Jezikovna naravnost - nekaj (obliko)skladenjskih zgledov iz slovenščine

Within Naturalness Theory as practised in the local work, the following mostly (morpho)syntactic phenomena of Slovenian are considered (the numbering refers to the so-called deductions in the main text):2. The type Brežice so bile mesto ‘Brežice was a town’, as against to mesto so bile Brežice ‘this town was Brežice’. 3. The verbal aspect in the affirmative and the negative imperative. 4. Informal and less informal addressing of one person. 5. Formal and less formal addressing of one person. 6. The displacement of the adjective modifier to the right of the head. 7. Non-imperative sentences as expressive variants of the imperative. 8. The conditional expressed with an imperative clause. 9. The use of the affirmative imperative supported with suitable particles instead of the negated imperative. 10—11. The accusative in the form of the corresponding genitive if the inanimate noun head of the adjectival is ellipted, e.g., hočem belega ‘I want the white one (scil. the white car)’. 12. The emphasis of intra- and extra-clausal sentence negation. 13. The sentence negation + the finite and infinite verb. 14. The subject complement of middle-voice reflexive verbs in the nominative and in the accusative. 15. The definite form of the adjective in vocatives. 16—7. Full noun phrase subjects with verbs in the non-third verbal person, e.g., študentje garate ‘you students work hard’. 18—9. Pronominal possession, alienable and inalienable. 20. The main arguments of the verb and of the noun. 21—2. Definite and indefinite adjective forms. 23. The definite article ta-. 24. Characterizing and identifying possessive adjectives. 25. Genitivus subiectivus v. genitivus obiectivus. 26. The direct object in infinite clauses of purpose. 27. Inflection of men’s and women’s surnames. 28. Slovenian geographical regions whose names end in -sko and -ska, e.g., Gorenjsko, Gorenjska ‘Upper Carniola’.V slovenski izvedbi teorije o jezikovni naravnosti se obravnavajo naslednji večinoma (obliko)skladenjski pojavi slovenščine (številke se nanašajo na t.i. izpeljave v glavnem besedilu): 2. Tip Brežice so bile mesto nasproti tipu to mesto so bile Brežice. 3. Glagolski vid v trdilnem in zanikanem velelniku. 4. Neformalno in manj neformalno ogovarjanje edninskega sogovornika. 5. Formalno in manj formalno ogovarjanje edninskega sogovornika. 6. Umik levega pridevniškega prilastka desno od jedra samostalniške zveze. 7. Nevelelniške povedi kot čustveno poudarjeni različki velelnika. 8. Pogojnik izražen z velelniškim stavkom. 9. Raba trdilnega velelnika, podprtega s primernimi členki, namesto zanikanega velelnika. 10–11. Tožilnik v obliki soodnosnega rodilnika, če je neživo jedro ob pridevniški besedi izpuščeno, npr. hočem belega (namreč bel avto). 12. Poudarjanje zunaj- in znotrajstavčne nikalnice. 13. Stavčna nikalnica + osebna in neosebna glagolska oblika. 14. Povedkovo določilo povratnih srednjiških glagolov v imenovalniku in tožilniku. 15. Določna oblika pridevnika v zvalniku. 16–7. Nezaimenski osebki ob glagolskih obliki v netretji osebi, npr. študentje garate. 18–9. Zaimkovno izražena svojina, odtujljiva in neodtujljiva. 20. Glavni argumenti glagola in samostalnika. 21–2. Določna in nedoločna oblika pridevnika. 23. Določni člen ta-. 24. Opisovalni in določevalni svojilni pridevniki. 25. Osebkov rodilnik nasproti predmetnemu. 26. Premi predmet v nedoločniških polstavkih namere. 27. Sklanjanje moških in ženskih priimkov. 28. Slovenska pokrajinska imena na -sko in -ska, npr. Gorenjsko, Gorenjska

Uvodnik

Introduction by section editors Noit Banai and Marina Gržinić.Uvodnik urednic sklopa Noit Banai in Marine Gržinić

»Ko bi le bil Trubar Hrvat!« Slovenske variacije na temo skupni južnoslovanski jezik od reformacije do neoilirizma

Whenever leading Slovene intellectuals were in the position todecide about a large-scale solution to the literary language question,there was to be a fierce debate for several years, with the minimalist view eventually prevailing. Representatives of three differently motivated movements, the Reformation, Illyrism and Neo-Illyrism, tried to restore the linguistic unity among the South Slavs (mostly excluding the Bulgarians from the start). Accordingly, the literary language for all South Slavs was to be based either on one of the regional dialects, aiming for a wider reading public in order to spread the reformation doctrine also among the uneducated, or it was to be the language of sophisticated literature, based on lexical and morphological featurescommon to most South Slavic dialects, in order to create a nation by creating a national literature for all South Slavs (or, sometimes even wider, for all Slavs). In the third period, in the Neo-Illyrist movement, the idea was to create a common literary language for the useof all inhabitants of a Yugoslav state after the dissolution of the Habsburg Monarchy: the identification of its citizens with their state was to be strengthened by linguistic unity. The Slovenian clergy's, writers' and intellectuals' attitudes towards suggestions for a common South Slavic literary language, the topic of discussion in the present paper, appear to be mostly rather skeptical than friendly, and, while there were among the Slovenes men like Sebastian Krelj in the 16th, Stanko Vraz and Matija Majar-Ziljski in the 19th and Fran Ilešič in the20th century, who played the parts of protagonists of a wider concept of literary language, fusing the Slovene and the Croatian dialectal basis, there were others who took a minimalist point of view at least as decidedly, accepting nothing outside the Slovene dialects as a basis for a literary language used by Slovenes. The best known among themwere Primus Truber, Jernej Kopitar, France Prešeren and Ivan Cankar, and it was their minimalist notion of the Slovene literary language that each time prevailed in the end. Now, at the end of the 20th century, the Slovene literary language is, for the first time in history, on its way towards validity in all fields of private and public life in the Republic of Slovenia.Kadar koli so se slovenski intelektualci odločali o temeljnih vprašanjih knjižnega jezika, se je vnela večletna srdita razprava, vkateri so vedno prevladali nasprotniki vzpostavitve enotnega južnoslovanskega knjižnega jezika. Težnje k (ponovni) jezikovni enotnosti južnih Slovanov (razen Bolgarov) so se pojavile v reformaciji, v obdobju ilirizma in neoilirizma. V 16. stoletju naj bi skupni knjižni jezik temeljil na enem od narečij in tako omogočil razširjati protestantizem tudi med neizobraženim ljudstvom. Cilj ilirizma je bila vzpostavitev skupnega južnoslovanskega knjižnega jezika umetniške književnosti, temelječega na skupnih značilnostih večine južnoslovanskih idiomov, z namenom, da se z enotno književnostjovseh južnih Slovanov (v nekaterih poskusih vseh Slovanov) ustvari enovit narod. V neolirizmu naj bi skupni južnoslovanski jezik, ki najbi po razpadu Avstro-Ogrske postal državni jezik, služil utrjevanju zavesti pripadnosti isti državi. Slovenska duhovščina, pisatelji in intelektualci ideji o skupnem južnoslovanskem jeziku večinoma niso bili naklonjeni. Medtem ko so v 16. stol. Sebastijan Krelj, v 19. Stanko Vraz in Matija Majar-Ziljski ter v 20. Fran Ilešič zagovarjali približevanje slovenskega jezika hrvaškemu, so v istih obdobjih drugi, predvsem Primož Trubar, Jernej Kopitar, France Prešeren in Ivan Cankar vztrajali, da se slovenski knjižni jezik razvija le v okviru danosti, ki mu jih nudi njegova narečna osnova. Le-ti so prevladali v vsakem odnavedenih poskusov, da bi se ustvaril širši skupni knjižni jezik. Danes, proti koncu 20. stol., ima slovenščina v Sloveniji prvič vzgodovini resnično veljavo na vseh področjih zasebnega in javnega življenja

Izbris kot konstitutivni mehanizem globalnega nekrokapitalizma: od periferije k centru

Fredrikzon and Haffenden (2023) argue that the so-called notion of erasure has remained largely under-researched. But what does erasure mean—how does it operate and how is it reproduced, particularly in relation to global capitalism? Contrary to the inclination to individualize the repressive character of erasure, this text will aspire to thematize erasure as a constitutive mechanism of global capitalism that permeates its logic. Stemming from distinct disciplinary areas yet which intersect in various ways, this research will therefore investigate erasure as a notion that is not isolated but related to its political, social, cultural, physical, and technological dimensions and processes that give meaning to it within a temporal horizon. Thus, the central thesis of this paper will be that the process of erasure needs to be understood as the essential element of modernity, appearing uncompromisingly in its histories and in particular in contemporary politics.Fredrikzon in Haffenden (2023) trdita, da je tako imenovani koncept izbrisa ostal v veliki meri neraziskan. Toda kaj pomeni izbris – kako deluje in kako se reproducira, zlasti v povezavi z globalnim kapitalizmom? V nasprotju z individualizacijo represivnega značaja izbrisa, si ta tekst prizadeva tematizirati izbris kot konstitutivni mehanizem globalnega kapitalizma, ki prežema njegovo logiko. Izhajajoč iz različnih disciplinarnih področij, bo ta raziskava tematizirala izbris kot pojem, ki ni izoliran, temveč povezan z njegovimi političnimi, družbenimi, kulturnimi, fizičnimi in tehnološkimi dimenzijami ter procesi, ki mu dajejo pomen znotraj časovnega horizonta. Osrednja teza tega prispevka bo torej, da je treba proces izbrisa razumeti kot bistveni element modernosti, ki se neizprosno pojavlja v njeni zgodovini in zlasti v sodobni politiki

Slovensko-pruska leksikalno-mitološka vzporednica: kres/kresze

In three 15th-century German sources concerning certainly Baltic (chiefly Prussian) pagan customs, the term Kresze 'a pagan feast' is mentioned (the other two forms mentioned are keyse, krysze). This form is comparable to the Slavic *krěs’b and also with the Slovene krês 'ogenj pred 24. junijem', which means primarily a pagan feast. The etymology is not fully clear, because the ancient Baltic word must have had an other form. The traditional hypothesis considers the Prussian Kresze as an earlier Slavic (Old-Polish?) lexeme. Two other etymological explanations of this word are less certain, but they have never been definitively refuted. The parallel kresze/krês is interesting especially on a mythological and ritual level. We may assume that the Prussian kresze corresponds to the Slovene pagan ritual krês, krêsovânje. Such a parallel would prove the primary sacred character of the stem *kres- for all the Balto-Slavic area and confirm the theory that the Slovene form is archaic, where the stem *kres- has maintained more of its primary meanings than in other Slavic languages.V treh nemških virih iz 15. stol., ki se nanašajo na baltske (v glavnem pruske) poganske šege, je omenjen Kresze 'neki poganski praznik' (drugi dve obliki sta keyse, krysze). Obliko te besede in njen pomen lahko primerjamo s slovanskim *krěs’b in torej s slovenskim krês 'ogenj pred 24. junijem', kar prvotno pomeni tudi poganski praznik. Etimologija Kresze ni popolnoma jasna, ker je prvotna baltska beseda morala imeti drugo obliko. Običajno domnevajo, da je prus. Kresze zelo zgodnja slovanska (staropoljska?) izposojenka. Poleg nje obstajata še dve domnevi, ki sta manj verjetni, toda nikdar nista bili dokončno zavrnjeni. Vzporednica kresze/kres je zanimiva predvsem na mitološko-ritualni ravni. Lahko domnevamo, da prusko kresze ustreza slovenskemu poganskemu ritualu krês, kresovinje. Taka paralela lahko dokazuje prvotno sakralnost elementa *kres- na vsem baltoslovanskem območju, poleg tega potrjuje tudi arhaičnost slovenščine, v kateri je podstava *kres- ohranila več prvotnih pomenov, kakor v drugih slovanskih jezikih

Glagolska referenca (nanašanje) kot oblika ustvarjanja kohezije

The author first treats the difference between reference in its philosophical and linguistic contexts, then defines the notion of verbal reference on the basis of Halliday’s systemic-functional model. This is expressed with the use of general verbs in conjunction with demonstrative pronouns. The results of the research emphasize the close connection between a general verb and the demonstrative pronoun as a unit of reference, which is supported by Slovene and English examples. It is also discovered that in Slovene the function of a general verb is taken by a number of verbal meanings of higher order, whereas in English the same role is played exclusively by the pro-verb do. In the realm of text analysis there are differing views on the treatment of reference as a means of cohesion. For example, de Beaugrande and Dressler treat reference in connection with substitution, since in their opinion both means function on the level of pro-forms. They claim that substitution is a form of reference and vice versa. Here the English definite article is important, whereas in Slovene the phenomenon of zero pronominalization is encountered. According to Lo Cascio and Howeling, reference is presented from the point of view of the relationships between verbal actions expressed with the use of grammatical tenses. Verbal actions are divided into autonomous and non-autonomous actions, where autonomous actions are deictic and present a reference to non-autonomous actions. In English this relationship between verbal actions is expressed with the use of various grammatical tenses, whereas in Slovene it is encompassed by the semantic value of verbal forms. In the conclusion the author emphasizes the meaning of reference as a domain of verbal and not exclusively nominal elements. Reference in linguistics represents a complex area of investigation, which on the level of discourse is closely bound up with the treatment of the use of grammatical tense.Avtorica v članku najprej izpostavi razliko v pojmovanju reference v filozofskem in jezikoslovnem smislu, nato pa na primeru Hallidayjevega sistemsko-funkcijskega modela opredeli pojem glagolske reference. Ta je izražena z rabo splošnopomenskih glagolov, v povezavi s kazalnimi zaimki. Ugotovitev je v članku podkrepljena s slovenskimi in angleškimi zgledi, ki poudarjajo tesno povezanost splošnopomenskega glagola s kazalnim zaimkom kot referenčno enoto. Pri tem se pokaže tudi ugotovitev, da v slovenščini funkcijo splošnopomenskega glagola privzema niz glagolskih nadpomenk, medtem ko v angleščini to vlogo opravlja izključno za-glagol do. Na področju besediloslovja se avtorji pri obravnavi reference kot kohezivnega sredstva razhajajo. Npr. de Beaugrande in Dressler referenco obravnavata v povezavi s substitucijo, saj po njunem mnenju obe sredstvi delujeta na ravni rabe za-oblik. Trdita, da je substitucija oblika reference in obratno. Tu se kot pomemben element nanašalnosti v angleščini pokaže določni člen, v slovenščini pa naletimo na pojav ničtega pozaimljenja. Obe značilnosti zaznamujeta temeljno razlikovanje v analiziranju glagolske reference v slovenščini in angleščini. Referenca je s strani avtorjev Lo Cascia in Howelinga predstavljena tudi z vidika odnosov med glagolskimi dejanji, izraženimi z rabo slovničnih časov. Glagolska dejanja sta razdelila na avtonomna in neavtonomna, pri čemer so avtonomna dejanja deiktična in predstavljajo odnosnico neavtonomnim dejanjem. Tu se zopet pokaže razlika med slovenščino in angleščino. V angleščini je to razmerje med glagolskimi dejanji izraženo z rabo različnih slovničnih časov, v slovenščini pa je zajeto v semantični vrednosti glagolskih oblik. V zaključku avtorica poudari pomen reference kot domene glagolskih, in ne le samostalniških prvin. Referenca v jezikoslovju predstavlja kompleksno področje, ki se na ravni diskurzne obravnave prepleta z obravnavo slovničnih časov

Vpliv purizma na razvoj slovenskega knjižnega jezika

Purism has played a significant role throughout the history of written Slovene. It has been directed at both external and internal threats to the language. Chief among the former have been German, the dominant language of the region, which has influ- enced the Slovene vernacular at all linguistic levels, and Serbo-Croatian, which served as the de-facto idiom of inter-ethnic communication in the former Yugoslavia. Xeno- phobic purism has succeeded in removing most German loanwords from the standard language and replacing them with loanwords from other Slavic languages and calques. Inasmuch as the majority of the German loanwords have been retained in the spoken vernacular this has had the net effect of distancing the standard language from the respective vernacular. On the other hand, the attempt to remove the numerous syntactic and phraseological calques based on German models has been generally unsuccessful in practical terms. However, the puristic reaction to these covert influences has served an important symbolic function in emphasizing a sense of Slovene linguistic identity in the linguistic consciousness of the Slovene speech community. Serbo-Croatian lexical elements, on the other hand, have posed a particularly intractable problem for Slovene purists. This was primarily because in the nineteenth century the Croatian abstract lexicon played a major part in providing standard Slovene with acceptable replacements for internationalisms and Germanisms. Secondly, because of a common involvement in Yugoslavia and the close genetic relationship between Slovene and Serbo-Croatian it was often difficult in practice to identify Serbo-Croatian material in Slovene with any degree of certainty. Indeed, a systematic, dispassionate identification of such material remains as one of the many tasks confronting Slovene scholarship in the years of political independence. Internally, purists have at various times attempted to archaize and Slavicize the orthography and morphology of the standard language. This has fostered a spirit of hypercorrection and pendantry in some Slovene linguistic circles. On the other hand, the strain of ethnographic purism, which goes back to the seminal figure of Jernej Kopitar, has served as an antidote to both archaization and Slavization of Slovene by seeking justification for the norms of standard Slovene in the contemporary dialects. This helps to explain why puristic intervention in standard Slovene can be generally characterized as moderate and free of excesses. Nevertheless, it is equally clear that the puristic debate, which has resounded in the times of Trubar, Kopitar, Cop, and Pregeren right down to the present day, will continue to be a significant factor as the Slovene standard language seeks to define its role on the new socio-political stage of the Slovene-speaking territory.V zgodovini slovenskega knjižnega jezika je purizem igral pomembno vlogo. Usmerjen je bil tako proti zunanjim kot proti notranjim dejavnikom, ki so ogrožali jezik. Od zunanjih sta bila predvsem nemščina, ki je kot dominantni jezik srednje Evrope imela velik vpliv na slovenščino na vseh jezikovnih ravninah, in srbohrvaščtina, ki je bila dejansko sredstvo mednacionalnega sporazumevanja v bivši Jugoslaviji. Ksenofobični purizem je izločil iz knjižnega jezika večino nemških izposojenk in jih nadomestil z izposojenkami iz drugih slovanskih jezikov in kalki. Ker je glavnina nemških izposojenk ostala v pogovornem jeziku, se je knjižni jezik oddaljil od pogovornega. Po drugi strani pa je bil poskus izločanja številnih skladenjskih in frazeoloških kalkov iz jezika na splošno neuspešen, vsaj s praktičnega stališča. Kljub temu pa je puristični odziv na te prikrite vplive odigral pomembno simbolično vlogo s tem, da je utrdil slovensko jezikovno identiteto v zavesti slovenske jezikovne skupnosti. Besedje iz srbohrvaščine pa je povzročalo posebne zagate slovenskim puristom, ker je v 19. stol. hrvaščina dajala slovenščini sprejemljiva nadomestila za mednarodno in nemško abstraktno besedišče. Pri tem pa je bilo zaradi skupnega položaja v Jugoslaviji in izvorne bližine slovengščne in srbohrvaščine v praksi pogosto težko z gotovostjo razlikovati slovensko gradivo od srbohrvaškega. Zato je sistematično in nepristransko identificiranje tega gradiva ostalo naloga, s katero se morajo slovenski jezikoslovci soočiti v obdobju politične samostojnosti. Kar zadeva notranji razvoj, so puristi včasih skušali arhaizirati in slovanizirati pravopis in oblikoslovje knjižnega jezika. To je v določenih jezikoslovnih krogih pospeševalo vzdušje hiperkorektnosti in pikolovstva. Po drugi plati pa je struja narodoslovnega purizma, ki se začenja z vplivno osebnostjo Jerneja Kopitarja, sluižla kot protiutež arhaizaciji in slovanizaciji, ker je utemeljevala normo knjižne slovenščine na sodobnih narečjih. To osvetljuje dejstvo, da puristitčo poseganje v knjižno slovenščino lahko v glavnem označimo kot zmerno in neobremenjeno s skrajnostmi. Vendar je prav tako jasno, da bo puristični spor, ki se vleče od obdobij Trubarja, Kopitarja, Čopa in Prešerna do danes, ostal pomemben dejavnik tudi v času, ko se določa vloga slovenskega knjižnega jezika na novem družbeno-političnem prizorišču slovenskega jezikovnega področja.     

Zvita vitis ali par prepletenih vrvi? Ikonografija oblasti na morju na Likejevi steli iz Apsorja

The article examines the tombstone of the naval centurion Liccaeus, which was discovered in the village of Osor (Apsorus) on the island of Cres. According to the inscription, it appears that a public site was allocated for the monument, indicating the honorand’s significance to the local community. Liccaeus is depicted wearing a tunic and a sagum, but the most unusual feature is the object he holds in his hand. This object has often been interpreted as a rope tied into a knot, similar to those used for mooring ships. Little is known about the appearance of the command staff, vitis, that was a distinctive symbol of also naval centurions. However, depictions on Ravenna tombstones from the Early Imperial period which feature an object similar to knot suggest that, during this era, the vitis for naval centurions may have been represented differently. Given the absence of any attributes on the tombstone that would directly associate the deceased with his rank, it is possible that Liccaeus is holding a vitis, which, by its appearance, could also refer to his maritime skills.V članku je obravnavana nagrobna stela mornariškega centuriona Likeja, ki je bila najdena v naselju Osor (Apsorus) na otoku Cresu. Sodeč po napisu, je bilo zanjo izbrano javno mesto, kar priča o centurionovi pomembnosti za kraj. Likej je oblečen v tuniko in sagum, nenavaden pa je predmet, ki ga drži v roki. Največkrat je bil interpretiran kot vrv, zvezana v vozel, kakršnega so uporabljali za privez ladij. O videzu poveljniške palice (vitis), ki je bila prepoznavni znak tudi mornariških centurionov, je malo znanega. Prav upodobitve na ravenskih stelah zgodnjega cesarskega obdobja, na katerih je upodobljen nekakšen vozel, so spodbudile domnevo, da je bila vsaj v tej dobi vitis pri mornariških centurionih upodobljena drugače. Glede na to, da na steli ni nobenega atributa, ki bi pokojnika povezoval z njegovim činom, bi lahko Likej v rokah držal prav vitis, ki bi z videzom obenem lahko namigovala na Likejeve pomorske sposobnosti

Dry grasslands of the central valleys of the Alps from a European perspective: the example of Ausserberg (Valais, Switzerland)

The upper Rhone valley in the Swiss canton of Valais is one of the driest and most continental of the inner-alpine valleys and harbours a rich xerothermic flora. We studied syntaxonomy and ecology of dry grasslands and their species richness patterns. In 2018 we recorded 28 vegetation plots (10 m2) and three nested-plot series of 0.0001 to 100 m2 on the south-facing slopes above the village of Ausserberg. Mean richness of all species ranged from 1.7 on 1 cm2 to 47.3 on 100 m2, with little contribution of bryophytes and lichens. The species-area relationship for total richness closely followed a power function. Modified TWINSPAN yielded a three-cluster solution, which could easily be matched with three orders of the class Festuco-Brometea: Stipo pulcherrimae-Festucetalia pallentis (xeric, rocky), Festucetalia valesiacae (xeric, non-rocky) and Brachypodietalia pinnati (meso-xeric). The subdivision of the xeric types into two orders is new for Swiss dry grasslands, where these types up to now had been joined in a single alliance Stipo-Poion within the Festucetalia valesiacae