| dc.description.abstract | ENGLISH: One of the more interesting questions in Western South Slavic dialectology is the relationship, both historical and modern, between the dialects of the Slovene and the Kajkavian Croatian speech territories. The debate over the origin and genetic relationship between these dialect regions goes back to Dobrovský in the early 19th century and was carried on by such scholars as of Belić, Ramovš, Ivšić, and more recently by Ivić, Vermeer and Greenberg.
Contemporary Slavic linguists agree that the dialects of the Slovene and Kajkavian speech territories are part of a dialect continuum with almost all of the isoglosses which unite them being archaisms rather than shared innovations. Although it is clear that this is a dialect continuum, the political border between Slovenia and Croatia has had an important influence on dialect development in this area. This paper is a contribution to the pool of dialect data from the border region. It provides a brief description of the phonemic inventory of the Croatian village dialect of Mohenski in Brezova Gora. It also reports on developments in the prosodic system based on a spectrographic analysis of tonal oppositions in this dialect and compares the situation in Mohenski to the dialects just across the border in Slovenia.
Based on the dialect forms in this study, Mohenski has much more in common with Kajkavian than with Pannonian Slovene dialects. (1) It has the merger of the jat and the jers, 'liet, 'dien. (2) The reflex of Common Slavic *o is distinct from that of the reflexes of Common Slavic *“ and *è, which have merged in u, ke'koši, but 'puno and peosudili. Mohenski also exhibits several of Vermeer’s secondary Kajkavian features, all of which it also shares with Bednja. (1) It has a velarized a. (2) The reflex of the jat is distinct from i and e. (3) The reflex of Common Slavic *o is fronted to e. (4) The reflex of the jat is a diphthong with rising sonority, ie.
All prosodic oppositions including quantity oppositions have been lost in Mohenski. This is based on the author’s perception as well as an instrumental analysis. There is almost no circumflex advancement in this dialect. As would be expected for a Kajkavian dialect, there is no advancement onto open syllables. This is true no matter what the relative syllable weight of the word is, 'mäso, 'kosti, 'bili, 'bilo, d'rievo.
Additional dialect descriptions from this area are needed in order to more specifically locate the isoglosses of circumflex advancement and tone loss in this part of the Slovene-Croatian dialect continuum.
SLOVENE: Eno od zanimivejših vprašanj v zahodni južnoslovanski dialektologiji je tako zgodovinsko kot sodobno razmerje med govori slovenskega in hrvaškega kajkavskega jezikovnega ozemlja. Razpravljanje o izvoru in sorodnosti teh govorov sega v začetek 19. stoletja k Dobrovskemu, nadaljevali so ga Belić, Ramovš, Ivšić, v novejšem času pa Ivić, Vermeer in Greenberg.
Današnji slovanski jezikoslovci se strinjajo v ugotovitvi, da so govori slovenskega in kajkavskega jezikovnega ozemlja del narečnega kontinuuma, v katerem so skoraj vse izoglose, ki povezujejo ta dva dela, arhaizmi in ne skupne inovacije. Čeprav je jasno, da gre za narečni kontinuum, pa je imela politična meja med Slovenijo in Hrvaško pomemben vpliv na razvoj narečij tega področja.
Pričujoča razprava je prispevek v zbirko narečnega gradiva z mejnega področja. Podaja kratek opis glasovnega inventarja hrvaške vasi Mohenski v Brezovi Gori. Na osnovi spektografske analize tonemskih nasprotij v tem govori avtor poroča tudi o razvoju prozodičnega sistema ter stanje v govoru Mohenskega primerja z govori na slovenski strani meje. Narečne oblike iz te raziskave kažejo, da ima govor Mohenskega veliko več skupnega s kajkavskimi kot s slovenskimi panonskimi govori: (1) sovpad jata s polglasnikoma, npr. 'liet, 'dien; (2) refleks psl. *o se razlikuje od refleksov psl. *“ in *è, ki sta sovpadla v u, npr. ke'koši, vendar 'puno in pe'sudili. Govor Mohenskega izkazuje tudi nekatere Vermeerove drugotne kajkavske poteze, ki jih ima vse tudi govor Bednje: (1) zaokroženi a; (2) refleks jata se razlikuje od i in e; (3) refleks psl. *o se je pomaknil naprej v e; (4) refleks jata je dvoglasnik z rastočo zvočnostjo ie.
Vsa prozodična nasprotja, vključno s kolikostnimi, so se v govoru Mohenskega izgubila. To opažanje temelji na avtorjevem slušnem vtisu in na strojni analizi. Govor skoraj ne pozna pomika cirkumfleksa. Kot bi bilo pričakovati za kajkavski govor, pomika na odprte zloge ni. To velja ne glede na relativno zložno težo besede, npr. 'mäso, 'kosti, 'bili, 'bilo, d'rievo.
Za natančnejšo določitev izoglos pomika cirkumfleksa in izgube tonemskosti v tem delu slovensko-hrvaškega narečnega kontinuuma bodo potrebni dodatni opisi govorov s tega področja. | |
