The author states that there are in our vocabulary three, and only three, classes of semantic units: a) predicates, i.e. generic concepts – the result of our conceptualization of the world; they represent more than 90% of the vocabulary; b) operators of reference – a small, almost closed set bounding predicates to their concrete denotates; c) proper names, which are by defi nition referentially bound and are object of research of a specialized linguistic discipline. Thus, the main tasks of our grammar are (1) to defi ne and to describe the scope of the grammaticalization in the language in question and (2) to present the semantic classification of predicates, the description of their – bound and/or free – functioning in the text included.
The author defends the thesis that language is an attribute of a nation and as such it is offi cially protected by the international legal system irrespective of the number of its speakers; thus, there is no such phenomenon as a “little language”. Linguistic minorities speak their mother languages or some dialectal variants of those languages
The text is an overview of the first volume of the lexical atlas of the Russian folk dialects. It presents modern cartographic methods used in the volume and types of maps contained therein. In order to better present the volume, one exemplary map is analysed, indicating its advantages and drawbacks. In conclusion the richness of the Russian dialectal lexical material, which was precisely geographically located, is stressed. This is the biggest merit of the atlas.
The article discusses the book Zmiana perspektywy. Gawęda nie tylko językoznawcza [Change of perspective. More than a tale of linguistics] by Zuzanna Topolińska (Cracow 2015). The author of this text emphasizes that the word gawęda [tale] in the book’s subtitle is misleading, given that, despite the style of language used in the book, Topolińska discusses important issues of a linguistic and intercultural nature. In her short essays in the fi rst part of the book Topolińska addresses the organizational structure of philology studies in Poland and Macedonia, she confronts the Polish and Macedonian approach to the dialectgeneral language relationship, she talks about language standards, about the differences between politeness in Poland and Macedonia, as well as the attitude towards women and the outlook toward religion in both countries. In the second part of the book Topolińska takes up lexical issues, giving examples of how under the infl uence of spiritual culture certain words in Polish and Macedonian that derive from the same core have taken on a different meaning. The author of the article concludes that this short and very personal book by Topolińska fulfi lls its task and subsequently alters his view on the linguistic and non-linguistic world of the Slavs.
The jubilee volume “Slavica Wratislaviensia”, CLIX: Wyraz i zdanie w językach słowiańskich (8), is a collection of contributions by pupils, collegues, and friends, dedicated to Professor Jan Sokołowski slavist of Wroclaw University, on the occasion of his 70th birthday. The publication topics covered subjects connected with researches on word and sentence in Slavic languages, their description, comparative and contrastive studies, and translation. They take up important current topics, reliably and comprehensively analyze problems that have not been noticed before or have not been solved yet. Due to the selection of topics and high scientific level (most authors are renowned linguists) the volume should be considered as representative for contemporary Slavic linguistics.
This paper discusses the defi nitions of the glottal stop encountered in the literature. The term glottal stop appears in many works in the field of linguistics (or, more precisely, phonetics and phonology), phoniatrics, voice emission and speech therapy. However, this term may be understood in various ways. Generally speaking, in speech therapy, a glottal stop is defined, for example, as: 1. a form of phonation; 2. a type of pseudo articulation. In phonetics the term is referred to as: 1. a form of voicing initiation; 2. a type of articulation; 3. both the type of articulation and the type of phonation. In the light of the definitions quoted in this work, the answer to the question posed in the title of this paper is neither simple nor clear
The article deals with 8 etymologies of dialectal lexemes (along with their variant forms and derivatives) in three dialects of Croatian: drlo and drlog ‘mess, old things scattered’, krtog ‘lair; mess’, madvina (medvina) ‘lair, den’, mlađ / mlaj ‘silt’, sporak / sporǝk ‘hill, slope’, tušek ‘empty grain; undeveloped corn cob’, zavet i zavetje ‘sheltered place’, žužnja ‘leather shoelace; string; ribbon; belt’.
Launched in Cracow in 1908, Slavic Yearbook ~ Revue Slavistique is one of the oldest journals of Slavic linguistics in Europe. Volume 50 (1997) features a bibliography of the journal covering the years 1908–1997 and the bibliography presented above, covering the years 1998–2018, is its continuation. The bibliography includes the following sections: 1. The composition of Editorial Committees and Boards; 2. Articles, dissertations, notes and reports (in an alphabetical order according to the names of the authors in their original versions, all names written in Cyrillic have also their transliterated equivalents); 3. Reviews (in an alphabetical order according to the names of the authors, titles of reviewed works or titles of reviews); 4. Miscellany (obituaries, memoirs and editorial notes); 5. Name index including names of the authors of articles, notes, reports and reviews, authors and editors of reviewed books, and names mentioned in the titles of works included in the Bibliography. For the last 20 years 130 Polish and foreign authors have published their articles in Slavic Yearbook. The journal has published 165 articles and dissertations in various areas of Slavic linguistics, 110 reviews and write-ups (including comprehensive reviews discussing several works on related subjects and multi-authored monographs) and 16 memoirs and obituaries.
This article analyzes the common Slavic linguistic atlas maps (OLA). Assessing the preliminary results of the OLA project, the author focused her attention on the new linguistic geography data given in the Atlas, and the evolution of some units and Proto-Slavic dialect differentiation of Slavia.
The article offers an insight into the Slavonic contemporary etymological research and its new possibilities. Modern etymology has witnessed a seachange that can be referred to as a digital breakthrough. Thanks to the Internet and electronic media the etymologists today have easier access to historicallinguistic, dialectal and onomastic sources as well as to etymological dictionaries. They also better access to many monographs and studies. Moreover, today the etymologist has no problems making use of analogous materials published in foreign languages, the obtaining of which in the past had posed a major problem. This will clearly accelerate progress in etymological research, thereby opening up new vistas for etymology. We can research effectively the origins of dialectal and colloquial words as well as words no longer in use, a task which had earlier been very difficult.
The paper presents an analysis of the voicing of the phoneme /v/ in modern spoken Macedonian. The phoneme /v/ in the standard Macedonian language is classifi ed as a fricative, but some of its characteristics separate it from the other phonemes in this group. This is due to the fact that this phoneme was once a sonorant. In a part of the Macedonian dialects this phoneme is pronounced with marked voicing to this day. This phenomenon is then refl ected in the pronunciation of standard Macedonian. Our analysis is based on a selected corpus of examples that have been spoken by speakers from various dialect origins, in order to assess the any differences in pronouncing of the phoneme /v/ when placed in different phoneme contexts in the word.
The use of Church Slavonic texts as resources for the study of the history of Macedonian language requires a serious deep level analysis in order to defi ne the structure of the Church Slavonic language system on all its level. The structure of the literary language can be differentiated in several types of features: specifi c literary features unknown in the dialectal language; hybrid features, i.e. features based on dialectal grounds but developed in Old Slavonic in a specifi c way; dialectal features of various origins, differentiated chronologically or locally. The Macedonian Recension of the Church Slavonic language from its gradual beginning during the 11th century, especially in the second half, reaches its full development in the 12th century, when there is a consolidation of the basic norms of the Macedonian Church Slavonic literacy. The consolidation of these norms is connected and in continuity with the Old Slavonic Glagolitic period in the work of the Ohrid literary center. The paper presents representative examples that characterize the language of the Macedonian Old Church Slavonic literacy on orthographic, phonological, morpho-syntactic and lexical level.
One of the diffi culties of Slavic etymology which also occur in works devoted to the reconstruction of Proto-Slavic vocabulary, is the problem associated with distinguishing words, with an identical or similar sound, of native origin, and borrowings. The article considers four situations of this kind. The reconstruction of the allegedly Proto-Slavic word *kova one adduced the dialectal Croatian kȏva ‘quarry’, whereas it is a local phonetic variant of the well-attested noun kȃva ‘quarry; pit, trench; mine’, borrowed from the Italian (and Venetian) cava ‘quarry; mine; pit; cave rn’. Among the descendants of the Proto-Slavic *kojiti ‘to soothe, to alleviate’ one included the dialectal Croatian kojȉti ‘to wind a rope, to haul in a net’, whereas it is a fi shing term borrowed from the dialectal Italian coir ‘to wind a rope’; in this context one considered the dialectal Kajkavian Croatian kojiti ‘to breast-feed; to cultivate, to nourish’ (which heretofore was unfamiliar to Croatian scholarship), the actual descendant of the Proto-Slavic *kojiti. The dialectal Croatian lȕća ‘a lump of earth’ was said to be derived from the earlier *glut-ja from the Proto-Slavic *gluta ‘a dense lump of something; protuberance; knag’, whereas the geography indicates that it is more likely a Romance borrowing which is etymologically related to the Latin luteum ‘mud’. In this context one considered the Čakavian lȕća ‘skull’ and ‘a species of a nocturnal moth (death’s head hawkmoth, Acherontia atropos), which is probably related with this Romance borrowing. Apart from the unquestionable Proto-Slavic *klǫpь ‘bench’ one also reconstructed the proto-forms *klupь *klupa, whereas the Slavic words, which were supposed to indicate original forms featuring the root -u- are borrowings from German: Kashubian klëpa ‘a sandbank which protrudes above the sea level’ from the German Klippe ‘coastal rock’, Croatian klupa ‘an instrument which is used to measure the diameter of a tree trunk’ from the German Kluppe, which has the same meaning in the technical language.