Rocznik Slawistyczny

A direct impetus for this research is the dictionary of metaphorical values of names for dishes in the Russian language (Словарь русской пищевой метафоры), whose editor is E.A. Jurina. This linguistic and cultural dictionary contains an abundance of data on food lexemes, on the basis of which it is possible to reconstruct the place of names for certain dishes in the cultural and lexical system of the Russian language. In addition to the basic meaning, the dictionary also lists all the metaphorical meanings of the chosen lexeme, derivatives and their meanings, and expressions and their meanings. A particularly useful segment of the dictionary entry is the linguo-cultural commentary, in which the authors exhaustively list the cultural significance of food, as well as its properties on which metaphorical meanings are based on.

Dictionaries of the Serbian language were also used as source (primarily the Речник српскохрватског књижевног и народног језика Српске академије наука и уметности), as well as electronic corpora of both languages.

In the paper, the meanings of the lexeme zrno / зерно (‘grain’) were analyzed and compared in Serbian and Russian, as well as derivatives, phraseology, verbal associations, as well as the most common phrases in which this lexeme appears in both languages.

The research is based on the theoretical and methodological foundations of cognitive semantics and linguocultural studies.

According to the terminology of Milka Ivić, zrno (‘grain’) belongs to particularizers and shapers. The paper answers the question of whether this meaning is primary or whether the edible fruit (seed) of the grain from which flour is made can still be treated as the primary meaning. The paper presents the criteria for determining the primary meaning of this lexeme. The similarities and differences in the way in which substances are particularized with a zrno ‘grain’ in relation to other particularizers used to indicate a small amount (eg crumbs or pieces) were analyzed.

The lexeme zrno (‘grain’) attracts attention because in both languages it appears in expressive phrases as a particularizer (grain of truth, grain of humor), so one of the goals of this paper was to examine which phenomena in small quantities can be conceptualized as grain: are there pragmatic limitations that prevent some abstractions conceptualize in the form of grains, and how the round shape of the grain and its solid state relates to it.

Many concrete phenomena of small scale and round shape can be called a zrno ‘grain’. The paper answers the question of whether there are any limitations in this and whether there are differences in the Serbian and Russian languages in this regard.

Based on the meaning of the seed, the symbolism of the grain was developed as the essence of a phenomenon of significant value. The germination of grain is metaphorically projected onto the development of an idea. In the conclusion of the paper, the similarities and differences in the way the grain is conceptualized in the Russian and Serbian languages are analyzed, and the semantic and creative potential of this token and the symbolism of the zrno ‘grain’ are presented.

The researcher A. Bańkowski recognised 585 lexemes in Etymologiczny słownik języka polskiego (Etymological Dictionary of Polish Language), as probable ruthenisms. 176 units were refered to the old Polish language, and 129 belonged to the modern general Polish language, but their Ruthenian origin has been described earlier. In this case, A. Bańkowski's task was just to confirm these facts. 280 lexical units which have not yet been described as units of Ruthenian (Belorussian, Ukrainian) provenance are much more important for us. These words are in the orbit of interest of this sketch for obvious reasons, and just they are the subject of the detailed, multifaceted, chronological, geographical, and etymological analysis.

This analysis showed clearly that the etymologist from Częstochowa quantitatively exaggerated the issue of ruthenisms in Polish beyond the real and acceptable measure. Among 280 units not mentioned so far as genetically Ruthenian, he acknowledged as such 82 Proto-Slavicisms, 35 dialectal (northern) Proto-Slavicisms, 54 native Polish words, 15 borrowings from languages other than Ruthenian. Among the remaining 94 lexical units, possible to postulate with a high degree of probability the Ruthenian origin for only 15 of them. These words are: czeznąć, czort, dobroduszny, gołąbka (‘caressingly about a girl’), hałaśliwy, klucz ‘szyk lecących ptaków’, koleina, kraszanka, krupnik, na pohybel, napytać się, oszołomić, perkoz, pokrój, ryży. What about the remaining 79 lexemes, it is difficult to uniquely determine their origin and they require further in-depth and systematic research.

Thus, it should be concluded that the only unquestionable contribution made by A. Bańkowski to the study of the role of Ruthenian languages in the formation of the lexical resource of general Polish has actually been the expansion of the existing number of Polish ruthenisms by just 15 lexical units.

The concept of etymological doublets refers to two words within a language ultimately derived from the same etymon. This paper explores etymological doublets found in Old Polish, focusing on terms within Christian terminology originating from Latin. The analysis discusses selected Old Polish etymological doublets, including lucyfer ~ lucyper, hymna (~ imna) ~ hymn, korona ~ koruna ~ krona, and kolęda ~ kalendy (~ kalandy). The article concludes by emphasizing the value of etymological doublet analysis in understanding the linguistic and cultural influences in the history of Old Polish.

This contribution compares the Common Celtic intensifying *trē and its Slavic counterparts in Serbian Church Slavonic (trь- & tri-), Serbian of the religious style (tri-), and vernacular Serbian (tro-). In addition, evidence from Ancient Greek and Latin is mentioned. This paper proposes several development scenarios and discusses them critically.

The subject of the analysis is a group of Slavic words of German origin that denote traditional folk musical instruments. These include the borrowing of older German brumel, or brummle ʻjaw harp, Maultrommelʼ (such as Czech brumle, Upper Sorbian brumla, Polish dialectal brombla, Slovenian archaic and dialectal brȗmda, etc.), as well as the compound Brummeisen (such as Kashubian bremza, etc., Czech brumajzl, Lower Sorbian archaic brumejza, etc.), and the borrowing of early German trum(el), trumb(e)l ʻdrum; noise, dinʼ, which continues as modern German Trommel ʻdrumʼ (e.g., Polish drumla, Slovak drumbľa, Slovenian dialectal drȏmlja, Ukrainian drýmba, etc.). The linguistic environment (dialects of the individual Slavic languages) and the nature of these words (onomatopoeic origin) have created conditions for rich phonetic variability, as well as for mutual formal and semantic influence; very probable is also contamination of the words with initial b- and initial d-. A striking, but typical feature for the names of folk instruments is that several musical instruments can be denoted by the same lexeme.

The Historical Dictionary of the Slovak Language also contains the adjective bezčelný, attested in the so-called Camaldolese Dictionary (Latin-Slovak dictionary; manuscript, 1763) as an equivalent of Latin asomatos ‘incorporeal’ (from Greek ἀσώματος ‘id.’ < Greek σῶμα ‘body’). In the authors’ opinion, the respective entry originates from the 17th century Cnapius’ Polish-Latin-Greek dictionary (vol. 2: Latin-Polish) which was one of the sources used in the compilation of the Camaldolese Dictionary. Cnapius gives the Polish form bezcielny (derivative of Polish ciało ‘body’ < Proto-Slavic *tělo) whose expected Slovak cognate is, however, beztelný (cf. Slovak telo ‘body’). The Slovak translator of the entry apparently ignored the etymology of the Latin (and Polish) lexeme and mechanically substituted the Polish consonant ć (rendered as ci in bezcielny), non-existent in Slovak, with Slovak č; in this way, he created the form bezčelný which might suggest a (fictitious) etymological connection with Slovak čelo ‘forehead’ (< Proto-Slavic *čelo; hence also Polish czoło ‘id.’). Against this background, Slovak bezčelný may be labelled as an occasional (and unfortunate) borrowing from Polish; yet it expands the existing inventory of the Slovak lexical Polonisms. In this context, the authors also point to the need for a special historical-etymological dictionary of the Polish loanwords in the Slovak language.

The article deals with the history and etymology of the basic means of transport on snow and ice in Slavonic languages – sledge, ski and skate. The oldest of these means is the sledge. The word for it (Proto-Slavonic *sani, *saně) is attested in all Slavonic languages and even expanded into some surrounding languages; its etymology, however, remains unclear. Among the expressions for ski, only East (North) Slavonic *lyža can aspire to be a late Proto-Slavonic (dialectal) word. Other Slavonic words are newer, some of them even relatively late borrowings. The words for skates are the most diverse in Slavonic languages, with special motivations especially in North Slavonic languages, and reflecting their relatively late use in Slavonic terrritory (not before the late 17th century).

The article considers the effects on the phonological representation of words caused by the syllabification of sonorants in two-peak syllables, in particular the emergence of an additional vowel. In Russian, this leads to morphophonological changes and mixing of units in the graphic system, ergo in the underlying representation. Abundant documentation comes from the Internet, and older examples can be found in literary production. Possible changes in the accent system and the problem of recognizing syllabicity are also mentioned.

The topic of this paper is an etymological interpretation of the Czech wine term tarant. On the basis of the linguistic and cultural-historical analysis, it’s possible to conclude that it is a Germanism of Romance origin, at the beginning of which stands the Italian taranta (or Old French tarante) denoting the poisonous spider ‘Lycosa tarantula’. The semantic development seems to have been along the lines of ‘spider’ → (‘scorpion’) → ‘colour of spider’ → ‘colour variability’ → ‘type of colour-changing wine’, with the original meaning being ‘a type of wine whose colour oscillates between white and red’. The same motivation for the naming based on the changing colour of the wine was found in the corresponding German term Schiller, which is often found in Middle Czech monuments as a translation equivalent of the Czech tarant. The family of the Romance word, borrowed into a number of european languages, also proved to be richly branched, covering a number of words with original meanings as well as meanings metaphorically or metonymically transferred. For some of them, however, a clear affiliation to this etymological family is difficult to determine, as shown, for example, by the Polish hipological term tarant.

This collection, entitled Ukraine as an Object of Russian Great Power Claims – Languages, Identities and Discourses, consists “mostly” of written versions of contributions to a series of online lectures that Björn Wimer, a professor of Slavic linguistics at the University of Mainz, organized a few weeks after Russia’s full- scale war in Ukraine began. The book is intended to contribute to a broader understanding of the “deeper-rooted” causes of the war in Ukraine “from different scientific perspectives” and “help correct” traditional misconceptions, particularly in view of “historical, linguistic, political and economic circumstances and their background”. To the extent that any quality study of Ukrainian-Russian relations helps to achieve this goal, the book does explain some of the underlying causes of the tragic war.

The monograph focuses on the study of the origin and development of grammatically orientated language units in North Slavic languages. The author deals particularly with the words with lexicalized grammatical information on the one hand and words with grammaticalized lexical information on the other one. The first three theoretical chapters discuss the place of the etymological research in linguistics, semantic and functional changes in language including the concept of the language unit in dynamic perspective and the questions of lexicalization a grammaticalization. The second part of the book is formed by three „case studies“: Indo-European (and in particular North Slavic) function words related to the concept of truth in comparison with Semitic units, the North Slavic enclitics -kV and -ž(e), and the function words as borrowings – Bohemisms in Polish and Polonisms in Yiddish.