Перейти к главному меню навигации Перейти к основному контенту Перейти к нижнему колонтитулу сайта
Językoznawstwo baner

№ 2/19 (2023)

Artykuły

Noun categories and the survival/replacement of the synthetic case system in Syrinic: Quantitative analysis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.25312/j.6961  [Google Scholar]
Опубликован: 2023-12-18

Аннотация

The subject of this paper is the relationship between the stability of synthetic case system and noun categories in sirinić speech, which is a part of prizren-timoc dialect zone in Serbian language. The existing foundings about synthetic declensions and categories of gender and number have been tested by using corpus and quantitative method in this paper. This research has confirmed that synthetic cases are better preserved in singular than in plural and that they are the most stable in feminine nouns, less in muscular and the least stable in neuter nouns. In plural, dative remains only in musculine and femine nouns. A greater number of cases has been found in singular, but their percentage compared to general case indicates that they persisted only in limited functions and meanings.

Библиографические ссылки

  1. Baerman M., Brown D., Corbett G. (2005), The Syntax-Morphology Interface: A Study of Syncretism, Cambridge. [Google Scholar]
  2. Belić A. (1905), Diјalekti istočne i јužne Srbiјe, Beograd. [Google Scholar]
  3. Belić A. (1911), O diјalekatskom materiјalu O. Brokha. Srpski diјalektoloshki zbornik Kh., Beograd. [Google Scholar]
  4. Belić A. (1969), Istoriјa srpskohrvatskog јezika. Knj. II, sv. 1, Rechi sa deklinatsiјom, Beograd. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bukumirić M. (1988), Onomastika Sirinićke Žhupe, „Onomatološki prilozi”, vol. IX, pp. 253−470. [Google Scholar]
  6. Comrie B. (1989), Language Universals and Linguistic Typology, Oxford. [Google Scholar]
  7. Crystal D. (2008), A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics, Oxford. [Google Scholar]
  8. Fillmore C. (1968), The case for case, [in:] E. Bach, R.T. Harms (eds.), Universals in linguistic theory, New York. [Google Scholar]
  9. Heine B., Kuteva T. (2005), Language Contact and Grammatical Change, Cambridge. [Google Scholar]
  10. Ivić M. (1989), Neka zapažanja od rodu i broјu u srpskohrvatskom јeziku, „Јužnoslovenski filolog”, vol. XLV, pp. 27–44. [Google Scholar]
  11. Ivić M. (2008), Lingvistički ogledi, Beograd. [Google Scholar]
  12. Ivić P. (1991), Iz srpskohrvatske diјalektologiјe, Nish. [Google Scholar]
  13. Ivić P. (2001), Diјalektologiјa srpskohrvatskog јezika, Novi Sad. [Google Scholar]
  14. Joseph. B. (2001), Is Balkan Comparative Syntax Possible?, [in:] M.L. Rivero, A. Ralli (eds.), Comparative Syntax of Balkan Languages, Oxford. [Google Scholar]
  15. Kordić S. (2005), Gramatička kategorija broja, [in:] M. Tatarin (ed.) Zbornik Stanislava Marijanovića povodom sedamdesetogodišnjice života i četrdesetpetogodišnjice znanstvenoga rada, Osijek. [Google Scholar]
  16. Kramer R. (2015), The Morphosyntax of Gender, New York. [Google Scholar]
  17. Lindstedt J. (2000), Linguistic Balkanization: contact-induced change by mutual reinforcement, ”Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics. Languages in Contact”, vol. 28, pp. 231–246. [Google Scholar]
  18. Malchukov A., Spencer A. (2009), Introduction, [in:] Oxford Handbooks: The Oxford Handbook of Case, Oxford. [Google Scholar]
  19. Mladenović R. (2007), Semantika i gramatička stabilnost imenitsa pluralia tantum u srpskim (slovenskim) govorima na јugozapadu Kosova i Metohiјe, [in:] R. Simić (ed.), Srpski јezik, književnost i umetnost. Zbornik radova sa nauchnog skupa održanog na Filološko umetničkom fakultetu u Kraguјevсu 31. oktobra i 1. novembra 2006, Kraguјevac. [Google Scholar]
  20. Mladenović R. (2011), Morfološka i sintaksička pluralizaciјa zbirnih imenica i nekih zamenica u govorima jugozapadnog dela Kosova i Metohiјe, „Zbornik Matitce srpske za filologiјu i lingvistiku“, vol. LIV/1, pp. 205–206. [Google Scholar]
  21. Mladenović R. (2013), Govor јužnokosovskog sela Gatnje (Monografiјe 18), Beograd. [Google Scholar]
  22. Mladenović R. (2015), Od značenja ka obliku – iz diјalekatske (morfo)sintakse govora prizrensko-јužnomoravskog tipa metohiјsko-kosovsko-sirinićkog areala, [in:] M. Kovačević (ed.), Srpski јezik – od Vuka do danas, Kraguјevaс. [Google Scholar]
  23. Mladenović R. (2016), Lingvogeografski položhaј i diјalekatska individualnost sirinićkog govora, “Јužnoslovenski filolog”, vol. LVII/3–4, pp. 67–91. [Google Scholar]
  24. Mladenović R. (2019), Govor šarplaninske župe Sirinić, „Srpski diјalektološki zbornik“, vol. LXVI/1, pp. 1−10. [Google Scholar]
  25. Nikolić M. (2002/2003), Prirodni i gramatički rod imenica, „Nash јezik”, vol. XXXIV/3–4, pp. 181–194. [Google Scholar]
  26. Peco A. (1989), Pregled srpskohrvatskih dijalekata, Beograd. [Google Scholar]
  27. Redžić A. (2021), Forme standardnog srpskog jezika u sirinićkom govoru, „Ishodišta”, vol. 7, pp. 285−300. [Google Scholar]
  28. Redžić A. (2022), Odnos upotrebe dijalekatskih i standardnojezičkih formi u govoru mladih u Siriniću, [in:] B. Mišić Ilić, V. Lopičić (eds.), Jezik, književnost, alternative, Niš. [Google Scholar]
  29. Revzina O.G. (1976), Osnovnyye cherty struktury grammaticheskoy kategorii roda, [in:] Slavyanskoye i balkanskoye yazykoznaniye (Problemy morfologii sovremenykh slavyanski¬kh i balkanskikh yazykov, Moskva. [Google Scholar]
  30. Schaller H. (2015), Remnants and Representatives of Old Substrate and New Adstrate Languages, [in:] M.M. Makartsev, I.A. Sedakova, T.V. Tsiv’yan (eds.), Balkanskiy tezaurus: Nachalo, Moskva. [Google Scholar]
  31. Sobolev A. (2009), From Synthetic to Analytic Case: Variation in South-Slavic Dialects, [in:] Oxford Handbooks: The Oxford Handbook of Case, Oxford. [Google Scholar]
  32. Sobolev A.N. (1991), Kategoriya padezha na periferii balkanoslovyanskogo areala, „Јužnoslovenski filolog”, vol. XXXIV/1, pp. 93–139. [Google Scholar]
  33. Sobolev A.N. (2003), Malyy dialektologicheskyy atlas balkanskikh yazykov, München. [Google Scholar]
  34. Sobolev A.N. (2021), Retsenziya na knigu: Mladenović R. „Govor severnosharplaninske zhupe Sirinić, Beograd: Srpska akademiјa nauka i umetnosti, 2019. 1047 s., karte”. (Na serbskom yazyke), „Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya”, vol. 73, pp. 334–341. [Google Scholar]
  35. Spencer A. (1991), Morphological theory: an introduction to word structure in generative grammar, Oxford–Cambridge. [Google Scholar]
  36. Stanišić V. (1987), Balkanizmi u srpskohrvackom jeziku, „Balcanica”, vol. XXI, pp. 245−265. [Google Scholar]
  37. Stanojčić Ž., Popović Lj. (1999), Gramatika srpskoga jezika za I−IV razred srednje škole, Beograd. [Google Scholar]
  38. Tafra B. (2019), Gramatička višeznačnost kategorije broja, „Croatica“, vol. XLIII, pp. 79–103. [Google Scholar]
  39. Tomić O.M. (2004), The Balkan Sprachbund properties. An Introduction, [in:] O.M. Tomić (ed.) Balkan Syntax and Semantics, Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, vol. 67, Amsterdam–Philadelphia. [Google Scholar]
  40. Topolinjska Z. (2016), Padežni odnosi vs. semantičke uloge, „Južnoslovenski filolog”, vol. LXXII/3–4, pp. 27–34. [Google Scholar]
  41. Urošević A. (1948), Šarplaninska župa Sirinić, „Godišen zbornik”, vol. 1, pp. 115−176. [Google Scholar]
  42. Veselinova L. (2006), Defining the concept, [in:] L. Veselinova (ed.), Suppletion in verb paradigms, „Typological Studies in Language“, vol. 67, Amsterdam. [Google Scholar]
  43. Wahlstrom M. (2015), The Loss of Case Inflection in Bulgarian and Macedonian, „Slavica Helsingiensia”, vol. 47, III−205. [Google Scholar]

Скачивания

Данные скачивания пока недоступны.