109
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

The Functional Yield of Prosodic Features in the Patterns of Serbocroatian Dialects

Pages 293-308 | Published online: 04 Dec 2015

  • The examples are taken from A. Belić, “Zamětki po čakavskim govoram”, Izvěstija Otdělenija russkago jazyka i slovesnosti Imperatorskoj akademii nauk, t. XIV (1909) monograph 2.
  • In this paper, accent signs customary in SC accentology will be used. The signs denote: (“) the short falling “accent” (cf. 3.1 about “accents”), (’) the short rising, (˘) the long falling (') and (˜) two historically (and in dialects where they co-occur, also phone- mically) different long rising accents. Signs for falling accents are also utilized for (short or long) accents unmarked as to tone (i.e. where no tone contrast occurs). Stress in dialects without contrastive quantity or tone will be denoted by (') before the stressed vowel.
  • The scope of this paper does not include the complex details concerning the geographical distribution of prosodic features in SC. Geographical information is furnished to a certain extent in my paper “Die Hierarchie der prosodischen Phänomene im serbokroatischen Sprachraum”, Phonetica III (1959) 23–38, and more extensively in my book Die serbokroatischen Dialekte, ihre Struktur und Entwicklung, Bd. 1 (Allgemeines und Die štokavische Dialektgruppe), The Hague: Mouton, 1958. (The second volume is in preparation.) The latter work comprises also a detailed bibliography of the subject. Cf. also the very useful annotated bibliography by M. Hraste, “Bibliografija radova iz dijalektologije, antroponimije, toponimije i hidronimije na području hrvats-koga ili srpskoga jezika”, Hrvatski dijalektološki zbornik I (1956), 387–479.
  • A comparison between sizes of the areas of different structural solutions would also have a typological interest. Certain types could be termed normal (at least within the frame of SC dialects), whereas some others are more or less exceptional. Some of them appear only in regions of contact with neighboring languages (e.g., type 6 in the above diagram).
  • E.g., in the Tamiš region; P. Ivić, Juźnoslovenski filolog XVIII (1949–50), 143.
  • E.g., in Dubrovnik; P. Budmani, Rad LXV (1883), 156–157.
  • Cf. Die serbokroatischen Dialekte 1, 108–110.
  • Examples for dialects with distinctive tone: Group 1—the dialect of Novi (A. Belić, op. cit.).
  • Group 2—many Kajkavian dialects (S. Ivšić, Ljetopis XLVIII [1936], 79ff.).
  • Group 3—the dialect of Dubrovnik (P. Budmani, op. cit.).
  • Group 4—the dialect of Bakar (P. Ivić, Godišnjak Filozofskog fakulteta u Novom Sadu IV [1959] 396).
  • Examples for dialects without distinctive tone:
  • Group 1—the dialect of Piperi (M. Stevanović, Srpski dijalektološki zbornik X [1939], 67ff.).
  • Group 2—the dialect of Vučitrn (G. Elezović, Rečnik kosovsko-metohiskog dijalekta—Srp. dijal. zbornik IV [1932] and V [1935]).
  • Group 3—the dialect of Baška (P. Ivić, Godišnjak Filozofskog fakulteta u Novom Sadu IV [1959], 397).
  • Group 4—the dialect of Mrkovići (L. Vujović, Godišnjak Zadužbine Stojanovića II [1935], 41).
  • Die serbokroatischen Dialekte I, 105.
  • The former situation is normal in most Čakavian and Kajkavian dialects, and in some peripheral Štokavian areas, whereas the latter situation is a characteristic feature of the bulk of Štokavian dialects.
  • E.g., in most dialects of the Kosovo-Resava area, Die serbokroatischen Dialekte I 227.
  • This paper deals exclusively with the functional yield of prosodic features in PHONOLOGICAL PATTERNS of SC dialects. Statistical questions concerning the functional yield of prosodic features in the LEXICON and in the MORPHOLOGY (e.g. the number of minimal pairs) are not included. Nevertheless it is clear that, as a general rule, dialects with a greater role of prosodic distinctions in the pattern, will also contain more minimal pairs differentiated by these distinctions.
  • More details in my paper “Osnovnye puti razvitija serboxorvatskogo vokalizma”, Voprosy jazykoznanija VII (1958), 19.
  • The sign (ˆ) here indicates unstressed short vowels (or unstressed vowels in general, in dialects without quantity outside of stressed position); (-) is the sign for unstressed length.
  • E. Stankiewicz, “Towards a Phonemic Typology of the Slavic Languages”, American Contributions to the Fourth International Congress of Slavicists, The Hague 1958, 315.
  • Figure (A) represents the pattern of some dialects in Posa vina (S. Ivsic, Rad CXCVI 1913, p. 147), and figure (B) the pattern of the dialect of Slum in Istria (according to my notations). In figure (B) the left column represents the stressed vowels, and the right column the unstressed ones. Both figures assume the framework set up in 3.12; a representation in terms of 3.2 would yield more complex diagrams with (+) and (—) signs in the Jakobsonian tradition.
  • I.e., high in prosodic solutions (their number in SC dialects varies between 1 and 7), and low in inherently defined vowels (having a scope of variation from 5 to 10).
  • The diagrams in 4.1 are based on the traditional definition of Standard SC accentuation. This is a controversial interpretation, and if we accept the alternative solution, proposed by R. Jakobson (Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague IV [1931] 175–176), the diagrams have to be rearranged (with a considerable economy in representation): and Here, however, unstressed words (enclitics and proclitics) are not taken into account.
  • Die serbokroatischen Dialekte, 108–110.
  • Enclitics and proclitics are disregarded; (the same is valid for further discussion in 5).
  • The letter a symbolizes here any vowel in function of syllable nucleus. It is easy to cite words confirming the actual occurrence of each particular type, e.g.: grâd ‘town (Nom. sg.)’, grἂd ‘hail (Nom. sg.)’;
  • mâjka ‘mother (Nom. sg.)’, bâbā ‘old women (Gen. pl.)’, bἂbaē ‘old woman (Nom. sg.)’, bἂbē ‘old woman (Gen. sg.)’, bába ‘dad (Nom. sg.)’, bábā ‘dads (Gen. pl.)’, žèna' woman (Nom. sg.)’, žènemacr; ‘woman (Gen. sg.)’;
  • mâjčica ‘mother (Nom. sg.)’, râdīmo ‘we work’, mâjčicē ‘mother (hypocoristic, Gen. sg.)’, mâjčicā ‘mothers (hypocoristic, Gen. pl.)’, jἂbuka ‘apple (Nom. sg.)’, mïslīmo ‘we think’, jἂbukē ‘apple (Gen. sg.)’, jἂbūkā ‘apples (Gen. pl.)’, národa ‘people (Gen. sg.)’, tŕpīmo ‘we tolerate’, národnī ‘popular (Nom. sg. masc.)’, nárōdā ‘peoples (Gen. pl.)’, žènica ‘woman (hypocoristic, Nom. sg.)’, dèvōjka ‘girl (Nom. sg.)’, žènicē ‘woman (hypocoristic, Gen. sg.)’, dèvōjkē ‘girl (Gen. sg.)’, činímo ‘we do’, planínā ‘mountains (Gen. pl.)’, planìna ‘mountain (Nom. sg.)’, planìnē ‘mountain (Gen. sg.)’.
  • Our presentation is based on the material of A. Belić, cf. footnote 1.
  • The otherwise excellent description of Belić fails to inform us whether the type āāἂ occurs in the dialect. If it did, this would raise the number of prosodic possibilities in trisyllabic words to 32.
  • E.g., in Srecka (M. Pavlović, Govor Sretečke Župe = Srpski dijalektološki zbornik VIII [1939]).
  • E.g., in most dialects of East and South Serbia (A. Belić, Dijalekti istočne ijužne Srbije = Srpski dijalektološki zbornik I [1905]).
  • E.g., in the dialect of Baška (P. Ivić, Godišnjak Filozofskog fakulteta u Novom Sadu IV [1959] 397).
  • E.g., in the dialect of Bakar (P. Ivić, ibidem).
  • As far as SC dialects are concerned, this seems to be a purely theoretical case. Although in many SC dialects quantity contrasts occur in a great majority of positions, there is no SC dialect known to us with completely free distinctive quantity, as it is for example in most Hungarian and Czech dialects.
  • There is no known SC dialect satisfying this definition completely, cf. footnote 28.
  • E.g., in the dialect of Kotoriba (S. Ivšić, Ljetopis XLVIII [1936] 81).
  • E.g., in the dialect of Mrkovići (L. Vujović, Godišnjak Zadužbine Stojanovića II [1935] 41).
  • It is significant that, contrary to the case of the phonemic interpretation of the Standard SC accentuation (cf. footnote 18), the formula concerning prosodic possibilities is not controversial. Unlike phonemic solutions, the number of prosodic possibilities is an immediately given reality, not subject to divergences in interpretation.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.