U neslavnom nizu zaboravljenih kajkavskih pisaca o kojima se danas ništa, ili gotovo ništa ne zna, nalazi se i Josip Vračan – varaždinski profesor, ludbreški svećenik i zagrebački kanonik koji je ...živio krajem 18. i u prvoj polovici 19. stoljeća. U literaturi se o njemu mogu naći relativno oskudni biografski podaci, a informacije o njegovu književno-jezičnom radu mahom se donose frag-
mentarno i usputno u radovima koji se bave drugim temama. Da bi se produbilo i zaokružilo poznavanje Vračanova lika i djela, potrebno ga je staviti u fokus analize te kompletirati i analizirati njegovo književno i jezično stvaralaštvo u kontekstu vremena u kojem je živio. S tim je ciljem u Zavodu za lingvistička istraživanja Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti pokrenut projekt naslova Popunjavanje bjelina na suvremenoj i povijesnoj kajkavskoj jezičnoj karti gdje se, između ostaloga, istražuje upravo višejezični korpus Vračanovih pisanih djela. Na tom je tragu i ovaj rad koji donosi rezultate nedavno provedenih arhivskih istraživanja bacajući novo svjetlo na Vračanovu biografiju, bibliografiju, kao i na (više)jezičnu povijest ludbreškoga kraja.
U literaturi se dokazanim smatra da
je u hrvatskome proces departicipijalizacije, tj. adverbijalizacije participa u
glagolske priloge završen do 17. st., iako neki od novijih radova (npr. Horvat,
...Štebih Golub 2016.) te tvrdnje dovode u pitanje. Kako sve poznate gramatike
kajkavskoga književnog jezika prikazuju participe, u ovome se radu nastoji
odgovoriti na pitanje jesu li participi zaista postojali u književnoj
kajkavštini iz vremena nastanka slovnica ili ih kajkavski gramatičari kao i
neke druge kategorije (član, preterit, konjunktiv) opisuju tek pod utjecajem
egzogenih modela gramatičkog opisa, ili pod utjecajem jezične tradicije (jer se
particip rabio u ranijim razdobljima književne kajkavštine). Istraživanje je
provedeno na dvjema kajkavskim slovnicama, Matijevićevoj Horvackoj gramatici iz 1810. i Kristijanovićevoj Grammatik
der kroatischen Mundart iz 1837. i na
odabranim tekstovima dvojice gramatičara (Matijevićevu Rastolnačenju
evangelijumov (1796.), Rastolnačenjima
zvrhu Velikoga katekižmuša III. (1797.) i
Genovefi (1808.) te Kristijanovićevim
Blagorečjima (1830.), Ezopuševim
basnama pohorvačenim (1843.). Danici
zagrebečkoj (1845.) i tekstovima iz
njegova aneksnoga rječnika Anhang zur Grammatik der kroatischen Mundart (1940.) Opis participa u dvjema gramatikama
uspoređuje se s uporabom u tekstovima kako bi se utvrdilo koriste li kajkavski
autori participe koje opisuju u gramatikama i u svojim tekstovima i, ako ih
rabe, u kojim sintaktičkim funkcijama.
The process of participles losing their adjectival
characteristics in Croatian, i.e. of adverbialization of participles into
deverbal adverbials, is commonly accepted in the literature, although there are
more recent contributions (e.g. Horvat, Štebih Golub 2016) that question these
claims. Since participles are dealt with in all known grammars of the
Kajkavian
literary language
, the aim of this paper is to determine whether the
participles were really in use in the literary Kajkavian language of the same
period when the grammars were written or whether the Kajkavian grammarians deal
with them, as they do with some other categories (article, preterit,
subjunctive), under the influence of exogenous models of grammatical
description. Two Kajkavian grammars were the focus of our study:
Matijević’s
Horvacka gramatika
(1810) and Kristijanović’s
Grammatik
der kroatischen Mundart
(1837) as well as selected works by the same
authors: Matijević’s
Rastolnačenje evangelijumov
(1796),
Rastolnačenja
zvrhu Velikoga katekižmuša III.
(1797), and
Genovefa
(1808), and
Kristijanović’s
Blagorečja
(1830),
Ezopuševe basne pohrvačene
(1843), and
Danica zagrebečka
(1845). The description of participles in
the two grammars is compared with the use of participles in the texts in order
to determine whether the Kajkavian authors use participles described in their
grammars in their texts, and if they do, in which syntactic roles. The analysis of grammars shows that in their grammars both
authors treat participles as an established category of the Kajkavian literary
language. While Kristijanović explicitly describes their dual nature already in
the definitions, Matijević does not mention it explicitly, but the fact that he
is aware of it can be seen in the way he describes it. Both authors share the
understanding that participles are reduced dependent clauses.
The analysis of the use of the active participles of
present and preterit on the corpus of selected texts by the previously
mentioned authors has shown that they both use both participles, although their
frequency and functions differ significantly. Active present participle has
been found in attributive, predicative and secondary predicative function. Nominalized
it occurs in other syntactic functions (subject, direct and indirect object,
nominal attribute) as well, while the active preterit participle has been found
as a secondary predicate in marked stylistic use.
The most frequent use of participle is attributive and
that is in accordance with the results of previous research. Although the
frequent use of active present participle in the attributive function -
especially in translations - is without any doubt the result of the influence
of (German and Latin) originals, since it has been attested in Kajkavian texts
that date up to the 19th century that were not translations and were
aimed at a wider audience, such as popular scientific literature and calendars,
we believe that it is a feature of the literary Kajkavian language.
Other syntactic functions of participles (nominalized
participle, predicative, secondary predicative) are much rarer and are found in
deliberately archaized texts written in a more formal style.
All the detected syntactic functions of
participle have been present since the Old Church Slavonic, and have also been
attested in the other two Croatian literary languages, which testifies to the
incorporation of the Kajkavian literary language into the common Croatian
tradition and to the existence of certain syntactic constructions that might have
been the result of calquing and the influence of the originals in foreign
languages (Latin, German), but which have become trademarks of higher literary
style and certain literary genres.
Kamen po kamen palača Schubert, Bojana
Kaj,
12/2018, Volume:
51, Issue:
3-4
Journal Article
Open access
U današnjoj, prije svega standardnojezičnoj kulturi, trebamo
cijeniti svaki pokušaj da se znanstveni lingvistički fokus skrene i na stare hrvatske,
neštokavske jezike. Gotovo zaboravljen, u najtežem ...je položaju vjekovni
kajkavski književni jezik kojim se pisalo od polovice 16. do polovice 19.
stoljeća. Danas se o njem u široj javnosti malo što zna, ne spominje ga se u
obrazovnom programu, pa čak ni u kajkavskoj Hrvatskoj. Ipak, zaslugom rijetkih
istraživača, o njem se u novije vrijeme donose važne znanstvene spoznaje. Ovaj je rad zamišljen kao kritički osvrt na prijevod druge
tiskane kajkavske gramatike. Autor je gramatike Franjo Kornig, naslov glasi
Kroatische Sprachlehre, oder Anweisung für
Deutsche, die kroatische Sprache in kurzer Zeit gründlich zu erlernen, nebst
beigefügten Gesprächen und verschiedenen Übungen
(
Horvatska gramatika ili uputa Nijemcima kako da u kratkom vremenu
temeljito nauče horvatski jezik s dodanim razgovorima i različitim vježbama
),
a godina je izdanja 1795. Autorica je prijevoda kajkavologinja Barbara Štebih
Golub (2015. Institut za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje).
Croatians, as many other European nations,
live in a standard language culture. Contemporary Croatian standard language is
based on the Štokavian organic basis. In the past, numerous works based on the
organic basis of all three Croatian dialect groups (Čakavian, Kajkavian and
Štokavian), as well as on the mixed language of Ozalj, were written and
published.
Kajkavian standard
language was used from the mid-16th century until the mid-19th
century in the north-west part of Croatia.
This language was supraregional, standardized, described in six (known) grammar
books and it was competing with Štokavian for the role of the standard language
in the1830s. After losing the battle, it has been devalued in Croatia, erased in the Croatian education
system, and repressed from the Croatian collective memory. Every effort regarding
linguistic research of non-Štokavian Croatian historical languages is more than
welcome. This paper is a
critical review of one of such efforts. Historical linguist Barbara Štebih
Golub translated 4 of 6 known old Kajkavian grammar books which were originally
written in German (1779–1837). We will focus on the translation of Franjo
Kornig's grammar book: Kroatische Sprachlehre, oder Anweisung für Deutsche, die kroatische
Sprache in kurzer Zeit gründlich zu erlernen, nebst beigefügten Gesprächen und
verschiedenen Übungen (Horvatska gramatika ili uputa Nijemcima kako
da u kratkom vremenu temeljito nauče horvatski jezik s dodanim razgovorima i
različitim vježbama), published in
1795.
Dan je prikaz pretiska djela Ignacija Szentmártonya UVOD U NAUK O HORVATSKOME JEZIKU / EINLEITUNG ZUR KROATISCHEN SPRACHLEHRE FÜR TEUTSCHE, 1783. (prijevod i pretisak) Prijevod i popratnu studiju ...izradila Barbara Štebih Golub. Zagreb, Institut za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje, 2014.
The Paper analyzes the Kajkavian dialect in Fran Galović’s literary works: the unfinished Kajkavian collection of poems Z mojih bregov (1914), the unfinished novel Rastanak (1914), and the unfinished ...play Sodoma (1911). In these works the author uses, in various ways, the urban Zagrebian Kajkavian dialect and the local Kajkavian dialect of Peteranec. The paper also includes an overview of the general literary tendencies of the literary movement in which Galović took part and which is called ‘Moderna’. The authors also deal with some of the most important editions of Galović’s works, and they base their linguistic analysis on the manuscripts that are kept in the National and University library in Zagreb.
U radu se analizira odnos školskih rječnika hrvatskoga jezika prema nestandardnom leksičkom sloju koji je dijelom hrvatske književnosti, lektire, a onda i čitanki za nastavni predmet Hrvatski jezik. ...Dolazi se do zaključka da je u hrvatskim čitankama nestandardni leksik hrvatskoga jezika često obrađen neprecizno, bez velikog mara, a u školskim je rječnicima uglavnom preskočen, neobrađen, što upućuje na zaključak da postojeći školski rječnici hrvatskoga jezika ne ispunjavaju u potpunosti svoju svrhu jer ne opisuju hrvatski jezik s kojim se učenik susreće u školskome gradivu – tijekom nastave ili čitajući lektiru – nego p(r)opisuju ono što njihovi autori/sastavljači smatraju standardnim hrvatskim jezikom.
Paper analyses standard language ideology in Croatia, with a special focus on educational system – obligatory readers and school dictionaries. In Croatia three dictionaries having the adjectives ...school and Croatian in their titles were published. We examined two of them: Školski rječnik published in 2012 by Institute of Croatian language and linguistics and Anićev školski rječnik published in 2015 by Znanje. The most interesting dictionary is the latest Anićev školski rječnik hrvatskoga jezika (Anić School Dictionary of the Croatian Language) (edited by Ivo Pranjković i Lada Badurina), because it has government recommendation for school purposes. Its editors stress that the core of the Dictionary (app. 10,500 words) is formed by the words featuring in school textbooks – and they are marked with an asterisk – and approximately 6,500 general culture words have been added. In 2006 they even formed a work team that read the textbooks in detail and sorted out the words, so in 2013 they updated the list. In the Preface they say that the dictionary contains some regional and colloquial vocabulary, which they consider to be in household use, widespread and which has no standard language equivalent. We examined 13 readers published by three different publishers (Profil, Ljevak and Školska knjiga) during the period when two school dictionaries were made. We were interested in how much regional vocabulary, slang and jargon they generally contain and how they relate to it. That vocabulary is more or less successfully dealt with on the margins or inside quadrat frame footnotes below the texts (From the dictionary; Unknown words). We excerpted the regionalisms – kajkavisms, čakavisms, štokavisms, slang and jargon words and checked them up in Školski rječnik, 2012, and Anićev školski rječnik, 2015. 1591 lexemes have been excerpted, and only 76 of them entered Školski rječnik and 62 of them entered the Anićev školski rječnik – they make up less then 5 per cent of the total number of dictionary entries. In other words, the editors of school dictionaries just skipped the lexemes in the readers which they did not consider to be parts of the Croatian standard language and they did not include them into the school dictionaries. Such a procedure raises several questions: How justified is it? What message does it send to children whose mother tongues are Kajkavian, Štokavian, Čakavian, or non-standard colloquial urban speeches? Why should a school dictionary be exclusively a normative dictionary? Especially if we take into account that Croatian literature is open to the vocabulary coming from all the three dialect groups and it also contains slang and jargon? Should the principal purpose of a school dictionary not be to explain the meanings of the words which a student comes across during his or her education? – all the words – including the non-standard ones that the literature is written in? We concluded that a non-normative school dictionary of the Croatian language should be written and it should be based on the corpus that includes reading lists, children's literature, both Croatian and foreign (translated), texts from schoolbooks and readers, because a child comes across them on a daily basis. A Kajkavian person should be able to find in it the Čakavian and Štokavian forms he or she does not understand in literature, and the other way round. That kind of school dictionary should promote language tolerance and demonstrate wealth and beauty of Croatian language in hole.
PDF
