Cover not available
Part of
Perspectives on Language Structure and Language Change: Studies in honor of Henning Andersen
Edited by Lars Heltoft, Iván Igartua, Brian D. Joseph, Kirsten Jeppesen Kragh and Lene Schøsler
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 345] 2019
► pp. 327–344

Diatopy and frequency as indicators of spread

Accentuation in Bulgarian dialects

Diatopy (the geographical distribution of linguistic differentiation) gives important clues about diachrony (the direction and spread of language change). Here I apply these concepts to the study of accentual phenomena in Bulgarian dialects, focusing on the accentuation of phrases including clitic forms. Methodologically, my study is innovative because it does not work with isoglosses of the normal, binary type (which mark the presence vs. absence of a feature). Rather, I utilize a database consisting of large stretches of conversation, recorded in the field by myself and my colleagues over a 27-year period, to construct indices of relative frequency of occurrence of the pattern in question. The resulting isoglosses allow new conclusions to be drawn about accentual patterns in Bulgarian dialects.
Keywords: accentuation, Balkan Slavic, Bulgarian dialectology
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The data
    • 2.1Sources
    • 2.2.Description
    • 2.3Preparation for analysis
    • 2.4Geographical distribution
    • 2.5A second data set: “Additional accentuation”
    • 2.6Historical commentary: Double accent
  • 3.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 18 June 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.345.15ale
References (25)
References
Alexander, Ronelle. 1983. Directions of morphophonemic change in Balkan Slavic: The accentuation of the present tense. In M. Flier (ed.), American contributions to the Ninth international congress of Slavists, vol. 1, 9–49. Columbus: Slavica.Google Scholar
. 1993. Remarks on the evolution of South Slavic prosodic systems. In R. Maguire and A. Timberlake (eds.), American contributions to the Eleventh international congress of Slavists, 181–201. Columbus: Slavica.Google Scholar
. 1994. The prosodic systems of Balkan Slavic: A partial typology. Zbornik za filologiju i lingvistiku 37 / 1–2. 23–40.Google Scholar
Alexander, Ronelle, and Vladimir Zhobov. 2011–2016. Bulgarian Dialectology as Living Tradition. [URL]Google Scholar
Andersen, Henning. 1969. The change of *ot to *od – a central Slavic innovation. Die Welt der Slaven 14. 315–330.Google Scholar
. 1988. Center and periphery: Adoption, diffusion and spread. In J. Fisiak (ed.), Historical dialectology, 39–83. Berlin: Mouton). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asenova, Petja. 2002. Balkansko ezikoznanie: Osnovni problem na Balkanskija ezikov sŭjuz, 2d edn. Sofia: Faber.Google Scholar
Birnbaum, David. 1988. Textual and accentual problems of Muz. 3070 and Zogr. 151. Cambridge MA: Harvard University dissertation.Google Scholar
Bŭlgarska akademija na naukite. 1975. Bŭlgarski dialekten atlas, vol. III. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarska akademija na naukite.Google Scholar
Dëmina, Evgenija. 1971. Tixonravovskij damaskin: Bolgarskij pamjatnik XVII vek. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarska akademija na naukite.Google Scholar
Ivanov, Jordan. 1971. Dvojno udarenie v bŭlgarskija ezik. Izvestija na Instituta za bŭlgarski ezik 20. 187–226.Google Scholar
. 1977. Bŭlgarski preselničeski govori ( = Trudove po bŭlgarska dialektologija 9). Sofia: Izadeltstvo na Bŭlgarska akademija na naukite.Google Scholar
Ivić, Pavle. 1958. Die serbokroatischen Dialekte, ihre Struktur und Entwicklung I: Allgemeines und die štokavische Dialektgruppe. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
. 1967. The Serbocroatian case system in diachrony and diatopy. To honor Roman Jakobson: Essays on the occasion of his seventieth birthday 11 October 1966, 995–1008. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Kolev, Georgi. 2001. Danni za dvojnoto udarenie v pametnik ot sredata na minalija vek. Bŭlgarskijat ezik prez XX vek, 284–303. Sofia: Pensoft.Google Scholar
Mirčev, Kiril. 1932. Edin nevrokopski bŭlgarski sbornik s grŭcko pismo ot kraja na minalija vek. Makedonski pregled 7, 2–3. 149–186.Google Scholar
. 1936. Nevrokopskijat govor. Godišnik na Sofijskija univerzitet, istoriko-filologičeski fakultet 32.Google Scholar
Mladenova, Olga. 2013. The rise of modern Bulgarian literacy in the seventeenth century: New facts and interpretations. Kenneth E. Naylor memorial lecture in South Slavic Linguistics. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 22 March 2013 [To appear, 2019, in Naylor Lecture Series (Balkanistica Supplemental Volumes)]Google Scholar
Mladenova, Olga & Borjana Velčeva. 2013. Loveški damaskin: Novobŭlgarski pametnik ot XVII vek. Sofia: Nacionalna biblioteka “Sv. sv. Kiril i Metodij”.Google Scholar
Romanski, Stefan. 1928. Bŭlgarski pesni s grŭcko pismo ot Makedonija. Makedonski pregled 4, 4. 107–120.Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah Grey & Terence Kaufman. 1988. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Tilkov, Dimitŭr & Todor Bojadžiev. 1978. Udarenieto v bŭlgarskija knižoven ezik. Sofia: Narodna prosveta.Google Scholar
Todorov, Cvetan. 1939. Dvojno akcentuvane v bŭlgarskija ezik. Spisanie na Bŭlgarska akademija na naukite 58. 107–202.Google Scholar
Vidoeski, Božidar. 1987. Systemy akcentowe dialektów macedońskich w Grecji (Macedonii egejskiej) i w południowej Albanii. Studia linguistica Polono-Jugoslavica 5. 263–284.Google Scholar
Zhobov, Vladimir, Ronelle Alexander & Georgi Kolev. 2004. Hierarchies of stress assignment in Bulgarian dialects. Revitalizing Bulgarian dialectology, 226–240. [URL]Google Scholar