Kā loka darbības vārdus ēst un gulēt dažās dziļajās latgaliskajās Izloksnēs

This article compares the use of the verbs to eat and to sleep in four deep Latgalic sub-dialects of the High Latvian dialect — Ziemers and Veclaicene from North-East Vidzeme and Dricāni and Gaigalava from Latgale. When studying the deep Latgalic sub-dialects, one faces the challenge that the same linguistic unit tends to differ, both phonetically and morphologically, not only within one dialect or group of sub-dialects, but also within one sub-dialect or neighbouring sub-dialects. Typically, sub-dialect dictionaries and dialect atlases provide the transposed form as the basic unit, thereby losing the original specific phonetic and morphological form of the variant spoken in the sub-dialect in published sources. Furthermore, The Program for Data Collection for the Latvian Dialect Atlas (LVDApr, 1954) does not require a full paradigm of present tense forms for many verbs, such as the word to sleep. This article identifies the common and distinct phonetic and morphological characteristics of the verbs to eat and to sleep, which could be useful in determining both isoglosses and regiolect boundaries for future sub-dialect studies. The language material was obtained through analyzing the responses to questions of the survey of the Latvian Dialect Atlas. Additionally, the authors used material collected by themselves and other recent sources. By comparing the verb forms of to eat and to sleep in the simple present, past, and future tenses, as well as the supine forms in the Ziemers, Veclaicene, Dricani, and Gaigalava sub-dialects, the authors identify both common features of the deep Latgalic sub-dialects of the High Latvian dialect and significant phonetic and morphological phenomena that differentiate these sub-dialects from one another. Descriptions of specific sub-dialects, represented as language units, with precise phonetic transcriptions and the inclusion of both contemporary and earlier versions of these descriptions, are crucial for developing a more comprehensive characterisation of the dialects. For a more thorough linguistic analysis, it is important to obtain language material from respondents of different ages, as well as speakers of the same sub-dialect residing in different locations, each with their own linguistic experiences.