UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An analysis of the Phonology of the Dukhobor dialect Harshenin, Alex Peter 1960

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1960_A8 H27 A5.pdf [ 5.33MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0105962.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0105962-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0105962-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0105962-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0105962-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0105962-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0105962-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0105962-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0105962.ris

Full Text

AN ANALYSIS OF THE PHONOLOGY of the DUKHOBOR DIALECT hy ALEX PETER HARSHENIN B.A. University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1955 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of Slavonic Studies We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, I 960 v I n p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e a n d s t u d y . I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by t h e Head o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be. a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D e p a r t m e n t o f S l a v o n i c S t u d i e s The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , V a n c o u v e r $, C a n a d a . D a t e September 16, I960 ABSTRACT This study endeavors to provide a descriptive analysis of the phonology of the Dukhobor Dialect and to introduce some of the main features of i t s i n f l e c t i o n a l system. The description i s drawn against the background of standard Russian of which Dukhobor speech i s unquestionably a d i a l e c t . Several older generation Dukhobors l i v i n g i n Grand Forks, B r i t i s h Columbia, served as the chief informants. Following a b r i e f introductory chapter regarding the geographical and l i n g u i s t i c contacts of the Dukhobors during their short history, the main body of the text deals with the phonology of their language. Each phoneme i s described as articulated, established by minimal pairs and noteworthy variations from the Russian phonological pattern are given. The study i s b a s i c a l l y one of segmental phonemes. The Dialect's phonemic inventory includes f i v e stressed vowels /a, o, u, i , e/ and three unstressed vowels /a, u, i / . Only i n unstressed positions are deviations from the Russian pattern evident. There i s a tendency toward moderate jakarfe. Thi r t y - f i v e consonants comprise the remainder of the l i s t of phonemes: /p, p% b, tf, t, 1?, d, cf, k, Is?, m, nf, n, if, 1, 1', r, r*, s, s*, ss, z, z% s, §§, S, §§, x, h, c, 5, 3» w » >^ j/• The principal allophones are [ i , v, V, f, f> St 6?» x"* A consideration of the behavior of phonemes i n word contraction and cluster reduction i s included. Wherever i t i s apparent, the influence of Canadian English i s indicated. A b r i e f note on stress completes the main text and an appendix provides a short summary of substantive and verb i n f l e c t i o n s . ACKNOWLEDGEMENT With sincere gratitude the author acknowledges his indebtedness to the elderly Dukhobors who served as informants, to Peter P. Legebokoff, editor of Iskra, who permitted extensive browsing smong the Paper's f i l e s , to Professors James 0. St. Clair-Sobell and Alexander W. Wainman, and to my wife, Susan. Without the interest, cooperation, and assistance of the aforementioned, i t would have been exceedingly d i f f i c u l t to bring t h i s task to a satisfactory conclusion. i v TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION 1 I I . A SELECTED HISTORY OF THE DUKHOBORS 7 I I I . VOWELS 17 A. Stressed Vowels 18 B. Unstressed Vowels 25 C. Elements of Jakaife 40 IV. CONSONANTS 45 A. Plosive Consonants 50 B. Nasal Consonants 54 C. Lateral Consonants 55 C. Vibrant Consonants 57 E. F r i c a t i v e Consonants 59 F. A f f r i c a t e Consonants 66 G. Semivowels (Semiconsonants) 69 V. OTHER PHONOLOGICAL PHENOMENA 79 A. Contraction 79 B. Cluster Reduction 82 C. Stress 84 APPENDIX I NOUN, ADJECTIVE, AND VERB DESINENCES 87 II MEANINGS OF TERMS IN THE TABLES OF CHAPTER IV 99 LITERATURE CITED 106 V LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE . 1 . Vowels of the Dukhobor Dialect 18 2. Vowels i n Stressed and Prestressed Position 29 3 . Vowels i n Prestress Position 33 4. Vowels i n Other Unstressed Positions 39 5> Consonants of the Dukhobor Dialect 47 6. Basic Consonantal Contrasts — I n i t i a l 48 7. Basic Consonantal Contrasts — Final 49 8. Plosive Contrasts 51 9. Nasal Contrasts 55 10. Lateral Contrasts 56 11. Vibrant Contrasts 58 12. Fricative Contrasts 60 13* A f f r i c a t e Contrasts 67 14» Semivowel Contrasts 70 V ERRATA Page 21 1st l i n e : Change l a s t word t o /s'urawno/. 26 7th l i n e : A f t e r the word "unrounded," add the words " t o — non-high: h i g h and rounded: unrounded". 32 4th l i n e : Change /Sukok/ t o /cudok/. 26th l i n e : Change the l a s t e x p r e s s i o n t o "her ( a . ~ d. s g . ) , M . 35 21st l i n e : Change the f i r s t e x p r e s s i o n t o " ( g . and d. s g . , " . 36 25th l i n e : B e g i n t h e 26th l i n e w i t h the s e c t i o n o m i t t e d : i i ) A f t e r p a l a t a l consonants: /Sasawoj ~ Sas; Sajawa'tf- ~ 5 a j ; Sudak£; Sirnawcttaj ~ 6 o r n a j ; cirtawa" ~ S o r t ; fiiSalo; c i l a t f e k ; S i W i k a " ~ cerWi/ 'watchman ~ hour; to d r i n k t e a ~ t e a ; f o o l ( g . s g . ) ; b l a c k i s h ~ b l a c k ; d e v i l i s h t h i n g ~ d e v i l ; i t ' s heavy; man; worm (g. s g. ~ n. p l . ) • / j a z i k a 1 ; j a d a V f t n a j a ~ j a t ; janwafe ~ jiriwar'e; j u t f i f e j ; ( j ) i r u s a l ' f m ; ( j ) i c f i n a l ' f S r i i k ; s j i c f i r f f c a ; ( j ) i s a w t f l a w / 'tongue ( g . s g . ) ; poisonous ~ p o i s o n ; January (1. s g . ) ; j u b i l e e ; J e r u salem; an independent D.; to u n i t e ; D. surname'. 53 16th l i n e : Expand the phrase / t a x - t a / t o / t a x - t a ~ t a k / . 64 12th l i n e : Change / s u k f n / t o / S r f k i n / . 90 4th l i n e : Change "13" t o "Ml". 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION An interesting and controversial ethnic group of Slavic origin has been l i v i n g i n the Province of B r i t i s h Columbia f o r half a century. Numerous studies, investigations, and even three Royal Commissions (1912, 1948, 1955) have attempted to examine, interpret, and report on various s o c i a l , economic, and re l i g i o u s aspects of their l i f e . To our knowledge no one has yet investigated on l i n g u i s t i c grounds the language spoken by these "peculiar people", widely known as the Dukhobors. A. Purpose. At the outset t h i s study purposed to investigate the general l i n g u i s t i c features of the Dukhobor language. After considerable data had been accumulated, however, i t was decided to describe i n th i s treatise the basic phonology of the Dialect alone and to include enough material by way of examples and a summary of i n f l e c t i o n s to indicate at least some of the fundamental features of i t s morphology and lexicology. Thus, the primary purpose of our study may be said to be an examination and analysis of the phonology of the Dukhobor Dialect as spoken i n B r i t i s h Columbia. B. Literature. 0 No l i t e r a t u r e on the speech of the Dukhobors i n Canada i s known to be extant. It i s therefore assumed that no l i n g u i s t i c inquiry into the Dialect has been previously undertaken. A b r i e f two week study 1 of the folklore and speech of a dialect 1 I.S. Il'inskaja, "Nabljudenija Nad Govorom Russkix Pereselencev v Zakavkaz'e", Materialy i Issledovanija po Russkoj Dialektologii , ed. S.P. Obnorskij and others, Moscow and Leningrad, Akademii Nauk S.S.S.R., 1949, v o l . I, pp. 265-279-2 related to the Dukhobor Dialect i n B r i t i s h 00111011)13 was conducted i n 1943 hy Soviet investigators. Members of the University of T b i l i s i v i s i t e d f o r the f i r s t time certain Transcaucasian v i l l a g e s i n which many of the Canadian Dukhobors once l i v e d , l o t a l l of the Dukhobors exiled to the Transcaucasus had subsequently emigrated to Canada and some of the i r descendants remain there to th i s day. The observations i n th i s rather cursory Soviet survey indicate both s i m i l a r i t i e s and differences between the speech of the Russian settle r s presently l i v i n g i n the Transcaucasus and those Dukhobors domiciled i n Canada. In some instances minor variations which existed over f i f t y years ago between separate Russian-speaking v i l l a g e s i n the Transcaucasian region have become more diverse since the emigration of many of the v i l l a g e r s to Canada. In addition, varied external p h i l o l o g i c a l influences have further alienated these two d i a l e c t a l streams of Dukhobor speech ( i f one may at least postulate a theoretical e a r l i e r unity). Nevertheless, their simi-l a r i t i e s preponderantly outweigh t h e i r differences. But as i n other comparisons between any given dialects of Russian, these "two streams" are best treated as separate d i a l e c t s . A close comparison between them would constitute an independent study. C. Sources. In view of a complete lack of l i t e r a t u r e on our subject, i t was inevitable that the necessary data be obtained by firsthand observation. As the Dialect varies somewhat from l o c a l i t y to l o c a l i t y and from one generation of speakers to another, some delimitation of informants was imperative. Therefore the study concentrated on the older generation of Dukhobors speaking the "purest" form of the Dialect and l i v i n g i n the v i c i n i t y of Grand Forks, B r i t i s h Columbia. Notations on other categories of Dukhobor speakers were not excluded although the study i s not d i r e c t l y based 3 on them. F i e l d t r i p s were also conducted i n the B r i l l i a n t and Krestova areas. An important supplementary source of information regarding the Dialect was discovered i n the of f i c e of the Editor of Iskra, a socio-religipus weekly devoted to subjects pertaining to Dukhobor interests and a f f a i r s . An examination of scores of l e t t e r s to the Editor substantiated most of the findings by the direct contact method. A few personal l e t t e r s and other unpublished documents provided additional recorded material. D. Procedure. P h i l o l o g i c a l data from the l a t t e r source was readily obtained by noting graphic errors made i n the "Russian" writing attempted. Complete l i b e r t y i n the selection and use of the material for the author's purpose was permitted. Data from the primary source was collected by simple aural perception and recorded, i n i t i a l l y i n Russian phonemic script and l a t e r i n Dukhobor phonemic script as determined from a study of minimal contrasts. Senior members of the sect were contacted d i r e c t l y either by v i s i t a t i o n to their plaees of residence, or on the street and at sundry meetings. Besides recording significant elements of individual speech and group conversations, talks, prayers, and hymns, the author made notations on informants* answers to specific questions, at times aided by the use of objects and pictures. Ho mechanical devices such as tape recorders were used i n th i s investigation, although certain disk recordings of Dukhobor songs were auditioned. F. Definitions. The terms found i n t h i s description are by and large those terms conventional i n elementary l i n g u i s t i c s and Slavic Studies and therefore need no d e f i n i t i o n . Abbreviations. a. • • * * accusative adj. • • • • adjective adv. • • * * adverb cf . • • • • compare ch. • • • • chapter d. • • • • dative D. • • • • Dukhobor D.D. • • • • Dukhobor Dialect etc. • • • • and so forth e.g. • * • • f o r example F. • • • * feminine f f . • • • • following f . • • • • future g. • • • • genitive i . e . • • • • that i s imp. • • • • imperative impf . • • • • imperfective i n f . • • • • i n f i n i t i v e i . • • • • instrumental i n t r . • • • • i n t r a n s i t i v e i n t r o . • • • • introduction 1 . • • • • locative M. • • • • masculine N. . • • • • neuter n. • • • • nominative No. • • • • number p.5 pp. • • • • page5 pages Ip.j 2 p . ; 3 p . . . . f i r s t person, etc. p i . • • • • plural 5: p f . ps. re. p f l . R. sec. sg. t . tr. vd. v l . perfective past regarding ref l e x i v e Russian section singular tense tra n s i t i v e voiced voiceless alternates, alternating with contrasts, contrasting with H. Transcription The transcription system employed i n t h i s treatise i s the standard Latin transcription commonly used by scholars of the Russian language, with the following additional symbols: /w/ for the b i l a b i a l semivowel; /ss, sS, zz/ f o r the long counterparts of /s, §, 5/ respectively; and /3, h/ f o r the voiced counterparts of /5, x/ respectively. A raised comma indicates p a l a t a l i z a t i o n . Phonemic slant l i n e s are u t i l i z e d f o r Dukhobor expressions throughout (except where phonetic square brackets indicate otherwise), yet the transcription system i s not s t r i c t l y phonemic. In order to depict more accurately the preferred pronunciation of Dukhobor terms, major allophones of consonants, for example, [ f , f , v, v", Si 4lt and of vowels, are deliberately included where applicable. For the same reason, before vowel /e/ the allophonic d i s t i n c t i o n of hard and soft consonants i s retained. Stress i s indicated "by the accute d i a c r i t i c /*/ which i s excluded above stressed /o, e/ since these vowels occur only under strong stress making additional markings redundant. I. Transliteration. The t r a n s l i t e r a t i o n system employed almost entirely i n the footnotes and bibliography i s ide n t i c a l to the one used by the Slavic Department of Harvard University. It too corresponds to other similar schemes currently used by scholars of Russian, though i t d i f f e r s s l i g h t l y from those preferred by various l i b r a r i e 7 CHAPTER II A SELECTED HISTORY2 OF THE DUKHOBORS Before the year 1785 the name "Dukhobors" was unknown. The term Duxoborci was then coined, i t i s said, by an Orthodox arch-bishop and intended to imply 'fighters against the Holy S p i r i t ' , but was accepted and retained by the sectarians i n the meaning 'fighters by means of the Holy S p i r i t ' . The sect was so named because of i t s opposition to certain teachings of the Russian Orthodox Church and i t s priests, ikons, and formalisms. Being closely a f f i l i a t e d with the Church, the Russian Government was also resisted i n respect to certain of i t s demands. The early Dukhobors explained away the doctrine of the T r i n i t y by saying, "The Father i s l i g h t , the Son, l i f e , and the Holy S p i r i t , peace." To them, Christ i n the New Testament was only the s p i r i t of piety, purity, and so forth, who re l i v e d His l i f e i n every believer. Emphasis was placed on "Christ within" and the "inner l i g h t " . A l l Dukhobors were sons of God i n the same sense that Christ was and therefore had no need of the Scriptures or "outer word" or priests f o r guidance. True believers worshipped God "in s p i r i t and i n truth", eliminating the need for temples, sacra-ments, or church ceremonies. As a l l men were equal, and children of God do good w i l l i n g l y , no governments or authority were required, except, perhaps, f o r evildoers. It was wrong to go to war, carry arms, or take oaths. Adhering to such doctrines the Dukhobors opposed the church and the state. 2 In t h i s b r i e f chapter on the Dukhobors i t i s intended that there be provided enough of th e i r history to indicate the nature of their f a i t h and l i f e , geographical movements and l i n g u i s t i c contacts inasmuch as these pertain to the study of their language. 8 Dukhobor doctrines spread throughout southern and central European Russia: and adherents l i k e l y became as widely scattered. Claiming the support of o f f i c i a l documents, one author^names the following provinces i n which Dukhoborism was found: Xarkov, Ekaterinoslav, Tambov, Xerson, Tavrida, Astraxan, Kursk, VoronoS, Penzensk, Simbirsk, Saratov, Orenburg, and Rjazan i n the south, and Moscow and Tver i n central Russia. It might be added, however, that even i n o f f i c i a l reports Dukhobors have probably not been too carefully distinguished from other sectarians i n the same general areas, the e a r l i e r history of Russian sects often being rather obscure. Be as i t may, i n the second half of the eighteenth century Dukhobors were most heavily concentrated i n two p r o v i n c e s — i n Ekaterinoslav, under the leader S. Kolesnikov, and i n Tambov, under I. Pobirohin. The l a t t e r became leader of both colonies when Kolesnikov died i n 1775. Living prosperously i n separate v i l l a g e s the number and influence of the Dukhobors increased and their presence came to be undesired by the authorities i n these two heavily populated provinces. Under the rule of the less astute and less consistent Pobirohin, the welfare of the colonies became endangered under pressures from the Russian church and government. The application of some Dukhobor theories i n settled l i v i n g conditions was evidently embarrassing to the authorities and persecutions set i n during the l a s t decade of , the eighteenth century. For many spokesmen of Dukhoborism, perse-cution invariably led to e x i l e . Exiles resulted i n the increase of Dukhobor contacts i n new areas and formally recorded evidence admits that converts to the sect were made hera, and there i n places of e x i l e . 3 V.A. Suxorev, I s t o r i j a Duxoborcev. North Kildonan,. Manitoba, Canada, J . Regehr, 1944> P» 12. 9 Again referring to o f f i c i a l Russian government documents prepared by Hovitsky, the aforementioned author names and l i s t s a number of Dukhobors exiled at t h i s time not only from the Ekaterino-slav and Tambov areas, but also individuals and groups judged and banished from the Don region to Viborg province. Severe judgments simi l a r l y occured i n Xarkov, Ekaterinoslav, Perekop, Alexandrov, and i n the Kursk and Moscow provinces. Prom the v i l l a g e s Xoxlovka, Vebrovka, Kolomenskoe i n Moscow province, three preachers of Dukhoborism were exiled to Benderi. (In Tver, Tambov, and Voronez, Dukhobors had been brought to t r i a l and sentenced to the Azov citadel as early as 1762 and 1769, while certain members of the sect i n Tavrida province had been persecuted i n 1775*) In 1796 thirty-eight Dukhobors sent to Azov increased t h e i r numbers by f i f t e e n through propagandization. A few families were exiled to Riga and Finland. In 1802 fifty-seven Dukhobors from Kol'sk were transferred to Archan-gelsk. An 1816 report regarding Dukhobors among the Cossacks stated that their persecution took the form of being denied lands, homes, jobs, and even the right to retain t h e i r children. Some of the l a t t e r group of sectarians were exiled to the Islands of Esel and Soloveckiji^. After the ascension of Alexander I to the Russian throne i n 1801, a government commission favorable to the Dukhobors recommended that they emigrate from the t h i c k l y populated provinces i n which they were settled. Accepting the report, the Czar ordered t h e i r settlement i n the Milky Waters region i n the province of Tavrida bordering on the Black Sea. Thus, the sect was given lands along a f r o n t i e r harassed by Crimean Tatars but free from government and church interference. 4 Ibid., pp. 26-27. 10 During the next f i f t e e n years Dukhobors from various parts of Russia including the Slobodo-Ukrainian and Kavkaz regions and from the many places of exile, including ninety families from Finland, migrated to the Milky Waters area. There, under th e i r leader S. Kapustin, the Dukhobor colony abolished private property and land was held and t i l l e d i n common although l a t e r , private ownership of land was permitted. Also owned i n common were the treasury and the granaries i n each of the nine v i l l a g e s inhabited by the sectarians. The propagandist era ceased and one of i s o l a t i o n and subservience to the leader and h i s council of t h i r t y elders and twelve apostles began. Through th i s r u l i n g e l i t e the colony paid i t s taxes and had i t s contacts with government o f f i c i a l s . The colonists prospered and word of t h i s prosperity reached the ears of other Russians who were attracted to the Dukhobor f a i t h . A l l this led to suspicion of the sect and charges of p r o s e l i t i z i n g Orthodox Russians, nevertheless, nothing serious developed and Dukhobors continued to l i v e peacefully and prosperously u n t i l the th i r d decade of the nineteenth century without being compelled to serve i n the Russian. V a s i l i Kalmikoff succeeded his father Kapustin as head of the sect but dissipated his l i f e as a drunkard and died i n 1832 at the age of f o r t y . His son I l l a r i o n became leader at sixteen and followed his father into a dissipated l i f e . Rumours of corruption and e v i l practices by the r u l i n g c i r c l e of Dukhobors spread and i n 1834 an investigation was ordered by Nicholas I. At the end of the i n v e s t i -gation i n 1839 "the Czar decided to banish the s e l f - r u l i n g Dukhobors from the Milky Waters region to the wilderness of the Caucasus, already a place of e x i l e . Those implicated i n the scores of misdeeds were exiled i n 1841> I. Kalmikoff among them. By 1846 well over 4000 Dukhobors were transported to the Transcaucasian provinces. Willing to accept Russian Orthodoxy once again, a few members of the sect remained i n the Milky Waters area. 11 In the Transcaucusus bordered by Turkey, Persia, and the Black and Caspian Seas, the Dukhobors f i r s t settled i n the Wet Mountains plateau. There they became herders of sheep, c a t t l e , and horses. In the v i l l a g e of Gorelovka was b u i l t the Orphans' Home, which was always located i n the government centre. Other Dukhobor v i l l a g e s established i n the province of T i f l i s were: Troickoe, Efremovka, Goreloe, Spasskoe, Orlovka, Bogdanovka, Radionovka, Tambovka, BaskiSet, OrmaSen, and Karaklis. Dukhobors l i v i n g i n a l l but the l a s t three v i l l a g e s above were called 'xolodenskie*. Later, some Dukhobors were induced to move to an area more suitable f o r the kinds of agriculture more familiar to them (namely, grain growing, f r u i t and vegetable gardening, and dairying), to an area formerly forbidden to them by the authorities. In this new area of E l i z a -vetopol province, some two hundred miles southeast of the larger settlement, were established the v i l l a g e s of Slavjanka, Troickoe, and K i r i l o v k a . Later s t i l l , after Kars was won from Turkey, the Dukhobors were invited to settl e i n that region as they had assisted the Eussian government i n the Russo-Turkish war of 1877-78 by pro-viding munitions transport. Consequently, the Dukhobor v i l l a g e s of Terpenie, Spasskoe, Kiri l o v k a , Troickoe, Goreloe, and Petrovka were founded i n Kars province. As i s evident from a glance at a detailed map of the U.S.S.R. some of these v i l l a g e s exist to t h i s day. During their Caucasian sojourn the Dukhobors were ruled u n t i l 1864 by Peter Kalmikoff, I l l a r i o n ' s son. Then u n t i l 1886 the sect thrived under the leadership of his wife, Lukerija. Again i n a period of prosperity and peace th e i r numbers increased. One set of 5 figures states that t h e i r numbers about this time as t o t a l l i n g 5 A. Maude, A Peculiar People, The Doukhobors, New York, London, Funk and Wagnalls, 1904, p. 150. 12 21,000 with the following d i s t r i b u t i o n : 12,000 under the T i f l i s government, 4»000 under Elizavetopol and 5,500 under Kars. The various peoples who were neighbors to the Dukhobors i n these regions were Turks, Tatars, Georgians, Armenians, Kurds, and Persians. Into the midst of turmoil resulting from a schism i n the sect following Lukerija's death, i n 1887 a conscription order reached the Caucasus. The minority party under the guidance of Lukerija's brother Mixail Gubanov and A. Zubkov (who had managed to obtain control of the sect's "public" property, the Orphans' Home and to secure the good w i l l of the authorities) decided to submit to con-sc r i p t i o n . The majority party of Dukhobors followed Peter V a s i l i v i c h Verigin (who had been i n Lukerija's custody since 1880 and was her choice of successor) and refused to comply with the conscription order. Consequently, many of Verigin's followers of mili t a r y age were compelled to serve i n penal battalions. Their "czar, prophet, and Christ", Verigin himself, was condemned by the government and exiled to Archangelsk province f o r f i v e years. Receiving money and other support from his followers i n the south, Verigin l i v e d i n his own house and wrote them l e t t e r s of instruction. His anti-government propaganda and the general effect of his l e t t e r s led to the extension of his term to f i f t e e n years and to his transfer to Obdorsk, Siberia. Nevertheless, Verigin remained i n contact with the sect through trusted messengers and advised the Dukhobors on a l l matters. The sectarians were ordered to l i v e as ascetics, ref r a i n i n g from meat, tobacco, liquor, oaths, and even sex relations during the t r i b u l a t i o n . A communistic l i f e was advocated and a new name, "The Christian Community of Universal Brotherhood", was adopted. Refusing to swear allegiance to Czar Nicholas II i n 1894, Verigin sent the message that a l l weapons, guns, scimitars, swords, and knives 13 were to be burned on the eve of "Peter's Day", June 28 of the f o l l o w i n g year. When t h i s event came to pass, r e p r i s a l s descended. Many Dukhobors were s e v e r e l y f l o g g e d with whips by Cossacks. Several thousand Dukhobors were s c a t t e r e d among the Georgians and other t r i b e s by the T i f l i s government. A l a r g e number die d of m a l n u t r i t i o n , f e v e r , and dysentry. D e l i b e r a t e p e r s e c u t i o n continued i n " d i s c i p l i n a r y " , penal b a t t a l i o n s and i n p r i s o n s to which young Dukhobors were sent. During these t r y i n g times f o r the s e c t , Tolstoyan sympathizers and the S o c i e t y of F r i e n d s i n England sought to b r i n g to p u b l i c a t t e n t i o n the p l i g h t of the persecuted and to encourage every a s s i s -tance to them, even to the extent of supporting t h e i r m i g r a t i o n to another country. O f f i c i a l Russian government permission to emigrate at t h e i r own expense was granted the Dukhobors i n March, I898. A p a r t y of 1126 l e f t f o r the I s l e of Crete i n August of the same year. On January 24, 1899, a f t e r a month of s a i l i n g , the ship "Lake Huron" steamed i n t o H a l i f a x with some 2,000 Dukhobors aboard. A few days l a t e r the steamer "Lake Su p e r i o r " brought a second p a r t y of 1974* In June a r r i v e d the t h i r d group which had p r e v i o u s l y been s e t t l e d i n Crete and was f o l l o w e d by a f i n a l s h i p l o a d of about 2,000 Dukhobors. The t o t a l number of Dukhobors who came to Canada and s e t t l e d i n the province of Saskatchewan stood at 7363* Homestead lands were given to the sect near Yorkton, Thunder H i l l , and P r i n c e A l b e r t . 7 In Canada p e r s e c u t i o n of the type s u f f e r e d i n Russia and f o r c e d r e s e t t l e m e n t were unknown. Nevertheless, d i v i s i o n s w i t h i n the sect and geographical movement occurred through d e c i s i o n s of the s e c t a r i a n s themselves. 6 V. Snesarov, The Dukhobors i n B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1 9 3 1 , p. 1 6 . 7 The h i s t o r y of the Dukhobors i n Canada comprises a f a i r l y - w e l l documented i n s t a l l m e n t of i t s own which cannot be r e l a t e d here. Therefore only a very r e s t r i c t e d and g e n e r a l i z e d account of t h i s s t o r y f o l l o w s . 14 The appearance i n Canada of th e i r exalted leader, Peter "Lordly" Verigin, from his Siberian exile i n 1902 did not prevent the sect from disunity. There soon arose a group of Independents who preferred to practice t h e i r own forms of Dukhoborism. In protest to many things, but especially the basic "materialism" of the sect, sprouted, almost spontaneously, the group known as the Sons of Freedom. The largest party, the Community Dukhobors, who i n 1934 adopted the name "Union of S p i r i t u a l Communities of Christ", remained f a i t h f u l to Verigin and his communal form of l i f e u n t i l his death i n a railway car explosion of unknown ori g i n on October 28, 1924« Soon after, Peter "Cistjakov" Verigin, son of the deceased leader, came from the U.S.S.E. to guide the a f f a i r s of the Community u n t i l his own passing on February 11, 1939* It i s with the Freedomites and Community Dukhobors that the "true" s p i r i t of the sect i s claimed to have remained. E a r l i e r , these two groups coexisted rather peacefully and were considered to be one, but such i s the case no longer. The Sons of Freedom have r a d i c a l l y demonstrated that they are a people apart, and i n name now distinguish themselves as the "Union of Christian Communities and Brotherhood of Reformed Dukhobors". Of both the Community Dukhobors and Freedomites, the vast majority l i v e i n B r i t i s h Columbia, while Independent Dukhobors may be found almost anywhere i n Western Canada. Discovering that considerable d i f f i c u l t i e s faced the sect on the homestead lands i n the p r a i r i e s , Verigin had looked to B r i t i s h Columbia as the region where communal l i v i n g would be greatly f a c i l i -tated without subservience to the Crown. In 1909 the f i r s t pieces of land were purchased by the sect near B r i l l i a n t and at Grand Forks. More land was subsequently acquired i n the B r i l l i a n t area. Settle-ments i n B r i l l i a n t spread to Champion Creek, Glade, Pass Creek, and 15 Crescent Valley. By the autumn of 1912 some 5000 Dukhobors were l i v i n g i n the province. Although the communal form of l i f e which had i t s "heyday" i n "Lordly" V e r i g i n 1 s reign no longer exists, Dukhobors of a l l v a r i e t i e s and many of th e i r desoendents may yet be found l i v i n g i n the aforementioned areas of B r i t i s h Columbia. A review of Dukhobor geographical movements and l i n g u i s t i c contacts reveals that the e a r l i e r members of the sect came from various provinces i n Russia and spoke d i f f e r i n g d ialects of t h e i r national language. Extensive exiles introduced some of the Dukho-bors to s t i l l other dialects of Russian. When s e t t l i n g i n colonies as they f i r s t did i n the Tambov region, a mixing and blending of the dialects spoken by them was inevitable. Dukhobor resettlement i n Russia i n the Milky Waters and l a t e r the Transcaucasian areas and similar resettlements i n the Canadian p r a i r i e s and then i n B r i t i s h Columbia caused further regroupings of the sect. Each resettlement but the one i n Saskatchewan was followed by a period of r e l a t i v e s t a b i l i t y and must have produced additional subtle modifications and readjustments i n their speech. In Canada the voluntary movements and further mixing of the sectarians also had i t s effect i n blending and l e v e l l i n g d i a l e c t a l variations. Unfortunately, no written records exist to indicate the nature of the speech i n the various s e t t l e -ments and i n separate v i l l a g e s . However, old-timers among them s t i l l remember a few of the p e c u l i a r i t i e s i n the speech of some Dukhobors from given areas i n the Transcaucasus. Dukhobor movements and contacts also explain the evidence of certain external influences of foreign tongues on t h e i r language. The Milky Waters colonies were surrounded by Crimean Tatars and not-so-foreign Ukrainians. In the Transcaucasus many varied peoples, 8 J.P.C. Wright, Slava Bohu, The Story of the Dukhobors, New York and Toronto, Parrar and Rhinehart, Inc., 1940, p. 253. 16 but primarily Turks, Tatars, Georgians, and Armenians, were their neighbors. During exiles small numbers of Dukhobors met and l i v e d with s t i l l other peoples such as the Yakuts i n Siberia and the Finns. Some Finnish (Morvidian) and Gypsy elements actually joined the sect. In Canada, of course, apart from infrequent contacts with immigrants from continental Europe, most members of the sect experienced repeated contacts with speakers of English which has l e f t a s i g n i f i -cant mark on the speech of a l l Dukhobors and has even supplanted the mother tongue i n the speech of the younger generations. 17 CHAPTER I I I VOWELS The vowels herein described are oral resonant speech sounds produced by voice, a process whereby the a i r stream passing from the lungs through the larynx causes the vocal cords to vibrate. As shall be revealed l a t e r , the voicing process i s also used i n the production of certain consonants. Every vowel of the Dukhobor Dialect i s described as i t i s articulated i n i t s f u l l e s t form by the organs of speech which produce the contrasting features distinguishing each vocalic phoneme from every other. By a l t e r i n g the shape and volume of the oral cavity or resonator, the chief organs participating i n the formation of these vowels are the l i p s and tongue. Only one plane of contrast, namely, l i p -rounding ( l a b i a l i z a t i o n ) or absence of the same (non-labialization) i s operative f o r the l i p s ; whereas, two planes of contrast, the v e r t i c a l and horizontal, operate for the tongue. On the v e r t i c a l plane, the height to which the tongue i s raised i n the mouth (low-mid-high) and on the horizontal plane, the most elevated part of the tongue (back-central-front) are to be noted. Based on the above contrasting planes the following vowels are cl e a r l y discernible i n the Dialect: A. Via participation of the l i p s . 1. Labialized : o - u 2. Unlabialized : a - e - i B. Via participation of the tongue. 1. On the v e r t i c a l plane. a. Low : a b. l i d : o c. High : u 18 2. On the horizontal plane. a. Back : o - u b. Central : a c. Front : e - i Thus, the sum t o t a l of vowel phonemes i s f i v e . Vowels of the Dukhobor Dialect front central back and l a b i a l i z e d high i u mid e 0 low a Table 1 Basic forms or pri n c i p a l members of vowel phonemes are found under strong stress and are hereafter termed "stressed vowels", while the basic forms found under weak stress are termed "unstressed vowels". Phonetic contexts i n which a l l the basic phonemes are realized are as follows: i n i s o l a t i o n , i n i n i t i a l position but before hard consonants; and i n addition, after hard but before hard conso-nants f o r the front vowels. A l l other phonetic environments create allophones or phonetic variants of the principal members, A. Stressed Vowels. The author contends that the vowels of the Dukhobor Dialect closely resemble those of contemporary standard Russian and even i n 19 unstressed positions behave in; much the same manner as Russian vowels. Limited and predictable variations from the Russian vowel pattern are evident i n the Dialect and w i l l be discussed i n the section on unstressed vowels. As i n Russian, f i v e stressed vowel phonemes are operative i n the Dialect, s p e c i f i c a l l y , /a, o, u, i , e/. Under stress the vowels are i n a position of strength and receive their clearest and f u l l e s t a r t i c u l a t i o n i n terms of their intensity, duration, and quality. Consequently, phonemic distinctiveness i s maximal i n t h i s position, the contrasting features being — low: mid: high, and rounded: unrounded. When phonetically conditioned by the presence or absence of a preceding and/or following soft consonant, the vowels r e a l i z e only allophonic distinctions on the horizontal plane — back: central: front• 1. /a/. Phoneme /a/ i s a low (and more or less) central- unrounded vowel. In i t s formation the l i p s are neutral and the tongue l i e s low i n the mouth, which i s open more widely than f o r the other Dukhobor vowels. The central part of the tongue i s either minimally raised or not at a l l , a physiological phenomenon that makes i t d i f f i c u l t to ascertain the exact position of t h i s vowel on the horizontal plane. For those familiar with Professor Daniel Jones' phonetic scheme of the "eight cardinal vowels", the vowel described above corresponds to the cardinal vowel CaJ but i s formed nearer the center of the mouth. An important phonetic variant of /a/ i s found i n closed s y l l a b l e s following soft consonants — when the tongue advances and r i s e s from i t s basic position f o r /a/, creating an allophone closely resembling 20 the English phoneme /ae/ i n words l i k e "cat" and "nap". The use of th i s allophone enables the Dialect to assimilate e f f e c t i v e l y words adopted from Canadian English, such as /k*at; l£ampa; nMk*in/ c f . /hririalfin/ 'bulldozer; camp; mackinaw coat; c f . (D. surname)'. Under the same phonetic conditions, especially when followed by a soft consonant, the two back vowels are si m i l a r l y fronted (into the central region) with /of being simultaneously raised considerably more than /u/. 2. /o/. Phoneme jo/ i s a mid back rounded vowel. To form t h i s vowel the l i p s move forward from their position f o r /a/ and become rounded, though less rounded than for /u/. The back part of the tongue moves up toward the soft palate to the mid area and the mouth closes some-what, but not as f u l l y as f o r /u/ or / i / . The above vowel may be compared to the cardinal vowel [p], with /o/ being s l i g h t l y higher. 3. /u/. Phoneme /u/ i s a high back rounded vowel. The l i p s are protruded and rounded more f u l l y , thus creating a smaller opening than for /o/. The back part of the tongue i s raised toward the soft palate, higher than f o r /o/ — almost approaching the height f o r / i / — and the mouth i s more closed than f o r /o/. Compared with cardinal vowel [u], the above vowel i s articulated somewhat lower. .As a s y l l a b i c i n the Dialect, /u/ occurs i n considerably more varying contexts than i t s fiussian counterpart. Here are a few words with /u/ i n the Dialect but not i n equivalent Russian words: a In divers isolated words: /surop; curesrfa; surowno; buwa*la; susVfc; uzMm; rfetuj utak/ 'syrup? cherries; a l l the same; i t used to he; neighbor; r a i s i n s ; none; thus' b. In substitution of /w/ i n i t i a l l y before a consonant: /uz*a*1?j uslux; us'akaj; u5ara*/ 'to take; aloud; every kind of; yesterday'. c. In noun desinences: /na kariM; z horadu/ 'on horseback; from town'. 4. / i / . Phoneme / i / i s a high front unrounded vowel. The l i p s remain neutral and open, while the tongue i s fronted and i t s central part raised toward the hard palate. The tongue i s raised higher and the whole mouth i s closed more than for the other vowels. Vowel / i / corresponds to the cardinal vowel [ i ] , but i s formed inconsiderably lower and further back. It i s worth noting that the phonetic variant of / i / following hard consonants sounds quite different from i t s basic form, being an unrounded high back-central vowel. In describing contemporary l i t e r a r y Russian A. N. Gvozdev, a prominent Soviet writer i n his 9 f i e l d , c l a s s i f i e s t h i s variant as a separate phoneme . However, since t h i s form of / i / occurs i n both the Russian language and i n the Dukhobor Dialect only following hard consonants i n complete comple-mentary d i s t r i b u t i o n to i t s basic form which i s found only after soft consonants, by the interpretation of a phoneme held i n t h i s thesis i t must be considered simply as an allophone. 9 A.H. Gvozdev, Sovremennyj Russkij Literatumyj Jazyk, Moskva, UCPEDGIZ, 1958, v o l . I, pp. 11-12. 22 5 . /e/. Phoneme /e/ i s a mid front unrounded vowel. In i t s formation the l i p s are neutral and open. The central part of the tongue i s raised approximately to middle position i n the front part of the mouth, but i s less advanced than for / i / . Also, the mouth i s more open than f o r / i / though less open than f o r /a/. Compared with the cardinal vowels, /e/ i s just s l i g h t l y higher and more advanced than cardinal vowel [€.]. Before /e/ Russian and Dukhobor paired consonants, with the questionable exception of / r / i n the Dialect, are i n weak position and therefore only palatalized and unpaired hard consonants 1^ occur. In "unassimilated" words of foreign o r i g i n , however, i t i s possible to f i n d unpalatalized consonants before t h i s particular vowel. Since the vast majority of such words are "learned" terms, considerably more of them exist i n contemporary Russian than i n the Dukhobor Dialect f o r two principal reasons. F i r s t of a l l , any English words absorbed into the Dialect — almost exclusively a spoken tongue — are more readily assimilated than comparable foreign words adopted into Russian? and secondly, the "learned" speech of most Dukhobors today i s neither t h e i r own Dialect nor Russian, but Canadian English. Consequently, not many terms i n the Dialect have hard paired conso-nants before /e/ or i t s unstressed substitute phoneme / i / . A few examples w i l l suffice to i l l u s t r a t e the foregoing state-ments: a. Words p a r t i a l l y assimilated i n Russian 1 1 but t o t a l l y assimilated i n the Dukhobor Dialect: c f . R. /redaktar; 1 0 Also called "non-palatal" consonants. 11 R.I. Avanesov, Ruskoe Literaturnoe ProiznoSenie, Moskva, UCPEDGIZ, 1 9 5 8 , pp. 141-145. s'ekdnda; tanef; inergUja ~ irierg*ija/ and D. /r*ida*ktar; s*ikunda; turfe!'; irferlft j a / . b. Words p a r t i a l l y unassimilated i n the Dukhobor Dialect: /hotel* ~ hutfel'; hamstet; haladej; nelsan ifelsan; recfija " ratfijp; s e j l ; sent; setawaM?; 5ekawa!t/. Note the apparent resistance of the various dentals or near-dentals to p a l a t a l i z a t i o n before /e/, but only i n "foreign" terms. The above Dukhobor words are "unassimilated" s t r i c t l y i n the phono-l o g i c a l sense, because l e x i c a l l y they are an inherent part of the Dialect. As i n Russian, a close variety of /e/ i s heard when environed en t i r e l y by soft consonants as i n the verb /infef/. This particular allophohe i s formed by advancing and r a i s i n g the tongue to about midway between i t s positions f o r the basic forms of /e/ and / i / . 12 6. Phonetic contexts i n which the basic forms or principal members of stressed vowels are found. (Respective meanings follow minimal pairs and other examples. Stress i s omitted unless d i f f e r i n g from that indicated or implied i n the headings.) a. For a l l the vowels — i n i t i a l l y , but not before soft consonants. l ) In i s o l a t i o n : /a, o, u, i , e/, each of the phonemes being exclamations or interjections and also names for the corresponding l e t t e r s of the Russian alphabet. 12 A modified version of Avanesov's c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i s used here fo r Dukhobor vowels. See: R.I. Avanesov, Fonetika Sovremennogo Russkogo  Literaturnogo Jazyka, Izdatel'stvo Moskovskogo Universiteta, 1956, P. 97. 24 2) In i n i t i a l position "before hard consonants: /ax: ox: ux: i x : ex; as: us; urn: em; oca: uca; ada: i d a l / •various exclamations; t i l l ; ready; mind; l e t t e r "m"; Father (D. prayer); he teaches; hades (g. sg.); i d o l ' . b. In addition, f o r non-front vowels — after hard, hut not before soft consonants: /na: no: nu; sat: sot: sut; kak: kok: kuk/ c f . /ifik : ls?ek/ 'here I; but i ; well i ; orchard; 1 0 0 (g. p i . ) ; suit of clothes; how; coke; cook; c f . kick (re. liquor); cake 1. c. In addition, for front vowels — after soft, but not before soft consonants: / r i i : rfe; s*il : s*el; jim: jem/ 'neither...nor (emphatic); no 1; powers (g. p i . ) ; he sat down; to them; I eat'. Phonetic contexts i n which the major allophones or variants of principal members occur. a. For non-front vowels: 1 ) I n i t i a l l y or following hard, but before soft conso-nants: /az'ija: oz?ira: ul'ja; maj: moj; mat?: muf/ 'Asia; lake (one version); beehive; May; my (M. sg.); mother; muddiness'. 2) After soft, but before soft consonants: /l?a1?a: ifoifa. tfuvu; p'al?/ 'sweetie; auntie; urinate! ( a l l i n baby-ta l k ) ; f i v e c f. e.g. i n "b. l ) " below 1. 3) After soft, but not before soft consonants: /maja: majo: maju; nfals rfol: nful; 4ol/ 'my (F.; N.; F. a. sg.) he crushed; he swept; mules (g. p i . ) ; v i l l a g e s (g. pi.) cf . e.g., i n " 6 . c." above'. 25 b. For front vowels: 1) I n i t i a l l y or following soft, but before soft conso-nants: /infa: e*ti; p*i1?: p%s1?/ • name; these (rarer form); to drink; to sing'. 2) After hard, but before soft consonants: /§i1f: 2e5: 6es*1f; mil?/ 'to l i v e ; to burn; six; to wash c f . e.g. "7. a." above'. 3) After hard, but not before soft consonants: / t i ; dim; s i r ; S i r ; Ser/ 'you (sg.); smoke; cheese; f a t ; share c f . "6. b." above'. In summing up the foregoing i t may be stated that allophones of stressed vowel phonemes are formed i n phonetic environments other than those conditioning the production of their basic forms. Palata-l i z a t i o n (softness) preceding and/or following the non-front vowels, and non-palatalization (hardness) preceding and following, or non-palatal i z a t i o n preceding and palatalization following the front vowels results i n the creation of allophones. A l l other phonetic contexts produce the basic forms of the phonemes. Although allophonic d e t a i l s do not concern us i n th i s treatise, i t might be added that the back vowels are noticeably raised and fronted at the beginning, end, or whole of their a r t i c u l a t i o n when environed by palatalization (as are the front vowels when t o t a l l y environed by softness); and conversely, front vowels are correspond-ingly retracted when environed by non-palatalization. B. Unstressed Vowels. As i n standard l i t e r a r y Russian, only three unstressed vowels /a, u, i / are operative i n the Dukhobor Dialect. The f i v e stressed vowels may be said to be reduced, not only i n number, but also i n 26 intensity of a r t i c u l a t i o n and i n duration. As a r e s u l t , the unstressed vowels d i f f e r from their stressed members both i n quantity and quality yet are not s u f f i c i e n t l y different nor d i s t i n c t i v e enough to qualify as independent phonemes. Por this reason they must be considered as "reduced" variants of the stressed vowels whose unconditioned d i s -t i n c t i v e powers have been reduced from — low: mid: high and rounded: unrounded. Furthermore, i n certain positions phonemic contrastiveness of unstressed vowels i s reduced to — rounded: unrounded. It i s the reduction of d i s t i n c t i v e contrasts that results in,the the quantitative reduction of vowel phonemes. Thus, i n unstressed positions no new vowel phonemes are introduced. But, on the contrary, following non-palatalization /o/ and /e/ concur with vowels /a/ and / i / respectively; and following palatalization /a/, /o/, and /e/ concur with / i / , while /u/ and / i / remain phonemically unchanged under a l l phonetic conditions. This concurrence of weakly-stressed vowels effects the displace-ment of one established phoneme by another and may therefore be c a l l e d phoneme alternation or substitution — a feature of the language which also pertains to the consonants. Hence, one may con-clude that, unstressed Dukhobor (and Russian) vowels are i n weak position inducing reduction and substitution of phonemes. Immediately below are a few basic introductory examples of vowel substitution (and reduction) i n prestress and poststress positions. These examples w i l l be followed by a more completely i l l u s t r a t e d analysis of unstressed vowels. 1. Phoneme /a/. a. /sat ~ sad^ ~ sadawotstwa ~ wf satka/ 13 In t h i s dissertation the sign "~" i s used to indicate variant forms of the same word, different words containing the same root, and phoneme substitution. 27 b. /tfal? ~ p*itfbrka ~ p*ii?i-re-ftfi j - naVii?/. 2. Phoneme /o/. a. /wodi *" wada" " wadap^t wadaprawot ~ po-wadu/. b. /l'ot - 1'icHfk ~ l'icfina'ja/. 3. Phoneme /u/. a. / r d k ~ rukd* ~ rukawa* ~ wfrucif/. b. /vurmi ~ T u n n a " / . 4» Phoneme / i / . a. / s i n ~ sinf ~ pa'sinak/. b. /rffttfa ~ tfil'fl? ~ wftfil'il?/. 5« Phoneme /e/. a. /Ses,1? ~sis*1ff ~ SisYi-l'eUtfij ~ na%-sis*1?/. b. /<?ela ~ tfila" ~ cfilawoj ~ wfcfilka/. Although unstressed vowels are themselves allophones of the stressed members, for purposes of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n i n the unstressed group, the "purest" forms of these weakly-stressed vowels i n each specific unstressed position may be referred to as the basic forms of the phonemes i n that particular position and other forms i n the same position as the i r phonetic variants or allophones. However, for our purposes i n t h i s study these f i n e r d istinctions between members of an unstressed phoneme are unnecessary and w i l l be largely ignored. For example, i n our f i r s t major grouping of "basic forms" i n prestress position the influence of palatalization following the vowels w i l l be disregarded. 28; Reduction of unstressed vowels i s least i n i n i t i a l and stress positions, but greatest i n closed syllables of other prestress and poststress positions* It i s i n unstressed positions that the more significant differences between I>ukhobor and Russian vowels become evident. 1. Unstressed vowels of the f i r s t degree. a. Phonetic contexts i n which the "basic forms" of unstressed vowels of the f i r s t prestress position occur. 1) For a l l three unstressed vowels — i n i t i a l l y : /apa^tf: upas*1?; uSol: i S o l ; akon: ikon? ab*i1f: ub*it; unfet?: infer1/ 'to f a l l o f f; to f a l l down; he went away; he walked; windows (g. pl.) c f . n. p l . /okni/; icon; to cover (e.g. a bldg.); to k i l l ; to be able; to have*. 2) In addition, for the non-front vowels — after unpalatalized consonants: /sadi: sudi; tap*i1f: tup*i1?; paxav"; lamar/ 'orchards c f . n. sg. /sat/; court cases cf . n. sg. /sut/; to drown c f . he was drowning /top/; to d u l l ; to plough c f . he ploughs /p£§a/; to break cf . wrecking bar /lom/. 3) In addition, for the front vowels —- after palatalized consonants: / l ' i S i ~ l'fga ~ l»as; tfidi ~ f a t ; jfitfi ~ pVt?; v i z l a ~ w*os ~ vestf; s*ilo ~ s*oli; 1'icWik ~ l»ot; p*iro - p*oruska ~ p'efja; ctila ~ c?el; s'icfi ~ iel/ ' l i c k i ; l i e there 1 ~ he l i c k s ~ l i e down I; rows n. sg.; f i v e (g. pl.) ~ n. sg.; she conveyed ~he conveyed ~ to convey; v i l l a g e ~ n. p l . ; ice-box ~ ice; pen ~ feather (dim.) ~ feathers; doings ~ g. p l . ; s i t I ~ he sat down*. 29 In t h i s l a s t phonetic context allophones of unstressed / i / ranging from [e] or [ e 1 ] to [ i e ] or [ i ] are sometimes heard i n certain words, p a r t i c u l a r l y "before hard consonants, hut these phonetic variants are s t i l l compatible with the system of ikarfe 1^ here established. "b. Phonetic contexts i n which important variants of unstressed vowels i n prestress position are found. Since after p a l a t a l i z a t i o n /a < a", o/ and /e/ are displaced by / i / only two allophones of any consequence appear (palatalization following the vowel being discounted): one, fronted /u/ following pala t a l i z a t i o n — a comparative r a r i t y — and the other, retracted / i / following non-palatalization — a more common occurrence. 1) The fronted back vowel — after palatalized consonants: /ifurma ~ -ftlrmij ifuxWak; "tfirVikow/ 'prison (n. sg. ~ n. p i . ) ; mattress; D. surname'• 2) The retracted front vowel — after unpalatalized consonants: /bikax ~ bik; pil'ii? ~ pil'/ 'bulls ( l . p i . ~ u. sg.); to raise dust ~ dust'. The patterning of unstressed Dukhobor vowels of the f i r s t degree after unpalatalized and palatalized consonants i s concisely i l l u s -trated by the following table. Vowels i n Stressed and Prestressed Positions position f f . consonants vowels occuring stressed hard and soft a 0 u i e prestressed unpalatalized a a u i ( i ) palatalized i i u i i Table 2 14 See Gvozdev, op. c i t . , pp. 31-32; and S.I. Avanesov, Qgerki  Russkoj Di a l e k t o l o g i i , UCPEDGIZ, 1949, v o l . I., pp. 40-77. 30 Phoneme / i / < /e/ following unpalatalized consonants would appear only occasionally following / r / or certain other consonants i n words adopted from Canadian English. The foregoing vowel pattern almost completely coincides with that of standard l i t e r a r y Russian. At the base of the Dialect are the vocalic features of non-dissimilative akarfe and ikarfe. On t h i s base, however, an investigator w i l l also find fragmentary elements of j akarfe. This l a t t e r l i n g u i s t i c feature i s evident i n phonetic contexts following unpaired soft consonants i n the Dialect here described and more extensive traces of i t may be found i n certain individual pronunciations. The remaining sections on Dukhobor vowels w i l l elaborate on jakarfe by means of the many examples provided. c. Unstressed vowels i n the f i r s t prestress position f o l -lowing unpaired hard and soft consonants. In this section significant departure from the Russian pattern w i l l be observed. The palat a l i z a t i o n of consonants following vowels, disregarded above, cannot be discounted below as shall become cl e a r l y evident. Exceptions to the predominant patterns are marked with an asterisk. l ) After unpaired non-palatal consonants — a) but before unpalatalized consonants: /caplVtf ~ ssapfiwal?; caluj ; cana ~ cerfa; cihan; *cirkow ~ cerkwa/ 'to fasten ~ to couple; kiss I; price ~ he values; gypsy ; churches (g. p l . ~ n. sg.)' /Saha ~ §ax$ Saptav" Sopat; surup; Sirokaj; sastoj ~ ses'lf/ « step (g. sg. ~ n. sg.); to whisper ~ whispering; screw; wide; sixth ~ six' 31 /Sara ~ Sar; Sana ~ Son; Salatf; Sal1?e1? ~ Soltaj; Saludak; Suka; Siwoj/ 'heat (two meanings); wife ~ (g. p i . ) 5 to desire; to yellow ~ yellow; stomach; beetle (g. sg.); alive* /SSaka ~ §Sol&; SSanok ~ sserfica; SSipci; SSibav/ •cheek ~ (n. pi.); pup ~ she i s whelping; pliers; to resemble1. b) but before palatalized consonants: /car*a ~ car*; *car?i1? ceifa; cicfit? *" cfcfa; cipl'onak; cirfent/ •king (g. sg. *" n. sg.); to value ~ he values; to strain ~ he strains; chick; cement1 /Salfi ~§ax; pSarfica; sumVtf; SiSil'ej ~ BiSolaj; laSitfej ~ laSonak; Sis*t7i ** Ses*v/ 'steps ~n. sg.; wheat; to shout; heavier ~ heavy; horses (g. pi.) ~ pony; six (g. sg. ~ n. sg.)' /Sar*ewrfa ~ Sara; *Sarfix ~ Son; Sufica; *Sil'e1? ~ Sal'; SirVt? ~ Sir; Siwbm ~ Sif; Sil'eza; Sis*1fanka Ses*i?/ 'frying pan ~ he fries; suitor ~ wives ( g . pi.); to worry; to pity ~ pity; to grow fat ~ fat; we live ~ to live; iron; a piece of metal ~ sheet metal' /*Ssan*ica; ra§6if*ai?/ 'to whelp; to widen'. c) but before non-palatal consonants: /Sisnacal? *" §es*tf/ 'sixteen; six'. Thus, in phonetic contexts a) and b) above, vowels /a, u, i / occur. 32 2) After unpaired palatal consonants — a) but before unpalatalized consonants: /8asi ~ 5as; carnow ~ cornaj; 5artowka ~ Sort; *Satir*i ~ SevWira; *u$ara; Sukok; Sisnok; S i s l o ; v i S i r a / •hours (n. sg.); (D. surname) ~ black; devil (F. ~ M.); four (two meanings); yesterday; a l i t t l e ; g a r l i c ; date; evenings' / j a z i k ; japonci; jarmo ~ jormi; jabaca ~ jop; juraha; j i d a ; pajizda ~ pajez*a?iv/ 'tongue; Japanese; yoke ~ n. p l . ; to have sexual i n t e r -course ~ M. p. t.; buttermilk; food; trains ~ to ride around' b) but before palatalized consonants: /5ir*1fi1f ~ Sort ** 5ef1?i; SirVenkaw ~ Sornaj ~ SiAfel?; SirVej ~ cerVi; Siifwbrtaj ~ cefwifl?/ 'to act d e v i l i s h l y ~ devil ~ n. p l . ; (D. surname) ~ black ~ to blacken; worms (g. p l . " n. sg.); fourth ~ quarter' / z a j i v i ~ *zajavi; jirfwaV; jiwrej/ 'report I; January; Jew' /jikJetka ~ ja*3s?it; j u f i v / 'jacket; to d r i z z l e ' . c) but before non-palatal consonants: /Si§olaj ~ i?6ska; S i s i ~ Sosanaj ~ SeSuif; j i S S ^ j ~ jed?a/ 'heavy (two meanings); comb 1 ~ combed ~ they comb; go r i d i n g 1 ~ he i s r i d i n g 1 . d) but before palatal consonants: /jajco ~ ja'jci; i j o ~ j e j / ' t e s t i c l e ~ n. p l . ; her (a. sg.)'. Thus, vowels /a, u, i / occur i n phonetic context a) above, while i / occur i n the remaining contexts with /a/ appearing only sporadically. 33 The "basic p a t t e r n i n g of the Dukhobor vowels i n p r e s t r e s s p o s i t i o n f o l l o w i n g p a l a t a l and n o n - p a l a t a l consonants i s summarized i n the t a b l e below. Vowels i n P r e s t r e s s P o s i t i o n f f . consonants b f . consonants a vowels 0 o c c u r i n g u i e n o n - p a l a t a l u n p a l a t a l i z e d a a u i a p a l a t a l i z e d a i ( a ) u i i ( a ) u n p a l a t a l i z e d a a u i i ( a ) p a l a t a l p a l a t a l i z e d i i u i i n o n - p a l a t a l i i u i i T able 3 « Evidence f o r vowel behaviour i n contexts f o l l o w i n g n o n - p a l a t a l consonants but preceding both n o n - p a l a t a l and p a l a t a l consonants, and f o r vowels f o l l o w i n g p a l a t a l s but preceding p a l a t a l s i s too incomplete to be i n c l u d e d i n the above t a b l e . Nevertheless, as re v e a l e d by the f o r e g o i n g alignment of vowels, elements of akarfe and jakarfe have penetrated the unpaired consonants area c o n s i d e r a b l y more thoroughly than i n Russian. D i s c o v e r i n g t h i s f a c t your r e s e a r c h e r f e l t that the whole system of ikarfe would f l o u n d e r upon i t . But, h a p p i l y , a statement i n Avanesov's t e x t on Russian D i a l e c t s saved the s i t u a t i o n and r e s t o r e d order. Many Russian D i a l e c t s with ikarfe do i possess sundry d e v i a t i o n s with r e s p e c t to non-front vowels f o l l o w i n g 15 n o n - p a l a t a l s even where normally f r o n t vowels were expected. 15 I h i d . , p. 105* Among Avanesov's examples are such words as / s a s t o j / and zala"1?/. 34 The l a t t e r deviation i s noted whenever /e/ i s substituted by /a/ after non-palatals and after the palatal /£/, which i n such circum-stances may be considered as at least p a r t i a l l y hard. Such substitu-ti o n i s probably permitted i n the Dialect because, f i r s t l y , there i s p a r t i a l loss of consonantal weakness before /e/, which after hard consonants i n unstressed positions i s a more retracted vowel more closely resembling unstressed /a/ than unstressed / i / and ceasing to be a true front vowel; and secondly, because of the reenforcing strength of akarfe and j akarfe following unpaired consonants. 2. Unstressed vowels of the second degree. In spite of even greater qualitative reduction i n other prestress and poststress positions, especially i n closed syllables, numerically the same vowel distinctiveness i s maintained as i n the f i r s t prestress position. I n i t i a l l y i n other prestress positions are recognized the phonemes /a, u, x/ having a quality corresponding to that of the same vowels i n i t i a l l y i n the f i r s t prestress position. Similarly i n open end syllables are detected the clearest articulations of the same vowels in poststress position. In closed syllables, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n poststress ones, qualitative reduction i s maximal and phonemic distinctiveness minimal; and com-bined with qualitative variations, such significant vowel reduction sometimes creates d i f f i c u l t i e s i n determining the di f f e r e n t i a t i o n between the weaker vowels, especially between [e] and [ i ] , the weakest unstressed allophones of /a/ and / i / respectively. The former, [e], i s a mid central vowel distinguished from [ i j primarily by a s l i g h t l y lower a r t i c u l a t i o n . Even i n open end syllables following hard consonants these two phonetic variants are d i f f i c u l t to d i s t i n -guish. 35 In closed syllables following palatalized consonants distinctive-ness i s reduced to /u, i / , except posttonically, where grammatical desinences, possibly supported by intrusive jakarfe, sometimes interfere with what otherwise may be considered a regular pattern of vowel sub-stitution in unstressed positions of the second degree and reintroduce the weaker allophone of /a/ or / i / . Likewise in closed syllables following palatal consonants a l l three vowels common to unstressed syllables may be heard under certain conditions* Since finer distinctions exist between allophones of unstressed vowels of the second degree, and as such distinctions are unessential for our purposes, allophonic differentiation will be ignored in the following classification of these vowels. a. Phonetic contexts for unstressed vowels of the second degree in open syllables. 1) I n i t i a l l y : /apus^fftT: upus'ifi'lf: i-pus*i?i*if; atfiw^l?: ucfiwdt?; iz*cfiwdca/ • to lower; to drop; and to release; to clothe; to thread; to mock'. 2) Finally: /mila: mflu: mfli: mfla: miTu: mf]?i; haroda: harodu: harodi: harocfi/ 'she washed; soap (a. sg.); (g. sg.); he lathers; I lather; they washed; garden (n. and a. sg., n. pi . , and 1. sg.)'. Thus, the three vowels /a, u, i / occur in i n i t i a l and final positions of open syllables. Prestress articulations of vowels in open syllables are less reduced and more distinct than poststress articulations. b. Phonetic contexts for unstressed vowels of the second degree in closed syllables. 36 l ) Pretonieally. a) Following hard consonants. i ) After unpalatalized consonants: /praxacfflf: prixacff 1? ~ pfixacffif; zaxacff 1?; wixacfff ~ wf jd*a; harada* *" horat; hustata* ~ hdstaj/ 'to pass; to come; to enter; to go out ~ he w i l l go out; towns (n. p l . ~ n. sg.); thickness ~ thick'. i i ) After non-palatal consonants: /calawa*1?; sar-latan; £an*ix£; Son; Saltawa/fcaj ~ Soltaj; sur-jaka"; sirako; siwll'f; cil'ikom ~ c e l a j ; sirs*finoj ~ Sers*1f; SiScPis'a't ~ Se^tf; S i s f i n o j ~ 5es*1?/ 'to k i s s ; deceiver; suitor ~ wives (g. p l . ) ; yellowish ~ yellow; brother-in-law (g. sg.); widely; hustle I; wholly ~ whole; woolen ~ wool; sixty ~ six; metallic ~ sheet metal'. Again, the three vowels /a, i , u/ are operative i n pretonic positions following hard consonants. b) Following soft consonants. i ) After palatalized consonants: /k'inawa'lf ~ l&nafi; p*ffi-l'efrfij ~ p*av; viplata* ~ fopla; s'irata' ~ s*frati; fisnatd ~ vesna; vM-Bira* ~ veSir; s*in?ina* ~ s*enfi5]*£i/ 'to can ~ cannery; five-year-old ~ f i v e ; warmth ~ i t ' s warm; orphan ~ n. p l . ; closeness ~ i t ' s close; evenings ~ n. sg.; seeds ~ sunflower seeds'. Thus, af t e r soft consonants the vowels /a, u, i / occur but f o l -lowing palatalized consonants /a, o, e/ are substituted by / i / , 37 whereas, following palatals only / o , e/ are replaced by / i / . In other words, after palatalized consonants are found the two vowels / u , i / , while after palatal consonants a l l three unstressed vowels occur. 2) Posttonically. a) Following hard consonants. i ) After unpalatalized consonants: /wfkapaj: wfkupaj; wfruhal: wfrihal; wfmii? ~ wfmat? ~ mil? ~ moj; nosam/ 'dig out 1; bathe i (both pf . sg.) ; he scolded; he burped (both pf . sg.) ; to wash out (pf. impf. ~ imp. sg.) ; nose ( i . s g . ) ' . i i ) After non-palatal consonants: /dw£ca1? ~ dwa"cii?; ptffcam ~ p^fcanfi ~ ptffcinfi; kiieat?; xaroSaj; wfsal ~ i S o l ; sweSaj ~ swe§ij i ; jozica; kaSil'/'twenty; birds (d.""i .pl . ) ; to taste; good; he went out ~ he walked; fresh; i t br is t les ; cough'. Hence, the three vowels / a , u, 1 / occur following hard consonants with the distinction between the allophones of / a / and / i / being more or less negligible, particularly before softness in non-desinencial closed syllables. b) Following soft consonants. i ) After palatalized consonants: /SarVl?; £ar*im; kan&fim ~ kanfrfam; kan&fiw ~ kanMaw; baifij; s*fh*ij ~ haluboj; kol'is; wfvis ~ wbs/ 'they f ry ; we f ry ; rock ( i . sg.) ; (g. p i . ) ; bath-house ( i . sg.) ; blue; you chop cf . you take 38 /b*ir*os/; he conveyed (pf. ~ impf.) . i i ) After palatal consonants! /pldcam: pl£6im: pla*Suif; wfma5u1?: wfmaSitf; tdfcij; harMSij; dofiik/ 'weeping ( i . sg.) ; we weep; to weep; they weep; to wet (3p. pl«)» ( i n f . ) ; cloud ( i . sg.) ; hot cf . "big /barsoj/j daughters (g. P L ) ' /rojams rojim; pamojui?; pamojim: pamojam ~ pamojinfi; sara*jaw ~ sara*jiw/ 'swarm ( i . sg.) ; we dig; they w i l l wash (pf . ) ; ( lp. p l ) ; slops (d. ~ i . p l . ) ; barns (g. p l . ) ' . Thus, after soft consonants the two high vowels / u , i / are stabilized while a rather unstable resurgent / a / occasionally occurs as a kind of oristic signalling of substantive desinences. The vowel / a / appears more readily after the palatal than after the palatalized consonants. As can be deduced from a comparison of the two foregoing groups of examples, / a / and / i / following palatals are even phone-mically distinctive before hard consonants but only in grammatical desinences. The table below summarizes the occurence of the unstressed vowels of the second degree. 39 Vowels in Other Unstressed Positions f f . consonants position vowels occuring a o u i e unpalatalized prestressed a a u i i poststressed a a u i i palatalized prestressed i i u i i poststressed i(a) i(a) u i i non-palatal prestressed. a a u i i poststressed a(i) a(i) u i i palatal prestressed a(i) i(a) u i i poststressed a(i) i(a) u i i Table 4 As Table 4 i l lustrates , alternate vowel forms appear in certain contexts. A word about these alternate forms follows. 1. Posttonically after palatalized consonants / a / reappears in grammatical desinences of substantives, e.g.j/kamrfim ~ kamrfam; kamrfinfi ~ kamifanfi/. 2. Posttonically after non-palatals / i / alternates with / a / < / a , o/ before soft consonants as in the terms /dw£ca1? "* dwacil?; sweSiji ~ sweSaji/. 3« Pretonically after palatals / a / i s replaced by / i / before softness as in /u-airiVa3?e/, and conversely, / i / < /of may be replaced by / a / before hardness as in /5arnawa*taj/. 40 4* Posttonically after palatals / a / i s infrequently changed to / i / before softness as in /pamojanfi ~ pamojinfi/. The non-substitu-tions of / a / < / o / by / i / may occur before hardness as in /sara'jam cf . sar£jiw ~ sardjaw/. The influence of grammatical morphemes i s apparent in both cases. Here again one must confess that the whole picture of vowels in unstressed positions of the second degree would be further elucidated by a more exhaustive study of the phonology of the Dialect. Having established i t s e l f in unstressed positions following unpaired soft consonants and finding support in individual and scat-tered group pronunciations of the Dialect, jakarfe at times extends i t s influence even into the area of positions following paired soft consonants. Notations regarding this l inguistic phenomenon are made in the next section. C. Elements of Jakarfe. In the preceding sections on Dukhobor vowels in unstressed positions i t was demonstrated that akarfe i s more widespread in the Dukhobor Dialect than in standard Russian. It was also noted that elements of jakarfe are evident in the Dukhobor language whose pre-dominant features are non-dissimilative akarfe and ikarfe. These basic features illustrated above at length have been overwhelmingly substantiated by a l l the sources examined. Now something more ought to be said regarding the presence of jakarfe in the Dialect. The kinds of jakarfe observed in the Dialect may be classified into two general types — intrusive moderate jakarfe and strong jakarfe found in the speech of a minority of Dukhobors. This c lass i -fication i s based on the ideolects of a limited but representative group of informants and i s supplemented by secondary sources. 41 1. Intrusive moderate jakarfe* Intrusive jakarfe of the moderate type occuring now and then in speech whose "basic feature i s ikarfe i s supported by jakarfe common in the Dialect following unpaired palatal consonants and in grammatical desinences. Thus, the variety of jakarfe found in ordinary words l ike /casf; Sartowka; ucara*; jazfkj jarmo; kanfrfam; pamojam/ i s also found in more fixed types of terms l ike surnames and pronouns as in /Sarnow; jawo; cawoj majamu/ and i s extended to similar types even in pretonic positions following palatalized consonants, for example, /Sis'tfakow; u-rfawo; k-rfamd; us'awo/. In ordinary words intrusive moderate j akarfe may also occur in positions after soft consonants which, l ike palatal / 5 / , tend to exhibit certain characteristics of hard consonants. Only one such palatalized consonant was noted, specifically /r*/, but in view of the examples just given and the fact that dental-alveolar consonants in neologisms tend to remain unpalatalized before / e / , the whole lot of consonants formed in the dental-alveolar area are suspect of having characteristics similar to those of /r*/ and thus encouraging jakarfe where ikarfe i s the norm. Therefore i t i s not surprising at times to hear /tfadfj hl'azii; Ifip'er'aca/ where /rUdfj hl'izilj Ifip'er'iSa/ are anticipated, l o r is i t surprising to hear the alternating forms /cfirzf ~ tferzf ~ cfarzf j sMlo ~ s'elo ~ ^alo; nfiSkff ~ riaSkanfi/ under the same circumstances. The intrusive and sporadic nature of this type of jakarfe therefore i s revealed in a few words and in alter-nating ikarfe ~ jakarfe forms. Moderate jakarfe as an exclusive prevalent form was not observed although i t may exist in the Dialect. 2. Strong jakarfe. Strong jakarfe of undetermined quality was noted in the ideolects of two particular individuals (who were aware of the fact that their speech was different) whose ancestors were said to have come from the Tombov region and in the speech of certain Dukhobors called 42 'xalocfinskaji•. Usually 'tambowskaji' informants spoke with strong jakarfe so that regardless of whether hard or soft consonants followed the unstressed vowel in question, a distinct / a / was heard in place of / a , o, e/ as illustrated by the following. a. After:,.-soft and before hard consonants: /^alo ; infant; panfarl^; s*astra"; rfasd; tfada*; rfaxa'j; w'asna'; j a § £ £ j ; niastax/ •village; names; .she died; sister; I carry ; misfortune; let bei ; spring; go (riding) (imp. sg.) ; places (g. p l . ) ' . b . After soft but before soft consonants: /fatfati; til'acPa!; rfas*f; tfalrf; p*ariok; 2?afonaja; zam,a5a*ju1?/ 'boys; consider-l ing;, carry I (sg.); run 1 (sg.); stump; yellow (M. sg.) ; they notice ' . A third middle-aged person interviewed whose parents were 'tam-bowsls?iji' but who had not been l iv ing with them for quite some time spoke with sl ightly "weakened" jakarfe^ As already mentioned, the second group of Dukhobors speaking with rather strong j akarfe are the 'xalocfinskaji •. Exceedingly few of these were met in the Grand Porks area on which the study i s based but several were found in the Br i l l iant and Krestova areas. Examples recorded do not essentially differ in jakarfe type from those of the 'tambowskaji': /ifl'agd; panfadora; vadrom; s'alo; sriatana; pVtro; pfiwazla*; br'axa't?; tfwalo; ifaklo; htL'acfi; cfatfa'ci j ; tfari; s'emd'isVt?; as'arM/. Older Dukhobors born in Russia s t i l l remember some of the dialectal differences they encountered when thrust together during and following their exodus from the Transcaucasus. On more than one occasion the writer was informed that 'xalocTinskaji hawafffi na j a ' . The label 'tambowskaji' seems to refer to Dukhobors once l i v i n g in the Transeaucasian village of Tambovka which i s only one of the group of villages in T i f l i s province called "Xolodenskie" . On such inadequate evidence, however, i t must not he assumed that strong jakarfe did in fact characterize a l l the 'xolocfinskaoi' vil lages. Other comments regarding earlier differences included the statement: 'Bohda*-nawskaji hawa^fl'l pa xaxl^cki ' , which may he interpreted to mean "the inhabitants of the village Bohdanovka spoke more like Ukrainians". The speech of the 'l'isaveckaji' Dukhobors, being indistinguishable from that of the 'karaxanskaji', stands in contrast to the afore-mentioned types. 'Ijisaveckaji' refers to the Dukhobors once l i v i n g in Elizavetopol province. It may be safely argued that the Dukhobor Dialect described in this treatise i s by and large the present day speech of the latter two groups of Dukhobors and the Dialect which most Dukhobors seem to consider as their "standard" native language. The more significant phonological differences discovered among the Dukhobors with respect to vocalism have now been discussed. Considerable levell ing of earlier dialectal differences must have occured during the days of the closely-knit communal l iv ing in Brit ish Columbia and especially in the Grand Porks area where almost a l l the Dukhobor villages and enterprises have been vir tually within sight of each other. Two additional early groups of sectarians mentioned by informants but not located in research ought to be noted in this con-nection. 'Radijonawskaji' Dukhobors, presumably from the village Radionovka, were one of these groups supposedly having peculiarities of speech that no one could adequately describe. At least three individuals classifiable in this group were visited but nothing which could be considered extraordinary was discovered. Members of the second group, 'dubowskaji', were said to have spoken like •mardvf, and although two informants divulged their descent from this Pinno-Ugric race, neither were any phonological differences noticed in their Dukhobor speech. 16 See Chapter I I . 44 A fa i r example of phonological levell ing of the kind which must have occured repeatedly in other Dukhobor communities following periods of resettlement i s provided by a family l i v i n g in Grand Forks. Forsaking the more isolated and restricted type of agricultural l i f e in the prairies during the last World War, this particular family moved to Bri t ish Columbia. Apparently at that time a l l members of the family spoke with pronounced jakarfe. However, after some fifteen years of closer contact with other Dukhobors, only the mother, who stayed at home most of the time spoke with distinct' jakarfe. She described her usual form of speech as the language of her parents but could readily reduce the strength of her jakarfe by concentrating on her words. Working for several years now with other Dukhobors at the local sawmill, the father spoke with only slight jakarfe. Upon enquir-ing about the noticeable difference between his speech and that of his spouse, he confided that he was compelled to speak as others do because of the constant teasing he received from fellow employees and other Dukhobors about his peculiar speech habits. The Dukhobor speech of their young businessman son, whenever he used i t , corresponded even more closely than his father's to the speech of the surrounding Dukhobor community. 45 CHAPTER IV CONSONANTS The consonants herein described are speech sounds whioh are produced by the passage of air from the lungs, accompanied or unaccom-panied by voice and palatalization, and in the production of which there i s either a complete closure or a constriction of the air stream. The consonants are described as articulated by the speech organs which produce the contrasting features distinguishing one consonantal sound from another. Consonants are formed by the participation, in creating constric-tions or closures, of an active articulator (lower l i p or various parts of the tongue) and a passive area of articulation (upper l i p , teeth, alveolar ridge, parts of the palate) which mutually produce the various consonantal sounds. Thus, contrastive distinctions of conso-nants are conditioned by the speech organs in five ways on five planes: 17 1. manner of articulation 2. place of articulation 3. participation or non-participation of voice 4* presence or absence of palatalization 5. presence or absence of length. The f i r s t category given shall be ut i l ized as a basic division of classification. In the f i r s t contrastive category there are clearly discernible seven groupings of consonants contrasting according to the manner of formation: stop, nasal, lateral , vibrant, f r icat ive , affricate, and 17 As used in category 1. , the word "manner" w i l l automatically exclude the other categories. 46 semivowel. The second category presents six contrasting groups of consonants conditioned by their point of articulation in the oral cavity: b i l a b i a l , dental, alveolar, palato-alveolar, palatal, and velar. In the third category the vibration of the vocal chords as the air stream passes through them produces voice and creates contrasts in the nonsonant class of consonants. The fourth category renders contrasts when the tongue approaches or contacts the central palatal region of the oral cavity creating an " i - l i k e " articulation and thereby producing palatalized consonants. And in the f inal category the articulation of a consonant i s prolonged (in duration) in contrast to i t s commonly shorter form. These five distinctive categories are more f u l l y elaborated upon individually in the discussion of each consonantal group. As shall become evident, every contrasting plane noted above i s not contrastive in each case. Following the table i l lustrat ing the sum of Dukhobor consonants and the tables of minimal pairs for a l l plain consonants, each class of consonants established by the f i r s t category above w i l l be con-sidered and members of each class described. 47 Consonants of the Dukhobor Dialect Contrasting planes bi labial dental alveolar palato- palatal velar alveolar plosive v l . vd. nasal lateral vibrant fricative v l . vd. affricate v l . vd. semivowel h. s. h . s. h. s. h . s. s. h . s. P P* b tf t 1? d cf k i? m nf n rf 1 1' r f s:ss s* Z 2? s:ss h o 3 w W* d Table 5 The two tables immediately following provide minimal pairs contrasting the basic consonantal categories both i n i t i a l l y and f i n a l l y , but contrasting a l l the plain consonants in the Dialect i n i t i a l l y only. In subsequent discussions of each fundamental category of consonants the remaining phonemic contrasts within each class wi l l be provided by additional minimal pairs. Basic Consonantal Contrasts I . In i t ia l contrasts. plosive h pap pas pop pot t tap tas tam top tot k kap kas kop kot kafrf nasal m map mam n • nas nam not nand narM lateral 1 lap lop lot vibrant r rap ras ram rot fricative s sas sam sot saru sarM s Sap Sop Saru Sahii X zap xop xot affricate c cap cop carM/ 5 cap Sas Sop semivowel w was warn wop wot j jap jam jop jot Table 6 The last column contains varied minimal pairs essential to the completion of the series of i n i t i a l consonantal contrasts. For the meanings of terms in Table 6 and subsequent tables in this chapter see Appendix I I . 49 II . Pinal contrasts. plosive /P Pap wop dop I'ip t wot k kuk nasal m dom n pan won don lateral 1 pal wol l ' i l vibrant r par wor kur fricative s pas wos 8 woS dos l'is X wox doz affricate c Tic c doe kufi/ semivowel w wow 0 paj woj doj Table 7 In Table 7 there i s an attempt to contrast only the most basic categories and not every plain consonant. The second column of minimal pairs i s redundant but reenforcing, while the fourth column provides f inal contrasts for the lateral and vibrant classes with the affricate class of consonants. 50 A* Plosive Consonants. Plosive consonants are produced by a complete oral closure and a concomitant velic closure. The articulator stops the air stream at some contact point of articulation behind which the air i s compressed and then released orally with a slight explosion. 18 As determined by the place of articulation three distinct groupings of plosives exist in the Dukhobor Dialect: b i l a b i a l , dental, and velar. Accordingly the oral closure i s effected by the lower l i p contacting the upper l i p for the bi labials , by the upper front part of the tongue pressing against the base of the upper teeth including the lower portion of the alveolar ridge for the dentals, and by the back part of the tongue contacting the soft palate for the velars. The accompanying velic closure operative in the production of a l l but the nasal consonants i s made by elevating the rear portion of the soft palate (velum) to contact the pharynx. The three plain consonants representing the basic plosive sub-divisions are / p , t, k/ respectively: l a b i a l , dental, and velar. With the exception of the velars, two of the above plosive groupings are further distinguished by the participation of voice creating the contrasts / p , b, t , d / , and by the presence of palatalization s igni -ficantly increasing the plosive contrasts to / p , p% b, b% t, f , d, et, k, H/. Thus, in the Dukhobor Dialect ten plosive phonemes are found and maintained in a l l except weak positions for consonants. These plosive contrasts are il lustrated in the following table. 18 Where there was doubt regarding the details of the actual articulation of any consonant, reference was made to Avanesov's description of Russian consonants. 51 Plosive Contrasts I . In i t ia l contrasts* Contrasting planes bilabial dental velar place pas tas kas voice pop.bop tom.dom — palatalization v l . p i l . t f i l tok:1?ok kas:k*a§ vd* b i l . t f i l don:t?on — II . Pinal contrasts. Contrasting bi labial dental velar planes place rap rat rak palatalization v l . cep:cep* Sit.zitf — Table 8 1. Loss of voice. Voiced plosives are in weak position before nonsonant voiceless consonants and zero. (Actually the same maxim applies to a l l paired 19 \ voiced consonants . ; As a general rule, voiced plosives are sub-stituted by their voiceless counterparts in the aforementioned positions and, consequently, no f inal voiceless: voiced contrasts appear in the above table. Thus, the word /babf/ 'kidney beans' becomes /bop/ before a zero desinence. Likewise, the word /b£ba/ •a woman' becomes /bapka/ 'an old woman1 when the voiced plosive 19 occurs before a voiceless consonant. Sporadic non-substitution of voiced plosives in f inal position also occurs. 19 See p. 7 6 . 52 2. Loss of soft labials . The minimal pair /cep: cep*/ is probably the last stronghold of contrasting soft labials in f inal position. Only the older genera-tions of Dukhobors recall the word /cep/ in i t s earlier meaning of ' f l a i l ' , an instrument long since replaced by divers threshing machines and combines. For the majority of speakers of the Dialect then, the terms /cep ~ cep*/ convey the same meaning 'a big chain' with /cepka/ 'a chain' and /cepa5ka/ *a l i t t l e chain' being the most common semantic alternants. In a l l other instances observed only unpalatalized labials were found before zero: / s i p ; s*i?ep; s*em; wos*im; na'-z'im} rubow; brow; hatow/'pour I ; steppe; seven; eight; onto the ground; love; brow; ready'. An obvious conclusion to be drawn from such evidence i s the fact that labials in the Dialect appear as hard consonants in f inal position. 3. The soft velar plosive. A sound evidently old in the Dialect but newly acquired as a phoneme i s /li/. Its phonemic status i s established by a widely used minimal pair /ka"sa: k^sa/ (see Table 7), the latter member being an Anglicism, and i s supported by the adoption of other English terms (at least in the ideolect of some Dukhobors) but also by common Dukhobor words. Examples in which the soft velar plosive phoneme occurs may be divided into the two categories represented by the above minimal pair . a. Anglicisms: /kat : k*at; kuk: £uk; Uampa; £anda; slai&n/ 'apricot (rare in sg.) ; bulldozer (common); cook; cucum-ber (rare); camp; candy; Slocan'. 53 b. Dukhobor isms: /tfkVt?; 1?±lfo1?5 tfitfotf; wdrDiTa ~ waifJAi; tarftfa; tol^a; kojk'a; cf . k i s ; ki*sa/ ' i t weaves; flows; bakes; Ivan (dim. n. ~ a. sg.) ; Tanya (dim.); just; bed; cf . (a repetitive cat-calling expression); cat (in baby talk)* . As our examples i l lustrate , / £ / i s not an infrequent phoneme in the Dialect and may be found before a l l the non-front vowels. In addition, at least one root / k i s - / possesses a hard velar plosive before the high front vowel / i / after the pattern of other paired consonants which may appear either hard or soft before this vowel. It should be noted, however, that no f i n a l hard-soft contrasts were located for the phonemic pair under discussion and no other velar consonants are similarly paired. Yet another inescapable observation from the above examples is the progressive assimilation of / k / in contrast to i t s behavior in Russian. Also in contrast to literary Russian is the regular d i s -similation of / k / before the dental plosive as in /xto ~ kawo; tax-ta; t r £ x t a r ; doxtar/ 'who (n. ~ a. sg.) ; thus; tractor; doctor'. 4. The voiced velar plosive. The question arises whether the voiced counterpart of the plain velar plosive i s ever heard. It i s , but exclusively in words of English origin, although i t may also appear where / k / has become voiced by contiguous assimilation as in the phrase /g-horadu/. In toponymies and other substantives encountered in Canada even senior speakers of the Dialect sometimes pronounce £g] as, for example: /gran xork; kasilgar; tferfigaraw; gara'g ~ g a r £ 3 ; gubirnfen; grawal; negati; igzanfin; dfgar/ 'Grand Porks (one version); Castlegar; Henniger (surname); garage; government; gravel; negatives; examination; potato digger*. Of course, one should not be surprised to hear a 54 distinct voiced velar fricative replacing the plosive in some of the above words as pronounced "by older folk . There i s no question as to whether / h / i s a phoneme (see section on fricatives) and i t s preference over [g] in earlier "borrowings" from the English is illustrated by two closely related terms./has; halan/ 'gasoline; gallon' , which are much more commonly used than their alternate forms, /g*as; g'a'lan/. In later "borrowings", as exemplified in the preceding paragraph, the plosive i s evidently preferred. How-ever, ho minimal pairs were encountered to establish [g] as a phoneme and consequently i t must be considered an allophone of / h / , the 20 principal member . Frequently [gj freely alternates with [h] as in the place name /bran xork ~ gran xork/. No unpalatalized: palatalized phonemic contrasts of velars other than the plosives appear to exist. B. Nasal Consonants. Like the plosives, the nasals are produced by a complete oral closure, but unlike a l l other consonants, nasals lack an accompanying velic closure ( i . e . , the soft palate i s lowered). Consequently the pent-up air behind the articulator i s released through the nasal cavity, the whole mouth and nose area acting as a resonator. In the Dialect two nasal groupings are clearly discernible, a bi labial and a dental. These nasals are voiced sounds or sonants and therefore possess only one additional feature of distinctiveness, namely, palatalization. This second plane of contrast increases the nasal phonemes from two /m, n / to four /m, m*, n, h*/• (See table below). 20 The term "principal member" i s here used as described i n : Daniel Jones, The Phoneme, Its Nature and Use, Cambridge, Heffner and Sons, 1950, p. 8. 55 Nasal Contrasts I In i t ia l II Final Contrasting planes bilabial 1 dental bi labial dental place mox nox dom don palatalization ma1f:m*a'£ nos:rios — won: won* Table 9 Notations. 1. As explained in the notations regarding plosives, labials are in the f inal process of losing their unpalatalized: palatalized contra-distinction before zero. Hence, no contrasts between hard and soft , b i labial nasals occur in f inal position. 2 . In two Dukhobor Christian names the bi labial nasal was found in the place of the Russian dental nasal: /nfikolka ~ rfikola ~ m*ikal£j; diHit/ 'Nick, Nicholas; N i k i t a ' . C. Lateral Consonants. Positionally related to the dentals, the laterals are sonants formed by the t ip of the tongue pressing against the upper teeth and alveolar ridge thereby stopping the air passage in the centre and forc-ing the air to escape orally along one or both sides of the tongue which i s lowered and separated from the teeth and gums. Since voice i s non-distinctive in sonants, only two laterals exist in the Dialect. In phonemic opposition to the plain consonant i s i t s palatalized counterpart creating the pair / l , 1'/. 56 Lateral Contrasts I In i t ia l II Pinal Contrasting plane palatalization lot:Tot p i l : p i l ' Table 10 When comparing certain Dukhobor words with equivalent terms in Russian (and at least in two instances, in English), the lateral consonant would occasionally supplant other consonants in various ways. 1. Sound change with the Russian vibrant l i q u i d . a. Replacing / r / : /atfl'ikos; kal'i&or; l'itfistraci ja ~ l'itfis-trowka/ 'apricot; corridor; registration' cf . /farma!'/ •farmer'. b . Replaced by /r/:/ap*irs*fna/ •orange'. 2. Sound change with other Russian consonants. a. / j / : /muravel'/ 'ant ' ; cf . / re jca / cf . R. /rel's/ ' r a i l 1 . b . / v / : /slaboda, slabodnaj, slabodriik/ 'freedom, free, a Sons of Freedom*. c. / n / : /kalakon/ ' b e l l * . 3. Sound change with Russian consonants in conjunction with truncations. The contraction /dos*il'/, equating Russian /da s*ix por/, i s exceedingly common. By analogy other similar forms apparently have 57 been created: /pakVL'/ alternating with /paka*/ and /atkVL'j at tel ' / , alternating with /at-kilda; at-tdda/ respectively. 4* Sound change with zero. a. The Dukhobor surname /padav^flWikaw/ i s always pronounced with the l iquid consonant and always written without i t in both Russian and English forms. b . Another instance of a deliberate omission of the l iquid consonant i s in the Dukhobor equivalent of the Russian possessive adjective /koz?ij/ which in the Dialect i s normally /kazl 'fnaj/ . When i t came to using this adjective in the term "goat's milk", however, two men of about middle age (one of whom actually kept two goats at Krestova i) declared that those who used the expression /kazl'fnaja malako/ were in error (this included both parents of the goat owner i) because i t suggested a biological impossibility. The only correct form was /ka^fnaja malako/ both affirmed 1 D. Vibrant Consonants. The vibrant i s a sonant formed when the t ip of the tongue bends upward and touches the alveolar ridge in a rapid succession of several taps as the air stream forces the tongue to vibrate or t r i l l while the velum remains raised. As in the nasal and lateral sonant classifications, palatal-ization alone operates in the production of another phoneme to contrast with the plain consonant with the resulting pair being / r , r*/. 58 Vibrant Contrasts I Ini t ia l II Final Contrasting plane palatalization rat:r"at par: par* Table 11 In the pronunciation of many speakers of the Dialect there i s a tendency for the vibrant to be partially or totally unpalatalized where the palatalized consonant may be expected. This phenomenon was noted in both neologisms and older Dukhobor terms of Slavic origin and indicates a hardening characteristic of the phoneme in question. Examples i l lustrat ing the aforementioned feature are here given: 1. In neologisms including place names: / t r e j l ; kresan lejk; resturan ~ rasturan; rindaw^l? ~ r*enda/ ' T r a i l ; Christina Lake; restaurant; rent ( inf . and noun)'. 2. In older terms: / r i d £ ; r ibro; r i s l f ; p r i § l £ ; prfcfa; presnaj; drim^tT; retka; prezefi; xris*1?ijan; xres'tfik; kristowaja ~ xristowaja/ 'row (g. sg.) ; r i b ; to decide; came (F. ps. t . ) ; wi l l come ( f i t . 3p») ; f lat- tasting; to doze; rarely; before (adv.); Christian; cross (dim); Krestova'. It w i l l be observed that / r / can appear hard even before the front vowel / e / , normally a weak position for Dukhobor paired conso-nants. But i t should be remembered that in neologisms dental conso-21 nants also occur unpalatalized before / e / , strengthening the position of the vibrant In this respect. 21 See notes regarding / e / , pp. 22-23. 59 E. Fricative Consonants. In the formation of fricatives the articulator narrows the oral cavity at some point to the extent that the passing air stream rubs against the sides of the constricted area thereby creating a rubbing or fricative sound. As determined by their place of articulation, three groups of fricatives are to be found in the Dukhobor Dialect: alveolar, palato-alveolar, and velar. For the alveolar plain fricative the constric-tion causing f r i c t ion i s made by the t ip and upper front part of the tongue approaching the base of the upper teeth and the teeth ridge while the tongue's sides contact the side teeth. The palato-alveolar fricative consonant i s formed by the same kind of constriction, except that the tongue i s slightly retracted and grooved with i t s tip some-what raised. To create the constricted area for the velar fricative the back part of the tongue approaches the soft palate. In the manner described for each are formed three basic phonemes / s , §, x/. A l l three fricative groupings are further distinguished by the participation of voice, doubling their phonemic inventory to / s , z, S, 5, x, h / . Palatalization of the f i r s t pair creates two other phonemes in the alveolar group / s , s% z, z*/. Interestingly enough there emerges exclusively among the f r i c a -tives a f i f t h contrasting plane — length. In the palato-alveolar group the feature of length yields a long phoneme contrasting with the shorter plain consonant / s , Ss/ . Both phonemes are definitely non-palatal. Following Table 12 an attempt wi l l be made to show that there is sufficient evidence for also recognizing the Dukhobor alveolar voiceless and palato-alveolar voiced long consonants as phonemes. 60 Fricative Contrasts I . In i t ia l contrasts. Contrasting ' planes alveolar palato-alveolar velar place sot Ssot xot sut sut xut voice sat.zat sar.Sar xor.hor palatalization v l . sok.^ok — — vd. *aziwaca: *az,iwaca — — length v l . sal :ssal *p,i,sa:p,i'ssa — vd. — * § a f : £ £ a f — II . Final contrasts. Contrasting planes alveolar palato-alveolar velar place wos wos wox dus dus dux palatalization teattei — — Table 12 61 Notations. 1. Minimal pairs in Table 12 marked with an asterisk. The minimal pairs /aziwaca: az'iw^ca; pfsa: pf 56a/ are obviously not contrasted i n i t i a l l y as no satisfactory examples of i n i t i a l opposition for / z , i\ S, § 6 / were found. However, in the speech of those influenced by jakarfe such a contrast does exist for the f i r s t pair of phonemes in the words /zatfok: z*ai?ok/ 'penetrated by rain (M. p. t . ) ; son-in-law (dim.) ' . The minimal pair /zai?: zzar*/ are not genuine in the same sense as the other pairs, but are included in the Table to complete the picture for fr icat ives . (For more information regarding /5z/ see below.) 2. The labio-dental fr icat ives . If one recalls the sum of Russian fricatives, a phonemic grouping conspicuous by i t s absence from the above two tables i s that of the labio-dentals. While in Russian the labio-dental class has four phonemes contrasting via voice and palatalization, in the Dukhobor Dialect these same sounds operate in an allophonic capacity only with the voiced members predominating in occurence. a. [v, v*]. Although both members of the voiced labio-dental fricative pair may be heard before any vowel in,the Dialect, the unpalatized member i s infrequently found before non-front vowels, whereas the palatalized allophone i s more frequently used but before front vowels. Instead of [v] before non-front vowels, in consonant clusters, and in f inal position i s usually heard the bilabial semi-vowel [w] whose palatalized counterpart also occurs before front vowels. 62 In addition to the aforementioned occurrences, [w] appears as the non-syllabic alternant of the vowel / u / and as a prothetic sound before the labialized vowels. Due to the bilabial semivowel's considerably more common usage, [w] i s to be designated as the p r i n c i -pal member of the phoneme and [vj as the subsidiary member. In close conformity with the common distribution of these two consonants in the Dialect, our phonemic transcription system uses /w, w/ before non-front vowels including the allophone [V j , and [v*] before front vowels. It should be understood, however, that in the Dialect i t s e l f [yf] may also be pronounced in place of [v1] and conversely, [v] in place of [VJ • The preferential selection of the two consonants as observed may be illustrated by the following series of examples: 1) Consonant before vowel: /was: was; wos: wbs; wus; wislal ; visna'; tfes; veriik/. 2) Consonant in cluster before vowel: /swaxa; sw&zanaj; swoj; swos; ilwlza; sw'fs'nul; 5irWfk*i; swe5ka/. 3 ) Consonant following vowel: / t raw£; trawka; pr£wda; karowu; cPiwconka; l'ew/. b. [f, f ] . The voiceless labio-dental fricative pair i s likewise found in the Dialect, but only as allophones of /x, xw/ and almost exclusively in words of English derivation. Dukhobors who are more literate in both Canadian English and standard Russian wi l l tend to use |]f, fj more often than those less literate which includes most of those in the older generations. Between the various speakers of the Dialect and even in the speech of the same individuals some of the alter-nations exemplified below occur. 63 1) Dukhobor terms via English* / f r i j ~ x r i j ; alfa* ~ alxwa*; f£rma ~ xwarma; farfic ~ xW&rfic; forman ~ xworman; xdta; firiisaw£l? ~ ftflifisawal?; frej t ~ xrejt ~ f re j t ; kafej ~ kaxwej/ 'refrigerator; a l f a l f a ; farm; fence; foreman; foot; to be finishing (re. carpentry); freight; cafe ' . 2) Dukhobor terms via Russian: /xwatbrika; xwantal; ifuxw'ak:; xworma; hramaxon ~ hramaxwon; xVodar; xront; xunt; xudanfint; xriixta; juxta/ 'factory; irrigation ditch; mattress; form; gramophone; Fred; front; pound; foundation (re. carpentry; f r u i t ; fine leather* /tfixl'is; xVi l fp ; xVilffl ; x'iwr'a'l'; xWe; xwed*a; laxwet; strax/ ' T i f l i s ; P h i l i p ; wick; February; letter of R. alphabet; Fred; hayrack; a f i n e ' . Even in the latter group of "terms via Russian", sometimes Cf , tf] are pronounced instead of /x, x1, xw, xw"/ which are unquestion-ably the predominant choice. A careful examination of the foregoing terms reveals the general patterns of occurrence for the velar fricative in place of the labio-dental f r icat ive . Indications are that /x/ occurs before the l a b i a l -ized vowel / u / — the bilabial semivowel evidently being absorbed — and may appear before the less labialized vowel / o / , while /xw, xw1, xW/ occur before the front vowels and / o / . In addition, /x/ appears without the accompanying semivowel before other consonants which seem to supplant /w/ . 3. The alveolar and palato-alveolar fr icatives . It would be sheer negligence not to comment and elaborate upon the phonemes formed by the extraordinary contrasting plane of length functioning among the fr icat ives . 64 That the phonemes /&, § § / are established by this kind of contrast is indisputable. But although words in which these particular sounds are found in i n i t i a l position abound, no actual i n i t i a l contrasts forming minimal pairs seem to be available, except of the type /sit?: sSii?/ which involve morpheme prefixation. Medially, however, these phonemes find support in other contrasting pairs such as /SatSa: 5£&§a/ •abig bowl; more often' . In f inal position contrasts are unlikely as there i s a strong tendency to shorten the long phoneme and thus to force the coincidence of the two consonants. Therefore in the substantive /dos/ ' r a i n ' , the length and voice features become evident only in oblique cases and derivatives, as for instance in the words /dazz£ ; dozzik/. In the Dukhobor words /bors; i § o ; Sukfn; §akolda; Salakta'tf/ 'borsch; yet; (D. surname); doorhandle; to t i c k l e ' , the length feature — present in the same Russian words — is nonexistent even in declined or conjugated forms. Voiced counterparts to / § , § § / , that i s / z , z £ / , are similarly distinguished by length, but unfortunately minimal pairs have not been encountered to establish them as separate phonemes according to our definition. Nevertheless, a number of near-minimal pairs have been traced, for example, /ddza: dazzd; wosi: wosi: wozzi; drozzi; zeS: Sze5/ 'even; rain (g. sg.) ; wasps; l i c e ; reins; yeast; to burn 22 (impf. and p f . ) ' . Such proximate distinctiveness i s evidence enough for this investigator to include / z z / among the phonemes of the Dialect. Further investigation of Dukhobor phonology wi l l l i k e l y substantiate this stand. The problem of finding adequate examples of phonemic opposition here results largely from the marginal character of the distinctive feature of length. Numerically, at least, other planes of contrast are exceedingly more frequent. 22 I b i d . , pp. 39-40. Among D. Jones' secondary methods of deter-mining phonemes i s one regarding "words containing the sounds in situations of sufficient similarity" and Trager and Bloch's word series, e .g. , /dazza': dama'; dama: da'za/. 65 The peripheral nature of the length feature is perhaps "best il lustrated in the alveolar fricative category. In the term /ssav/, one of the two words noted in the Dialect, i s realized the long phoneme / s s / which finds an immediate i n i t i a l contrast with / s / in the pairs derived from the given inf ini t ive and the word / sa*la/. The fact that this extremely limited appearance of a consonant in the root of a word is able to he contrasted at a l l i s a marvel indeed I Of course, alongside / § § , 8S/ the appearance of the long or "double" consonant / s s / at points of morpheme suture lends support to the acceptance of the long phoneme. An additional minimal pair based on the same roots and near-minimal pairs are among the following: /sa*la: ssala; sat: ssai?: s*a1?; ssfssik; sec: sseS; paea: paesa; kla*sa: k l£ssa / ' fat ; urinated (F. p. t . ) ; orchard; to urinate; sit 1; spy; to thrash (impf. and p f . ) ; a pass (g. sg.) ; to graze ( r f l . ) ; class; to place onese l f . Digressing from the Dialect to Russian in connection with long consonants, the author wishes to assert that there would appear to be substantially enough evidence to recognize at least the long alveolar fricative / ss / as a phoneme of standard Russian regardless of the consonant's marginal character. Synchronically considered, the words /ssora; sstfda/ 'quarrel; loan' , juxtaposed with the terms /sora; suda/ 'weeds (g. sg.) ; judgment (g. sg . ) ' , form suitable minimal pairs to establish the phoneme / s s / . Add to these the inconsiderable semantic differentiation between /m£sa: ma"ssa/ 'mass (re. people); mass (re. money)' and what the writer has been informed to be common colloquial Russian for 'to urinate' , that i s , /ssav/ with i t s potential for distinctive contrasts and there are more distinctive pairs for / s , ss/ in Russian than in the Dukhobor Dialect 1 Now what about the feature of length in the palato-alveolar fricative group? Soviet scholars state that the Russian phonemes 66 / § § , §z*/ are frequently pronounced hard and the latter may even be OA acceptably substituted by /£z/ in contemporary Russian . Such a statement i s actually an admission that in the standard speech of many literate Russians, the distinctive feature of palatalization is lost and the feature of length assumes contrastive powers. Why i s this feasible? Long hard / s s ; zS; ss/ are already operating at OA morpheme sutures and / ss / i s contrasting with / s / . Why should not this contrasting plane of length be permitted to extend i ts influence to the neighboring fricatives? Its influence is now being fel t in the fricative class of consonants and i ts study as a plane of phonemic contrast in Russian warrants further investigation. 4. The velar fr icat ives . The velar fricatives have just one phonemic contrast based on voicing but several allophones. With considerable regularity the allophones [x, h] occur before the non-front vowels and hard conso-nants while their palatalized counterparts Cx", h*] occur before front vowels and certain soft consonants. F. Affricate Consonants. In their articulation affricate consonants are a complete blend of certain plosive and homorganic fr icat ives . An affricative begins as the plosive formed at the same point but the release of the pent-up air behind the point of oral closure is more gradual (rather than a sudden unstopping as for plosives) and, as a result of a slower separation of the articulatory organs, a corresponding fricative i s heard in the latter stage of the affricate's formation. Thus, a 23 V. Vinogradov, et a l . , eds., Grammatika Russkogo Jazyka, Moscow, 1952-54, v o l . I, pp. 51-52. In this o f f i c i a l volume is upheld the view that /ss*, z2/ are not obligatory as phonemes since [ s § ] alter-nates with [S5] and [zz*] with [Sz] in l i terary Russian. 24 A.H. Gvozdev, op. c i t . , pp. 16, 71-72. 67 closure blending into a following constriction creates an affricate. On the position plane two groupings of affricates are distinct in the Dialect: alveolar and palato-alveolar. The alveolar affricate is formed by the front section of the tongue stopping the air stream at the base of the upper teeth and alveolar ridge, then releasing the air as for the alveolar f r icat ive . In the same manner the palato-alveolar affricate i s produced slightly further back on the alveolar ridge with the central part of the tongue simultaneously approaching the hard palate. The two phonemes thus created are / c , c/, the f i r s t being non-palatal and the second palatal — softness here being non-distinctive. The palato-alveolar plain affricate i s further con-trasted with a voiced counterpart thereby making another phonemic pair / c , 3/. Affricate Contrasts I Ini t ia l II Final Contrasting planes alveolar palato-alveolar alveolar palato-alveolar place cop cop ^ i c s'p'iS voice — cox:jox — — Table 13 Notations. 1. Supplementary minimal and near-minimal pairs for / c , &/ include: /cap: Sap; ustreca: ustreSa; ud£ca: uda"Sa/ 'onomatopoetic term for clutching with claws; chop; to meet; a meeting; to succeed; good fortune'. 2. Loss of the plosive element, etc. 68 A phenomenon noted in connection with the alveolar affricate i s the occasional loss of either i t s plosive or fricative element, the former being the most common. For the most part this affricate remains intact but at times the above reduction occurs. For example, in the words /cihan; can£; sonca; scap*f1?; francUs; kl'a'ca? udaca/ •beggar; price; sun; to join; Frenchman; to swear; i t wi l l succeed', the plosive element i s sometimes absent, and in the last two examples a long / s s / replaces / c / , an interesting assimilation at a morpheme boundary. On the other hand, in the words /tfwltok, tfwes'tf/ 'flower; to bloom1 and derivatives, the fricative element i s absent, except in the measure to which i t i s present in the accompanying semivowel. A case in which the plosive element i s lost in the palato-alveolar fricative due to simplification before another consonant, specifically a dental plosive, i s / § t o / whose genitive and dative forms restore the f u l l affricate, /cawo, 5amd/. In the adjectival and adverbial forms of at least one root palatalized /i?/ i s fricated and becomes palatal / c / as in /SiSolaj , 5izalo/ 'heavy, heavily' contrasting with /iMzas^l?/ 'weight'. Com-pared with Russian /xot*/, in the Dukhobor term /xu5/, the soft dental plosive has evidently undergone a similar change, which i s phonemic (cf. /visaM?: Sisa/t?/ 'to spl i t ; to comb'). 3. The apparent hardening of / f i / . Sometimes the patterning of unstressed vowels following palatal consonants seem to suggest that /5 / was at least partially hard. For example, even in speech characterized by ikarfe, in a few words l ike / c a t f r i ; uSara"/ the vowel / e / becomes / a / , but only in prestress position — just as when i t appears after non-palatal but before hard consonants. 69 The apparent partial hardness of / c / i s also evident in i ts lack of power to palatalize a following velar. As pointed out earlier, the velar plosive i s readily palatalized by a preceding soft consonant including jod: / larVa < lara ; warik'a < watfa; da'lfk'a; h^jk*a (cf.) ha*jda; skanfejk'a (cf.) skamejicka/ 'Larry? John; uncle; nut cf . cattle c a l l ; bench cf . (dim)'. Note that in the latter two pairs of examples a non-velar consonant remains hard after jod whereas the velar becomes palatalized; and also, that the same velar, soft after / j / , remains hard after / $ / . Unpalatalized / k / occurs regularly following /c/i / t £ 5 k a ; docka; feSka; swefcka/ 'wheelbarrow; daughter; r iver ; candle'. The same type of non-palatal behavior would presumably apply to / j / . 4. The voiced palato-alveolar affricate. Drawn from Dialect neologisms minimal pairs for / S , 3/ are abundant: /cok: 3°k; Sap: jap; 5ip: 3ip/» I R spite of this, / j / , l ike /8 / i s not a "new" phoneme in the language. Many examples which are not more recent "borrowings" or Anglicisms testify to this fact : /Soha; wanjow; majara; 3ur*I'1?; Hinjfr ; jJinjak; injirfer; jar^nka/ 'switch; (D. surname); semen; to t r ickle ; f igs ; jacket; engineer; deer*. It i s worth noting that in the three terms just preceding the last word, Dukhobor / j / equates with Russian / z / . The f inal Dialect term was probably acquired during their stay in the Transcaucasian region since the Georgian word for ''antelope" i s "dzheirani". G. Semivowels (Semiconsonants). The semivowels are f r icat ive- l ike sonants produced by a momentary constriction of the air stream at some point in the oral cavity. The velum being raised, the air passes out through the mouth rubbing against the sides of the constricted area. 70 In the Dialect under consideration two semivowel consonantal groupings are found, namely /w, j / , the f i r s t being bi labial or labio-velar and the second, palatal. To form the bilabial semivowel the lower l i p approaches the upper l i p and both are fronted and slightly rounded while concomitantly the back part of the tongue i s raised to a vowel / j / position. However, before unrounded vowels the l i p s appear somewhat spread for /w/ . The palatal semivowel i s produced by means of the central part of the tongue being raised towards the hard palate. Whereas the latter phoneme is palatal, the former i s unpalatalized and by way of palatalization finds opposing contrast in /w1/. Semivowel Contrasts I Ini t ia l II Final Contrasting planes bilabial palatal bi labial palatal place wot jot l'ew I'ej palatal-ization wos:wbs — — — Table 14 Notations. 1. The bi labial semivowel. a. Generalities regarding /w/. As noted earlier in the discussion of fricatives, /w/ i s the principal member of the /w-v/ family of sounds and as such occurs most frequently before non-front vowels and before front vowels when in a consonantal cluster. What has been said earlier on this subject wil l not be repeated here. 71 Some Dukhobors are aware of the fact that their pronunciation of the Russian "v" sound i s more l ike the English nw" and use the latter symbol in writing their names in English script. The following Dukhobor surnames were copied directly fron The West Kootenay Tele- phone Directory for 1 9 5 9 ' Sopow, Oglow, Poznikow, Wishlow, Cheveldeaw, Wlasoff, Woykin, Sophonow, Popow cf . Papove, Popoff; Moroso, Makorto, Chernenko, Waselenko; Cheveldave. Of course, more Dukhobor surnames are written with the "-off" ending (in conformance with the spelling used by the Canadian Immigration authorities in recording names of Dukhobor immigrants) than with "-ow", but the above forms serve to i l lustrate attempts at representing the bilabial semivowel as i t i s pronounced f i n a l l y and i n i t i a l l y . Of considerable interest in this section i s the function of this bi labial as a legitimate semivowel. Its alternation between non-syllabic /w/ and syllabic / u / i s often observed under certain phonetic conditions. An attempt to analyze this fluctuating behavior of the semivowel i s made below. While this i s being done i t ought to be noted that /w/ does not become voiceless in the same contexts as other voiced paired consonants nor does i t assimilate voiceless conso-nants. In this respect and in i t s palatalizing effect on contingent unpaired hard consonants i t behaves as the sonants. b . Occurrences of /w ~ u / alternation. l ) Non-syllabication i f preceding or following a vowel: /wad£; wosk; wfras; Vint; Vera; naw5fl; rowna; nawf£t; cfewka; i-ws'o; naws*ihda*; sxwaffl; vwbrdaj; swoj; raswet; S i rVfki ; tfejstwawatf; rfi w-na"s; rii w-w£s; al'fwa; l£wa5ka; parawoj; browi; zavet; pastaw; krow; narfw; few/. 72 2) Syllabication i f preceding a consonant either i n i t i a l l y or after another consonant: /upas*i?; u-padwa"l; ubok; uwofu; uverx; ukils; urfis; unfe^i; us*o; us*ihd^; udowka; u-na"s; u-wa's; u c f l ; ur*eria ~ wr^ enfa ~ vr*enfa; urocti; wr'ot'j ul 'fla; u(w)las*i? ~ wlas*1?; b i l u-nas; won uzfal us*o; jecfim unfes't'i/. This distribution of the /w ~ u / alternation would hold true for the vast majority of the speakers of the Dialect. Only before the l iquid consonants does there appear to be some incompletion of the alternation, probably because of the semivowel's close aff ini ty to these oral sonants. c. The semivowel /w/ as a hiatus breaker. The semivowel in question acts as a kind of hiatus breaker between two non-front vowels, i f one of them is labialized. Although the evidence i s incomplete, a few examples of this phenomenon were noted: /nawrfka; pawiik; awdl; nawilsifik; zaV-wuxu; u-wuhlil; uw-atfedrfij ~ na-ab*et; uw-akno ~ tffla w-akno/ 'learning; spider; Caucasian vil lage; ear-muffs; by the ear; in the corner; in the dining room ~ for dinner; into the window ~ she hit on the window'. d. The semivowel /w/ as a prothetic sound. In a few Dukhobor terms /w/ can appear prothetically before the stressed labialized vowels: /won ~ ana"; woz*ira; wostraw; wostraj; wokni ~ akno; wosi ~ as£ ; wux*i ~ uxa"; wiitram; wdskaj; wtfhal/ 'he ~ she; lake; island; sharp; windows ~ n. sg . ; wasps ~ wasp; ears ~ ear; in the morning; narrow; corner'. In some of the foregoing words prothetic /w/ i s a permanent fixture in the pronunciation of a l l speakers encountered. 73 e. The appearance of / u / from /w/ in connection with contractions. Occasionally the contraction of the semivowel and a non-front vowel results in the formation of / u / as illustrated by examples: /uta'k < wot tak; ut^xta < wot tak to; utdt < wot tut; wutorriik < wawtortfik/ 'thus; thus; right here; Tuesday*. f . Hot a single instance of /w/ substituting for the l iquid / l / was observed. 2. The palatal semivowel. The extent to which jod behaves l ike the bi labial semivowel has not been thoroughly examined. It i s apparently found in much the same phonetic contexts as /w/ but i t s existence and behavior is not complicated by the presence of major allophones corresponding to [v, v"]. A minimum of examples wi l l be given below to reveal some of the simi- . l a r i t i e s of / j / to /w/ in terms of what has been said regarding the lat ter . a. Occurrences of / j ~ i / alternation. As /w/ is associated with the non-front vowels, so / j / i s related to the front vowels. / j / occasionally alternates with the high front vowel even as /w/ alternates with the high back vowel. Such alter-nation occurs under essentially the same phonetic conditions as those stated for the bi labial semivowel: / i d i i " ~ ja jdd ~ ujdiS; ilffi? ~ paji?f1? ~ razajrica; icPe ~ t i jcte ~ won icte; imrfe ~ dala" (j)mrie ~ dal imrfe; i tf ~ nu j tl*/ *I go (on foot) ~ I wil l go away; to walk ~ pf. ~ to disperse; where? ~ where are you? ** where i s he?; to me ~ she gave me ~ give me; and you ~ well, and you' . As for /w/, the terms "syllabication, non-syllabication" are equally applicable for jod. 74 b . The semivowel / j / as a prothetic sound. Three words found in the Dialect have a prothetic / i / which "becomes / j / or disappears altogether: /imrfe(cf») dala" jmrie ~ dala" mrie? i sol (cf.) pa daro§k*i j s o l ; je^l'i(cf.) is*l*i talc/. Jod, or more accur-ately, / i / , may "be considered a prothetic here only in contrast to the same words in Russian. Also in contrast to standard Russian, Dukhobor oblique case forms of the pronoun /aril"/ a l l retain jod: / j i x , j im/, whereas in Russian / j / i s frequently omitted. The example /jesTi ~ i s T i / i l lustrates the type of alternation found in /asa* ~ wosi; uxa" ~ wilxi/ wherein the semivowel disappears (in the case of /w/ when labialization ceases) or i s absorbed by i t s alternant phoneme, the respective high vowel. Another Dukhobor sample patterning in the same manner i s / i j o ~ j e j / 'she (a. ~ d . ) ' . But in view of the Russian forms in both of which / j / i s retained, in this last example jod cannot be considered prothetic in the same sense. H. Remarks Regarding Dukhobor Consonants As a Whole. The consideration of specific consonants has been completed. For this purpose the contrasting plane of the manner of articulation has been uti l ized as a basic category. The sub-categories — place of articulation, voicing, palatalization, and length — were used accordingly and a l l the consonants have been examined in separate sections. Therefore before entering upon a further consideration of the categories most descriptive of Dukhobor consonants, namely, voice and palatalization, let us glance at them again as a sum total in the light of their basic category. 75 1. A tabulation of Dukhobor consonants according to their manner of articulation. total plosives / p , p\ b, b% t, d, d% k, k*/ 10 nasals /m, m% n, n?/ 4 laterals / l , 1'/ 2 vibrant s / r , 2*/ 2 fricatives / s , ss, s% z, z% S, SS, z, z5, x, h / 11 affricates / c , 5, 3/ 3 semivowels /w, n?, j / 3 grand total 35 If the phoneme /§2/ be permitted to stand on the grounds on which i t was established, the Dukhobor Dialect has exactly thirty-five 25 consonantal phonemes — just o n e more than standard Russian j but i f /k*/ i s recognized as a phoneme of Russian, the total i s identical . The numerical difference i s less important than the differing inven-tory. Using Avanesov's total and distribution as an acceptable account of Russian consonants, Dukhobor lacks the following Russian phonemes / g , f , f , v, V , ss*, z?/ but possesses /k% h, ss, SS, zz, 3> w, w1/ which are absent in Russian. 2. The grouping of Dukhobor consonants according to voiceless: voiced opposition presents a series worth considering. The series of voiceless: voiced contrasts includes: / p , bj p% 1?; t, d; 1?, cf; s, z; s\ z*; 5, S; SS, 5§ ; x, h; 5, 3/. Thus, the voiceless: voiced series consists of ten pairs — 25 Thirty-four i s Avanesov's total excluding /if/ in Fonetika, p. 134« 76 four plosive, five fr icat ive , and one affricate. The remainder of Dukhobor consonants unpaired on this plane of contrast consists of eleven sonants /m, nf, n, ri*, 1, 1', r , r*, w, W*, j / , two velars / k , Is!/, and an affricate / c / . ?6 In essentially the same manner as the equivalent Russian series , before vowels and sonants the voiceless: voiced contrasts are in their strongest positions of distinction. That i s to say, they can maintain their voicelessness or voice irrespective of the following vowel or consonant. Weak positions of distinction for consonants paired in this series are positions before nonsonant voiced consonants for voiceless consonants and before nonsonant voiceless consonants and zero for voiced consonants. Thus, in the given weak positions voiceless conso-nants tend to become voiced and vice versa. Examples i l lustrat ing consonantal substitution in the foregoing weak positions: a. Unvoicing of voiced consonants before zero: /bap ~ baba; hot ~ hoda; sax ~ sahmil; l'es ~ l'ezla; maS ~ ma'Sa/ •woman (g. p l . ~ n. sg.) ; year (n. " g. sg.) ; step (noun " M. ps. t . ) ; crawled (iff. and F . ) ; smear I ~ he smears'. b . Unvoicing of voiced consonants before voiceless consonants /walocPa ~ walovl^a; krifSak ~ krffska; pat-xatu ~ pad-fe5ku; ap-stol ~ ab-iihal ~ ab-dom/ 'Walter; book (g. p l . ~ n . sg. under the house ~ down the river bank; against the table ~ corner ~ bui lding ' . c. Voicing of voiceless consonants before paired voiced consonants: /zdox; ad-b£vk*i; k-akmS ~g-domu/ 'he died; 26 I b i d . , p. 162 77 from father; toward the window ~ home'. It wil l be observed that voicing and unvoicing may occur at both morpheme sutures and word borders. Contrary to the regular substitution of phonemes as described above, there i s evidently somewhat of a tendency to retain voiced consonants before zero wherever a semantic clash threatens to confuse meaning. Hence, / r o z / 'roses (g. p l . ) ' may be heard instead of the expected / ros / because the latter also means 'he grew'. Similarly /woz; plod; sud/ ' load; produce; court' may replace /wos; plot; sut/, since the latter may also mean 'wasps; raft ; suit of clothes' respec-t ively . The extensiveness of f inal voiceless: voiced contrasts of consonants does not seem to be great. It i s l ike ly purely peripheral and rather limited. On the other hand, the Dialect as spoken by the younger generations of Dukhobors may be embracing more of such con-trasts quite prevalent in the English language which i s increasingly 27 better known to them. However, since Ukrainian retains at least partial voice in f inal consonants, this feature may have been in force in the South Russian Dialect for some time. 3. The grouping of Dukhobor consonants according to unpalatalized: palatalized opposition i s also of interest here. The series of unpalatalized:.palatalized contrasts includes: /p> ^ 5 b» # 5 "t, 1?; d, ct; k, k*; s, a*; z, z*; m, nf; n, if; 1, 1'; r, r*; w, w"/. In this series are twelve pairs — five plosive, two fricative, two nasal, one lateral , one vibrant, and one semivowel. The last 27 R.G-.A. De Bray, Guide to the Slavonic Languages, Dent and Sons, London, 1951 > P« 76. 78 five pairs are sonants. The remainder of the consonants, unpaired on this plane of contrast, consists of six fricatives / s , z, §s , zz, x, h / , three affricates / c , 8, j / , and a semivowel / j / . The only completely unpaired consonants on the voiceless: voiced and hard: soft planes are / c , j / , the former being voiceless and non-palatal, and the latter , voiced and palatal . Strong positions of distinction for hard: soft contrasts include the following: for a l l consonants but the velars and labials , before a l l vowels except /e/, and before zero. Other possible positions of strength need additional examination. Positions of weakness for consonants paired in this series include 28 the position preceding the vowel / e / , and for the velar consonants also before / i / ; for most of the consonants, before paired soft con-sonants; and for labials also word f i n a l l y . In such weak positions phonemic contrastiveness on the hard: soft plane f a i l s to materialize. As our examination of Dukhobor consonants reveals, Dukhobor consonants do not differ greatly from those of Russian. The d i f f e r -ences which do exist may be said to be minor. Three consonantal forms which characterize the Dialect and contrast strongly enough with the consonants of standard Russian to be conspicuous are the voiced affricate and fricative / 3 , h/ and the semivowels /w, w/. To these may be added the phonemes /x, xw/ and their various combinations appearing in place of Russian / f , f / . But here we are introducing the use and distribution of phonemes, factors which further alienate the two languages. The same analogy would apply to the differences between Dukhobor and Russian vowels. Morphological, syntactical, and lexical factors tend to widen the gap even more between the two languages. Unfortunately a l l these factors cannot be included in this paper. However, the major grammatical inflections are appended to the main text. 28 With few exceptions — see notes regarding vowel / e / and consonant 79 CHAPTEE V OTHER PHONOLOGICAL PHENOMENA This brief chapter does not pretend to complete the investigation of the phonology of the Dukhobor Dialect. It i s merely an "addendum" to the-preceding two chapters. The reason for i t s inclusion i s the conviction that-something ought to be said regarding stress as well as the important features of contraction and cluster-breaking which to some extent characterize the Dialect. The latter phenomenon w i l l be considered f i r s t . A. Contraction. The contraction, syncopation, or truncation of sounds i s well known in ordinary colloquial speech. Since the Dukhobor Dialect i s primarily a spoken language, contractions of various kinds are common and are not distinguished from uncontracted forms by the speakers of the Dialect. Contractions may vary from minute ones, such as the loss of some feature of a single phoneme, to more extensive ones in which several phonemes may be eclipsed. 1. Contraction within a phoneme. Because length of some description is essential before any contraction can occur, in the Dialect only the long fricative conso-nants and affricates have anything to truncate. a. Some long fricatives lose their length feature either only before zero as in the word /dos ~ da§zd/ 'rain (n. ~ g. sg.)*, or permanently in almost any position as in the terms /§iik*in; i § o ; bors/ 'CD. surname); more; borsch". Comparable Russian words retain the long consonants. 80 b. Length in affricates i s of a different nature — the "blend of a plosive and fr icat ive . One of the elements of this com-i pound may he lost and a simplified consonant remain. Loss of the plosive element is often evident in words l ike /sonca; capl'ai?/ •sun; to grasp' and the complete loss of the fricative element in the related terms /tfwitok; tfwe^tf/ 'flower; to bloom'. 2. Contraction within a word. A contraction within a given word may involve one or more phonemes in either i n i t i a l , medial, or f inal position. A truncated particle following a word may be attached to the end of that word even as in the English term "wouldn't". In the examples which follow, contracted terms appearing without alternations or their f u l l forms i l lustrate contractions in the Dialect in contrast to corresponding terms in standard Russian. a. Contraction of a single phoneme: /us < u£e; wihrai? < wf-ihraf; jfirdaw^i? < jfifidaw^tf (cf .) iJirxactfl?; poxrani ~ paxaron; pamlactel ~ maladoj; rie < rfet; siSdis; kad£; tad£; pravi ~ praiflwnaj; padimaf; pojas ~ pajizuaV 'already; to win; to transmit cf . to pass; funeral; he looks younger ~ young; no; now; when; then; against (prep. ~ adj . ) ; t o l i f t ; t r a i n (n. sg. ~ p l . ) ' . b. Truncation of particles: /xtod < xto-ta; kadds* < kad£-ta ; kudf^ < kudf-ta; idfes* < icfe-ta; t a x t a < tak-ta; is*Tip < j e s T i - b a ; t ip < t i - b a (cf.) wip; biitta < biit-ta-ba; kud£§ < kudd-5a ~ k u d f s < kudf-Sa; tud£§ < tuda^-za/ 'someone; sometime; somewhere (direction); somewhere; thus; i f ; you should (sg.) cf . ( p l . ) ; as i f ; whence; thence'. 81 3. Contraction involving two or more words: /utalc < wot tak; utaxta < wot tak-ta; utilt < wot tut; uteta < wot jeta; wotan < wot won; wonan < wot won; do^i ~ dos*il' < da dxx por; netsa < net i so / 'thus; thus; here; this ; here he i s ; there he i s ; yet; not yet ' . 4« Contractions in specific parts of speech. Nouns: /strunfint < instrument; salai?ej; ramaifls < rumaiffzam; il'ektr*ika/ 'instrument; celery; rheumatism; e lec t r i c i ty ' . Pronouns: /mawo < raajawo; twawo < twajawo; swawo < swajawo/ 'my; your; one's own ' . Numerals: /pUcfi^at; siz'cfis'at; SiSn^caf; dWinosta; tiSSa < tfs*i5a; dimoj ~ s*amoj/ ' f i f t y ; sixty; sixteen; ninety; thousand; seventh'. Verbs: /moza (cf.) maHof; patfedal? < pa-atfedatf; p'irdajom < p'ir'id^f/ 'he may cf . he can; to dine (pf . ) ; to transmit'. Adverbs: /atk'el' < at krida; at tel' < at tiSda; oul? < cudok/ 'from whence; from thence; a l i t t l e ' . Prepositions: /okl < okala; dl'e < podl'i; z-domu < is-domu; pralff/ 'by; near; from home; against'. 5. Contraction in neologisms. The phenomenon of contraction even enters the area of new terms in the Dialect: /alxwa"; hran xork; l'ejnfas; s'ekSa/ ' a l f a l f a ; Grand Forks; laying mash; section'. 6. Contractions in Christian names. Comparing Dukhobor given names with equivalent Russian names 82 one would assume that most Dukhobor names are contractions or diminutives of their Russian counterparts. Some Dukhobors feel that the name by which a grown man or woman is daily called i s the fullest possible "Russian" form. Here are a few "formal" .names of adults together with their longer forms, which have been forgotten by some Dukhobors: /ma!sa < maff ja; ldsa < lulc?efija; xWeria < xVidos*ija; pol'a < palalfeja; na's'ifa < anast£s*ija; wa"s*a < va^fl' (cf. R. vasfl ' i j ) ; nffsa < m'ixa'jla ~ riixajfl/. A certain Dukhobor pensioner (oddly enough, a Freedomite) con-fided to me that when negotiating for his wife's pension, he was asked by a government agent for his wife's Christian name. He could supply no other name than /hnlria/. This name was apparently inade-quate for searching the records regarding her entry date into Canada, homestead settlement, and other facts required as she had no legal identification, birth certificate, citizenship papers, or anything of the sort. After an extensive investigation of o f f i c i a l records in Regina, they found her f u l l maiden name and the l i t t l e pensioner learned for the f i r s t time in his l i f e that her "real" name was, as he put i t , /ahraferfa/ 1 B. Cluster Reduction. Cluster breaking may be considered as a tendency in opposition to contraction since to simplify a consonant cluster in the former, vowels are added instead of consonants and/or vowels being truncated. In cluster reduction, therefore, words are lengthened by the addition of phonemes rather than being shortened by the elimination of phonemes. Nevertheless, the subconscious intent and end result of both processes i s the same — simplification of the articulation of a word. Each of the vowels may be used for cluster reduction. 83 1. / a / : /wawtorriik ~ wutorrfik; akronfi; smfsal; malarfj^; samaro-cfina; pasalom; h a l a d ^ f ; ata-ws'awo < at-us'awo; zaw^ihda ~ u^ihda/ 'Tuesday; bes i d e s ; i d e a ; l i g h t n i n g ; c u r r a n t s ; psalm; to hunger; from a l l ; always'. 2. /o/t / l o p ~ lobam; r o t ~ r o t a ; wos ~ wosi; l'ot ~ l'odu; l'on ~ l'onu/ 'forehead (n. ~ i . s g . ) ; mouth (n. ~ g. s g . ) ; f l e a s (g. ~ n. p i . ) ; i c e (n. ~ g. s g . ) ; f l a x (n. ~ g. s g . ) * . 3. /u/: /untfk; uverx; udwoja; u s l u x / 'nephew; upwards; twice; aloud'. 4. / i / : / i r z a " ; icfe < itfde; imife; Sffin? ~ Sizfrfi; kar£tfil' ~ karatfl'i; mfs'il' ~ mfs*l'i; f§la ~ i s o l / ' r u s t ; where; to me; l i f e (n. ~ g. sg.); ship (n. sg. ~ p i . ) ; thought (n. sg. ~ p i . ) ; went (F. ~ M. ps. t . ) * . 5. /e/t /l'ew ~ l'ewa ~ l'ewu/ ' l i o n (n. ~ g. ~ d. s g . ) ' . The type of c l u s t e r b r e a k i n g i l l u s t r a t e d here by the vowel /u/ was d e s c r i b e d e a r l i e r i n the s e c t i o n on semivowels. As may be expected i n connection with t h i s phenomenon, i n the D i a l e c t f u l l - v o w e l l i n g i s even more widespread than i n Russian. Notations on the r e d u c t i o n of consonantal c l u s t e r s c o u ld q u i t e n a t u r a l l y l e a d i n t o a d i s c u s s i o n of the c l u s t e r i n g of consonants i n a l l p o s s i b l e p o s i t i o n s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , consonantal c l u s t e r i n g and s y l l a b i f i c a t i o n i n the D i a l e c t i s another area of study which must remain incomplete f o r the present. Only some of the more conspicuous c l u s t e r i n g v a r i a t i o n s from the Russian p a t t e r n were noted as p a r t i a l l y r e l a t e d above. I t can be s a f e l y assumed, however, that a c l o s e and thorough comparison of Dukhobor and Russian consonantal c l u s t e r i n g would r e v e a l c o n s i d e r a b l y more v a r i a t i o n s of v a r i o u s k i n d s . 84 C. Stress. Word stress in the Dukhobor Dialect plays the same role as stress in Russian. In both languages stress is a phonemic suprasegmental feature in that i t alone may distinguish a pair of words having identical phonemes (segments) in the same order. In addition, the stress i s dynamic in that i t distinguishes a stressed syllable from the remainder of the word by a more forceful, sharper, and evidently longer articulation of that syllable. (See the notes regarding vowels). Furthermore, the stress i s free and not fixed to any one syllable as in Polish or Czech. L i t t l e i s to be gained by a thorough comparison of the s imilar i -ties between Dukhobor and Russian stress behavior and patterns. Of greater importance are some of the differences noted between the two languages in certain isolated terms and in some paradigms. But f i r s t , a note about the distinctive power of stress which places i t in the same general phonological category as the phonemes. 1. How does stress distinguish words? Stress distinguishes expressions in the following ways: a. Meaning from non-meaning: /mfla (cf.) mil£; akno (cf.) a"kna/ 'soap vs. non-meaning; window vs. non-meaning1. b . Meaning from meaning or two l ike forms of different words: /para: para"; horat: harot; babi: babf; milk1!; p'fla: p * i l e i / 'a pair; i t ' s time; town; garden; women; kidney beans; tortures; flour (F. g. sg.); she drank; saw'. c. Two forms of the same word: /atktitai?? atkutdi?/ 'to open (pf.and impf.)'. 85 As illustrated above, in both Dukhobor and Russian the function of stress i s the same. However, the word for word or paradigm for paradigm use of stress occasionally varies between the two languages. There follow examples in which such differences were observed. 2 . Stress differences between the Dialect and Russian. a. In isolated words. Nouns: /at rub's*.; sluSdj; d*fs*h*a; rajduha*; kalakon; r*eriin*; p*a*.tka; izWoska; ssaVil'/ 'bran; occurrence; gum; rainbow; b e l l ; belt ; heel; quick lime; s o r r e l ' . Verbs: /Vida 'lfj v idal ; iftsu; xoSu; rfi-bilo; daridl; nae£l / 'to see; he saw; I write; I want; there was not; he annoyed (pf . ) ; he began'. Numerals: /actin^cai?; 5itirnaca1?/ 'eleven; fourteen'. Adjectives: /cPikoj; sUlskoj; zarfa'taj; balnoj/ 'wild; pertaining to a vi l lage ; busy; i l l ' . Adverbs: /vbmna; ifopla; xaladno; l'oxka; vis*ilo/ 'darkly; warmly; coldly; l ight ly ; cheerfully' . Prepositions: /pas*l'^; pratf/ 'after; against'. b. In paradigms. Noun: /wor ~ warf; woz*ira ~ woz*iri/ ' thief (n. sg. ~ p l ) ; lake (n. sg. ~ p l . ) ' . Verb: /sutffr ~ surd ~ Suvfs ~ SUVST; xovet? ~ xacd (xocu) ~ xoSis ~ xocim; mahd ~ malfoS (cf.) moisu ~ moSiS/ 86 •to joke (inf. ~ l p . ~ 2p. sg.) ; "to desire (lp. ~ 2p. sg. ~ l p . p i . ) ; I can ~ you can cf.Iimay ~ you may' /darfal ~ darfala ~ darial'i; padrial ~ padriala; bral ~ brala; tfil ~ p*£la; hnal ~ hnala; srfdl^a ~ sri^las* ~ srial'ls*/ 'annoyed (M. ~ F. ~ p i . ) ; l i f t e d (M. ~ F . ) ; took (M. ~ F . ) ; drank (M. ~ F . ) ; chased (M. ~ F . ) ; removed self (M. ~ F. ~ p l . ) « . The latter group of verb forms in the past tense most lucidly demonstrates the apparent tendency of Dukhobor paradigms when they differ in stress patterning from the Russian. If i t were not for the overabundance of examples with vacillating stress in accordance with Russian patterns, one would be tempted to conclude that columnar stress was characteristic of the Dukhobor Dialect. 87 APPENDIX I NOUN, ADJECTIVE, AND VERB DESINENCES 0.1. Phonologically defined allomorphs not covered by the f o l -lowing statement w i l l be explained by additional phonological statements. A l l phonological changes applicable to phonemes are also applicable to morphemes, although in their pronunciation oft repeated desinences tend to resist phonological pressures to change them. Therefore, wherever possible, only the morphemes found under stress wi l l be provided and their unstressed variants may be determined from phonological data in the main text. 0.2. Morphologically defined allomorphs wi l l be explained by appropriate statements after each l i s t i n g of desinences. 0.3* Por the sake of brevity only desinences w i l l be given and examples w i l l be kept to a bare minimum. 1.0. Substantives. Dukhobor substantives are inflected for gender, number, and case. 1.1. Nouns excluding surnames. 1.11. Feminine declension. 1.111. Paradigms. singular -a ~ -# ' n . ' -u ~ -# ' a . ' -e ~ - i ' g . ' 88 -e ' 1 . , d. -oj ~ - j u ~ -u ' i . ' plural - i ' n . ' - i ~ -# ~ -ej 'a .* -# ~ -ej ~ -iw «g.« -ax '1. • -am 1 d . ' -arfi ~ -rrfi ' i . • 1.112. General statements. In the nominative singular case most feminine nouns (hereafter labelled class PI nouns) end in / - a / , but some (hereafter called P2 nouns) end in /-#/ following a soft consonant. Examples are: /docka, har£, 2?iml'£; noS, losatf, krow/ 'daughter, mountain, land; night, horse, blood' . In the accusative singular, class PI nouns end in / - u / and P2 nouns in /-#/. In the genitive singular, PI nouns end in / - e / or / - i / and P2 nouns in / - e / . In the instrumental singular, class PI nouns end in / - o j / , while P2 nouns end in / - j u / and in some cases simply in / - u / . In the accusative plural , inanimate PI and P2 nouns end in / - i / , animate PI nouns in /-#/, and animate P2 nouns in / - e j / . In the genitive plural , PI nouns end in /-#/ although PI noun stems ending in a soft consonant may also take / - i w / , and P2 nouns end in / - e j / . 89 In the instrumental plural , Pl and F2 nouns end in /-anfi/ although F2 nouns in which the f i r s t syllable of the desinence is unstressed may also end in / - r i i / . 1.12. Masculine declension. 1.121. Paradigms. singular -# * -a ~ -o ' n . ' -# ~ -a ~ - u ' a . ' -a ~ -u ~ -e ~ - i ' g . ' -u ~ -e ' 1 . ' -om ~ -oj ' i . ' plural - i ~ -a 1 n . ' - i ~ -ej ~ -ow ** -# 1 a . ' -ow ~ -ej ~ -# ' g . ' -ax ' 1. • -am ' d . ' -anfi 1 i . ' 1.122. General statements. In the nominative singular case, most nouns (hereafter labelled class Ml nouns) end in /-#/, some given names and common nouns (here-after called class M2 nouns) referring to male humans end in / - a / , and a very few nouns (hereafter labelled class M3 nouns) consisting of male given names and the word for ' c h i l d ' end in / - o / . Examples include: /burak, s a r £ j , korf; cteduska, p*eTk*a, sluha*; dfifo, p*ltro/ •beet, barn,.horse; grandfather, Peter (dim.), servant; c h i l d , . Peter' . The desinences of M2 nouns completely coincide with those of animate Pl nouns discussed above and therefore w i l l not be noted below. 90 In the accusative singular, inanimate Ml nouns end in /-#/, and animat e Ml and M3 nouns in / - a / . In the genitive singular, Ml and M3 nouns end in / - a / although M3 nouns representing substances capable of subdivision may also take / - u / . In the locative singular, inanimate Ml nouns end in / - u / or / - e / while animate Ml and M3 nouns take / - u / . In the instrumental singular, Ml and M3 nouns end in / -om/. In the nominative plural , with the exception of a few nouns ending in / - a / which must be stressed, a l l nouns end in / - i / . In the genitive plural , animate Ml and M3 noun stems ending in a soft consonant take / - e j / , and the remaining Ml nouns end in /-ow/. 1.13* "Neuter" declension. A vestigial neuter gender category continues a fragmentary existence in the Dialect but, as a rule, "neuter" nouns with unstressed and stressed endings (except in the nominative, accusa-tive and genitive cases) are usually declined as inanimate Fl nouns, although the latter may also be declined as inanimate Ml nouns (except in the nominative and accusative). A few examples are: /akno, ^ i l o ; st£da, sabr^rija/ 'window? vi l lage ; herd, meeting'. No neologisms in the neuter gender were observed. 1.2. Surnames. 1.21. Feminine declension. 1.211. Paradigms. 91 singular -a 'n.« -u ' a . ' -aj ' g . , 1., d . , i . ' plural - i ' n . ' -ax ~ - i x ' a . , g . , 1.' -am ~ -im • d . ' -anfi ~ -infi ' i . * 1.212. Statement. In the non-nominative plural cases the respective allomorphs are in free fluctuation. E . g . , /padmafowax ~ padmafowix/. 1.22. Masculine declension. 1.221. Paradigms. singular -# ' n . ' -a ~ -awa ' a . , g . ' -am ~ -im . 11 . , i . 1 -amu ~ -u •d. ' The plural paradigm of the masculine declension coincides with that of the feminine paradigm. 1.222. General statements. In the accusative and genitive singular cases, surnames ending in /-ow-/ take / - a / , while those ending in / - i n - / take /-awa/ or / - a / . E . g . , /wanjowa; maxlfinawa ~ martfina/. 92 In the locative and instrumental singular cases, /-am/ and / - i m / occur in free fluctuation, although in the locative the former a l l o -morph i s used for surnames ending in / -ow-/ . In the dative singular, surnames ending in /-ow-/ and in / - i n - / take /-amu/ while the latter type may also take / - u / . 2.0. Adjectives. Dukhobor adjectives are inflected for gender, number, and case and must agree in a l l three with the nouns they modify. 2.1. Feminine declension. 2.11. Paradigms. singular -aja ' n . ' -uju ~ -aju ' a . ' -oj ' g . , 1., d . , i . ' plural - i j a ~ - a j i ' n . ' - i j a ~ - i x ~ -ax ' a . ' - i x ~ -ax ' g . , 1. 1 -im ~ -am ' d . ' —infi ~ -anfi ' i . ' 2.12. Statements. In the accusative singular case, adjectives with stressed desinences take / - u j u / while adjectives having unstressed desinences and stems ending in a hard consonant, take / - a j u / more frequently than / - u j u / . 93 In the nominative plural , adjectives with stressed desinences take / - i j a / while those having unstressed desinences and stems ending in a hard consonant, take / - a j i / . In the accusative plural , adjectives with stressed desinences modifying an animate noun take / - i x / , or / - i x / ~ /-ax/ i f desinences are unstressed, while a l l other adjectives end in / - i j a / or / - a j i / in accordance with their nominative plural . In the genitive, locative, dative, and instrumental plural cases, the alternate /-ax, -am, -am*i/ allomorphs respectively occur in free fluctuation in adjectives having unstressed desinences and stems ending in a hard consonant. 2.2. Masculine declension. 2.21. Paradigms. singular -oj -oj ~ -owa -owa -om ~ -im -omu -im ~ -am «n. • ' a . ' ' g . ' •1.' •d.« ' i i ' The plural paradigm of this declension coincides with the plural feminine paradigm. 2.22. Statements. In the accusative singular case adjectives modifying animate nouns take /-owa/ and a l l others take / - o j / . In the locative singular both allomorphs occur in free f luctu-ation even in stressed desinences. In the instrumental singular, only adjectives having unstressed desinences and stems ending in a hard consonant end in either / - i m / or /-am/. Stressed desinences always end in / - i m / . 2.3. "Neuter" declension. "Neuter" adjectival endings are far less common than "neuter" nouns and practically non-existent. Even neuter nouns with stressed desinences are most frequently modified by adjectives in the feminine paradigms although the old non-feminine genitive singular does recur. This may be illustrated by the following examples: /bal'sdja akno, baPsowa aknaj kazl'fnuju malako, kazffnawa malak£; bal'Soja cfela/ •big window (n. , g. sg.) ; goat's milk (a. , g. sg.) ; great thing' . 3.0. Verbs. Dukhobor verbs are inflected for person, number, and tense. 3.1. Present tense conjugation. 3.11. Paradigms. singular •u ' l p . ' -os 15 '2p.« '3p. ' - o f ~ •it? ~ -a plural -om am l p . ' -ot?a i1?a '2p. ' '3p. ' -ut ~ - a f 3.12. Statements. Two classes of verbs exist in the Dialect and wil l be hereafter 95 referred to as class VI and class V2. Class VI takes the desinences / - u , -os, -of , -om, -oifa, -u1?/ while class V2 takes / - u , - i § , - i f ~ -a , -im, -ifa, -af ~ - u f / . The verbs /rfesM?, ctelatf, pakawa"tf; hri<£atf/ 'to carry, to do, to pack; to look' are inf ini t ive forms i l lustrat ing both classes. In the third person singular and plural , V2 verbs with stressed desinences end in /-if/ and / - a f / respectively, but V2 verbs with unstressed desinences end in / - a / alternating infrequently wi th /-if/ and in / - u f / respectively. Compare /ztfotf/ and /hl*i<ffi?; v'fd'a ~ vfctii?/ 'he burns ( i t ) ; he looks; he sees'. 3 .2. Past tense conjugation. In past tense forms person distinction lapses and one for gender occurs in the singular. 3.21. Paradigms. singular : -# ~ -l-# «M. (a l l persons)' -1-a 'P. (a l l persons)' plural - l ' - i ' ( a l l genders and persons)' 3.22; Statements. The derivational morpheme / - l - / i s absent when i t would occur after another consonant and not be followed by a vowel. E . g . , /rios, riisla1/ 'he carried; she carried' . In addition, / - ! - / i s palatalized by the plural formant / - i / . 3.3. Future tense conjugation. 96 Depending on the aspect of the verb the future tense is formed in two ways. 3.31. Future tense paradigm < verb in the perfective aspect. Verbs in the perfective aspect take present tense endings to form the future tense. Examine /sazhd, saStfol?/ 'I shall burn ( i t ) ; he wil l burn ( i t ) * . 3.32. Future tense paradigm < verb in the imperfective aspect. Verbs in the imperfective aspect use the present tense conju-gation of the verb 'to be' plus the infini t ive of the verb in question to form the future tense. For example, note /bridu vid£l?, bucPa vida1-!?/ 'I shall see; he w i l l see'. 3.4. Imperative conjugation. In two general imperative forms the tense is present or future by implication depending on whether the aspect i s imperfective or perfective respectively. Only the second person is used in imperatives. 3.41. Paradigms. singular - i - -# 3.42. Statements. In the singular and plural forms of the imperative, stressed desinences end in / - i / and / - U f a / while unstressed desinences end in /-#/ and /-i?a/ respectively. Compare /hl'icff, hl'icfflfa/ and /pakiij, paktfjifa/ 'look', (sg., p i . ) ; pack I (sg., p i ) ' . A third imperative type includes the speaker of the command. Its form is simply the f i r s t person plural of either a perfective plural - i f a ~ -# 97 or imperfective verb. An example is /pajctom/ ' l e t ' s go' . Other miscellaneous imperative types also exist. 3«5« Reflexive verb. Reflexive verbs possess a l l the common tense and imperative conjugations of regular verbs. 3.51. Present tense conjugation. 3.511. Paradigms. singular -u-s"a ~ -u-s*" -o^-s*a ~ -os'-s'i ~ is"-s*a ~ -is'-s'i -ot-sa ~ - i t - s a plural -om-s*a ~ -om-^i ~ -im-s*a ~ - im-^i -o1?i-s*a ~ -oHi-d ~ - ivi-s 'a ~ -ii?i-s* -ut-sa ~ -at-sa 3.512. Statements. The reflexive desinences above consist of the present tense ending of VI or V2 verbs plus the reflexive particle /-s'a ~ -ii ~ -4 ~ - s a / . Some of the present tense and reflexive suffixes undergo phono-logical changes. Compare /umuw£jitsa; umuw£jims*a ~ umuweijims*!/ 'he washes himself; we wash ourselves'. In the f i r s t person singular and second person plural , the reflexive particle allomorphs / - S a / and / - & / freely fluctuate in both verb classes. •Ipi' ' 2p . ' *3p.' ' l p . ' «2p.' ' 3 p . ' 98 In the second person singular the f inal consonant of the present tense endings of "both verb classes i s completely assimilated to the consonant in the reflexive particle . Allomorphs of the particle freely fluctuate between /-ia./ and /-dl/. This latter fluctuation also occurs in the f i r s t person plural . In the third person singular and plural , the conjunction of the two soft consonants of the present tense and reflexive suffix respec-tively results in the consonantal cluster / - t s - / which is hard only as / c / . 3.52. Past tense conjugation. Past reflexive desinences consist of the regular past tense forms plus the reflexive particle . 3.521. Statements. To the masculine past tense suffixes /-l-#/ either form of the reflexive particle /-il ~ -ia/ may be attached although the f i r s t form is preferred. To the feminine and plural past tense suffixes, either /-ia/ or /-i/ may be attached, as illustrated by /umuwdlis'a ~ umuwali^/ 'they were washing themselves'. 3.53. Future and imperative paradigms. Future and imperative desinences are formed in a manner closely corresponding to the formation of the present and past tense forms. 9 9 APPENDIX II MEANINGS OP TERMS IN THE TABLES OP CHAPTER IV 1.0. Table 6. pap . . . dad I c f . / papa 5 papa's a/ tap . . . a strongly contracted form of /jenta-ba/ kap . . . an onomatopoetic term describing water dripping map . . . a map lap . . . paws (g. p i . ) rap . . . a slave sap . . . a shop zap . . . an onomatopoetic term describing a sudden pouncing upon cap . . . an onomatopoetic term describing a sudden clutching with claws Sap . . . chop (feed) jap . . . a contraction of / j £ - b a / 'I would. . . . * pas . . . a railroad worker's pass tas . . . tub kas . . . treasuries (g. p i . ) nas . . . we (g.-a. p i . ) ras . . . once sas . . . sauce Sas . . . hour was . . . you (g.-a. p i . ) tarn . . . there mam . . . mother! cf . /mama; mamka; mam^sa/ nam . . . we ( d . p i . ) 100 ram . . . window frames (g. p l . ) sam . . . self warn . . . you (d. p l . ) jam . . . hole (g. p l . ) pop . . . priest top . . . he was drowning kop . . . an onomatopoetic term describing digging lop . . . forehead sop . . . an onomatopoetic term describing whispering xop . . . an onomatopoetic term describing a sudden pouncing upon cop . . . an onomatopoetic term describing a sudden clutching with claws cop . . . plug for a pipe or barrel wop . . . a signal for stopping jop . . . he had sexual intercourse pot . . . sweat tot . . . the learned alternant form of / jentaj / kot . . . tomcat not . . . musical note lot . . . a lot (of land) rot . . . mouth sot . . . one hundred (g. p l . ) xot . . . movement wot . . . here I jot . . . iodine karM . . . I humble (tr .) nahil . . . foot (a. sg.) narM . . . animal burrow (a. sg.) sa*ru . . . (a. sg. of a P. given name) sarM . . . I scatter dust 101 saru . . . sphere (d. sg.) sahii . . . footstep (d. sg.) carM . . . czar (d. sg.) 2.0. Table 7« pap . . . dad 1 pan . . . gentleman of leisure pal . . . the anglicised version of the given name /pawlo/ par . . . steam pas . . . a railroad worker's pass paj . . . pie wop . . . a signal for stopping wot . . . here i won . . . he; there I wol . . . 0 1 wor . . . thief wos . . . load woS . . . l i ce (g. sg.) wox . . . an exclamation wow . . . an alternant form of /wop/ woj . . . a command to cry; an exclamation dop . . . strong medicine dom . . . a building for meetings don . . . Don; bottom (g. p i . ) dos . . . rain dox . . . i t (M.) was dying doc . . . daughter ' doj . . . milking Tip . . . i t (M.) used to stick kuk . . . a cook 102 P i l . . . he poured kur . . . chickens (g. p l . ) Pis . . . an expression implying the meaning 'only* Pic . . . faces (g. p l . ) ku5 . . . piles (g. p l . ) 3.0. Table 8. 3.1. I n i t i a l contrasts. pas . . . a railroad worker's pass pop . . . priest bop . . . kidney bean p i l . . . blaze p*il . . . he drank b i l . . . he was b*il . . . he beat tas . . . tub torn . . . volume dom . . . home, building tok . . . threshing floor rok . . . i t (M.) leaked don . . . Don; bottom (g. p l . ) d*on . . . days (g. p l . ) kas . . . treasuries (g. p l . ) kas . . . cereals (g. p l . ) k*a§ . . . cash 3.2. Final contrasts. rap cep cep* slave f l a i l a large chain rat . . . Sit Sit: .Pcilc • • • 4.0. Table 9« mox mai? . . . rial? nox . . . nos . . . rfos . . . dom don won worf 5.0. Table 10. lot l'ot p i l pi l ' 6.0. Table 11. rat r*at par . . . par* . . . 103 glad (from / j a rat/ 'I'm glad') rye (grain) to l ive crab; cancer moss; he was able mother to crush foot (g. p i . ) nose he carried house, building Don; bottom (g. p i . ) he; there 1 smell a lot (of land) ice a blaze dust glad (from / j a rat/ 'I'm glad') a row a pair (g. p i . ) steam i (sg. imp.) 7.0. Table 12. 104 7.1* In i t ia l contrasts. sot . . . one hundred (g. p l . ) sut . . . a suit sat . . . orchard zat . . . hack sok . . . juice s*ok . . . he thrashed aziw^ca . . to answer az*iw£ca . . to' yawn sal . . . . fat (g. p l . ) ssal . . . he urinated ssot . . . h i l l ; account sut . . . a chute sar . . . sphere zar . . . heat p*fSa . . . he writes p*fSSa . . . food zaf- . . . cook 1 (impf. sg. imp.) Szar* . . . cook 1 (pf. sg. imp.) xot . . . motion xut . . . feet (g. p l . ) xor . . . choir hor . . . mountains (g. p l . ) 7.2. Final contrasts. wos . . . wasps (g. p l . ) dus . . . ace l'es . . . he crawled; forest Pes* . . . crawl 1 (sg. imp.) woS . . . l i ce (g. p l . ) 105 dus wox dux 8 . 0 . Table 1 3 . cop Sop Sox jox s'p'ic sViS 9 . 0 . Table 1 4 . wot . . . here I wos . . . a load wbs . . . be conveyed jot . . . iodine l'ew . . . l ion l'ej . . . pour 1 (sg. imp.) soul (g. pL) an exclamation spirit an onomatopoetic term describing a sudden clutching with claws plug for a pipe or barrel a sneezing spell swithes (g. p i . ) spokes (g. p i . ) a speech. 106 LITERATURE CITED Avanesov, R. I. Fonetika Sovremennogo Russkogo Literaturnogo Jazyka. Izdatel'stvo Moskovskogo Universiteta, 1956. Avanesov, R. I. O&erki Russkoj Dialektologii . Moscow, UCPEDGIZ, 1949. Avanesov, R. I. Russkoe Literaturnoe Proizno§enie. Moscow, UCPEDGIZ, 1958. De Bray, R. G. A. Guide to the Slavonic Languages. London, Dent and Sons, 1951. Gvozdev, A. N. Sovremennyj Russkij Literaturnyj Jazyk. Moscow, UCPEDGIZ, 1958, v o l . I. Il'inskaja, I . S. "Nabljudenija Nad Govorom Russkix Pereselencev v Zakavkaz*e. "Materialy i Issledovanija po Russkoj Dialektologii, ed. S. P. Obnorskij and others, Moscow and Leningrad, Akademii Nauk S.S.S.R., 1949, v o l . I. Jones, Daniel. The Phoneme, Its Nature and Use. Cambridge, Heffner and Sons, 1950. Maude, A. A Peculiar People, The Doukhobors. New York and London, Funk and Wagnalls, 1904. Snesarov, V. The Dukhobors in Brit ish Columbia. Vancouver, University of Brit ish Columbia, 1931. Suxorev, V.A. Istorija Duxoborcev. North Kildonan, Manitoba, Canada, J . Regehr, 1944. Vinogradov, V . , ed. and others. Grammatika Russkogo Jazyka. Moscow, 1952-54, v o l . I. Wright, J . F. C. Slava Bohu, The Story of the Dukhobors. New York and Toronto, Farrar and Rhinehart, Inc., 1940. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0105962/manifest

Comment

Related Items