塞尔维亚语和克罗地亚语方言学和标准语言学术中的narečje和diasystem概念

Q4 Arts and Humanities Slavistica Vilnensis Pub Date : 2022-09-29 DOI:10.15388/slavviln.2022.67(1).85
Vuk Vukotić
{"title":"塞尔维亚语和克罗地亚语方言学和标准语言学术中的narečje和diasystem概念","authors":"Vuk Vukotić","doi":"10.15388/slavviln.2022.67(1).85","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to present a historical analysis of the concept of narečje (narječje) and diasystem in dialectology since their beginnings on the territory of contemporary Croatia and Serbia until today. These concepts are normally used to denote a dialectological unit higher than a single dialect, and also play an important role when defining standard languages. Regardless of their uniqueness and importance, there is no historical overview of their development. The historical analysis identified two distinct periods: (1) the comparative-descriptive and (2) the neogrammarian-structuralist. The first is ascribed to Vuk Karadžić and the philological school, who understood narečje as contemporary linguistic forms, while the second was started by Aleksandar Belić, who understood them primarily as homogenous proto-dialects, which split into smaller dialects over time. This understanding of narečje remained dominant even during the times Pavle Ivić introduced structural dialectology, as well as in the research of Dalibor Brozović, who introduced the alternative notion of diasystem in the 1970s. The conclusions invite for a revision of the concept of a narečje and diasystem in dialectology and the studies of standard languages. On a practical level, the author suggests that for contemporary varieties, adjectival forms or forms clearly refering to a hypothetical origin should be used (i.e. Štokavian dialects or dialect of Štokavian origin), while narečje, or noun-forms (i.e. Štokavian narečje, Štokavica, Štokavština) should either be avoided or substituted with reconstructed proto-dialect.","PeriodicalId":33056,"journal":{"name":"Slavistica Vilnensis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Concepts of narečje and diasystem in Serbian and Croatian Dialectology and Standard Language Scholarship\",\"authors\":\"Vuk Vukotić\",\"doi\":\"10.15388/slavviln.2022.67(1).85\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this paper is to present a historical analysis of the concept of narečje (narječje) and diasystem in dialectology since their beginnings on the territory of contemporary Croatia and Serbia until today. These concepts are normally used to denote a dialectological unit higher than a single dialect, and also play an important role when defining standard languages. Regardless of their uniqueness and importance, there is no historical overview of their development. The historical analysis identified two distinct periods: (1) the comparative-descriptive and (2) the neogrammarian-structuralist. The first is ascribed to Vuk Karadžić and the philological school, who understood narečje as contemporary linguistic forms, while the second was started by Aleksandar Belić, who understood them primarily as homogenous proto-dialects, which split into smaller dialects over time. This understanding of narečje remained dominant even during the times Pavle Ivić introduced structural dialectology, as well as in the research of Dalibor Brozović, who introduced the alternative notion of diasystem in the 1970s. The conclusions invite for a revision of the concept of a narečje and diasystem in dialectology and the studies of standard languages. On a practical level, the author suggests that for contemporary varieties, adjectival forms or forms clearly refering to a hypothetical origin should be used (i.e. Štokavian dialects or dialect of Štokavian origin), while narečje, or noun-forms (i.e. Štokavian narečje, Štokavica, Štokavština) should either be avoided or substituted with reconstructed proto-dialect.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33056,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Slavistica Vilnensis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Slavistica Vilnensis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15388/slavviln.2022.67(1).85\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Slavistica Vilnensis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/slavviln.2022.67(1).85","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的目的是对从当代克罗地亚和塞尔维亚领土上开始直到今天的方言学中的narečje和diasystem概念进行历史分析。这些概念通常用于表示高于单一方言的方言单位,在定义标准语言时也发挥着重要作用。无论其独特性和重要性如何,都没有关于其发展的历史概述。历史分析确定了两个不同的时期:(1)比较描述性和(2)新语法主义结构主义。第一种是Vuk Karadžić和语言学学派,他们将narečje理解为当代语言形式,而第二种是由Aleksandar Belić发起的,他将其主要理解为同质的原始方言,随着时间的推移,这些方言会分裂成更小的方言。即使在Pavle Ivić引入结构方言学的时期,以及在Dalibor Brozović的研究中,这种对narečje的理解仍然占主导地位,后者在20世纪70年代引入了散居系统的替代概念。这些结论要求对方言学和标准语言研究中的narečje和diasystem的概念进行修订。在实践层面上,作者建议,对于当代变体,应使用形容词形式或明确指代假设起源的形式(即Štokavian方言或Štokavian起源的方言),而narečje或名词形式(即štokaviannarečje、Štokovica、Štokavština)应避免使用或用重建的原始方言代替。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
On the Concepts of narečje and diasystem in Serbian and Croatian Dialectology and Standard Language Scholarship
The aim of this paper is to present a historical analysis of the concept of narečje (narječje) and diasystem in dialectology since their beginnings on the territory of contemporary Croatia and Serbia until today. These concepts are normally used to denote a dialectological unit higher than a single dialect, and also play an important role when defining standard languages. Regardless of their uniqueness and importance, there is no historical overview of their development. The historical analysis identified two distinct periods: (1) the comparative-descriptive and (2) the neogrammarian-structuralist. The first is ascribed to Vuk Karadžić and the philological school, who understood narečje as contemporary linguistic forms, while the second was started by Aleksandar Belić, who understood them primarily as homogenous proto-dialects, which split into smaller dialects over time. This understanding of narečje remained dominant even during the times Pavle Ivić introduced structural dialectology, as well as in the research of Dalibor Brozović, who introduced the alternative notion of diasystem in the 1970s. The conclusions invite for a revision of the concept of a narečje and diasystem in dialectology and the studies of standard languages. On a practical level, the author suggests that for contemporary varieties, adjectival forms or forms clearly refering to a hypothetical origin should be used (i.e. Štokavian dialects or dialect of Štokavian origin), while narečje, or noun-forms (i.e. Štokavian narečje, Štokavica, Štokavština) should either be avoided or substituted with reconstructed proto-dialect.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Slavistica Vilnensis
Slavistica Vilnensis Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Macarius: HTR modelis senoms slaviškoms spausdintoms knygoms iš Rumunijos Crow and Raven in Lithuanian and Slavic Phraseology and Ethnic Culture To the 95th anniversary of Doctor of Philology, Professor Adam Evgenievich Suprun „Aš myliu ir gerbiu visą Čekijos tautą“. Elzės Ožeškienės čekofilinės veiklos pėdsakai, pagrįsti laiškais Edvardui Jelinekui Investigating the Sources of the French Grammar (1724) by Ivan Gorlitsky
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1