Skip to main content
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Linguistic complexity of South Slavic dialects: a new perspective on old data

  • ORCID logo EMAIL logo , and
Published/Copyright: November 8, 2022
Linguistics Vanguard
From the journal Linguistics Vanguard Volume 9 Issue s1

Abstract

This article presents the results of a quantitative study in which the complexity levels of dialectal varieties belonging to the South Slavic dialect continuum are measured and analyzed. The sample comprises 919 data points, pertaining to the Bulgarian–Macedonian and Serbo-Croatian dialect continua. Complexity is viewed in this study as a property demonstrating variation across areas and subject to diachronic change which can be associated either with language-internal processes or with language contact. This study discusses which linguistic processes produced varying levels of complexity in the modern South Slavic varieties. In particular, a correlation of complexity with altitude and distance to the Albanian border, two factors which can be associated with degree of isolation versus contact of speech communities, is investigated for a subset of varieties spoken across the areas with bi- and multilingual population. Suggestions on which constellations of societal features could act as determinants of linguistic change are made for several areas within the South Slavic continuum. Particular attention is paid to the contact-related developments in the South Slavic varieties spoken in the areas of intensive past and present contact, such as the west of North Macedonia, the south of Montenegro, Kosovo, and Southeast Serbia.

Keywords: complexification; language contact; linguistic complexity; simplification; South Slavic dialects
Corresponding author: Maria Morozova, Department of Comparative and Areal Linguistics, Institute for Linguistic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint Petersburg, Russia, E-mail:

Funding source: Russian Science Foundation

Award Identifier / Grant number: 19-18-00244

Funding source: Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung

Award Identifier / Grant number: 00015_176378/1

Acknowledgement

We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers, our colleague Andrey Sobolev and the editors, Aleksandrs Berdichevskis and Kaius Sinnemäki, for their valuable comments on the manuscript.

  1. Research funding: The research was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (RSF, https://doi.org/10.13039/501100006769) grant Nr. 19-18-00244 (https://rscf.ru/project/19-18-00244/, https://rscf.ru/project/22-18-35008/) and the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF, https://doi.org/10.13039/501100001711) grant Nr. 100015_176378/1.

Appendix A: Data sources

Dialect groups and macroareas Sources Countriesa No. of points
Aegean Slavic Vidoeski 1999; Boyadzhiev 1972; Ivanov 1972 GR 51
Banat Bulgarian Stoykov 1967 RO 1
Central Macedonian Vidoeski 1998 MK 6
Eastern Čakavian Šimunović 2009 HR 3
Eastern Macedonian Vidoeski 1999 MK, BG 25
Eastern Herzegovinian Stevanović 1934; Marković S. 2011; Vušović 1927; Đukanović 1995; Kašić 1995; Đurović 1992; Nikolić 1991; Kozomara 2016 BiH, HR, ME, RS 96
Kosovo-Resava Bukumirić 2003; Tomić 1987; Milanović 1968 KS, RO 29
Northeastern Bulgarian Stoykov 1966 BG 70
Northern Macedonian Vidoeski 1999 MK 11
Northwestern Bulgarian Stoykov 1981; Mladenov 1969 BG 141
Prizren-Timok (Torlak) Sobolev 1998; Pavlović 1939; Remetić 1996; Vukadinović 1999; Ćirić 1999; Marković J. 2000; Stevanović 1950; Trajković 2016; Žugić 2005; Božkov 1984; Bogdanović 1987 BG, KS, RS 74
Southeastern Bulgarian Stoykov and Bernshteyn 1964; Kabasanov 1963 BG 134
Southern Macedonian Vidoeski 1999 AL, GR, MK 33
Southwestern Bulgarian Stoykov 1975 BG 96
Šumadija-Vojvodina Radovanović 2014; Nikolić 1964; Nikolić 1966 RS 32
Western Macedonian Vidoeski 1998; Mladenović 2001 AL, KS, MK 47
Zeta-Lovćen Barjaktarović 1966; Ćupić and Ćupić 1997; Ćupić 1977; Miletić 1940; Stojović 2007; Pešikan 1965; Vujović 1969 KS, ME, RS 70

  1. aAL, Albania; BiH, Bosnia-Herzegovina; BG, Bulgaria; GR, Greece; HR, Croatia; KS, ∗Kosovo; ME, Montenegro; MK, North Macedonia; RO, Romania; RS, Serbia.

Appendix B: Frequency and distribution of features

Feature Simplifying (S) or complexifying (C) No. and % of points where feature is attested (value of 1) Dialect groups and macroareasa
1 Length of vowels S 230 (25%) ECh, EH, KR, ShV, ZL
2 Presence of /ə/ S 631 (69%) AS, BB, CM, EM, KR, NEB, NM, NWB, PT, SEB, SM, SWB, WM, ZL
3 Presence of /æ/ C 92 (10%) BB, KR, NEB, NM, NWB, SEB, SWB, SM, ShV, WM, ZL
4 Presence of /ɒ/ C 83 (9%) ECh, EH, KR, SM, WM, ZL
5 Presence of /y/ C 47 (5%) KR, NEB, PT, SM
6 Presence of /ɨ/ S 9 (1%) AS, BB, NEB, SEB
7 Differentiation of reflexes of PSl. *ŭ and *ĭ S 467 (51%) AS, BB, CM, EM, NEB, NM, NWB, SEB, SM, SWB, WM
8 Differentiation of PSl. *ě in different positions C 451 (49%) AS, EH, EM, NEB, ShV, SEB, SM, SWB, ZL
9 Presence of /l˚/ S 139 (15%) NWB, PT, SWB, WM
10 Presence of /r˚/ S 452 (49%) CM, ECh, EH, EM, KR, NM, NWB, PT, ShV, SM, SWB, WM, ZL
11 Presence of /h/ S 398 (43%) AS, BB, ECh, EH, EM, KR, NEB, NWB, SEB, SM, SWB, WM, ZL
12 Presence of /dz/ S 550 (60%) AS, BB, CM, EH, KR, NEB, NM, NWB, PT, SEB, SM, SWB, WM, ZL
13 Presence of /ɕ/, /ʑ/ C 163 (18%) EH, ShV, ZL
14 Palatalisation of consonants C 346 (38%) AS, NEB, NWB, SEB
15 Presence of tones in prosodic system S 181 (20%) ECh, EH, KR, ShV, ZL
16 Postpositive article C 636 (69%) AS, BB, CM, EM, NEB, NM, NWB, PT, SEB, SM, SWB, WM
17 Triple postpositive article C 96 (10%) CM, NM, NWB, PT, SEB, SWB, WM
18 Peripheral cases S 239 (26%) ECh, EH, KR, PT, ShV, ZL
19 Presence of dative S 337 (37%) CM, ECh, EH, KR, NM, NWB, PT, ShV, SEB, SM, WM, ZL
20 Presence of accusative S 353 (38%) BB, ECh, EH, KR, NEB, NM, NWB, PT, ShV, ZL
21 Distintion between patterns of Pl. declension of M and F nouns S 308 (34%) ECh, EH, KR, NWB, PT, ShV, ZL
22 Gender differentiation in 3pl pronoun S 316 (34%) CM, ECh, EH, KR, NWB, PT, ShV, SM, ZL
23 Ending -t in prs.3pl S 571 (62%) AS, BB, CM, EM, NEB, NM, NWB, PT, SEB, SM, SWB, WM, ZL
24 Ending -t in prs.3sg S 75 (8%) EM, NM, SM, WM
25 Presence of habere-perfect forms C 114 (12%) AS, SM, WM, ZL
26 Presence of esse-perfect forms C 42 (5%) SM, WM
27 l-perfect as evidential C 530 (58%) AS, NEB, NWB, SEB, SWB, WM
28 Presence of l-participle S 902 (98%) AS, BB, CM, ECh, EH, EM, KR, NEB, NM, NWB, PT, ShV, SEB, SWB, WM, ZL
29 da-form and infinitive C 227 (25%) EH, KR, ShV, ZL

  1. aAS, Aegean Slavic; BB, Banat Bulgarian; CM, Central Macedonian; ECh, Eastern Čakavian; EM, Eastern Macedonian; EH, Eastern Herzegovinian; KR, Kosovo-Resava; NEB, Northeastern Bulgarian; NM, Northern Macedonian; NWB, Northwestern Bulgarian; PT, Prizren-Timok (Torlak); SEB, Southeastern Bulgarian; SM, Southern Macedonian; SWB, Southwestern Bulgarian; ShV, Šumadija-Vojvodina; WM, Western Macedonian; ZL, Zeta-Lovčen.

Appendix C: Catalog of features

C.1 Phonetics and phonology

Features (2–6, 9–13) characterize the phoneme inventories of the modern South Slavic varieties. Features (1) and (14) refer to the phonemic system as a whole rather than a single phoneme. Two historical phonetic features (7–8) of particular relevance for South Slavic dialect classifications are also included.

  1. Length of vowels

1 – presence of the distinction between long and short vowels, as in Serbian gra:d ‘town, city’ versus grad ‘hail’.

0 – absence of such distinction: Macedonian grad ‘town, city’ versus grad ‘hail’.

  1. Presence of /ə/ in the phonemic system

1 – presence of the stressed schwa of any origin: from the PSl. *ŭ and *ĭ in Torlak, from vocalic *l in Eastern Macedonian, from the PSl. *ŭ and back nasal *õ in most but not all Bulgarian dialects, and from back nasal *õ in Western Macedonian (Friedman 2020: 395).

Cf. Northern Macedonian dăn ‘day’ and zălva ‘husband’s sister’ (in Standard Macedonian den, zolva), from PSl. *dĭnĭ and *zŭly; Eastern Macedonian sănce ‘sun’ (Stand. Maced. sonce) < PSl. *sŭlnĭce (Vidoeski 1999); Western Macedonian răka ‘hand’ (Stand. Maced. raka) < PSl. *rõka (Vidoeski 1998); Bulgarian zălva ‘husband’s sister’ and răka ‘hand’.

0 – absence of this vowel, as in most Serbo-Croatian dialects, part of Western Macedonian, and some Southwestern Bulgarian dialects in the Rhodopes.

Cf. Southwestern Bulgarian pat (in most Bulgarian dialects păt) ’road’ < PSl. *põtĭ (Stoykov 1962).

  1. Presence of /æ/

1 – presence of the stressed near-close front unrounded vowel, e.g. in the Zeta-Lovćen dialect of the Mrkovići in Montenegro: dænæs ‘today’ (Vujović 1969).

0 – absence of this vowel, cf. danas ‘today’ in most Serbo-Croatian varieties.

  1. Presence of /ɒ/

1 – presence of the stressed open back rounded vowel, e.g. in the Zeta-Lovćen dialect of the Mrkovići: zlo ‘gold’ (Vujović 1969).

0 – absence of this vowel, as in zlato ‘gold’ in most Serbo-Croatian varieties.

  1. Presence of /y/

1 – presence of the close front rounded vowel, e.g. in Kosovo-Resava dialects of Northern Metohija in contact with Albanian: dyzgin ‘bridle’ (Bukumirić 2003).

0 – absence of this vowel.

  1. Presence of /ɨ/

1 – presence of inherited close central unrounded i, e.g. in Rhodopes or some Northeastern Bulgarian varieties of Mizia: četɨrɨ ‘four’ < PSl. *četyre, cf. četiri in other Bulgarian dialects (Stoykov 1962).

0 – absence of this vowel.

  1. Differentiation of reflexes of PSl. *ŭ and *ĭ

The so-called strong jers were merged into schwa in most Serbo-Croatian dialects with a subsequent shift into /a/. On the contrary, in Bulgarian–Macedonian the reflexes of *ŭ and *ĭ are not merged.

1 – presence of the differentiation as in Macedonian son ‘dream’ and den ‘day’, from PSl. *sŭnŭ, *dĭnĭ.

0 – absence of the differentiation as in Serbian san ‘dream’ and dan ‘day’.

  1. Differentiation of PSl. *ě in different positions

On the one hand, the major Serbo-Croatian and Bulgarian–Macedonian varieties have different reflexes of PSl. *ě. On the other hand, many varieties in both dialect continua demonstrate different reflexes of *ě, depending on sound position and other factors.

1 – presence of the differentiation as in Bulgarian b’al ‘white’ versus belijat ‘white (DEF)’ < PSl. *bělŭ(jĭ).

0 – absence of the differentiation as in considerable number of Serbo-Croatian dialects bel (the vowel remains the same in all positions).

  1. Presence of /l˚/

1 – presence of the syllabic liquid /l˚/ as in vl˚k ‘wolf’ in some Torlak varieties.

0 – absence of this sound, cf. vuk ‘wolf’ in Serbian.

  1. Presence of /r˚/

1 – presence of the syllabic liquid /r˚/ as in Serbian kr˚v ‘blood’.

0 – absence of this sound as in karf ‘blood’ in the Drimkol-Golo Brdo dialect of Western Macedonian (Vidoeski 1999).

  1. Presence of /h/

1 – presence of /h/ as in Serbian hleb ‘bread’.

0 – absence of this consonant as in Macedonian leb ‘bread’.

  1. Presence of /dz/

1 – presence of /dz/ as in Macedonian dzvezda ‘star’.

0 – absence of this consonant as in Serbian zvezda ‘star’.

  1. Presence of /ɕ/, /ʑ/

1 – presence of /ɕ/ and /ʑ/ as in some Montenegrin varieties, e.g. cutra ‘tomorrow’ and iʑesti ‘to eat’.

0 – absence of these consonants as in common Serbian, e.g. sutra ‘tomorrow’ and izesti.

  1. Palatalisation of consonants

1 – presence of non-palatalized and palatalized variants of consonants, e.g. /k/ versus /k’/, and of assimilatory palatalisation of consonants as in some Rupic dialects of Bulgarian komšijk’a ‘neighbor (fem.)’.

0 – absence of this phenomenon.

C.2 Prosody

In some varieties of the Serbo-Croatian dialect continuum the accent system disposes a more or less rich inventory of positional pitch distinctions and alternations, while in the most Balkanized South Slavic dialects this system was simplified. The feature (15) addresses these diachronically complex developments very generally and simply controls for presence/absence of tones.

  1. Presence of tones in prosodic system

1 – presence of tones and complex interactions of tone and stress in the prosodic system as in Neo-Štokavian Serbian varieties: long falling (â), long rising (á), short falling (a``) and short rising (à) pitch accents.

0 – absence of tones in prosodic system.

C.3 Morphosyntax

Features (16–20) survey gender in nouns and pronouns, case forms of nouns, and definiteness (the postpositive definite article and the triple postpositive article distinguishing between proximate (this), non-proximate (that), and deictically unmarked objects). Features (23–28) include number and person, as well as tense/aspect/mood (TAM) categories of verbs. Feature (29) considers the simultaneous presence of two complementation strategies: the use of subjunctive and infinitive as sentential complements.

  1. Postpositive article

Postpositive article, originally a Proto-Slavic demonstrative/deictic pronoun, is one of the most prominent traits of the Balkan sprachbund found in Slavic and non-Slavic languages spoken in this area. In our sample, the article is present in most Balkan Slavic varieties.

1 – presence of postpositive article (1).

0 – absence of postpositive article.

(1)
Macedonian (Vidoeski 1998)
majka-ta
mother-def.f.sg
‘the mother’

  1. Triple postpositive article

In some Balkan Slavic varieties (mostly in the westernmost ones), the postpositive article can have three forms which are derived from different demonstrative pronouns expressing various deictic meanings as in (2a), (2b) and (2c).

1 – presence of three different forms of the postpositive article.

0 – absence of this phenomenon.

(2)
Macedonian (Vidoeski 1998)
a.
zgrada-va
building-def.prox.f.sg
‘the building (one of possible meanings: the one close to the speaker)’
b.
zgrada-na
building-def.dist.f.sg
‘the building (one of possible meanings: the one far away from the speaker)’
c.
zgrada-ta
building-def.f.sg
‘the building (deictically neutral and most common article)’

  1. Peripheral cases

Peripheral cases (instrumental, genitive and locative) in nominal declension are present in Neo-Štokavian varieties of Serbian (3) and absent in Macedonian (4).

1 – presence of peripheral cases.

0 – absence of peripheral cases.

(3)
Novi Pazar-Sjenica dialect (Barjaktarović 1966: 122–123)
a.
otiš-l-a e s majk-om
go-ptcp.pst-f.sg be(aux).prs.3sg with mother-instr.sg
‘She went away with her mother.’
b.
ovo e dobro za kuć-e
this.n.sg.nom be.prs.3sg good for house-gen.sg
‘This is good for the house.’
c.
skita po sel-u
wander.prs.3sg Around village-loc.sg
‘(S)he wanders around the village.’
(4)
Macedonian (Vidoeski 1998)
so brat mi
with brother.sg.indf 1sg.dat
‘with my brother’

  1. Presence of dative

1 – presence of the dative case in nominal declension (5).

0 – absence of dative (6).

(5)
Macedonian (Vidoeski 1998)
mu reče na maž-ot
3sg.m.dat say.prs.3sg on man-def.m.sg
‘She says to the man/husband.’
(6)
Serbian (Ivić 1985)
da-l-a je to majc-i
give-ptcp.pst-f.sg be(aux).prs.3sg that.n.acc.sg mother-dat.sg
‘She gave it to her mother.’

  1. Presence of accusative

1 – presence of the accusative case in nominal declension (7).

0 – absence of accusative (8).

(7)
Preševo, Prizren-Timok (Trajković 2016: 405)
sa muž-a mi sa-m bi-l-a
with husband-acc.sg 1sg.dat be(aux)-prs.1sg be-ptcp.pst-f.sg
‘I was with my husband.’
(8)
Vratarnica, Prizren-Timok (Sobolev 1994: 203)
povede ona bik noč-am
lead.pst.3sg 3sg.f.nom bull.nom.sg night-instr.sg
‘She led the bull away at night.’

  1. Distinction between patterns of pl declension of m and f nouns

1 – presence of distinction: muž-i <man-nom.pl> ‘men’/žen-e <woman-nom.pl> ‘women’ in most Serbo-Croatian varieties (Ivić 1985).

0 – absence of distinction: maž-i <man-pl.indf> ‘men’/žen-i <woman-pl.indf> ‘women’ in Macedonian (Vidoeski 1998).

  1. Gender differentiation in 3pl pronoun

1 – presence of distinction: 3pl.m oni / 3pl.f one/3pl.n ona in most Serbo-Croatian varieties.

0 – absence of distinction: 3pl oni in the Serbian variety of Prizren, Kosovo (Remetić 1996: 486); 3pl tie in most Macedonian varieties.

  1. Ending -t in prs.3pl

1 – presence of -t (9).

0 – absence of -t ([10] and [11]).

(9)
most Macedonian varieties
vika-at
call-prs.3pl
‘They call.’
(10)
Valjevo, Šumadija-Vojvodina (Radovanović 2014: 271)
zov-u
call-prs.3pl
‘They call.’
(11)
Tetovo, Western Macedonian (Vidoeski 1998: 160)
vika-a
call-prs.3pl
‘They call.’

  1. Ending -t in prs.3sg

1 – presence of -t (12).

0 – absence of -t (13).

(12)
Debar, Western Macedonian (Vidoeski 1998: 151)
vika-t
call-prs.3sg
‘(S)he calls.’
(13)
Valjevo, Šumadija-Vojvodina (Radovanović 2014: 171)
se zove
refl call.prs.3sg
‘He (she, it) is called.’

  1. Presence of habere-perfect forms

1 – presence of habere-perfect as in Western Macedonian (14).

0 – absence of habere-perfect as in the rest of South Slavic varieties.

(14)
Debar, Western Macedonian (Escher 2020: 71)
i volna ima-m rabot-en-o
And wool.sg.indf have-prs.1sg work-ptcp.pst-n.sg
‘I have processed also wool.’

  1. Presence of esse-perfect forms

1 – presence of esse-perfect as in Western Macedonian (15).

0 – absence of esse-perfect as in the rest of South Slavic varieties.

(15)
Debar, Western Macedonian (Escher 2020: 75)
salata su-m jad-en
salad.sg.indf be(aux)-prs.1sg eat-ptcp.pst.m.sg
‘I have eaten salad.’

  1. l-perfect as evidential

1 – l-perfect used as evidential as in Bulgarian–Macedonian varieties (16).

0 – l-perfect does not have evidential meaning as in Serbo-Croatian varieties.

(16)
Debar, Western Macedonian (Escher 2020: 66)
lupa-l-o mu, vika-l-o mu…
knock-ptcp.pst-n.sg 3sg.m.dat call-ptcp.pst-n.sg 3sg.m.dat
‘Someone knocked [on his door] and called him…’ (about a man who was said to be visited by vampires)

  1. Presence of l-participle – see example (16).

1 – presence of l-participle.

0 – absence of l-participle.

  1. da-form and infinitive

1 – presence of both strategies as in most non-balkanized varieties (17)

0 – presence of only da-form as in Balkan Slavic, i.e. Bulgarian–Macedonian and Torlak (18).

(17)
Valjevo, Šumadija-Vojvodina (Radovanović 2014: 270)
a.
mog-u ti priča-ti
can-prs.1sg 2sg.dat tell-inf
‘I can tell you.’
b.
mog-u da rekne-m
can-prs.1sg sbjv say-prs.1sg
‘I can say.’
(18)
Preševo, Prizren-Timok (Trajković 2016: 478)
ne mog-u ja da ga jede-m
neg can-prs.1sg 1sg.nom sbjv 3sg.n.acc eat-prs.1sg
‘I cannot eat it.’

References

Arkadiev, Peter & Francesco Gardani. 2020. Introduction: Complexities in morphology. In Peter Arkadiev & Francesco Gardani (eds.), The complexities of morphology, 1–19. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198861287.003.0001Search in Google Scholar

Berdichevsky, Alexander. 2012. Iazykovaia slozhnost’ (Language complexity). Issues in Linguistics 5. 101–124.Search in Google Scholar

Chambers, Jack K. & Peter Trudgill. 2004. Dialectology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chernyak, Alexander & Andrey Sobolev. 1998. Bolgarskii iazyk [Bulgarian]. In Agnia V. Desnitskaya & Nikita I. Tolstoy (eds.), Osnovy balkanskogo iazykoznaniia. Iazyki balkanskogo regiona. Chast 2. Slavianskie iazyki [The basics of Balkan linguistics. Languages of the Balkan region. Part 2. Slavic languages], 189–246. Saint Petersburg: Nauka.Search in Google Scholar

Curtis, Matthew Cowan. 2012. Slavic-Albanian language contact, convergence, and coexistence. Ohio: The Ohio State University dissertation.10.17161/SCN.1808.10781Search in Google Scholar

Dahl, Östen. 2004. The growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Search in Google Scholar

Escher, Anastasia. 2020. Preterital’naia sistema govorov regiona Prespa – makedonskogo, albanskogo i arumynskogo [The past tense system of the Macedonian, Albanian and Aromanian dialects in the Prespa lake region]. Saint Petersburg: Nauka.Search in Google Scholar

Friedman, Victor A. 2008. Balkan Slavic dialectology and Balkan linguistics: Periphery as center. In Christina Y. Bethin (ed.), American contributions to the 14th International Congress of Slavists, Ohrid, September 2008. Vol. 1. Linguistics, 131–148. Bloomington, IN: Slavica.Search in Google Scholar

Friedman, Victor A. 2018. Where do evidentials come from? In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidentiality, 124–147. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.6Search in Google Scholar

Girnth, Heiko. 2010. Mapping language data. In Alfred Lameli, Roland Kehrein & Stefan Rabanus (eds.), Language and space. An international handbook of linguistic variation. Vol. 2. Language mapping, 98–120. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110219166.1.98Search in Google Scholar

Gołąb, Zbigniew. 1997. The ethnic background and internal linguistic mechanism of the so-called Balkanization of Macedonian. Balkanistica 10. 13–19.Search in Google Scholar

Graul, Christian. 2016. leafletR: Interactive web-maps based on the Leaflet JavaScript library. http://cran.r-project.org/package=leafletR (accessed 20 January 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Joseph, Brian. 2010. Language contact in the Balkans. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), The handbook of language contact, 618–633. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781444318159.ch30Search in Google Scholar

Kusters, Wouster. 2003. Linguistic complexity: The influence of social change on verbal inflection. Leiden: Leiden University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kuteva, Tania. 2008. On the frills of grammaticalization. In María José López-Couso & Elena Seoane (eds.), Rethinking grammaticalization: New perspectives, 189–217. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.76.10kutSearch in Google Scholar

Leifeld, Philip. 2013. texreg: Conversion of statistical model output in R to LATEX and HTML tables. Journal of Statistical Software 55(8). 1–24. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v055.i08.Search in Google Scholar

Lindstedt, Jouko. 2000. Linguistic Balkanization: Contact-induced change by mutual reinforcement. In Dicky G. Gilbers, John Nerbonne & Jos Schaeken (eds.), Languages in contact (Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics 28), 231–246. Amsterdam & Atlanta, GA: Rodopi.10.1163/9789004488472_023Search in Google Scholar

Lindstedt, Jouko. 2018. Diachronic regularities explaining the tendency towards explicit analytic marking in Balkan syntax. In Iliana Krapova & Brian Joseph (eds.), Balkan Syntax and (Universal) Principles of Grammar, 70–84. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110375930-005Search in Google Scholar

Makarova, Anastasia. 2021. Mutual understanding among Albanians, Slavs and Aromanians in Prespa, North Macedonia: Perfect tense as a perfect tool. In Andrey Sobolev (ed.), Between separation and symbiosis: Southeastern European languages and cultures in contact, 59–88. Boston & Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781501509254-003Search in Google Scholar

Miestamo, Matti. 2017. Linguistic diversity and complexity. Lingue e Linguaggio 16(2). 227–253. https://doi.org/10.1418/88241.Search in Google Scholar

Miloradović, Sofia. 2004. Analytismus in serbischen Dialekten. In Uwe Hinrichs (ed.), Die europäischen Sprachen auf dem Wege zum analytischen Sprachtyp, 303–317. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Search in Google Scholar

Mithun, Marianne. 1999. The languages of native North America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Morozova, Maria. 2021. “Balanced language contact” in social context: Velja Gorana in Southern Montenegro. In Andrey Sobolev (ed.), Between separation and symbiosis: Southeastern European languages and cultures in contact, 89–134. Boston & Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781501509254-004Search in Google Scholar

Morozova, Maria & Alexander Rusakov. 2018. Chernogorsko-albanskoe iazykovoe pogranichʹe: v poiskakh “sbalansirovannogo iazykovogo kontakta” [Montenegrin-Albanian linguistic border: In search of “balanced language contact”]. Slověne 7(2). 258–302. https://doi.org/10.31168/2305-6754.2018.7.2.10.Search in Google Scholar

Morozova, Maria & Alexander Rusakov. 2021. Societal multilingualism à la balkanique: The Montenegrin Velja Gorana and beyond. International Journal of Bilingualism 25(4). 999–1018. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069211023152.Search in Google Scholar

Munishi, Shkumbin. 2020. Projeksion i zhvillimeve sociolinguistike (rasti i bilinguizmit shqip-serbisht në Kosovë) [Projection of sociolinguistic developments (case of Albanian-Serbian bilingualism in Kosovo)]. Prishtinë: Zeroprint.Search in Google Scholar

Nichols, Johanna. 1992. Linguistic diversity in space and time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226580593.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Nichols, Johanna. 2009. Linguistic complexity: A comprehensive definition and survey. In Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 110–125. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199545216.003.0008Search in Google Scholar

Nichols, Johanna. 2013. The vertical archipelago: Adding the third dimension to linguistic geography. In Peter Auer, Martin Hilpert, Anja Stukenbrock & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi (eds.), Space in language and linguistics, 38–60. Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110312027.38Search in Google Scholar

Nichols, Johanna & Christian Bentz. 2018. Morphological complexity of languages reflects the settlement history of the Americas. In Katerina Harvati, Gerhard Jäger & Hugo Reyes-Centeno (eds.), New perspectives on the peopling of the Americas, 13–26. Tübingen: Kerns Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Pantelić, Nikola. 1978. Društveni i porodični život na teritoriji opštine Zaječar [Social and family life in the municipality of Zaječar]. Glasnik etnografskog muzeja u Beogradu 42. 309–339.Search in Google Scholar

Poljakov, Oleg. 2018. The dialectology of Slavic. In Jared Klein, Brian Joseph & Matthias Fritz (eds., in cooperation with Mark Wenthe), Handbook of comparative and historical Indo-European linguistics, vol. 3, 1585–1600. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110542431-006Search in Google Scholar

R Core Team. 2017. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed 20 January 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Selishchev, Afanasiy. 1931. Slavianskoe naselenie v Albanii [The Slavic population in Albania]. Sofia: Izdanie Makedonskogo nauchnogo instituta.Search in Google Scholar

Sobolev, Andrey. 1990. Zametki o padezhnykh sistemakh serbokhorvatskikh govorov kontaktnykh zon [Notes on the case system of Serbo-Croatian dialects in contact areas]. Južnoslovenski filolog 46. 13–28.Search in Google Scholar

Sobolev, Andrey. 1991. K istorii utraty balkanoslavianskogo skloneniia [On the history of case loss in Balkan Slavic]. Zbornik Matice srpske za filologiju i lingvistiku 34. 7–41.Search in Google Scholar

Sobolev, Andrey. 2008. Macedonian in the Western Balkan linguistic area. STUF — Language Typology and Universals 61(2). 153–161. https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2008.0015.Search in Google Scholar

Sobolev, Andrey. 2009. From synthetic to analytic case: Variation in South Slavic dialects. In Andrej Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case, 717–729. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Thomason, Sarah Grey. 2001. Language contact: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Thomason, Sarah Grey & Terrence Kaufman. 1988. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.10.1525/9780520912793Search in Google Scholar

Todorova, Maria. 1997. Imagining the Balkans. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Trudgill, Peter. 2011. Sociolinguistic typology: Social determinants of linguistic complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Trudgill, Peter. 1986. Dialects in contact. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Vuković, Teodora. 2021. Representing variation in a spoken corpus of an endangered dialect: the case of Torlak. Language Resources and Evaluation 55. 731–756. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-020-09522-4.Search in Google Scholar

Wahlström, Max. 2015. Loss of case inflection in Bulgarian and Macedonian. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Department of Modern Languages dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Wickham, Hadley. 2016. ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis, 2nd edn. New York: Springer. https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org (accessed 20 January 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Sources

Barjaktarević, Danilo. 1966. Novopazarsko-sjenički govori [Dialects of Novi Pazar and Sjenica]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 16. 1–177.Search in Google Scholar

Bogdanović, Nedeljko. 1987. Govor Aleksinačkog Pomoravlja [The dialect of Aleksinačko Pomoravlje]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 33. 7–302.Search in Google Scholar

Boyadzhiev, Todor. 1972. Govorŭt na s. Sŭchanli, Giumiurdzhinsko [The dialect of Sachanli, Giumiurdzhinsko]. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarskata akademiia na naukite.Search in Google Scholar

Bozhkov, Rangel. 1984. Dimitrovgradskiiat (Tsaribrodskiiat) govor [The dialect of Dimitrovgrad (Tsaribrod)]. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarskata akademiia na naukite.Search in Google Scholar

Bukumirić, Mileta. 2003. Govori Severne Metohije [Dialects of Northern Metohija]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 50. 1–356.Search in Google Scholar

Ćirić, Ljubisav. 1999. Govori Ponišavlja [Dialects of Ponišavlje]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 46. 7–262.Search in Google Scholar

Ćupić, Drago. 1977. Govor Bjelopavlića [The dialect of Bjelopavlići]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 23. 1–226.Search in Google Scholar

Ćupić, Drago & Željko Ćupić. 1997. Rečnik govora Zagarača [Dictionary of the dialect of Zagarač]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 44. 9–577.Search in Google Scholar

Đukanović, Petar. 1995. Govor Dragačeva [The dialect of Dragačevo]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 41. 1–240.Search in Google Scholar

Đurović, Radosav. 1992. Prelazni govori južne Bosne i visoke Hercegovine [Transitional dialects of southern Bosnia and upper Herzegovina]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 38. 9–378.Search in Google Scholar

Escher, Anastasia. 2020. Preterital’naia sistema govorov regiona Prespa – makedonskogo, albanskogo i arumynskogo [The past tense system of the Macedonian, Albanian and Aromanian dialects in the Prespa lake region]. Saint Petersburg: Nauka.Search in Google Scholar

Friedman, Victor A. 2020. The Balkans. In Evangelia, Adamou & Yaron, Matras (eds.), The Routledge handbook of language contact, 385–403. London, New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Ivanov, Yordan (ed.). 1972. Bŭlgarski dialekten atlas. T. 1. Bŭlgarski govori ot Egeiska Makedoniia. Dramsko, Siarsko, Valovishko i Ziliakhovsko. Ch. I. Karti. Ch. II. Statii. Komentari. Pokazaltsi [Bulgarian dialect atlas. Vol. I. Bulgarian dialects in Aegean Macedonia. Drama, Serres, Valovishta, Zilyahovo regions. Part I. Maps. Part II. Articles. Commentaries. Indices]. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarskata akademiia na naukite.Search in Google Scholar

Ivić, Pavle. 1985. Dijalektologija srpskohrvatskog jezika. Uvod i štokavsko narečje [Dialectology of Serbo-Croatian. Introduction and Štokavian]. Novi Sad: Matica Srpska.Search in Google Scholar

Kabasanov, Stayko. 1963. Edin starinen bŭlgarski govor: Tikhomirskiiat govor [An ancient Bulgarian dialect: Tikhomirski dialect]. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarskata akademiia na naukite.Search in Google Scholar

Kašić, Zorka. 1995. The dialect of Konavle [Govor Konavala]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 41. 241–396.Search in Google Scholar

Kozomara, Dragomir. 2016. Fonetske i morfološke osobine srpskih posavskih govora izmedu Vrbasa i Ukrine [Phonetic and morphological features of Serbian Posavina dialects between Vrbas and Ukrina]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 63. 579–733.Search in Google Scholar

Marković, Jordana. 2000. Govor Zaplanja [The dialect of Zaplanje]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 47. 7–307.Search in Google Scholar

Marković, Slavoljub. 2011. Govor Užičke Crne Gore [The dialect of Užička Crna Gora]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 58. 337–672.Search in Google Scholar

Milanović, Peco. 1968. Resavski govor [The dialect of Resava]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 17. 241–367.Search in Google Scholar

Miletić, Branko. 1940. Crmnički govor [The dialect of Crmnica]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 9. 209–245.Search in Google Scholar

Mladenov, Maksim. 1969. Govorŭt na Novo Selo, Vidinsko [The dialect of Novo Selo, Vidinsko]. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarskata akademiia na naukite.Search in Google Scholar

Mladenović, Radivoje. 2001. Govor šarplaninske župe Gora [The dialect of the zhupa of Gora in Šar Planina]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 48. 1–606.Search in Google Scholar

Nikolić, Berislav. 1964. Sremski govor [The dialect of Srem]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 14. 201–412.Search in Google Scholar

Nikolić, Berislav. 1966. Mačvanski govor [The dialect of Mačva]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 16. 179–313.Search in Google Scholar

Nikolić, Miroslav. 1991. Govori srbijanskog Polimlja [The dialects of Serbian Polimlje]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 37. 1–548.Search in Google Scholar

Pavlović, Milivoj. 1939. Govor Sretečke Župe [The dialect of Sretečka Župa]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 8. 1–74.Search in Google Scholar

Pešikan, Mitar. 1965. Starocrnogorski, srednjokatunski i lješanski govori [The dialects of Stara Crna Gora, Katunska and Lješanska nahija]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 15. 1–294.Search in Google Scholar

Radovanović, Dragana. 2014. Govor Valjevske Podgorine [The dialect of Valjevska Podgorina]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 61. 7–366.Search in Google Scholar

Remetić, Slobodan. 1996. Srpski prizrenski govor I (glasovi i oblici) [The Serbian dialect of Prizren I (sounds and forms)]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 42. 319–361.Search in Google Scholar

Šimunović, Peter. 2009. Rječnik bračkih čakavskih govora [Dictionary of the Brač Čakavian dialects]. Zagreb: Tehnička knjiga.Search in Google Scholar

Sobolev, Andrey. 1994. Govor sela Vratarnitsa v vostochnoi Serbii v istoricheskom i areal'nom osveshchenii [The dialect of Vratarnica in Eastern Serbia from historical and areal point of view]. Munich: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar

Sobolev, Andrey. 1998. Sprachatlas Ostserbiens und Westbulgariens. Marburg: Biblion.Search in Google Scholar

Stevanović, Mihailo. 1934. Istočnocrnogorski dijalekat [Eastern Montenegrin dialect]. Južnoslovenski filolog 13. 1–129.Search in Google Scholar

Stevanović, Mihailo. 1950. Đakovački govor [The dialect of Đakovica]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 11. 1–152.Search in Google Scholar

Stoykov, Stoyko. 1962. Bŭlgarska dialektologiia [Bulgarian dialectology]. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarskata akademiia na naukite.Search in Google Scholar

Stoykov, Stoyko. 1967. Banatskiiat govor [The dialect of Banat]. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarskata akademiia na naukite.Search in Google Scholar

Stoykov Stoyko & Samuil Bernshteyn (eds.). 1964. Bŭlgarski dialekten atlas. T. I. Iugoiztochna Bŭlgariia. Ch. I. Karti. Ch. II. Statii. Komentari. Pokazaltsi [Bulgarian dialect atlas. Vol. I. Southeastern Bulgaria. Part I. Maps. Part II. Articles. Commentaries. Indices]. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarskata akademiia na naukite.Search in Google Scholar

Stoykov Stoyko (ed.). 1966. Bŭlgarski dialekten atlas. T. II. Severoiztochna Bŭlgariia. Ch. I. Karti. Ch. II. Statii. Komentari. Pokazaltsi [Bulgarian dialect atlas. Vol. II. Northeastern Bulgaria. Part I. Maps. Part II. Articles. Commentaries. Indices]. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarskata akademiia na naukite.Search in Google Scholar

Stoykov Stoyko (ed.). 1975. Bŭlgarski dialekten atlas. T. III. Iugozapadna Bŭlgariia. Ch. I. Karti. Ch. II. Statii. Komentari. Pokazaltsi [Bulgarian dialect atlas. Vol. III. Southwestern Bulgaria. Part I. Maps. Part II. Articles. Commentaries. Indices]. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarskata akademiia na naukite.Search in Google Scholar

Stoykov Stoyko (ed.). 1981. Bŭlgarski dialekten atlas. T. IV. Severozapadna Bŭlgariia. Ch. I. Karti. Ch. II. Statii. Komentari. Pokazaltsi [Bulgarian dialect atlas. Vol. IV. Northwestern Bulgaria. Part I. Maps. Part II. Articles. Commentaries. Indices]. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Bŭlgarskata akademiia na naukite.Search in Google Scholar

Stojović, Rada. 2007. Govor Gornjih Vasojevića [The dialect of Upper Vasojevići]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 54. 1–323.Search in Google Scholar

Tomić, Mile. 1987. Govor Radimaca [The dialect of Radimac]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 33. 303–374.Search in Google Scholar

Trajković, Tatjana. 2016. Govor Preševa [The dialect of Preševo]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 63. 277–578.Search in Google Scholar

Vidoeski, Bozhidar. 1998. Dijalektite na makedonskiot jazik. T. 1 [Dialects of the Macedonian language. Vol. 1]. Skopje: Makedonska akademija na naukite i umetnostite.Search in Google Scholar

Vidoeski, Bozhidar. 1999. Dijalektite na makedonskiot jazik. T. 2 [Dialects of the Macedonian language. Vol. 2]. Skopje: Makedonska akademija na naukite i umetnostite.Search in Google Scholar

Vujović, Luka. 1969. Mrkovićki dijalekat [The dialect of the Mrkovići]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 18. 73–399.Search in Google Scholar

Vukadinović, Vilotije. 1999. Govori Crne Trave i Vlasine [Dialects of Crna Trava and Vlasina]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 42. 1–317.Search in Google Scholar

Vušović, Danilo. 1927. Dialekt istočne Hercegovine [Dialect of Eastern Herzegovina]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 1. 1–70.Search in Google Scholar

Žugić, Radmila. 2005. O govoru jablaničkog kraja [On the dialect of the Jablanica area]. Srpski dijalektološki zbornik. Rasprave i građa 52. 11–35.Search in Google Scholar
Received: 2021-09-18
Accepted: 2022-02-01
Published Online: 2022-11-08

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Research Articles
  3. Measuring language complexity: challenges and opportunities
  4. Complexity trade-offs and equi-complexity in natural languages: a meta-analysis
  5. What do complexity measures measure? Correlating and validating corpus-based measures of morphological complexity
  6. Head and dependent marking and dependency length in possessive noun phrases: a typological study of morphological and syntactic complexity
  7. Why is this language complex? Cherry-pick the optimal set of features in multilingual treebanks
  8. Situational diversity and linguistic complexity
  9. Linguistic complexity in second language acquisition
  10. Measuring redundancy: the relation between concord and complexity
  11. A multifactorial approach to crosslinguistic constituent orderings
  12. Complexity in sign languages
  13. Linguistic complexity of South Slavic dialects: a new perspective on old data
  14. A quantitative global test of the complexity trade-off hypothesis: the case of nominal and verbal grammatical marking
https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2021-0116
Keywords for this article
complexification; language contact; linguistic complexity; simplification; South Slavic dialects

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Research Articles
  3. Measuring language complexity: challenges and opportunities
  4. Complexity trade-offs and equi-complexity in natural languages: a meta-analysis
  5. What do complexity measures measure? Correlating and validating corpus-based measures of morphological complexity
  6. Head and dependent marking and dependency length in possessive noun phrases: a typological study of morphological and syntactic complexity
  7. Why is this language complex? Cherry-pick the optimal set of features in multilingual treebanks
  8. Situational diversity and linguistic complexity
  9. Linguistic complexity in second language acquisition
  10. Measuring redundancy: the relation between concord and complexity
  11. A multifactorial approach to crosslinguistic constituent orderings
  12. Complexity in sign languages
  13. Linguistic complexity of South Slavic dialects: a new perspective on old data
  14. A quantitative global test of the complexity trade-off hypothesis: the case of nominal and verbal grammatical marking
Downloaded on 17.4.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/lingvan-2021-0116/html
Scroll to top button