Articolul precedent |
Articolul urmator |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
Ultima descărcare din IBN: 2022-03-13 07:55 |
Căutarea după subiecte similare conform CZU |
811.161.2'282 (2) |
East Slavic / Slavonic languages (373) |
![]() ROMANCIUC, Alexei. Bulaestian /Ч’iндреǐвеч’iр/ and early ethnic history of Bulaestian dialect speakers. In: Patrimoniul cultural: cercetare, valorificare, promovare, Ed. 9, 30-31 mai 2017, Chișinău. Chișinău, Republica Moldova: "Notograf Prim" SRL, 2017, Ediția 9, p. 91. ISBN 978-9975-84-030-9. |
EXPORT metadate: Google Scholar Crossref CERIF DataCite Dublin Core |
Patrimoniul cultural: cercetare, valorificare, promovare Ediția 9, 2017 |
||||||
Conferința "Patrimoniul cultural: cercetare, valorificare, promovare" 9, Chișinău, Moldova, 30-31 mai 2017 | ||||||
|
||||||
CZU: 811.161.2'282 | ||||||
Pag. 91-91 | ||||||
|
||||||
![]() |
||||||
Teza |
||||||
P. E. Hritsenko convincingly demonstrated that the manifestations of the asynchronous VN-reflexes (Bulaestian /ч’iндреǐ/ ‘generous’ serves as an example) in the Ukrainian linguistic continuum should be explained as a “phonetic polonism” (using the term of M. O. Onyshkevich). Well, the question is when and how it appeared in the Bulaestian dialect? Looking for the answer, we should consider the following facts: 1 in general, polonisms are presented in the Bulaestian dialect by some early examples only; 2 the great part of polonisms, known in other Ukrainian dialects, are absent in the Bulaestian one; 3 the Polish szczodry ‘generous’ do not evince any VN-reflex; 4 besides some analogies in the Pisarevka dialect (Kodymdisrict, Odessa region), we see шандрий(with the same meaning ‘generous’) in Boiky’s dialect (the variant is known in Hotin region and, according to M. V. Tunitskaya, in Tetskani dialect (Edintsy district, Republic of Moldova) also), as well as чандрий in some Ukrainian villages of the northern part of the Republic of Moldova (according to K. S. Kojuhar) and Kel’mentsy district of Chernovtsy region; 5 it is unlikely that all these analogies appeared in the mentioned dialects independently; it looks more probable that a whole areal of the form existed in the early times, and this areal was ruptured later by the subsequent linguistic and historical processes; 6 it is obviously impossible to get the Bulaestian variant neither from чандрий (conversely, чандрий appeared as a result of the shift of /e/ to /a/), nor, moreover, from шандрий (as it demonstrates, in addition, the loss of /ч/ from the initial /шч/). Thus, the phonetic form /ч’iндреǐ/ reflects some early stages of ethnic and linguistic history of Bulaestians. |