On the relationship between small and large Slavic languages

Abstract

This article draws on the analysis of (standard) Slavic languages comprising the following pairs: Slovenian – Serbo-Croatian, Lower Sorbian – Upper Sorbian, Slovak – Czech, Rusyn – Slovak, Belarusian – Russian, and Ukrainian – Russian. In these pairs, the first language may be classified as small, the second one as large. This may be done on the basis of the following criteria: number of speakers, spread of the language, its economic strength, status of speakers, how the language is elaborated, and its prestige. These factors operate in particular periods of history, thus a language may vary regarding its “smallness” or “largeness.” The notion of a small or large language is relative: with respect to a particular language, a language may be small and with respect to a different language, the same language may be large. Given that the areas where these languages are spoken border on each other and “semicommunication” (Haugen 1966) between their speakers is possible, the large languages influence the small ones. A large language penetrates the communicative domains of a small language or even its structure, especially in terms of vocabulary. The legal equality of small and large languages cannot stop these processes, as it works to the benefit of large languages simply due to their “largeness.” Actual equality may be guaranteed by compensatory measures to the detriment of large languages.

This article also further develops Language Management Theory, particularly its power dimension. Another characteristic of this approach is its focus on the reflexivity of linguists' work — the descriptions of language situations produced by linguists are viewed as an essential part of the language situations themselves.