Balkan linguistic Union

The Balkan linguistic union or Balkan linguistic surface is a whole of languages of use in the Balkans sharing many phonological similarities , morphological, syntactic and lexical which does not rise of a common origin.

Can be regarded as belonging to the union the following languages:

All these languages are not however similar to the same degree:

  • Rumanian, Albanian, the Bulgarian one and the Macedonian have the most joint properties and form a central group
  • the Greek and the Serb one (particularly the dialects torlak) shows typically Balkan features, but some of importance are not
  • there Turkish takes part in the union primarily by the vocabulary and the replacement of infinitive by the subjunctive.

All these languages are Indo-European except for the Turkish , but they belong to distant branches from/to each other, and whose divergence is very former to the development of these common characteristics. This one rather results from a linguistic phenomenon of convergence than of an old heritage; the characteristic balkanisms are not observed in the states in the past attested which ended to these languages: the Latin (for Rumanian), the old Greek and the Old Slavic.

The Romani and the Judéo-espagnol in their forms of use in Balkans also were subject to a certain influence of this linguistic union.

History of the concept

The first scientist to notice the resemblances between the Balkan languages beyond their genetic affiliation was the Slovenien Jernej Kopitar in 1829, but it was only starting from the Années 1920 that they were theorized, with like important contributors Gustav Weigand and Kristian Sandfeld-Jensen ( Balkan Linguistique , 1930).

It was the Rumanian linguist Alexandru Rosetti who launched the term of linguistic union Balkan in 1958. Theodor Capidan was further affirming than their structure was likely to be reduced with a common Balkan type. The opponents with this theory (for example Alexandru Graur) affirm that the use of the Balkan term of linguistic is unsuitable and that some of these common properties can result from the internal development of each language, while the others would concern simple a " reciprocity linguistique" , insufficient to found a " linguistics balkanique" autonomous, like are the romanistic or the germanistic .

Possible origins

The source of the development of these common characteristics and their diffusion were the subject of many debates and gave place to various theories.

Thrace substrate, dace or illyrien

As the main part of the balkanisms do not find the related languages external with those of the union, the first scientists, whose Kopitar, thought that those had inherited them the old indigenous languages which form the Substrat modern Balkan languages: the thrace, the dace and the Illyrien. But as he reached us only very little of information on these languages, one cannot affirm that the balkanisms were present there.

Greek influence

Another theory advanced by Kristian Sandfeld in 1930 is that of a purely Greek influence, because of " supériorité" Greek civilization on its neighbors. However, none the Dialectes of the old Greek presents typical balkanisms; those which find in Greek modern are posterior innovations with the Greek of the Koinè. Moreover, in the Balkan linguistic union, it is not central misses the Greek certain important features such as the postposition of the definite article.

Latin and Romance influence

The Roman Empire controlled the whole of Balkans and it is possible that a local form of Latin left its mark on all the languages autochtones, which formed the substrate of the southernmost Slavic languages later on. The weak point of this theory worked out by Georg Solta is that only some of the Balkan features find in the others Romance Langues, and there is no proof that the Romains were insulated long enough in Balkans for developing to with it.

An argument in favor of this theory is the existence in Macedonian of loans of structure (Calque S) to the aroumain, which can be explained by a substrate aroumain in Macedonian, but the problem of the origin of the balkanisms in aroumain remains whole.

Multiple origins

The theory most largely accepted nowadays was advanced by Polish Zbigniew Gołąb: all the innovations would not have the same source and the influence of the languages between them would have been reciprocal, certain common features being able to go back with Latin, the Greek or to the Slavic languages while others, in particular those which Rumanian, Albanian, the Macedonian and the Bulgarian one are alone to divide, would be explained by an effect of substrate at the time of the romanisation (in the case of Rumanian) or the slavisation (in the case of the Bulgarian one and of the Macedonian). Albanian was influenced so much by Latin than the Slavic one, but preserved most of his characteristics of origin.

An argument in favor of this theory is that the turbulent history of Balkans led many populations to move of a place with another, inhabited by another ethnos group. These small groups were assimilated often quickly by leaving traces in the new language which they acquired. Another possibility is that before the modern era, the Multilinguisme was current in Balkans, making it possible the linguistic changes to quickly diffuse from one language to another. It is notable in this respect the Dialecte S richest in balkanisms are those of the areas which had contacts with many different languages.

Chronology of the contacts

(under development)

It is probable that the first contacts took place between the ancestors of Rumanian and Albanian, between the Ier and the 5th century, because of existence in Albanian of words borrowed from Balkan Latin and in Rumanian of words of substrate connected with Albanian words.

The exact place of these contacts is object of debate, between the Albania of North to the Transylvania (see Origine of the Rumanian people). All the varieties of Rumanian belong to the linguistic union, indicating that the contact is former to their divergence.

The invasion of the Slaves opened one period of migrations through Balkans which made emerge from the multi-ethnic communities at the probable origin of the linguistic union, as from the 8th century; the majority of the features existed about it at the 12th century, the balkanization continuing however until the 17th century in certain points.

The Serb one was perhaps the last language to be joined to it, which indicates the low number of features that it comprises some, and for the majority in the dialects torlak only, of the speeches of transition with the Bulgarian one of rather late origin, after the majority of the common features had been established in the linguistic union.

Common characteristics

Morphosyntaxe

Case system

The number of cases is reduced, several being supplanted by the use of prepositions, except for the Serb one. The typical variation nominal of a Balkan language comprises the following Cas:

Syncretism of the genitive and the dative
In the Balkan languages, the Genitive and the Dative, or prepositional constructions which correspond to it, are of identical form. Example:

Syncretism of the locative and the directional one
The semantic expression of the locative (place where one is) and of directional (place where one goes) is made form consequently (it is also the case of the French moreover, like others Romance Langues, but of the languages like the Latin or the German explicitly marks the difference in their Morphosyntaxe).

Verbal system

Formation of the future
The future is formed in an analytical way by using an auxiliary whose direction is " vouloir" (as in English " will"), follow-up generally of a Subjunctive .

Perfect periphrastic
The perfect is formed in an analytical way with the auxiliary " avoir" , as in the Romance languages or the modern Germanic languages. The origin of this feature east can be to seek in the Vulgar Latin . That does not apply however to Bulgarian and the Serb one, where the perfect one is formed with the auxiliary " être" and the last participle active: обещал - " having promis" (last credit takes part); съм (Bull.); сам (Ser.) - " I suis" ; обещалсъм ; обећаосам (Ser.) - " I have promis" (literally. " I am having promis"), perfect. The Macedonian for its part can optionnellement use " être" or " avoir" like auxiliary, according to the dialect; construction with " to have " is characteristic of this language: Имамветено "I have promis"

Reduction of the use of infinitive
The use of the Infinitive , commun run in the languages connected with those of Balkans but external with the union, like the Romance Languages and the Slavic Languages, is generally replaced by constructions with the Subjonctif:

  • in Macedonian, Greek and in the tosque dialect of Albanian, the loss of infinitive is complete

  • in aroumain, Bulgarian and in the southernmost dialects of Serb, it is almost complete
  • in mégléno-Rumanian and in the dialect guègue of Albanian, the use of infinitive is reduced to a number of limited expressions
  • in Daco-Rumanian, into Serb and in Croatian, infinitive shares many functions with the subjunctive
  • spoken Turkish with Sliven and Choumen also almost entirely lost infinitive to him.

For example, " I want écrire" " will be said literally; I want that I écrive" :

Subjunctive in direct use
The subjunctive can get busy to only express a wish, a wish, a request, an intention or a suggestion.

Below, translation of " you would owe there Al; by constructions with the subjunctive in the Balkan languages:

Evidentiality
(Addition compared to the english language version, to develop)

Placed after definite article

Except for Greek and romani, all the languages of the union use a Definite article placed after, attached at the end of the name rather than placed in front. None the related languages (other Romance and Slavic languages) has this characteristic, and she is regarded as an innovation created and diffused in Balkans.

However, each language created independently in-house its own articles, so that the Rumanian articles are connected with the articles (and conclusive) of Italian or French, while those of Bulgarian correspond to the conclusive ones in the other Slavic languages.

Formation of the numeral ones

The numeral between ten and twenty are formed with the Slavic way: " unité" + " sur" + " dix". For example, " onze" " is said literally; one on dix". The modern Greek does not follow this tendency.

Pronominal Enclise

The Direct object and the Complément of indirect object are redoubled by a weak form Clitique of personal Pronom. This feature is found in Rumanian, Greek, Bulgarian and Albanian.

Example: " I see Georges".

Note: The not marked form follows an order SVO without clitic: " ВиждамГеорги". The redoubling by clitique is nevertheless possible in familiar language: " ВиждамгоГеорги". The clitique one is obligatory in the event of Thématisation of the object, with order OVS, which is used as alternative to the Passive voice in familiar register: " Георгиговиждам".

Suffixes

Some suffix S of lexical Dérivation are in the whole of the Balkan linguistic surface, like the Slavic diminutive of origin - ica - API - which is found in Albanian, Greek and Rumanian.

Lexicology

Vocabulary

The languages of the Balkan linguistic union have several hundreds of joint words, for the majority originating in Greek or in Turkish Osmanli, because of cultural and economic domination of the Byzantine Empire then of the Ottoman Empire on the area.

Albanian, Rumanian and the Bulgarian one also share number of words of various origins:

Phraseology

Apart from the lexical Loan itself, there exists also many Calque S last from one Balkan language to another, in majority between Albanian, the Bulgarian one, the Greek and Rumanian.

For example, the word for " mûr" (as a fruit) is derived from the word " cuire" in Albanian, Greek and Rumanian.

Another example is a wish meaning " literally; for many années" :

Expressions idiomatic meaning " that one or not " are formed with turning " -ne pas-". For example, for " that it is wanted or not " :

Phonology

A common feature of the Balkan languages " centrales" is the existence of a phoneme Schwa (in API), written E in Albanian, ъ into Bulgarian, ă in Rumanian. The schwa also exists in the majority of the dialects of the Macedonian, but not in those of the center and the West, on which is based the written language.

In Rumanian and Albanian, the schwa drift of one in inaccentuée position. Thus, the Latin word camisia (" chemise") became in Rumanian cămaşă , in Albanian këmishë .

Another sound change common to Rumanian and Albanian is the closing of inaccentué in.

References

Random links:Geometría algebraica | Guinea | Thousand-year-old XXIXe front J. - C. | Cold wave 2006 in Europe | Ariana | Baone | Différentiation_automatique