Marcho-Magdeburgian dialect

Last updated November 01, 2024

The Marcho-Magdeburgian dialect,^[1]Old March and Magdeburg dialect^[2] is an extinct Slavic Lechitic dialect spoken by Slavic tribes living in the Old March and around Magdeburg.^[2] Linguistically, the dialect was particularly related to the Drevani language used until the 18th century in Wendland and belonged to the West Lechitic dialects.^[1]

Features

Development of vowels and sonants

Proto-Slavic nasal vowels were preserved - *ǫ gave ą̊, e.g. Bombeck, Dambeke < PS *Bǫbъkъ, *Dǫbъkъ, and *ę gave narrow ę̇, e.g. Prinzlowe, Wenzlow < PS *Prędislavъ, *Vęťeslavъ.^[3] There are also traces of Lechitic apophony nasals: Randowe < PS *Rędovo.^[4]

Proto-Slavic *ě also yielded to Lechitic apophony – it gave a before the hard dental consonants, e.g. Gnadau, Latzke < PS *Gnědovo, *Lěsъko, and in other positions it gave e, e.g. Belin, Pechowe < PS *Bělinъ, *Pěxovo.^[5]

Proto-Slavic *e essentially gave e, although before the originally palatal consonants there was a tendency to narrow the pronunciation to ė, e.g. Britzin, Popeliz < PS *Berzinъ, *Popelicě.^[6]

The Proto-Slavic *i essentially gives i, e.g. Klinkov, Sydowe < PS *Klinъkovъ, *Židovo, but in the position before l it is reduced to e, e.g. Melcowe < PS *Milъkovo.^[7] Proto-Slavic *y is presented in a similar way, e.g. Dipkowe, Synowe < PS *Dypъkovo, *Synovo, and the yl group, like il, is rendered by el, e.g. Kubelke, Motelicze < PS *Kobylъky, *Motylicě.^[7]

The Proto-Slavic *a gave a, e.g. Cracowe, Gaddow < PS *Krakovo, *Gadovo, however, since the 10th century, a (including that formed from other Proto-Slavic sounds) has been labialized to o, e.g. Boben, Dontze, Sodin < PS *Babinъ, *Donicě, *Sadinъ.^[8] It developed differently only in the *ja- group, which gave je-, e.g. jeggowe < PS *Jajьkovo.^[9]

The Proto-Slavic *o has narrowed to ȯ, as evidenced by the frequent spelling with ⟨u⟩, e.g. Drozdowe or Drusdowe < PS *Drozdovo.^[10] However, the bifurcation of *o into ö/ü, characteristic of the Drevani area, is missing.^[10] The anlaut *o- has been provided with a prosthetic v-, e.g. Wustrewe, Wutzow < PS *Ostrovъ, *Osovъ, while in front of palatal consonants this group passed into vi-, as in Polabian, e.g. Wilnitz, Wiebelitz < PS *Voľьnica, *Oblica.^[11]

The Proto-Slavic *u most likely did not change its pronunciation and is continued by u, e.g. Bukowe, Lubicz < PS *Bukovo, *Ľubičь.^[12]

Yers in weak position disappeared,^[13] while in the strong position *ь gave e, e.g. Zwinez < PS *Svinьcь, and *ъ gave o, e.g. Zerkow < PS *Cŕ̥kъvь.^[13] The separate development of the two yers is a feature that coincides with the Drevani and Rani areas, and definitely distinguishes the Old March and Magdeburg dialects from the Polish and Pomeranian areas, where both yers produce a vowel of the same color.

Spellings such as Bukowe, Drozdowe attest to the reduction of the final vowel – similar processes also occurred in the Drevani and Rani areas.^[14]

The Proto-Slavic *r̥ (*ъr) regularly gave ar, and *ŕ̥ (*ьr) develops similarly before hard dental consonants, e.g. Parchowe, Tarnewitz < PS *Pr̥xovo, *Tŕ̥novica, with the a becoming labialized over time, so that the group was thus or, e.g. Morditz, Storkow < PS *Mr̥dicě, *Str̥kovъ.^[15]

The Proto-Slavic *l̥ and *ĺ̥ (*ъl and *ьl) similarly to the other West Lechitic dialects became mixed and gave ol, e.g. Dolchow, Kolpin < PS *Dĺ̥govъ, *Kl̥pinъ.^[16]

The development of *TorT groups was inconsistent – TarT, e.g. Gardiss, Karwitz < PS *Gordъčь, *Korvicě, and TroT, e.g. Drogawiz, Potgrot < psł. *Dorgovicě, *Podъgordъ, competed with each other.^[17] The TarT type became established much later than in the Drevani and Rani dialects.^[17]

The *TerT group is almost uniquely given over by TreT or TriT, e.g. Brisen, Stresen < PS *Berzьno, *Strežьno.^[18] The only exception seems to be Derwen < PS *Dervьno.^[19]

The *TolT group generally yielded to a metathesis to TlåT, as in Drevani dialect, e.g. Clodene, Gladove < PS *Koldьno, *Goldovo,^[20] cases of keeping TolT are rare, e.g. Coldiz, Golwicz < PS *Koldicě, *Golvicě.^[19] No examples for *TelT group descendants.^[21]

Anlaut *orT under circumflex intonation has passed into roT (meanwhile in Drevani it became råT), e.g. Rostocke < PS *Orz-tokъ.^[22]

Development of consonants

The spelling does not resolve whether the original palatal consonants were depalatalized before the front vowels, as in the Drevani and Rani dialects.^[23]

Written monuments lack the distinction of the series s, c, z from š, č, ž, e.g. Plessow, Petzenow, Stressowe < PS *Plěševъ, *Pečenovъ, *Streševo, which most likely indicates the mazuration of the Marcho-Magdeburgian dialect.^[23]

Related Research Articles

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.

The Lechiticlanguages are a language subgroup consisting of Polish and several other languages and dialects that were once spoken in the area that is now Poland and eastern Germany. It is one of the branches of the larger West Slavic subgroup; the other branches of this subgroup are the Czech–Slovak languages and the Sorbian languages.

Historical Chinese phonology deals with reconstructing the sounds of Chinese from the past. As Chinese is written with logographic characters, not alphabetic or syllabary, the methods employed in Historical Chinese phonology differ considerably from those employed in, for example, Indo-European linguistics; reconstruction is more difficult because, unlike Indo-European languages, no phonetic spellings were used.

The soft sign is a letter in the Cyrillic script that is used in various Slavic languages. In Old Church Slavonic, it represented a short or reduced front vowel. However, over time, the specific vowel sound it denoted was largely eliminated and merged with other vowel sounds.

Russian is an East Slavic language of the Indo-European family. All Indo-European languages are descendants of a single prehistoric language, reconstructed as Proto-Indo-European, spoken sometime in the Neolithic era. Although no written records remain, much of the culture and religion of the Proto-Indo-European people can also be reconstructed based on their daughter cultures traditionally and continuing to inhabit most of Europe and South Asia, areas to where the Proto-Indo-Europeans migrated from their original homeland.

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.

Ancient Greek phonology is the reconstructed phonology or pronunciation of Ancient Greek. This article mostly deals with the pronunciation of the standard Attic dialect of the fifth century BC, used by Plato and other Classical Greek writers, and touches on other dialects spoken at the same time or earlier. The pronunciation of Ancient Greek is not known from direct observation, but determined from other types of evidence. Some details regarding the pronunciation of Attic Greek and other Ancient Greek dialects are unknown, but it is generally agreed that Attic Greek had certain features not present in English or Modern Greek, such as a three-way distinction between voiced, voiceless, and aspirated stops ; a distinction between single and double consonants and short and long vowels in most positions in a word; and a word accent that involved pitch.

The phonological system of the Polish language is similar in many ways to those of other Slavic languages, although there are some characteristic features found in only a few other languages of the family, such as contrasting postalveolar and alveolo-palatal fricatives and affricates. The vowel system is relatively simple, with just six oral monophthongs and arguably two nasals in traditional speech, while the consonant system is much more complex.

The phonology of the Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) has been reconstructed by linguists, based on the similarities and differences among current and extinct Indo-European languages. Because PIE was not written, linguists must rely on the evidence of its earliest attested descendants, such as Hittite, Sanskrit, Ancient Greek, and Latin, to reconstruct its phonology.

The Old Polish language was a period in the history of the Polish language between the 10th and the 16th centuries. It was followed by the Middle Polish language.

The Slavic liquid metathesis refers to the phenomenon of metathesis of liquid consonants in the Common Slavic period in the South Slavic and West Slavic area. The closely related corresponding phenomenon of pleophony occurred in parallel in the East Slavic languages.

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.

The Natisone Valley dialect, or Nadiža dialect, is a Slovene dialect spoken mainly in Venetian Slovenia, but also in a small part of Slovenia. It is one of the two dialects in the Littoral dialect group to have its own written form, along with Resian. It is closely related to the Torre Valley dialect, which has a higher degree of vowel reduction but shares practically the same accented vowel system. It borders the Torre Valley dialect to the northwest, the Soča dialect to the northeast, the Karst dialect to the southeast, the Brda dialect to the south, and Friulian to the west. The dialect belongs to the Littoral dialect group, and it evolved from Venetian–Karst dialect base.

Proto-Slavic is the unattested, reconstructed proto-language of all Slavic languages. It represents Slavic speech approximately from the 2nd millennium BC through the 6th century AD. As with most other proto-languages, no attested writings have been found; scholars have reconstructed the language by applying the comparative method to all the attested Slavic languages and by taking into account other Indo-European languages.

This glossary gives a general overview of the various sound laws that have been formulated by linguists for the various Indo-European languages. A concise description is given for each rule; more details are given in their respective articles.

The Proto-Slavic language, the hypothetical ancestor of the modern-day Slavic languages, developed from the ancestral Proto-Balto-Slavic language, which is the parent language of the Balto-Slavic languages. The first 2,000 years or so consist of the pre-Slavic era, a long period during which none of the later dialectal differences between Slavic languages had yet emerged. The last stage in which the language remained without internal differences that later characterize different Slavic languages can be dated around AD 500 and is sometimes termed Proto-Slavic proper or Early Common Slavic. Following this is the Common Slavic period, during which the first dialectal differences appeared but the entire Slavic-speaking area continued to function as a single language, with sound changes tending to spread throughout the entire area. By around 1000, the area had broken up into separate East Slavic, West Slavic and South Slavic languages, and in the following centuries it broke up further into the various modern Slavic languages of which the following are extant: Belarusian, Russian, Rusyn and Ukrainian in the East; Czech, Slovak, Polish, Kashubian and the Sorbian languages in the West, and Bulgarian, Macedonian, Serbo-Croatian and Slovenian in the South.

Palatalization is a historical-linguistic sound change that results in a palatalized articulation of a consonant or, in certain cases, a front vowel. Palatalization involves change in the place or manner of articulation of consonants, or the fronting or raising of vowels. In some cases, palatalization involves assimilation or lenition.

This article discusses the phonological system of the Greenlandic language.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">West Lechitic dialects</span> Group of extinct Slavic dialects

The West Lechitic dialects are a group of extinct Lechitic dialects, used by the Slavic peoples of Pomerania, Margraviate of Brandenburg, Mecklenburg and the lands on the lower and middle Elbe. At the same time, the dialects of Central Pomerania and Gdańsk Pomerania are usually considered transitional between West Lechitic and East Lechitic and are called the Middle Lechitic dialect group.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rani dialect</span> Medieval slavic dialect spoken by the Rani tribe

The Rani dialect or Lechito-Rani supradialect is an extinct Slavic Lechitic dialect used by the Rani tribe – the medieval Slavic inhabitants of the island of Rügen and its opposite coast. This dialect, because of its closer affinity to the Drevani language than to the Pomeranian area, should be classified as a West Lechitic dialect.

References

Bibliography

Papierkowski, Stanisław (1930). "Szczątki języka słowiańskich mieszkańców Starej Marchji i okolic Magdeburga". Slavia Occidentalis. IX: 73–124.

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.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930120-1] 1 2 Papierkowski 1930, p. 120.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski193073-2] 1 2 Papierkowski 1930, p. 73.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930111-113-3] Papierkowski 1930, p. 111-113.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930112-113-4] Papierkowski 1930, p. 112-113.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930113-5] Papierkowski 1930, p. 113.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930114-6] Papierkowski 1930, p. 114.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930115-7] 1 2 Papierkowski 1930, p. 115.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930115-116-8] Papierkowski 1930, p. 115-116.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930116-9] Papierkowski 1930, p. 116.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930117-10] 1 2 Papierkowski 1930, p. 117.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930117-118-11] Papierkowski 1930, p. 117-118.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930118-12] Papierkowski 1930, p. 118.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930110-13] 1 2 Papierkowski 1930, p. 110.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930118-119-14] Papierkowski 1930, p. 118-119.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930106-107-15] Papierkowski 1930, p. 106-107.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930109-16] Papierkowski 1930, p. 109.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930103-17] 1 2 Papierkowski 1930, p. 103.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930103-104-18] Papierkowski 1930, p. 103-104.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930104-19] 1 2 Papierkowski 1930, p. 104.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930104-105-20] Papierkowski 1930, p. 104-105.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930105-21] Papierkowski 1930, p. 105.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930105-106-22] Papierkowski 1930, p. 105-106.

[FOOTNOTEPapierkowski1930119-23] 1 2 Papierkowski 1930, p. 119.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]