sign in sign up
<<
Home , Anton Melik, Berkovci, Bukovski Vrh, Dolgi Laz, Gorenji Log, Gorski Vrh

ONOMÀSTICA 3 (2017): 105–126 | REBUT 24.4.2017 | ACCEPTAT 19.9.2017

Geographical in the languages of official minorities in Matjaž Geršič, Drago Kladnik & Peter Repolusk Geographical Institute, Research Center of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts () [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Abstract: This article presents the use of geographical names in the ethnically mixed Slo- venian-Italian bilingual areas of Slovenian in southwest Slovenia and the Slove- nian-Hungarian bilingual areas of in northeast Slovenia. It also briefly re- flects upon the smaller and more dispersed Roma and German minorities. Attention is drawn to the need for further standardization of names, including those used in the languages of the minorities, highlighting two examples of bad practice when dealing with Slovenian geographical names outside Slovenia. Key words: Geographical names, bilingualism, ethnic minority, standardization, Slovenia

Els noms geogràfics a les llengües de les minories oficials a Eslovènia Abstract: Aquest article considera l’ús dels noms geogràfics a les àrees bilingües eslove- noitalianes ètnicament mixtes, a la Ístria eslovena, al sudoest d’Eslovènia, i a les àrees eslovenhongareses a Prekmurje, al nord-est d’Eslovènia. També considera les minori- es, més petites i disperses, de població romaní i alemanya. es fa atenció a la necessitat d’una major estandardització dels noms, inclosos els que s’utilitzen en les llengües de les minories, i es destaquen dos exemples de mala praxis a l’hora de tractar els noms eslovens fora d’Eslovènia. Paraules clau: Noms geogràfics, bilingüisme, minories ètiniques, estandardització, Es- lovènia

1 INTRODUCTION

Slovenia is a country in which minority issues are handled in an exempla- ry manner. The official language in the country is Slovenian but in munic- ipalities where the Italian or the Hungarian ethnic community lives, the official language is also Italian or Hungarian. In Slovenia, both Italian and Hungarian ethnic minorities are recognized by the constitution and in 105 Matjaž Geršič, Drago Kladnik & Peter Repolusk legislation. In addition to the constitution, the 1994 Self-Governing Eth- nic Communities Act also makes provisions about their governance and basic minority rights. In addition to the protection of minority rights in education, culture, and political representation, the official use of Italian and Hungarian is provided for in the native settlement areas of these two minorities (i.e., in bilingual settlements, also referred to in the specialist literature as ethnically mixed or ethnically heterogeneous settlements). In accordance with the law, the names of settlements in which the two minorities natively live are standardized and written in bilingual form on road signs; other names, both Slovenian and non-Slovenian, have largely yet to be standardized. Under certain conditions, the law also allows members of the Italian and Hungarian minorities to use and learn Italian and Hungarian outside the bilingual areas. In addition to the Italian and Hungarian minorities, the dispersed Roma and small German-speaking minorities are also na- tive to Slovenia.

2 Ethnic composition of the slovenian population

Slovenians account for the majority of the population in Slovenia (83.1% according to the 2002 census). The members of all four ethnic groups described in the introduction amount to around 15,000 people, which is less than one percent of the total population. Immigrants from elsewhere in the former and their descendants contribute significantly more to Slovenia’s ethnic heterogeneity. Tables 1 and 2 provide data on ethnicity and native language as established in the 2002 census and cer- tain earlier censuses. The data were collected from direct statements on ethnicity and native languages provided by the census participants. In terms of the methodology used, the last census of 2011 took the form of a register and no longer recorded the ethnic, linguistic, and religious com- position of the population.

106 Geographical names in the languages of official minorities in Slovenia Table 1. Population by ethnic affiliation in Slovenia in 1953, 1961, 1971, 1981, 1991, and 2002 censuses

Ethnic affiliation 1953 1961 1971 1981 1991 2002 1,415,448 1,522,248 1,578,963 1,668,623 1,689,657 1,631,363 * 854 3,072 2,987 2,138 2,959 2,258 11,019 10,498 8,943 8,777 8,000 6,243 Roma 1,663 158 951 1393 2,259 3,246 and Austrians 1,906 986 666 455 424 680 Bosniacs 1,617 465 3,197 13,339 26,577 40,071 Serbs 11,225 13,609 20,209 41,695 47,401 38,964 17,978 31,429 41,556 53,882 52,876 35,642 Others, unknown and 4,715 9,058 21,579 48,079 83,202 205,569 undeclared Total 1,466,425 1,591,523 1,679,051 1,838,381 1,913,355 1,964,036

*In 1953 Zone B of the Free Territory of Trieste was not yet under the jurisdiction of Yugoslavia and Slovenia (Census of Population, House- holds and Housing 2002).

Table 2. Population by native language in Slovenia in the 1991 and 2002 censuses 1991 2002 Native language Number Proportion (%) Number Proportion (%) Slovene 1,690,388 88.3 1,723,434 87.7 Italian 3,882 0.2 3,762 0.2 Hungarian 8,720 0.5 7,713 0.4 Romany 2,752 0.1 3,834 0.2 German 1,093 0.1 1,628 0.1 Serbo-Croatian* 152,355 8.0 153,760 7.8 Others, unknown 54,165 2.8 69,905 3.6 Total 1,913,355 100.0 1,964,036 100.0

*Bosnian, Croatian, Croatian-Serbian, Montenegrin, Serbian, and Ser- bo-Croatian (Census of Population, Households and Housing 2002). 107 Matjaž Geršič, Drago Kladnik & Peter Repolusk Slovenia’s ethnic composition after the Second World War was heavily in- fluenced by migration: the emigration of the majority of German speak- ers and Italians, and the economically conditioned immigration of people from other parts of the former Yugoslavia. Immigration from the other Yugoslav republics and autonomous provinces was strongest during the 1970s, and a second immigration peak occurred after Slovenia gained in- dependence (after 2000). The majority of immigrants come from Bos- nia-Herzegovina. The changes in the data on the ethnic and linguistic composition after 1971 resulted from the increasing number of people that failed to identify their ethnicity. Thus, for example, in the 2002 cen- sus, 49,000 individuals refused to provide data on their ethnicity, and for 126,000 persons this information remained unknown. Between 1991 and 2002, the number of those with identified ethnicity decreased in all eth- nic groups, except among Bosniacs. The tendency not to identify one’s ethnicity is also present among members of the two official ethnic minorities, which is one of the major reasons for their varying and receding numbers between individual pop- ulation censuses (Šircelj 2003, 116). Both of the officially recognized ethnic minorities live in the extreme southwestern and northeastern parts of Slovenia—that is, the areas bor- dering Italy and (Komac 2015). In spatial terms, the members of the Italian minority live natively in four municipalities and the members of the Hungarian minority live natively in five (Figure 1).

2.1 Settlement area of the Italian ethnic minority

Examining the distribution of the minorities at the level of settlements, it can be established that the bilingual area is considerably smaller. Mem- bers of native ethnic minorities populate only a narrow belt on the coast and along the Hungarian border. There are twenty-five bilingual settlements that use Slovenian and Ital- ian as official languages, spread across four municipalities in Slovenian Is- tria (Figure 2): thirteen in the Municipality of (Ital. Capodistria), eight in the Municipality of (Ital. Pirano), three in the Municipali- ty of (Ital. Isola), and one in the Municipality of (Ital. An- carano). 108 Geographical names in the languages of official minorities in Slovenia

Fig. 1. Ethnically mixed compact settlement areas in Slovenia (Map: Matjaž Geršič)

Fig. 2. Bilingual settlements in Slovenian Istria in southwest Slovenia (Map: Matjaž Geršič) 109 Matjaž Geršič, Drago Kladnik & Peter Repolusk

Fig. 3. at the exit of a Fig. 4. Bilingual Slovenian-Italian signs settlement in Slovenian Istria (Photo: at the entrance to the Koper Tax Office Miha Pavšek) (Photo: Suzana Kos)

Fig. 5. The problematic monolingual sign Fig. 6. After intervention, a bilingual at the entrance to the newly built tunnel sign was installed (Photo: Radio on the Slovenian coast (Photo: Tjaša Capodsitria) Škamperle)

All the towns and the majority of settlements in the countryside are bi- lingual (Figure 3). Italians are a notable minority in the bilingual area, ac- counting for only 4 to 5% of the total population. Approximately 80% of all Italians in Slovenia live in the bilingual area; the rest live in major Slo- venian cities, such as Ljubljana, , and Nova Gorica. The number of people that identify themselves as Italians has varied greatly over the past fifty years: between 2,200 and 3,100. The number of individuals that have declared Italian to be their native language has been considerably more stable: just under 4,000. 110 Geographical names in the languages of official minorities in Slovenia A large portion of ethnic Italians live in ethnically mixed households: during the 2002 census, 1,500 individuals spoke exclusively Italian in the , and 4,500 individuals were members of households that spoke both Italian and Slovenian. However, the local use of Italian greatly ex- ceeds the minority’s size: during the 1991 census (for which the last data are available) approximately 10,000 people used Italian in various speech situations (Figure 4). The reasons for this include the ethnic heterogene- ity of already mentioned above, the immediate vicinity of Italy and the subsequently frequent cross-border contacts, and the important role of tourism in the local economy. In addition to traditional geographical names, a problem has also aris- en with the use of the new for a physical structure. In 2015, the new- ly built Markovec Tunnel (passing through Markovec Hill) was opened. From the outset, the sign in front of it was only in Slovene (Markovec; Fig- ure 5), whereas all of the other road signs in this area are bilingual. This issue was even brought up at the European Commission, which agreed that the sign in front of the tunnel should include both the Slovenian and Italian names. After this and a concurring judgement from the Slovenian Government Committee for the Standardization of Geographical Names, the Italian name Monte San Marco was added (Figure 6). The Motor- way Company of the Republic of Slovenia (Družba za avtoceste Republike Slovenije, DARS) stated that such questions are handled by the Surveying and Mapping Authority (Geodetska uprava Republike Slovenije, GURS), which, in turn, claims that the Government Office for National Minorities (Urad Vlade Republike Slovenije za narodnosti) is the body responsible for these matters. The Office is of the opinion that the law does not provide that the name of the tunnel should be written in both languages, but that in the case of an initiative from the local community the issue of a suita- ble form of both names would be resolved by the Slovenian Government Committee for the Standardization of Geographical Names (Komisija Vlade Republike Slovenije za standardizacijo zemljepisnih imen, KSZI).

2.2 Settlement area of the Hungarian ethnic minority

There are thirty bilingual settlements in Slovenia that use Slovenian and Hungarian as official languages. They can be found in five Prekmurje mu- 111 Matjaž Geršič, Drago Kladnik & Peter Repolusk

Fig. 7. Bilingual settlements in Prekmurje in northeast Slovenia (Map: Matjaž Geršič)

112 Geographical names in the languages of official minorities in Slovenia

Fig. 8. Bilingual sign at the entrance to a Prekmurje settlement (Photo: Jurij Senegačnik)

Fig. 9. Bilingual sign at the entrance to a store in , the center of the Prekmurje bilingual area (Photo: Road-adventures.si)

nicipalities (Figure 7): twenty in the (Hung. Lendva), five in the Municipality of (Hung. Alsómarác), two in the Municipality of (Hung. Dobronak), two in the Mu- nicipality of Hodoš (Hung. Hodos), and one in the Municipality of Ša- lovci (Hung. Sal). In all of the censuses, the number of individuals with Hungarian as their native language has been greater than the number of those that have identified themselves as Hungarians. The number of the latter continues to decrease, which is largely connected with negative demographic trends in their settlement area, resulting from rurality and a location along the state border that was closed for several decades. Around 83% of the mem- bers of the Hungarian ethnic minority live in the native bilingual settle- ments (Figure 8). Half of the Hungarian population speaks Hungarian 113 Matjaž Geršič, Drago Kladnik & Peter Repolusk in the family, and the other half speaks Hungarian and Slovenian. Hun- garians predominate in the majority of the rural settlements, but they no longer form a majority in the local bilingual town of Lendava (Figure 9). A problem closely connected to the nature of the endonym has arisen in connection with bilingual names in the ethnically mixed area in Prek- murje. A few years ago, one of the local communities decided to dissoci- ate itself from the ethnically mixed area, whereby official bilingualism was also abandoned. This includes the settlements of Lončarovci, Ivanjševci, and pri Prosenjakovcih (Hung. Gerőháza, Jánosfa, and Berke- háza), for which it is no longer clear, based on the definition of an endo- nym, whether these remain endonyms or rather have become Hungarian exonyms instead. Although official bilingualism was already abandoned two decades ago, all three settlement names are still written in bilingual form in the latest edition of Veliki atlas Slovenije (Great Slovenian Atlas, 2013) (Figure 10), whereas the officially appropriate monolingual forms are used on the National Index Map (Furlan et al. 2008) produced in 2008 (Figure 11).

2.3 The Roma community in Slovenia

A third special-status ethnic group in Slovenia is the Roma. The Roma Community Act also defines the status of the Roma population. In their case, no precise spatial area of settlement is defined because the Roma groups are spread across all of Slovenia, with the majority living in the east (Prekmurje) and south (Lower and the Valley). How- ever, twenty municipalities are defined in which the Roma have a signif- icant population and where protection measures are being applied more intensively (Figure 12). These municipalities also have Roma representatives on the municipal councils, but they do not have a representative in the Slovenian parlia- ment. The number of Roma is considerably larger than what the statisti- cal data show. According to the social services and detailed demographic studies (Josipovič & Repolusk 2003), around 8,500 Roma or even more live in Slovenia. As a rule, no Roma settlements are recognized as independent spa- tial-statistical categories in Slovenia. The Roma usually live in clusters, 114 Geographical names in the languages of official minorities in Slovenia

Fig. 10. A section of the topographic map showing the bilingual settle- ments in Prekmurje that lost their bilingual status years ago (Veliki atlas Slovenije 2013, 337).

Fig. 11. A section from the National Index Map (Furlan et al. 2008), in which the settlement names of Lončarovci and Berkovci pri Prosen- jakovcih are included exclusively in their monolingual Slovenian form.

115 Matjaž Geršič, Drago Kladnik & Peter Repolusk

Fig. 12. Areas with Roma communities in Slovenia (Map: Matjaž Geršič) in what are usually more or less separate parts of a larger settlement. Be- tween 105 and 130 clusters of this type can be found in larger settlements in Slovenia (Zupančič 2007). The areas settled by the Roma are morpholog- ically different from the rest of the settlement, but sited adjacent to it (Fig- ure 13). Over the past two decades, only three new settlements were offi- cially established because of a notable predominance of Roma. These are Pušča in the Municipality of , Sovinek in the Municipality of Semič, and Kerinov Grm in the Municipality of Krško (Zupančič 2015). Usually the Roma geographical names do not differ from the Sloveni- an ones. The problem partly lies in the degree of standardization of the Roma language and the establishment of a uniform standard for all Roma groups. The Roma language is predominantly used at cultural events and in preschools, and to a lesser extent also in the media.

2.4 The German community in Slovenia

The German-speaking ethnic group also used to be native to Slovenia, but its numbers decreased drastically after the First and the Second World Wars. 116 Geographical names in the languages of official minorities in Slovenia

Fig. 13. A typical living environment of Roma communities in Slovenia (Photo: Ljubo Vukelič)

Fig. 14. A sign in German (left) and German (right) on the memorial plaque on the wall of the Holy Sepulcher Chapel at Corpus Christi Church in Kočevje’s Trata neighborhood (Photo: Wikimedia)

In the High and Late , feudal lords colonized some sparse- ly settled parts of Slovenia with German-speaking serfs, especially from and Tyrol (Mihelič 1998, 290‒291). They contiguously settled in the Sora Plain (and were soon Slovenianized), the Bača Gorge, the headwaters of the Selška Sora River in the southern part of the Julian (where they persisted until the mid-nineteenth century), and the Kočevje region, where a contiguous linguistic enclave (Figure 14) survived until the Second World War. 117 Matjaž Geršič, Drago Kladnik & Peter Repolusk From the time of their arrival in what is now Slovenia, the Kočevje Ger- mans have differed significantly from the Germans living in other parts of Slovenia because they settled in the Kočevje area primarily for economic reasons. The first colonists were brought in the 1430s by Count Oton of Ortenburg and came from Carinthia and Tyrol. In 1910 there were sixty-one ethnically mixed and 110 completely Ger- man settlements in the Kočevje area with 17,184 inhabitants. In 1931 only thirty-one settlements were completely German and 11,878 inhabitants spoke German as their native language (Kladnik 2009, 403). After the Second World War, the Germans in the Kočevje region offi- cially no longer existed. As part of an agreement between and Italy, nearly all of them were relocated to Lower , which was part of the German Reich at that time (Ferenc & Šumrada 1991, 179). Prior to this, the Slovenian inhabitants there had been exiled to Serbia. Many settlements were completely destroyed, and the names of the others were Slovenianized; some of them were simply translated. None- theless, a strong German influence can still be recognized in their names. Thus Göttenitz (originally a Slovenian name) corresponds to , Gottschee to Kočevje, Handlern to Handlerji, Hasenfeld to Zajčje , Lienfeld to , Moos to Mlaka pri Kočevski Reki, Reichenau to Ra- jhenav, Schalkendorf to Šalka vas, Stalzern to Štalcerji, and Zwischlern to Cvišlerji (Kladnik 2009, 403). Throughout this period, the German population also lived in Slovenian towns, where they generally comprised a higher social and economically stronger stratum of the population. The towns were the focal points of semi-planned Germanization; for instance, up until 1848 Ljubljana used exclusively German street names (Geršič & Kladnik 2016, 258‒259), the proponents of which became the victims of political and ideological re- prisals after the founding of Yugoslavia and the political emancipation of the Slovenians, as well as after the Second World War (Kladnik 2009, 396). Four German societies remain active today: three in the Gottschee German settlement area and one in the Apače Basin west of the border town of Gornja Radgona (Heberle 2008).

118 Geographical names in the languages of official minorities in Slovenia 3 THE STANDARDIZATION OF GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES WITHIN SLOVENIA AND SLOVENIAN EXONYMS

To date, the Slovenian Government Committee for the Standardization of Geographical Names has standardized the names of countries and ma- jor dependent territories, which are treated as Slovenian exonyms. Ap- proximately one thousand geographical names from the 1:1,000,000 map of Slovenia were standardized in 2001, and all of the geographical names within Slovenia as displayed on the 1:250,000 National Index Map (Fur- lan et al. 2008) were standardized in 2008. The National Index Map features all of the bilingual names of settle- ments with Slovenian and Italian as official languages (separated with a slash), whereas other geographical names in the ethnically mixed area that have all been standardized are written only in Slovenian. With regard to the consistent use of bilingual names in the ethnically mixed area, the offi- cial Slovenian minority protection policy has even gone so far as to force- fully introduce bilingual forms for some more recent toponyms of Sloveni- an origin, which although strange, undoubtedly defines the location with- in this area. The Italian versions of the remaining geographical names will also have to be carefully studied and standardized. The same also applies to the ethnically mixed area along the Slovenian-Hungarian state border. In the future, the standardization of geographical names in bilingual ar- eas will have to continue. This activity will be supervised by the aforemen- tioned Slovenian Government Committee for the Standardization of Ge- ographical Names. In addition to the names of settlements already stand- ardized, other geographical names found in the official registers (Register zemljepisnih imen, REZI) at various scales (1:5,000 and 1:25,000) of the Sur- veying and Mapping Authority will also have to be standardized. Figures 15 and 16 provide two examples, the first from Slovenian Istria and the sec- ond from Prekmurje, that show the current situation in the registers that have been transferred to digital orthophotos. It can be seen that the names include either Slovenian names or Slovenianized Italian and . The committee has yet to standardize these names, but great atten- tion will have to be paid to the actual bilingualism and modern functional- ity of the names, which are subject to constant change, like everything else. 119 Matjaž Geršič, Drago Kladnik & Peter Repolusk

Fig. 15. Except for the names of settlements, the names in the southern part of Slovenian Istria remain monolingual for the time being in the Register of Geographical Names (Map: Matjaž Geršič).

Fig. 16. In the Register of Geographical Names, the names in the central part of the Prekmurje bilingual area remain exclusively monolingual (either Slovenian or Hungarian) for the time being (Map: Matjaž Geršič).

120 Geographical names in the languages of official minorities in Slovenia 4 TWO EXAMPLES OF BAD PRACTICE WHEN DEALING WITH SLOVENIAN GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES OUTSIDE SLOVENIA

The standardization of geographical names in Slovenia is vital in to ensure proper use of Slovenian names in non-Slovenian atlases and on the internet. The GermanNeue Orbis Weltatlas (New Orbis World Atlas, 1992) in- corporates a map of the extreme northern part of Slovenia (Figure 17) on which place names and other geographical names are almost exclu- sively written in German. For example, Črna na Koroškem is written as Schwarzenbach, Luče as Leutsch, Prevalje as Prävali, Radenci as Radein, Ribnica na Pohorju as Reifnig, Ruše as Maria Rast, Solčava as Sulzbach, Veržej as Wernsee, Zgornja Velka as Oberwölling, and Žirovnica as Sche- raunitz.

Fig. 17. Detail from a German atlas showing part of northeast Slovenia where the majority of geographical names are written in German only (Neue Orbis Weltatlas 1992, 55).

These are minor settlements that indeed had German names under the Austro-Hungarian Empire, but which fell out of use in everyday life both in Slovenia and elsewhere. Such an exceptional degree of exonymization 121 Matjaž Geršič, Drago Kladnik & Peter Repolusk cannot be explained by any need other than that of responding to polit- ical impulses. However, at least on maps, the number of deviations of this type has been declining recently due to increased UNGEGN activity. Another example of the poor use of Slovenian geographical names oc- curs in Italy. This is illustrated by the list of settlement names in the -Mu nicipality of used in the Italian version of Wikipedia, in which all seventy-two settlements appear first in Italian with the Slovenian name in parentheses (Table 3). In the last decade, some Italian names have been changed or added when previously only Slovenian names were written (Kladnik 2009, 405).

Table 3. Il comune di Tolmino è diviso in 72 insediamenti (naselja) (Tolmino, Wikipedia.org; ‘The is divided into 72 settlements’;* error in the Slovenian name; **settlement was dissolved and no longer exists).

Baccia di Modrea (Bača pri Modreju) Paniqua (Ponikve) Baccia di Piedicolle (Bača pri Podbrdu) Peccine () Camina (Kamno) Piedicolle (Podbrdo) Cal (Tolmino) (Kal) Piedimelze () Chiesa San Giorgio (Kneža) Poglie (Polje) Ciadra (Čadrg) Polubino () Cighino (Čiginj) Porsena (Porezen) Clavice (Klavže) Pràpeno di Lubino () Colle Pietro () Pràpeno del Monte (Prepetno Brdo) Coritenza (Koritnica) Rauna di Piedimelze (Kneške Ravne) Cosarsa (Kozaršče) Ràuna di Sàbicce () Cosmarizze () Roce (Roče) Cucco di Gracova (Kuk) Rutte di Gracova Rut( ) Daber (Daber) Rutte di Volzana Volčanski( Ruti) Lungo Las () Sàbbice (Žabče) Dòllia (Dolje) Zacrie (Zakraj) Dobrocheni (Drobočnik) Santa Lucia d’Isonzo (Most na Soči) Gàbria di Tolmino (Gabrje) Santa Lucia Stazione (Postaja)

122 Geographical names in the languages of official minorities in Slovenia

Vetta del Monte () Sant’Osvaldo [“Strizisce”] (Stržišče) Gracova Serravalle (Grahovo ob Bači) Sella di Piedimelze () Grandi (Grant) Sella di Volzana (Sela pri Volčah) Grudenza (Grudinca*) Sellìschie di Tolmino (Selišče) Villa Iùsina (Hudajužna) Selze di Caporetto Selce( ) Idria della Baccia (Idrija pri Bači) Slappe d’Idria () Lisizza (Lisec**) Sottolmino () Loia () Stopenìco (Stopnik) Logarse (Logaršče) Temeline () Log [di sopra] () Tertenico () Tribussa di Monte Sanvito (Dolenja Lom di Canale () Trebuša) Lom di Tolmino () Tribussa (Gorenja Trebuša) Lubino () Tolmino (Tolmino*) Modrea () Vetta di Monte San Vito Bukovski( Vrh) Modreuzza () Villa Grotta di Dante Zadlaz-Žabče*( ) Monte Sanvito (Šentviška gora*) Vollària () Monte Snoile (Znojile) Volzana (Volče) Oblocca () Zadlas Ciadra (Zadlaz-Čadrg*)

This kind of presentation is all the more problematic because the Italian names are cited first and the Slovenian names are written in parentheses, as though they were exonyms. Note that this part of Slovenia was indeed part of Italy during the interwar period (from 1920 to 1943), as was a third of what is now Slovenian territory, but its inhabitants were exclusively Slovenian (Kladnik 2009, 408). Although some place names have an old, well-established Italian form, based on the local romance dialect (i.e. Cighino, Santa Lucia, Tolmino), when comparing the variants of individual names in Italian and Slovene a person with only a rudimentary knowledge of Slavic languages will quickly conclude that during the interwar period the majority of the orig- inal Slovenian names were only Italianized superficially and without any deeper semantic logic.

123 Matjaž Geršič, Drago Kladnik & Peter Repolusk 5 CONCLUSION

Slovenia is a country in which minority issues are handled in an exempla- ry manner. This is especially true for the native, more or less contiguously populated areas of the Italian and Hungarian ethnic minorities. The mem- bers of both groups have a representative in the ninety-member Slovenian parliament, have their own media, and, most importantly, receive educa- tion in their native language. Furthermore, the members of the majori- ty Slovenian population that live in the ethnically mixed areas also learn how to write in the language of the minority and use it in primary school. This approach ensures that functional bilingualism is maintained, something that is also manifested externally through the consistent use of bilingual names of settlements on the signs along the main roads. Slo- venian settlement names (but only up to the level of entire settlements, without individual hamlets) and other important geographical names have already been standardized, whereas the Italian and Hungarian names have not. As we write, preparations are underway to carry out this de- manding process. Special attention will also have to be dedicated to pro- cessing other names that have not yet been standardized, including many bilingual names. Because the relevant records are fairly scant, these names will doubtless have to be studied in greater detail. Slovenia is doing an exemplary job in taking care of its official native minorities, which comprise several thousand members living in a more or less contiguous settlement pattern; yet, it fervently refuses to recog- nize similar rights for the significantly larger number of immigrants from elsewhere in the former Yugoslavia, who mostly moved to Slovenia after the Second World War. These people migrated to industrialized Slove- nia as economic migrants and settled largely in towns. In the 2002 census, which was the last time Slovenia’s ethnic composition was inventoried, the number of Serbs, Croatians, Bosniacs, Macedonians, , and Montenegrins significantly exceeded 100,000 (Šircelj 2003, 141). Despite occasional appeals from these immigrants, Slovenia is trying hard to integrate these people because it is not willing to recognize an official ethnic minority status for them. This would demand extensive changes in education and culture, but it would not affect the use of geo- graphical names within Slovenia because exonyms for the Slovenian ter- 124 Geographical names in the languages of official minorities in Slovenia ritory used by members of the immigrant ethnicities are extremely rare (Kladnik 2009, 409).

References Census of Population, Households, Housing and Farms 1991. Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia. Ljubljana. Census of Population, Households and Housing 2002. Ljubljana: Statisti- cal Office of the Republic of Slovenia. Ferenc, T., and J. Šumrada. 1991. Kočevarji. Enciklopedija Slovenije, vol. 5, 179. Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga. Furlan, M., et al. 2008. Imenik zemljepisnih imen Državne pregledne karte Republike Slovenije v merilu 1:250.000 = Gazetteer of the national general map of the Republic of Slovenia at the scale 1:250,000. Državna pregledna karta Republike Slovenije v merilu 1:250.000 = National general map of the Republic of Slovenia at the scale 1:250,000. Ljubljana: Geodetski in- štitut Slovenije / Geodetska uprava Republike Slovenije. Geršič, M., and D. Kladnik. 2016. Street-name changes in Ljubljana. Place- -Name Changes. (Proceedings of the Symposion in , 17‒18 November 2014), ed. P. Jordan & P. Woodman, 249‒274. Rome: Verlag Dr. Kovač. Heberle, G. 2008. Političnogeografska analiza nekdanjega kočevarskega je- zikovnega otoka. Bachelor’s thesis. Ljubljana: Filozofska fakulteta Uni- verze v Ljubljani. Josipovič, D., and P. Repolusk. 2003. Demographic Characteristics of the Romany in Prekmurje = Demografske značilnosti Romov v Prekmurju. Acta Geographica Slovenica 43–1: 127‒149. doi: https://doi.org/10.3986/ AGS43105. Kladnik, D. 2009. Semantic Demarcation of the Concepts of Endonym and Exonym = Prispevek k pomenski razmejitvi terminov endonim in eksonim. Acta geographica Slovenica 49–2: 394‒428. doi: htt ps://doi . org/10.3986/AGS49206. Komac, M. 2015. Poselitveni prostor avtohtonih narodnih manjšin = The settlement territory of autochthonous ethnic minorities.Razprave in gradivo 74, 90‒91. Mihelič, D. 1998. Kolonizacija. Geografski atlas Slovenije, ed. J. Fridl et al., 288‒291. Ljubljana: DZS. 125 Matjaž Geršič, Drago Kladnik & Peter Repolusk Šircelj, M. 2003. Verska, jezikovna in narodna sestava prebivalstva Slove- nije. Popisi 1921–2002. Ljubljana: Statistični urad Republike Slovenije. Veliki atlas Slovenije 2013. Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga Založba d. d. Zupančič, J. 2007. Romska naselja kot posebni del naselbinskega sistema v Sloveniji = Roma settlements as a specific part of settlement system in Slovenia. Dela 27: 215‒246. Zupančič, J. 2015. O integraciji romskih naselij v slovenski naselbinski sis- tem = About the integration of Roma settlements into Slovene settle- ment network. Razprave in gradivo 75: 24‒26.

126