The Impact of Purism on the Development of the Slovene Standard Language

Abstract

SLOVENE: V zgodovini slovenskega knjižnega jezika je purizem igral pomembno vlogo. Usmerjen je bil tako proti zunanjim kot proti notranjim dejavnikom, ki so ogrožali jezik. Od zunanjih sta bila predvsem nemščina, ki je kot dominantni jezik srednje Evrope imela velik vplivna slovenščino na vseh jezikovnih ravninah, in srbohrvaščina, ki je bila dejansko sredstvo mednacionalnega sporazumevanja v bivši Jugoslaviji. Ksenofobični purizem je izločil iz knjižnega jezika večino nemških izposojenk in jih nadomestil z izposojenkami iz drugih slovanskih jezikov in kalki. Ker je glavnina nemških izposojenk ostalav pogovornem jeziku, se je knjižni jezik oddaljil od pogovornega. Podrugi strani pa je bil poskus izločanja številnih skladenjskih in frazeoloških kalkov iz jezika na splošno neuspešen, vsaj s praktičnega stališča. Kljub temu pa je puristični odziv na te prikrite vplive odigral pomembno simbolično vlogo s tem, da je utrdil slovensko jezikovno identiteto v zavesti slovenske jezikovne skupnosti. Besedje iz srbohrvaščine pa je povzročalo posebne zagate slovenskim puristom, ker je v 19. stol. hrvaščina dajala slovenščini sprejemljiva nadomestila za mednarodno in nemško abstraktno besedišče. Pri tem pa je bilo zaradi skupnega položaja v Jugoslaviji in izvorne bližine slovenščine in srbohrvaščine v praksi pogosto težko z gotovostjo razlikovati slovensko gradivo od srbohrvaškega. Zato je sistematično in nepristransko identificiranje tega gradiva ostalo naloga, s katero semorajo slovenski jezikoslovci soočiti v obdobju politične samostojnosti. Kar zadeva notranji razvoj, so puristi včasih skušali arhaizirati in slovanizirati pravopis in oblikoslovje knjižnega jezika.To je v določenih jezikoslovnih krogih pospeševalo vzdušje hiperkorektnosti in pikolovstva. Po drugi plati pa je struja narodoslovnega purizma, ki se začenja z vplivno osebnostjo Jerneja Kopitarja, služila kot protiutež arhaizaciji in slovanizaciji, ker je utemeljevala normo knjižne slovenščine na sodobnih narečjih. To osvetljuje dejstvo, da puristično poseganje v knjižno slovenščino lahkov glavnem označimo kot zmerno in neobremenjeno s skrajnostmi. Vendar jeprav tako jasno, da bo puristični spor, ki se vleče od obdobij Trubarja, Kopitarja, Čopa in Prešerna do danes, ostal pomemben dejavnik tudi v času, ko se določa vloga slovenskega knjižnega jezika na novem družbeno-političnem prizorišču slovenskega jezikovnega področja.

ENGLISH: Purism has played a significant role throughout the history of written Slovene. It has been directed at both external and internal threats to the language. Chief among the former have been German, the dominant language of the region, which has influenced the Slovene vernacular at all linguistic levels, and Serbo-Croatian, which served asthe de-facto idiom of inter-ethnic communication in the former Yugoslavia. Xenophobic purism has succeeded in removing most German loanwords from the standard language and replacing them with loanwords from other Slavic languages and calques. Inasmuch as the majority of the German loanwords have been retained in the spoken vernacular this has had the net effect of distancing the standard language from the respective vernacular. On the other hand, the attempt to remove the numerous syntactic and phraseological calques based on German models hasbeen generally unsuccessful in practical terms. However, the puristic reaction to these covert influences has served an important symbolic function in emphasizing a sense of Slovene linguistic identity in the linguistic consciousness of the Slovene speech community. Serbo-Croatian lexical elements, on the other hand, have posed a particularly intractable problem for Slovene purists. This was primarily because in the nineteenth century the Croatian abstract lexicon played a major part in providing standard Slovene with acceptable replacements for internationalisms and Germanisms. Secondly, because of a common involvement in Yugoslavia and the close genetic relationship between Slovene and Serbo-Croatian it was often difficult in practice to identify Serbo-Croatian material in Slovene with any degree of certainty. Indeed, a systematic, dispassionate identification of such material remains asone of the many tasks confronting Slovene scholarship in the years of political independence. Internally, purists have at various times attempted to archaize and Slavicize the orthography and morphology ofthe standard language. This has fostered a spirit of hypercorrection and pendantry in some Slovene linguistic circles. On the other hand, the strain of ethnographic purism, which goes back to the seminal figure of Jernej Kopitar, has served as an antidote to both archaization and Slavization of Slovene by seeking justification for the norms of standard Slovene in the contemporary dialects. This helps to explain why puristic intervention in standard Slovene can be generally characterized as moderate and free of excesses. Nevertheless, it is equally clear that the puristic debate, which has resounded in the times of Trubar, Kopitar, Čop, and Prešeren right down to the present day, will continue to be a significant factor as the Slovene standard language seeks to define its role on the new socio-political stage of the Slovene-speaking territory.