Im Wettstreit der Werte. Sorbische Sprache, Kultur und Identität auf dem Weg ins 21. Jahrhundert by Dietrich Scholze (review)

Abstract

Reviews Scholze, Dietrich (ed.). Im Wettstreit der Werte.Sorbische Sprache, Kulturund Identitat aufdem Weg ins2J. Jahrhundert. Schriftendes SorbischenInstituts/ Spisy Serbskeho instituta, 33. Domowina Verlag, Bautzen/Budyiin, 2003. 448 pp. Maps. Tables. Notes. ?22.90 (paperback). INMay 200I a conferencewas heldin Bautzento markthefiftiethanniversary of the foundation of the Institutza serbskiludospyt.The German Democratic Republic and its Academy of Sciences have passed away, but the Sorbian research institute which was once attached to the Academy lives on in the same premises in Bautzen under the simplifiedtitle Serbskiinstitut, carrying out advanced researchinto the language, historyand cultureof the Sorbs. It houses the biggest Sorbian library in the world and the central Sorbian archives. With dwindling resources, however, its activities are slowly contracting .Thirty-fourpapersfrom the conference are now publishedunderthe catchy but cryptictitleIm Wettstreit derWerte (Inthe Contest of Values). Following its foundation in May 195 I the institute identified as an urgent prioritythe taskof carryingout fieldworkto record the Sorbian dialects. The resultwas the Sorbischer Sprachatlas in fifteen volumes (Bautzen, I965-96). An analysis in the present volume by Hanna Popowska-Taborskaof the 1,II7 lexical maps in the Sprachatlas reveals that I36 of them show clear Upper Sorbian-Lower Sorbian oppositions which appear to reflect similar oppositions between Czech and Polish. This she interprets as evidence of the existence of 'two independent Sorbian languages' (pp. iio-ii), thereby makinga new and challenging contributionto a longstandingdebate. Ronald Lotzsch, representingthe opposition to thisview, emphasizes the significance of systematic features that are common to all Sorbian dialects yet are not found in other Slavonic languages, such as the formationwith the prefixz- of the futuretense of the verb 'to have' (e.g., zmejju, 'I shallhave') or the lack of a verb meaning 'to live' (the sense being expressed by the adjective biw)y, 'living'+ byc,'to be'). These featuresprove (he says)that the oft-propounded theory of a prolonged isolation in pre-history of the Lower Sorbs from the Upper Sorbs is untenable (p. 423). Lotzsch also expertly counters August Leskien's specious description of Sorbian as 'mostly German with Slavonic words' (p.424). The main emphasis during the firstforty years of the Institute'sexistence was on linguisticresearch,but therehas since been a move towardsliterature, history, and cultural studies generally. An interesting contribution to the historyof the Sorbsis made by K. H. Blaschke,who reconsiders,among other things,the questionwhy the Sorbianlanguage survivedin Lusatialong afterit died out in neighbouring areas. The key element, he believes, is in Lusatia's inability to develop all the attributesof statehood and, especially, its lack of political centralization. Unlike the neighbouring Mark Meissen, where Sorbian declined rapidly,Lusatiaremained until the Thirty YearsWarwhat he callsan 'impededstate'without a princelydynastyand ruledby a legislative assemblycontent to live and let live (pp. 78-79). i i8 SEER, 83, I, 2005 Likemost conference proceedings the paperspublishedhere are of uneven quality, but one or two are quite outstanding. Since the nineteenth century linguistshave been tryingto confine Sorbianto a Procrusteanbed suppliedby the other Slavonic languages. Some of this was an impulsive reaction to the attitudes of the likes of Leskien (see above). But now we have a younger generation of scholarswho are not satisfiedwith any of this. EdwardWornar rejectsthe traditionalview thatUpper Sorbianperfectiveverbscannot express the actualpresentorbe combined with phasalverbs,such as 'to begin', a view that is simply not borne out by the evidence. General observations about Slavonic aspect, as if all Slavoniclanguageshad somethingin common in this respect, are (he says)misguided. Even among the Slavonic languages aspect varies from one language to another. Aspect in Upper Sorbian is not a grammatical but a lexical category and it is doubtful whether grammatical verbal aspect ever existed (pp. I55-68). Another investigation into aspect is offeredby WalterBreu. Based on fieldworkwith informantsfrom Ralbitz and Crostwitz, it does not go quite as far as Wornar,but agrees with him at least thataspectin Upper Sorbianis differentfromthatin otherSlavoniclanguages (PP. 143-54). Its specificqualityin Lower Sorbianhas yet to be explored, but by revealingsomething of its truenaturein Upper Sorbian,Wornarand Breu have begun to dispel the confusionby which Sorbiangrammarhas long been troubled. Her~ford College, Oxford GERALD STONE Krasovec, Joze. MedIzvirnikom in Prevodi. Studijskazbirka, 3. Svetopisemska druzba Slovenije, Ljubljana, 2001. 784 pp. Illustrations.Notes. Bibliography .Indexes. SIT II,900...