Search results

1

Językowe pogranicza polszczyzny

100%

Bednarczuk L.

Gwary Dziś

|

2017

|

vol. 9

85-158

2

Zur Frage des nichtindogermanischen Substrats im Germanischen : ein kurzer Überblick

88%

Bichlmeier H.

Slovo a slovesnost: časopis pro otázky teorie a kultury jazyka (Slovo a slovesnost: A journal for the theory of language and language cultivation)

|

2016

|

vol. 77

|

issue 4

316-336

EN

For about 100 years, a myth has been fostered in Germanic historical linguistics: it has been claimed that some 30% or more of the Germanic lexical stock are of non-Indo-European substrate origin. Despite this claim, no list of more than 40–50 lexical items has ever been offered to prove it. For most of these lexical items, which pertain to the sphere of seafaring and related subjects, solid Indo-European etymologies have been completed in the meantime. On the other hand, it can be shown that the mythical number of 30% is based on an Indo-Europeanists’ incorrect interpretation of rather sound statistics on the Germanic lexicon offered in a book by Bruno Liebich (1899). Moreover, Vennemann’s theories of a ‘Vasconic’ substratum and a ‘Semitidic’ superstratum in the Germanic lexicon may be discarded of as an unproven and unprovable phantasma. Discussion must go on, however, about claims made by Leiden Indo-Europeanists regarding the substratal origin of certain phonological structures in Germanic words, which cannot go back directly to PIE preforms. In the end, the more conservative approaches to the problem by the authors of the Etymological Dictionary of Old High German are exemplified with data taken from Vol. V (2014).

3

Ugrofinizmy w języku jaćwieskim

88%

Witczak K. T.

Acta Baltico-Slavica

|

2020

|

vol. 44

EN

Finno-Ugric Borrowings in YatvingianThis paper considers 15 Yatvingian words suspected of being borrowed from a Finno-Ugric source. The hypothesis is rejected in the case of five lexical units, while two further proposals are considered uncertain. The following words are verified as Finno-Ugricisms: Yatv. aiga ‘end’ (← Balto-Finnic *akja ‘id.’); Yatv. ajki ‘time’ (← BF. *ajka ‘id.’); Yatv. fała ‘meat’ (← FU. *pala ‘bite; to eat’); Yatv. ławe ‘boat’ (← FU. *lajwa ‘boat, canoe’); Yatv. sini pl. ‘mushrooms’ (← BF. *sēne ‘mushroom’ < FU. *śänä ‘bracket fungus’); Yatv. tuolis ‘devil’ (← FU. *tule ‘fire’); Yatv. wa[g] ‘it is necessary’ (← BF. *wajakз ‘id.’); Yatv. wał ‘was’ (← FU. *wol- ‘was’). Ugrofinizmy w języku jaćwieskimW niniejszej pracy omówiono 15 jaćwieskich wyrazów, podejrzanych o zapożyczenie ze źródła ugrofińskiego. Stanowczo odrzucono 5 jednostek leksykalnych. Dwie propozycje uznano za niepewne. Do prawdopodobnych ugrofinizmów zaliczono następujące wyrazy: jaćw. aiga ‘koniec’ (← bfi. *akja ‘ts.’); jaćw. ajki ‘czas’ (← bfi. *ajka ‘ts.’); jaćw. fała ‘mięso’ (← ugrofi. *pala ‘kąsek; jeść’); jaćw. ławe ‘łódź’ (← ugrofi. *lajwa ‘łódź, czółno’); jaćw. sini pl. ‘grzyby’ (← bfi. *sēne ‘grzyb’ < ugrofi. *śänä ‘huba, grzyb drzewny’); jaćw. tuolis ‘diabeł’ (← ugrofi. *tule ‘ogień’); jaćw. wa[g] ‘trzeba’ (← bfi. *wajakз ‘ts.’); jaćw. wał ‘było’ (← ugrofi. *wol- ‘był’).

4

Жанравыя асаблівасці інскрыпту (дарчага надпісу)

88%

Albut A.

Przegląd Wschodnioeuropejski

|

2018

|

vol. 1

169-176

EN

An inscription (dedication) is analyzed as a speech genre on the set of texts byYakub Kolas (242 items) and Yanka Kupala (139 items). These writers are among those whocreated the modern literary Belarusian language and are highly appreciated in the society, sotheir communicative experience is worth examining. There are two main genre features of aninscription: substrate (any surface, on which something is written to be given to somebody) andinscription structure. Usually it deals with the basic model, consisting of several units. But thereare examples of modified basic inscription models. It helps a speaker to express his attitude toan addressee making such utterances a valuable object of pragmatics.

5

Ugrofinizmy w języku staropruskim

88%

Witczak K. T.

Przegląd Wschodnioeuropejski

|

2021

|

vol. 1

237-250

EN

The paper discusses 9 Old Prussian words suspected of being borrowed from a Finno-Ugric source. The following words are verified as Finno-Ugricisms: OPrus. jūrī ‘sea’ (← FV. *järwä ‘lake, sea’); OPrus. kadegis ‘juniper’ (← BF. *kataŋa ‘id.’ ← Ur. *kača ‘resin’); OPrus. kaywe ‘mare’ (← BF. *keewe ‘female horse or reindeer’ < Ur. *kewe ‘female animal’); OPrus. kērdan ‘time’ (← FV. *kerta ‘succession, order, time’); OPrus. *palwe in toponymy (← FU. *palγɜ ‘village’); OPrus. *salavō ‘island’ (← FU. *sala-wɜ ‘island; dry place in the swamp’ < Ur. *sala); OPrus. sylecke ‘Baltic herring’ (← BF. *silakka ‘id.’ ← Ur. śilä ‘fat’); OPrus. wargien ‘copper’ (← FU. *würγɜnɜ ‘id.’).

6

Substrate and Adstrate Influence on (Ki)Nubi: Evidence from Early Records

75%

Avram A. A.

Academic Journal of Modern Philology

|

2020

|

vol. 10

7-21

EN

(Ki)Nubi is an Arabic-lexifier creole, spoken in Kenya and Uganda. Its substrate includes a wide range of languages, of various genetic affiliations: Nilo-Saharan (Acholi, Avokaya, Baka, Bari, Belanda Bor, Bongo, Didinga, Dinka, Jur, Lendu, Lotuho, Lugbara, Luo, Ma’di, Mamvu, Moru, Nuer, Päri, Shilluk) , as well as Niger-Congo (Mundu and Zande). The adstrate languages, all Niger-Congo, are Bangala, Swahili and Luganda. The present paper looks at a number of selected features of (Ki)Nubi which can be attributed to substrate and adstrate influence and which are attested in the earliest extant records of the language: Wtterwulghe (1904), Cook (1905), Jenkins (1909), Meldon (1913), and Owen & Keane (1915). Since (Ki)Nubi is believed to have creolized by the end of the 19th century, the records examined provide insights into the earlier stages of the language. The issues covered are developments in the phonology, calques, and loanwords. The analysis of the phonology of early (Ki)Nubi focuses on instances of substitutions of consonants and vowels, the occurrence of variation, “imported” phonemes, and the repair strategies employed for syllable restructuring. The calques recorded in early (Ki)Nubi are shown to be indicative of the existence of areal features, cutting across genetic affiliations. Wherever possible, loanwords are traced to their source languages. Also examined is the possibility of multiple etymology in the case of lexical items attested in several of the substrate and/or adstrate languages.

7

Co wiemy i czego nie wiemy o polszczyźnie kowieńskiej

63%

Karaś H.

Poradnik Językowy

|

2024

|

vol. 810

|

issue 1

7-23

EN

The article aims at providing a synopsis of previous studies on the Kaunas Polish language, as well as identifying knowledge gaps, i.e., the things that – despite extensive research on this language variety – are still not known. At the turn of the 20th and the 21st century, intensified research both on the current Polish language variety, as spoken in the Kaunas region, and its history (mainly over the 19th century up till the 1950s) brought about vast amounts of linguistic and extralinguistic data. However, a detailed analysis shows that there is no easy answer to the question posed in the title of the paper. The article overviews the situation of the Kaunas Polish language, its territorial range, scope, and functions, as well as its defining features observable at the beginning of the 21st century. The author also outlines how the language variety – a subdivision of the Polish in the North-Eastern Borderlands – has evolved over the 20th century.

PL

Celem artykułu jest próba podsumowania dotychczasowej wiedzy na temat polszczyzny kowieńskiej, a także pokazanie luk badawczych, a więc tego, czego jeszcze mimo wielu badań, nie wiemy o tej odmianie języka. Niezwykła intensyfikacja badań na przełomie XX i XXI wieku zarówno nad współczesną, mówioną odmianą języka polskiego na Kowieńszczyźnie, jak i nad jej dziejami (głównie w XIX i w pierwszej połowie XX wieku) dostarczyła ogromnej liczby danych językowych i pozajęzykowych. Jednak szczegółowa analiza pokazuje, że mimo to nie jest to zadanie łatwe. W artykule przedstawiono sytuację polszczyzny kowieńskiej, jej zasięg terytorialny, zakres i funkcje, jej cechy konstytutywne na początku XXI wieku. Pokazano także zmiany, jakim podlegała omawiana pododmiana polszczyzny północnokresowej w XX wieku.

Refine search results

2 Przegląd Wschodnioeuropejski

1 Academic Journal of Modern Philology

1 Acta Baltico-Slavica

1 Gwary Dziś

1 Poradnik Językowy

1 Slovo a slovesnost: časopis pro otázky teorie a kultury jazyka (Slovo a slovesnost: A journal for the theory of language and language cultivation)

1 2024

1 2021

2 2020

1 2018

1 2017

1 2016

2 Witczak K. T.

1 Albut A.

1 Avram A. A.

1 Bednarczuk L.

1 Bichlmeier H.