Slavs (Russians, Poles, Belarusians, Ukrainians) and numerous religions (Catholicism, Orthodox faith, Lutheranism and Old-Believers) co-exist. All of these factors resulted throughout history in developing multilingualism much more complex than in other borderlands. Three languages (Latvian, Russian and Polish) and numerous dialects (Latgalian, Belarusian and Polish of the Northern Borderland) exist together and intermingle.
The territory of present Latvia has been inhabited by a population of Ruthenian origin (Kryvichi) for ages. As early as in the medieval times the first families (most often merchant ones from Vitebsk and Polotsk) settled along the river Daugava as far as Hanseatic Riga. A significant increase in the number of Belarusian population in Latvian lands was in the second half of 19th century after the serfdom law had been lifted and the railway Vitebsk-Daugavpils built. The Russian general census of 1897 calculated the population of Belarusians at almost 82 thousand people. A lot of Belarusians inhabited Latvia in the inter-war period as well. The greatest increase in the number of population was however after World War II what resulted from the policy of Soviet authorities and higher standard of living in Latvia than in other Soviet republics. There were 120 thousand Belarusians in Latvia in 1989.
The population of Belarusian origin constitutes 17% inhabitants of Kraslav region, the Latvians (including Latgalians) – 48,7%, Russians – 24,7%, Poles – 6,6%, Ukrainians – 1,2%, Lithuanians – 0,4%, others – 1,4%.
Sociolinguistic aspects of functioning of Belarusian dialects
Socio-historical conditions led to the situation that in particular historical periods the Latvian and Russian languages, Latgalian and Belarusian dialects and Polish of the Northern Borderland possessed a different prestige and embraced certain social spheres of the local community which inhabited Kraslav region. Analysing the sociolinguistic situation by means of the domain method including all the generations of interlocutors as well as taking the chronological aspect into consideration made it possible not only to look at the function of Belarusian dialects but also to give a wide picture of the whole linguistic situation in the researched area.
The family-neighbours domain has invariably been served most of all by a simple speech (mowa prosta) and a local variation of Russian for many years. We can only talk about slight differences in the dialect (the degree of saturating it with words of Belarusian, Russian or Polish origin) depending on the age and origin of the informants of the oldest generation.
The middle generation and youth use Russian. Latvian or Latgalian is less frequently the language of conversation (nationally mixed families or a few neighbours speaking Latvian or Latgalian). In case of the family-neighbours domain the most important criterion is not the origin but the interlocutor’s age.
A look at the Belarusian educational system in Latvia shows with hindsight that the Belarusian minority had little opportunity of attending their schools. Definitely the best period is the inter-war years when Belarusian schools usually functioned freely. The majority of my informants who were born in Latvia before the war attended a Belarusian school. After World War II the Belarusians could attend only Russian schools (no one chose a Latvian school). This led to substantial russification of the middle generation of informants mainly.
Regaining independence by Latvia allows of free opening of schools, however the weakness of Belarusian institutions (poor organisation and co-operation as well as financial limitations) and no demand for Belarsian schools on the part of the Belarusians themselves result in only one Belarusian school functioning in Riga per almost 90 thousand of the Belarusian minority in this country. Therefore we can talk about an ongoing process of russification (to a less extent lettisation) of this national minority what substantially influences their primary language.
Field research done in the visited places proved that there are no major differences in the religious domain which would result from the geographical location. The exception is the Kaplava commune which does not belong to historical Latgale, therefore Latgalian is not the language of liturgy here. Priests usually adjust the language to the needs of the faithful so that Catholics of different nationalities could participate in the Holy Mass. That is why the Mass (or its particular parts) is officiated in four languages: Polish, Latvian, Russian and Latgalian (with the exception of the Kaplava commune). A curiosity is behaviour of the priest taking care of churches in Piedruja, Indra and Indryca who speaks a Belarusian dialect during the Mass.
The choice of the language of the prayer or wedding ceremony usually results from the informant’s age and to a less extent from the place of residence. Until the present day a strong attachment to Polish and Latgalian as the languages of liturgy and religion has been visible. The time of the Soviet rule contributed to a considerable increase in the role of Russian which is becoming more and more popular. The Latvian language appeared in liturgy relatively lately (but it already existed as the language of documents in the inter-war period). As the official language it has to be present in church, nevertheless it still plays a minor role. The Belarusian language is also of minor importance but the Belarusian dialect has been present for many years as the language of the prayer at home or confession.
The administrative-public domain is this area of life where the Belarusian community has an opportunity to contact all the languages which function in Kraslav region. These are first of all Russian and Latvian but also literary Belarusian and to a less extent Polish and Latgalian. There has been a significant increase in the role of the official language recently. In spite of this fact, Russian is widespread as it is still the only fully understood language for all the inhabitants. The Belarusian dialect is of minor importance here – its appearance is connected with the fact that numerous elderly people know no other language than their own speech. Therefore they use the simple speech (mowa prosta) in official situations. My interlocutors have a contact mainly with Russian and Belarusian, seldom with Latvian or Latgalian via mass media. The appearance of Polish is limited only to the radio broadcasting from Poland (The Polish Radio Maryja and PR1) and to a Polish school in Kraslav.
The analysis of functioning of all the languages in different domains of life in historical view showed that Belarusian dialects permanently embrace the family-neighbours domain regardless of time (both before World War II, in the Soviet times and at present). Observing strong russification of the middle generation and youth one can expect that the oldest interlocutors are the last generation using the Belarusian dialect every day. The appearance of the simple speech (mowa prosta) partly embraces the religious domain as well – the daily prayer or talking to a priest (or an Orthodox priest) and a part of the Holy Mass in Piedruja and Idra churches.
The Latvian language in Kraslav region functioned in the sphere of high culture (social clubs, Latvian schools, partly libraries) in the Soviet times. After Latvia regained independence, the role of Latvian has been growing annually (unfavourably for Russian), especially in the administrative-public domain and schooling system. Latvian appears in religious sphere, too. Nevertheless, it will remain outside the family sphere and as the language of contacts with neighbours it will play a secondary role compared with Russian.
The Belarusian minority usually has a contact with Latgalian dialects only in church (a part of the Mass is officiated in Latgalian, especially in Kraslav) and rarely through a contact with Latgalian neighbours.
Russian, which played the greatest role in the area in the Soviet times, is still the most widespread. It holds and surely will maintain its position in such domains of life as the family or neighbourhood, however it systematically begins to give way to Latvian in working places and partly in official situations. In religious sphere (the Catholic Church) it gradually starts to supersede Polish.
Although literary Belarusian is known to newcomers from Belarus it is obviously their secondary speech and they don’t use it in everyday life. The community of Kraslav region has a contact with the language only through the television and radio broadcast from Minsk and to a minimal extent through newspapers.
The Polish language, despite maintaining still high prestige (numerous respondents consider it „a higher, more beautiful and gentle” language), gradually gives way to Russian (in religious sphere). A part of respondents (elderly people, newcomers from Western Belarus) know it but, as in the case of literary Belarusian, it is usually a secondary language. A certain chance may be functioning of Polish in Polish schools.
Belarusian dialects in Kraslav region
The book provides a comparison of dialects of two examined groups – native Belarusians and immigrant population from Western Belarus. Phonetic, morphological, syntactic features and the lexis were a subject of an analysis (partly quantitative). On the basis of the analysed material one can state that:
- the field research confirmed that Belarusian dialects functioning in Kraslav region for many years are undoubtedly the extension of dialects belonging to the so called northern (Polotsk) group, despite the fact that for a long time these lands were outside administrative borders of Belarus (or the Soviet Union) and were divided by the river Daugava;
- the Belarusian character of dialects functioning in Kraslav region has been preserved in phonetics and inflection, particularly in the speech of newcomers. It is confirmed by prevalence (and in fact domination) of appearance of such linguistic features as the voiced (h), labial and nonsyllabic (;), dzekanye, tsekanye and yakanye (both dissimilative and non-dissimilative) or the Belarusian type of akanye;
- phonetics and inflection, which have a temporary character in Northern Belarus (and surely in Kraslav region as well), begin to acquire crossness features. Variant realisations of one feature accordingly to the specificity of the Belarusian language (dialect) or accordingly to Russian are visible in the speech of one interlocutor (particularly in utterances of those inhabitants of Kraslav region who have lived there for many generations). This is visible in the speech of native Belarusians in the example of the (c’) ending of 1st conjugation verbs, 3rd person singular and plural, present and future tense, or the appearance of the soft (R) where the frequency of Russian forms was respectively 33,50% and 27,80% of all possible occurrence;
- mixed character of phonetics and inflection is more apparent in the speech of people coming from Latvia and this process undoubtedly started there earlier fostered by lack of opportunity to receive education at Belarusian schools;
- because of the fact that the speech of both examined communities represents one dialectal group, the linguistic unification, though apparent, does not embrace the dialect from the territory of Braslav and Miory regions towards Kraslav dialects (as both are characterised by occurrence of the same linguistic features) and it is in fact the process of russification typical of Belarusian dialects in other parts of the country;
- widespread and alternate functioning of Belarusian and Russian lexemes (mainly in the speech of newcomers from Western Belarus) which name the same referent is apparent, therefore we can talk about a mixed, Russian-Belarusian character of the lexis with obvious superiority of Russian terminology;
- among all the levels of the language the differences in the language between natives and newcomers can be discussed only regarding the lexis. Several dozens of years ago people coming from Braslav region were characterised by the vocabulary typical of Western Belarus whereas the native, Latvian Belarusians used terminology spread in the zone of dialects from North-Eastern Belarus. Currently we can observe a rather strong unification of the two groups’ lexis which occured (in the case of newcomers) towards north-eastern dialects. Therefore it became similar to the vocabulary spread in Kraslav region for many years, i.e. closer to the Russian language;
- the structure of the dialect in the researched area has been preserved quite well what can be confirmed by the frequency with which features typical of this territory or the zone of dialects of North-Eastern Belarus occur. This mainly applies to the speech of newcomers from Western Belarus and native interlocutors to less extent.
Translated by Marta Dąbrowska
Belarusian dialects in Latvia, Kraslav region. A sociolinguistic study Introduction Belarusian... more Belarusian dialects in Latvia, Kraslav region. A sociolinguistic study
Introduction
Belarusian dialects which appear within the administrative borders of present Belarus have been the subject of numerous detailed theses. However the problem of Belarusian outside the country is still little or even not examined. The only exception is Belastok and Vilnius regions. Smolensk and Chernihov regions as well as Latgale were an area that was little known and neglected by scholars despite its value.
The territory of Latgale was included in the massif of Belarusian dialects both by J. Karski (Ethnographic Map of the Belarusian Tribe, 1903) and The Moscow Committee of Dialectology on earlier maps. The maps, indicating the boundary of Belarusian settlement of the end of 19th and 20th centuries, made by J. Karski (1903), A. Rittich (1875) and M. Downar-Zapolski (1919) also show that a part of Latgale belongs to Belarusian ethnicity. Only the boundary marked by E. Erkiert in 1863 runs east of the present border, i.e. through Braslav.
The aim of the author was presenting the sociolinguistic situation of Belarusian dialect users who live in Latvia and precisely in three communes of Kraslav region (Kaplava, Piedruja and Indra). The study presents the communicative situations and domains of social life in which Belarusian dialects as well as other languages in this area function. It also indicates the relation between social-historical conditions and the linguistic situation. Multilingualism of the three examined groups: native (Latvian) Belarusians, the Belarusians who had arrived from Western Belarus (in the pre-war period within the borders of Poland) and those who had come from Eastern Belarus was the subject of analysis. Moreover, the system of Belarusian dialect of native population and comers from Western Belarus was discussed and compared.
The research was based geographically on three communes bordering Belarus (Piedruja – 8 villages, Indra – 5 and Kaplava – 13) and the town of Kraslav. The whole researched area belongs to Kraslav region, however it is included in two historical lands – two communes (Indra and Piedruja) and Kraslav are situated in Latgale. The commune of Kaplava is a part of Zemgale.
Kraslav region
A very interesting area for research appeared to be Kraslav region, situated in the south of Latgale, at the border with Belarus. It represents a specific borderland of borderland where the Balts (Latvians, Latgalians, Lithuanians) live together with the Slavs (Russians, Poles, Belarusians, Ukrainians) and numerous religions (Catholicism, Orthodox faith, Lutheranism and Old-Believers) co-exist. All of these factors resulted throughout history in developing multilingualism much more complex than in other borderlands. Three languages (Latvian, Russian and Polish) and numerous dialects (Latgalian, Belarusian and Polish of the Northern Borderland) exist together and intermingle.
The territory of present Latvia has been inhabited by a population of Ruthenian origin (Kryvichi) for ages. As early as in the medieval times the first families (most often merchant ones from Vitebsk and Polotsk) settled along the river Daugava as far as Hanseatic Riga. A significant increase in the number of Belarusian population in Latvian lands was in the second half of 19th century after the serfdom law had been lifted and the railway Vitebsk-Daugavpils built. The Russian general census of 1897 calculated the population of Belarusians at almost 82 thousand people. A lot of Belarusians inhabited Latvia in the inter-war period as well. The greatest increase in the number of population was however after World War II what resulted from the policy of Soviet authorities and higher standard of living in Latvia than in other Soviet republics. There were 120 thousand Belarusians in Latvia in 1989.
The population of Belarusian origin constitutes 17% inhabitants of Kraslav region, the Latvians (including Latgalians) – 48,7%, Russians – 24,7%, Poles – 6,6%, Ukrainians – 1,2%, Lithuanians – 0,4%, others – 1,4%.
Sociolinguistic aspects of functioning of Belarusian dialects
Socio-historical conditions led to the situation that in particular historical periods the Latvian and Russian languages, Latgalian and Belarusian dialects and Polish of the Northern Borderland possessed a different prestige and embraced certain social spheres of the local community which inhabited Kraslav region. Analysing the sociolinguistic situation by means of the domain method including all the generations of interlocutors as well as taking the chronological aspect into consideration made it possible not only to look at the function of Belarusian dialects but also to give a wide picture of the whole linguistic situation in the researched area.
The family-neighbours domain has invariably been served most of all by a simple speech (mowa prosta) and a local variation of Russian for many years. We can only talk about slight differences in the dialect (the degree of saturating it with words of Belarusian, Russian or Polish origin) depending on the age and origin of the informants of the oldest generation.
The middle generation and youth use Russian. Latvian or Latgalian is less frequently the language of conversation (nationally mixed families or a few neighbours speaking Latvian or Latgalian). In case of the family-neighbours domain the most important criterion is not the origin but the interlocutor’s age.
A look at the Belarusian educational system in Latvia shows with hindsight that the Belarusian minority had little opportunity of attending their schools. Definitely the best period is the inter-war years when Belarusian schools usually functioned freely. The majority of my informants who were born in Latvia before the war attended a Belarusian school. After World War II the Belarusians could attend only Russian schools (no one chose a Latvian school). This led to substantial russification of the middle generation of informants mainly.
Regaining independence by Latvia allows of free opening of schools, however the weakness of Belarusian institutions (poor organisation and co-operation as well as financial limitations) and no demand for Belarsian schools on the part of the Belarusians themselves result in only one Belarusian school functioning in Riga per almost 90 thousand of the Belarusian minority in this country. Therefore we can talk about an ongoing process of russification (to a less extent lettisation) of this national minority what substantially influences their primary language.
Field research done in the visited places proved that there are no major differences in the religious domain which would result from the geographical location. The exception is the Kaplava commune which does not belong to historical Latgale, therefore Latgalian is not the language of liturgy here. Priests usually adjust the language to the needs of the faithful so that Catholics of different nationalities could participate in the Holy Mass. That is why the Mass (or its particular parts) is officiated in four languages: Polish, Latvian, Russian and Latgalian (with the exception of the Kaplava commune). A curiosity is behaviour of the priest taking care of churches in Piedruja, Indra and Indryca who speaks a Belarusian dialect during the Mass.
The choice of the language of the prayer or wedding ceremony usually results from the informant’s age and to a less extent from the place of residence. Until the present day a strong attachment to Polish and Latgalian as the languages of liturgy and religion has been visible. The time of the Soviet rule contributed to a considerable increase in the role of Russian which is becoming more and more popular. The Latvian language appeared in liturgy relatively lately (but it already existed as the language of documents in the inter-war period). As the official language it has to be present in church, nevertheless it still plays a minor role. The Belarusian language is also of minor importance but the Belarusian dialect has been present for many years as the language of the prayer at home or confession.
The administrative-public domain is this area of life where the Belarusian community has an opportunity to contact all the languages which function in Kraslav region. These are first of all Russian and Latvian but also literary Belarusian and to a less extent Polish and Latgalian. There has been a significant increase in the role of the official language recently. In spite of this fact, Russian is widespread as it is still the only fully understood language for all the inhabitants. The Belarusian dialect is of minor importance here – its appearance is connected with the fact that numerous elderly people know no other language than their own speech. Therefore they use the simple speech (mowa prosta) in official situations. My interlocutors have a contact mainly with Russian and Belarusian, seldom with Latvian or Latgalian via mass media. The appearance of Polish is limited only to the radio broadcasting from Poland (The Polish Radio Maryja and PR1) and to a Polish school in Kraslav.
The analysis of functioning of all the languages in different domains of life in historical view showed that Belarusian dialects permanently embrace the family-neighbours domain regardless of time (both before World War II, in the Soviet times and at present). Observing strong russification of the middle generation and youth one can expect that the oldest interlocutors are the last generation using the Belarusian dialect every day. The appearance of the simple speech (mowa prosta) partly embraces the religious domain as well – the daily prayer or talking to a priest (or an Orthodox priest) and a part of the Holy Mass in Piedruja and Idra churches.
The Latvian language in Kraslav region functioned in the sphere of high culture (social clubs, Latvian schools, partly libraries) in the Soviet times. After Latvia regained independence, the role of Latvian has been gro...
Papers by Mirosław Jankowiak
Slavistica Vilnensis, Dec 28, 2020
The aim of the article is to present contemporary Belarusian dialects functioning in Eastern Lith... more The aim of the article is to present contemporary Belarusian dialects functioning in Eastern Lithuania (in the regions of Ignalina and Švenčionys), which have not been the subject of comprehensive linguistic research. The basis for the analysis are the author’s own materials, which were collected during field research in 2014–2016. The structure of these Belarusian dialects (selected features in phonetics, morphology, syntax, vocabulary and phraseology) as well as the sociolinguistic aspect of their functioning in a multilingual environment are demonstrated in the article
Gwary Dziś
W artykule zaprezentowano koncepcję tworzenia Atlasu gwar białoruskich na Łotwie. Podstawę materi... more W artykule zaprezentowano koncepcję tworzenia Atlasu gwar białoruskich na Łotwie. Podstawę materiałową stanowią badania własne autora, zebrane w trakcie ekspedycji dialektologicznych w latach 2004–2009/2022, łącznie ok. 230 godz. wywiadów. Publikacja będzie się składała z map prezentujących różne cechy fonetyczno-gramatyczne i leksykę oraz mapy poglądowe (klasyfikacja gwar, dystrybucja w różnych okresach historycznych etc.). W atlasie zostaną przedstawione nie tylko cechy uwzględnione w Dialektologicznym atlasie języka białoruskiego, ale również ukazujące związki z językami (i ich dialektami) – polskim, rosyjskim i bałtyckimi.
Książka "Gwary białoruskie na Łotwie w rejonie krasławskim" dokumentuje socjolingwistyc... more Książka "Gwary białoruskie na Łotwie w rejonie krasławskim" dokumentuje socjolingwistyczną sytuację osób mówiących różnymi odmianami języka białoruskiego w miejscu będącym swoistym pograniczem pograniczy, gdzie obok siebie mieszkają Bałtowie (Łotysze, Łatgalczycy, Litwini), Słowianie (Rosjanie, Polacy, Białorusini, Ukraińcy), stykają się ze sobą liczne religie (katolicyzm, prawosławie, luteranizm i staroobrzędowość). Wszystko to na przestrzeni dziejów przyczyniło się do wykształcenia wielojęzyczności o wiele bardziej złożonej niż na innych pograniczach. Koegzystują tu obok siebie i przenikają się wzajemnie trzy języki (łotewski, rosyjski i polski) oraz liczne gwary (łatgalskie, białoruskie i polskie północnokresowe)."Belarusian dialects in Latvia, Kraslav region" looks into the sociolinguistic situation of people speaking different varieties of Belarusian in an area that is a sui generis borderland of borderlands, where the Balts (Latvians, Latgalians, Lithuanian...
"Dialektologia białoruska" to praca dostarczająca czytelnikowi wiarygodnych, aktualnych... more "Dialektologia białoruska" to praca dostarczająca czytelnikowi wiarygodnych, aktualnych i opartych na wynikach badań informacji na temat dialektów białoruskich, ich początków, zasięgu i zróżnicowania. Celem autorów jest ukazanie czytelnikowi bogactwa i różnorodności białoruskich dialektów, ich pozycji i roli w kulturze i życiu współczesnych Białorusinów oraz tendencji językowych panujących obecnie na Białorusi."Belarusian dialectology" is a study which provides the reader with reliable, up-to-date and research-based information about Belarusian dialects, their origin, range and diversification. The authors' aim is to show the reader the richness and diversity of Belarusian dialects, their position and role in the culture and life of contemporary people as well as current language tendencies in Belarus.Pracę wykonano w ramach projektu badawczego (grant nr N104 072137) finansowanego przez Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego / Narodowe Centrum Nauki w latach 2009–2012, afiliowanego przy Instytucie Slawistyki PAN
Studia Białorutenistyczne, 2021
The presented article describes the Belarusian press that was published in Latvia in the interwar... more The presented article describes the Belarusian press that was published in Latvia in the interwar period (1920-1933). The available publications usually only mention that Belarusianlanguage newspapers were published in Riga or Daugavpils, were mentioned by name, provided general information, or analysed a specific aspect (the language of the texts or some issue raised in the press). The author's intention is to provide a broader description of each of the printed newspapers with the fullest possible information about their editorial office, authors, subject matter, or place of publication. The second important issue was to show the political, social, and cultural conditions that influenced the functioning of the Belarusian minority in Latvia and, inter alia, creating new newspapers in Belarusian and publishing them. For this purpose, the author conducted a library query in Riga (The National Library of Latvia), in London (Francis Skaryna Belarusian Library and Museum) and in Prague (Slavonic Library of the National Library in the Czech Republic). The creation of new newspapers and the frequency of their appearances depended primarily on the finances of Belarusian organizations and their activity as well as current political events (such as the so-called "Belarusian trial" and the introduction of authoritarian rule by K. Ulmanis in 1934). The most important were the newspapers edited by the most active activists (K. Jezavitaŭ and S. Sakharaŭ) and published by the largest Belarusian organizations (newspapers: Голас беларуса, Беларуская школа ў Лавтвіі and Школьная праца). Most of the newspapers were published irregularly and/or only one or a few issues were published. * Autor wykazuje podziękowanie dr hab. Jerzemu Grzybowskiemu z Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego oraz Jūliji Gabranovej z Rygi za udostępnienie części numerów gazet, które nie znajdowały się w archiwum autora, oraz za cenne wskazówki i informacje.
Acta Baltico-Slavica, 2021
From the Research on Latvian Dialectal LexisReview Benita Laumane, Zvejasrīku nosaukumi latvijas ... more From the Research on Latvian Dialectal LexisReview Benita Laumane, Zvejasrīku nosaukumi latvijas piekrastē [Names of Fishing Gear on the Latvian Coast], Liepāja: Liepājas Universitāte, Kurzemes Humanitārais institūts, 2019, 507 pp.This article is a review of the work entitled Zvejasrīku nosaukumi latvijas piekrastē [Names of Fishing Gear on the Latvian Coast], written by the Latvian linguist from Liepāja – Benita Laumane. The study consists of two major parts. The first one, divided into thematic sections, presents the vocabulary related to coastal sea fishing (1: Sea fishing and fishing gear; 2: Hook gear; 3: The organisation of fishing; 4: Fish processing). The second part is devoted to the linguistic characteristics of the lexemes under discussion (phonetics, grammar, etymology, geographical extent). Z badań nad łotewską leksyką gwarowąRecenzjaBenita Laumane, Zvejasrīku nosaukumi latvijas piekrastē [Nazwy narzędzi połowowych na wybrzeżu łotewskim], Liepāja: Liepājas Universitāte...
Recenzja ksiązki: Krzysztof Zajas, Nieobecna kultura. Przypadek Inflant Polskich, Krakow 2008
LingVaria, 2019
Relics of the Polish Language of the North-Eastern Borderland in the Former Boundaries of Polish-... more Relics of the Polish Language of the North-Eastern Borderland in the Former Boundaries of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Southern Lands of the Pskov Province). Part IThe present paper consists of two parts, and presents the spoken Polish of the North-Eastern Borderland, as well as borrowings from Polish which function in the dialects of the Pskov province. Three regions with different histories have been included. The southern lands of the Pskov province (the area which belonged to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth until 1772) were described in the first part of the article. The sociolinguistic situation and loanwords borrowed from Polish (or via Polish) were analysed basing on two sources: the author’s materials collected during dialectological field research, and material from The Pskov Regional Dictionary with Historical Data. The Pytalovo region (which belonged to Latvia in the interwar period) and the historical Pskov region (where there were no Polish settlements) were descr...
LingVaria, 2018
Lexical Borrowings from Polish in Belarusian Dialects of Lithuania (the Varėna District)The paper... more Lexical Borrowings from Polish in Belarusian Dialects of Lithuania (the Varėna District)The paper discusses lexical borrowings from Polish in Belarusian dialects of the southern part of the Varėna District Municipality in Lithuania. The dialectological material has been collected from members of the oldest generation, living in five villages close to the Belarusian border: Balbutai, Rakai, Kalviai, Kotra, and Paramėlis. The borrowings refer to various aspects of life, e.g. the Catholic Church, the sphere of education, administration, vocabulary connected to Polish landowners, Polish culture and everyday life. It is interesting to note that also Polish numerals could be found in the speech of my interlocutors. Borrowings from Polish were more frequent in the speech of the Catholic part of the populace than among Orthodox informers.
Studia z Filologii Polskiej i Słowiańskiej, 2016
Dialectal zones of the Belarusian language as an example of language contacts between neighbourin... more Dialectal zones of the Belarusian language as an example of language contacts between neighbouring nationsThe article regards dialectal zones of the Belarusian language, which, as opposed to the traditional division into dialectal belts and dialectal groups, were marked out mainly on the basis of lexical and not grammatical features. While the traditionally delineated dialects indicate ethnographic unity of the Belarusian nation, dialectal zones present cultural and historical contacts with neighbouring nations. We can distinguish five zones: north-western (contacts with the Baltic languages, mainly with Lithuanian, and the Polish language of the northern borderland), south-eastern (contacts with Russian and Ukrainian), western (contacts with Polish), eastern (contacts with Russian) and central. Strefy dialektalne języka białoruskiego jako przykład językowych kontaktów z sąsiednimi narodami Artykuł traktuje o strefach dialektalnych języka białoruskiego, które, w odróżnieniu od trady...
Acta Baltico-Slavica, 2016
The Vocabulary of Baltic Origin in Mixed Belarusian-Russian Dialects of the South Pskov Region (t... more The Vocabulary of Baltic Origin in Mixed Belarusian-Russian Dialects of the South Pskov Region (the Area of Sebezh and Nevel)The article discusses the issue of the vocabulary of Baltic origin which functions in contemporary mixed Belarusian-Russian dialects. It contains analysis of the vocabulary of dialects functioning in the southern part of Pskov region – in the area of Sebezh and Nevel which once were part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The material basis was the author’s own recordings collected during a dialectological expedition carried out as a part of the TriMCo (Triangulation Approach for Modelling Convergence with a High Zoom-In Factor) project in 2014 as well as volumes of the Pskov regional dictionary (Псковский областной словарь).The southern part of Pskov region has been the place of contact of various languages and dialects (Russian, Belarusian, Lithuanian, Latvian, Polish, Yiddish). The Baltic vocabulary is connected mainly with the oldest layer of the lexis...
Slavistica Vilnensis, 2017
W artykule zostały przedstawione współczesne gwary białoruskie funkcjonujące na obszarze wschodni... more W artykule zostały przedstawione współczesne gwary białoruskie funkcjonujące na obszarze wschodniej Litwy (rejony ignaliński i święciański), które do tej pory nie były tematem kompleksowych badań lingwistycznych. Podstawę analizy stanowią materiały własne autora zebrane w trakcie ekspedycji terenowych przeprowadzonych w latach 2014–2016. W artykule została pokazana struktura samych gwar (wybrane cechy fonetyczne, morfologiczne, składniowe, leksyka, frazeologia) oraz socjolingwistyczne aspekty ich funkcjonowania w wielojęzycznym środowisku.
Acta Baltico-Slavica
Professor Iryda Grek-Pabisowa (1932–2021)This article presents the profile of Iryda Grek-Pabisowa... more Professor Iryda Grek-Pabisowa (1932–2021)This article presents the profile of Iryda Grek-Pabisowa, a renowned linguist, associated with the Institute of Slavic Studies, Polish Academy of Sciences for sixty years. She was a long-serving head of North Borderland Polish, and the deputy director of the Institute for two terms (1996–2003). She was a pioneer of research on the language and culture of Old Believers in Poland, and the language of Poles in Belarus and Lithuania. The most important research areas on which she focused were dialectology and lexicography: the study and description of the subdialects of Old Believers living in Poland (e.g. A Dictionary of the Dialect of Old Believers Living in Poland), the Russian language (e.g. The Great Russian-Polish Dictionary) and North Borderland Polish (7 monographs and A Dictionary of the Spoken Polish of the North-Eastern Borderland). She is the author or co-author of about 160 articles, 11 monographs and 7 dictionaries. In 1974–2003 she...
Acta Albaruthenica
The article discusses the Northern subdialect group of the Northeastern Belarusian dialect, which... more The article discusses the Northern subdialect group of the Northeastern Belarusian dialect, which is one of the least studied in terms of its structure and genesis. It is characterized primarily by a number of lexical and lexical-semantic features, typical not only for this area of Belarus, but linking it with Russian dialects and dialects of the Baltic languages. These features were formed in various historical periods: the oldest (from before the writing system appeared) include, among others, the so-called cokan'e and the preservation of the suffix -dl- forming the names of farm tools; the syncretism of noun endings probably dates back to to the general Russian period, while the pronouns íchny, jéjny and the verb forms jadzióm and dadzióm are newer innovations from the period of the formation of Belarusian dialects.
Belarusian dialects in Latvia, Kraslav region. A sociolinguistic study Introduction Belarusian ... more Belarusian dialects in Latvia, Kraslav region. A sociolinguistic study
Introduction
Belarusian dialects which appear within the administrative borders of present Belarus have been the subject of numerous detailed theses. However the problem of Belarusian outside the country is still little or even not examined. The only exception is Belastok and Vilnius regions. Smolensk and Chernihov regions as well as Latgale were an area that was little known and neglected by scholars despite its value.
The territory of Latgale was included in the massif of Belarusian dialects both by J. Karski (Ethnographic Map of the Belarusian Tribe, 1903) and The Moscow Committee of Dialectology on earlier maps. The maps, indicating the boundary of Belarusian settlement of the end of 19th and 20th centuries, made by J. Karski (1903), A. Rittich (1875) and M. Downar-Zapolski (1919) also show that a part of Latgale belongs to Belarusian ethnicity. Only the boundary marked by E. Erkiert in 1863 runs east of the present border, i.e. through Braslav.
The aim of the author was presenting the sociolinguistic situation of Belarusian dialect users who live in Latvia and precisely in three communes of Kraslav region (Kaplava, Piedruja and Indra). The study presents the communicative situations and domains of social life in which Belarusian dialects as well as other languages in this area function. It also indicates the relation between social-historical conditions and the linguistic situation. Multilingualism of the three examined groups: native (Latvian) Belarusians, the Belarusians who had arrived from Western Belarus (in the pre-war period within the borders of Poland) and those who had come from Eastern Belarus was the subject of analysis. Moreover, the system of Belarusian dialect of native population and comers from Western Belarus was discussed and compared.
The research was based geographically on three communes bordering Belarus (Piedruja – 8 villages, Indra – 5 and Kaplava – 13) and the town of Kraslav. The whole researched area belongs to Kraslav region, however it is included in two historical lands – two communes (Indra and Piedruja) and Kraslav are situated in Latgale. The commune of Kaplava is a part of Zemgale.
Kraslav region
A very interesting area for research appeared to be Kraslav region, situated in the south of Latgale, at the border with Belarus. It represents a specific borderland of borderland where the Balts (Latvians, Latgalians, Lithuanians) live together with the Slavs (Russians, Poles, Belarusians, Ukrainians) and numerous religions (Catholicism, Orthodox faith, Lutheranism and Old-Believers) co-exist. All of these factors resulted throughout history in developing multilingualism much more complex than in other borderlands. Three languages (Latvian, Russian and Polish) and numerous dialects (Latgalian, Belarusian and Polish of the Northern Borderland) exist together and intermingle.
The territory of present Latvia has been inhabited by a population of Ruthenian origin (Kryvichi) for ages. As early as in the medieval times the first families (most often merchant ones from Vitebsk and Polotsk) settled along the river Daugava as far as Hanseatic Riga. A significant increase in the number of Belarusian population in Latvian lands was in the second half of 19th century after the serfdom law had been lifted and the railway Vitebsk-Daugavpils built. The Russian general census of 1897 calculated the population of Belarusians at almost 82 thousand people. A lot of Belarusians inhabited Latvia in the inter-war period as well. The greatest increase in the number of population was however after World War II what resulted from the policy of Soviet authorities and higher standard of living in Latvia than in other Soviet republics. There were 120 thousand Belarusians in Latvia in 1989.
The population of Belarusian origin constitutes 17% inhabitants of Kraslav region, the Latvians (including Latgalians) – 48,7%, Russians – 24,7%, Poles – 6,6%, Ukrainians – 1,2%, Lithuanians – 0,4%, others – 1,4%.
Sociolinguistic aspects of functioning of Belarusian dialects
Socio-historical conditions led to the situation that in particular historical periods the Latvian and Russian languages, Latgalian and Belarusian dialects and Polish of the Northern Borderland possessed a different prestige and embraced certain social spheres of the local community which inhabited Kraslav region. Analysing the sociolinguistic situation by means of the domain method including all the generations of interlocutors as well as taking the chronological aspect into consideration made it possible not only to look at the function of Belarusian dialects but also to give a wide picture of the whole linguistic situation in the researched area.
The family-neighbours domain has invariably been served most of all by a simple speech (mowa prosta) and a local variation of Russian for many years. We can only talk about slight differences in the dialect (the degree of saturating it with words of Belarusian, Russian or Polish origin) depending on the age and origin of the informants of the oldest generation.
The middle generation and youth use Russian. Latvian or Latgalian is less frequently the language of conversation (nationally mixed families or a few neighbours speaking Latvian or Latgalian). In case of the family-neighbours domain the most important criterion is not the origin but the interlocutor’s age.
A look at the Belarusian educational system in Latvia shows with hindsight that the Belarusian minority had little opportunity of attending their schools. Definitely the best period is the inter-war years when Belarusian schools usually functioned freely. The majority of my informants who were born in Latvia before the war attended a Belarusian school. After World War II the Belarusians could attend only Russian schools (no one chose a Latvian school). This led to substantial russification of the middle generation of informants mainly.
Regaining independence by Latvia allows of free opening of schools, however the weakness of Belarusian institutions (poor organisation and co-operation as well as financial limitations) and no demand for Belarsian schools on the part of the Belarusians themselves result in only one Belarusian school functioning in Riga per almost 90 thousand of the Belarusian minority in this country. Therefore we can talk about an ongoing process of russification (to a less extent lettisation) of this national minority what substantially influences their primary language.
Field research done in the visited places proved that there are no major differences in the religious domain which would result from the geographical location. The exception is the Kaplava commune which does not belong to historical Latgale, therefore Latgalian is not the language of liturgy here. Priests usually adjust the language to the needs of the faithful so that Catholics of different nationalities could participate in the Holy Mass. That is why the Mass (or its particular parts) is officiated in four languages: Polish, Latvian, Russian and Latgalian (with the exception of the Kaplava commune). A curiosity is behaviour of the priest taking care of churches in Piedruja, Indra and Indryca who speaks a Belarusian dialect during the Mass.
The choice of the language of the prayer or wedding ceremony usually results from the informant’s age and to a less extent from the place of residence. Until the present day a strong attachment to Polish and Latgalian as the languages of liturgy and religion has been visible. The time of the Soviet rule contributed to a considerable increase in the role of Russian which is becoming more and more popular. The Latvian language appeared in liturgy relatively lately (but it already existed as the language of documents in the inter-war period). As the official language it has to be present in church, nevertheless it still plays a minor role. The Belarusian language is also of minor importance but the Belarusian dialect has been present for many years as the language of the prayer at home or confession.
The administrative-public domain is this area of life where the Belarusian community has an opportunity to contact all the languages which function in Kraslav region. These are first of all Russian and Latvian but also literary Belarusian and to a less extent Polish and Latgalian. There has been a significant increase in the role of the official language recently. In spite of this fact, Russian is widespread as it is still the only fully understood language for all the inhabitants. The Belarusian dialect is of minor importance here – its appearance is connected with the fact that numerous elderly people know no other language than their own speech. Therefore they use the simple speech (mowa prosta) in official situations. My interlocutors have a contact mainly with Russian and Belarusian, seldom with Latvian or Latgalian via mass media. The appearance of Polish is limited only to the radio broadcasting from Poland (The Polish Radio Maryja and PR1) and to a Polish school in Kraslav.
The analysis of functioning of all the languages in different domains of life in historical view showed that Belarusian dialects permanently embrace the family-neighbours domain regardless of time (both before World War II, in the Soviet times and at present). Observing strong russification of the middle generation and youth one can expect that the oldest interlocutors are the last generation using the Belarusian dialect every day. The appearance of the simple speech (mowa prosta) partly embraces the religious domain as well – the daily prayer or talking to a priest (or an Orthodox priest) and a part of the Holy Mass in Piedruja and Idra churches.
The Latvian language in Kraslav region functioned in the sphere of high culture (social clubs, Latvian schools, partly libraries) in the Soviet times. After Latvia regained independence, the role of Latvian has been growing annually (unfavourably for Russian), especially in the administrative-public domain and schooling system. Latvian appears in religious sphere, too. Nevertheless, it will remain outside the family sphere and as the language of contacts with neighbours it will play a secondary role compared with Russian.
The Belarusian minority usually has a contact with Latgalian dialects only in church (a part of the Mass is officiated in Latgalian, especially in Kraslav) and rarely through a contact with Latgalian neighbours.
Russian, which played the greatest role in the area in the Soviet times, is still the most widespread. It holds and surely will maintain its position in such domains of life as the family or neighbourhood, however it systematically begins to give way to Latvian in working places and partly in official situations. In religious sphere (the Catholic Church) it gradually starts to supersede Polish.
Although literary Belarusian is known to newcomers from Belarus it is obviously their secondary speech and they don’t use it in everyday life. The community of Kraslav region has a contact with the language only through the television and radio broadcast from Minsk and to a minimal extent through newspapers.
The Polish language, despite maintaining still high prestige (numerous respondents consider it „a higher, more beautiful and gentle” language), gradually gives way to Russian (in religious sphere). A part of respondents (elderly people, newcomers from Western Belarus) know it but, as in the case of literary Belarusian, it is usually a secondary language. A certain chance may be functioning of Polish in Polish schools.
Belarusian dialects in Kraslav region
The book provides a comparison of dialects of two examined groups – native Belarusians and immigrant population from Western Belarus. Phonetic, morphological, syntactic features and the lexis were a subject of an analysis (partly quantitative). On the basis of the analysed material one can state that:
- the field research confirmed that Belarusian dialects functioning in Kraslav region for many years are undoubtedly the extension of dialects belonging to the so called northern (Polotsk) group, despite the fact that for a long time these lands were outside administrative borders of Belarus (or the Soviet Union) and were divided by the river Daugava;
- the Belarusian character of dialects functioning in Kraslav region has been preserved in phonetics and inflection, particularly in the speech of newcomers. It is confirmed by prevalence (and in fact domination) of appearance of such linguistic features as the voiced (h), labial and nonsyllabic (;), dzekanye, tsekanye and yakanye (both dissimilative and non-dissimilative) or the Belarusian type of akanye;
- phonetics and inflection, which have a temporary character in Northern Belarus (and surely in Kraslav region as well), begin to acquire crossness features. Variant realisations of one feature accordingly to the specificity of the Belarusian language (dialect) or accordingly to Russian are visible in the speech of one interlocutor (particularly in utterances of those inhabitants of Kraslav region who have lived there for many generations). This is visible in the speech of native Belarusians in the example of the (c’) ending of 1st conjugation verbs, 3rd person singular and plural, present and future tense, or the appearance of the soft (R) where the frequency of Russian forms was respectively 33,50% and 27,80% of all possible occurrence;
- mixed character of phonetics and inflection is more apparent in the speech of people coming from Latvia and this process undoubtedly started there earlier fostered by lack of opportunity to receive education at Belarusian schools;
- because of the fact that the speech of both examined communities represents one dialectal group, the linguistic unification, though apparent, does not embrace the dialect from the territory of Braslav and Miory regions towards Kraslav dialects (as both are characterised by occurrence of the same linguistic features) and it is in fact the process of russification typical of Belarusian dialects in other parts of the country;
- widespread and alternate functioning of Belarusian and Russian lexemes (mainly in the speech of newcomers from Western Belarus) which name the same referent is apparent, therefore we can talk about a mixed, Russian-Belarusian character of the lexis with obvious superiority of Russian terminology;
- among all the levels of the language the differences in the language between natives and newcomers can be discussed only regarding the lexis. Several dozens of years ago people coming from Braslav region were characterised by the vocabulary typical of Western Belarus whereas the native, Latvian Belarusians used terminology spread in the zone of dialects from North-Eastern Belarus. Currently we can observe a rather strong unification of the two groups’ lexis which occured (in the case of newcomers) towards north-eastern dialects. Therefore it became similar to the vocabulary spread in Kraslav region for many years, i.e. closer to the Russian language;
- the structure of the dialect in the researched area has been preserved quite well what can be confirmed by the frequency with which features typical of this territory or the zone of dialects of North-Eastern Belarus occur. This mainly applies to the speech of newcomers from Western Belarus and native interlocutors to less extent.
Translated by Marta Dąbrowska
Belarusian dialects in Latvia, Kraslav region. A sociolinguistic study Introduction Belarusian... more Belarusian dialects in Latvia, Kraslav region. A sociolinguistic study
Introduction
Belarusian dialects which appear within the administrative borders of present Belarus have been the subject of numerous detailed theses. However the problem of Belarusian outside the country is still little or even not examined. The only exception is Belastok and Vilnius regions. Smolensk and Chernihov regions as well as Latgale were an area that was little known and neglected by scholars despite its value.
The territory of Latgale was included in the massif of Belarusian dialects both by J. Karski (Ethnographic Map of the Belarusian Tribe, 1903) and The Moscow Committee of Dialectology on earlier maps. The maps, indicating the boundary of Belarusian settlement of the end of 19th and 20th centuries, made by J. Karski (1903), A. Rittich (1875) and M. Downar-Zapolski (1919) also show that a part of Latgale belongs to Belarusian ethnicity. Only the boundary marked by E. Erkiert in 1863 runs east of the present border, i.e. through Braslav.
The aim of the author was presenting the sociolinguistic situation of Belarusian dialect users who live in Latvia and precisely in three communes of Kraslav region (Kaplava, Piedruja and Indra). The study presents the communicative situations and domains of social life in which Belarusian dialects as well as other languages in this area function. It also indicates the relation between social-historical conditions and the linguistic situation. Multilingualism of the three examined groups: native (Latvian) Belarusians, the Belarusians who had arrived from Western Belarus (in the pre-war period within the borders of Poland) and those who had come from Eastern Belarus was the subject of analysis. Moreover, the system of Belarusian dialect of native population and comers from Western Belarus was discussed and compared.
The research was based geographically on three communes bordering Belarus (Piedruja – 8 villages, Indra – 5 and Kaplava – 13) and the town of Kraslav. The whole researched area belongs to Kraslav region, however it is included in two historical lands – two communes (Indra and Piedruja) and Kraslav are situated in Latgale. The commune of Kaplava is a part of Zemgale.
Kraslav region
A very interesting area for research appeared to be Kraslav region, situated in the south of Latgale, at the border with Belarus. It represents a specific borderland of borderland where the Balts (Latvians, Latgalians, Lithuanians) live together with the Slavs (Russians, Poles, Belarusians, Ukrainians) and numerous religions (Catholicism, Orthodox faith, Lutheranism and Old-Believers) co-exist. All of these factors resulted throughout history in developing multilingualism much more complex than in other borderlands. Three languages (Latvian, Russian and Polish) and numerous dialects (Latgalian, Belarusian and Polish of the Northern Borderland) exist together and intermingle.
The territory of present Latvia has been inhabited by a population of Ruthenian origin (Kryvichi) for ages. As early as in the medieval times the first families (most often merchant ones from Vitebsk and Polotsk) settled along the river Daugava as far as Hanseatic Riga. A significant increase in the number of Belarusian population in Latvian lands was in the second half of 19th century after the serfdom law had been lifted and the railway Vitebsk-Daugavpils built. The Russian general census of 1897 calculated the population of Belarusians at almost 82 thousand people. A lot of Belarusians inhabited Latvia in the inter-war period as well. The greatest increase in the number of population was however after World War II what resulted from the policy of Soviet authorities and higher standard of living in Latvia than in other Soviet republics. There were 120 thousand Belarusians in Latvia in 1989.
The population of Belarusian origin constitutes 17% inhabitants of Kraslav region, the Latvians (including Latgalians) – 48,7%, Russians – 24,7%, Poles – 6,6%, Ukrainians – 1,2%, Lithuanians – 0,4%, others – 1,4%.
Sociolinguistic aspects of functioning of Belarusian dialects
Socio-historical conditions led to the situation that in particular historical periods the Latvian and Russian languages, Latgalian and Belarusian dialects and Polish of the Northern Borderland possessed a different prestige and embraced certain social spheres of the local community which inhabited Kraslav region. Analysing the sociolinguistic situation by means of the domain method including all the generations of interlocutors as well as taking the chronological aspect into consideration made it possible not only to look at the function of Belarusian dialects but also to give a wide picture of the whole linguistic situation in the researched area.
The family-neighbours domain has invariably been served most of all by a simple speech (mowa prosta) and a local variation of Russian for many years. We can only talk about slight differences in the dialect (the degree of saturating it with words of Belarusian, Russian or Polish origin) depending on the age and origin of the informants of the oldest generation.
The middle generation and youth use Russian. Latvian or Latgalian is less frequently the language of conversation (nationally mixed families or a few neighbours speaking Latvian or Latgalian). In case of the family-neighbours domain the most important criterion is not the origin but the interlocutor’s age.
A look at the Belarusian educational system in Latvia shows with hindsight that the Belarusian minority had little opportunity of attending their schools. Definitely the best period is the inter-war years when Belarusian schools usually functioned freely. The majority of my informants who were born in Latvia before the war attended a Belarusian school. After World War II the Belarusians could attend only Russian schools (no one chose a Latvian school). This led to substantial russification of the middle generation of informants mainly.
Regaining independence by Latvia allows of free opening of schools, however the weakness of Belarusian institutions (poor organisation and co-operation as well as financial limitations) and no demand for Belarsian schools on the part of the Belarusians themselves result in only one Belarusian school functioning in Riga per almost 90 thousand of the Belarusian minority in this country. Therefore we can talk about an ongoing process of russification (to a less extent lettisation) of this national minority what substantially influences their primary language.
Field research done in the visited places proved that there are no major differences in the religious domain which would result from the geographical location. The exception is the Kaplava commune which does not belong to historical Latgale, therefore Latgalian is not the language of liturgy here. Priests usually adjust the language to the needs of the faithful so that Catholics of different nationalities could participate in the Holy Mass. That is why the Mass (or its particular parts) is officiated in four languages: Polish, Latvian, Russian and Latgalian (with the exception of the Kaplava commune). A curiosity is behaviour of the priest taking care of churches in Piedruja, Indra and Indryca who speaks a Belarusian dialect during the Mass.
The choice of the language of the prayer or wedding ceremony usually results from the informant’s age and to a less extent from the place of residence. Until the present day a strong attachment to Polish and Latgalian as the languages of liturgy and religion has been visible. The time of the Soviet rule contributed to a considerable increase in the role of Russian which is becoming more and more popular. The Latvian language appeared in liturgy relatively lately (but it already existed as the language of documents in the inter-war period). As the official language it has to be present in church, nevertheless it still plays a minor role. The Belarusian language is also of minor importance but the Belarusian dialect has been present for many years as the language of the prayer at home or confession.
The administrative-public domain is this area of life where the Belarusian community has an opportunity to contact all the languages which function in Kraslav region. These are first of all Russian and Latvian but also literary Belarusian and to a less extent Polish and Latgalian. There has been a significant increase in the role of the official language recently. In spite of this fact, Russian is widespread as it is still the only fully understood language for all the inhabitants. The Belarusian dialect is of minor importance here – its appearance is connected with the fact that numerous elderly people know no other language than their own speech. Therefore they use the simple speech (mowa prosta) in official situations. My interlocutors have a contact mainly with Russian and Belarusian, seldom with Latvian or Latgalian via mass media. The appearance of Polish is limited only to the radio broadcasting from Poland (The Polish Radio Maryja and PR1) and to a Polish school in Kraslav.
The analysis of functioning of all the languages in different domains of life in historical view showed that Belarusian dialects permanently embrace the family-neighbours domain regardless of time (both before World War II, in the Soviet times and at present). Observing strong russification of the middle generation and youth one can expect that the oldest interlocutors are the last generation using the Belarusian dialect every day. The appearance of the simple speech (mowa prosta) partly embraces the religious domain as well – the daily prayer or talking to a priest (or an Orthodox priest) and a part of the Holy Mass in Piedruja and Idra churches.
The Latvian language in Kraslav region functioned in the sphere of high culture (social clubs, Latvian schools, partly libraries) in the Soviet times. After Latvia regained independence, the role of Latvian has been gro...
Slavistica Vilnensis, Dec 28, 2020
The aim of the article is to present contemporary Belarusian dialects functioning in Eastern Lith... more The aim of the article is to present contemporary Belarusian dialects functioning in Eastern Lithuania (in the regions of Ignalina and Švenčionys), which have not been the subject of comprehensive linguistic research. The basis for the analysis are the author’s own materials, which were collected during field research in 2014–2016. The structure of these Belarusian dialects (selected features in phonetics, morphology, syntax, vocabulary and phraseology) as well as the sociolinguistic aspect of their functioning in a multilingual environment are demonstrated in the article
Gwary Dziś
W artykule zaprezentowano koncepcję tworzenia Atlasu gwar białoruskich na Łotwie. Podstawę materi... more W artykule zaprezentowano koncepcję tworzenia Atlasu gwar białoruskich na Łotwie. Podstawę materiałową stanowią badania własne autora, zebrane w trakcie ekspedycji dialektologicznych w latach 2004–2009/2022, łącznie ok. 230 godz. wywiadów. Publikacja będzie się składała z map prezentujących różne cechy fonetyczno-gramatyczne i leksykę oraz mapy poglądowe (klasyfikacja gwar, dystrybucja w różnych okresach historycznych etc.). W atlasie zostaną przedstawione nie tylko cechy uwzględnione w Dialektologicznym atlasie języka białoruskiego, ale również ukazujące związki z językami (i ich dialektami) – polskim, rosyjskim i bałtyckimi.
Książka "Gwary białoruskie na Łotwie w rejonie krasławskim" dokumentuje socjolingwistyc... more Książka "Gwary białoruskie na Łotwie w rejonie krasławskim" dokumentuje socjolingwistyczną sytuację osób mówiących różnymi odmianami języka białoruskiego w miejscu będącym swoistym pograniczem pograniczy, gdzie obok siebie mieszkają Bałtowie (Łotysze, Łatgalczycy, Litwini), Słowianie (Rosjanie, Polacy, Białorusini, Ukraińcy), stykają się ze sobą liczne religie (katolicyzm, prawosławie, luteranizm i staroobrzędowość). Wszystko to na przestrzeni dziejów przyczyniło się do wykształcenia wielojęzyczności o wiele bardziej złożonej niż na innych pograniczach. Koegzystują tu obok siebie i przenikają się wzajemnie trzy języki (łotewski, rosyjski i polski) oraz liczne gwary (łatgalskie, białoruskie i polskie północnokresowe)."Belarusian dialects in Latvia, Kraslav region" looks into the sociolinguistic situation of people speaking different varieties of Belarusian in an area that is a sui generis borderland of borderlands, where the Balts (Latvians, Latgalians, Lithuanian...
"Dialektologia białoruska" to praca dostarczająca czytelnikowi wiarygodnych, aktualnych... more "Dialektologia białoruska" to praca dostarczająca czytelnikowi wiarygodnych, aktualnych i opartych na wynikach badań informacji na temat dialektów białoruskich, ich początków, zasięgu i zróżnicowania. Celem autorów jest ukazanie czytelnikowi bogactwa i różnorodności białoruskich dialektów, ich pozycji i roli w kulturze i życiu współczesnych Białorusinów oraz tendencji językowych panujących obecnie na Białorusi."Belarusian dialectology" is a study which provides the reader with reliable, up-to-date and research-based information about Belarusian dialects, their origin, range and diversification. The authors' aim is to show the reader the richness and diversity of Belarusian dialects, their position and role in the culture and life of contemporary people as well as current language tendencies in Belarus.Pracę wykonano w ramach projektu badawczego (grant nr N104 072137) finansowanego przez Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego / Narodowe Centrum Nauki w latach 2009–2012, afiliowanego przy Instytucie Slawistyki PAN
Studia Białorutenistyczne, 2021
The presented article describes the Belarusian press that was published in Latvia in the interwar... more The presented article describes the Belarusian press that was published in Latvia in the interwar period (1920-1933). The available publications usually only mention that Belarusianlanguage newspapers were published in Riga or Daugavpils, were mentioned by name, provided general information, or analysed a specific aspect (the language of the texts or some issue raised in the press). The author's intention is to provide a broader description of each of the printed newspapers with the fullest possible information about their editorial office, authors, subject matter, or place of publication. The second important issue was to show the political, social, and cultural conditions that influenced the functioning of the Belarusian minority in Latvia and, inter alia, creating new newspapers in Belarusian and publishing them. For this purpose, the author conducted a library query in Riga (The National Library of Latvia), in London (Francis Skaryna Belarusian Library and Museum) and in Prague (Slavonic Library of the National Library in the Czech Republic). The creation of new newspapers and the frequency of their appearances depended primarily on the finances of Belarusian organizations and their activity as well as current political events (such as the so-called "Belarusian trial" and the introduction of authoritarian rule by K. Ulmanis in 1934). The most important were the newspapers edited by the most active activists (K. Jezavitaŭ and S. Sakharaŭ) and published by the largest Belarusian organizations (newspapers: Голас беларуса, Беларуская школа ў Лавтвіі and Школьная праца). Most of the newspapers were published irregularly and/or only one or a few issues were published. * Autor wykazuje podziękowanie dr hab. Jerzemu Grzybowskiemu z Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego oraz Jūliji Gabranovej z Rygi za udostępnienie części numerów gazet, które nie znajdowały się w archiwum autora, oraz za cenne wskazówki i informacje.
Acta Baltico-Slavica, 2021
From the Research on Latvian Dialectal LexisReview Benita Laumane, Zvejasrīku nosaukumi latvijas ... more From the Research on Latvian Dialectal LexisReview Benita Laumane, Zvejasrīku nosaukumi latvijas piekrastē [Names of Fishing Gear on the Latvian Coast], Liepāja: Liepājas Universitāte, Kurzemes Humanitārais institūts, 2019, 507 pp.This article is a review of the work entitled Zvejasrīku nosaukumi latvijas piekrastē [Names of Fishing Gear on the Latvian Coast], written by the Latvian linguist from Liepāja – Benita Laumane. The study consists of two major parts. The first one, divided into thematic sections, presents the vocabulary related to coastal sea fishing (1: Sea fishing and fishing gear; 2: Hook gear; 3: The organisation of fishing; 4: Fish processing). The second part is devoted to the linguistic characteristics of the lexemes under discussion (phonetics, grammar, etymology, geographical extent). Z badań nad łotewską leksyką gwarowąRecenzjaBenita Laumane, Zvejasrīku nosaukumi latvijas piekrastē [Nazwy narzędzi połowowych na wybrzeżu łotewskim], Liepāja: Liepājas Universitāte...
Recenzja ksiązki: Krzysztof Zajas, Nieobecna kultura. Przypadek Inflant Polskich, Krakow 2008
LingVaria, 2019
Relics of the Polish Language of the North-Eastern Borderland in the Former Boundaries of Polish-... more Relics of the Polish Language of the North-Eastern Borderland in the Former Boundaries of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Southern Lands of the Pskov Province). Part IThe present paper consists of two parts, and presents the spoken Polish of the North-Eastern Borderland, as well as borrowings from Polish which function in the dialects of the Pskov province. Three regions with different histories have been included. The southern lands of the Pskov province (the area which belonged to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth until 1772) were described in the first part of the article. The sociolinguistic situation and loanwords borrowed from Polish (or via Polish) were analysed basing on two sources: the author’s materials collected during dialectological field research, and material from The Pskov Regional Dictionary with Historical Data. The Pytalovo region (which belonged to Latvia in the interwar period) and the historical Pskov region (where there were no Polish settlements) were descr...
LingVaria, 2018
Lexical Borrowings from Polish in Belarusian Dialects of Lithuania (the Varėna District)The paper... more Lexical Borrowings from Polish in Belarusian Dialects of Lithuania (the Varėna District)The paper discusses lexical borrowings from Polish in Belarusian dialects of the southern part of the Varėna District Municipality in Lithuania. The dialectological material has been collected from members of the oldest generation, living in five villages close to the Belarusian border: Balbutai, Rakai, Kalviai, Kotra, and Paramėlis. The borrowings refer to various aspects of life, e.g. the Catholic Church, the sphere of education, administration, vocabulary connected to Polish landowners, Polish culture and everyday life. It is interesting to note that also Polish numerals could be found in the speech of my interlocutors. Borrowings from Polish were more frequent in the speech of the Catholic part of the populace than among Orthodox informers.
Studia z Filologii Polskiej i Słowiańskiej, 2016
Dialectal zones of the Belarusian language as an example of language contacts between neighbourin... more Dialectal zones of the Belarusian language as an example of language contacts between neighbouring nationsThe article regards dialectal zones of the Belarusian language, which, as opposed to the traditional division into dialectal belts and dialectal groups, were marked out mainly on the basis of lexical and not grammatical features. While the traditionally delineated dialects indicate ethnographic unity of the Belarusian nation, dialectal zones present cultural and historical contacts with neighbouring nations. We can distinguish five zones: north-western (contacts with the Baltic languages, mainly with Lithuanian, and the Polish language of the northern borderland), south-eastern (contacts with Russian and Ukrainian), western (contacts with Polish), eastern (contacts with Russian) and central. Strefy dialektalne języka białoruskiego jako przykład językowych kontaktów z sąsiednimi narodami Artykuł traktuje o strefach dialektalnych języka białoruskiego, które, w odróżnieniu od trady...
Acta Baltico-Slavica, 2016
The Vocabulary of Baltic Origin in Mixed Belarusian-Russian Dialects of the South Pskov Region (t... more The Vocabulary of Baltic Origin in Mixed Belarusian-Russian Dialects of the South Pskov Region (the Area of Sebezh and Nevel)The article discusses the issue of the vocabulary of Baltic origin which functions in contemporary mixed Belarusian-Russian dialects. It contains analysis of the vocabulary of dialects functioning in the southern part of Pskov region – in the area of Sebezh and Nevel which once were part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The material basis was the author’s own recordings collected during a dialectological expedition carried out as a part of the TriMCo (Triangulation Approach for Modelling Convergence with a High Zoom-In Factor) project in 2014 as well as volumes of the Pskov regional dictionary (Псковский областной словарь).The southern part of Pskov region has been the place of contact of various languages and dialects (Russian, Belarusian, Lithuanian, Latvian, Polish, Yiddish). The Baltic vocabulary is connected mainly with the oldest layer of the lexis...
Slavistica Vilnensis, 2017
W artykule zostały przedstawione współczesne gwary białoruskie funkcjonujące na obszarze wschodni... more W artykule zostały przedstawione współczesne gwary białoruskie funkcjonujące na obszarze wschodniej Litwy (rejony ignaliński i święciański), które do tej pory nie były tematem kompleksowych badań lingwistycznych. Podstawę analizy stanowią materiały własne autora zebrane w trakcie ekspedycji terenowych przeprowadzonych w latach 2014–2016. W artykule została pokazana struktura samych gwar (wybrane cechy fonetyczne, morfologiczne, składniowe, leksyka, frazeologia) oraz socjolingwistyczne aspekty ich funkcjonowania w wielojęzycznym środowisku.
Acta Baltico-Slavica
Professor Iryda Grek-Pabisowa (1932–2021)This article presents the profile of Iryda Grek-Pabisowa... more Professor Iryda Grek-Pabisowa (1932–2021)This article presents the profile of Iryda Grek-Pabisowa, a renowned linguist, associated with the Institute of Slavic Studies, Polish Academy of Sciences for sixty years. She was a long-serving head of North Borderland Polish, and the deputy director of the Institute for two terms (1996–2003). She was a pioneer of research on the language and culture of Old Believers in Poland, and the language of Poles in Belarus and Lithuania. The most important research areas on which she focused were dialectology and lexicography: the study and description of the subdialects of Old Believers living in Poland (e.g. A Dictionary of the Dialect of Old Believers Living in Poland), the Russian language (e.g. The Great Russian-Polish Dictionary) and North Borderland Polish (7 monographs and A Dictionary of the Spoken Polish of the North-Eastern Borderland). She is the author or co-author of about 160 articles, 11 monographs and 7 dictionaries. In 1974–2003 she...
Acta Albaruthenica
The article discusses the Northern subdialect group of the Northeastern Belarusian dialect, which... more The article discusses the Northern subdialect group of the Northeastern Belarusian dialect, which is one of the least studied in terms of its structure and genesis. It is characterized primarily by a number of lexical and lexical-semantic features, typical not only for this area of Belarus, but linking it with Russian dialects and dialects of the Baltic languages. These features were formed in various historical periods: the oldest (from before the writing system appeared) include, among others, the so-called cokan'e and the preservation of the suffix -dl- forming the names of farm tools; the syncretism of noun endings probably dates back to to the general Russian period, while the pronouns íchny, jéjny and the verb forms jadzióm and dadzióm are newer innovations from the period of the formation of Belarusian dialects.
oraz wielu innych. 11 Obecna sytuacja językowa w rejonie krasławskim jest w dużej mierze wynikiem... more oraz wielu innych. 11 Obecna sytuacja językowa w rejonie krasławskim jest w dużej mierze wynikiem uwarunkowań historycznych oraz zmian społeczno-ekonomicznych, jakie zaszły po II wojnie światowej (migracje ludności czy rozwój rolnictwa w związku z tworzonymi kołchozami). Do czynników warunkujących znajomość i posługiwanie się językami (gwarą) można zaliczyć także: wiek, pochodzenie społeczne, wykształcenie, zawód czy płeć. Powyższe parametry społeczno-demograficzne omawia szeroko [Kurek 1995: 23]. 12 W dalszej części monografii, opisując Białorusinów, którzy zamieszkują Łotwę od pokoleń, oprócz formy "autochtoniczni Białorusi" będę używał również następujących określeń: "łotewscy Białorusini" oraz "miejscowi Białorusini", w przeciwieństwie do osób, które przybyły do rejonu krasławskiego z terenów Białorusi. 13 Wobec osób należących do tej grupy będę również stosował nazwę "pokolenie najstarsze".