Search Results

You are looking at 11 - 18 of 18 items for :

  • "lexical borrowings" x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All

Dialetti Italiani “Esportati” Nell’Ottocento TRA Europa Meridionale e Mediterraneo

Per una Mappatura delle Sopravvivenze Comunitarie e delle Eredità

Verbum
Author:
Fiorenzo Toso

This paper examines the historical events and the linguistic consequences of a number of migratory movements from Italy to Southern European and Mediterranean countries between the end of the 17th century and the first few decades of the 18th century. Such directions and destinations are lesser known than those migrations generally associated “historically” with Italian emigration (North and South America, and, more recently, Northern Europe and Australia); nevertheless, the linguistic heritage of such movements is still very much alive or else has become extinct in only very recent times. Those who migrated from Veneto and Trentino to the Balcans, from Puglia to Crimea, the Sicilians who emigrated to Tunisia, the Piedmontese who went to province, the Ligurians who moved to various locations from Gibraltar to the Black Sea, all gave birth to small linguistic communities, to real dialectal koinès , to important phenomena of mixing codes and lexical borrowing from the local languages. An overall picture will be built up in order to evaluate the importance of these phenomena and to posit a series of hypotheses of a sociolinguistic and political nature.

Restricted access

The present article is dedicated to the study of interlingual contacts based on the facts given by the history of the Hungarian personal suffix -as. This suffix is used in modern Serbian, Croatian, Yugoslav-Ruthenian, Slovenian and Slovak literary languages and dialects. People speaking these dialects have been living for a long time in these territories that used to be a part of the Hungarian kingdom. The history of this suffix, its functioning and its present status is demonstrated on the basis of Carpathian and Ruthenian written old and new texts. The productivity of the borrowed personal suffix - ?? (-??) is considered to be a result of active interlingual contacts in the Carpathian region and also of the considerable influence of Hungarian on the language and culture in the  Southern Carpathian hills. There are many words in modern Carpatho-Rusyn texts which are borrowed from Hungarian, e.g.: ???????, ??????, ??????, ??????, ??????, ????????? etc. Some of them appear in word formation paradigms of the Carpatho-Rusyn motivated words, e.g.:????????, ????????????, ????????, ???????, ??????, ??????? and so on. The result of the Carpatho-Rusyn and Hungarian language contacts on word formation level testifies to a very intensive interaction. In modern Ruthenian the same tendency is to be observed: numerous lexical borrowings from Hungarian exist side by side with borrowings of units on a more abstract level. In our case the word formation suffix ?? (-??) with a personal meaning is of Hungarian origin and it is very productive in modern Carpatho-Rusyn.

Restricted access

The oral folk prose of Transcarpathia is a valuable source of history and culture of the region. Supplementing the written sources, it has maintained popular attitudes towards events, giving assessments and interpretations that are often different from the official one. In the Ukrainian oral tradition, we find many words borrowed from other languages, in particular Hungarian, which reflects the long period of cohabitation as well as shared historical events and contacts. They also occur in local toponymic legends, which in their own way explain the origin of the local names and are closely linked with the life and culture of the region, contain a lot of ethnographic, historical, mythological, and other information. They are represented mainly by lexical borrowings, Hungarian proper names and realities, which were transformed, absorbed and modified in another system, and, among other things, has served the originality of the Transcarpathian folklore. The process of borrowing the Hungarianisms is marked by heterochronology and a significant degree of assimilation in the receiving environment.

It is known about the long-lasting contacts of the Hungarians with Rus at the time of birth of the homeland - the Honfoglalás, as evidenced by the current geographical names associated with the heroes of the events of that time - the leaders of uprisings Attila, Almash, Prince Latorets (the legends Almashivka, About the Laborets and the White Horse Mukachevo Castle). In the names of toponymic legends and writings there are mentions of the famous Hungarian leaders, the leaders of the uprisings - King Matthias Corvinus, Prince Ferenc Rákóczi II, Lajos Kossuth (the legends Matyashivka, Bovtsar, Koshutova riberiya). Many names of villages, castles and rivers originate from Hungarian lexemes and are their derivatives, explaining the name itself (narratives Sevlyuskyy castle, Gotar, village Gedfork). The times of the Tatar invasion were reflected in the legends The Great Ravine Bovdogovanya and The village Goronda. Sometimes, the nomination is made up of two words - Ukrainian and Hungarian (Mount Goverla, Canyon Grobtedie). In legends, one can find mythological and legendary elements.

The process of borrowing Hungarianisms into Ukrainian is marked by heterochronology, meanwhile borrowings remain unchanged only partially, and in general, they are assimilated in accordance with the phonetic and morphological rules of the Ukrainian language. Consequently, this is a creative process, caused by a number of different factors - social, ethnocultural, aesthetic, etc. In the course of time, events and characters in oral narratives are erased from human memory, so they can be mixed, modified and updated, adapting to new realities.

Restricted access

O leksiku u kajkavskom narječju

Vocabulary in the Kajkavian Dialect

Studia Slavica
Author:
Đuro Blažeka

U radu se daju temeljni podatci o kajkavskom leksiku, njegovu podrijetlu, kontaktu s mađarskim i njemačkim jezikom te suvremenim pojavama u interferenciji s hrvatskim standardnim jezikom (pseudoanalogonimija, najnovije semantičke adaptacije). Kako je leksik hrvatskih kajkavskih govora rubno zastupljen u postojećim etimološkim rječnicima hrvatskoga jezika, u radu se ističe da je teško napraviti klasifikaciju velikog broja leksema koji se ne nalaze ni u kojem od slavenskih jezika.

Kod leksičkog posuđivanja hungarizama vrlo je rijetko riječ o popunjavanju leksičkih praznina, a mnogo češće o posuđivanju zbog izvanjezičnih razloga (zemljopisnih i političkih) jer ih je velika većina u trenutku primarne adaptacije imala ekvivalente u govorima primaocima. Od semantičkih polja koje pokrivaju hungarizmi najbrojnije je ono koje se odnosi na pejorativna značenja u kontekstu osobina, izgleda i ponašanja ljudi, a od onih koje pokrivaju germanizmi je ono koje se odnosi na tehničke izraze iz najrazličitijih obrta.

Arhaičan kajkavski leksik ili nestaje ili suvremenim semantičkim adaptacijama pronalazi novo mjesto u vokabularu suvremenih govornika kajkavskog narječja. Apostrofira se velika učestalost deminutiva / hipokoristika, i to ne samo kao tvorbena mogućnost ili rubni sloj leksika, već kao izuzetno često korišteni leksik u svakodnevnoj komunikaciji. Opisuju se istraživanja pseudoanalogonimije koja su osim za lingvističke spoznaje važna i za metodiku nastave hrvatskog jezika, što bi mogla biti stožerna točka oko koje bi i kajkavsko narječje dobilo bolji položaj u školama.

Na kraju se govori o najnovijim trendovima u istraživanju kajkavskog leksika i solidnom razvoju kajkavske dijalektne leksikologije zbog pojave velikog broja amatera koji cijeli život skupljaju leksik i prepuštaju njegovu obradu jezikoslovcima pa djelo objave kao zajednički rad. Na kraju se predlaže metodologija istraživanja razlikovnosti leksika između pojedinih mjesnih govora kad za neki mjesni govor već postoji objavljeni opsežni znanstveni rječnik. Na taj bi se način lakše pratili procesi širenja i rasprostranjenosti najrazličitijih jezičnih pojava iz područja semantike i tvorbe riječi, a ne samo općepoznatih jezičnih izoglosa koje se tiču uglavnom fonologije.

U zaključku se ističe da je posljednji trenutak da se leksička istraživanja kajkavskog narječja intenziviraju jer za razliku od fonologije i morfologije, semantika je puno brže podložnija promjenama s obzirom na to da nove realije doslovce svakodnevno prodiru u suvremeni život, a to se manifestira na i na standardni jezik i na interdijalekt i na mjesne govore.

The paper provides basic information about the Kajkavian lexicon, its origin, its contact with the Hungarian and German languages and about contemporary phenomena in its interference with the Croatian standard language (pseudo-analogonymy and the latest semantic adaptations). As the lexicon of Croatian Kajkavian dialects is marginally represented in the existing etymological dictionaries of the Croatian language, the paper points out that it is difficult to classify a large number of lexemes that are not found in any of the Slavic languages.

Lexical borrowing of Hungarianisms occurs very rarely to fill in lexical gaps and is much more common for non-linguistic reasons (geographical and political) because the vast majority of them had equivalents in the recipients’ vernaculars at the time of primary adaptation. Of the semantic fields covered by Hungarianisms, the most numerous is the one that refers to pejorative meanings in the context of human characteristics, appearance and behaviour, whereas those covered by Germanisms refer to technical expressions from various trades.

The archaic Kajkavian lexicon either disappears or finds a new place in the vocabulary of modern speakers of the Kajkavian dialect with modern semantic adaptations. A high frequency of diminutives / hypocorisms is emphasized, not only as a creative possibility or a marginal layer of vocabulary but also as an extremely frequently used vocabulary in everyday communication. Research activities of pseudo-analogonymy are described. They are important not only for linguistic knowledge but also for the methodology of teaching the Croatian language, which could be a pivotal point around which the Kajkavian dialect could get a better position in schools.

The paper continues to talk about the latest trends in the research of Kajkavian lexicon and the solid development of Kajkavian dialect lexicology due to the emergence of a large number of amateurs who collect lexicon all their lives and leave it to linguists and publish the work as a joint work. Finally, a methodology for researching the distinctiveness of lexicons between individual local dialects is proposed, when an extensive scientific dictionary already exists for a local dialect. In this way, it would be easier to follow the processes of spreading and prevalence of various linguistic phenomena in the field of semantics and word formation, and not only the well-known linguistic isoglosses that concern mainly phonology.

In conclusion, it is pointed out that it is the last moment to intensify the lexical research studies of the Kajkavian dialect because, unlike phonology and morphology, semantics is much more susceptible to change, given that new real objects literally penetrate modern life on a daily basis and this is manifested in both the standard language and in the interdialect and the local vernaculars.

Open access

З історії лінгвоукраїністики в Угорщині (мовознавча діяльність Ласлова Чопея)

From the History of Ukrainian Linguistics in Hungary (László Csopey’s Works on Linguistics)

Studia Slavica
Author:
Єлизавета Барань

Вивчення українського мовознавства в Угорщині має давню історію. Увага дослідників зосереджу-валася насамперед на питаннях синхронної та діахронної діалектології, зокрема закарпатської, про-блемах українсько-угорських міжмовних контактів. Ім’я Ласлова Чопея в українській лексикографії відоме насамперед як укладача «Русько-мадярського словаря» (Будапешт, 1883).

У статті проаналізовано статтю «Magyar szók a rutén nyelvben» (Угорські слова в руській мові) та реєстр «Русько-мадярського словаря», подано етимологію слів, які з погляду їх первинного похо-дження були спірними, зіставлено різні оцінки словника мовознавцями з часу його появи до сього-дення.

Ласлов (Василь) Чопей (уг. Csopey / Csopei László) – угорський педагог, перекладач, мовознавець. В енциклопедії «Українська мова» написано: «Ласлов (Василь) Чопей – український мовознавець; писав мовою дуже близькою до закарпатського народного мовлення центральної частини краю». Ю. Шевельов доповнює: «Чопей Василь – педагог, упорядник підручників для народних шкіл Закар-паття (1881–1890)».

Угорський славіст Аттіла Голлош зі вступною статтею Іштвана Удварі підготував до видання уза-гальнювальну працю «Csopey László élete és művei» (Життя і праці Ласло Чопея). А. Голлош уклав бі-бліографію праць Л. Чопея, класифікувавши їх за такими галузями: літературознавство, етнографія, мовознавство, переклади, фахова література, підручники для русинських шкіл, природознавство, експедиції, виставки, поштова скринька, статистика, рецензії, лекції в Малій Академії, редакторська робота, листування. На прохання міністерства Л. Чопей уклав та переклав вісім підручників для народних шкіл.

З появою статті «Magyar szók a rutén nyelvben» (Угорські слова в руській мові), опублікованій у 1881 році, Ласло Чопей розпочав дослідження угорсько-слов’янських мовних зв’язків. Працю Чо-пея можна вважати першою у дослідженні угорських лексичних запозичень в українських говорах сучасної території Закарпаття. У своїй статті, написаній на науковому рівні свого часу, автор пе-рерахував відомі йому угорські лексичні елементи березької говірки, вказав на фонетичні зміни, які відбулися на українському мовному ґрунті, подав тематичну класифікацію, указавши, по суті, напрямки подальших досліджень.

Традиційно вважається, що українсько-угорська словникова справа бере свій початок від другої половини ХІХ ст. із появою «Русько-мадярського словаря» Ласлова Чопея. Словник високо оцінила Угорська королівська академія наук – автор отримав премію Фекешгазія. Словниковий реєстр нараховує 20 тисяч вокабул і відображає лексичний склад добре відомих укладачеві закарпатських східнослов’янських говорів.

Проживаючи далеко від україномовної території, у кінці ХІХ ст. наголошував на самостійності української мови, відстоював право на її розвиток і функціювання.

Вважаємо, що словник є цінною лексикографічною працею, а його автора можемо вважати осно-воположником українсько-угорської лексикографії. Доробок Л. Чопея і сьогодні може стати в при-годі лексикологам, діалектологам, історикам мови, а також дослідникам міжмовних та діалектних контактів, а його результати формують основу для нових наукових розробок.

The investigation of Ukrainian linguistics in Hungary has a long history. The researchers in this field have focused mainly on issues of synchronic and diachronic dialectology, in particular Transcarpathian, as well as the problems of Ukrainian–Hungarian interlingual contacts. László Csopey’s name is first known in Ukrainian lexicography as the compiler of the Ruthenian–Hungarian Dictionary (Budapest, 1883). We have analyzed the paper Hungarian words in the Ruthenian language and the register of the RuthenianHungarian dictionary in order to present the etymology of words that are controversial in terms of their origin and aimed to compare various assessments of the dictionary by linguists from the time of its appearance to the present.

László Csopey was a Hungarian teacher, translator, and linguist. In the encyclopaedia of the Ukrainian language, he is described as follows: “László (Vasyl) Csopey – a Ukrainian linguist; he wrote in the language which is very close to the Transcarpathian folk language of the central part of the region”. Yurii Shevelyov adds: “Vasyl Csopey is a teacher, compiler of textbooks for public schools of Transcarpathia (1881–1890)”.

In 2004, the Hungarian Slavist Attila Hollós prepared for publication the generalized work László Csopeys life and works with an introductory paper by István Udvari. At the request of the Ministry of Education, László Csopey compiled and translated eight textbooks for public schools. He began to investigate Hungarian–Slavic language contacts and published the paper Hungarian words in the Ruthenian language in 1881. The paper can be considered the first in the field of investigation of Hungarian lexical borrowings in the Ukrainian dialects on the territory of present-day Transcarpathia. In his paper, the author has listed all the Hungarian lexical elements of the Bereg dialect known to him, pointed out the phonetic changes that took place in the Ukrainian language, and gave a thematic classification indicating, in fact, areas for further research.

It is traditionally believed that the Ukrainian–Hungarian dictionary publication dates back to the second half of the nineteenth century with the appearance of RuthenianHungarian Dictionary by László Csopey. The dictionary was highly praised by the Hungarian Royal Academy of Sciences and the author received the Fekésházi Prize. The dictionary register has 20,000 entries and reflects the lexical composition of the Transcarpathian East Slavic dialects well-known to the compiler. Living far from the Ukrainian-speaking area in the late nineteenth century, László Csopey emphasized the independence of the Ukrainian language, defended the right to its development and functioning.

We believe that the analyzed dictionary is a valuable lexicographical work, and its author is considered the founder of Ukrainian–Hungarian lexicography. László Csopey’s work is still relevant up to now and it can be used by lexicologists, dialectologists, language historians as well as specialists in interlingual and interdialectical contacts, and its results form the basis for further research in these fields of linguistics.

Restricted access
Studia Slavica
Author:
И. В. Кузнецова

К ориентализмам относят слова, принадлежащие к разным группам тюркских, а также иранских и арабо-семитских языков. В нашей работе термины арабизм и персизм понимаются широко: не только как прямое лексическое заимствование, восходящее к арабскому или персидскому языку, но и как опосредованное. Языком-посредником проникновения слов арабского и персидского проис-хождения в языки балканских народов стал язык османских турок.

В статье анализируются устаревшие и активно употребляющиеся в наши дни на территории Бос-нии и Герцеговины фразеологические единицы с компонентами ориентального происхождения те-матической группы «Напитки» (кофе, буза и шербет), вошедшие в языки-реципиенты в результате языковой коммуникации, сопровождавшей диалог разных культур на протяжении многих столе-тий. В статье приводятся некоторые культурологические и историко-этимологические коммента-рии к фразеологическим единицам, а также толкование фразеологических оборотов и компонентов, входящих в них.

При обработке фразеологического материала применялся синхронно-описательный метод и ме-тод анализа компонентов. Привлечение фразеологического материала других языков (славянских и неславянских) позволило выявить универсальность или национальную специфику фразеологиче-ской единицы с компонентами кофе, буза и шербет в языке боснийских мусульман. Лексема кофе как компонент фразеологических выражений и пословиц может употребляться как в прямом зна-чении, так и в эвфемистическом.

В статье не рассматриваются устойчивые сочетания слов терминологического характера, связан-ные со способом приготовления кофе и его подачи (кофе по-венски, кофе с молоком, кофе глясе, чеш. ruská káva ‘кофе, в который добавляется водка’ и т. д.). Почти все рассмотренные фразеологи-ческие обороты с компонентом кофе идиоэтничны (кроме связанных с традицией гадания на кофе). Персизм буза как гастрономическая реалия кухни Востока известен не всем народам, что затрудня-ет перевод фразеологизмов с этим компонентом. Несмотря на популярность шербета, словарную прописку получили лишь боснийские фразеологизмы с лексемой шербет.

Фразеологический материал показывает, как в разные языки входили заимствования-ориента-лизмы восточной кухни, демонстрирует разный их фразеологический потенциал, ареальную проек-цию (или отсутствие таковой). В силу разных причин (исторических и актуальных ныне) названия напитков ориентальной кухни чаще встречаются в боснийских фразеологических единицах. Вари-анты фразеологизмов иллюстрируют параллельное использование в некоторых структурно-семан-тических моделях ориентализмов и славянизмов или германизмов.

Orientalisms include words belonging to different groups of Turkic as well as Iranian and Arab-Semitic languages. In our work, the terms Arabism and Persism are used in a broad sense: not only as a direct lexical borrowing going back to the Arabic or Persian language but also as an indirect one. The language of the Ottoman Turks became the intermediary language for the penetration of words of Arabic and Persian origin into the languages of the Balkan peoples.

The paper analyzes phraseological units both obsolete and actively used nowadays on the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina with components of Oriental origin in the thematic group «Drinks» (coffee, buza, and sorbet), which entered the recipient languages as a result of linguistic communication that accompanied the dialogue of different cultures for many centuries. The paper presents some culturological and historical-etymological comments on phraseological units as well as the interpretation of these idioms and the components included in them.

When processing phraseological material, the synchronous descriptive method and the method of component analysis were applied. The use of phraseological material from other languages (Slavic and non- Slavic) allowed us to identify the universality or national specificity of phraseological units with components of coffee, buza, and sherbet in the language of Bosnian Muslims. The lexeme coffee as a component of phraseological expressions and proverbs can be used both in the direct meaning and in the euphemistic.

The paper does not consider stable combinations of terminological words related to the method of preparing coffee and serving it (Viennese coffee, coffee with milk, ice coffee, etc.). Almost all the considered phraseological units with the component coffee are idioethnic (except those related to the tradition of coffee fortune telling). The Persism buza as a gastronomic reality of the cuisine of the East is not known to all peoples, which makes it difficult to translate phraseological units with this component. Despite the popularity of sherbet, only Bosnian phraseological units with the lexeme sherbet received a dictionary registration.

The phraseological material shows how loanwords of Oriental cuisine were included in different languages, demonstrates their different phraseological potential, areal projection (or the lack thereof). For various reasons (historical and current), the names of Oriental cuisine drinks are more often found in Bosnian phraseological units. The variants of phraseological units illustrate the parallel use in some structural and semantic models of Orientalisms and Slavonisms or Germanisms.

Restricted access
Across Languages and Cultures
Authors:
Károly Polcz
,
Szvetlana Hamsovszki
,
Erika Huszár
,
Emőke Jámbor
,
Nóra Szigetváry
, and
Marianna Válóczi

open to lexical borrowing” ( Milić & Kardoš, 2019 , p. 867). The high proportion of English borrowings – particularly striking in the language use of domain experts – is reported to lead to code-switching ( Mateo, 1993 ; Polcz, 2017 , 2020 ) and

Open access

. Winter , Werner 1961 . ‘ Lexical Interchange between ‘Tocharian’ A and B.’ Journal of the American Oriental Society 81 / 3 : 271 – 280 . Winter , Werner 1962 . ‘ Further Evidence of Inter-Tocharian Lexical Borrowing.’ Journal of the American

Restricted access