User:Nahden/tmp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

History[edit]

16. i 17. st. comprehensive kajk. writings by Vramec, Pergošić[1]

Kajkavian as a distinct idiom/dialect/whatever? can be seen traced to writings around the 12th century[2]

First comprehensive works in Kajkavian started to appear during the 16th century, the most notable work of that era being Ivanuš Pergošić's Decretum released in 1574, a translation of István Werbőczys Tripartitum.

File:Tripartitum 1574.jpg

Many protestant writers of the Slovene lands also release their works in Kajkavian so as to reach a wider audience, while also sometimes using Kajkavian features in their native writings.[3]

17th century - works discussing Kajkavian and its features starting to appear, writings over the different Yat reflexes and schwa. Introduction of Juraj Habdelić's Zercalo Mariansko also mentions the yat reflex differentiation. also 17th cent - Hieronymus Megiser's polyglot dictionary contains Kajkavian entries.[4]


Juraj Habdelić's Dikcionar in 1667, Kajkavian-Latin. Habdelić important > Jagić went as far as calling the 17th century "the Habdelić period". besides the dictionary work, his prose was very influential and served as influence for other writers to come.[5] habdelić wrote in zagreb kajkavian for the most part.[6]

Gazofilacij by Ivan Belostenec (completed and released in 1740 by Jeronim Orlović), the most comprehensive work of kajkavian lexicography, two volumes, Vol I latin-kajkavian, Vol II kajkavian-latin

1742 - four-language latin-kajkavian-german-hungarian dictionary, with an index of Kajkavian words, dict started by Franjo Šušnik, most of the work done by jesuit Andrija Jambrešić. done independently of Gazofilacij.

first improtant grammars start to appear in 18th century, first descriptions of the kajkavian literary language.

first kajkavian grammar (written by a non-native speaker), by Johannes Christophorus de Jordan (of Czechia), included as a comparative grammar of slavic languages. in it kajkavian appears under the name croatian, along czech, slovak and latin.[7]

first kajkavian grammar written by a native speaker, 1779, Ivan Vitković.

1783. grammar by Ignac Szentmartony - "Einleitung zur kroatische Sprache"). the intro to it says that it describes the speech of the area around Zagreb, Križevci and Varaždin and their surroundings.

1790 - Franz Kornig's grammar

1825 - Josip Đurkovečki's grammar

1837 Ignac Kristijanović, grammar based on the one by Vitković

Second half of 18th century - three languages in active use in Kajkavian territories - Kajkavian, Austrian German and Latin. Kajkavian as the language of everyday communication, civil-legal treaties and other official documents. By the end of 18th cent, German took over the role of Latin, making it also a language of communication, education, science, nobility. In general, German was considered the language of higher social classes, and a status langauge. Kajkavian served as a strong factor of identification. Strong language contact led to mass word borrowing.[8]

Written using Hungarian spelling until Ljudevit Gaj's attempts to modernize it.[9][10]

Last Kajkavian book written using the Hungarian spelling was printed in 1859.[11]

classification[edit]

  • complicated issue throughout history, various opinions by laymen, linguists, historical/modern, but Kajkavian is currently conventionally (and has been for at least a century) classified as a dialet of Serbo-Croatian
  • autonyms - up until 17th century, inconsistent, sometimes Kajkavian writers refer to their language and themselves as "slovenski", "slavonski", "slovinski", "horvatski", "ilirski", etc., the name also depended on the yat reflex, so where the yat was "e", "slovenski" was more common. [12][13]

historical[edit]

  • Josef Dobrovský. Dobrovsky classifies Kajkavian and Slovene as the same language, and Kajkavians and Slovenes as one nation. He uses the name "Croat" and "Croatian" for them.[14][15]
  • Slovene Jernej Kopitar accepts the premise of Kajkavian and Slovene being the same language, and their respective speakers belonging to the same people, but he calls them all Slovenes, because as he says Slovenes are more numerous than Kajkavians.[16]
  • Later he calls Kajkavian speakers Pseudocroatorum, rectius Slovenorum Zagrabiensium[17]
  • Slovene philologist Franc Miklošič agrees with the idea of the "unity", but considers Chakavians to be Croats, Kajkavians as Slovenes.[18]
  • Due to the prevalency of the above opinions, some Slovene authors also included distinct Kajkavian folk songs as part of Slovene folk songs[19]


  • Jagic calls Kajkavians "kroatische Slovenen"[20]
  • All throughout that era Kajkavian was the prefered written form in its spoken area, the status which it loses around mid-19th century, after the acceptance of shtokavian as the basis of the literary language.[21]
  • 1905 - Ukrainian A.M. Lukjanenko's reasearch considers Kajkavian a Serbo-Croatian speech.[22]
  • Belić meanwhile, talks of kajkavian being "based on shtokavian-chakavian-slovenian".[23]
  • Vatroslav Jagić, in response to Lukjanenko's work: two possibilities, "not belonging to either slovene or serbo-croatian", "separate"; or alternatively, "croatian, not slovene, despite similarities with slovene"[24]
  • Stanko Vraz, Croatian-Slovene writer, similar to contemporaries, advocated unity between Kajkavians and Slovenes. However, he adopted the idea of Illyrian movement, and used Shtokavian and was the opinion that Slovenes ought to adopt it[9]


  • Ramovš and Margulies, A. consider it to be genetically a Slovene idiom. Ramovš: "initially genetically a Slovene idiom", "fell under separate political influence, and thus considered Croatia" (Slo-Cro border), "and ultimately then categorized as SC"[25]

more contemporary, non-ethnic, only language[edit]

"No major CSl isogloss cuts through either Sloveno-Serbocroatian or Macedo-Bulgarian...."

"Hence, there are certain difficulties in classifying a dialect like Kajkavian as Slovenian or Serbocroatian (although it seems clear that the basis of Kajkavian is Slovene rather than Serbocroatian)"[26]

  • "No common Kaj-Cha-Shto innovations", RM says "no common kajk-chak-shto ancestor, instead there's a common slov-kajk-chak-shto ancestor". RM dates such a common slov-kaj-chak-shto ancestor to the time of Frankish rule, says it would have been spoken in 8th and 9th century[27]

Borders[edit]

  • initially at least stretching to Pakrac and Slatina, today's Western Slavonia[28]

Characteristics[edit]

  • protethic v, generalized in front of u, kajk. vuho (shto. uho), kajk. vugel (shto. ugao), kajk. vučil (shto. učio), attested in glagolithic texts early on, already around 15th century (Petrisov zbornik, 1468)[29]
  • proto-slavic *dj > kajk. j, kajk. meja (shto. međa, slo. meja)[30]
  • nasal *a > kajk. closed o, shto. u, kajk. roka (shto.ruka, slov. roka)[31]
  • yat - various reflexes, most common closed e, like in northern chakavian speeches[32]
  • syllabic l merges with the reflex of nasal a, results in closed o (o in Podravina, u in Bilogora)[33]
  • common slavic *v *v- > kajk. v (shto. u, u-, čak. va)[34]
  • č in front of r retained, kajk. črn, črv (shto. crn, crv, slov. črn, črv)[35]
  • ž in front of vowel turns to r (same for slov, chak, western shto), kajk. moči > morem/moreš/more (shto. moći > mogu/možeš/može, slov. moči > morem/moreš/more)[36]
  • retention of -jt and -jd, kajk. pojti, dojdem (shto. poći, dođem)[37]
  • final devoicing, kajk. vrag pronounced as vrak (shto. vrag, slov. vrak)[38]
  • diminutive suffixes:

-ek > pes, pesek (shto. pas, psić)

-ec > dečko, dečec

-eko > sonce, sončeko

-eco > mleko, mlekeco[39]

  • negative past tense deviates from neighboring speeches, slov. jaz nisem slišal, shto. ja nisam čuo, kajk. ja sem nȩ čul/ ja sem nie̯ čul, like in Czech and Slovak, possibly a remnant of Pannonian Slavic verb system.[40]
  • 1PL present kajk. -mȩ/rečemȩ (slov. -mo/rečemo, shto. -mo/kažemo, slovak -me, povieme)[41]
  • relative pronouns, kajk. kateri/tȩri (Czech který, Slovak ktorý, Polish który, shto. koji)[42]
  • genitive plural in shto. adds -a, kajk. retains old form, kajk. nom.sg. VUK, gen.pl. VUKOV, shto. gen.pl VUKOVA, kajk. ŽENE, ŽEN, shto. ŽENE, ŽENA[43]
  • locative plural retained, shto. changes, kajk. nom.pl. PRSTI, loc.pl. PRSTEH[44]
  • dual lost, but that change is significantly more recent than in shto.[45]
  • loss of vocative[46]
  • s-type nouns retained as separate declination class, different from neuter due to the formant -es- in oblique cases (same in slo.), kajk. nom.sg. ČUDO, gen.sg. ČUDESA[47]
  • PIE *wixu, in shto. there's metathesis, turns into sav (sva, svo), no metathesis in kajk. ves (vsa)[48]
  • numeralical adjective in shto. have -or- variants of suffix, kajk. only -er- (kajk. četvero, petero, shto. četvoro/četvero, petoro/petero)[49]
  • in 15th century, nehaj turns in shto. into NEKA, kajk. and slo. still retain old form, shortened to NAJ (but also as NEHAJ), that's the negative imperative SG3 commonslavic *xajati (dialectal hajati - mariti)[51]
  • futur I formed with the verb biti, kajk. bom delal (slo. bom delal, shto. radit ću)[52]
  • supine retained as distinctive from infinitive, like in slovene, infinitive is -ti, -či, supine is -t, -č. supin and infinitive often are stressed differently. used with verbs of movement.[53]
  • turkish words enter via shtokavian standard[54]
  • praslav sufiks *u-, cf. češko výhled ili východ, u bednji ima "vigled", sačuvano u i slov. primorju, koruškoj a i u sjevernočakavskom[55][56]
  • modern urban Kajkavian speeches have stress as the only significant prosodic feature[57]
  • syntactic influence, predominantly from German[58]

Influence on Shtokavian in Kajkavian areas[edit]

Due to the amount of mutual influence, the speeches of urban areas in Central Croatia (such as Zagreb), are often called "Kajkavian koine" or "Kajkavian-Shtokavian" koine rather than labeled as any of the two[59]

Younger Zagreb-born speakers of Kajkavian koine in Zagreb tend to use more Kajkavian features when speaking to older people[60]

The Kajkavian koine is distinct from Kajkavian as spoken in the rural areas. Due to the influence of Kajkavian koine on Shtokavian, the particular variety of has been named as Zagreb Shtokavian by some.[59]

Influence on standard[edit]

Extent of influence of Kajkavian on the standard language much lesser than on colloquial non-standard Shtokavian. Examples of influence on SC standard (not exclusive to Croatia but all SC-speaking countries), words like

  • propuh, huškati, poboljšati, pogoršati[61]
  • kukac, hlače, rječnik[62]

Comparison[edit]

Phonology[edit]

Declension[edit]

Conjugation[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 36
  2. ^ Lončarić 1985, p. 282
  3. ^ Lončarić 1985, p. 282
  4. ^ Lončarić 1985, pp. 282–283
  5. ^ Canadian Slavonic Papers. Canadian Association of Slavists. 1991.
  6. ^ Benjamin A. Stolz; I. R. Titunik; Lubomír Doležel (1984). Language and literary theory: in honor of Ladislav Matejka. University of Michigan. ISBN 978-0-930042-59-2.
  7. ^ Lončarić 1985, p. 284
  8. ^ Jernej, Mirna; Glovacki-Bernardi, Zrinjka; Sujoldžić, Anita (2012). "Multilingualism in Northwestern part of Croatia during Habsburg rule". p. 341. Retrieved 10 May 2014.
  9. ^ a b Joshua Fishman; Ofelia Garcia (16 March 2011). Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity: The Success-Failure Continuum in Language and Ethnic Identity Efforts. Oxford University Press. pp. 372–. ISBN 978-0-19-983799-1.
  10. ^ Balázs Trencsényi; Michal Kopeček (January 2007). National Romanticism: The Formation of National Movements. Central European University Press. pp. 232–. ISBN 978-963-7326-60-8.
  11. ^ Tomasz Kamusella (15 January 2009). The politics of language and nationalism in modern Central Europe. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-230-55070-4.
  12. ^ Journal of Croatian Studies. Croatian Academy of America. 2000.
  13. ^ Svet med Muro in Dravo: Ob stoletnici 1. slovenskega tabora v Ljutomeru 1868-1968. Skupščina občine. 1968.
  14. ^ Lončarić 1985, p. 284
  15. ^ Balázs Trencsényi; Michal Kopeček (2006). Late Enlightenment: Emergence of modern national ides. Central European University Press. pp. 226–. ISBN 978-963-7326-52-3.
  16. ^ Lončarić 1985, p. 284
  17. ^ Lončarić 1985, p. 284
  18. ^ Lončarić 1985, p. 284
  19. ^ James Gow; Cathie Carmichael (2000). Slovenia and the Slovenes: A Small State and the New Europe. C. Hurst & Co. Publishers. pp. 11–. ISBN 978-1-85065-428-5.
  20. ^ Rado Ludovik Lenček (1982). The structure and history of the Slovene language. Slavica. ISBN 978-0-89357-099-6.
  21. ^ Lončarić 1985, p. 285
  22. ^ Lončarić 1985, p. 281
  23. ^ Lončarić 1985, p. 288
  24. ^ Lončarić 1985, p. 286
  25. ^ Lončarić 1985, p. 287
  26. ^ Henrik Birnbaum; Jaan Puhvel (1966). Ancient Indo-European Dialects: Proceedings of the Conference on Indo-European Linguistics Held at the University of California, Los Angeles, April 25-27, 1963. University of California Press. pp. 188–. GGKEY:JUG4225Y4H2.
  27. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 65
  28. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 35
  29. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 140
  30. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 148
  31. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 152
  32. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 153
  33. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 155
  34. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 157
  35. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 161
  36. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 161
  37. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 161
  38. ^ International Review of Slavic Linguistics. Linguistic Research. 1982.
  39. ^ Ineta Savickien?; Wolfgang U. Dressler (1 January 2007). The Acquisition of Diminutives: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. John Benjamins Publishing. pp. 76–. ISBN 90-272-5303-X.
  40. ^ Nuorluoto 2008, p. 42
  41. ^ Nuorluoto 2008, p. 41
  42. ^ Nuorluoto 2008, p. 42
  43. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 186
  44. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 187
  45. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 187
  46. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 187
  47. ^ Matasović 2008, pp. 205–206
  48. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 245
  49. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 24
  50. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 269
  51. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 284
  52. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 286
  53. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 301
  54. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 311
  55. ^ Matasović 2008, p. 37
  56. ^ Bjeletić, Marta (1998). "Praslovenska leksika u etimološkom rečniku srpskohrvatskog jezika" (PDF). Praslowianszczyzna i jej rozpad. Retrieved 8 May 2014.
  57. ^ Thomas F. Magner (1966). A Zagreb kajkavian dialect. Pennsylvania State University.
  58. ^ Donald F. Reindl (2008). Language Contact, German and Slovenian. Brockmeyer Verlag. pp. 96–. ISBN 978-3-8196-0715-8.
  59. ^ a b Martin Pütz; René Dirven (1 January 1996). The Construal of Space in Language and Thought. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 50–. ISBN 978-3-11-015243-2.
  60. ^ Ursula Stephany; Maria D. Voeikova (14 July 2009). Development of Nominal Inflection in First Language Acquisition: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 158–. ISBN 978-3-11-021711-7.
  61. ^ Kapović, Mate (2006). "Dijalekti, standard i sociolingvistički aktivizam". Jezik i mediji – jedan jezik : više svjetova. Hrvatsko društvo za primijenjenu lingvistiku. Retrieved 9 May 2014.
  62. ^ Georg Rehm; Hans Uszkoreit (22 August 2012). The Croatian Language in the Digital Age. Springer. pp. 56–. ISBN 978-3-642-30882-6.


References[edit]

Matasović, Ranko (2008). Poredbenopovijesna gramatika hrvatskoga jezika. Zagreb: Matica hrvatska. ISBN 978-953-150-840-7.

Lončarić, Mijo (1985). "Kajkavsko narječje u svjetlu dosadašnjih pručavanja". Zavod za jezik IFF, Zagreb. Retrieved 9 May 2014.

Nuorluoto, Juhani (2010). "Central Slovak and Kajkavian Structural Convergences: A Tentative Survey" (PDF). Retrieved 7 May 2014. {{cite web}}: line feed character in |title= at position 55 (help)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nahden/tmp&oldid=695559311"