Die Entwicklung der Lexik der obersorbischen Schriftsprache vom 18. Jahrhundert bis zum Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts by Helmut Jentsch (review)

Abstract

REVIEWS 499 the masculine singular of the past tense, Vafiko contrasts the bilabial 'u' of Rusyn, Ukrainianand Belorussianwith Polish 'T', e.g. inpisal the differenceis orthographic,not phonetic; furthermore,the Macedonian equivalent for this morpheme is 1not vof the firstperson singularof the aoristformshere quoted, which derives from '-xb' (p. 28). The account of specificfeaturesof Rusyn is unusuallygenerousin the space allotted to vocabularyand syntax(thirteenand thirty-onepages againstthree and twelve forphonology and morphology respectively).Here vysol 'went out' should be removed from the list of reflexes of jer in verbal prefixes (p. 40). Vanko treats the consonants 'z', 'C in the first person singular of CS velar stems, mou, pecu,as derived from 'gt" and 'kt",respectively, but these both produce 'c, as in the infinitives moc'i, peci;a more acceptable explanation is internalanalogywith palatalizedformsof the presenttense. Vafiko's survey of the lexicon considers the main historical strata and thematic groups, starting with Common Slavonic derivatives, which according to the author are remarkablywell preserved, and paying particularattention to the role of Slovak as source and channel of more recent elements. In the extended discussion of names for buckwheat and potatoes it is surprisingto findBranibor tagged as a 'German word', and not the Czech or Slavonic form of a German place-name (p. 59). The provision of Englishequivalentsfor all Rusyn words and phrases quoted in the book is particularlywelcome in this section, though it must have involved the author in much extra effort and exposed him to additional possibilities of error. Therefore the following corrigenda are offered in a spirit of sympathy, not criticism:pravda'truth' (p. 55), roditi'to bear', dychati'to breathe' (p. 56), the conjunction sto 'that' (P. 57). The well presented and richly illustrated account of Rusyn syntax fully justifies Vainiko's decision to give more prominence to this aspect. Contrast with standard Slovak and Ukrainian makes this an interesting comparative study.If an extended second edition of thisworkwere to be planned, thought should be given to the provision of a map showing the location of the places referredto, an index, a bibliographyand a glossaryto the dialect texts, which the nion-native Slavist scans with broad understanding of the plot and commiseration in hardship recalled, with bafflement at the odd dialectical enigma and, in one case, frustrationat a tale left unfinished, with heroine facing a grislyend, while her faithfulhound racesto the rescue. London H. LEEMING Jentsch, Helmut. DieEntwicklung derLexikderobersorbischen Schriftsprache vomi8. fJabrinndert hiszumi Beginndes20. Jahrhunderts. Spisy Serbskeho instituta, 22. Domowina-Verlag, Bautzen/Budysin, 1999. 384 pp. Tables. Notes. Bibliography.DM 49.00. THERE is a gap of about fivehundredyearsbetween the firstrecordedSorbian sentence and the firstcontinuoustexts. It ispossible, of course, thattherewere once medieval texts of which we now know nothing, but it appears that the firstimpulseto use Sorbianextensivelyin writingcame fromthe Reformation, 500 SEER, 79, 3, 2001 which caused Christiantexts to be translatedfrom German into local Sorbian dialects. Soon after this the Counter-Reformation supplied the parishesthat had remained Catholic with Sorbiantexts translatedfrom Latin. By the early eighteenth century there were two distinct variants of the Upper Sorbian literary language one for Protestants and another for Catholics. The Protestantvariantwas founded mainly on the dialects spoken to the east and south of Bautzen/Budy'sin.The dialectalbase of the Catholic variantwas first in the north of the Catholic area (north-west of Bautzen), but in the mid eighteenth century it moved about ten miles southwards from its original position. The study of the history of the Upper Sorbian vocabulary cannot be separated from Sorbian dialectology, the field in which Helmut Jentsch first distinguished himself, notably as co-author (with Helmut Fafikeand Frido Michalk) of the first ten volumes of the Sorbischer Sprachatlas (Bautzen, I965-86), and as author of a comprehensive account of one of the dialects underlying the Protestant norm (Die sorbische Mundartvon Rodewitz/Spree, Bautzen, I980), but the expertiselying behind thisimportantnew book on the development of the vocabularyof the Upper Sorbian literarylanguage in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuriescomes also fromhis workas leader of the team which produced the two-volume Deutsch-obersorbisches Wdrterbuch (Bautzen, I989-9 I).This project, involving the huge task of excerpting material from many thousands of printed and manuscriptpages, simultaneously provided evidence of the...