Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T00:09:01.227Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Standard Lithuanian

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 July 2023

Rima Bakšienė
Affiliation:
Institute of the Lithuanian Language, Research Centre of Geolinguistics, Lithuania rima.baksiene@lki.lt
Agnė Čepaitienė
Affiliation:
Institute of the Lithuanian Language, Research Centre of Geolinguistics, Lithuania agne.cepaitiene@lki.lt
Jurgita Jaroslavienė
Affiliation:
Institute of the Lithuanian Language, Research Centre of Standard Language, Lithuania jurgitai.lukauskaitei@gmail.com
Jolita Urbanavičienė
Affiliation:
Institute of the Lithuanian Language, Research Centre of Standard Language, Lithuania jolita.urbanaviciene@lki.lt
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Lithuanian language, together with Latvian, belongs to the Baltic branch of the Indo-European language family and to the group of Eastern Baltic languages. The two surviving Baltic languages have many common features of phonemic inventories: opposition of long and short vowels, an abundance of diphthongs, a system of pitch accent. They have also developed substantial differences, e.g. Latvian has fixed stress and a set of palatal consonants, while Lithuanian has free (distinctive) stress and a phonological opposition between palatalized and non-palatalized consonants (Poliakovas 2008: 9, 42; Dini 2019: 577; Jaroslavienė et al. 2019: 263; Gelumbeckaitė & Pakerys 2020). In contrast to other Indo-European languages, the Baltic languages have lost j between a consonant and a front vowel, and have preserved m, rather than assimilated it, before the dental consonants d, t, which has not become n1 (Endzelynas 1957: 8). Lithuanian has preserved the manner of articulation of Indo-European plosive consonants (Bonfante 2008: 40). As a result of the continuous and long-lasting contact of Baltic with Slavic languages, these language groups also share common linguistic features (discussed later).

Information

Type
Illustration of the IPA
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The International Phonetic Association
Figure 0

Figure 1 (Colour online) Lithuania and bordering countries (Map of Lithuania 2020).Note: More about Lithuanian regional variation, population, language norms and other related questions can be found in e.g. Mikulėnienė et al. 2014, 2019; Aliūkaitė et al. 2017; Miliūnaitė 2018, 2019; Lithuania 2020.

Figure 1

Figure 2 Speech articulators activity for pronouncing non-palatalized /l/.

Figure 2

Figure 3 Speech articulators activity for pronouncing palatalized /lʲ/.

Figure 3

Figure 4 Locus equations: Lithuanian non-palatalized () and palatalized () consonants (male data).Note: The material for Figures 4–6 was read by six male speakers, aged 21–42 years. Each segment was repeated three times. There were 15 isolated prevocalic CVC sequences, i.e. about 270 tokens, for each consonant. Long CVC syllables were pronounced with a circumflex accent (because circumflex is the non-marked variant in the final syllable of words, including monosyllables).

Figure 4

Figure 5 Relative amplitude of Lithuanian fricatives and affricates: non-palatalized () and palatalized (○) consonants (male data, 270 tokens for each consonant).

Figure 5

Table 1 Duration of the release burst of Lithuanian plosives and affricates (540 tokens for each consonant) (according to Urbanavičienė et al. 2019: 155).

Figure 6

Figure 6 Spectral peaks of Lithuanian affricates, fricatives [s], [z], [₃], [ʒ] and plosives [t], [d]: voiceless () and voiced () consonants (male data; , in the center indicates statistical mean; , on the left – statistical mean – standard deviation; , on the right – statistical mean + standard deviation).

Figure 7

Table 2 Quantitative oppositions of the Lithuanian vowels.

Figure 8

Table 3 Qualitative oppositions of the Lithuanian vowels.

Figure 9

Table 4 Duration of the Lithuanian long and short vowels in CVC sequences (according to Jaroslavienė et al. 2019: 142).

Figure 10

Table 5 Values of F1 and F2 for Standard Lithuanian long and short vowels (male data; according to Girdenis 2014: 238).

Figure 11

Figure 7 Mean values of the Lithuanian vowels in the acoustic F2/F1 (Hz) plane. The ellipses explain 99.72% of the data according to the calculated standard deviation (male data, 33 tokens for each vowel; circles represent long vowels, triangles represent short vowels).

Figure 12

Figure 8 Pitch (solid line) and intensity (dashed line) traces of stressed and unstressed short vowels in Lithuanian [ˈkʲɪt₌s] (top panel) vs. [kʲɪˈt₌s] (bottom panel) (female data).

Figure 13

Figure 9 Pitch (solid line) and intensity (dashed line) traces of stressed and unstressed short vowels in Lithuanian [ˈnʲ┋₃ʲɪ] (top panel) vs. [nʲ┋ˈ₃ʲɪ] (bottom panel) (female data).

Figure 14

Table 6 Prosodic features of stressed and unstressed Lithuanian short vowels (female data). The investigated vowel is given in angle brackets < >.

Figure 15

Figure 10 Pitch (solid line) and intensity (dashed line) traces of acute and circumflex long monophthongs in Lithuanian [1ˈloːpoː] (top panel) vs. [2ˈloːpoː] (bottom panel) (female data).

Figure 16

Figure 11 Pitch (solid line) and intensity (dashed line) traces of acute and circumflex long monophthongs in Lithuanian [1ˈsʲkʲiːrʲ┋ɪ] (top panel) vs. [2ˈsʲkʲiːrʲ┋ɪ] (bottom panel) (female data).

Figure 17

Table 7 Prosodic features of Lithuanian acute and circumflex vowels, diphthongs and VR-type diphthongoid sequences (female data).

Figure 18

Figure 12 Pitch (solid line) and intensity (dashed line) traces of acute and circumflex diphthongs with [ɐˑ/ɒ] in Lithuanian [1ˈ₃ɐˑʊk] (top panel) vs. [2ˈ₃ɒʊˑk] (bottom panel) (female data).

Figure 19

Figure 13 Pitch (solid line) and intensity (dashed line) traces of acute and circumflex VR-type diphthongoid sequences with [æˑ/┋] in Lithuanian [1ˈʋʲæˑrʲsʲʊ̟] (top panel) vs. [2ˈʋʲ┋rʲˑsʲʊ̟] (bottom panel) (female data).

Figure 20

Figure 14 Pitch (solid line) and intensity (dashed line) traces of acute and circumflex VR-type diphthongoid sequences with [ɪ] in Lithuanian [1ˈʋʲɪrtoː] (top panel) vs. [2ˈʋʲɪrˑtoː] (bottom panel) (female data).

Figure 21

Figure 15 Pitch (solid line) and intensity (dashed line) traces of acute and circumflex VR-type diphthongoid sequences with [ʊ] in Lithuanian [1ˈkʊrtʌs] (top panel) vs. [2ˈkʊrˑtʌs] (bottom panel) (female data).

Supplementary material: File

Bakšienė et al. supplementary material

Bakšienė et al. supplementary material

Download Bakšienė et al. supplementary material(File)
File 25.5 MB