Humanities and Social Sciences

Rocznik Slawistyczny

Description

Rocznik Slawistyczny – ukazuje się od 1908 roku, początkowo w Krakowie, a od 1994 we Wrocławiu. Publikacje dotyczą szeroko pojętej slawistyki. Oprócz języka polskiego publikuje też artykuły w językach obcych.

ISSN

ISSN 0080-3588

Publishers

Komitet Słowianoznawstwa PAN

REDAKTOR NACZELNY

Jan Sokołowski (Uniwersytet Wrocławski)

KOMITET REDAKCYJNY

Feliks Czyżewski (Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, Lublin)
Adam Fałowski (Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie)
Dorota Krystyna Rembiszewska (Instytut Slawistyki PAN, Warszawa)

SEKRETARZ

Iwona Łuczków (Uniwersytet Wrocławski)

RADA REDAKCYJNA

Janusz Siatkowski (Uniwersytet Warszawski) – PRZEWODNICZĄCY
Diana Blagoeva (Българаска академия на науките, Sofia)
Rajna Dragićević (Универзитет у Београду)
Victor A. Friedman (University of Chicago)
Zbigniew Greń (Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Ilona Janyšková (Akademie věd České republiky, Brno)
Małgorzata Korytkowska (Instytut Slawistyki PAN, Warszawa)
Aleksandr Moldovan (Российская академия наук, Moskwa)
Stefan Michael Newerkla (Universität Wien)
Irena Sawicka (Instytut Slawistyki PAN, Warszawa)
Zuzanna Topolińska (Македонска академија на науките и уметностите, Skopje)
Pavol Žigo (Slovenská akadémia vied, Bratysława)

Rocznik Slawistyczny
Redakcja
53-313 Wrocław
ul. Pocztowa 9
tel. (071) 37-54-566; fax (071) 37-54-559
rocznik.slawistyczny@uni.wroc.pl

Volumes
Instructions for authors
Reviewers

Select number

Content

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII

1 Professor Hanna Taborska (1930–2022)

Jadwiga Waniakowa

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 3-16 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147251

Keywords: Hanna Popowska‑Taborska Kashubian studies Slavic studies

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

On December 6, 2022, Professor Hanna Taborska, an outstanding linguist, Slavicist, distinguished researcher of the Kashubian language, doctor honoris causa of the University of Gdańsk, Righteous Among the Nations passed away at the age of 92. She worked continuously for 58 years at the Institute of Slavic Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Warsaw. She is the author of over 500 scientific publications, including fundamental works in the field of Kashubian and Slavic studies.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jadwiga Waniakowa

e-mail:

ORCID:

Instytut Języka Polskiego PAN Kraków

2 Professor Włodzimierz Pianka (1937–2022)

Ignacy M. Doliński

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 17-29 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147252

Keywords: Włodzimierz Pianka Slavic linguistics Macedonian, confrontative grammar of Slavic languages Slavonic Studies at the University of Vienna

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In Memoriam Professor Włodzimierz Pianka, prominent linguist, distinguished scholar in Slavic, Macedonian and Sorbian languages and in onomastics (with particular focus on the Balkan area), expert in Slavic confrontative grammar, professor at the Universities of Warsaw and Vienna, honorary doctor at the Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, member of the Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts. The paper outlines and profiles the late Professor’s life and work as well as research interests along with selected publications.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Ignacy M. Doliński

e-mail:

ORCID:

Uniwersytet Warszawski, Warszawa

3 Linguistics as a Human‑focused Discipline (Towards a Portrait of Professor Wojciech Chlebda)

Anna Pajdzińska

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147253

Keywords: Wojciech Chlebda slavist lexicographer phraseology ethnolinguistics borderland memory

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The contribution presents the main events in the life of Wojciech Chlebda (1950–2022), an eminent linguist, Polish and Slavic philologist, preoccupied throughout his career with the subject status of individuals and communities, as well as with the language‑culture interface. The main areas of his research, including the major tenets of his linguistic proposals, are also characterized, relating to the issues of phrasematics (speaker phraseology), lexicography as an instrument of national self‑identification, linguistic self‑identity, mental geography, and collective linguistic (non‑)memory.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Anna Pajdzińska

e-mail:

ORCID:

Uniwersytet Marii Curie‑Skłodowskiej Lublin

4 On certain phonetic balkanisms

Leszek Bednarczuk

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 41-46 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147254

Keywords: Albanian Romanian dialects phonetic changes lenition (pre) nasalization rhotacism

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The focus of this article is the origins of (1) reduced vowels in languages of the Balkan Sprachbund, (2) lenition of soft stops, (3) its (pre)nasalization, (4) the change of ‑n‑ into ‑r‑ in the Tosk dialect of Albanian and a similar process in Old Romanian as well as the Istro‑Romanian, Maramuresh and Oltenian dialects of this language, a parallel change of Latin ‑l‑ into ‑r‑ in common Romanian and certain Italian dialects.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Leszek Bednarczuk

e-mail:

ORCID:

Uniwersytet Pedagogiczny im. Komisji Edukacji Narodowej Kraków

5 From Polish etymology (3): przyzwoity; wyśmienity; rubaszny

Adam Fałowski

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 47-59 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147255

Keywords: Polish language lexis etymology

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This article deals with the etymology of three Polish words: przyzwoity, wyśmienity and rubaszny. All three should probably be considered native formations. Przyzwoity (in the older version przywoity, also przyzwoisty) in genetic terms should probably be combined with the verb wić: *przy‑wić > * przy‑wój > * prz‑woj‑ity. Wyśmienity – according to A. Brückner's hypothesis – derives from the hypothetical preform of pol. * wyśmień ‘height’. Rubaszny, on the other hand, is also the result of native derivational processes and derives from the Polish adjective gruby in the sense of undelicate, simple, unsophisticated, uncouth, coarse, rude’: * (g)ruby > * (g)rubacha > * (g)rubaszny.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Adam Fałowski

e-mail:

ORCID:

Uniwersytet Jagielloński Kraków

6 A large etymological project has been completed

Ilona Janyšková

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 61-66 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147269

Keywords: etymology Old Church Slavonic Language etymological dictionary

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article reports on the Etymological Dictionary of the Old Church Slavonic Language, which was completed at the end of 2022. It is the first extensive scientific etymological vocabulary of Old Church Slavonic, consisting of a total of 21 volumes, of which 19 volumes contain entries (there are 2483 entries on 1164 pages). The last two volumes are registers of all words listed in the dictionary.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Ilona Janyšková

e-mail:

ORCID:

Etymologické oddělení Ústavu pro jazyk český, Akademie věd České republiky, Brno

7 Ukrainian Morphemics in Slavic Parallels

Євгенія А. Карпіловська

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 67-89 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147256

Keywords: morphemics comparative studies simple morphemic unit compplex morphemic unit morphemic dictionary

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article analyzes the state of lexicographic modeling of modern Slavic morphemics, primarily the Ukrainian language. The development of Ukrainian morphemography over the past 40 years has been traced. Particular attention is paid to the computer morpheme and word‑formative fund of the Ukrainian language, which was created and is being developed by researchers of the Institute of the Ukrainian Language of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine in Kyiv. Common parameters of the form and semantics of roots and affixes are highlighted, which can become a basis for comparative studies. It is noted that, in contrast to Ukrainian morphemology, the morphemic dictionaries of other Slavic languages rarely present complex morphemic units: pairs and chains of affixal morphemes, affixal surroundings (lattices) of roots, models of the morphemic structure of words and morphemic nets for constructing words of certain parts of speech. The need to create a common factual basis, a common theoretical and methodological foundation for carrying out comparative studies on morphemics is emphasized. Only under this condition can we expect reliable conclusions about the typology and characterology of Slavic morphemics in general and morphemics of a certain Slavic language in particular. Keywords: morphemics,

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Євгенія А. Карпіловська

Інститут української мови, Національної академії наук, України, Київ

8 Equipotentiality in the evolution of a language on the basis of examples of Polish adverbs

Krystyna Kleszczowa

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 91-104 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147257

Keywords: linguistic shift the mechanisms of linguistic shift intensification and disintensification iterativity functional expressions

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In the theory of open systems one mentions equifinality – by drawing from various sources, one may reach the same results. The new linguistic phenomenon, which emerged due to equifinality, upsets the stability of the system, causes various types of re‑evaluation, therefore the same source causes different results. Thus, one may speak about equipotentiality. In her article, the author demonstrates how the adverbia which emerged in the late part of the Proto‑Slavic period influenced the word‑formative system of the Polish language. She focuses on the adverbs with the formants ‑o and ‑e, a class which was thriving already in the earliest period of the written Polish language (more than 500 units in the Old Polish period).
In adjectives, the adverb influenced the gradual decline of intensifying prefixes prze‑ ( przedobry ‘extremely good’) and nad‑ ( nadpełny ‘Latin: superplenus’), and on the basis of the elative na(j)‑ and ‑ szy there emerged the morphosyntactic category of grade. The development of the category of disintensification took a different direction.
Adverbs were one of the reasons which caused the decline of diminutive and augmentative verbs. The traces of these categories are preserved in the following words used in the modern Polish language: głaskać ‘to fondle, to caress, to stroke gently’, nadskakiwać ‘to fawn, to flatter, to toady’. Adverbs also influenced the gradual decline of obsolete iterativa, their properties were assumed by adverbs ( palać – często palić ‘to smoke often’).
Many original adverbs shifted to the class of functional expressions, assuming a metatextual role – of commenting upon one’s own, current utterances. Sometimes they perform the functions of thematic operators ( Intelektualnie Marek ma cechy lidera, emocjonalnie absolutnie nie ‘Mark has the qualities of a leader intellect‑wise, but not at all emotion‑wise); rhematic operators (particles, e.g. Janek podobno wyjechał ‘Janek supposedly went away’), appositions: A pani czytała to? – Naturalnie! ‘And have you read it? – Naturally!’

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Krystyna Kleszczowa

e-mail:

ORCID:

Uniwersytet Śląski Katowice

9 Grammaticalization of the opposition Whole : Part as the influence of various sources of interference (examples from South Slavic languages and Kashubian dialects)

Małgorzata Korytkowska

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 105-116 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147258

Keywords: language interference opposition Whole : Part emantic category of definitenesse / indefiniteness South Slavic languages Kashubian dialects

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Constructions expressing the separation of a part from the whole which arose independently on the two ends of the Slavic land are presented in the article. The analyzed phenomena, resulting from interference of Slavic and non Slavic languages (Greek and German), are relevant to some South Slavic and Kashubian dialects. The semantic structure of these constructions is proposed and it is shown how their relevant semantic features are expressed in sentences. One of them is the definiteness of the object from which a certain part is detached. It is concluded that Bulgarian and Macedonian on the one hand and Kashubian dialects on the other are characterised by similar level of details expressing the semantic structure of the analyzed sentences despite different grammatical structures of these languages.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Małgorzata Korytkowska

e-mail:

ORCID:

Instytut Slawistyki PAN, Warszawa

10 Neuter past tense forms in the first and second person singular like widziałom, widziałoś in Slavic languages

Tadeusz Lewaszkiewicz

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 117-143 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147259

Keywords: potential/rare linguistic forms perfectum comparative grammar of Slavic languages

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Neuter past tense forms in the first and second person singular like widziałom, widziałoś (as well as neuter indicative future tense forms like będę widziało, będziesz widziało and conditional forms like widziałobym, widziałobyś) occur in all main Slavic languages (so‑called macrolanguages) and in the so‑called Slavic literary microlanguages, but only as potential, rarely occurring albeit regularly derived forms. They were noted mainly in older grammar manuals. Some grammatical paradigms are incomplete because their authors listed only masculine forms. While they took the derivation of feminine forms for granted, it is not certain if they assumed that neuter forms in the first and second person singular existed. Engaging in researching the textual presence of these very rare linguistic forms in individual Slavic languages might be worthwhile. It appears that suitable computer software will allow searching existing textual corpora and provide relevant data on the linguistic forms discussed in this article.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Tadeusz Lewaszkiewicz

e-mail:

ORCID:

Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza, Poznań

11 Тhe terms for ‘footprint, track’ (‘stapalka, traga’) in macedonian dialects in correlation with the equivalents on the slavic linguistic territory (based on the material from the General Slavic Linguistic Atlas)

Соња Миленковска

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 145-156 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147260

Keywords: terms for ‘footprint, track’ (‘stapalka, traga’) Macedonian dialects Slavic dialects OLA

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This paper analyses the question from the Lexical volume 9 – “Man” of the General Slavic Linguistic Atlas (OLA). It is about the terms for the ‘footprint, track’ (‘stapalka, traga’ in Macedonian) in the Slavic dialects covered by the question L 1575 (‘след стопы’) according to the Questionnaire of OLA. The aim of the analysis is to show the geographical distribution, etymology and semantic motivation for the terms of ‘footprint, track’ in Macedonian dialects (which are based on the material from the OLA) in correlation with the equivalents on the Slavic linguistic territory.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Соња Миленковска

e-mail:

ORCID:

Истражувачки центар за ареална лингвистика „Божидар Видоески“, МАНУ, Скопје

12 Patronyms ( otchestva) in the Orthodox Parish of Łapy (1898–1915)

Michał Mordań

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 157-180 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147261

Keywords: onomastics anthroponymy patronyms otchestva parish registers

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The following paper discusses the anthroponymy of Białystok region in the late 19th and early 20th century with the focus on patronyms ( otchestva) excerpted from the church registers of the Orthodox parish in Łapy dated 1898‑1915. It was established that the majority of the patronyms were derived from the Orthodox (Church‑Slavonic) variants of proper names (e.g., Dionisiyev, Emilіanova), although the study confirms the presence of the cases where non‑canonical variants of baptismal names were used (e.g., Denisov, Emel’yanova). Moreover, the graphic notation of the patronyms reflects the rules enforced in the period prior to the final spelling reform; simultaneously, the observed trends point to the removal of doublets and the deviation from the Church‑Slavonic pattern. Despite the commonality of patronyms in their short forms (e.g., Yakovlev, Kirillov, Ivanova), the full forms of otchestva in the parish registers (e.g. Yakovlevich, Kirillovich, Ivanovna) were detected as well. Their occurrence can be explained by several factors, such as an effort to differentiate between identical surnames, or the social origin of the name owner and his profession. Nonetheless, the discussed dependencies between the short and full forms are not unconditionally consistent.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Michał Mordań

e-mail:

ORCID:

Uniwersytet w Białymstoku, Białystok

13 On the semantic differentiation of Proto‑Slavic * lichъ

Jiří Rejzek

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 185-197 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147262

Keywords: Proto‑Slavic qualitative‑evaluative adjectives semantic development enantiosemia

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article deals with the semantic development of Proto‑Slavic * lichъ. This adjective has many disparate meanings in Slavonic languages which have predominantly developed from the Proto‑Slavic meaning ‘odd, uneven’. The concept of ‘oddness, unevenness’ was mostly viewed as something undesirable and harmful which is reflected by meanings like ‘needless, futile, vain, wretched, evil, ominous etc.’. There is, however, also a group of positive meanings in Slavic languages, such as ‘free, daring, high‑spirited, skilful, famous’. The semantic shift to these meanings has not been satisfactorily explained. We suggest a development via the meanings ‘free from sth, singular’ (partially attested in Old Church Slavonic and some other Slavic languages) as one of the possible directions of semantic development of * lichъ from which the aforementioned positive meanings could be explained.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jiří Rejzek

e-mail:

ORCID:

Filozofická fakulta Univerzity Karlovy, Ústav pro jazyk český, Praha

14 Questionnaires for the German Language Atlas from Masuria, Warmia and the Neighbouring Areas as a Source of Dialect Lexis

Dorota Krystyna Rembiszewska , Janusz Siatkowski

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 199-257 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147263

Keywords: dialect lexis linguistic geography historical dialectology dialect questionnaires

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article discusses selected dialect lexis from the Polish questionnaires for the German Language Atlas from Masuria, Warmia and the Neighbouring Areas, then in Eastern Prussia. The 19th‑century records are a valuable source for the study of dialect lexis, offering a comparative basis for inquiries into the contemporary state of dialects in the area under study. The text analyses words that, according to the authors, bring interesting data to the collection of dialect lexis or confirm occurrence in the area under study. These are words meaning ‘many’, ‘peasant, man’, ‘those, others’, and ‘to crush, knead, squeeze, press, strangle’. The text is supplemented by a compilation of source material for the appended map, illustrating the equivalents of German Andern.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Dorota Krystyna Rembiszewska

e-mail:

ORCID:

Janusz Siatkowski

e-mail:

ORCID:

Instytut Slawistyki Polskiej Akademii Nauk, Warszawa
Uniwersytet Warszawski, Warszawa

15 Slavic languages in contact, 9: Surzhyk in Evliya Çelebi’s ‘Book of Travels’ (17th century)

Marek Stachowski

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 259-268 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147264

Keywords: surzhyk Ukrainian Evliya Çelebi lexicology

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Evliya Çelebi’s Seyāḥatnāme, i.e. ‘Book of Travels’, contains, among others, a handful of Slavic words that are marked as Ukrainian. As a matter of fact, some of them display mixed features, probably resulting from the contamination of Ukrainian and Russian variants. Such hybrid words (e.g., [9] below) are attested together with purely Ukrainian (e.g., [2]) and purely Russian (e.g., [18]) forms. This situation prompted this author to classify Evliya Çelebi’s lexical materials as surzhyk vocabulary and, thus, antedate the emergence of surzhyk (see section 3).

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marek Stachowski

e-mail:

ORCID:

Uniwersytet Jagielloński, Kraków

16 [Rev.:] Leszek Bednarczuk, Języki celtyckie. – Kraków: Wydawnictwo Lexis, 2022. – 124 pp.

Václav Blažek

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 269-273 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147265

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Authors and Affiliations

Václav Blažek

e-mail:

ORCID:

Masaryk University, Brno

17 Quest for new vistas of learning: Turning pages of a new publication in the field of Slavic studies

Павло Гриценко

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 275-309 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147266

Keywords: Janusz Siatkowski areal paradigm topochronographic analysis Slavic dialect lexis Slavic Linguistic Atlas (OLA)

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Among the highlights of Professor Janusz Siatkowski’s scholarly activity in the field of Polish and Slavic studies, there are his consistent development of the areal paradigm of linguistic research and his establishing and interpreting correlations between the areal distribution of linguistic phenomena and their chronological features, as well as between language‑internal and extralinguistic factors influencing language evolution processes.
The method of topochronographic analysis, which primarily emerged in Siatkowski’s numerous studies of Slavic dialect lexis, was then adopted and further developed by other linguists. Using exhaustive synchronic and diachronic linguistic data, and also taking into account the specificity of every linguistic item under scrutiny have resulted in the efficiency of his reconstruction and interpretation of structural, areal, and functional changes in linguistic inventories, their variation within individual Slavic languages and the common Slavonic area. Siatkowski’s analysis of a wide range of structural elements of various languages, differing in their genesis and history, testifies to the high informative value of all kinds of linguistic items, something that, while not denying the existence of general regularities of language development, brings into clearer relief their shared as well as exclusive properties. From the viewpoint of their content, Siatkowski’s works are twofold: firstly, they involve detailed analysis of linguistic items, and secondly, they employ a rigorous theoretical and methodological apparatus, which includes a set of relevant analytical procedures and is fit to be applied to other linguistic objects and in other research areas. Many studies in the 2019 volume “Prace Filologiczne” demonstrate the further proliferation and development of his ideas and methods – of what may be termed Siatkowski’s approach. Heuristically, many papers in this volume are valuable for the new material of Slavonic dialects and languages they bring, as well as the way this material is structured and interpreted. The inventories of linguistic items presented in dialect descriptions then turn into a matrix applicable in checking up other Slavonic linguistic areas, finding their common and distinctive elements, and establishing cross‑dialectal and cross‑linguistic isoglosses of various structural levels as well as exclusive features. The authors of the papers arrive at new theoretic generalizations concerning the regularities and scale of structural and functional changes in the common Slavonic dialectal area, effectively elaborating the areal paradigm of language study as an important direction in modern linguistics.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Павло Гриценко

e-mail:

ORCID:

Інститут української мови, Національної академії наук, України, Київ

18 The next issue of the Dictionary of Folk Stereotypes and Symbols

Наталья Б. Корина

Rocznik Slawistyczny | 2023 | No LXXII | 311-326 | DOI: 10.24425/rslaw.2023.147267

Keywords: ethnolinguistics Polish folk culture cultural stereotypes lexicography symbolism shrubs berries

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The next (and not yet the last) issue of the second volume Plants of the Dictionary of Folk Stereotypes and Symbols, published in Lublin under the editorship of prof. E. Bartminsky and S. Niebrzegowska‑Bartminska, contains the topics Shrubs and Little bushes. The ethnolinguistic “portraits” of the plants are given at the broad Slavic and European background. Like the previous issues, it is a significant contribution to the study of Polish and Slavic folk culture. It also provides various material for linguistic studies of Polish and Slavic phytonymy thanks to a rich dialect corpus of plant names and related folklore and ethnographic contexts. Moreover, the Dictionary of Folk Stereotypes and Symbols provides a new method of ethnolinguistic lexicography, which can be successfully applied to the study of other Slavic and non‐Slavic languages and cultural traditions.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Наталья Б. Корина

e-mail:

ORCID:

Очередной выпуск Словаря народных стереотипов и символов

Instructions for authors

PROCEDURA RECENZOWANIA

Do druku w „Roczniku Slawistycznym” przyjmowane są oryginalne (wcześniej niepublikowane) artykuły są z zakresu językoznawstwa słowiańskiego. Przyjmujemy teksty napisane we wszystkich językach słowiańskich oraz w językach kongresowych.
Osoby zgłaszające teksty do druku zobowiązane są do ujawnienia wkładu poszczególnych autorów w powstanie publikacji (z podaniem ich afiliacji oraz kontrybucji, tj. informacji, kto jest autorem koncepcji, założeń, metod itp. wykorzystywanych przy przygotowaniu publikacji). Główną odpowiedzialność za podane dane ponosi autor zgłaszający tekst.
Konsekwencje prawne nierzetelności naukowej (ghostwriting, guest authorship, plagiat) ponoszą autorzy zgłaszanych artykułów. Redakcja „Rocznika Slawistycznego” dokłada wszelkich starań, aby wykryć i ujawnić przypadki nieuczciwych praktyk (m.in. plagiat, fałszowanie danych, wielokrotna publikacja, nieuprawnione cytowania).
Komitet redakcyjny dokonuje wstępnej kwalifikacji tekstu pod względem zgodności z tematyką i profilem czasopisma oraz pod względem językowym. Prace niespełniające podstawowych warunków merytorycznych, językowych i formalnych publikacji naukowej są odrzucane, o czym niezwłoczne informowani są ich autorzy.
W wypadku pozytywnej opinii komitet redakcyjny wyznacza dwóch recenzentów afiliowanych w innej jednostce niż jednostka macierzysta autora (autorów) artykułu.
Jeśli tekst nie został przygotowany zgodnie z zasadami redakcyjnymi określonymi w instrukcji dla autorów, redakcja przed wysłaniem go do recenzentów zwraca się do autora (autorów) o dokonanie poprawek i uzupełnień.
Recenzja jest anonimowa dla recenzentów i autorów, tzn. redakcja nie ujawnia recenzentom nazwisk autorów, ani nie informuje autorów, kto był recenzentem artykułu.
Recenzja tekstów przygotowywana jest w formie pisemnej, opisowej i powinna zawierać jednoznaczną konkluzję, czy artykuł nadaje się do druku (ewentualnie ze wskazaniem koniecznych zdaniem recenzenta poprawek), czy też nie. Konkluzja musi być umotywowana.
Proces recenzowania jest poufny. Lista współpracujących recenzentów umieszczona jest na stronie internetowej „Rocznika Slawistycznego”.
Na podstawie otrzymanych recenzji komitet redakcyjny podejmuje dalsze decyzje:
- Jeśli obie recenzje są pozytywne, ujawniane są one autorowi z prośbą o ustosunkowanie się do ewentualnych uwag krytycznych. Po otrzymaniu poprawionej wersji tekstu komitet redakcyjny ocenia ją i kwalifikuje do druku. W uzasadnionych wypadkach może się zwrócić do recenzentów o ponowną ocenę tekstu.
- Jeśli recenzje kończą się sprzecznymi konkluzjami (a także w innych uzasadnionych wypadkach) komitet redakcyjny może powołać dodatkowego recenzenta.
Ostateczna decyzja o akceptacji artykułu do druku lub o jego odrzuceniu należy do redakcji.
Redakcja niezwłocznie komunikuje autorom swoją ostateczną decyzję o przyjęciu lub nieprzyjęciu tekstu do druku.
Zgłoszenie artykułu do czasopisma jest jednoznaczne z wyrażeniem zgody na opublikowanie w wersji papierowej i elektronicznej (lub równoważnej).
Redakcja nie odsyła tekstów niezamówionych.

ZALECENIA REDAKTORSKIE DOTYCZĄCE PRZYGOTOWYWANIA DO DRUKU ARTYKUŁÓW DO „ROCZNIKA SLAWISTYCZNEGO”

Objętość artykułów przesyłanych do druku (łącznie z przypisami, bibliografią i streszczeniem) nie powinna przekraczać 20. stron znormalizowanego maszynopisu, a recenzji – 5. stron.
W wypadku użycia znaków specjalnych (np. zapisów fonetycznych czy alfabetów niełacińskich) prosimy dołączyć plik z fontami oraz artykuł zapisany w formacie PDF (lub wydruk).
Edytor: Word, tekst zapisany w formacie *.rtf lub *.doc. Plik proszę nazwać nazwiskiem autora (np.

Reviewers

Lista recenzentów (2020–2023)

Mieczysław Balowski (Polska, Uniwersytet Adama Mickiewicza, Poznań)
Oleh Beley (Polska, Uniwersytet Wrocławski)
Magdalena Błaszak (Polska, Uniwersytet Śląski, Katowice)
Wiesław Boryś (Polska, Instytut Słowianoznawstwa PAN, Kraków)
Maciej Czerwiński (Polska, Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie)
Feliks Czyżewski (Polska, Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, Lublin)
Andriy Danylenko (USA, Pace University, Nowy Jork)
Henryk Duda (Polska, Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II, Lublin)
Adam Fałowski (Polska, Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie)
Maciej Grochowski (Polska, Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika, Toruń)
Pavlo Grycenko (Ukraina, Украïнська академiя наук, Kijów)
Stefan Grzybowski (Polska, Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika, Toruń)
Aleksandra Janowska (Polska, Uniwersytet Śląski, Katowice)
Ilona Janyšková (Czechy, Akademie věd České republiky, Brno)
Henryk Jaroszewicz (Polska, Uniwersytet Wrocławski)
Evgenija Karpilovs'ka (Ukraina, Украïнська академiя наук, Kijów)
Małgorzata Korytkowska (Polska, Instytut Słowianoznawstwa PAN, Warszawa)
Tomasz Kwoka (Polska, Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie)
Veselinka Labroska (Macedonia Północna, Институт за македонски jазик „Крсте Мисирков”, Skopje)
Tadeusz Lewaszkiewicz (Polska, Uniwersytet Adama Mickiewicza, Poznań)
Czesław Łapicz (Polska, Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika, Toruń)
Iwona Łuczków (Polska, Uniwersytet Wrocławski)
Jarosław Malicki (Polska, Uniwersytet Wrocławski)
Marjan Markovikj (Macedonia Północna, Универзитет „св. Кирил и Методиj”, Skopje)
Jolanta Mędelska-Guz (Polska, Uniwersytet Kazimierza Wielkiego, Bydoszcz)
Aleksandr Moldovan (Rosja, Российская академия наук, Moskwa)
Maryla Papierz (Polska, Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie)
Magdalena Pastuch (Polska, Uniwersytet Śląski, Katowice)
Marzanna Pomorska (Polska, Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie)
Hanna Popowska-Taborska (Polska, Instytut Słowianoznawstwa PAN, Warszawa)
Janusz Rieger (Polska, Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Ewa Rudnik-Karwatowa (Polska, Instytut Słowianoznawstwa PAN, Warszawa)
Roman Roszko (Polska, Instytut Słowianoznawstwa PAN, Warszawa)
Michał Sajewicz (Polska, Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, Lublin)
Zofia Sawaniewska-Mochowa (Polska, Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie)
Irena Sawicka (Polska, Instytut Słowianoznawstwa PAN, Warszawa)
Ewa Siatkowska (Polska, Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Janusz Siatkowski (Polska, Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Kazimiera M. Solecka (Instytut Języka Polskiego PAN, Kraków)
Julia Mazurkiewicz-Sułkowska (Polska, Uniwersytet Łódzki)
Arletta Szulc (Polska, Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika, Toruń)
Dorota Szumska (Polska, Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie)
Stanisłava Staša Tofoska (Macedonia Północna, Универзитет „св. Кирил и Методиj”, Skopje)
Svetlana Tolstaya (Rosja, Российская академия наук, Moskwa)
Zuzanna Topolińska (Macedonia Północna, Македонска академиjа на науките и уметностите, Skopie)
Tat'jana Vendina (Rosja, Российская академия наук, Moskwa)
Krzysztof Tomasz Witczak (Polska, Uniwersytet Łódzki)
Pavol Žigo (Słowacja, Slovenská akadémia vied, Bratysława)
Waldemar Żarski (Polska, Uniwersytet Wrocławski)
Jadwiga Waniakowa (Polska, Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie)

Lista recenzentów (2012–2019)

Diana Blagoeva (Bułgaria, Българаска академия на науките, Sofia)
Wiesław Boryś (Polska, Instytut Słowianoznawstwa PAN, Kraków)
Wojciech Chlebda (Polska, Uniwersytet Opolski)
Adam Fałowski (Polska, Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie)
Antoni Furdal (Polska, Uniwersytet Wrocławski)
Victor A. Friedman (USA, University of Chicago)
Stanisław Gajda (Polska, Uniwersytet Opolski)
Ilona Janyšková (Czechy, Akademie věd České republiky, Brno)
Evgenija Karpilovs'ka (Ukraina, Украïнська академiя наук, Kijów)
Małgorzata Korytkowska (Polska, Instytut Słowianoznawstwa PAN, Warszawa)
Tadeusz Lewaszkiewicz (Polska, Uniwersytet Adama Mickiewicza, Poznań)
Czesław Łapicz (Polska, Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika, Toruń)
Aleksandr Moldovan (Rosja, Российская академия наук, Moskwa)
Maryla Papierz (Polska, Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie)
Włodzimierz Pianka (Polska, Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Predrag Piper (Serbia, Српска академија наука и уметности, Belgrad)
Hanna Popowska-Taborska (Polska, Instytut Słowianoznawstwa PAN, Warszawa)
Zdenka Ribarová (Czechy, Akademie věd České republiky, Praga)
Janusz Rieger (Polska, Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Michał Sajewicz (Polska, Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, Lublin)
Michał Sarnowski (Polska, Uniwersytet Wrocławski)
Irena Sawicka (Polska, Instytut Słowianoznawstwa PAN, Warszawa)
Ewa Siatkowska (Polska, Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Janusz Siatkowski (Polska, Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Elżbieta Smułkowa (Polska, Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Svetlana Tolstaya (Rosja, Российская академия наук, Moskwa)
Zuzanna Topolińska (Macedonia Północna, Македонска академиjа на науките и уметностите, Skopie)
Tat'jana Vendina (Rosja, Российская академия наук, Moskwa)
Jadwiga Waniakowa (Polska, Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie)