Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

Proteze v hospodářských příručkách 16. století

100%
Šimečková M.
Listy filologické (Folia philologica)
|
2013
|
vol. 136
|
issue 3-4
343-363
EN
The analysis shows that the status of prothetic v- explored in old prints differs from contemporary common Czech. The non-etymological v- is conditioned by the following factors: 1) grammatical or lexical status of words (prothetic v- occurs most frequently in grammatical words, sporadically in prepositions vo ‘about’, vod ‘from’, in 3rd-person personal pronouns and in pronominal adverbs); 2) prefixation or non-prefixation (v- is more common in non-prefixed words, less frequent in prefixed words with prefix o-, rare in words with prefix od-, and quite sporadic in words with prefix ob-); 3) semantics of words (v- is common in names of domestic things and works, on the contrary, it is not used in abstract words, literary expressions and borrowings); 4) lexicalization (the most lexicalized forms are e. g. vorati ‘to plough’, votava ‘aftermath’, votruby ‘bran’); 5) literary genre (agricultural literature is more opened to the phenomenon in question than biblical texts or chronicles); 6) text topics (most benevolent are mathematical texts, less agricultural texts and the least medical texts); 7) other factors, especially extralinguistic.
2

Languages and Dialects as Part of Regional Identity and Cultural Heritage (on the Example of the Czech Republic)

100%
Šimečková M.
Národopisná revue (Journal of Ethnology)
|
2022
|
vol. 32
|
issue 2
114 - 124
EN
The aim of the paper is to determine whether languages and their territorial dialects are intangible cultural heritage or not. Excerpts from the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage have been argued, as well as specific entries on the UNESCO lists, in which languages and dialects appear as intangible cultural heritage independently or as part of more complex items. The definition of intangible cultural heritage, as formulated in the aforementioned Convention, has been found to entirely correspond to the nature of dialects – these are considered by the general public as part of cultural heritage, passed down from generation to generation, reshaped by various threatening factors, and they provide people with a sense of identity and continuity. Several options for the preservation of dialects in terms of their documentation and presentation by dialectologists and laypersons were presented. At the same time, attention was drawn to potential consequences of active protection through legislation channels, especially to the undesirable conservation of a certain state without taking into account natural language development and to the need for canonization leading to the creation of an artificial language hyper-standard.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.