sign in sign up
<<
Home , Banat Bulgarians, Burgenland Croatian, Croatian language, Rusyn language, Slovak language

The Palgrave Handbook of Slavic , Identities and Borders This page intentionally left blank The Palgrave Handbook of , Identities and Borders

Edited by Tomasz Kamusella University of St Andrews, UK Motoki Nomachi Hokkaido University, Japan and Catherine Gibson European University Institute, Selection, introduction and editorial content © Tomasz Kamusella, Motoki Nomachi and Catherine Gibson 2016 Individual chapters © Respective authors 2016 Foreword © Peter Burke 2016 Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 2016 978-1-137-34838-8 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may made without written permission. No portion of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, Saffron House, 6–10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS. Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. The authors have asserted their rights to be identified as the authors of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. First published 2016 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN Palgrave Macmillan in the UK is an imprint of Macmillan Publishers Limited, registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS. Palgrave Macmillan in the US is division of St Martin’ Press LLC, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010. Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the above companies and has companies and representatives throughout the world. Palgrave® and Macmillan® are registered trademarks in the , the , Europe and other countries. ISBN 978-1-349-57703-3 ISBN 978-1-137-34839-5 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-1-137-34839-5 This book is printed on paper suitable for recycling and made from fully managed and sustained forest sources. Logging, pulping and manufacturing processes are expected to conform to the environmental regulations of the country of origin. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The Palgrave handbook of Slavic languages, identities and borders / edited by Tomasz Kamusella, Motoki Nomachi, Catherine Gibson. pages cm Summary: “Languages are artefacts of culture, meaning they are created by people. They are often used for identity building and maintenance, but in Central and they became the basis of nation building and national statehood maintenance. The recent split of the Serbo-Croatian in the wake of the break-up of amply illustrates the highly politicized role of languages in this region, which is also home to most of the world’s Slavic-speakers. This volume presents and analyzes the creation of languages across the Slavophone areas of the world and their deployment for political projects and identity building, mainly after 1989. The overview concludes with a reflection on the recent rise of Slavophone speech communities in Western Europe and . The book brings together renowned international scholars who offer a variety of perspectives from a number of disciplines and sub-fields such as , socio- political history and language policy, making this book of great interest to historians, sociologists, political scientists and anthropologists interested in Central and Eastern Europe and ”—Provided by publisher. ISBN 978–1–137–34838–8 (hardback) 1. Slavic languages—History. 2. Languages in contact—Slavic languages. . Kamusella, Tomasz, editor. II. Nomachi, Motoki, editor. III. Gibson, Catherine, editor. PG45.P35 2015 491.8'09—dc23 2015003227

Typeset by MPS Limited, Chennai, India. In remembrance of Professor . Cienciała (1929–2014) Professor Milka Ivić (1923–2011) Professor Jerzy Tomaszewski (1931–2014) This page intentionally left blank Contents

List of Figures, Tables, and Maps x

Foreword xii

Acknowledgements xiv

Notes on Contributors xv

Introduction 1 Tomasz Kamusella, Motoki Nomachi, and Catherine Gibson

1 Cross-border Turkic and Iranian Language Retention in the West and East Slavic Lands and Beyond: A Tentative Classification 8 Paul Wexler

2 Identity and Language of the Roma (Gypsies) in Central and Eastern Europe 26 Elena Marushiakova and Vesselin Popov

Part I North and Their Languages

3 The Polish Livonian Legacy in Latgalia: The Confluence of Slavic Ethnolects in the Baltic-Slavic Borderland 57 Catherine Gibson

4 Iazychie and : Mixing Languages and Identities in the Ukrainian Borderlands 81 Andrii Danylenko

5 A Borderland of Borders: The Search for a in Carpathian Rus’ 101 Paul Magocsi

6 Rusyn: A New–Old Language In-between Nations and States 124 Michael Moser

7 The Czech-Slovak Communicative and Continuum: With and Without a Border 140 Mira Nábělková

vii viii Contents

8 The Changing Lattice of Languages, Borders, and Identities in 185 Tomasz Kamusella

9 ‘Our People is Divided, Yes, and Torn Asunder …’: The Sorbian Language Community and Its Internal Divisions 206 Roland Marti

10 Fickle Nationalism: ’s Shifting Ethno-Linguistic Borders 230 Maxwell

11 From ‘Hungarus’ Patriotism to Linguistic Nationalism 245 István Fried

Part II and Their Languages

12 Phonology and the Construction of Borders in the 263 Brian .

13 after the Schengen Agreement: Will the Linguistic Borders Also Disappear? 276 Andrej Bekeš

14 Borderlands and Transborder Regions of the : How Far Back in History Is Enough? 309 Anita Peti-Stantić and Keith Langston

15 The Language Situation for the on Both Sides of the Serbian/Montenegrin Border 330 Robert D. Greenberg

16 Croatian: An Old Language on a Do-it-Yourself Border with a New Name 347 .

17 Identity Problems of the Gorani in Eastern Albania and 360 Klaus Steinke

18 Borders in in the Light of Areal Ethnolinguistics 376 Irina Sedakova

19 The Rise, Fall, and Revival of the Bulgarian Literary Language: Sociolinguistic History from the Perspective of Trans-Border Interactions 394 Motoki Nomachi

20 Conflicting Nationalist Discourses in the Balkan Slavic Language Area 429 Jouko Lindstedt Contents ix

Part III A Glimpse into the Future

21 Speakers of Russian in Ireland: Where Borderless and Bordered Languages Meet 451 Sarah Smyth

22 Central Europe in the : The in Israel 477 Anna Novikov

23 Negotiating Goods and Language on Cross-Border Retail Markets in the Postsocialist Space 495 Dieter Stern

24 Migration or Immigration? Ireland’s New and Unexpected Polish-Language Community 524 Tomasz Kamusella

Index 549 List of Figures, Tables, and Maps

Figures

4.1 Language and identity mixing in the Ukrainian borderlands 83 13.1 The evolving of bilingual topographic names in Carinthia 294 23.1 Allegedly irredentist slogan in factory at Aginskoe, Chitinskoe oblast’. The text in fact translates as: ‘Safety and civilized order of production enhance and guarantee a prosperous future of the enterprise’ 498 23.2 Torgovyi tsentr at Manzhouli in classicist style 507

Tables

4.1 Development of the literary (s) 96 12.1 Genealogical classification and affiliation of languages of the Balkans 266 15.1 Bosniaks, , and Bosniaks/Muslims in the 2011 Montenegrin Census 339 17.1 Gorani in Albania 364 21.1 Question 1: which languages do you know? 458 21.2 Responses to questions 16–19 on language use 460 21.3 Question 2a: I consider language X ‘part of who I am’ 462 21.4 Responses to question 8 464 21.5 Responses to question 9: re. the status of languages 465 21.6 Responses to question 9: intrinsic and extrinsic factors motivating language needs 466 21.7 Responses to question 9: psychological factors motivating language education needs 467 21.8 Question 11: attitudinal statements () and () 471

Maps

5.1 Carpathian Rus’: a borderland of borders 102 5.2 in Carpathian Rus’ 104

x List of Figures, Tables, and Maps xi

5.3 Ethnographic divisions in Carpathian Rus’ 105 7.1 and Slovak Republic with main cities and towns mentioned (map by Marián Sloboda) 141 7.2 Isoglosses of features considered Czech/Slovak (adapted and translated from Bělič 1972) 153 7.3 Moravian, Silesian, and Slovak border dialects (based on a merger of dialect division maps in Bělič (1972) and Štolc et al. (1968), created by Marián Sloboda) 154 10.1 The Czechoslovak and North Hungarian Slavic national concepts 239 13.1 Ethnic distribution in - (Wikimedia Commons, based on Shepherd 1911: 168) 280 13.2 Present distribution of in and neighbouring countries 281 15.1 The Sandžak after 2006: divergent language policies of and 332 16.1 The ethnic groups of Austria-Hungary in 1910 according to Distribution of Races in Austria-Hungary by . Shepherd, 1911 351 17.1 Slavic minorities in Albania 371 18.1 Terms for Christmas 381 18.2 Terms for the Yule log 382 18.3 Terms for Christmas loaves 383 18.4 Terms for the Twelve Days’ demons 384 18.5 Terms for the Twelve Days 385 18.6 Christmas and Mumming processions 386 18.7 St Ignatius Day: semantics and main rituals 387 18.8 Local specific features in celebrating the Twelve Days’ rituals 388 Foreword

A handbook of Slavic languages needs no introduction to linguists working in this field, but this foreword gives me an opportunity to welcome a collective study that is of great interest and relevance to historians of Europe, whether their principal interests are in cultural, social, or political history. The editors and the contributors to this volume, 25 of them in all, working in 18 different countries, have interpreted their task in broad terms. One might have expected to find a chapter apiece on each of the Slavic languages, and nothing more. However, this volume also includes chapters about the use of Slavic languages outside ‘Slavia’ (in Ireland, for instance, in the United Kingdom, in Iceland, and in Israel), as well as discussions of neighbouring languages, from Iranian to , Romany, and Hungarian. Readers of this Handbook are also warned against imagining languages as discrete entities, as handbooks tend to do. More exactly, they are told that attempts to present languages in such a way are part of history, especially the history of nation-building in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The Handbook ranges widely in time as well as space, from the third mil- lennium BCE to the present, although most contributions focus on the last two or three centuries. The authors do not confine themselves to the analysis of languages (including dialects and pidgins), but also place these topics in a wider context or framework, including Romanticism and the discovery of the ‘people’, usually the peasantry, by urban intellectuals. They discuss both the political element in the history of language and the linguistic element in political history, as a means of ‘mass mobilization’, for instance. The con- tributors naturally have much to say about nations and the ‘nationalization’ of languages, especially in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, but they do not neglect larger and smaller topics, from dialect to Sprachbund. Their concern with cultural, social, or political groups ranges from the supporters of Pan- Slavism on the one side to the Bosniaks, say, or the Goranians on the other. The standardization of languages is a recurrent theme, but so is the reaction against standardization. As in the case of cultural history in general, at least as it is practised today, questions of identity (including mental maps and imagined communities) play an important part in many chapters. The standardization of languages is an attempt to create one kind of identity, and the revival of dialect an attempt to create or recreate another, while polyglossia and code-switching both express and maintain the consciousness of multiple identities: national, local, religious, and so on. The writer Elias Canetti, for instance, born in Bulgaria,

xii Foreword xiii spoke Ladino at home and Bulgarian in the street, before learning German, French, and English. Another central theme in this Handbook, and once again in cultural history more generally, is that of borders, whether they are political or linguistic, pre- cise or fuzzy, fluid, malleable, porous, contested, or (as Alexander Maxwell calls them in the case of Slovakia) ‘fickle’ in the sense of to recurrent change. Fernand Braudel was already exploring what he called frontières culturelles in his famous study of the Mediterranean world (1949), although it is only relatively recently, in an age when everything seems to be described as cultural, that terms such as kulturelle Grenze or fronteras culturales have come into regular use. In this volume, borders are viewed in the main not as obstacles but as what Mary-Louise Pratt famously called ‘contact zones’ (1991: 34). They are not only lines that emigrants and immigrants cross in search of a new life but also regions where many people speak several languages (more or less fluently), switch between them in different situations, and even mix them, eventually producing hybrids like Iazychie and Surzhyk in the or what Tomasz Kamusella calls ‘creole’ in Silesia. The tension between standard languages, often imposed from the centre, and the ‘incorrect’ and mixed languages, asso- ciated with borders, recurs in many contributions and so, paradoxically, holds the Handbook together. In short, one might say that the series of intertwined histories presented in this volume offers a guide not only to the Slavic languages themselves but also to the cultures of the lands in which these languages have been spoken and written at various times, especially the many and various cultures of national- ism. Let us that this project inspires similar handbooks to the Romance, Germanic, and Celtic languages!

Peter Burke, University of Cambridge

References

Braudel, Fernand. 1949. La Méditerranée et le Monde Méditerranéen à ’Époque Philippe II. Paris: Armand Colin. Pratt, Mary-Louise. 1991. Arts of the Contact Zone (pp. 33–40). Profession. Vol. 91. Acknowledgements

Maps 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3 were produced by the chapter’s author.

Maps 7.1 and 7.3 were produced for the chapter by and are reproduced with the kind permission of Marián Sloboda.

Map 7.2 is an adaptation executed by the chapter’s author from the map included in: Bělič, Jaromír. 1972. Nástinceské̌ dialektologie. Prague: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství.

Map 16.1 is from Wikimedia Commons, the copyright-free media repository http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Austria_Hungary_ethnic.svg. Description: The ethnic groups of Austria-Hungary in 1910. Based on ‘Distribution of Races in Austria-Hungary’ from the Historical Atlas by William R. Shepherd, 1911, file: Austria_hungary_1911.jpg. The city names were changed to those in use since 1945.

Map 17.1 was produced by the chapter’s author.

Maps 18.1 through 18.8 were produced by the chapter’s author.

xiv Notes on Contributors

Andrej Bekeš was born in Celje, Slovenia. Having graduated in mathematics from the University of Ljubljana, he received an MSc in mathematics from Osaka University and an MA in Japanese linguistics from the Osaka University of Foreign Studies. After obtaining his PhD in linguistics from the University of Tsukuba in 1986, he worked as a researcher at Iskra Delta and at the Jožef Stefan Institute, and as Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana. From 1990 to 1995 he served as Invited Foreign Professor at the University of Tsukuba. In 1995 he returned to the University of Ljubljana to teach as Professor of Japanese Studies. Between 2010 and 2013 he was Professor at the Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Tsukuba. Since 2013 he has been back to the University of Ljubljana. His areas of interest are Japanese text linguistics and language policies in East Asia and the Balkans.

E. Wayles Browne was educated at Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the University of , Yugoslavia, and holds a PhD from the University of . He is Professor of Linguistics at Cornell University, specializing in Slavic linguistics, with a specific focus on the Serbo-Croatian area (Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, and Serbian). He has also taught at University and Yale University. He has published widely on vari- ous aspects of Serbo-Croatian linguistics, among others, in such renowned journals as Balkanistica, Folia Slavica, and Linguistic Inquiry. He has also translated literary works from Serbo-Croatian and other Slavic languages.

Andrii Danylenko is Professor of Russian and Slavic Linguistics in the Department of Modern Languages and Cultures at Pace University, New York, and Research Associate at the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard University. His research interests lie in the history of East Slavic, especially Ukrainian, Polish, literary Ukrainian and linguistic typology, as well as socio- linguistics and cultural studies, Medieval and Early Modern Muslim-Slavic relationships. He has authored or co-edited seven books and more than 100 articles, reviews, and encyclopaedic entries published across the world.

István Fried was born in Budapest in 1934. Between 1955 and 1973 he taught in elementary schools in Budapest; from 1973 to 1984 he was a research fel- low in the Széchényi National Library in Budapest; between 1984 and 1987 he worked as Assistant Professor in the Department of Comparative Literature at the University of . In 1987 he became University Professor, and in 2005 Professor Emeritus. He specializes in comparative literature and in modern

xv xvi Notes on Contributors

East-Central Europe. He has published widely in Hungarian, German, French, English, Czech, Slovak, Slovene, Croatian, and Serbian.

Catherine Gibson has an MA in English and Modern History from the University of St Andrews, Scotland and an International MA in Economy, State and Society: Nation, History and Society with reference to Central and Eastern Europe and Russia (IMESS) from the School of Slavonic and East European Studies, University College London, and the University of Tartu, Estonia. She is currently a doctoral researcher at the European University Institute in Florence, Italy, where she is writing her PhD on nineteenth-century ethnolin- guistic cartography in the northwest Russian Empire. In summer 2013, she was awarded a grant from the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland to conduct fieldwork on the development of written Latgalian in eastern Latvia. Her publications include ‘Gruomota: The Influence of Politics and Nationalism on the Development of Written Latgalian in the Long Nineteenth Century (1772–1918)’, Sprawy Narodowościowe/Nationality Affairs (2013) and ‘Language and Nationalism between , Latvia, Lithuania, , and Russia: The Case of Latgale’, The St Andrews Historian (2014).

Robert Greenberg is the Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Professor of Linguistics at the University of Auckland. Between 2003 and 2013, he taught in the Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures at Yale University. He received his PhD from Yale University in 1991, and has taught at Yale, Georgetown, and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He is a specialist in and linguistics, and has worked primar- ily on sociolinguistic issues in the former Yugoslavia. He has explored issues of language, nationalism, and ethnic identity both in Tito’s Yugoslavia and in the years following Yugoslavia’s breakup. His publications include numer- ous books and articles on South Slavic and Balkan Slavic topics. His most recent book, Language and Identity in the Balkans (2004, second revised and expanded edition, 2008), received an award in 2005 for the best book on Slavic Linguistics from the American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages. Greenberg has been a research fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and has held two Fulbright scholar- ships. In 2010 he was awarded the William Clyde DeVane medal for excel- lence in teaching and scholarship from the Phi Beta Kappa chapter at Yale University.

Brian D. Joseph is Distinguished University Professor of Linguistics and the Kenneth E. Naylor Professor of South Slavic Linguistics at The Ohio State University, where he has taught since 1979. He is a specialist in the history and structure of Greek and Albanian, as well as in Balkan linguistics and historical linguistics more generally. Notes on Contributors xvii

Tomasz Kamusella is Reader in Modern History at the University of St Andrews, Scotland. His English-language monographs include Silesia and Central European Nationalisms: The Emergence of National and Ethnic Groups in Prussian Silesia and Austrian Silesia, 1848–1918 (2007) and The Politics of Language and Nationalisms in Modern Central Europe (2009). He co-edited the two-volume collection Nationalisms Across the Globe (2005–2006), and Nationalisms Today (2009). He is working on his new project, ‘The Atlas of in Modern Central Europe’, and co-edits for Peter Lang the book series, ‘National isms Across the Globe’, which he founded in 2009.

Keith Langston is Professor of Slavic Studies and Linguistics at the University of Georgia. He is the author of Cˇakavian Prosody: The Accentual Patterns of the Cˇakavian Dialects of Croatian (2006) and co-author, together with Anita Peti-Stantic,́ of Hrvatsko jezicnǒ pitanje danas: Identiteti i ideologije [The Croatian Language Question Today: Identities and Ideologies] (2013) and Language Planning and National Identity in (2014). He has published numerous articles on the phonology, , and sociolinguistics of South Slavic languages and dialects.

Jouko Lindstedt is Professor of Slavonic Philology, University of Helsinki. His research interests are in the development of Bulgarian and Macedonian as Balkan languages; the origin, spontaneous change, and nativization of as a contact language; language policy in the Balkans and in the ; early Slavonic studies; South Slavonic philology. He has also published on tense, aspect, evidentiality, and other verb categories. His research projects include ‘Updating the Sociology of Language in the Balkans’ (funded by the Academy of Finland, 2009–2013), ‘The Konikovo Gospel’ (diverse funding, 2004–2008), ‘Corpus Cyrillo-Methodianum Helsingiense’ (no separate funding, slowly developing from 1986), and ‘Contacts and Identity in the Balkans’ (funded by the Academy of Finland, 1998–2000).

Paul Robert Magocsi is Professor of History and Political Science at the University of Toronto, where he also holds the professorial Chair of Ukrainian Studies. Among his 700-plus publications are 30 books, including the follow- ing: The Shaping of a National Identity: Subcarpathian Rus’, 1848–1948 (1978); : A Historical Survey and Bibliographic Guide (1983); Historical Atlas of East Central/Central Europe (1993); A History of Ukraine (1996); Of the Making of Nationalities There Is No End, 2 vols (1999); The Roots of Ukrainian Nationalism (2002); and Ukraine: An Illustrated History (2007). He is also editor-in-chief of the Encyclopedia of Canada’s Peoples (1999) and co-editor and main author of the Encyclopedia of Rusyn History and Culture (2002). Magocsi has taught at Harvard University and the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. In 1996 he was appointed as Permanent Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada – Canadian Academies of Arts, Humanities, and Sciences. xviii Notes on Contributors

Roland Marti was born in Geneva (Switzerland). He studied Slavonic, German, and Oriental Philology in Switzerland and Russia (then the ). He holds a PhD in Slavonic Philology from Basel University (Switzerland). He is head of the Department of Slavonic Philology at the University of the Saarland in Saarbrücken (). He is a member of the editorial boards of the scholarly journals Palaeobulgarica (Sofia) and Lětopis (Budyšin/Bautzen) and of the advisory board of several others. His main areas of research include minority languages in Europe, the sociolinguistics of Slavonic languages, and literature, historical linguistics (Old Slavonic), and graphematics.

Elena Marushiakova and Vesselin Popov have published widely about Gypsies in Bulgaria, Balkans, and Central and Eastern Europe. Their major publications include the first monographic research on history, ethnogra- phy, social structure, and culture of the Gypsies in Bulgaria (1997), a book on Gypsies in the (2000), and a volume on Gypsies on the Black Sea littoral (2008). They published a book series in the field of Romani Studies entitled ‘Studii Romani’. Elena Marushiakova and Vesselin Popov work at the Department of Balkan Ethnology at the Institute of Ethnology and Folklore Studies with the Ethnographic Museum, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. They have created a specialized Romani/Gypsy Studies Library with an Archive and a Romani Studies Centre. Elena Marushiakova is President of the Gypsy Lore Society, the world’s oldest scholar organization in the field of Romani studies. From January 2015 Elena Marushiakova is Leverhulme Visiting Professor at the University of St Andrews.

Alexander Maxwell teaches history at Victoria University in Wellington, New Zealand. He obtained his doctorate in history from the University of Wisconsin, Madison. He has held research positions at the University of Erfurt and the New Europe College in Bucharest. Publications include Choosing Slovakia: Slavic Hungary, the Czechoslovak Language and Accidental Nationalism (2009), Patriots Against Fashion: Sartorial Nationalism in Europe’s Age of Revolutions (2014), an English translation of Ján Kollár’s1 Wechselseitigkeit (2009), and, as editor, The East–West Discourse: Symbolic Geography and Its Consequences. He has pub- lished on the interplay between linguistic and national loyalties in Hungary, Macedonia, Poland, and Slovakia.

Michael Moser is an associate professor at the Institute for Slavic Studies, University of and a full professor at the Ukrainian Free University in Munich and at the Pázmáneum Catholic University of Budapest, Piliscsaba. His numerous publications include eight monographs. He focuses on studying the history of Slavic languages from their beginnings to today in a sociolinguistic and interdisciplinary manner, primarily the history of Ukrainian, Russian, Notes on Contributors xix and Polish, and the question. He is the editor of the series ‘Slavische Sprachgeschichte’ and a member of the editorial boards of several journals, including Studia Slavica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae (Budapest), the Journal of Ukrainian Studies (Toronto), Ukrajina moderna, and Dialektolohični studiji.

Mira Nábelková̌ is Associate Professor in the Department of Central European Studies, University, Prague. After graduating in Slovak and Russian Studies from , , she worked in the L’udovít Štúr Linguistics Institute of the Slovak Academy of Sciences in Bratislava, where she defended her dissertation Relational Adjectives in Slovak: Functional-Semantic Analysis of Desubstantive Derivates (in Slovak, 1993). Since 1999 she has been teaching at Charles University in Prague. From 1999 to 2004 she also taught at the Institute of Slavic Studies of Masaryk University, Brno. In 2005 she was awarded a Masaryk University Silver Medal for her contribution to the devel- opment of Slovak Studies in the Czech Republic. Her research interests are in linguistic and socio-cultural aspects of Czech– contact, recep- tive bilingualism, and Czech–Slovak communication. Her publications on the topics include numerous articles and the monograph Slovak and Czech in Contact: Continuation of the Story (in Slovak, 2008). She is working on the project ‘Confrontative Description of the Slovak and Czech Lexicon: Systemic Relations and Communicative Coexistence’.

Motoki Nomachi is Associate Professor in the Slavic-Eurasian Research Center at Hokkaido University, Japan. He is also an associate member of the Center for East European and Russian/Eurasian Studies at the University of Chicago. He holds a PhD in Slavic linguistics from the University of Tokyo (Japan). His research interests are in language contact and grammatical change with a special focus on Polish, Kashubian, Slovene and Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian, the history of the Serbian literary language, and the formation and develop- ment of the Slavic microliterary languages. Nomachi has written and edited The Grammar of Possessivity in South Slavic: Synchronic and Diachronic Perspectives (2011), Slavica Islamica: Language, and Identity (2011, with Robert Greenberg), Grammaticalization and Lexicalization in the Slavic Languages (2014, with Andrii Danylenko and Predrag Piper) and Slavic in the Language Map of Europe (forthcoming, with Andrii Danylenko).

Anna Novikov is a research fellow at the German Historical Institute in Warsaw. She received her doctoral degree at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Her research focuses on social, cultural, and visual transnational East-Central European history and on questions of identity and self-definition. She was Junior Visiting Fellow at Oxford University (2010, 2012) and at the Simon Dubnow Institute for Jewish History and Culture in Leipzig (2010, 2011). xx Notes on Contributors

Her recent publications include ‘Leo Baeck and Leon Ader: A Friendship Reflected in Correspondence’, Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook 2015. Her book Shades of a Nation: The Dynamics of Belonging among the Silesian and the Jewish Population in Eastern Upper Silesia (1922–1934) will be published in 2015. She is researching the process of nationalization of Jewish and Polish societies through fashion and clothing appearance within partitioned Poland in 1848–1918.

Anita Peti-Stantic ́is Professor of South Slavic Studies and Comparative Linguistics at the , Croatia. She is the author of Jezik naš i/ili njihov: Vježbe iz poredbene povijesti južnoslavenskih standardizacijskih procesa [Language, Ours and/or Theirs: Essays on the Comparative History of South Slavic Standardization Processes] (2008) and co-author, together with Keith Langston, of Hrvatsko jezicnǒ pitanje danas: Identiteti i ideologije [The Croatian Language Question Today: Identities and Ideologies] (2013), and Language Planning and National Identity in Croatia (2014). She has also published numerous articles on the syntax and sociolinguistics of South Slavic languages, primarily in Croatian and in Slovene.

Irina Sedakova is Leading Research Fellow in the Institute for Slavic Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, and Director of the Center for Linguo- cultural Studies ‘BALCANICA’. She is the author of Balkan Motifs in the and Culture (Moscow, 2007; Sofia, 2013) and has published over 300 articles. She has edited and co-edited 25 books in Russian, Bulgarian, and English, and contributed to the ethnolinguistic dictionary Slavic Antiquities (1995–2012, 5 vols). She is interested in Slavic and Balkan linguistics, cultural anthropology and folklore, linguistic unions, ethnolinguistics, popular reli- gion, myths and folklore in contemporary narratives and commercials, verbal etiquette, and the comparative analysis of Soviet and post-Soviet Russian.

Sarah Smyth is Principal Investigator of a large project funded by the Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences (IRCHSS), investigat- ing Russian speakers in Ireland, a sociolinguistic study of hybrid identities. Her research interests include the study of Russian language and culture in Ireland. She has also been actively involved in public bodies and national committees. These responsibilities have brought her into close contact with the realities of in the immigrant communities from the post-Soviet and Eastern bloc states. Using a large-scale quantitative methodology to map speakers’ linguistic identities and practices, and subsequently focus groups, interviews and life-story elicitations, her plan is to draw together a unique picture of the processes being acted out in contemporary migrant communities throughout Ireland.

Klaus Steinke is Professor Emeritus of Slavonic Languages and Literatures at the University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany. He graduated from the Universities Notes on Contributors xxi of Berlin and Munich, and received his Habilitation from the University of Heidelberg. From 1969 to 1977, he worked as a German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) lecturer at the Universities of Ias¸i and Bucharest in . Later he was a researcher at the Institute of , Mannheim, Assistant Professor at the University of Heidelberg, Professor at the University of Trier, and from 1991–2007 Head of the Department of Slavonic Philology at the University of Erlangen-Nürnberg. At present he works as Professor of German Linguistics at the Pedagogical University, Cracow, Poland. His research interests include minority languages, the sociolinguistics of Slavonic languages, and historical linguistics.

Dieter Stern is Professor of Slavic Historical Linguistics in the Department of Slavic and East European Studies at Ghent University, Belgium. His primary interest is in cultural and language contacts. Recently, he has taken up research on informal retail markets on the Chinese–Russian border. In the past he had dedicated himself to the study of Russian lexifier pidgins. He completed a mon- ograph on Taimyr Pidgin Russian based on field research carried out between 2000 and 2005. He further specializes in Russian language politics and ideology as well as in and premodern varieties of Ukrainian. He teaches historical and sociolinguistics for all Slavic languages.

Paul Wexler is Professor Emeritus in the Department of Linguistics, Tel-Aviv University. He has published 14 monographs and edited volumes, including Purism and Language: A Study in Modern Ukrainian and Belorussian Nationalism (1840–1967) (1974), A Historical Phonology of the Belorussian Language (1977), The Balkan Substratum of Yiddish (1992), The Ashkenazic Jews: A Slavo-Turkic People in Search of a Jewish Identity (1993), The Non-Jewish Origins of the Sephardic Jews (1996), Two-tiered Relexification in Yiddish (Jews, , Khazars and the Kiev- Polessian Dialect) (2002), and Jewish and Non-Jewish Creators of ‘Jewish’ Languages (2006).

Note

1. Kollár was originally Slovak and in Slovak language his first name is written as ‘Ján’. However, Kollár was fiercely opposed to the creation of a Slovak and wrote in Czech only (or in German or , but never in Slovak), and thus he himself always spelt his name as ‘Jan’ in the Czech form. The authors in this volume use both versions. Introduction Tomasz Kamusella, Motoki Nomachi, and Catherine Gibson

Languages, peoples, states

The Handbook is a fruit of labour by many hands. The authors, in one way or another, agree with the editors that a quarter of a century after the fall of and the breakups of the Soviet Union, , and Yugoslavia, it is high time to re-evaluate the imprint these processes have left on the linguistic landscape and on the interface between the linguistic and the political. The relevance of such an interdisciplinary reflection cannot be emphasized more than by bringing to the reader’s attention that the break-up of Yugoslavia was followed by the parallel split of the Serbo-Croatian language. In this manner, each post-Yugoslav state (with the sole exception of Kosovo) was fitted with its own specific , ideally, not shared with any other state or nation. These processes, though most distinctive in the Balkans, also unfolded across Central and Eastern Europe. The disappearance of impermeable fron- tiers between the two ideological blocs characteristic of the Cold War decades brought populations speaking different languages into direct and intensifying contact. This was especially exemplified by the subsequent eastward enlarge- ments of the European Union (EU) in 1995, 2004, 2007, and 2013. But, as in the case of the post-Yugoslav states, while some borders faded away or disappeared altogether, others were erected where there had been none previously. The most obvious case is the EU’s eastern frontier that bisects the former republics of the Soviet Union. In these cases, communication between populations is hindered. In order to sift through and limit the catch of abundant subject matter, the decision was taken to focus on the Slavic languages and their users. This is the main topic of the Handbook’s contributions. However, the authors remain acutely aware of multidirectional contacts that Slavic-speakers have with the users of other languages; indeed many Slavophones are highly polyglot, or, more correctly, diglossic. Symbolic of the scope of the changes experienced by

1 2 Tomasz Kamusella, Motoki Nomachi, and Catherine Gibson populations in Central and Eastern Europe during the span of one generation is the sudden and quite unexpected emergence of large Slavic-speaking com- munities in Britain, Ireland, and Israel. Between 1918 and 1989, in this short twentieth century, politicians were busy implementing the nineteenth-century ideological programme of ethno- linguistic nationalism. The premise of this ideology was that ethnolinguisti- cally defined nations should be housed in their own separate national polities. To this end, the old borders and states were redrawn and destroyed, millions were killed, and tens of millions were forced to leave their homes. The imagin- ing and fitting of the artefacts of languages, states, and nations so that they would perfectly overlap with one another was unprecedentedly bloody and tragic. School education and policies of statehood legitimation and mainte- nance have typically overlooked the resultant ‘Bloodlands’ (Snyder 2010) and continued to inculcate the population at large with the message of ethnolin- guistic nationalism to such an extent that its ideals now appear to be ‘natural’ and ‘normal’ to most people in Central and Eastern Europe. However, since 1989, in this age of new openness, in spite of some new bor- ders thrown in, the holy grail of ethnolinguistic ‘purity’ in a single nation-state has rapidly dissipated in front of our eyes. Where the aforementioned recent frontiers began to isolate populations, their effect to this end has been reduced – and often even nullified – by another unexpected development, that is, the rise of the internet. Cyberspace offers ample opportunities for interacting and the production of text, speech, and language outside direct state control, accord- ing to the wishes of members of speech communities themselves. The internet thus provides a more democratic, or at least pluralistic, forum for the use and development of languages as exemplified by the numerous articles written in languages not in official use outside of cyberspace. The Handbook takes stock of the developments as seen through the prism of Slavic languages, speech communities, nation-states, and scholars’ research itself on the issues. The contributors believe that without transcending the traditional boundaries separating disciplines, especially those of linguistics, political science, history, and sociology, it is impossible to understand the new phenomena. Hence, an interdisciplinary approach is de rigueur in most of the texts offered in the Handbook.

State languages between nation-states and the EU

The state in Central and Eastern Europe has played an important role in making and breaking languages in fulfillment of the ideology of eth- nolinguistic nationalism (it can be summarized in the following ‘equation’: language=nation=state), as shown by the splitting of Czechoslovak into Czech and Slovak, and Serbo-Croatian into Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, and Introduction 3

Montenegrin, following changes to state borders. These variously reimagined, ethnolinguistically defined national communities have been institutionalized through mechanisms such as state-controlled compulsory education and codi- fied standard languages, as well as the ‘census, map, and museum’ (Anderson 1983), and military conscription for all males. Speech communities that trav- erse two or more state borders have been subjected to various national attempts to ‘claim’ them in their entirety for this or that nation, as has been the case regarding the Bosniaks, Goranians, , , or the inhabitants of the Bulgarian-Macedonian borderland. The fact remains, however, that the ethnolinguistic reality continues to contradict the neat division of peoples into ethnolinguistically homogenous nation-states. As the discussions of Banat Bulgarian, , Polish and Belarusian in Latgalia, and Slovene in Austria, Hungary, and Italy highlight, the historical legacy of previous borders continues to shape the lin- guistic landscape of Central and Eastern Europe, and these speech communities have survived successive waves of nation-building, population transfers, and border redrawing. Mental borders too have not always kept apace with this neat division of territory and peoples. Whereas political borders are formalized frontiers that can be marked as lines on a map, linguistic borders are porous and cannot be instantly changed (such as the relatively recent formal division between Czech and Slovak) unless the full totalitarian brunt of ethnic cleansing and genocide is applied, which was the sad norm especially in the first half of the twentieth century. The dissolution of formal borders brought about by EU enlargement can be viewed, from the linguistic point of view, as a partial return to the multilingual Central Europe of the nineteenth-century Russian, Habsburg, German, and Ottoman empires, except that now even the smallest official Slavic languages such as Slovene are spoken in Brussels. In this aspect, the situation is simi- lar to the use of all the republican and provincial official languages of Tito’s Yugoslavia in the state’s parliament at Belgrade after 1974. Historical perspec- tives provide an important challenge to the dominant nationalist view that the division of Central and Eastern Europe into nation-states is primordial, as discussed in relation to the cases of the present-day territories of Slovakia, Hungary, Silesia, and Latgalia. The , with its pre-national Hungarus identity (comprising its Finno-Ugric-, Germanic-, Slavic-, East Romance- and Romani-speakers) and official use of the non-ethnic language of Latin, is a pertinent reminder of this.

Minority, sub-state, and transnational languages

Nowadays, globalization and migration have weakened the ties between language and territory, and state languages are increasingly being physically 4 Tomasz Kamusella, Motoki Nomachi, and Catherine Gibson spoken (in addition to virtually in cyberspace) in new contexts outside of their traditional areas, such as Polish and Russian as substantial minority languages in Ireland and Israel, respectively. Moreover, as a result of language contact and varying degrees of multilingualism between official Slavic state languages and non-Slavic minority or cross-border languages, signs of language mixing, language shift, creoles, and pidgins are discussed by contributors with regard to Albanian, Chinese, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Iranian, Latvian/ Latgalian, Romani, Romanian, Tatar, and Turkic. The taxonomy of Slavic languages is not set in stone and the debates about what constitutes a language, sub-language, and dialect ranges far and wide. The theme of the internal variation within standard languages as constructed out of a resonates throughout the Handbook, ranging from the dialectal borders and convergence in the Balkans and territories of former Czechoslovakia, to the parallel Ukrainian linguistic hybrids of the nineteenth century. A substantial portion of the Handbook is also given over to speech communi- ties, such as the Goranians, Rusyns, Silesians, Sorbs, and Banat , who have been variously described as speaking (and sometimes writing) dialects of state languages, while on the other hand at times their dialects are seen to con- stitute languages in their own right. Factors such as religion, script, geographi- cal barriers (for instance, mountain ranges), and distance from the part of the dialect continuum from which the standard language is codified, are shown to play important roles in determining their divergence and convergence from the standard under whose ‘roof’ they are gathered by political fiat. Since the 1980s, the new field of research devoted to, especially Slavic, (literary) microlanguages has come into its own (cf. Dulichenko 1981). They are variously defined as ‘regional’, ‘minority’, ‘immigrant’, or ‘non-state’ lan- guages or dialects. A similar degree of attention, however, has not yet been paid to non-national and non-official languages that are used in areas larger than states, such as Yiddish and Romani in the case of Central Europe. The former was extinguished during World War II as a result of the Holocaust, after which most survivors left the region for Israel or the West. Although a similar fate was prepared by for the Roma and their language of Romani, Roma communities survived and Romani in its many varieties can be heard across Europe. Yiddish and its Hebrew script-based literacy has been connected to Europe’s languages in many ways since the early Middle Ages, and especially to the Slavic languages, given that most of Europe’s Jews lived in the territories of Poland-Lithuania and historic Hungary between the fourteenth and mid- twentieth centuries. Roma inhabit mostly the same area, though they are demographically concentrated in the Balkans. Their language, Romani, was not committed to paper in any regular manner until the late twentieth century and Introduction 5 its interactions with Europe’s Slavic and other languages have been mostly oral, spawning pidgins and creole-like forms.

Language-making and destruction

Of the making, changing, and destroying of languages, there is no end as long as there are human groups. Groupings of humans, because we are endowed with the capacity for language, are always anchored in speech communities. In the scheme of human history, it is only relatively recently that people have begun to consciously reflect on the linguistic, which has led in some cases to attempts at controlling and altering it. This novel approach became possible with the invention of writing, which in Europe also spawned the idea of lan- guages as discrete entities. The linguistic is continuous in its nature, as is well noted in the telltale name of the heuristic device of ‘dialect continuum’. People move from one place to another, changing groups and countries, and their languages follow them. Despite this, the spread of Andersonian ‘print capital- ism’, combined with the ideal of full literacy, which was achieved in Europe by the mid-twentieth century, has underscored the tendency to construct discrete languages. Their boundaries are set by the choice of script, spelling, and gram- mar norms, the official way of pronunciation, dictionaries with the state seal of approval, and the rapidly growing corpus of writings and publications in this ‘standard’ language. In Europe, but especially in the central part of the continent, the state’s , in its character, is a reflection of the polity itself, almost its embodiment or ‘spirit’ as national writings tend to refer to it. In agreement with the model of the nation-state, all the population legally residing in its ter- ritory must be of the same kind, be it the case of enjoying the same citizenship and political privileges and/or sharing further features, for instance a language. Clearly demarcated and tightly controlled boundaries separate the state’s ter- ritory in its highly ideologized union with the ‘correct’ population from the ‘outside world’ composed of other national polities (seemingly, or said to be) organized in the very same manner. Likewise, the official language must be of the same kind (homogenous, standard), irrespective of who is speaking it and of where it is employed. Its internal homogeneity formalized through grammars, dictionaries, and other aforementioned technological choices, is imparted to (or rather, imposed on) a target population through mass education and ubiquitous mass media. In turn, this strenuously manufactured homogeneity liquidates dialects and the very continuity within non-state related dialect continua, and is translated into hardening boundaries of increasing difference between official languages. Ideally, this difference should become as pronounced as to prevent mutual comprehension, providing for the tight spatial overlap of the boundary of a 6 Tomasz Kamusella, Motoki Nomachi, and Catherine Gibson speech community, often construed as a nation, with the political frontiers of ‘its’ nation-state. This has been the typical organization of the political and the linguistic in Slavophones’ polities at the turn of the twenty-first century, notwithstanding the existence of multilingual states such as Russia and Belarus. Many borders (open, courtesy of European integration) and the internet undermine the homogeneity of nation-states and of languages. But while multiculturalism and multilingualism are now accepted as desirable or impossible to prevent, the homogeneity of languages, construed as their ‘correctness’ or ‘purity’, is still jealously guarded. Prescriptivism dominates in continental Europe, leav- ing precious little space for non-state languages that continue to be consigned to the margins as ‘dialects’ or ‘minority languages’, or are still disparaged as ‘incorrect speech’. This sad fate is suffered especially by Romani-speakers in Central Europe, where official languages double as metonyms for their nations and as the main instrument of statehood legitimation. We believe that democratic values and freedoms require depoliticization of religion, ethnicity, and language. Language should not be treated as a destiny. Revealingly, no English politician or thinker seriously claims that Americans, Australians, or Scots must be English, because they speak the English lan- guage. Nevertheless, most politicians, alongside the public at large in Central Europe, disagree and persist in the belief that if one speaks Polish one must be Polish. By extension, if Poland is to survive as a legitimate nation-state all the population must speak or must be compelled to speak this language. As a result, some speech communities residing in Poland who see their languages as separate from Polish are discriminated, their languages redefined from above as ‘dialects’ that ‘naturally belong’ to the . Until 2005 it was the fate of the Kashubians and their language of Kashubian, while the disability is still suffered by the Silesians, whose language of Silesian remains unrecognized in Poland. The logic of ethnolinguistic nationalism is still alive in Central Europe, though its ideological edge seems to be gradually blunted by European integration, as shown by Poland’s recognition of Kashubian as a language. However, quite worryingly, after Russia’s annexation of Crimea, in April 2014 the Russian Duma passed a law that equates all Russian native-speakers with the Russian nation and opens an easy path for them to Russian citi- zenship. And now, at the time of writing in late November 2014, the Israeli Knesset is deliberating the bill on the Jewish nation-state that proposes to ban in the polity and equates Israel’s nation exclusively with Hebrew- speakers who profess Judaism. The recent events fully justify the need for a better comprehension of how languages are made and used for defining and dividing human groups and Introduction 7 their states. This volume aspires to shed more light on the important processes and their mechanisms. Editors, November 2014

References

Anderson, Benedict. 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso. Dulichenko, Aleksandr D. 1981. Slavianskie literaturnye mikroiazyki [Slavic Literary Microlanguages {in Russian} {in Russian Cyrillic}]. Tallin: Valgus. Snyder, Timothy. 2010. Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin. London: Bodley Head, an imprint of Random House. 1 Cross-border Turkic and Iranian Language Retention in the West and East Slavic Lands and Beyond: A Tentative Classification Paul Wexler

Introduction

Speakers of Aramaic, Indo-Iranian, Turkic, Finno-Ugric, Mongolic, and possibly Indic languages migrated into Europe between the third millennium BCE and 1300 CE; see, for instance, Syrians, Jews;1 Sarmatians, Scythians, Jas, Jazygians, Chvalis, Alans, Avars, Huns, Roma (on their possible Iranian origins, see below), Cumans, Khazars, Kovars, Pechenegs, proto-Bulgarians, Hungarians, Mongolians, respectively. Apart from Hungarians and Turkic Karaites (at least until recently), most migratory groups eventually assimilated to the local majority ethnic groups and adopted their languages. The case of Yiddish, the language of the Ashkenazic Jews, is unique. Jewish Iranians – marginally of Palestinian Semitic stock and mainly the descendants of Iranian converts to Judaism from the first century CE onwards – probably mixed with Turkic and Slavic converts to Judaism in the Khazar Empire by the ninth century at the latest. The Khazar Jewish community as a whole presum- ably spoke Iranian and Eastern Aramaic (also brought from Iran – the language is still spoken in Iranian and Iraqi Kurdistan) and acquired the Turkic (Khazar) and the Eastern Slavic lingua francas of the Khazar Empire. Their two liturgical languages were Eastern Aramaic and Hebrew; their written language, a type of ‘pseudo-Hebrew’ or ‘Hebroid’, consisted of an Aramaic or Iranian grammar and phonology (depending on the speaker) plus an Old Semitic Hebrew lexicon with countless new Hebroidisms (this language was Semitic only if the native language of the scribes was Aramaic, but its grammar and phonology were never from ‘Semitic Hebrew’). Possibly as early as the eighth century, but certainly by the ninth, the Jewish Turko-Slavo-Iranians from the Khazar Empire and Jewish Iranians from the Iranian Empire migrated into the mixed Germano-Sorbian lands2 as peripatetic merchants who enjoyed a monopoly on the Silk Roads between the Holy Roman Empire, France, Spain, and Morocco in the West and China in the East (but apparently never reached the Korean and Japanese

8