Language and Identity in the Balkans: Serbo-Croatian and Its Disintegration by Robert D. s> Greenberg (review)

Abstract

REVIEWS 307 and vocabulary. Still more arrestingare phonetic features of the Ruthenian languageof the manuscript,testifyingto its somewhatmixed Ukrainiandialect basis, which may reflect the author's Volhynian provenance. On the one hand, there are a sizable number of Polissian (northernUkrainian)features, e.g., mesec" 'month' (9r, 6ir, 63v),pameti(gen.) 'memory', deseti (gen.) 'ten' (4v) and other forms with the e-reflex of , in unstressedposition, sto 'that' (4r), o(t)kul''fromwhere' (6r)(cf. MUkr. otkul', MoUkr. vidkil'), chgybet" 'spine'(38v), attested also in Jakub Gawatowicz's interludes, permeated with Volhynian features. On the other hand, there are numerous southern Ukrainian forms like sco'what' (3v, U2r), pogadkom" (instr.sg.)'order'(5v)with the palatalizedr', kozdyj'each,every' (69r)(cf. MBel. kazyj MoBel. kozny) and vsch"(gen.) 'all' (62v)to cite a few. Most remarkableis dopjuro 'now' (7r)with the 'u-reflexin place of the etymologicalo,althoughthismay be a Polishborrowing(cf.dopiero W, i4b), modified according to the rules of Ukrainianphonetics. Overall, this is a well-crafted edition with a broad target readership in Slavic studies. An indexverborum would immensely enhance the value of the publication for scholars. There is a confusion of publication dates under Petehyryciggga (p. xliv)and, strangelyenough, the 'Russian-like'renditionof a Ukrainianname under Panasenko I974(p.xliii)next to the Ukrainianrendition of the firstand patronymicnames of Zovtobrjuchin his Russian-language article, published in Moscow in I978 (p. xliv). Yet these minor flaws do not detractin a majorway from the exemplarycontributionmade by Buncic and Keipert. PaceUniversity, New rork ANDRII DANYLENKO Greenberg, Robert D. Language andIdentit in theBalkans:Serbo-Croatian and Its Disintegration. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York, 2004. x + i88 pp. Appendices. Bibliography.Index. ?40.??. THE title of this studyreflectsthe immediate difficultyfaced by commentators on many aspects of the formerYugoslavia:how to refer to something whose familiarname is no longer acceptable?It is only the subtitlethat makes the work's content clear: 'Serbo-Croatian and its Disintegration'. The issue of language in the Yugoslav successorstates has become so sensitiveand politicized that it is no simple matterto give a name to the topic under discussion. Because, ultimately, the discussion is largely about naming: what to call the language that the majorityof its speakersknow to be one mutuallyintelligible diasystem,when it has acquiredfour differentand mutuallyexclusivenames? Greenberg'slively account of the evolution of the three, possiblyfour, successorlanguagesis admirablythorough.A generalintroductionplaces the case of Serbo-Croatianin the broad context of languageas a markerof ethnic identity and askswhetherthe languagewidelyknownby that name since I850 may now be saidto be 'dying'?Chaptertwo tracesthe evolutionof Serbo-Croatian, considering the specific controversies connected with it as well as general models for unified languages (centrallymonitored; government-imposedand pluricentricunity);and discussingissues such as the competing dialects, the 308 SEER, 84, 2, 2006 multiplicityof alphabets and the vexed question of vocabulary.This section ends with a usefulchronologyof 'the turbulenthistoryof the language union'. In the following chapters, Greenberg focuses on each of the four successor languages in turn: Serbian, the longest section because of the complexities of its two alphabetsand pronunciations;Montenegrin,the shortest,but nevertheless thorough, account,justifiednot because of any realisticlinguisticcase for Montenegrin as a free-standinglanguage, but because of the possibilitythat an independent Montenegrin state may emerge demanding that its language, by analogy with that of its neighbours,have its own, separatename; Croatian and Bosnian,each allocatedthe same space, slightlyexceeding that grantedto Montenegrin. The study ends with an overview of the obstacles facing the successor languagesand theirdivergentsolutions.The authorstressesthe most strikingly unusual feature of the whole issue: that all four standards emerged from a single dialect area, a fact that is 'unprecedented in the sociolinguistic literature'.Greenberg'sconclusion is as open as his whole approach:'BosniaHerzegovina is where three of the four new standardsare forced to coexist, and where the linguistic differences have been used to keep ethnic groups apart, rather than bring them together. Bosnia-Herzegovina'sthree official languages are currently on a path towards divergence, but the possibility remains that at some futurepoint, when ethnic reconciliationis possible, language convergencewould once againbe in order.Fornow, however,language planners are bent on reducing mutual intelligibilityas much as possible. The separatingfunction of languagehas reached nearlyabsurdproportions,but:in the near term this policy seems irreversible.Perhapsafterthe...