Cooper, Jr., Henry R.

Henry R. Cooper, Jr.

Crossref

Slovene Studies Journal

Marija Pirjevec. Dvoje izvirov slovenske književnosti. Ljubljana: Slovenska matica, 1997.

University of Washington: ResearchWorks Journal Hosting

REVIEWS 201 , , of comparison, is the complete absence of discussion of verbs of motion. The section on syntax follows the pattern in the chapters on other languages and is fairly comprehensive. One point of question, though, concerns the description of the so-called "orphan-accusative" (438). The author states that any masculine or neuter adjective in direct object position that is used in a noun phrase from which the noun is omitted takes the genitive ending -ega (Le., it is marked animate). In the modern language, although this is true of masculine adjectives, it is now very rare in the case of neuter adjectives, for which the accusative form in -0 is preferred. The section on the lexis is good, with a description of borrowings and the incorporation of borrowings with specific reference to the modern period. The final section, on Slovene dialects, fifty in all, presents eight major groups comprising six pan-dialectal bases and two large transitional areas. Smaller transitional dialects are left out. Inevitably, only minimal information on the features of these dialects is given. In conclusion, one can say that despite certain regrets as to the extent of coverage, which is limited by the book's framework and guidelines, Priestly has done an excellent job of providing scholars with a good, clear profile of the modern Slovene language. His chapter will be welcomed by all those interested in this fascinating language. Peter Herrity, University of Nottingham Marija Pirjevec. Dvoje izvirov slovenske knjiZevnosti. Ljubljana: Slovenska Matica, 1997. 215 pp., 5176 SIT (=$30.75) (cloth). A professor of Slavic literatures in Trieste, Marija Pitjevec has made yet another contribution to the study of Slovene literature with her most recent analysis of Slovene literary history from the point of view of what she considers to be its two principal sources, ethnocentrism on one hand and universalism on the other (5). Starting with the second half of the eighteenth century and the writers of the Slovene Enlightenment, she documents the oscillations between writers who sought to discern a national style and content for their works, and those who attempted to raise Slovene literature to a higher, more international standard. As an • 202 REVIEWS . , exemplar of the latter trend she analyzes thoroughly and sympatheti-cally Anton Feliks Dev, while for the former she examines Valentin Vodnik. And as one who began under the influence of German Sturm und Orang and Shakespeare, but who finished by "Slovenizing" French revolutionary comedy for the masses, she suggests that Anton Tomaz Linhart performed an invaluable synthesis of the local and the universal in his works. The bulk of Pirjevec's attention fully two-thirds of her text is focused, however, not on the Enlightenment but on Slovene Romanticism. Here she retells with skill the battles between Jernej Kopitar on the one hand, the promoter of popular speech and peasant tastes, and France Preseren and Matija Cop on the other, who had a more cosmopolitan vision for Slovene letters. Along the way she examines other less Promethean figures, such as Janez Nepomuk Primic, Fran Metelko, Stanko Vraz, Jovan Vesel, Matevz Ravnikar, Janez Cigler, and Anton Martin Slomsek, who also made their contributions to the national literary program. It will come as no surprise, however, that she regards Preseren as the masterful practitioner and synthesizer of both trends in Slovene literature, "the domestic and the worldly, the ethnocentric and the universal" (103), and that from the very beginning of his poetic career, the late 1820s, in his translation of Burger's Lenore, his highly original ballad "Povodni moz," and the brilliant, mature, sophisticated "Slovo ad rnIadosti." Preseren's literary program, she says, involved embracing, and occasionally even confronting, the great wide world openly, "without inferiority complexes or hesitation" (114), and that, she maintains, must be the program of Slovene literature to the present day. It might have been interesting at this point to contrast this approach with those of other, especially Slavic, literatures (I have in mind specifically Czech and Russian), where issues of size and inferiority have also played a significant role. In any event, Cop-Preseren carried the day in Slovenia, with profound consequences: the ultimate proof of this may be that the finest example of Preseren's synthetic program, namely "Zdravljica," has become nothing less than the national anthem of the newly independent Republic of Slovenia. In her conclusion PiIjevec notes that in some senses the original bifurcation of Slovene literature, which has of course grown incomparably more complex esthetically since the eighteenth century, REVIEWS 203 , , nonetheless continues. Her study helps us to understand why this is so, and to appreciate it as a fundamental characteristic of the nation's literary profile. Henry R. Cooper, Jr., Indiana University Snoj, Marko. Slovenski etimoloski slovar. Ljubljana: Mladinska Knjiga, 1997. xxv + 900 pp., 13,850 SIT (=$82.25) (cloth). This review shall consider the above new etymological dictionary as it might be used by a Slavic linguist outside Slovenia. Although this would seem to be a bit different than its intended audience, the Western scholar who is interested in Slovene will surely be attracted by this new one-volume work. In addition to the expected listing of Slovene words and etymologies, the dictionary consists of a fifteen-page introduction, a three-page glossary of terms, a clear illustration of a sample entry, and a comprehensive 180-page Slovene word index, which facilitates the location of Slovene words that are discussed within entries, but do not appear as head words themselves. Because Slovene also has a more complete etymological dictionary, the Bezlaj work, which is in four volumes, I considered the possible advantages and disadvantages of using the more compact one-volume work by Snoj. Upon reading Snoj's introduction, I saw that the author is very forthright and clear about the pros and cons of his etymological work. He points them out very precisely, so my first conclusion is that Snoj's introduction represents an excellent and objective review and summary of what is actually contained in his work. In the remainder of this review, I shall highlight these points, citing several of those made by Snoj himself and adding a few additional considerations to them. Snoj's most important comment about his work is that it has only "limited scholarly ambitions" (iii), since these are already served by the Bezlaj dictionary. Most of the other points result from the fact that the Snoj dictionary makes no attempt to be the latest word in the field of 

English

https://journals.lib.washington.edu/index.php/ssj/article/download/4006/3412

Marija Pirjevec. Dvoje izvirov slovenske književnosti. Ljubljana: Slovenska matica, 1997.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Crossref

University of Washington: ResearchWorks Journal Hosting

University of Washington: ResearchWorks Journal Hosting

Crossref