DOCSLIB.ORG

University of Groningen Mutual Intelligibility in the Slavic Language

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

University of Groningen Mutual intelligibility in the Slavic language area Golubovic, Jelena IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2016 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Golubovic, J. (2016). Mutual intelligibility in the Slavic language area. University of Groningen. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license. More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne- amendment. Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 04-10-2021 Mutual intelligibility in the Slavic language area Jelena Golubović The work in this thesis was carried out under the Graduate school of the humanities (GSH) from the University of Groningen and the Center for Language and Cognition Groningen (CLCG). The work described in this thesis was carried out withing the project Mutual intelligibility of closely related languages in Europe: linguistic and non-linguistic determinants financed by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). Groningen Dissertations in Linguistics 152 ISSN: 0928-0030 ISBN: 978-90-367-8804-5 Printed by: MapioPublishing (www.mapiopublishing.com) Mutual intelligibility in the Slavic language area PhD thesis to obtain the degree of PhD at the University of Groningen on the authority of the Rector Magnificus Prof. E. Sterken and in accordance with the decision by the College of Deans. This thesis will be defended in public on Monday 2 May 2016 at 14.30 hours by Jelena Golubović born on 19 April 1988 in Belgrade, Serbia Supervisors Prof. J. Nerbonne Prof. V.J.J.P. van Heuven Co-supervisor Dr. C.S. Gooskens Assessment committee Prof. T. Avgustinova Prof. C.L.J. de Bot Prof. J. Navracsics Acknowledgements 11 Chapter 1: Introduction 15 1. General concepts 15 2. The MICReLa project 19 3. The Slavic language family 21 4. Thesis overview 25 Chapter 2: Linguistic distances among six Slavic languages 29 1. Introduction 29 2. Previous research into linguistic distances 32 2.1. Lexical distance 32 2.2. Phonetic distance 32 3. The data 34 3.1. Text data for lexical, orthographic, morphological and syntactic comparisons 34 3.2. List data for phonological comparisons 37 3.3. A note on orthographic systems 38 4. Linguistic distance measures 38 4.1. Lexis 38 4.2. Orthography 39 4.3. Stems and affixes 41 4.4. Phonology 42 4.5. Syntax 43 5. Results 46 5.1. What are the linguistic distances among Czech, Slovak, Polish, Croatian, Slovene and Bulgarian? 46 5.1.1. Lexis 47 5.1.2. Orthography 48 5.1.3. Morphology/Affix distances 49 5.1.4. Phonology 51 5.1.5. Syntax 52 5.2. How do the different linguistic levels correlate with each other? 53 5.3. Which linguistic distance measurement best represents the relationships established in historical linguistics? 54 6. Discussion and conclusion 58 5 Chapter 3: Mutual intelligibility between West and South Slavic languages 63 1. Introduction 63 2. Aims, research questions and hypotheses 64 3. Previous research 66 3.1. Mutual intelligibility in the Slavic language area 66 3.2. Languages of the study 67 3.3. How to measure mutual intelligibility? 68 4. Method 70 4.1. Testing material 70 4.2. Experimental design 71 4.3. Word translation task 72 4.4. Cloze test 72 4.5. Picture task 73 4.6. Scoring 74 4.7. The issue of Bulgarian Cyrillic 75 4.8. Participants 75 5. Results 76 5.1. What is the level of intelligibility among Czech, Slovak, Polish, Croatian, Slovene and Bulgarian? 76 5.1.1. The word translation task 77 5.1.1.1. Written word translation task 77 5.1.1.2. Spoken word translation task 78 5.1.2. The cloze test 79 5.1.2.1. Written cloze test 79 5.1.2.2. Spoken cloze test 81 5.1.3. Picture task 82 5.1.3.1. Written picture task 82 5.1.3.2. Spoken picture task 83 5.2. Is the level of intelligibility between language pairs symmetric or asymmetric? 84 5.3. Do all three tests give a similar pattern of results? 86 6. Discussion 87 7. Conclusion and future directions 89 Chapter 4: Linguistic factors determining mutual intelligibility in the Slavic language area 91 1. Introduction 91 2. Method 95 6 2.1. Measuring intelligibility 95 2.1.1. Testing material 95 2.1.2. Participants 95 2.1.3. Procedure 96 2.1.4. Intelligibility scores 97 2.2. Measuring linguistic distances 97 3. Results 97 4. Discussion and conclusions 101 Chapter 5: Linguistic and extra-linguistic predictors of intelligibility among six Slavic languages 105 1. Introduction 105 2. Previous research 106 3. Aims and hypotheses 110 4. Measuring intelligibility 111 4.1. The word translation task 111 4.1.1. Method 111 4.1.2. Participants 112 4.1.3. Procedure 113 4.2. The cloze test 114 4.2.1. Method 114 4.2.2. Participants 114 4.2.3. Procedure 115 5. Linguistic predictors 115 5.1. Lexical distances 115 5.2. Orthographic distances 117 5.3. Stem and affix distances 118 5.4. Phonological distances 118 5.5. Syntactic distances 119 6. Extra-linguistic predictors 119 6.1. Language attitudes 119 6.2. Language exposure 119 7. Results 120 7.1. Tests and predictors 120 7.2. Language level vs. participant level 122 7.3. Single predictors of intelligibility 122 7.4. Multiple regression analyses 123 8. Discussion and conclusions 125 7 Chapter 6: Mutual intelligibility of Czech and Croatian: A didactic approach 133 1. Introduction, aims and research questions 133 2. Method 139 2.1. Experimental design 139 2.2. Background questionnaire 139 2.3. The pre-test and the post-test 140 2.4. Participants 141 2.5. Teaching material 142 2.6. Teaching intervention 144 3. Results 144 3.1. Functional intelligibility 144 3.2. Perceived intelligibility 146 3.2.1. Written language 146 3.2.2. Spoken language 147 3.3. Perceived distance and language attitudes 148 4. Discussion and conclusions 149 Chapter 7: “Their language sounds aggressive”: a matched guise study with Serbian and Croatian 153 1. Historical background 153 2. The bigger picture: language attitudes and conflict 155 3. Zooming in: Serbian-Croatian attitudes and stereotypes 156 4. Aims and hypotheses 158 5. Method 159 5.1. Stimulus material 159 5.1.1. The recordings 159 5.1.2. The questionnaire 161 5.1.3. Bilingual speaker/voice parade 162 5.2. Participants 163 5.3. Procedures 163 6. Results 164 6.1. Data coding 164 6.2. What are the attitudes of the speakers of Serbian and Croatian to the “other” language compared to their attitudes to their native language? 164 6.3. Are the attitudes towards the neighboring language symmetric or asymmetric? 165 6.4. How do the attitudes to the native and the neighboring language vary across different age groups? 166 8 6.5. What is the relationship between the amount of exposure and attitudes to the neighboring language? 168 7. Discussion and conclusion 169 Chapter 8: General discussion and conclusions 173 References 179 Appendix A: The four texts used as the “text data” when measuring linguistic distances and as the testing material for the cloze test 193 English 193 Croatian 195 Slovene 196 Bulgarian 198 Czech 200 Slovak 202 Polish 204 Appendix B: The word lists used as the “list data” when measuring linguistic distances and as the testing material for the translation task 206 English 206 Croatian 207 Slovene 208 Bulgarian 209 Czech 210 Slovak 211 Polish 212 Appendix C: Slavic consonant and vowel inventory 213 Appendix D: An overview of the MICReLa experiment 214 Appendix E: A screenshot from the MICReLa app showing one of the written cloze tests 215 Appendix F: The four sets of pictures used for the picture task 216 9 Appendix G: Detailed information on the participants 218 Appendix H: Correlation matrices 221 Appendix I: Details on coefficients, adjusted R² change and AICs values for each model 223 Appendix J: The picture sets that were used in spot-the-differences task 227 Appendix K: Lesson plans 228 Appendix L: The non-cognates which were taught 229 Appendix M: Testing material (all the differences between the two languages are marked in bold) 231 Nederlandse samenvatting 232 Groningen dissertations in linguistics (Grodil) 235 About the author 242 Acknowledgements A PhD project is a journey of pushing the limits of current knowledge, but also a journey of self-dis- covery. I would like to thank everyone who helped along the ride. I am grateful to my supervisor Charlotte Gooskens for giving me this amazing opportunity in the first place. She always had the time to listen to my ideas and provide feedback.
Recommended publications
  • Language Contact in Pomerania: the Case of German, Polish, and Kashubian

    Language Contact in Pomerania: the Case of German, Polish, and Kashubian

    P a g e | 1 Language Contact in Pomerania: The Case of German, Polish, and Kashubian Nick Znajkowski, New York University Purpose The effects of language contact and language shift are well documented. Lexical items and phonological features are very easily transferred from one language to another and once transferred, rather easily documented. Syntactic features can be less so in both respects, but shifts obviously do occur. The various qualities of these shifts, such as whether they are calques, extensions of a structure present in the modifying language, or the collapsing of some structure in favor the apparent simplicity found in analogous foreign structures, all are indicative of the intensity and the duration of the contact. Additionally, and perhaps this is the most interesting aspect of language shift, they show what is possible in the evolution of language over time, but also what individual speakers in a single generation are capable of concocting. This paper seeks to explore an extremely fascinating and long-standing language contact situation that persists to this day in Northern Poland—that of the Kashubian language with its dominating neighbors: Polish and German. The Kashubians are a Slavic minority group who have historically occupied the area in Northern Poland known today as Pomerania, bordering the Baltic Sea. Their language, Kashubian, is a member of the Slavic branch of Indo-European languages and further belongs to the Pomeranian branch of Lechitic languages, which includes Polish, Silesian, and the extinct Polabian and Slovincian. The situation to be found among the Kashubian people, a people at one point variably bi-, or as is sometimes the case among older folk, even trilingual in Kashubian, P a g e | 2 Polish, and German is a particularly exciting one because of the current vitality of the Kashubian minority culture.
  • The Case of the Czech Language

    The Case of the Czech Language

    E-Leader Berlin 2012 Celebrating EUROMOSAIC vs. language policies: the case of the Czech language Božena Bedna říková Dept. of Czech Studies Faculty of Arts Palacký University Olomouc, Czech Republic and Universita degli Studi di Udine Dipartimento delle Lingue e Letterature Straniere Udine/I, Italy 1. The EU language policy and the European Commission Project EUROMOSAIC The EU has a positive policy towards regional and minority languages which is enshrined in Article 22 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights. It states that “The Union respects cultural, religious and linguistic diversity ”. The European Commision has been providing several projects supporting regional and minority languages, one of them being the NETWORK PROMOTING THE LANGUAGE DIVERSITY. It is a pan-European Network which covers regional, minority, indigenous, cross-border and smaller national languages with the task to promote linguistic diversity in Europe. The main focus is providing information about and easy access to a large network of organisations that can share ideas, information and best practice regarding the promotion of less widely used languages. In 1992, wishing to take stock of the situation of the various language communities in Europe, the Commission initiated a study on minority language groups in the European Union. The purpose of the study, entitled "EUROMOSAIC" (later EROMOSAIC I), was not only to support the regional and minority languages, but also to find out about the different regional and minority languages in existence and to establish their potential for expanding, i. e. for their production and reproduction, and to examine the difficulties, the barriers and the challenges they could encounter in doing so.
  • Czech Language Programs and Czech As a Heritage Language in the United States

    Czech Language Programs and Czech As a Heritage Language in the United States

    Czech Language Programs and Czech as a Heritage Language in the United States Simone J. Hrouda, Portland State University, Oregon Introduction Czech language schools and Czech classes exist across the United States because of the efforts of Czech heritage language speakers to preserve the language spoken by their ancestors. These programs provide heritage speakers with the opportunity to further develop and maintain their Czech oral and written skills. Even though the language and culture are vital to the identity of individuals in states such as Nebraska, Texas, and Wisconsin, the importance of sustaining the language is not recognized on a national level. Czech is not considered a critical foreign language, and limited opportunities are available for language courses and scholarship programs. It is up to Czech heritage societies to keep Czech classes alive. Czech is a less commonly taught language (LCTL) in the United States, and locating Czech classes is difficult. However, these challenges and many others do not hinder Czech speakers from learning the Czech language. Though small, there is a Czech-speaking population made up of heritage, non-heritage, and native speakers who are making efforts to keep the Czech language alive. History of the Czech Language in the United States The largest immigration of Czechs to the United States took place between the years 1848 and 1914, when over 350,000 Czechs fled their homeland and established Czech communities across the United States (Thernstorm, 1981). Over time, language attrition and acculturation have led to loss of the Czech language within these communities (Dutkova-Cope, 2006; Eckert, 1987; Hannan, 2003; Vasek, 1996).
  • Language Policy and Linguistic Reality in Former Yugoslavia and Its Successor States

    Language Policy and Linguistic Reality in Former Yugoslavia and Its Successor States

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Tsukuba Repository Language Policy and Linguistic Reality in Former Yugoslavia and its Successor States 著者 POZGAJ HADZ Vesna journal or Inter Faculty publication title volume 5 page range 49-91 year 2014 URL http://doi.org/10.15068/00143222 Language Policy and Linguistic Reality in Former Yugoslavia and its Successor States Vesna POŽGAJ HADŽI Department of Slavistics Faculty of Arts University of Ljubljana Abstract Turbulent social and political circumstances in the Middle South Slavic language area caused the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the formation of new countries in the 1990s, and this of course was reflected in the demise of the prestigious Serbo-Croatian language and the emergence of new standard languages based on the Štokavian dialect (Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian and Montenegrin). The Yugoslav language policy advocated a polycentric model of linguistic unity that strived for equal representation of the languages of the peoples (Serbo-Croatian, Macedonian and Slovenian), ethnicities (ethnic minorities) and ethnic groups, as well as both scripts (Latin and Cyrillic). Serbo-Croatian, spoken by 73% of people in Yugoslavia, was divided into the eastern and the western variety and two standard language expressions: Bosnian and Montenegrin. One linguistic system had sociolinguistic subsystems or varieties which functioned and developed in different socio-political, historical, religious and other circumstances. With the disintegration of Yugoslavia, the aforementioned sociolinguistic subsystems became standard languages (one linguistic system brought forth four political languages). We will describe the linguistic circumstances of the newly formed countries after 1991 in Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro.
  • The Case of Lower Sorbian

    The Case of Lower Sorbian

    Marti Roland Universität des Saarlandes Saarbrücken, Deutschland Codification and Re(tro)codification of a Minority Language: The Case of Lower Sorbian Lower Sorbian – codification – orthography – Slavonic microlanguages The codification of languages or language varieties belongs to the realm of standardology in linguistics (cf. Brozović 1970). It is interesting to note, although not really surprising, that questions of standardology first attracted the interest of linguists in Slavonic-speaking countries, albeit in rather different ways.1 On the one hand it was the Prague school of linguistics that developed a framework for the description of standard languages (cf. Jedlička 1990), prompted at least partly by the diglossic situation of Czech (according to Ferguson 1959). On the other hand it was Soviet linguistics with its hands-on experience of working with the many languages of the Soviet Union that had no written tradition at all or used very imperfect writing systems. The linguistic bases on which theories were developed differed considerably and so did the respective approaches. The Prague school had to deal with reasonably stable stand- ard languages whereas linguists in the Soviet Union often had to create a 1 On standardology with special reference to Slavonic languages, see Müller/ Wingender 2013 and section XXV. in the handbook Die slavischen Sprachen — The Slavic languages (Gutschmidt et al. 2014: 1958–2038), in particular Wingender 2014. - 303 - Marti Roland standard or to replace an existing standard that was unsuitable (or
  • The Mohammedan Bulgarians (Pomaks)

    The Mohammedan Bulgarians (Pomaks)

    Reconciliation Through art: Perceptions of Hijab 22nndd TTRRAANNSSNNAATTIIIOONNAALL WWOORRKKSSHHOOPP PPRREESSEENNTTAATTIIIOONN The Mohammedan Bulgarians (Pomaks) by Dr Stoyan Raichevsky The Mohammedan Bulgarians (the so-called Pomaks ) have often been the subject of research in contemporary Bulgarian and Balkan historiography. The major problem in such studies is the conversion to Islam: when, how and for what reason did it happen, was violence applied in adopting Islam or economic considerations were quite enough. The analysis of all existing publications indicates that the Mohammedan Bulgarians adopted Islam on a mass scale mainly in the period 17 th -18 th c. The reasons for that vary. Naturally there was change of faith imposed with sword, but this was not the only and the major reason for adopting Islam. It seems that the main factor was economic pressure and the temptation of privileges and tax reductions received immediately after renouncing the Christian faith. Still another group of reasons for adopting Islam by Mohammedan Bulgarians is suggested – the greed of Greek Orthodox clergy, the conflict of the Bogomils with the Orthodox Church, etc. A second group of studies of Mohammedan Bulgarians is centered on their ancient Bulgarian language, their rituals and traditional culture, in which scholars discover many traces of the pre-Islamic period and the so-called crypto-Christianity. We can’t disregard also a third group of studies, which uncovers the common hereditary roots, the kinship relations or the common property of Mohammedan Bulgarians and Christian Bulgarians. All authors and scholars of the period till 1878 – before the appearance of modern Bulgarian education, Bulgarian institutions and administration, which could apply some administrative measures of subjective influence in creating written evidence about Mohammedan Bulgarians, almost without exception, call the language of this Muslim population Bulgarian and rarely Slavic .
  • The Public Service Broadcasting Culture

    The Public Service Broadcasting Culture

    The Series Published by the European Audiovisual Observatory What can you IRIS Special is a series of publications from the European Audiovisual Observatory that provides you comprehensive factual information coupled with in-depth analysis. The expect from themes chosen for IRIS Special are all topical issues in media law, which we explore for IRIS Special in you from a legal perspective. IRIS Special’s approach to its content is tri-dimensional, with overlap in some cases, depending on the theme. terms of content? It offers: 1. a detailed survey of relevant national legislation to facilitate comparison of the legal position in different countries, for example IRIS Special: Broadcasters’ Obligations to Invest in Cinematographic Production describes the rules applied by 34 European states; 2. identifi cation and analysis of highly relevant issues, covering legal developments and trends as well as suggested solutions: for example IRIS Special, Audiovisual Media Services without Frontiers – Implementing the Rules offers a forward-looking analysis that will continue to be relevant long after the adoption of the EC Directive; 3. an outline of the European or international legal context infl uencing the national legislation, for example IRIS Special: To Have or Not to Have – Must-carry Rules explains the European model and compares it with the American approach. What is the source Every edition of IRIS Special is produced by the European Audiovisual Observatory’s legal information department in cooperation with its partner organisations and an extensive The Public of the IRIS Special network of experts in media law. The themes are either discussed at invitation-only expertise? workshops or tackled by selected guest authors.
  • (Ruthenian Or Rusyn) Language in Poland Lemkos

    (Ruthenian Or Rusyn) Language in Poland Lemkos

    The 17th Meeting of the Baltic Division of the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names Warszawa, 29 June – 01 July 2015 Maciej Zych Commission on Standardization of Geographical Names Outside the Republic of Poland Romanization rules for the Lemko (Ruthenian or Rusyn) language in Poland Lemkos (Ruthenians or Rusyns) is an ethnic minority which has been recognized in Poland on the basis of the Act of 6th January 2005 on national and ethnic minorities and on the regional languages. The act mentions, in addition to the Lemkos, 9 national minorities: Belorussian, Czech, Lithuanian, German, Armenian, Russian, Slovak, Ukrainian, and Jewish; 3 ethnic minorities – Karait, Roma, and Tartar; as well as one regional language – the Kashubian language. The Act lays down, among others, that traditional names in a minority language for localities, physiographic objects and streets may be used as “additional names” alongside geographic names established in the Polish language. To date (as of 1st June 2015), additional names have been introduced in 1204 localities and parts of them located in 57 communes. There were introduced: 27 Belarusian names, 359 German names, 779 Kashubian names, 9 Lemko names, and 30 Lithuanian names. Additional names in minority languages appear on road signs, they are also used on some maps. Pursuant to the Regulation of the Minister of Administration and Digitization of 14th February 2012 on the national register of geographical names, the Surveyor General of Poland shall maintain the database of the National Register of Geographical Names. In the Register, among others, officially adopted names in minority languages shall be listed.
  • Minority Place Names in Poland

    Minority Place Names in Poland

    UNITED NATIONS Working Paper GROUP OF EXPERTS ON No. 23 GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES Twenty-sixth session Vienna, 2-6 May 2011 Item 16 of the provisional agenda Activities relating to the Working Group on the Promotion of the Recording and Use of Indigenous, Minority and Regional Language Group Geographical Names Minority place names in Poland Submitted by Poland* * Prepared by Maciej Zych, Commission on Standardization of Geographical Names Outside the Republic of Poland Minority place names in Poland (Summary) Act on national and ethnic minorities and on the regional languages was passed in Poland six years ago (in 2005). The act recognizes nine national minorities (Belarusians, Czechs, Lithuanians, Germans, Armenians, Russians, Slovaks, Ukrainians and Jews), four ethnic minorities (Karaims, Lemkos, Roma and Tartars) and one minority using a regional language (Kashubian). On areas inhabited densely by these minorities, minority languages may be introduced as supporting languages. On these areas geographical names in minority language may be introduced alongside names established in the Polish language. By 20 February 2011 supporting languages (Belarusian, Kashubian, Lithuanian or German) were introduced in 30 communes in three voivodships (Opolskie, Podlaskie and Pomorskie). By that time 740 geographical names for localities and their parts in minority languages (374 Kashubian names, 310 German names, 30 Lithuanian names, 25 Belarusian names, and 1 Lemko name) were introduced in 39 communes in five voivodships (list of these names is accessible on page http://ksng.gugik.gov.pl/english/files/list_of_minority_names.pdf). 1 Minority place names in Poland On 6 January 2005 the Polish Parliament passed an Act on national and ethnic minorities and on the regional languages1.
  • Swedish Contributions to the Fourteenth International Congress of Slavists

    Swedish Contributions to the Fourteenth International Congress of Slavists

    swedish contributions to the fourteenth international congress of slavists Per Ambrosiani (ed.) Swedish Contributions to the Fourteenth International Congress of Slavists (Ohrid, 10–16 September 2008) Umeå Studies in Language and Literature 6 Department of Language Studies Umeå University 2009 Umeå University Department of Language Studies SE-901 87 Umeå www.sprak.umu.se Umeå Studies in Language and Literature 6 © 2009 The authors Cover photograph: Sveti Zaum, Macedonia © 2008 Tora Hedin Cover layout: Gabriella Dekombis, Print & Media Printed in Sweden by Print & Media, Umeå 2009 ISBN 978-91-7264-814-2 Preface The present volume—the second separate volume with Swedish contributions to the International Congresses of Slavists1—includes seven articles by Swedish Slavists presented at the Fourteenth International Congress of Slavists, which was held in Ohrid, Macedonia, 10–16 September 2008.2 The articles cover the following topics: Russian historical parish names, Hunno- Bulgarian loanwords in the Slavic languages, linguistic variation in the spoken language of contemporary Czech television, seventeenth-century translations of German and Dutch phraseologisms into Russian, the history of the translation of the South Slavic folk ballad “The Wife of Hasan Aga” into Swedish, the image of women in the works of the Polish writers Natasza Goerke and Olga Tokarczuk, and the use of irony in Soviet totalitarian and anti-totalitarian discourse. The Swedish Association of Slavists (Svenska slavistförbundet)wishes to express its gratitude to the Department of Language Studies at Umeå University for the decision to accept the present volume in the series “Studier i språk och litteratur från Umeå universitet / Umeå Studies in Language and Literature”.
  • Language, Ideology and Politics in Croatia

    Language, Ideology and Politics in Croatia

    Language, Ideology and Politics in Croatia M at e k a p o v i ć University of Zagreb, Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Ivana Lučića 3, HR – 10 000 Zagreb, [email protected] SCN IV/2 [2011], 45–56 Izhajajoč deloma iz osnovnih tez svoje pred kratkim izšle knjige Čiji je jezik (Čigav je jezik?) avtor podaja pregled zapletenega odnosa med jezikom, ideologijo in politiko na Hrvaškem v preteklih dveh desetletjih, vključno z novimi primeri in razčlembami. Razprava se osredotoča na vprašanja, povezana s Hrvaško, ki so lahko zanimiva za tuje slaviste in jezikoslovce, medtem ko se knjiga (v hrvaščini) ukvarja s problemi jezika, politike, ideologije in družbenega jeziko- slovja na splošno. Based in part on his recent book Čiji je jezik? (Who does Language Belong to?), the author reviews the intricate relation of language, ideology, and politics in Croatia in the last 20 years, including new examples and analyses. The article emphasizes problems related to Croatia specifically, which might be of interest to foreign Slavists and linguists, while the monograph (in Croatian) deals with the prob- lems of language, society, politics, ideology, and sociolinguistics in general. Ključne besede: jezikovna politika, jezikovno načrtovanje, purizem, hrvaški jezik, jezik v nekdanji Jugoslaviji Key words: language politics, language planning, purism, Croatian language, language in former Yugoslavia Introduction1 The aim of this article is to provide a general and brief overview of some problems concerning the intricate relation of language, ideology, and politics in Croatia in the last 20 years. The bulk of the article consists of some of the 1 I would like to thank Marko Kapović for reading the first draft of the article carefully.
  • The Rise of Bulgarian Nationalism and Russia's Influence Upon It

    The Rise of Bulgarian Nationalism and Russia's Influence Upon It

    University of Louisville ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository Electronic Theses and Dissertations 5-2014 The rise of Bulgarian nationalism and Russia's influence upon it. Lin Wenshuang University of Louisville Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.library.louisville.edu/etd Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Wenshuang, Lin, "The rise of Bulgarian nationalism and Russia's influence upon it." (2014). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1548. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/1548 This Doctoral Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has retained all other copyrights. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE RISE OF BULGARIAN NATIONALISM AND RUSSIA‘S INFLUENCE UPON IT by Lin Wenshuang B. A., Beijing Foreign Studies University, China, 1997 M. A., Beijing Foreign Studies University, China, 2002 A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of the University of Louisville in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Humanities University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky May 2014 Copyright © 2014 by Lin Wenshuang All Rights Reserved THE RISE OF BULGARIAN NATIONALISM AND RUSSIA‘S INFLUENCE UPON IT by Lin Wenshuang B. A., Beijing Foreign Studies University, China, 1997 M. A., Beijing Foreign Studies University, China, 2002 A Dissertation Approved on April 1, 2014 By the following Dissertation Committee __________________________________ Prof.