In this volume, Thomas Olander offers a historical analysis of the inflectional endings of Proto-Slavic, comparing them with the corresponding endings in related languages and reconstructing the ...Proto-Indo-European point of departure.
The article is devoted to the semantics of the Proto-Slavic word *kъrkъ, whose descendants have a wide range of meanings from ‘throat’ to ‘back’. The analysis presented shows that the Proto-Slavic ...word can be most probably reconstructed to mean ‘vertebra prominens / cervical vertebrae’. With this taken into account, the author looks at the previously proposed etymologies and puts forward a new one.
This book is a comprehensive study of the Germanic loanwords in Proto-Slavic. It includes an investigation of all Germanic words that were borrowed into Proto-Slavic until its disintegration in the ...early ninth century. Research into the phonology, morphology and semantics of the loanwords serves as the basis of an investigation into the Germanic donor languages of the individual loanwords. The loanwords can be shown to be mainly of Gothic, High German and Low German origin. One of the aims of the present study is to clarify the accentuation of Germanic loanwords in Proto-Slavic and to explain how they were adapted to the Proto-Slavic accentual system. This volume is of special interest to scholars and students of Slavic and Germanic historical linguistics, contact linguistics and Slavic accentology.
U ovom se radu raspravlja o podrijetlu praslavenskog ornitonima *čižь / *čižьkъ / *čižikъ m. ‘čižak, Spinus spinus L.’. Čižak je dobro poznata i lako prepoznatljiva ptica pjevica čiji karakterističan ...glas zvuči poput ponavljajućega cvrkuta čí-čí ʧi:-ʧi:. Onomatopejsko objašnjenje, koje je više puta prihvaćeno u literaturi o ovoj temi, moglo se pojaviti u praslovenskom jeziku tek nakon prve palatalizacije guturalnih suglasnika, datirane u sredinu prvoga tisućljeća pr. Kr. Dakle, s gledišta baltoslavenske fonologije, praslavenski je izraz za ‘čižak’ inovativan. Ne možemo odlučiti jesu li sami preci Slavena stvorili ornitonim *čižь / *čižьkъ / *čižikъ na onomatopejskoj osnovi u kasnoj fazi razvoja praslaveskog jezika ili su ga posudili iz stranoga izvora. Zvučni fonem *-ž-, koji narušava izvorno „onomatopejsko” podrijetlo, čini se da podupire hipotezu o posuđivanju iz stranoga jezika. U ovom se članku sugerira da bi izvor navodne posuđenice mogao biti protouralski izraz *čičä(-kä) ~ *činčä(-kä) koji označava ‘malu pticu pjevicu’ (savršeno sačuvan u saamiju, permu, ugarskom i samojedskim jezicima), koji je vjerojatno funkcionirao već u vrijeme raspada uralske zajednice (tj. u četvrtom tisućljeću pr. Kr.), pa je stoga nekoliko tisućljeća stariji od praslavenskog izraza za ‘čižak’. Autor pretpostavlja da su (po svoj prilici) Praslaveni tu uralsku posuđenicu preuzeli preko neutvrđenoga ugrofinskog supstrata, koji je ostavio različite tragove u praslavenskom leksiku.
This article analyses a number of Romanian dialectal words and expressions associated with: (1) coat colours of farm animals, like ‘black’, ‘pied’, ‘spotted white’, ‘piebald’ and ‘light brown’; and ...(2) different types of sheep earmarks. The study indicates that many archaic terms used to denote these meanings are Slavic in origin. In some cases, the very phonetics of the Romanian words in question proves beyond doubt that they are early borrowings from the Proto-Slavic language.
The paper deals with the Proto-Slavic two-part personal names reconstructed in the Etymological Dictionary of Slavic Languages (EDSL), vols. 1–42. Indo-European by their origin, these names retained ...their use among all Slavs even after the adoption of Christianity and the assimilation of the Christian name set. The author examines the set of lexical units that occur in two-part proto-Slavic anthroponyms, the rules of their design (pure basis, truncated basis, word form) and connection with one another (the presence or absence of a connector). It is shown that the first and second parts of a compound name have different properties: the first element can be represented by verbal, substantive, adjective bases, pronominal bases, adverbs, prepositions / prefixes, while the second — only by verbal, substantive, and adjective bases. Most certainly, EDSL does not claim to incorporate all binominal anthroponyms of this type in the Proto-Slavic language but provides a clear idea on the anthroponymic and wordbuilding patterns of compounds in the Proto-Slavic language, as well as their syntactic and semantic features. These patterns are quite similar to those existing in appellative vocabulary and anthroponymic systems of other Indo-European languages. The lexical and ideographic inventory of the units indirectly refers to the value system underlying the onomastic tradition (cf. the popularity of such concepts as ‘dear,’ ‘friend,’ ‘guest,’ ‘glad,’ ‘peace,’ ‘glory,’ ‘holy,’ ‘love,’ ‘praise,’ etc.).
This dictionary in the Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series systematically and exhaustively deals with the Slavic inherited lexicon. It is unique in combining recent insights from the ...field of comparative Indo-European linguistics with modern Balto-Slavic accentology. In addition, the author makes an explicit attempt at reconstructing part of the Balto-Slavic lexicon.The entries of the dictionary are alphabetically arranged Proto-Slavic etyma. Each lemma consists of a number of fields which contain the evidence, reconstructions and notes. The introduction explains the contents and the significance of the individual fields. Here the reader can also find information on the various sources of the material. The volume concludes with an extensive bibliography of sources and secondary literature, and a word index.
PDF
