This article should specify the language of its non-English content, using {{lang}}, {{transliteration}} for transliterated languages, and {{IPA}} for phonetic transcriptions, with an appropriate ISO 639 code. Wikipedia's multilingual support templates may also be used.See why.(May 2024)
The phonemic inventory of Contemporary Standard Bulgarian (CSB) has been a contested and controversial matter for decades, with two major currents, or schools of thought, forming at national and international level:[1][2][3][4][5]
One school of thought assumes palatalization as a phonemic distinction in Contemporary Standard Bulgarian and consequently states that it has 17 palatalized phonemes, rounding its phonemic inventory to 45 phonemes.[6][7][8] This view, originally suggested in a sketch made by Russian linguist Nikolai Trubetzkoy in his 1939 book Principles of Phonology, was subsequently elaborated by Bulgarian linguists Stoyko Stoykov and Lyubomir Andreychin. It is the traditional and prevalent view in Bulgaria and is endorsed by the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences;[3] some international linguists also favour it.[9]
The other view considers that there are only 28 phonemes in Contemporary Standard Bulgarian: 21 consonants, 1 semivowel and 6 vowels and that only one of them, the semivowel /j/, is palatal. This view is held by a minority of Bulgarian linguists and a substantial number of international ones.[10][11][12][13][3][9][14][15]
^1/ɤ/ is actually a mid-back and somewhat centralized vowel, usually pronounced midway between [ɤ̞] and [ə]. Thus, it is sometimes transcribed as ⟨ə⟩,[16] or even ⟨ɜ⟩,[17] but its usual notation is ⟨ɤ⟩.
Here /ɛ/, /a/ and /ɔ/ are "low", and /i/, /ɤ/ and /u/ are "high".
The dominant theory of Bulgarian vowel reduction posits that Bulgarian vowels have a phonemic value only in stressed position, while when unstressed, they neutralize in an intermediate centralized position, where lower vowels are raised and higher vowels are lowered.[18][14] This concerns only the central vowels /a/ and /ɤ/, which neutralize into [ɐ], and the back vowels /ɔ/ and /u/, which neutralize into [o].
The merger of /ɛ/ and /i/ is not allowed in formal speech and is regarded as a provincial (East Bulgarian) dialectal feature; instead, unstressed /ɛ/ is both raised and centralized, approaching the schwa ([ə]).[19] The Bulgarian /ɤ/ vowel does not exist as a phoneme in other Slavic languages, though a similar reduced vowel transcribed as [ə] does occur. The theory further posits that such neutralization may nevertheless not always happen: vowels tend to be distinguished in emphatic or deliberately distinct pronunciation, while reduction is strongest in colloquial speech.
Maximum tongue positions when pronouncing stressed and unstressed Bulgarian vowels
Frequency (F1) distinctions between Bulgarian vowels in stressed and unstressed position
Nevertheless, the hypothesis that high and low vowels neutralize into a common centralized vowel has never been properly studied or proven in a practical setting. Several recent studies by both Bulgarian and foreign researchers, involving volunteers speaking Contemporary Standard Bulgarian, have established—on the contrary—that while unstressed low vowels /ɛ/, /a/ and /ɔ/ are indeed raised as expected, unstressed high /ɤ/ and /u/ are also raised somewhat, rather than lowered, while /i/ remains in the same position.[20][21][22]
All three studies indicate that a clear distinction is kept between unstressed /ɛ/ and both stressed and unstressed /i/. The situation with unstressed /a/ and /ɔ/ is more complex, but all studies indicate that they both approach unstressed /ɤ/ and /u/ very closely and overlap with them to a great extent, but their average realisations remain slightly more open. One of the studies finds that unstressed /a/ to be practically undistinguishable from stressed /ɤ/,[23] while another finds a lack of statistically significant difference between /ɔ/ and /u/,[22] and a third one finds coalescence only in formants for one of the pairs and only in tongue position for the other.
While the difference between all stressed vowels and between unstressed/i/ and /ɛ/ can be heard in almost all cases, the unstressed back and central vowels are perceptually neutralised in minimal pairs, with only 62% identifying unstressed /u/, 59% unstressed /a/ and /ɔ/ and a mere 57% unstressed /ɤ/.[22]
Semivowels
The Bulgarian language officially has only one semivowel: /j/. It is traditionally regarded as a semivowel, but in recent years, it has largely been treated as a "glide" or approximant, thus making it part of the consonant system. Orthographically, it is represented by the Cyrillic letter ⟨й⟩ (⟨и⟩ with a breve) as in най-[naj] (prefix 'most') and (тролей[troˈlɛj] ('trolleybus'), except when it precedes /a/ or /u/ (and their reduced counterparts [ɐ] and [o]), in which case both phonemes are represented by a single letter, ⟨я⟩ or ⟨ю⟩, respectively: e.g., ютия[juˈtijɐ] ('flat iron'), but Йордан[jorˈdan] ('Jordan').
As a result of lenition of velarized /l/ ([ɫ]), ongoing since the 1970s, [w] appears to be an emerging allophone of velarized [ɫ] among younger speakers, especially in preconsonantal position: вълк[vɤwk] ('wolf') instead of [vɤɫk]. While certain Western Bulgarian dialects (in particular, those around Pernik), have had a long-standing tradition of pronouncing [ɫ] as [w], the use of the glide in the literary language was first noted by a radio operator in 1974.[24] A Ukrainian researcher found in 2012 that Bulgarians split into three age-specific groups in terms of [ɫ] pronunciation: 1) people in their 40s or older who have standard pronunciation; 2) people in their 30s, who can articulate [ɫ] but unconsciously say [w]; and 3) younger people who are unable to differentiate between the two sounds and generally say [w].[25]
A study of 30 graduate students was therefore conducted in 2014 to quantify the trend. The study testified to an extremely wide proliferation of the phenomenon, with 9 out of 30 participants unable to produce [ɫ] in any given word, and only 2 participants able to produce [ɫ] correctly, but in no more than half the words in the study.[26] Remarkably, not a single participant was able to enunciate [ɫ] between a bilabial consonant and a rounded vowel, e.g., in аплодирани[ɐpwoˈdirɐni] ('applauded'), or between a rounded vowel and a velar consonant, e.g. in толкова[ˈtɔwkovɐ] ('so').[27] Another discovery of the study was that in particular positions, certain participants enunciated neither [ɫ] nor [w], but the high back unrounded vowel[ɯ] (or its corresponding glide [ɰ]).
The glide [w] can also be found in English loan words such as уиски[ˈwiski] ('whiskey') or Уикипедия[ˈwikiˈpɛdiɐ] ('Wikipedia'). The semivowel/j/ forms a number of diphthongs, which are summarized below:[28][29]
Falling /j/ diphthongs
Word initially
[aj]
ай
айрян
'buttermilk'
-
-
-
-
[uj]
уй
уйдисвам
'indulge', 'be suitable for'
Word medially
[aj]
ай
кайма
'minced meat'
-
[ɛj]
ей
вейка
'twig'
[ij]
ий
партийна
'of a party'
[ɔj]
ой
война
'war'
[uj]
уй
вуйчо
'uncle'
Word finally
[aj]
ай
случай
'case'
[ɤj]
ъй
тъй
'thus, so'
[ɛj]
ей
гвоздей
'nail'
[ij]
ий
калий
'potassium'
[ɔj]
ой
завой
'road bend'
[uj]
уй
туй
'this'
Rising /j/ diphthongs
Word initially
[ja]
я
ям
'I eat'
-
[jɛ]
йе
йерархия
'hierarchy'
-
[jɔ]
йо
йод
'iodine'
[ju]
ю
юг
'south'
Word medially
[ja]
я
приятел
'friend'
-
[jɛ]
йе
фойерверк
'fireworks'
-
[jɔ]
йо
район
'area'
[ju]
ю
съюз
'union'
Word finally
[ja]
я
статуя
'statue'
[jɤ]
я
пия
'I drink'
-
-
[jɔ]
йо
Марийо
'You, Maria!' (vocative case)
-
Consonants
Two schools of thought on Bulgarian consonantism
The main point of contention between the two schools of thought on Bulgarian consonantism has been whether palatalized consonants should be defined as separate phonemes or simply as allophones of their respective hard counterparts.
Until the 1940s, Bulgarian linguists classified the Bulgarian consonants without including any palatal or palatalized consonants other than /j/ and, sometimes, the postalveolars ([ʃ], [tʃ], [ʒ], [dʒ]). The palatalized consonant sounds, when mentioned, were described merely as positional variants (what would today be called allophones) of hard consonants. Accordingly, the Bulgarian language was considered to have only 28 consonants.[30] A phonological analysis aligned with this view, positing 28 phonemes and viewing the palatalized consonants as allophones, has maintained some currency outside of Bulgaria and has also been (re-)adopted by some Bulgarian linguists since as early as the 1970s and 1980s[9] and even more so after the end of the Communist period.[31][13][14] It has proposed alternative notation of palatalized consonants in the form of C-j-V (consonant-glide-vowel) clusters and has made a tentative hypothesis about the decomposition of Bulgarian palatals into consonants + glide using the following arguments:[4][32][2]
Unlike the palatal consonants in other Slavic languages, which can usually be found in all positions, palatalized consonants in Bulgarian have very limited distribution: only before central or back vowels, and then only if there is a /j/ before the vowel, noted graphically with the letters ⟨я⟩[ja]/[jɤ], ⟨ю⟩[ju] or ⟨ьо⟩[jɔ].[9][33]
The enormous number of palatal or palatalized consonants claimed contradicts the historical development of Bulgarian and the South Slavic languages in general towards depalatalization, especially considering that there were only 9 or 10 palatal consonants in Old and Middle Bulgarian and that four of them have since hardened or are no longer used.[34][35][original research?]
The reanalysis would make it possible to make sense of sequences like ям[ˈjam] ('(I) eat') ↔ изям[iˈzʲam] ('(I) eat till the last crumb') ↔ доям[doˈjam] ('(I) finish eating something') ↔ отям[oˈtʲam] ('(I) eat to my heart's content'), where a root is considered to be iotated in some cases and to palatalize the previous consonant in others.[36]
Stoykov, Andreychin and Tilkov have all observed that the pronunciation of so-called palatalized consonants as consonant + /j/ is common among Bulgarian speakers and predominates in Western Bulgaria.[37][38][39]
The second school of thought came to being rather unexpectedly in the late 1940s, as a refinement of Trubetzkoy's rough draft a decade before. It posits that apart from ⟨й⟩ (/j/), there are 17 separate palatal phonemes that are in minimal pairs with their hard counterparts, including дз' (/d͡zʲ/) and х' (/ç/), which are not found in any native Bulgarian words and were excluded from Trubetzkoy's draft.[40] Thus, only 5 consonants are not in minimal pairs, ⟨ч⟩ (/t͡ʃ/), ⟨дж⟩ (/d͡ʒ/), ⟨ш⟩ (/ʃ/) and ⟨ж⟩ (/ʒ/), which are only hard, and the glide ⟨й⟩ (/j/), which is only soft. They argue that Bulgarian phonemic inventory consists of a total of 45 phonemes, whereof 6 vowels, 1 semivowel and 38 consonants, and present the following arguments:[41]
Even though the distribution of palatalized consonants is limited, there is still a large number of Bulgarian words can be distinguished only by the difference in palatalization, e.g. гол[ɡɔɫ] ('nude/naked') vs. гьол[ɡʲɔɫ] ('puddle'); лук[ɫuk] ('onion') vs. люк[ʎuk] ('hatch'); дал[daɫ] ('to have given') vs/ дял[dʲaɫ] ('share');
Palatal consonants cannot be considered to be formed by their hard counterparts by adding (/j/), as there is a clear auditory difference between pronouncing a soft consonant (as in Russian) and pronouncing a consonant and a glide (as in English). A 2012 comparative study of palatal phonemes in Russian, palatalized phonemes in Bulgarian and CjV clusters in English has deduced that the phonetic and auditory properties of Bulgarian palatals are similar to those in Russian and deviate substantially from the English consonant + glide sequences and that Bulgarian and Russian listeners did not need to wait for formant transitions to identify a consonant as palatal/palatalized unlike English listeners.[42]
Historical development of Bulgarian consonantism
Proto-Slavic underwent three separate rounds of palatalization and one of iotation, but the resulting palatal consonants eventually hardened in Western and South Slavic.
By the Old Bulgarian period, there were only four consonants left forming contrastive pairs: р (/r/) and р' (/rʲ/), н (/n/) and н' (/ɲ/), л (/l/) and л' (/ʎ/), с (/s/) and с' (/sʲ/). Three consonants were only hard: к (/k/), г (/ɡ/) and х (/x/), four were only soft: /ʒ/, /t͡ʃ/, /ʃ/ and ꙃ' (/d͡zʲ/), while the remaining eight consonants were generally hard, but could be semi-palatalized: б (/b/), в (/β/), д (/d/), ꙁ (/z/), м (/m/), п (/p/), т (/t/) and ф (/f/).[43]
Historical phonetician Anna-Maria Totomanova has expressed a slightly divergent opinion: the four hard/palatal contrastive pairs were again /r/ and /rʲ/, /n/ and /ɲ/, /l/ and /ʎ/, /s/ and /sʲ/, 11 consonants, /p/, /b/, /m/, (/f/, /β/), /d/, /t/, /z/, /k/, /ɡ/ and /x/, were only hard, and six consonants, /ʃ/, /ʒ/, /t͡ʃ/, /t͡sʲ/, /d͡zʲ/ and iota (/j/), along with the typically Bulgarian consonant combinations ⟨щ⟩[ʃt] and ⟨жд⟩[ʒd], were only soft.[44] Finally, Huntley mentions 9 palatal consonants: /ʃ/, /ʒ/, /t͡ʃ/, /t͡sʲ/, /d͡zʲ/ and /j/, which were only soft, and /ɲ/, /ʎ/ and /rʲ/, which could also be hard.[45] Both Haralampiev and Totomanova have noted a marked trend towards consonant hardening.[43]
Eventually, /ʃ/, /ʒ/ and /t͡ʃ/ hardened permanently, /d͡z/ disappeared from the phonemic inventory, and ⟨дж⟩ (/d͡ʒ/) was borrowed from Ottoman Turkish as only hard. But before that, two phenomena led to the palatalization of more consonants: a second iotation and the dissolution of the yat vowel. As a result of the contraction and closure of the syllable in the Middle Bulgarian period, unstressed /i/ in many cases turned into the semivowel /j/ or attached to a consonant, palatalising it. Thus, Old Bulgarian свиниꙗ[sviˈnija] ('swine') contracted into свиня[sviˈɲa] and братиꙗ[ˈbratija] ('brothers') into братя[ˈbratʲɐ].[46]
In many dialects, the resulting palatalised т' (/tʲ/) and д' (/dʲ/) turned into palatalised к' (/c/) and г' (/ɟ/).[47] These were subsequently eliminated from CSB as dialecticisms, e.g., цвет'e[ˈt͡svɛtʲɛ] ('flower')→ цвек'е[ˈt͡svɛkʲɛ] → Ø. The form accepted in the literary language was instead the unpalatalised цвете[ˈt͡svɛtɛ] based on the Old Bulgarian form.
The dissolution of the yat happened somewhat later, towards the end of the Middle Bulgarian period and had different effects on the various dialects. In most of the East, yat in a stressed syllable softened the preceding consonant and turned into /a/. In the West, however, it led to /ɛ/ in both stressed and unstressed syllables producing no palatalisation anywhere.[48] This was one of the main factors that led to the markedly different patterns of palatalisation in Western and Eastern Bulgarian dialects, i.e., strong palatalisation of only 5 consonants in the West vs. moderate palatalisation of almost all consonants in the East.
Development of phonological theory before 1945
The first Bulgarian grammar to mention phonetics is Ivan Bogorov's First Bulgarian Grammar, where he identified 22 consonants, however, including among them ⟨щ⟩ (ʃt), ⟨ъ⟩ and ⟨ь⟩ (no phonemic status at word end).[49] In 1868, Ivan Momchilov identified only 21 consonants.[50] Momchilov observed that Bulgarian consonants could sound hard or soft, entirely depending on the vowel accompanying them.[51]
Phonetics only started developing seriously after World War I, and towards the 1930s, all major Bulgarian linguists had reached consensus that Bulgarian phonemic inventory consisted of 28 phonemes. Out of the six major Bulgarian grammars published in the Interwar period, five explicitly mention the existence of 22 consonants (including the semivowel /j/) and 6 vowels: Petar Kalkandzhiev,[52]Aleksandar Teodorov-Balan, who suggested 20 certain consonants + 2 conditional ones (for the non-native and infrequent ⟨дж⟩ (/d͡ʒ/) and ⟨дз⟩ (/d͡z/)),[12] Dimitar Popov, who posited that the only soft or palatal consonant in Bulgarian was ⟨й⟩ (/j/),[53] as well as Lyubomir Andreychin, who mentioned the distinctive articulation of palatalised consonants, but did not ascribe them phonemic status.[54] All phoneticians referenced palatalisation extensively, but without ascribing phonemic value to the resulting sounds. Moreover, according to Stefan Mladenov,[55]
"If we disregard individual cases of old, stronger palatalization, which may be found in Eastern and Western dialects alike, Contemporary Standard Bulgarian has developed a very distinctive "semi-palatalization", which is often neglected."
This was a result of the attempts to unify the extremely divergent patterns of Eastern and Western palatalization into a common standard in the 1800s and early 1900s, which eventually led to its general elimination from the standard language. Examples include the complete elimination of end-word palatals in a number of words ending in ⟨р'⟩ (/rʲ/), ⟨н'⟩ (/ɲ/), ⟨л'⟩ (/ʎ/) and ⟨т'⟩ (/tʲ/), e.g., writing and saying кон[kɔn] ('horse') instead of конь[kɔɲ], път[pɤt] ('road') instead of пъть[pɤtʲ]), etc.; the adoption of the hard suffix -не instead of -нье for verbal nouns, i.e., писане[pisɐˈnɛ] instead of писанье[pisɐˈɲɛ] ('writing'); labelling palatalization before front vowels as dialectal: (поле[poˈlɛ] instead of полье[poˈʎɛ] ('field'), тиква[tikˈvɐ] instead of тьиква[tʲikˈvɐ] ('pumpkin')), etc.[56] Thus, the only sanctioned palatalisation in CSB is in syllable-initial position before central and back vowels, i.e., in front of /a/, /ɤ/, /ɔ/ and /u/.
The opinions of Bulgarian linguistics were also shared by a number of foreign Slavicists. French linguist Léon Beaulieux has stated that Bulgarian is characterised by its tendency to eliminate all palatal consonants.[57] Czech linguist Horalek claimed as early as the 1940s that palatalisation in standard Bulgarian was on its way to disappear through decomposition and the development of a specific /j/ glide and that words such as бял (white) and дядо (grandfather) were pronounced [bjaɫ] and [ˈdjado] (i.e., CjV) or even [biaɫ] and [ˈdiado] just as often as they were pronounced [bʲaɫ] and [ˈdʲado].[58]
Bulgarian consonantism according to IPA (22-consonant model)
^2[ɱ] only appears as an allophone of /m/ and /n/ before /f/ and /v/. For example, инфлация[iɱˈflat͡sijɐ] ('inflation'). In other words, /m/ and /n/ always neutralize into [ɱ] before /f/ and /v/.[59]
^3/n/ is usually elided before fricatives but nasalizes and usually lengthens the preceding vowel (V + [n] + CFricative → VNasalised + Ø + CFricative). Examples: бранш[brãːʃ] ('line of business'), конски [ˈkɔ̃ski] ('of a horse').[60]
^4[ŋ] only exists as an allophone of /n/ before /k/, /ɡ/ and /x/. Examples: тънко[ˈtɤŋko] ('thin' neut.), танго[tɐŋˈɡɔ] ('tango').[61]
^5/d͡z/ is only used in a handful of native words, and its use in dialects or foreign proper names is not wider. Thus, some phonologists include the phoneme into the phonemic inventory on a provisional basis only or not at all.[12][62]
^6[ɣ] only exists as an allophone of /x/, and its distribution is rather restricted. It appears only before voicedobstruents other than /v/ (i.e., only across word boundaries. Example: видях го[viˈdʲaɣɡo] ('I saw him').
^7/x/ is described as having "only slight friction".[63]
^8[w] is not a nativephoneme. It appears in borrowings from English, where it is often vocalised as /u/ (or as the fricative /v/ in a handful of very old borrowings adopted through German or Russian), e.g. уиски[ˈwiski] ('whiskey'), Уилям[ˈwiʎɐm] ('William'). Always marked with the Cyrillic letter ⟨у⟩ /u/ in Bulgarian orthography.[64] Allophone of /ɫ/ among younger speakers,[65] apparently causing an ongoing sound change, cf. Semivowels above.
^9/l/ as a phoneme in Bulgarian has three allophones in complementary distribution; "clear" [l], occurring before front vowels, "dark" or velarized [ɫ] occurring before central and back vowels, in between vowels and before consonants, and palatalized [ʎ], occurring before /j/ and a central or back vowel.
As palatalized consonants have very limited distribution in Standard Bulgarian and are only possible in syllable-initial position before central/back vowels, IPA's consonant table above treats them as palatalizedallophones of their respective "hard" counterparts + [j] rather than as palatal phonemes and suggests that they can unambiguously be interpreted as CjV (consonant-glide-vowel) clusters.[11]<[10] Thus, for example, някой[nʲakoj] ('somebody') can easily be reanalysed as [njakoj]. According to Ternes and Vladimirova-Buhtz:[66]
"The phonemic analysis underlying the present transcription does not assume the existence of palatalized consonants. An alternative postulates the following palatalized consonants /pʲ, bʲ, tʲ, dʲ, kʲ, gʲ, tsʲ, dzʲ, mʲ, nʲ, rʲ, fʲ, vʲ, sʲ, zʲ, xʲ, lʲ/. The nature of palatalization in Bulgarian is different from that in Russian. Its occurrence is very restricted. Before front vowels and [j], palatalization does not go beyond the degree that is conditioned by the inevitable play of coarticulation. Before back vowels, palatalization may unambiguously be interpreted as C plus [j]. In syllable and word final position, it does not occur."
Among modern Bulgarian phoneticians, strong opinions about the existence of 22 consonants only are held by, e.g., Blagoy Shklifov, Mitko Sabev, Andrey Danchev and especially by Dimitrina Ignatova-Tzoneva, who has consistently argued that palatal consonants, though present in a number of dialects and in earlier stages of the development of the Bulgarian language, have largely been eliminated from Contemporary Standard Bulgarian.[67][68] All of them have advocated for a CjV reanalysis of palatalization. A large number of other Bulgarian linguists have come out in support of this more minimalistic view of Bulgarian consonantism, e.g., Kiril Mirchev,[69] Petar Pashov,[70]Bozhil Nikolov,[71]Todor Boyadzhiev,[72]Борис Симеонов[bg], who has argued that there was no logic that could explain why a consonant affected by yat mutation (e.g., /b/ in бял-бели[bʲaɫ]-[ˈbɛli]) would be palatal in some of its forms and hard in others, and so on.[73]
A number of foreign linguists have rejected the 39-consonant model based on an analysis of the distribution and degree of "softening" of Bulgarian "palatals" and the number of speakers pronouncing ⟨bj⟩, ⟨dj⟩ or ⟨fj⟩ instead of ⟨bʲ⟩, ⟨dʲ⟩ or ⟨fʲ⟩. These have included Austrian researcher Merlingen (1957),[74] Americans Carleton Hodge (1957)[75] and Joseph van Campen and Jacob Ornstein (1959),[76] Romanian linguist Alexandru Rosetti, who qualified the degree of palatalization of Bulgarian consonants as "a softening" (1967),[77] Swiss Max Mangold (1988),[78] Korean Slavist Gwon-Jin Choi, who has argued about the decomposition of Bulgarian palatalism (into C + j) (1994),[4][36] as well as phoneticians Ternes and Vladimirova-Buhtz, who have most recently suggested C-j-V notation of palatals, as their limited distribution proved they were allophones rather than phonemes (1999).[14]
A comparison of the distribution of palatalized consonants in Bulgarian and other Slavic languages and of the number of palatals in each major Slavic languages is of key importance for understanding the issue:
Comparison of the distribution of ʎ/lʲ (palatal l) in Standard Bulgarian, Croatian and Russian[79]
It is argued that it is highly unlikely for modern Bulgarian to have developed 18 palatalized consonants (incl. /j/) from the 9 or 10 that existed in Old Bulgarian (/ʃ/, /ʒ/, /t͡ʃ/, /t͡sʲ/, /d͡zʲ/, /j/, /ɲ/, /ʎ/, /rʲ/ and /sʲ/), considering that four of those had already hardened or disappeared (/ʃ/, /ʒ/, /t͡ʃ/, /d͡zʲ/).[84] Townsend and Janda have argued that such a development is at odds with the general development in all South Slavic languages, which had suppressed the development of palatals very early.[85] If Bulgarian indeed had 18 palatal phonemes, it would be as palatal a language as Russian and Belarussian, which runs counter to auditory experience.
Bulgarian consonantism according to BAS (39-consonant model)
A graphic representation of the Bulgarian consonant system according to the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and based on Trubetzkoy's ideas follows below (39 consonants):[41]
^2[ɱ] only appears as an allophone of /m/ and /n/ before /f/ and /v/. For example, инфлация[iɱˈflat͡sijɐ] ('inflation'). In other words, /m/ and /n/ always neutralize into [ɱ] before /f/ and /v/.[59]
^3/n/ is usually elided before fricatives but nasalizes and usually lengthens the preceding vowel (V + [n] + CFricative → VNasalized + Ø + CFricative). Examples: бранш[brãːʃ] ('line of business'), конски[ˈkɔ̃ski] ('of a horse').[60]
^4[ŋ] only exists as an allophone of /n/ before /k/, /ɡ/ and /x/. Examples: тънко[ˈtɤŋko] ('thin' neut.), танго[tɐŋˈɡɔ] ('tango').[61]
^5/d͡z/ is only used in a handful of native words, and its use in dialects or foreign proper names is not wider. Thus, some phonologists include the phoneme into the phonemic inventory on a provisional basis only or not at all.[12][86]
^6[ɣ] only exists as an allophone of /x/, and its distribution is rather restricted. It appears only before a voicedobstruent other than /v/ (i.e., only across word boundaries. Example: видях го[viˈdʲaɣɡo] ('I saw him').[87]
^7/x/ is described as having "only slight friction".[63]
^8[w] is not a nativephoneme. It appears in borrowings from English, where it is often vocalised as /u/ (or as the fricative /v/ in a handful of very old borrowings adopted through German or Russian), e.g. уиски[ˈwiski] ('whiskey'), Уилям[ˈwiʎɐm] ('William'). Always marked with the Cyrillic letter ⟨у⟩ /u/ in Bulgarian orthography.[64] Allophone of /ɫ/ among younger speakers,[65] apparently causing an ongoing sound change, cf. Semivowels above.
^9/l/ as a phoneme in Bulgarian has three versions in complementary distribution: clear [ɫ] occurring before central and back vowels, in between vowels and before consonants; [l], occurring before front vowels and considered allophonic to [ɫ]; and palatalized [ʎ], occurring before a central or back vowel.[88]
^10 According to Klagstad Jr. (1958:46–48), /ttʲddʲssʲzzʲn/ are dental. He also analyzes /ɲ/ as palatalized dental nasal, and provides no information about the place of articulation of /t͡st͡sʲrrʲlɫ/.
^11[d͡zʲ] and [xʲ] do not exist in any native words, which has caused even phonologists who accept Trubetzkoy/BAN's model to remove them from the phonemic inventory.[89]
The 39-consonant model is inextricably linked to Russian linguist Nikolai Trubetzkoy. A refugee from the Bolshevik Revolution, he settled in Sofia in 1920, where he was granted tenure at Sofia University.[90] Eventually, he moved to Vienna and became one of the founders of the immensely influential Prague Linguistic Circle.[91] In his magnum opus, Principles of Phonology, published posthumously in 1939, he referenced extensively Eastern Bulgarian, even offering a model phonemic inventory it.[92] There he argued in favor of the existence of the distinctive feature of palatalization in Bulgarian, establishing 14 contrastive pairs of hard and palatalized consonants. The consonant inventory suggested by Trubetzkoy consisted of 36 consonants, including й (/j/), but not дз (/d͡z/), дз' (/d͡zʲ/) and х' (/ç/).
By the turn of the 1940s, Bulgarian linguist Stoyko Stoykov had adopted Trubetzkoy's consonant model, adding 15 palatalized consonants to his analysis of the Bulgarian phonemic inventory.[93] The other major postwar Bulgarian linguist, Lyubomir Andreychin, then quickly suggested another two, /d͡zʲ/ and /ç/, arguing that even though they only existed in foreign proper names like Хюстън/xʲustɤn/ ('Houston') and Ядзя[jad͡zʲa] ('Jadzia') and had no contrastive function, they could have one, if need be.
Stoykov eventually accepted the inclusion of these phonemes, too, and after the most distinguished Bulgarian phonetician of the Communist period, Димитър Тилков[bg], also agreed to the inclusion ("as they were entailed by the system"), the 39-consonant system was set in stone.[94] Tilkov designated /d͡zʲ/ and /ç/ as "potential phonemes", adding ф' (/fʲ/) to them in 1982, as it existed in only a handful of words, all of them borrowings (e.g., фюрер[ˈfʲurɛr] ('Führer')).[95] The "potential phoneme"approach has not enjoyed much support abroad, where most authors generally omit not only /d͡zʲ/ and /ç/, but also /d͡z/.[96][97][98]
While the consonant model was lauded in the Soviet Union by linguists such as, e.g., Yuriy Maslov, acceptance in the West, except for Klagstad, has been lukewarm.[citation needed] Most of those who have opted to go with it rather than with the alternative model routinely call into question parts of it or make caveats. The most prolific Bulgarian phonologist and grammarian in the English-speaking world, Ernest Scatton, notes (1993):[99]
Alveo-palatal obstruents are weakly palatalized. Palatalized labials are pronounced by many Bulgarians as sequences of [Cj].
In the compilation Common and Comparative Slavic (1996), American Slavist Charles E. Townsend states:[15]
Palatalization is marked by following vowels as in R[ussian]. Extent of distinctive palatalization is debated; most agree on n/n', l/l', k/k', g/g'. Our inventory lists B[ulgarian] as having some 37 consonants, but this is an idealized number. The real number obviously depends on how many palatalized consonants one recognizes as independent morphophonemes. A great deal of controversy surrounds this question, though, in spite of the large number of phonetic contrasts, phonemic palatalization is more circumscribed than in R. For one thing, phonemic palatalization in B is clearly secondary; we recall that SSL South Slavic Languages in general suppressed the development of palatalization quite early, and not only in SC [Serbo-Croatian], but also Sln [Slovenian] and Mac [Macedonian] (close as the latter is to B) do not show any phonemic contrasts. For another thing, palatalization in B consonants is distinctive only before non-front vowels, and palatalized consonants never occur in final position or before other consonants.
Hodge and Bidwell treat the palatalized consonants not as separate unit phonemes (as given in the inventory above) but as clusters of consonants + /j/, which occur only before non-front vowels. There is more agreement among the sources in the treatment of /l', n', k', g'/ as palatalized phonemes than in the treatment of the other palatalized phonemes.
Palatalization
Palatalization refers to a type of consonant articulation, where a secondary palatal movement similar to that for /i/ is superimposed on the primary movement associated with the consonant's plain counterpart.[101] During the palatalization of most hard consonants (bilabial, labiodental and denti-alveolar consonants), the middle part of the tongue is raised toward the hard palate and the alveolar ridge, which leads to the formation of a second articulatory centre whereby the specific palatal "clang" of the soft consonants is achieved. The articulation of palatalised alveolars /l/, /n/ and /r/ normally does not follow that rule. The palatal clang is instead achieved by moving the place of articulation further back towards the palate so that /ʎ/, /ɲ/ and /rʲ/ actually become alveopalatal (postalveolar) consonants. In turn, the articulation of soft /ɡ/ and /k/ (transcribed as /ɡʲ/ and /kʲ/ or /ɟ/ and /c/) moves from the velum towards the palate, and they are therefore considered palatal consonants.
Articulation of /t/ and /tʲ/ in Contemporary Standard Bulgarian
Articulation of /t/ and /tʲ/ in Russian
However, the only articulatory study of palatalized consonants in Bulgarian, conducted by Stoyko Stoykov via X-ray tracings of vocal tract configurations of hard/palatalised consonant pairs, indicates that the secondary palatal movement is missing (or severely weakened) during the articulation of a number of palatalized consonants.[102] Only the articulation of bilabial and labiodental consonants (/pʲ/,/bʲ/,/mʲ/,/fʲ/,/vʲ/) is accompanied by a noticeable raising of the body of the tongue towards the palate, but only to a moderate extent.[103] The articulation of soft /k/, /ɡ/ and /x/ (/c/, /ɟ/ and /ç/) also shows distinctive palatalization, as the place of articulation moves onto the palate.[104]
However, in denti-alveolars (/tʲ/,/dʲ/,/tsʲ/,/dzʲ/,/sʲ/,/zʲ/), the place of articulation neither shifts towards the palate, nor is the tongue raised. Instead, they are articulated with the blade of the tongue (laminally) rather than the tip (apically), which results in greater surface contact of the tongue front and a modification of the primary articulatory gesture.[105][106] Stoykov defines them as "weakly palatalized", while Scatton notes that the position of the mid-tongue in palatalized stops is not much higher than that in their plain counterparts.[107][108] A comparison with the articulation of the same consonants in a language where palatal consonants indisputably exist, such as Russian, reveals drastically different articulation, with Bulgarian being completely non-conformant with the definition of palatalization.[109] A comparison of the articulation of bilabials and labiodentals (/pʲ/,/bʲ/,/mʲ/,/fʲ/,/vʲ/) in Bulgarian also reveals much less pronounced secondary palatal gesture than in Russian.
The articulation of /ʎ/, /ɲ/ and /rʲ/ is very similar to that of the denti-alveolars, but with a slight shift of the place of articulation towards the palate and some raising of the mid-tongue towards the palate.[110] According to Stoykov, /ʎ/ and /ɲ/ are harder than their counterparts in the other Slavic languages, while /rʲ/ is just as palatal.[110] Based on Stoykov's study, several foreign and Bulgarian phonologists have noted that distinctive palatalization in Bulgarian can be only claimed in the cases of /c/, /ɟ/, /ʎ/ and /ɲ/,[111][112][100] or /c/, /ɟ/, /ç/ and /ʎ/.[32]
Moreover, a study of the perception of hard and palatlized consonants conducted by Tilkov in 1983 has indicated that with the exception of palatalized velars (/c/, /ɟ/, /ç/), Bulgarian listeners needed to hear the transition to the vowel to correctly identify a consonant as soft.[113] All this has raised the question whether Bulgarian palatals have indeed lost their secondary articulatory gesture and have decomposed into CjV sequences, as claimed by Danchev, Ignatova-Tzoneva, Choi, etc.
A 2012 perception study of palatalized consonants in Bulgarian compared with a language where palatalization is indisputed (Russian) and a language where such consonants are undoubtedly articulated as CjV clusters (English) concluded that unlike English listeners, Russian and Bulgarian listeners could identify a palatal(ized) consonant without waiting for the transition to the following vowel.[114] The study also found similarities in the phonetic shape of palatal(ized) consonants in Bulgarian and Russian and marked differences between those in the two languages and English, disproving the hypothesis for the decomposition of palatalization put forward by Horalek, Ignatova-Tzoneva, Choi, etc.[114] Nevertheless, based on the phonological distribution of Bulgarian palatals, which was similar to that in English and completely different from that in Russian, the author argued in favour of CjV notation.[114]
Palatalization of *tj/*gt/*kt and *dj in Bulgarian
While the results of the three Slavic palatalizations are generally the same across all or most Slavic languages, the palatalization of *tj (and the related *gti and *kti) and *dj in Late Common Slavic led to vastly divergent result in each individual Slavic language.
Reflexes of Proto-Slavic *dj and *tj/*gti/*kti in Old Church Slavonic (OCS) and modern Slavic languages[115]
Bulgarian *tj/*kti/*gti and *dj reflexes ⟨щ⟩ ([ʃt]) and ⟨жд⟩ ([ʒd]), which are exactly the same as in Old Church Slavonic, and the near-open articulation [æ] of the Yat vowel (ě), which is still widely preserved in a number of Bulgarian dialects in the Rhodopes, Pirin Macedonia (Razlog dialect) and northeastern Bulgaria (Shumen dialect), etc., are the strongest evidence that Old Church Slavonic was codified on the basis of a Bulgarian dialect and that Bulgarian is its closest direct descendant.[116] Though the ⟨ʃt⟩/⟨ʒd⟩ speaking area currently covers only the territory of the Republic of Bulgaria and the eastern half of the wider region of geographical Macedonia, toponomy containing ⟨ʃt⟩ and ⟨ʒd⟩ that goes back to the Early Middle Ages is widely preserved across Northern and Central Greece, Southern Albania, the Republic of Macedonia, Kosovo and the Torlak-speaking regions in Serbia.[116][117]
Reflexes of Proto-Slavic *tʲ/kt and *dʲ in the wider Macedonian region
For example, in the Struga municipality, the names of 13 out of 43 villages contain either ⟨ʃt⟩ (Kališta, Korošišta, Labuništa, Moroišta, Piskupština, Radolišta, Tašmaruništa, Velešta and Vraništa) or ⟨ʒd⟩ (Delogoždi, Mislodežda, Radožda and Zbaždi).[116] The same applies to Kosovo, where Russian Slavist Afanasiy Selishchev found а number of place names around the city of Prizren featuring the Bulgarian clusters ⟨ʃt⟩/⟨ʒd⟩ in a Serbian official document from the 1300s (Nebrěgošta, Dobroušta, Sěnožeštani, Graždenikī, Obražda, Ljubižda, etc.).[118] At present, a total of 8 villages out of 76 villages in the Prizren municipality still feature the Bulgarian consonant clusters ⟨ʃt⟩/⟨ʒd⟩, even though the region has not been ruled by Bulgaria in eight centuries: Lubizhdë, Lubizhdë e Hasit, Poslishtë, Skorobishtë, Grazhdanik, Nebregoshtë, Dobrushtë, Kushtendil. There are also numerous toponyms with the two clusters in the districts of Vranje, Pirot, Knjaževac, etc. in Serbia proper.[119]
The development of ⟨ʃt⟩ > /c/ and ⟨ʒd⟩ > /ɟ/ in certain dialects in the geographic region of Macedonia is a late and partial phenomenon dating back to the Late Middle Ages, probably caused by the influence of Serbian /t͡ɕ/ and /d͡ʑ/, and possibly aided by the Late Middle Bulgarian's trend to palatalise /t/ and /d/ and then transform them into soft k and g > /c/ and /ɟ/.[120][121][122]
Phonation
Phonation is a primary distinctive feature for obstruents in Bulgarian, dividing them into voiced and voiceless consonants. Obstruents form 8 minimal pairs: /p/↔/b/, /f/↔/v/, /t/↔/d/, /t͡s/↔/d͡z/, /s/↔/z/, /ʃ/↔/ʒ/, /t͡ʃ/↔/d͡ʒ/, /k/↔/ɡ/.[123] The only obstruent without a counterpart is the voiceless fricative /x/, whose voiced counterpart /ɣ/ does not exist as a separate phoneme in Bulgarian. The sonorants /m/, /n/, /l/ and /r/ and the approximant /j/ are always voiced.
If the existence of separate palatalised consonant phonemes (39-consonant model) is accepted, 6 more contrastive obstruent pairs are added: /pʲ/↔/bʲ/, /fʲ/↔/vʲ/, /tʲ/↔/dʲ/, /sʲ/↔/zʲ/, /tsʲ/↔/dzʲ/, /ɟ/↔/c/, for a total of 14.
Like all other Slavic languages apart from Serbo-Croatian and Ukrainian, Bulgarian features word-final devoicing of obstruents, unless the following word begins with a voiced consonant.[124] Thus, град is pronounced [ˈgrat] ('city'), жив is pronounced [ˈʒif] ('alive'). While obstruents devoice before enclitics (град ли[ˈgratli] ('а city?')), they do not devoice at the end of prepositions followed by a voiced consonant (под липите[podliˈpitɛ] ('under the lindens')).
CSB also features regressive assimilation in consonant clusters. Thus, voiced obstruents devoice if they are followed by a voiceless obstruent (e.g., изток is pronounced [ˈistok]) ('East')), and voiceless obstruents voice if they are followed by a voiced obstruent (e.g., сграда is pronounced [ˈzgradɐ] ('building')).[125]
Assimilation also occurs across word boundaries (in the form of sandhi), for example, от гората is pronounced [odgoˈratɐ] ('from the forest'), while над полето becomes [natpoˈlɛto] ('above the field').[126]
The consonants /t/ and /d/ in consonant clusters such as стн [stn] and здн[zdn] are usually not pronounced, unless the articulation is very careful, i.e., вестник tends to pronounced as [ˈvɛsnik] ('newspaper'), while бездна tends to pronounced as [ˈbeznɐ]) ('abyss').[127]
Distribution of voiced and voiceless consonants in Bulgarian
Distribution of Voiced & Voiceless Consonants in Standard Bulgarian[128]
^a The very limited distribution of /d͡z/ is yet another indicator that it is unable to function as a fully-fledged phoneme in CSB and should instead be regarded as an allophone of /z/, as suggested by Scatton.[89]
Consonant classification based on place and manner of articulation
ф (/f/), в (/v/) and the allophone of /m/ and /n/ before /f/ and /v/, [ɱ], are labiodental;
т (/t/), д (/d/), ц (/t͡s/), дз (/d͡z/), с (/s/), з (/z/) and the velar allophone of л, [ɫ], are dento-alveolar and sometimes also even described as dental;
р (/r/) and н (/n/), as well the "light" л (/l/) are alveolar;
к (/k/), г (/ɡ/), х (/x/), along with the allophone of /n/ before velars, [ŋ], are velar.[129][111]
The palatalized allophones of
п (/p/), б (/b/), м (/m/), ф (/f/) and в (/v/) are pronounced by many Bulgarians as sequences of C+j.;[130]
т (/t/), д (/d/), ц (/t͡s/), дз (/d͡z/), с (/s/) and з (/z/) remain dento-alveolar but are articulated with the back of the tip of the tongue (laminally) rather than with the tip (apically);
р (/r/), н (/n/) and л (l) shift towards the palatum and become alveo-palatal; and
к (/k/), г (/ɡ/) and х (/x/) are articulated at the back of the palatum instead of the velum.[130]
Manner of articulation
Plosives (7): п (/p/), б (/b/), т (/t/), д (/d/), к (/k/), г (/ɡ/);
Fricatives (7): ф (/f/), в (/v/), с (/s/), з (/z/), ш (/ʃ/), ж (/ʒ/), х (/x/);
Stress is not usually marked in written text. In cases where the stress must be indicated, a grave accent is placed on the vowel of the stressed syllable.13
Bulgarian word stress is dynamic. Stressed syllables are louder and longer than unstressed ones. As in Russian and other East Slavic languages, as well as English, Bulgarian stress is also lexical rather than fixed as in French, Latin or the West Slavic languages. It may fall on any syllable of a polysyllabic word, and its position may vary depending on the inflection and derivation, for example:
Stress usually isn't signified in written text, even in the above examples, if the context makes the meaning clear. However, the grave accent may be written if confusion is likely.15
The stress is often written in order to signify a dialectal deviation from the standard pronunciation:
каза̀ ми/kɐˈzami/ ('he told me'), instead of каза ми/ˈkazɐmi/
иска̀ да дойде/iˈskadɐdɔjdɛ/ ('he wanted to come'), instead of искаше да дойде/ˈiskɐʃɛdɐdɔjdɛ/)16
^13 For practical purposes, the grave accent can be combined with letters by pasting the symbol "̀" directly after the designated letter. An alternative is to use the keyboard shortcut Alt + 0300 (if working under a Windows operating system), or to add the decimal HTML code "̀" after the targeted stressed vowel if editing HTML source code. See "Accute accent" diacritic character in Unicode, Unicode character "Cyrillic small letter i with grave" and Unicode character "Cyrillic capital letter i with grave" for the exact Unicode characters that utilize the grave accent. Retrieved 2010-06-21. ^14 Note that the last example is only spelled the same in the masculine. In the feminine, neuter and the plural, it is spelled differently—e.g. vzrìvna ('explosive' fem.), vzrivèna ('exploded' fem.), etc. ^15 However, the grave accent is obligatorily used to disambiguate between the two non-stressed words—* и ('and'), ѝ ('to her'). Since many computer programs do not allow for accents on Cyrillic letters, "й" is sometimes seen instead of "ѝ". ^16 Note that in this case the accent would be written in order to differentiate it from the present tense иска да дойде/ˈiskɐdɐdojdɛ/ ('he wants to come').
Related Research Articles
Bulgarian is an Eastern South Slavic language spoken in Southeast Europe, primarily in Bulgaria. It is the language of the Bulgarians.
Old Church Slavonic or Old Slavonic is the first Slavic literary language and the oldest extant written Slavonic language attested in literary sources. It belongs to the South Slavic subgroup of the Balto-Slavic branch of the Indo-European language family and remains the liturgical language of many Christian Orthodox churches. Until the reforms of Patriarch Nikon of Moscow between 1652 and 1666, Church Slavonic was the mandatory language of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Ubykh, an extinct Northwest Caucasian language, has the largest consonant inventory of all documented languages that do not use clicks, and also has the most disproportional ratio of phonemic consonants to vowels. It has consonants in at least eight, perhaps nine, basic places of articulation and 29 distinct fricatives, 27 sibilants, and 20 uvulars, more than any other documented language. Some Khoisan languages, such as Taa, may have larger consonant inventories due to their extensive use of click consonants, although some analyses view a large proportion of the clicks in these languages as clusters, which would bring them closer into line with the Caucasian languages.
In phonetics, palatalization or palatization is a way of pronouncing a consonant in which part of the tongue is moved close to the hard palate. Consonants pronounced this way are said to be palatalized and are transcribed in the International Phonetic Alphabet by affixing the letter ⟨ʲ⟩ to the base consonant. Palatalization is not phonemic in English, but it is in Slavic languages such as Russian and Ukrainian, Finnic languages such as Estonian, Karelian, and Võro, and other languages such as Irish, Marshallese, Kashmiri, and Japanese.
Yat or jat is the thirty-second letter of the old Cyrillic alphabet. It is usually romanized as E with a haček: Ě ě.
The Bulgarian Cyrillic alphabet is used to write the Bulgarian language. The Cyrillic alphabet was originally developed in the First Bulgarian Empire during the 9th – 10th century AD at the Preslav Literary School.
Marshallese, also known as Ebon, is a Micronesian language spoken in the Marshall Islands. The language of the Marshallese people, it is spoken by nearly all of the country's population of 59,000, making it the principal language. There are also roughly 27,000 Marshallese citizens residing in the United States, nearly all of whom speak Marshallese, as well as residents in other countries such as Nauru and Kiribati.
The history of the Slavic languages stretches over 3000 years, from the point at which the ancestral Proto-Balto-Slavic language broke up into the modern-day Slavic languages which are today natively spoken in Eastern, Central and Southeastern Europe as well as parts of North Asia and Central Asia.
Selkup is the language of the Selkups, belonging to the Samoyedic group of the Uralic language family. It is spoken by some 1,570 people in the region between the Ob and Yenisei Rivers. The language name Selkup comes from the Russian селькуп, based on the native name used in the Taz dialect, шӧльӄумыт әты. Different dialects use different names.
Old English phonology is the pronunciation system of Old English, the Germanic language spoken on Great Britain from around 450 to 1150 and attested in a body of written texts from the 7th–12th centuries. Although its reconstruction is necessarily somewhat speculative, features of Old English pronunciation have been inferred partly from the sounds used in modern varieties of English, partly from the spellings used in Old English literature, partly from analysis of Old English poetry, and partly from comparison with other Germanic languages.
This article deals with the phonology of the standard Ukrainian language.
There is significant phonological variation among the various Yiddish dialects. The description that follows is of a modern Standard Yiddish that was devised during the early 20th century and is frequently encountered in pedagogical contexts.
Stoyko Ivanov Stoykov was a Bulgarian linguist.
Bulgarian dialects are the regional varieties of the Bulgarian language, a South Slavic language. Bulgarian dialectology dates to the 1830s and the pioneering work of Neofit Rilski, Bolgarska gramatika. Other notable researchers in this field include Marin Drinov, Konstantin Josef Jireček, Lyubomir Miletich, Aleksandar Teodorov-Balan, Stoyko Stoykov.
The phonological system of the modern Belarusian language consists of at least 44 phonemes: 5 vowels and 39 consonants. Consonants may also be geminated. There is no absolute agreement on the number of phonemes; rarer or contextually variant sounds are included by some scholars.
The following list is a comparison of basic Proto-Slavic vocabulary and the corresponding reflexes in the modern languages, for assistance in understanding the discussion in Proto-Slavic and History of the Slavic languages. The word list is based on the Swadesh word list, developed by the linguist Morris Swadesh, a tool to study the evolution of languages via comparison, containing a set of 207 basic words which can be found in every language and are rarely borrowed. However, the words given as the modern versions are not necessarily the normal words with the given meaning in the various modern languages, but the words directly descended from the corresponding Proto-Slavic word. The list here is given both in the orthography of each language, with accent marks added as necessary to aid in pronunciation and Proto-Slavic reconstruction. See below for a capsule summary of how to pronounce each language, as well as some discussion of the conventions used.
This article discusses the phonological system of standard Russian based on the Moscow dialect. For an overview of dialects in the Russian language, see Russian dialects. Most descriptions of Russian describe it as having five vowel phonemes, though there is some dispute over whether a sixth vowel,, is separate from. Russian has 34 consonants, which can be divided into two types:
French exhibits perhaps the most extensive phonetic changes of any of the Romance languages. Similar changes are seen in some of the northern Italian regional languages, such as Lombard or Ligurian. Most other Romance languages are significantly more conservative phonetically, with Spanish, Italian, and especially Sardinian showing the most conservatism, and Portuguese, Romanian, Catalan, and Occitan showing moderate conservatism.
The Eastern South Slavic dialects form the eastern subgroup of the South Slavic languages. They are spoken mostly in Bulgaria and North Macedonia, and adjacent areas in the neighbouring countries. They form the so-called Balkan Slavic linguistic area, which encompasses the southeastern part of the dialect continuum of South Slavic.
Elena Georgieva was a Bulgarian linguist whose work on Bulgarian syntax revolutionized the way that the Bulgarian language was studied by proposing that the word order was determined by the functional perspective of the subject and its theme.
References
↑ Mihaylov, Miroslav (2021). Фонетика на съвременния български книжовен език[Phonetics and Phonology of Contemporary Standard Bulgarian]. pp.48–54.
↑ Sabev (2013), Note 1: [In other accounts of the Bulgarian sound system a set of the so-called "soft" (i.e. palatal or palatalised) consonants is also included: /pʲ/, /bʲ/, /tʲ/, /dʲ/, /c/ (=kʲ ), /ɟ/ (=gʲ ), /tsʲ/, /dzʲ/, /mʲ/, /ɲ/ (=nʲ ), /rʲ/, /fʲ/, /vʲ/, /sʲ/, /zʲ/, /ç/ (=xʲ ), /ʎ/ (=lʲ )]. [dzʲ] and [ç] do not occur in native words, though they do in foreign names: Дзян [dzʲan] 'Jian', Хюс/Хюз [çus] 'Hughes'. However, the phonemic status of the "soft" consonants is questionable. Before front vowels they should be regarded as allophones of the corresponding "hard" (i.e. non-palatal or non-palatalised) consonant phonemes, since the palatalisation here is occurs naturally, to facilitate articulation. Before non-front vowels these can be interpreted as combinations of C + /j/.].
↑ Stoykov, Stoyko (1961). Увод във фонетиката на българския език[Introduction to Bulgarian Phonetics]. Sofia: Издателство „Наука и изкуство".
↑ Mladenov, Stefan (1979). История на българския език. Превод и редакция от проф. д-р Иван Дуриданов от оригиналното немско издание от 1929 г.[History of the Bulgarian language. Translation and Editing of the 1929 Original German Edition by Professor Ivan Duridanov] (in Bulgarian). p.139.
↑ van Campen & Ornstein (1959), pp.265, Quote: [(Stoyko Stoykov:[sic) I observed the same thing in the speech of my informants SS, GS, VV, PB. In their pronunciation there exists a hesitation (lack of a fixed norm) in the articulation of t', d', n' in words such as letja, bdja, njama and the like, by listening attentively, one can note several pronunciations: [le'təjə], ['bdəjə], ['nəjamə], le'tjə], ['bdjə], ['njamə], [le'tʲə], ['bdʲə], ['nʲamə]. I also established this fact in my work with artificial palates.].
↑ Tilkov, Dimitar (1983). Диференциалният признак палаталност на съгласните – Изследвания върху българския език[The Distinctive Feature of Consonant Palatalisation – Studies of the Bulgarian Language]. Sofia: Наука и изкуство. p.142. Общата основа, създадена от преходните процеси при реализация на палаталните съгласни и на [й], е предпоставка за откъсване на признака палаталност от сбора на признаците на палаталната фонема и да се включи в сбора на диференциалните признаци на фонемата [й]. Това често се случва в речта на говорител, за когото палаталните фонеми не са познати във фонологичната система на езика или на диалекта, който той практикува. В такъв случай съчетанията от диференциални признаци на една фонема се разкъсват и се обособяват в две различни фонеми, т.е. говорителят обособява като фонема това, което за фонемата в непознатата нему система не е нищо друго освен един от диференциалните признаци. Така например говорителите от Западна България, които не познават палаталните съгласни, имат тенденция да откъсват признака палаталност от консонантните фонеми и да го обособяват в по-голяма или в по-малка степен като самостоятелен йотов изговор: б*ал, н*ама, с*анка и др.[The common basis created by the transitional processes of articulation of palatal consonants and /j/ may detach the palatalisation feature from the sum total of features of the palatal phoneme and instead add it to the sum total of the distinctive properties of the phoneme /j/. This often happens in speakers whose language or dialect lacks palatal phonemes. In this case, the distinctive features of the phoneme break down, splitting into two separate phonemes, i.e., the speakers create a new phoneme based on one of the differential features of the phoneme in that unfamiliar system. Thus, for example, speakers in Western Bulgaria, who are not familiar with palatal consonants, tend to disconnect the palatalisation feature from the consonant phonemes, resulting, to a greater or smaller extent, in iotated speech: ['bjat], ['njamɐ], ['sjaŋkɐ].]
↑ Kalkandzhiev, Petar (1936). Българска граматика[Bulgarian Grammar]. Plovdiv: Hristo G. Danov. p.31. Меки съгласки са – ж, ш, й, ч, дж; твърди – всички останали; тази делитба обаче в днешния български език е излишна, защото всяка съгласка може да бъде повече или по-малко смекчена, ако се следва от някоя мека самогласка[Our palatal consonants are ⟨ж⟩ (/ʒ/), ⟨ш⟩ (/ʃ/), ⟨й⟩ (/j/), ⟨ч⟩ (/t͡ʃ/) and ⟨дж⟩ (/d͡ʒ/), while the rest of consonants are hard. Nevertheless, such a division in Contemporary Bulgarian is unnecessary, since every consonant may be palatalised to a greater or smaller extent, if followed by a soft vowel]
↑ Popov, Dimitar (1942). Българска граматика[Bulgarian Grammar]. Plovdiv: Hristo G. Danov. p.33. В новобългарски звуковете са по-твърди, отколкото в старобългарски. Гласните звукове затвърдели повече в западните говори, а съгласните - в източните. Книжовният език държи среднина[Sounds in New Bulgarian are harder than those in Old Bulgarian. Vowels have hardened more in the Western dialects, while consonants in the Eastern ones. The literary language balances in the middle.]
↑ Andreychin, Lyubomir (1942). Основна българска граматика[Basic Bulgarian Grammar]. Sofia: Hemus. pp.26, 33. Когато мястото на образуване на една съгласна се премести или разшири малко към средата на небцето и на езика (при запазване на другите учленителни особености), нейният изговор получава особен оттенък, който наричаме мек: л – ль, н – нь, т – ть, к – кь и пр.[When a consonant's place of articulation moves or somewhat widens towards the middle of the palate and tongue (while all other articulation characteristics remain unchanged, this articulation is given a particular nuance that we refer to as 'soft': l – lʲ, n – nʲ, т – тʲ, к – кʲ and so on]
↑ Mladenov, Stefan (1979). История на българския език. Превод и редакция от проф. д-р Иван Дуриданов от оригиналното немско издание от 1929 г.[History of the Bulgarian language. Translation and Editing of the 1929 Original German Edition by Professor Ivan Duridanov] (in Bulgarian). p.139. Без да се гледа на единичните случаи със стара, по-силна палатализация, която може да се срещне както в източни, така и в западни български говори, в новобългарски се е развила една твърде характерна "полупалатализация", която често бива занемарявана.
↑ Kalkandziev, Vasil; Kalkanzdziev, Kalkandzieva (22 June 2018). Българският университет и науката[The Bulgarian University and Science]. Vol.I The College in Sofia. pp.189–190.
↑ Beaulieux, Léon (1934). Quelques caracteristiques de l'évolution du bulgare moderne[Certain Characteristics of the Evolution of Modern Bulgarian] (in French).
↑ Horalek, K. (1950). "K otazce palatalnich suhlas v bulharstine" [On the Question of Palatal Consonants in Bulgarian]. Slavia (in Czech) (XX): 57–60.
↑ Scatton & Huntley (1993), pp.191 Quote: [Besides foreign proper names, /ʒ/ occurs in a small number of non-literary, dialectal words, which, if used in the literary language, regularly replace /ʒ/ with /z/: дзифт/dzift ~ зифт/zift ('tar')].
↑ Mihaylov, Miroslav (2021). Фонетика на съвременния български книжовен език[Phonetics and Phonology of Contemporary Standard Bulgarian]. p.53. Според Бл. Шклифов наличието на лабиални меки съгласни е антропофонетичен абсурд. Не е възможно човек да учленява едновременно един звук с устните си, и същевременно на палатума, с цел да го превърне в мек. Това означава, че не е възможно да има меки ⟨б'⟩, ⟨п'⟩, ⟨в'⟩, ⟨ф'⟩ и ⟨м'⟩[According to Blagoy Shklifov. the existence of soft labial consonants is anthrophonetic nonsense. It is impossible to simultaneously articulate a sound using both your lips and then your palate in order to make it palatal. This precludes any, even potential existence of palatal ⟨bʲ⟩, ⟨pʲ⟩, ⟨vʲ⟩, ⟨fʲ⟩ and ⟨mʲ⟩]
↑ Mirchev (1963), pp.133, Quote: [В системата на съгласните в българския език (19 of them) не са настанали някакви промени в количествено отношение. Всички съгласни, които се срещат в старобългарския език, остават характерни и за съвременния език [Bulgarian consonantism has not undergone any changes in relation to the number of consonants. All consonants found in Old Bulgarian are also found in Contemporary Standard Bulgarian].
↑ Pashov, Petar (1964). Означаване на мекостта на съгласните в българския език и някои свързани с това правописни въпроси[Palatalisation Marking of Bulgarian Consonants and Certain Related Ortography Issues]. Български език и литература (in Bulgarian) (6): 6–10.
↑ Nikolov, Bozhil. "Etude de phonétique et dе phonologie contrastive (Domaines franсais et bulgare" [Обучение по контрастивна фонетика и фонология]. Годишник на Софийския университет, Факултет по западни филологии. LXІV (2): 3–72. ... меките срички се състоят от непалатализирана съгласна + й + задна гласна[... soft syllables consist of a non-palatalised consonant + j + back vowel]
↑ Sawicka, Irena; Boyadzhiev, Todor (1988). Българо-полска съпоставителна граматика[Contrastive Grammar of Polish and Bulgaria]. Vol.1. Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.
↑ Simeonov, Boris (1984). Към въпроса за броя на фонемите и техния състав в съвременния български език[On the Issue of the Number of Phonemes in and the Phonetic Inventory of Contemporary Standard Bulgarian]. Съвременна България. Доклади от III--та комплексна международна конференция по славистика. 5. Sofia: 52, 55.
↑ van Campen & Ornstein (1959), pp.267, Quote: [Hodge writes that while the speech of his informants shows "some palatalization of the C", the sequences in question are 'phonetically /Cy/ clusters].
↑ Rosetti, Alexandru (1967). "A propos des consonnes palatales, palatalisées et mouillées et de leur statut phonologique en roumain" [On Palatal, Palatalized and Wet Consonants and Their Phonological Status in Romanian]. Phonologie der Gegenwart. Graz - Vienna - Cologne: 59–67.
↑ Mangold (1988), pp.102, Quote: [According to our inventory, the Bulgarian language has 6 vowels and 22 semivowels, for a total of 28 phonemes].
↑ Scatton & Huntley (1993), pp.191, Quote: [Besides foreign proper names, /ʒ/ occurs in a small number of non-literary, dialectal words, which, if used in the literary language, regularly replace /ʒ/ with /z/: дзифт/dzift ~ зифт/zift ('tar')].
↑ Stoykov, Stoyko (1951). Палаталните съгласни в българския книжовен език.[Palatal Consonants in Literary Bulgarian]. Известия на Института за български език. I: 5–63.
↑ Tilkov, Dimitar (1976). Фонологичната стойност на х' и дз' в книжовния български език[The Phonological value of /d͡zʲ/ and /ç/ in Contemporary Standard Bulgarian]. Български език (1–2ed.). Sofia: 112.
↑ Simeonov, Boris (1984). Към въпроса за броя на фонемите и техния състав в съвременния български език[On the Issue of the Number of Phonemes in and the Phonetic Inventory of Contemporary Standard Bulgarian]. Съвременна България. Доклади от III--та комплексна международна конференция по славистика. 5. Sofia: 55.
↑ Tilkov, Dimitar (1983). Акустичен състав и дистрибуция на палаталните съгласни в книжовния български език – Изследвания върху българския език[Acoustic Composition and Distribution of Palatal Consonants in Contemporary Standard Bulgarian – Studies of the Bulgarian Language]. Sofia: Наука и изкуство. pp.94–99.
↑ Georgiev, Vladimir (1985). Възникването на палаталните съгласни кʼ и гʼ от шт и жд в югозападните български говори, Проблеми на българския език[Emergence of Palatal /k'/ and /g'/ from [sht] and [zhd] in the Southwestern Bulgarian Dialects. Issues Relating to the Bulgarian Language]. p.43.
↑ Mihaylov, Miroslav (2021). Фонетика на съвременния български книжовен език[Phonetics and Phonology of Contemporary Standard Bulgarian]. p.47.
Andreychin, Lyubomir (1950). За меките съгласни в българския език[On the Palatal Consonants in Bulgarian]. Език и литература (in Bulgarian). 4.
Bogorov, Ivan (1848). Първичка българска словница[First Bulgarian Grammar]. Bucharest.
Choi, Kwon-Jin (1994). Глайдовата система на българския и корейския език[The Glide System in Bulgarian and Korean]. Съпоставително езикознание/Contrastive Linguistics. 19 (2). Sofia: Sofia University.
Duridanov, Ivan (1991). Граматика на старобългарския език[Grammar of Old Bulgarian] (in Bulgarian). Sofia: Bulgarian Language Institute, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. ISBN954-430-159-3.
Haralampiev, Ivan (2001). Историческа граматика на българския език[Historical Grammar of the Bulgarian Language] (in Bulgarian). Sofia: Faber. ISBN954775064X.
Ignatova-Tzoneva, Dimitrina (2008). Отново за палаталността на българските съгласни[Another Look at the Palatalisation of Bulgarian Consonants](PDF). Научни трудове на Русенския университет. 5.3 (in Bulgarian). 47: 7–12.
Ignatova-Tzoneva, Dimitrina; Baeva, Desislava (2009). Палатални или смекчени са българските съгласни[Are Bulgarian Consonants Palatal or Palatalised?](PDF). Научни трудове на Русенския университет. 6.3 (in Bulgarian). 48: 17–24.
Ignatova-Tzoneva, Dimitrina (2019). Моделиране на фонемната система на съвременния български книжовен език[Modelling the Phonemic Inventory of Contemporary Standard Bulgarian] (in Bulgarian). Ruse University. ISBN978-619-90981-1-0.
Klagstad Jr., Harold L. (1958). The Phonemic System of Colloquial Standard Bulgarian. American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages. pp.42–54.
Ladefoged, Peter; Maddieson, Ian (1996). The Sounds of the World's Languages. Oxford: Blackwell. ISBN0-631-19814-8.
Mangold, Max (1988). Увод в езикознанието с оглед и на българския език[Introduction into Linguistics Also Taking Account of the Bulgarian language]. Sofia: Sofia University.
Mirchev, Kiril (1963). Историческа граматика на българския език[Historical Grammar of the Bulgarian Language]. Sofia: Наука и изкуство.
Merlingen, Weriand (1957). "Zur Phonologie der sog. palatalisierten Konsonanten". Studia linguistica in honorem acad. S. Mladenov. Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences: 493–501.
Scatton, Ernest A.; Huntley, David (1993). The Slavonic Languages. London: Routledge. ISBN0-415-04755-2.
Selishchev, Afanasii (1933). "The Slavonic Languages" Диалектологическое значение македонской топоними[Dialectological Meaning of Macedonian Toponyms]. Collection in Honour of the 70th Anniversary of Prof. Lyubomir Miletich. Sofia: Macedonian Scientific Institute. ISBN0-415-04755-2.
Shklifov, Blagoy (1995). Проблеми на българската диалектна и историческа фонетика с оглед на македонските говори[Issues in Bulgarian Dialectal and Historical Phonetics with an Eye to the Macedonian Dialects]. Sofia: Качармазов. ISBN954603004X.
Tilkov, Dimitar (1982). Граматика на съвременния български книжовен език[Grammar of Contemporary Standard Bulgarian] (in Bulgarian). Vol.I Phonetics. Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.
Townsend, Charles E.; Janda, Laura A. (1996). COMMON and COMPARATIVE SLAVIC: Phonology and Inflection, with special attention to Russian, Polish, Czech, Serbo-Croatian, Bulgarian. Columbus, Ohio: Slavica Publishers, Inc. ISBN0-89357-264-0.
Totomanova, Ana-Maria (2014). Из българската историческа фонетика[On Bulgarian Historical Phonetics] (IIIed.). Sofia: University Printing House St. Clement of Ohrid. ISBN978-954-07-3788-1.
Trubetzkoy, Nikolai (1971) [1939]. Principles of Phonology. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. ISBN0-520-01535-5.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
