This article discusses Slavic names for 'finger joints' and the 'wrist' . The analysis is presented in a parallel fashion. First it discusses the names that are used to refer to both of the joints, and then it analyzes the names that exclusively refer to 'finger joints' or to the 'wrist'. The article is accompanied by maps presenting the territorial ranges of the respective names. The maps use the same graphic display so as to facilitate comparison of the territorial ranges. The existence of the common names for these body organs stems from the fact that both of them can be characterized by "bending" and "merging" of their parts. The names of these parts have often become the names of the joints themselves. This fact is attributed to various environmental perceptions of body parts and their functions by human beings. The article introduces some modifications to the interpretation of the material presented in the ninth volume of The Slavic Linguistic Atlas (OLA).
PL
W artykule omówiono słowiańskie nazwy ‘stawów palców’ i ‘przegubu ręki’. Zostały one przedstawione paralelnie. Najpierw omawiane są nazwy wspólne dla obu stawów, a dopiero potem nazwy właściwe tylko dla ‘stawów palców’ lub tylko ‘przegubu ręki’. Na mapach zostały one przedstawione za pomocą tych samych środków graficznych, by można było łatwiej porównać ich zasięgi terytorialne. Nazwy wspólne wynikają z faktu, że w obu wypadkach mamy do czynienia ze stawami charakteryzującymi się ich ‘zginaniem’ i ‘łączeniem’ ich części. Nazwy tych części też często stają się nazwami samych stawów. Wynika to z różnych środowiskowo percepcji przez człowieka elementów jego własnego ciała i ich funkcji. Wprowadzono pewne modyfikacje interpretacji materiału, przedstawionej w IX tomie OLA
Thanks to the collection of important information for the history and geography of words in the Polish language from all types of dictionaries, records and, in particular, hardly available sources quoted there, I have managed to establish the development of a Ukrainian borrowing hreczuszki in the Polish language into racuszki and the formation of a form racuchy.
The article discusses historical and dialectal changes of names of chosen body parts in Eastern-Slavonic languages. Two names formerly occurred in the meaning of 'forehead': more frequently 'chelo', rarely 'lob', which also has other meanings. The first one must have belonged to the higher (book) stratum, the other one - to the lower (folk) stratum. Today 'chelo' remained vestigially, in literary languages and in dialects 'lob' stayed common. In all Eastern Slavonic area the name 'ochi' occurred formerly in the meaning of 'eyes'. The name 'gl'az' is a Russian innovation. It sporadically appears as early as in the 15th century but it was popularised on the turn of the 16th and 17th centuries. It must have been known earlier in Russian dialects but it was probably understood as vulgar. The name of 'human skin' occurs mainly in Russian dialects but as a variant it reaches Belarus and Ukraine quite deeply. Today as a literary word it is fixed in Belorussian 'skura', Ukrainian 'shkira' and Russian 'kozha'. Their fixing in literary languages was a very complex process. In the past the form 'skora' was also quite popular in Russian, however, partly in the meaning of 'animal skin', 'leather', 'fur'. Undoubtedly the form 'shkura' appears in the 18th century as well. In the light of dialectal and historical materials it is rather unlikely that this word is a possible borrowing from Polish. The words 'lob' (forehead), 'visk' (temple) and 'kosa' (a plait) also appeared on the Eastern borderland of Poland, besides 'kosa' historically much wider. After World War II 'leb' (forehead) and 'kosa' (a plait) were introduced in Western and Northern Poland as well. They started to disappear over time so that ranges of names typical for Eastern-Slavonic languages were fixed on the Eastern border of Poland.
The names of 'the calf' are characterized by a very complex territorial structure. Several names from the past set up quite wide and cohesive complexes. Besides, a few names of a limited range also occur, in addition, there are a few rare or absolutely sporadic names of 'the calf'. Historical materials and materials from earlier studies show considerable changes in ranges of specified names of 'the calf'. In the past, the names of 'the calf' were even more mixed than they are today, it took some time to create more expressive divisions, mostly under the impact of literal languages. Names of 'the calf', as a rule, have a clear-cut semantic motivation depicting 'a bulge', 'a bump', 'a thickness', 'a swelling', or 'softness'. They also are combined with specified names of the animals. Many of these 'calf' names refer to other, neighboring parts of the body, such 'a shin', 'a hip', 'a leg', 'a bone', etc.
This paper analyzes Slavic equivalents of the words 'lungs' and 'liver' included in the 'General Slavic Linguistic Atlas' (OLA) in relation to dialectal material not included in the Atlas, as well as some additional data coming from contemporary and historical Slavic dictionaries. To facilitate the analysis of the words two synthetic maps have been created. These maps employ uniform technical solutions: they contain captions and identical cartographic signs for the words that occur in both meanings. A juxtaposition of the Slavic words for 'lungs' and 'liver' in the paper is motivated by the fact that some of these words refer both to the lungs and the liver, and they are distinguished only by certain adjectival modifiers, such as 'white' or 'light' referring to the lungs, and 'black' or 'heavy' in reference to the liver. Thus, the words for the lungs are quite uniform in terms of their semantic motivation (the main motivating feature is lightness), but in lexical terms they are quite diversified. Conversely, the words for the liver show a remarkable variation in motivation. Some of them point to the general meaning of an 'internal organ' (e.g. *otroba, *jetra), but in large linguistic areas in the North-East these words are motivated by a culinary tradition (e.g. *pecen'). Comparative material extracted from the sources other than the OLA has made it possible to illustrate shifts in the semantic ranges of many words, in particular the replacement of original Slavic terms by foreign borrowings in South Slavic.
Many identical Slavic words refer to the face and the cheek. The maps included in the article show their geographic distribution. It is often the case that identical words are geographically excluded. Only some of them are sporadically found in the same locations when they carry the same meanings. In East Slavic, the words *licE/'face' and *scEka /'cheek\ have very similar ranges. There are also a lot of words that are not found within distinct aerial borders. A few words that refer to the face have been recorded over a large area, especially in Czech, Polish, Byelorussian, and Ukrainian dialects. They are shown on the map through a layering of surfaces and in some cases, also through layering of cartographic signs. This is particularly visible in an area East of Kiev. Synonyms often differ with respect to their stylistic marking. In literary languages some of them are considered pejorative or even vulgar. This negative stylistic marking is less prominent in dialects, where such words are at times considered to be completely neutral. The historical material illustrates the variation concerning the availability of certain names over time in different locations. Some of the older forms have become bookish and/or formal and now are only used in the literary language whereas some others went out of use completely. It is also worth noting that there have been instances of intra-Slavic borrowing, although there have been rather few of them and they normally express a pejorative meaning.
The names of 'hair' from Slavic territories presented herein show a general development tendency, which is removing former multiple synonymic names and establishing one basic name, on certain territories. It can be seen mainly on the example of the root *vols' becoming widely recognized at the cost of another common Slavonic root *kosa. A certain influence on the decline of the root *kosa could have been exerted by the tendency to avoid homonymy with the word *kosa 'tool for mowing' (scythe). On eastern Slavic territories, as well as in Slovenia, in spite of the emergence of a similar tendency, an invariably frequent occurrence of opponent names and forms can be observed. A particular degree of complication can be seen in various plural forms and former collective formations occurring in opposition to the name *vols' and performing the same function.
The objective of this article to familiarize the reader with the rich history of research of Slavic influences on the general German language, on its regional varieties and dialects. They go back to the middle of the XIX century. They are poorly known, even by linguists. A particular attention was paid to the earliest research, the first, yet controversial, statements on Slavic influences on the German language. Finally, the disputes on the recognition of certain words as borrowings from the Slavic languages have not so far been resolved. We may see a particular increase in the said researches after the end of the Second World War. Numerous German regional vocabularies from the territories neighboring the Slavic languages and the German Language Atlas provided a great deal of materials. Slavic and German linguists, mainly German linguists, have amassed a huge number of dialect-related and historic materials concerning borrowings from the Slavic languages in the German language, from which only a minor part concerns the German literary language (about 180) or colloquial German language, however the prevailing majority (about 4 000) concerns different German dialects, in particular, the old German dialects, which are no longer existing. These are mainly lexical borrowings, however the morphological influence is also at issue here, e.g. the Slavic suffixes being added to the German root words.
Das Tschechische hat einen gravierenden Einfluß auf das sich herausbildende Polnisch gehabt, und zwar auf verschiedenen Ebenen: von der phonetischen Gestalt der Wörter über Flexionsformen bis hin zur Lexik. Die übernommenen phonetischen Merkmale beziehen sich vor allem auf die Distribution der Phoneme, auf ihre Frequenz, aber nicht auf deren Inventar. Die einzige phonetische Entlehnung ist die Übernahme des Phonems h. Auch die Einflüsse im Bereich der Flexion sind eher spärlich. Das Tschechische spielte vielmehr die Rolle eines Prüfsteins bei der Herausbildung von Flexionsnormen (vgl. z.B. die zusammengezogenen Formen des Possessivpronomens, die Behauptung der Infinitivformen auf -ci). Stärker sind die tschechischen Einflüsse im Bereich der Wortbildung, die sowohl Wortentlehnungen als auch Formantenentlehnungen umfassen (vgl. Suffixe -atko, -tel, -teiny, -stwie, dwie; Wörter vom Typ ‘podkomorze’, ‘przepiękny’, ‘naczyrwien’, ‘odprawować’). Im Bereich der Lexik bezieht sich der tschechische Einfluß auf die Religionsterminologie (X.-XI. Jh.), Verwaltungsterminologie (XIII/XIV. Jh.), botanische Terminologie, militärische Terminologie u.a.m. Besonders stark war der Einfluß im XVI. Jh., wo viele bislang sporadische Bohemismen Fuß gefaßt haben. Nach dem XVI. Jh. sind kaum neue Bohemismen hinzugekommen. Oft hat das Tschechische darüber entschieden, welche Dialektismen - durch Ähnlichkeit mit den Tschechischen Pendants - zur Hochsprache Weg gefunden haben.
Distinguishing continuations from past borrowings in the Polish-East Slavic borderland is not always an easy task. The material involved is very diverse. In the case of the lexeme *bdo ‘rigid heddle in a loom’ the decisive factor is the form: the relic bardo is a native word, whereas the forms berda, bierda, berdo and bierdo are borrowings appearing in the Polish-East Slavic borderland, in newly settled areas of north and northwest Poland but also, secondarily, in Masuria and Warmia. The borrowed name for ‘thistle’ has the phonetically foreign form of bodiak as well as Polonised forms bodak and bodziak, theoretically likewise possibile in Polish. In Polish dialects these forms are usually confounded, making it impossible to delineate any sort of boundary; they are also richly attested in written Polish. The names for ‘forehead’: the East Slavic *lъbъ and *čelo in the remaining territories do in their turn dichotomise the Slavic area, with the eastern-Polandattested łeb being a borrowing, and the enclaves of the name *čelo in East Slavic dialects constituting a former native relic. The appearances of the word wyszki, meaning ‘attic over a barn or a sty, built of logs or boards and used for storing Hay or straw’, which today seems like a borrowing from Belarusian or Ukrainian, are in fact relics of the word’s once wide range in Polish dialects.
Rozróżnienie dawnych nawiązań i zapożyczeń na pograniczu polsko-wschodniosłowiańskim nie zawsze jest łatwe. Przedstawiony materiał przedstawia się bardzo różnorodnie. W odniesieniu do pewnych wyrazów można stwierdzić bezspornie pożyczkę wschodniosłowiańską (np. koromysło, koleśnik ‘kołodziej’, korowaj) oraz wskazać źródło zapożyczenia (np. odliga, otliga ‘odwilż’), a w przypadku innych trudno ustalić bezpośrednie źródło zapożyczenia (np. oładki ‘placki’). Wśród wyrazów notowanych na pograniczu wschodniosłowiańskich znajdziemy takie (np. plośna ‘stopa’), których zasięg w gwarach polskich wydaje się wskazywać na możliwość wpływu ruskiego, jednakże ich polska postać fonetyczna przemawia raczej za rodzimością i należy tu przyjąć dawne nawiązanie. Mamy także do czynienia z wyrazami ogólnosłowiańskimi, gdzie powstaje wątpliwość, czy w języku polskim jest to zapożyczenie, czy w grę wchodzi dawne nawiązanie obejmujące wschodnią Słowiańszczyznę i wschodnią Polskę – tak jak w przypadku mielnika ‘młynarza’. Inny przykład funkcjonowania wyrazów na pograniczu stanowią pożyczki wschodniosłowiańskie, które uległy polonizacji fonetycznej (np. ciełuszka, całuszka ‘kromka chleba odkrojona z początku lub z końca bochenka’).
The article deals with the question of linguistic interference among Slavic languages at the example of Choroszczynka, a bilingual village in Biała Podlaska County, Lublin Voivodeship. The presentation of two complete questionnaires for the Slavic Linguistic Atlas (OLA), Polish and Ukrainian, not only makes it possible to capture grammatical and lexical peculiarities of both sets assigned to individual dialects, but also reveals carelessness of the fieldworkers who collected the data. This, in turn, contributed to such an interpretation of dialectal data presented in OLA maps which does not reflect linguistic reality.
PL
Artykuł podejmuje kwestię interferencji w obrębie języków słowiańskich na przykładzie dwujęzycznej wsi Choroszczynka w powiecie bialskim, woj. lubelskie. Przedstawienie całości materiału z dwóch kwestionariuszy do Ogólnosłowiańskiego atlasu językowego – polskiego i ukraińskiego daje możliwość nie tylko uchwycenia osobliwości gramatycznych i leksykalnych obu zestawień przypisanych do poszczególnych gwar, ale także pokazuje nierzetelność eksploratorek prowadzących badania terenowe. W konsekwencji wpłynęło to na niezgodną z rzeczywistością interpretację faktów gwarowych zobrazowanych na mapach OLA.
The text is devoted to the verb brechać, brzechać “bark” which is one of many examples of an overlap between Polish and East Slavonic systemic features, difficult to classify as native or foreign. The analysis of numerous sources and research papers enables to conclude that both Ruthenian brechać (expansive form that influenced derivatives) and Polish brzechać occured on Polish-East Slavonic borderland. This small difference has been either ignored or interpreted incorrectly in previous research.
The article describes a range of East Slavonic borrowing rubel in dialects of Eastern Poland as well as its derivatives, which not only serves as a good example of lexical peculiarity on the Polish-East Slavonic borderland but also bears witness to old rural reality. The material is an interesting illustration of language contacts beyond state borders and beyond affiliation with a particular literary language.
The last decades have witnessed extensive research projects that lasted for many years and have resulted in an impressive archive of Slavic language data. These data, which have been presented in various forms (dialect atlases and dictionaries , historical language dictionaries, dialect monographs and historical and linguistic studies of individual relics) describe the Polish language area as well as the Slavic dialects spoken within the Polish borders. The ever-growing lexical material that has been collected fostered comparative and etymological analyses. It also has enabled researchers to continue the investigation of the linguistic history of the Slavs as well as their mutual contacts and linguistic interactions. Dialectological work on Slavic took the form of international cooperation from early on, and this has resulted in the publication of The Slavic Linguistic Atlas (OLA)], The Carpathian Linguistic Atlas , and many other works in the areas of word formation and onomastics. Moreover, slavicists also investigate a new linguistic symbiosis that arises due to political processes and resettlement. This article is accompanied by an extensive bibliography of selected publications that were written during this period.
PL
Specyfiką tych czasów były zaplanowane na wiele lat duże zespołowe zamierzenia badawcze, w wyniku których odbywała się wielka archiwizacja słowiańskich materiałów językowych. Materiały te, utrwalone w różnorakich formach (atlasów i słowników dialektalnych, słowników dotyczących historii języka, monografii gwarowych i historyczno-językowych oraz opracowań poszczególnych zabytków) opisywały polski obszar językowy wraz z dialektami innych języków słowiańskich występujących w granicach Rzeczypospolitej. Powiększający się materiał leksykalny sprzyjał dociekaniom komparatystycznym i etymologicznym, kontynuowano też językoznawcze dociekania nad przeszłością językową Słowian oraz poświęcono wiele uwagi wzajemnym kontaktom i oddziaływaniom językowym. Slawistyczne prace dialektologiczne wcześnie przybrały formę międzynarodowej współpracy, wynikiem której jest Ogólnosłowiański atlas językowy [The Slavic Linguistic Atlas (OLA)], Językowy atlas karpacki oraz inne liczne prace o charakterze onomastycznym i słowotwórczym. Uwaga slawistów koncentruje się też na analizie nowej symbiozy będącej wynikiem procesów przesiedleńczych i politycznych. Załączona obszerna Bibliografia wybrana stanowi prezentację powstałych w opisywanym okresie dokonań.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.