Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Dialectologia et Geolinguistica

Journal of the International Society for Dialectology and Geolinguistics

Ed. by van Nahl, Astrid

1 Issue per year

IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.071
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.194

CiteScore 2017: 0.29

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.118
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.639

See all formats and pricing
More options …

Secondary Types of Pitch Accents of the Northern Aukštaitian Dialect of Panevėžys of the Lithuanian Language

Genovaitė Kačiuškienė
Published Online: 2016-11-17 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/dialect-2016-0005


The Baltic languages remain of special interest for linguists because they contain many archaic features essential for the comparative research of Indo-European languages and reconstruction of the Proto-Indo-European (Mikić 2014: 39). The Lithuanian prosodic system is characterized by free accent and two types of syllable accents (or tones) in the long stressed syllables. The stress is inherited from Indo-European and can fall on any syllable of a word, i. e. last, penultimate, antepenultimate etc. (Stundžia 2014: 12).

In the Northern Aukštaitian dialect of Panevėžys of the Lithuanian Language, four types of syllable accents are possible in the long stressed syllables (more clearly heard in the diphthongs, less in the monophthongs): acute, circumflex, neoacute, neocircumflex (Garšva 1982: 65 ff.). These accents are positional allotones of two types of syllable accents: acute and circumflex. Two more types of accents are possible in strong syllables consisting of two central sounds: typical and atypical. Typical acute and circumflex accents are characteristic of verbs of non-iterative action and of “barytone” denominative words, atypical accents, with an emphasis on the second part of the stressed component, are characteristic of verbs of iterative action and of “oxytonic” denominative words (Kačiuškienė 2009: 34).

The article focuses on results of the auditory and instrumental experiment and demonstrates different auditory and acoustic properties of the secondary types of pitch accents of the Northern Aukštaitian Dialect of Panevėžys of the Lithuanian Language.


  • Дыбо Владимир 1997. Балто-славянская акцентологическая реконструкция и индоевропейская акцентология (Studia Linguarum: De omnibus linguae scilibus et quibusdam aliis). Москва: Российский государственный гуманитарный университет.Google Scholar

  • Garšva Kazimieras. 1982. Svarbesnės šiaurės vakarų panevėžiškių fonologijos ypatybės. Baltistica 18: 65−85.Google Scholar

  • Girdenis Aleksas. 2000. Kalbotyros darbai II. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.Google Scholar

  • Гирденис Алексас, Качюшкене Геновайте. 2000 (1987). Вторичные типы слоговых интонаций в литовских диалектах. Kalbotyros darbai II. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.Google Scholar

  • Kačiuškienė Genovaitė. 2006. Šiaurės panevėžiškių tarmės fonologijos bruožai. Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla.Google Scholar

  • Kačiuškienė Genovaitė. 2009. Some features of prosodic elements and vowel phonemes of the Northern Aukštaitian dialect of Panevėžys of Lithuania. Dialectologia et Geolinguistica 17: 32−37.Google Scholar

  • Kruopis Julius. 1971. Matematinė statistika. Vilnius: Mokslas.Google Scholar

  • Labov William. 1978. On the use of the present to explain the past. Readings in historical phonology. London: University Park-London.Google Scholar

  • Meiliūnaitė Violeta. 2008. Netvirtapradžių žodžio galo dvibalsių vienbalsinimo tendencijos pietų panevėžiškių patarmėje. Lituanistica 54: 51–59.Google Scholar

  • Mikić Aleksandar. 2014. A note on the words in the Baltic languages for some of the most ancient European grain legume crops. Dialectologia et Geolinguistica 22: 39−45.Google Scholar

  • Pakerys Antanas. 1978. Lietuvių bendrinės kalbos fonetikos pratybos. Vilnius: Mokslas.Google Scholar

  • Pakerys Antanas. 1982. Lietuvių bendrinės kalbos prozodija. Vilnius: Mokslas.Google Scholar

  • Ručinskaitė Irena. 1984. Trys šiaurės panevėžiškių fonetikos etiudai. Vilnius: VU.Google Scholar

  • Stundžia Bonifacas. 2014. The Lithuanian language: Distinctive features, past and present. Vilnius: Science & Encyclopaedia Publishing Centre.Google Scholar

  • Švageris Evaldas. 2015. Akustinių požymių koreliacijos svarba lietuvių kalbos priegaidžių skyrimui. Baltistica 50: 91–113.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2016-11-17

Published in Print: 2016-11-01

Citation Information: Dialectologia et Geolinguistica, Volume 24, Issue 1, Pages 83–91, ISSN (Online) 1867-0903, ISSN (Print) 0942-4040, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/dialect-2016-0005.

Export Citation

© 2016 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in