Slav 20100 lecture_slides_week_02

385 views

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
385
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Slav 20100 lecture_slides_week_02

  1. 1. 10/11/2012 SLAV 20100/30100 genetic affiliation of SlavicIntro to Slavic Linguistics higher-order protolanguages: Autumn 2012 1. Swedish + Danish + Norwegian ? Yaroslav Gorbachov English + Dutch + German ? gorbachov@uchicago.edu 2. Scandinavian + West Germanic ? 3. Germanic + Slavic + Celtic + Greek… ? ” Indo-European! other branches of Indo-European? č ę genetic affiliation of Slavic genetic affiliation of Slavic source: http://www.verbix.com/documents/pie/ 1
  2. 2. 10/11/2012 genetic affiliation of Slavic closest relative: Baltic maximum spread of Baltic hydronymshow close are the IE languages? E. sister OCS sestrá E. brother Cz. bratr, OCS brátrŭ E. widow OCS vĭdová E. two OCS dŭvá E. three OCS trĭje E. sit OCS sěd- E. nose OCS nosŭ E. (eye)brow OCS brŭv- source: Marija Gimbutas, The Balts, London, 1963 closest relative: Baltic closest relative: Baltic1. lexical similarities (both pan-IE and, more OCS glavá Lith. galvá ‘head’ importantly, exclusively BSl.) OCS rǫká Lith. rankà ‘hand’2. morphology (structure of roots and affixes) OR pĭrstŭ Lith. pir͂štas ‘finger’ OCS lédŭ Lith. lẽdas ‘ice’3. syntax (rules for constructing phrases and OCS želězo Lith. geležìs ‘iron’ sentences) R. bába Lith. bóba ‘old woman’4. prosody (rhythm, stress, and intonation 150+ BSl. words not found in any other IE patterns) language, mostly referring to nature (flora, fauna, landscape, weather, etc.) 2
  3. 3. 10/11/2012the nature of B.-Slavic affinity Indo-European family treeSource: Van Wijk, Die baltischen und slavischen Akzent- und Intonations- systeme (1923) conservatism of BalticOCS synъ = synŭ son < PSl. *synŭ < Early PSl. *sūnus Lith. sūnùs survey of the literary/standardgen.sg.?OCS synu of (a/the) son, sons Slavic languages < PSl. *synu < Early PSl. *sūnåus Lith. sūnaũsvoc.sg.: OCS synu son! = Lith. sūnaũ son! 3
  4. 4. 10/11/2012 Old Church Slavonic Constantine (Cyril) & Methodiusthe first literary (liturgical and ecclesiastic)language of the Slavs; which branch of Slavic? Moravians (WS) Bulgarians, Serbs (SS) Russians (ES)genetic affiliation of the lang. of most mss.: South East Slavic (recall *tj > št, *dj > žd) i.e., the Bulgarian-Macedonian subgrouptime frame: 9-11th c. monument to SS Cyril & Methodius in Khanty-Mansiysk, Russia credit: Vitaly Moskalyuk Church Slavonic cover term for the local varieties (recensions) of OCS (Bulg., Serb., Russ., Rum., etc.) the supranational literary language of Slavia Orthodoxa was in use long after the 11th c. used for both ecclesiastic and non-ecclesiastic aspects of literary production has left an indelible mark on the Russian literary language (lexicon, бегущий vs. бегучий, etc.) 4
  5. 5. 10/11/2012 the scripts: GlagoliticCodex Zographensis, 10-11th c.; fnd.: Bulgarian Zograf Monastery, Mount Athossource: А. М. Селищев, Старославянский язык, ч. 2, Москва 1952, стр. 8source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glagolitic_alphabet the scripts: Cyrillic Ostromirovo Evangelie, Russia, 1056-1057 source: http://www.nlr.ru/exib/Gospel/ostr/index.html 5
  6. 6. 10/11/2012 Bosnian / Croatian / Serbianformerly known as Serbo-Croatianspeakers: ca. 15 millionfour main dialects: Štokavian (štokavski) – što, šta Kajkavian (kajkavski) – kaj Čakavian (čakavski) – ča original distribution of BCS dialects before the 16th c. migrations Torlak (torlački) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0tokavian_dialect Bosnian / Croatian / Serbian Bosnian / Croatian / SerbianŠtokavian is further subdivided into: prior to early 19th c.: Ekavian (ekavski) – PSl. *ě > e Serbia: Serb. recension of Church Slavonic (I)jekavian ((i)jekavski) – PSl. *ě > (i)je Dalmatia: old Glagolitic tradition since 15th c. – a Čakavian-based Ikavian (ikavski) – PSl. *ě > i written languagecf. reka, les, mera vs. rijeka, lijes, mjera 1818: Serbian folklorist Vuk Karadžić reformsNB: modern BCS is a pluricentric language (it the Cyrillic alphabet and adopts the principlehas several written standards) of phonetic spelling (piši kao što govoriš)all are based on the Neoštokavian dialect 1868: vukovica is officially adopted in Serbia 6
  7. 7. 10/11/2012 Bosnian / Croatian / Serbian Bosnian / Croatian / Serbian 1836: Ljudevit Gaj, Đuro Daničić, and a few some exx. of lexical differences btw. S and C: other Croatian writers abandon the local jul vs. srpanj (← srp) Čakavian-based norm and adopt Štokavian as the new standard oktobar vs. listopad (← list, padati) 1850: Serbian and Croatian linguists sign the fabrika vs. tvornica (← tvoriti) Vienna Literary Agreement settling on Štok. as muzika vs. glazba (← glas) the base for a common SC literary language advokat vs. odvjetnik (← odvjet?) both Roman gajevica & Cyrillic vukovica, the fudbal vs. nogomet (← noga, metati) ekavian & ijekavian pronunciation norms, and lexical differences are recognized as admissible Glagoljica in Croatia Glagoljica in Croatia Hrvoje’s Missal (1404) & Prince Novak’sthe Baška Tablet (Bašćanska ploča), ca. 1100; found: Baška, Krk island, Missal (1368) sources:Croatia source: http://www.croatianhistory.net/etf/baska.html http://www.croatianhistory.net/etf/et03.html http://www.croatianhistory.net/etf/lika.html#novak 7
  8. 8. 10/11/2012 the first printed Glagolitic the Zagreb Cathedral book (Missal), 1483, Croatia source: http://www.croatianhistory.net/etf/ et03.html source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glagolitic_alphabet phonology multiple palatal/palatalized consonants ("soft") consonants: some salient characteristics P. koń, BCS konj (коњ), R. конь (vs. R. кон) of Slavic languages minimal pair! /n/ and /nj/ are contrastive!) postalveolar sibilants: š [ʃ], ž [ʒ](a sketch of Slavic typology) Cz. šiška, žába; R. шишка, жаба + multiple affricates: ʒ [dzj], c [tsj], č [tʃ] Cz. čas, celý; R. час, целый; OCS ʒělo 8
  9. 9. 10/11/2012 phonology phonologysome "funny" vowels: late Proto-Slavic and early historical Slavic (OCS, ě (yat) ― [æ], [ie] (depending on the lg.) Old Russ., etc.) were characterized by y [ɨ] 1. law of open syllables (syllables should be open) + nasal vowels (OCS + P.): OCS mǫžь, P. mąż Old Russ. ратьникъ [ra.tĭ.nji.kŭ] > R. ратник [rat.njik]multiple morphophonemic alternations k:č, k:c, g:ž, x:š, s:š, o:a: 2. syllabic synharmony (syllables should be synharmonic: i.e., every sound within a syllable R. просить : спрашивать should have the same tonality – high or low) U. рука : в руцi P. ręka : w ręce Old Russ. поѥши [pɔ.jɛ.ʃi] OCS rek-ǫ, reč-eši, rě-xъ, rьc-i, rok-ъ > R. поёшь [pǝ.jɔʃ ] prosody morphology rich inflectional morphology (many morphologicalfree and mobile stress (minus West Slavic + M.): contrasts expressed by suffixes + endings): cf. R. головá : гóлову : голóв; robust case systems (NSl., SWSl.) ношý : нóсишь two adjective forms (short + long)pitch accent (Proto-Slavic + BCS): two-three numbers, three genders… acute, circumflex ― inherited from BSl., many tenses (SESl.) three moods cf. Lithuanian! verb aspects (perfective + imperfective)vowel quantity/length (BCS + Cz.); uni-/multidirectional (aka determinate/indeterm.) lost or transformed to vowel height verbs: R. нести : носить; лететь : летать, elsewhere (e.g., P. ó, P. dial. å, ė, R. dial ô) Cz. nést : nosit, letět : létat; P. lecieć : latać) 9
  10. 10. 10/11/2012 morphology syntax "free" word order (the word order is determinedmultiple noun + verb classes: by pragmatic factors such as topic and focus) P. gen. brat-a vs. siostr-y "scrambling" (in the sense discontinuity of P. inst. brat-em vs. siostr-ą constituents resulting in a crossing of lines in the R. 2.sg. pres. нес-ёшь vs. нос-ишь tree structure!)"fusional" (endings may carry multiple functions): R. в (его) дом-ах in (his) houses vs. Tatar торак-лар-(ын)-да idem or Georg. sakhl-eb-ši in houses новую книгу читаю новую читаю книгу syntax syntaxbut not so free within constituents (e.g., within examples of clitics (Bg.):NPs): Вчера Петко ми го даде. R. человек слова (noun + adnominal genitive) yesterday Petko me.DAT it gave R. честный человек (modifier + head noun) Ти си му ги показвал.not so free in general in Bg. and M.! you have him.DAT them shownoutright restricted so far as clitics are concerned Си му гиi дал ли паритеi? have.2.SG. him.DAT them given Q money.THEcomplex systems of (verb-adjacent) pronominal +verbal auxiliary clitics in WSl.+SSl. (obj. doubling!) 10
  11. 11. 10/11/2012 syntaxextensive agreement system subject/verb AGR: дети читают noun/modifier AGR: новую книгуgenitive of negation: R. они не едят мясаfinite subordinated (embedded) clausesintroduced by a clause-initial conjunctionsparticiples may be used for relative clausesWSl. + SSl. are largely null subject languages (butagain, ESl. which happen to lack overt presenttense copula are not) writing Slavic down what are the difficulties? more sounds than there are Rom. characters problematic areas: Slavic alphabets marking "soft" (palatalized/palatal cons.) "(ortho)graphic" strategies rendering postalveolars: š [ʃ], ž [ʒ] rendering affricates: ʒ [dzj], c [tsj], č [tʃ ]… some vowels: jers, jat, /ɨ/, nasal vowels + prosodic features (length, pitch, etc.) 11
  12. 12. 10/11/2012 writing Slavic down writing Slavic downFreising Fragments, Old Slovene (late 10th c. AD) Freising Fragments, Old Slovene (late 10th c. AD)Eccę bi detd nas ne zegresil te u veku Ešče bi děd(ъ) naš ne sъgrěšil(ъ) tъ vъ věkugemu be siti starosti ne prigemlióki jemu by žiti starosti ne prijьmlǫči writing Slavic downFreising Fragments, Old Slovene (late 10th c. AD)If our forefather had not sinned, he would havelived forever without growing old 12
  13. 13. 10/11/2012 writing Slavic down writing Slavic downGlagolitic: Cyrillic: Glagolitic: Cyrillic:¶ = ž [ʒ] ¶ ¶ = ž [ʒ] ¶È = š [ʃ] È È = š [ʃ] È °=ΑÇ = č [tʃ] Y Ç = č [tʃ] Y ²=ΒÎ = c [ts] Æ Î = c [ts] Æ ³=Γ@ = ě [æ] or [ie] @ the rest are Greek @ = ě [æ] or [ie] @ ´=Δ’ = ę [ɛ̃]  ’ = ę [ɛ̃]  ¸=Η™ = ǫ [ɔ̃] ™ ™ = ǫ [ɔ̃] ™ ¿=ΠÊ = ъ [ʊ̆ ] Ê Ê = ъ [ʊ̆ ] Ê Ä=ΦÌ = ь [ɪ ̆] Ì Ì = ь [ɪ ̆] Ì Å=Χ etc.Ë (ъ + i) = y [ɨ] or [ɯ] Ë (ъ + i) Ë (ъ + i) = y [ɨ] or [ɯ] Ë (ъ + i) marking post-alveolar cons. marking "softness"the post-alveolar affricates and sibilants Czech:inherited from Proto-Slavic: *š *ž *č *šč t d Ť Ď ň Ň dábel, kůň, daň, daňový ráj [ɲɔ]Russian: ш ж ч [tɕ] щ [ɕtɕ] > [ɕ:] but necitlivý vs. něco [ɲɛ]; dým vs. dimenze [ɟi]Bulgarian: ш ж ч щ [ɕtɕ] > [ɕt] > [ʃt] Polish (+ Sorbian/Lusatian):BCS Cyrillic: ш ж ч [tʃ] шт + ћ [tɕ] ђ [dʑ] џ nie wiem [ɲɛ vjɛm]; konia [kɔɲɑ]BCS Roman: š ž č št + ć đ dž koń [kɔɲ]; coś [tsɔsj] > [tsɔɕ] (laminal palatalized)Czech: š ž č št Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian:Polish: sz [ʂ] ż/rz [ʐ] cz [tʂ] szcz [ʂtʂ] + dż [dʐ] konj, коњ (н + ь) [ɲ]; zemlja, земља (л + ь) [ʎ] 13
  14. 14. 10/11/2012 marking "softness" marking prosodic featuresRussian лог [lɔk] лёг [ljɔk] stress, pitch, and vowel quantity (length): лук [luk] люк [ljuk] Czech á é í ú ů: pták chléb úraz kůň můj vozů сэр [sɛr] сер [sjɛr] Polish ó + dial. å ė: mój ptåk chlėb Slovak Í ŕ (long syllabic liquids): stÍp, vŕba мат [mɑt] мят [mjɑt] BCS stress + quantity + pitchare C and C distinct sounds or positional variants ȁ ȍ … = short falling grȁd mȍra pȁs lȕk(allophones) of the same phoneme? ȃ ȏ … = long falling grȃd mȏra pȃs lȗk / __ С,# кон [kɔn] конь [kɔnj] коньки à ò … = short rising kòsa mòra дан дань á ó … = long rising Kósa mórawhy not mark palatalization on consonants?!! ā ō … = long unstressed (flat intonation) writing the funny vowels two transliterations systems*y [ɨ]: merged with i everywhere (except P., R., B.) the "linguistic" system vs. the LOC systemnasal vowels: OCS ѧ ѫ: пѧть дѫбъ Cyrillic ш ж ч ц х я ю е э й ъ ь Pol. (i)ę (i)ą: pięć dąb but Cz. pět dub, BCS pȇt dȗb, R. пять дуб linguistic š ž č c x ja ju e è j " *ě [æ]/[ie]: LOC sh zh ch ts kh ia iu e ė ĭ " merged w. a, e, i (miasto město mȅsto mȉsto) distinct in R. dial ê, U. i, Jek. BCS (i)je (mjȅsto)*ь *ъ: fell everywhere (vocalized or dropped) 14

×