О пореклу финалног -е у облику множине глаголске л-форме у македонском - могући контактни утицаји

In addition to previous interpretations of the origin of final -e in the plural of the verbal l-form in Macedonian, the paper offers arguments for explaining the generalization of this marker of plurality as a result of Aromanian influence in the contact between the two languages.Kao doprinos dosadašnjoj diskusiji o uzrocima generalizacije markera za množinu u makedonskom jeziku (nadovezujući se na tumačenja Koneskog i Golomba) autor razmatra faktore koji su doveli do uopštavanja markera -e za množinu sva tri roda pasivnog participa u njegovoj modernoj funkciji glagolske l-forme. Kao dodatne argumente u prilog već postojeće teze o arumunskom uticaju na razvoj ove generalizacije autor vidi činjenicu da se njen (izvorno zapadnomakedonski) areal uglavnom podudara sa distribucijom ima-perfekta i da je kontakt makedonskog i arumunskog jezika u zapadnoj Makedoniji dovodio do uzajamnog pozajmljivanja analitičkih perfektnih konstrukcija

The language codes of ISO 639: A premature, ultimately unobtainable, and possibly damaging standardization

009 Stephen Morey, Mark W. Post and Victor Friedman The language codes of ISO 639: A premature and possibly unobtainable standardization ISO 639 is an ambitious attempt to standardize and organize various types of references to the languages of the world. It is designed to be fully comprehensive and permanent; as such, it promises to greatly enhance the precision and reliability with which language materials can be archived, catalogued, and referenced in the literature, as well as the ease and precision with which such materials and references can be processed by machines and effectively located via search queries. There are, however, a number of serious problems with several components of ISO 639 as they are currently conceived. At a minimum, these are: (1) use of both The Ethnologue as the basis for ISO 639-3’s “three-letter codes” and of SIL as its registration authority is problematic for a number of reasons (2) in-principle “arbitrary” (but in fact not arbitrary) “mnemonic” labels of ISO 639-3 have the potential to enshrine offensive designations for language communities, and in fact currently do so (3) decision-making processes in ISO 639-3 are currently excessively centralized and privilege the views of a minority of the linguistics community (4) the in-principle “permanency” of language codes such as those of ISO 639-3 is fundamentally incompatible with the nature of human languages, which are demonstrably impermanent (5) the structure of ISO 639-3 has a serious potential to be misunderstood, misused, and in fact abused by decision-making bodies (such as arms of government in various political contexts) (6) ISO 639-5, which attempts to catalogue the genetic affiliations of the world’s languages, is highly premature, since there is nothing approaching agreement among specialists in a great number of cases (7) ISO 639-6, which attempts to catalogue language variation, is in principle impossible, unless it aims to extend to an analysis of the language use of every human being on Earth, living or dead On the basis of these observations, which we will illustrate by means of three detailed “case studies” from the Eastern Himalaya, the Burmese/Indian border region, and the Balkan region, we will argue that ISO 639 must be substantially re-conceived and re-organized before it can be supported by linguists. The language codes of ISO 639: A premature and possibly unobtainable standardization. ISO 639 is an ambitious attempt to standardize and organize various types of references to the languages of the world. It is designed to be fully comprehensive and permanent; as such, it promises to greatly enhance the precision and reliability with which language materials can be archived, catalogued, and referenced in the literature, as well as the ease and precision with which such materials and references can be processed by machines and effectively located via search queries. There are, however, a number of serious problems with several components of ISO 639 as they are currently conceived. At a minimum, these are: (1) use of both The Ethnologue as the basis for ISO 639-3’s “three-letter codes” and of SIL as its registration authority is problematic for a number of reasons (2) in-principle “arbitrary” (but in fact not arbitrary) “mnemonic” labels of ISO 639-3 have the potential to enshrine offensive designations for language communities, and in fact currently do so (3) decision-making processes in ISO 639-3 are currently excessively centralized and privilege the views of a minority of the linguistics community (4) the in-principle “permanency” of language codes such as those of ISO 639-3 is fundamentally incompatible with the nature of human languages, which are demonstrably impermanent (5) the structure of ISO 639-3 has a serious potential to be misunderstood, misused, and in fact abused by decision-making bodies (such as arms of government in various political contexts) (6) ISO 639-5, which attempts to catalogue the genetic affiliations of the world’s languages, is highly premature, since there is nothing approaching agreement among specialists in a great number of cases (7) ISO 639-6, which attempts to catalogue language variation, is in principle impossible, unless it aims to extend to an analysis of the language use of every human being on Earth, living or dead On the basis of these observations, which we will illustrate by means of three detailed “case studies” from the Eastern Himalaya, the Burmese/Indian border region, and the Balkan region, we will argue that ISO 639 must be substantially re-conceived and re-organized before it can be supported by linguists

Нeка : чем македонский язык отличается от болгарского и от бывшего сербохорватского

The Common Slavic particle that is realized in sub-Alpine South Slavic as neka has distinctive developments in Macedonian, Bulgarian, and the former Serbo-Croatian. The particle has its broadest usage in the former Serbo-Croatian, which appears to be, at least in part, due to contacts with Italo-Romance. Macedonian is more conservative than Bulgarian, and thus occupies a unique place within sub-Alpine South Slavic. At the same time, Bulgarian is less Balkan than Macedonian in that the latter permits a bare direct object without a verb.Заједничка словенска партикула која се у субалпском јужнословенском ареалу реализује као нека има дистинктивни развој у македонском, бугарском и некадашњем српскохрватском. Ова партикула има најширу употребу у некадашњем српскохрватском, што може, макар делимично, бити последица контаката са итало-романским ареалом. Македонски језик је конзервативнији од бугарског и стога заузима јединствено место у оквиру субалпског јужнословенског ареала. У исто време, бугарски је мање балкански него македонски по томе што потоњи дозвољава употребу правог објекта без предиката.Общеславянская частица, реализующаяся в субальпийском южнославянском ареале как нека, имеет различное развитие в македонском, болгарском и бывшем сербохорватском. Данная частица употребляется шире всего в сербохорватском, что может, хотя бы отчасти, быть последствием контактов с итало-романским ареалом. Македонский язык более консервативный по отношению к болгарскому и поэтому он занимает единственное место в рамках субальпийского южнославянского ареала. Одновременно, болгарский язык является менее балканским в сравнении с македонским, поскольку последний разрешает употребление прямого дополнения без сказуемого

Languages are Wealth: The Sprachbund as Linguistic Capital

No abstract available

A Unified Account of the Moral Standing to Blame

Recently, philosophers have turned their attention to the question, not when a given agent is blameworthy for what she does, but when a further agent has the moral standing to blame her for what she does. Philosophers have proposed at least four conditions on having “moral standing”: 1. One’s blame would not be “hypocritical”. 2. One is not oneself “involved in” the target agent’s wrongdoing. 3. One must be warranted in believing that the target is indeed blameworthy for the wrongdoing. 4. The target’s wrongdoing must some of “one’s business”. These conditions are often proposed as both conditions on one and the same thing, and as marking fundamentally different ways of “losing standing.” Here I call these claims into question. First, I claim that conditions (3) and (4) are simply conditions on different things than are conditions (1) and (2). Second, I argue that condition (2) reduces to condition (1): when “involvement” removes someone’s standing to blame, it does so only by indicating something further about that agent, viz., that he or she lacks commitment to the values that condemn the wrongdoer’s action. The result: after we clarify the nature of the non-hypocrisy condition, we will have a unified account of moral standing to blame. Issues also discussed: whether standing can ever be regained, the relationship between standing and our "moral fragility", the difference between mere inconsistency and hypocrisy, and whether a condition of standing might be derived from deeper facts about the "equality of persons"