Estonian Between German and Russian
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ESTONIAN BETWEEN GERMAN AND RUSSIAN: FACTS AND FICTION ABOUT LANGUAGE INTERFERENCE Author(s): CORNELIUS HASSELBLATT Source: Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics, Vol. 28, Languages in Contact (2000), pp. 135-144 Published by: Brill Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40997158 Accessed: 04-01-2018 13:18 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Brill is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics This content downloaded from 91.129.99.79 on Thu, 04 Jan 2018 13:18:36 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Languages in Contact, edited by D.G. Gilbers, J. Nerbonne, and J. Schaeken (= Studies in Slavic and Generai Linguistics, vol. 28), 135-144. Amsterdam - Atlanta, GA: Rodopi, 2000. ESTONIAN BETWEEN GERMAN AND RUSSIAN: FACTS AND FICTION ABOUT LANGUAGE INTERFERENCE CORNELIUS HASSELBLATT German and Russian are the most important contact languages for Estonian. While the German influence has been described at different levels in several monographs (e.g. Ariste 1940, Pauley 1980, Hinderung 1981, Hasselblatt 1990) and numerous articles, the Russian influence still lacks a profound analysis. Some work has been done in the field of loanwords (e.g. Mägiste 1962, Seppet 1983), but most of the work seems to lie before us. Since the weakening of the Soviet/Russian political influence (ca. 1988) and the regaining of Estonian independence (1991) the Russian influence on Estonian has been dealt with by several Estonian scholars (cf. Hint 1990, 1990a, 1996, 1996a; Liivaku 1993 and 1994). The problem is, however, that some of the linguistic features characterized as Russian might be ascribed to other, i.e. mainly (Low) German influence, as this language was the most important contact language for Estonian for seven centuries: Estonia was conquered by Teutonic knights in the 13th century. This, and the embedding into the Hanseatic League led to a strong (Low) German influence which lasted until the beginnings of the 20th century when the German upper class finally lost its privileged position (1918) and left the country (1939). The Russian influence was intensified in the period of Russi- fication beginning with emperor Alexander III (1881) but was interrupted during the first independence period (1918-1940). The Soviet period (1941/44-1991) strengthened the position of Russian again, leading to a demographic shift, re- sulting in the large Russian minority of Estonia today. The problem, in short, is to weigh 700 years of (Low) German influence against 100 years of intense Russian influence. In what follows I will try to pre- sent a critical review of Russian influence in Estonian and ask whether Russian is, indeed, the only probable source for specific un-Estonian features in Estonian, or whether other source languages should also be considered. The following inven- tory is based mainly on Mati Hint (1990) but other sources are also taken into ac- count. Hint 1990a is an English version of the first part of (the Estonian) Hint 1990. This content downloaded from 91.129.99.79 on Thu, 04 Jan 2018 13:18:36 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 1 36 CORNELIUS HASSELBLATT 1) Ideologization of word usage (Hint 1990: 1383-1387): It is true that in a cen- tralized, totalitarian state language is an important instrument for rulers to steer the people. This certainly happened in Soviet Estonia as well as in Nazi-Germany and elsewhere. The specific position of Russian in the Soviet Union does indeed give the ideologization of word usage a Russian guise. Generally, however, ideologization of word usage is not confined to totalitarian states. Contemporary American 'political correctness' can also be a kind of ideologization as is any kind of prescribed euphemism: in German nuclear energy was originally called Atomkraft (e.g. Wahrig 1968: 454) but later replaced by Kernkraft {Duden 1993- 1995: 271 refers from Atomkraft to Kernkraft) because Kernkraft lacks the nega- tive connotation with the atomic bomb. So Hint's statement on ideologization of word usage should be modified: Due to the Russian rule the (normal) ideologiza- tion of word usage received a Russian guise. 2) Using reflexive (intransitive) verbs instead of transitive verbs or German sich- constructions (Hint 1990: 1388-1392): As Hint himself admits, the suffix -u- for reflexive or intransitive verbs is a common derivation suffix in Baltic-Finnic. The hypothesis that the use of this suffix has increased due to Russian influence can hardly be proved or disproved without larger-scale quantitative analysis. But there are some arguments which suggest that many -w-verbs are older than recent Rus- sian influence could account for. One of Hint's examples - sulguma 'to close' - can be attested for the early 18th century (Vestring's unpublished dictionary, see Vestring 1998: 234) and cannot therefore exist due to recent Russian influence. Secondly, a look at Finland can prove useful: the pair sisaldama 'to contain' / si- salduma 'to be contained, be included' - the latter being one of Hint's examples for the spreading of -w-verbs - has an exact Finnish counterpart in sisältää and sisältyä. A comparable Russian influence on Finnish has, however, never been suggested, and the fact that in a frequency analysis the Finnish verbs do not range very far away from one another {sisältää has position 580, sisältyä position 712 in a sample of more than 40.000 lexems, cf. Saukkonen et al. 1979: 468) is a further argument for the 'normality' of this verb pair. Mägiste (1982-1983: 2823) even suggests that not only sisaldama - which is quite obvious (cf. Raun 1982: 158) - but even sisalduma is a 19th century Finnish loan. Finally, we find the pair already in a pre-war Estonian-German dictionary (Graf 1937: 534-535) which again makes recent Russian influence seem more unlikely. 3) Aspect (Hint 1990: 1392-1393): The category of aspect is sometimes believed to be a peculiarity of the Slavic languages (cf. Lewandowski 1994: 95), but it is actually found in most of the world's languages, though the means of realisation can be very different (Comrie 1976, Dahl 1985). The Baltic-Finnic languages originally show the uncommon feature of marking aspect with the nominal object, not with the verb. But this method is restricted to certain syntactical constructions - e.g. only transitive verbs can display aspectual meanings with the object - and This content downloaded from 91.129.99.79 on Thu, 04 Jan 2018 13:18:36 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms ESTONIAN BETWEEN GERMAN AND RUSSIAN 1 37 syntactical aspectual minimal pairs are extremely rare (cf. for Finnish Ground- stroem 1988: 10). In Estonian, such cases are even less frequent (Metslang 1997: 32). Nevertheless the category of aspect can be expressed, as Estonian has devel- oped its own system of phrasal verbs which function mostly as aspect markers (Hasselblatt 1990; Metslang 1997). Although Hint (1990: 1392) admits that this aspectual system came into being mostly according to the German pattern (cf. G. essen vs. aufessen), he argues that the recent Russian influence has stimulated most of the contemporary phrasal verbs. This statement is insubstantial insofar as a large number of the phrasal verbs are considerably older than one hundred years. As Russian pressure was much weaker, or even non-existent, in previous centuries, a Russian loan translation is less likely than a German loan translation in case both possible source languages offer the same pattern. According to Hint (1990: 1393) Est. välja Mema 'to speak out' (välja 'out' + Mema 'to say') would be a recent (= Soviet) loan translation from Russ. vy-skazat'sja 'to speak out', but as this verb is found already in earlier sources (e.g. Wiedemann 1869: 1413), the German verb aussprechen might fit better as the source. I have shown earlier (Hasselblatt 1999: 228-229) that the Russian influence Erelt and Metslang (1998: 665) suggested for some verbs is not very probable as these verbs could already be attested in earlier centuries. Another example is a newspaper column by Hint (1990b) where he says: "In order to reach exactly the grammatical structure of the Russian verb one uses means of expressions which have come into being by German influence", and he mentions several examples of verbs with the (redundant) aspect marker ära. In his opinion these verbs are constructed according to their Russian counterparts with the means and methods earlier German influence had created in Estonian. I state, however, that a consid- erable number of the phrasal verbs has already been formed long before the Rus- sian influence strenghtened, as they can be attested in sources from the 17th and 18th century. As the most common aspect marker is ära 'away, off I will scrutinize the verb patterns with this particle. In an earlier corpus (Hasselblatt 1990) based on con- temporary, 20th century, dictionaries I examined 266 phrasal verbs with ära. Of these verbs, 41.4 % could be attested in the 17th century, 15.8 % in the 18th cen- tury, 18.4 % in the 19th century, and only less than a quarter (24.4 %) had no ear- lier attestation. This corpus is based on bilingual dictionaries (cf. Hasselblatt 1990: 50-53) and is not at all all-inclusive. But the tendency is rather obvious: more than the half of the phrasal verbs with ära stems from, at least, the 17th and 18th century.