Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T06:13:05.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

29 - Language Contacts

from Part 5 - Sociolinguistic and Geographical Approaches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

By
Dieter Stern
Edited by
Danko Šipka  and
Wayles Browne
Danko Šipka
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Wayles Browne
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

Throughout history, Slavic spread from a fairly restricted area somewhere around Ukraine, Belorussia, and Eastern Poland out to large parts of Europe, and Russian as the most widespread Slavic language today spans almost half of the Northern hemisphere. Historic and present migrations of Slavic speakers and the concomitant geographical expansion of their cultural and political dominions could not fail to afford rich opportunities for language contacts of all kinds, running the gamut from mild to intense forms of language contact, from lexical borrowing, language shift, and group bilingualism to the creation of new, contact-induced languages. Language contacts have been part of the history of Slavic from its very outset, and there is virtually no historical period for which no significant contacts can be identified. One of the tasks of this chapter is to give an idea of the deep historical layering of Slavic language contacts from Proto Slavic up to the present age.

Keywords

language contactlinguistic prehistoryBalkan linguistic areaCentral European linguistic areamixed codes and languagesRussian lexifier pidginsSurzhykTrasjankamultilingual empiresSlavic mutuality
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics , pp. 626 - 640
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Álvarez-Pedrosa, J. A. (2014). The reconstruction of the pre-Christian Slavic religion and Iranian lexical borrowing: A methodological review. Ollodagos, 30, 61–80.Google Scholar
Andersen, H. (2003). Slavic and the Indo-European migrations. In Andersen, H., ed., Language Contacts in Prehistory. Studies in Stratigraphy, Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 45–76.Google Scholar
Andersen, H. (2020). On the formation of the Common Slavic koiné. In Klír, T., Boček, V., & Jansens, N., eds., New Perspectives on the Early Slavs and the Rise of Slavic. Contact and Migrations, Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter, pp. 11–42.Google Scholar
Anderson, G. D. S. (2005). Language Contact in South Central Siberia, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Asenova, P. (2002). Balkansko ezikoznanie. Osnovni problemi na balkanskija ezikov săjuz, 2nd ed., Veliko Tărnovo: Faber.Google Scholar
Berend, N. (1998). Sprachliche Anpassung. Eine soziologisch-dialektologische Untersuchung zum Rußlanddeutschen, Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Bilaniuk, L. (2005). Contested Tongues. Language Politics and Cultural Correction in Ukraine, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Birnbaum, H. (1982). The Slavonic language community as a genetic and typological class. Die Welt der Slaven, 27, 5–43.Google Scholar
Birnbaum, H. (1996). Language contact and language interference: The case of Greek and Old Church Slavonic. Suvremena lingvistika, 41(1–2), 39–44.Google Scholar
Bond, A. (1974). German Loanwords in the Russian Language of the Petrine Period, Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Bracki, A. (2009). Surżyk. Historia i teraźniejszość, Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego.Google Scholar
Brehmer, B. (2007). Sprechen Sie Qwelja? Formen und Folgen russisch-deutscher Zweisprachigkeit in Deutschland. In Anstatt, T., ed., Mehrsprachigkeit bei Kindern und Erwachsenen: Erwerb, Formen, Förderung, Tübingen: Attempto, pp. 163–185.Google Scholar
Broch, I. & Jahr, E. H. (1981). Russenorsk – et pidginspråk i Norge, Oslo: Novus Forlag.Google Scholar
Broch, I. & Jahr, E. H. (1984). Russenorsk: A new look at the Russo-Norwegian pidgin in Northern Norway. In Sture Ureland, P. & Clarkson, I., eds., Scandinavian Language Contacts, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 21–65.Google Scholar
Broch, O. (1927). Russenorsk. Archiv für slavische Philologie, 41, 209–262.Google Scholar
Broch, O. (1930). Russenorsk tekstmateriale. Maal og Minne, 1930, 113–140.Google Scholar
Čerepanov, S. I. (1853). Kjaxtinskoe kitajskoe narečie russkogo jazyka. Izvestija Imperatorskoj Akademii nauk po otdeleniju jazyka i slovesnosti, 2, 370–377.Google Scholar
Curta, F. (2004). The Slavic lingua franca. Linguistic notes of an archaeologist turned historian. East Central Europe/L’Europe du Centre-Est, 31(1), 125–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daiber, T. (2012). Review of Gvozdanović 2009. Kritikon litterarum, 39(3–4), 180–202.Google Scholar
Daniel, M. A. & Dobrushina, N. R. (2013). Russkij jazyk v Dagestane: problemy jazykovoj interferencii. In Kompjuternaja lingvistika i intellektual’nye texnologii: po materialam ežegodnoj meždunarodnoj koferencii «Dialog» (Bekasovo, 29 maja-2 ijunja 2013 g.). Moscow: RGGU, pp. 186–211.Google Scholar
Fedorova, K. (2012). Transborder trade on the Russian-Chinese border: Problems of interethnic communication. In Bruns, B. & Miggelbrink, J., eds., Subverting Borders. Doing Research on Smuggling and Small-Scale Trade, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag, 107–128.Google Scholar
Feuillet, J. (2012). Linguistique comparée des langues balkaniques, Paris: Institut d’études slaves.Google Scholar
Flier, M. S. (1998). Surzhyk: The rules of engagement. Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 22, 113–136.Google Scholar
Fortson IV, B. W. (2010). Indo-European Language and Culture. An Introduction, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Friedman, V. A. & Joseph, B. D. (forthcoming). The Balkan Languages, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giger, M. (2008). Partizipien als Exportschlager. Zum Einfluss des Russischen auf andere slavische Sprachen im 19. Jahrhundert. In Kosta, P. & Weiss, D., eds., Slavistische Linguistik 2006/2007. Referate des 32. und 33. Konstanzer Slavistischen Arbeitstreffens, Munich: Otto Sagner, pp. 125–152.Google Scholar
Golovko, E. V. (1994). Mednyj Aleut or Copper Island Aleut: An Aleut-Russian mixed language. In Bakker, P. & Mous, M., eds., Mixed Languages. 15 Case Studies in Language Intertwining, Amsterdam: IFOTT, 113–121.Google Scholar
Golovko, E. V. & Vachtin, N. B. (1990). Aleut in contact: The CIA enigma. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 22, 97–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gołąb, Z. (1984). The Arumanian Dialect of Kruševo in SR Macedonia, SFR Yugoslavia, Skopje: Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts.Google Scholar
Gorham, M. S. (2000). Natsiia ili Snikerizatsiia? Identity and perversion in the language debates of late- and post-Soviet Russia. The Russian Review, 59, 614–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grenoble, L. A. (2000). Morphosyntactic change: The impact of Russian on Evenki. In Gilbers, D. J., Nerbonne, J., & Schaeken, J., eds., Languages in Contact, Amsterdam & Atlanta, GA: Rodopi, pp. 105–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, J. L. (1997). Global English invades Poland. English Today, 13(2), 34–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, J. L. (2001). Global English infiltrates Bulgaria. English Today, 17(4), 54–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruzdeva, E. (2000). Aspects of Russian-Nivkh grammatical interference: The Nivkh imperative. In Gilbers, D. J., Nerbonne, J., & Schaeken, J., eds., Languages in Contact, Amsterdam & Atlanta, GA: Rodopi, pp. 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gvozdanović, J. (2009). Celtic and Slavic and the Great Migrations. Reconstructing Linguistic Prehistory, Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.Google Scholar
Henninger, T. (1990). The Bulgarian national revival: Enforced elimination of some turkisms from the lexis. Canadian Slavonic Papers, 32(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hentschel, G. (2013). Belorusskij, russkij i belorussko-russkaja smešannaja reč’. Voprosy jazykoznanija, 2013(1), 53–76.Google Scholar
Hentschel, G., Taranenko, O., & Zaprudski, S., eds. (2014). Trasjanka und Suržyk – gemischte weißrussisch-russische und ukrainisch-russische Rede. Sprachlicher Inzest in Weißrussland und der Ukraine?, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holzer, G. (1989). Entlehnungen aus einer bisher unbekannten Indogermanischen Sprache im Urslavischen und Urbaltischen, Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Hüttl-Folter, G. (1996). Syntaktische Studien zur neueren russischen Literatursprache. Die frühen Übersetzungen aus dem Französischen, Vienna, Cologne, & Weimar: Böhlau.Google Scholar
Ivanova, N. I. (2004). Grammatičeskaja interferencija: narušenija norm upravlenija v ustnoj russkoj reči bilingvov-Saxa. In Krasovickij, A. M., ed., Issledovanija po jazykovoj interferencii [Evropejskaja Rossija, Sibir’, Dal’nij Vostok, Bjulleten’ Fonetičeskogo Fonda 9], Bochum, pp. 57–63.Google Scholar
Kallio, P. (2005). A Uralic substrate in Balto-Slavic revisited. In Meiser, G. & Hackstein, O., eds., Sprachkontakt und Sprachwandel: Akten der XI. Fachtagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft, Wiesbaden: Reichert, pp. 275–283.Google Scholar
Kazakevič, O. A. (2000). Smešenie i pereključenie kodov v reči severnyx sel’kupov. In Krysin, L. P., ed., Rečevoe obščenie v uslovijax jazykovoj neodnorodnosti, Moscow: Ėditorial URSS, pp. 14–21.Google Scholar
Kent, K. (2012). Language Contact: Morphosyntactic Analysis of Surzhyk Spoken in Central Ukraine, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, V. (1969). Gibt es ein finnougrisches Substrat im Slavischen? [Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae, Ser. B, Vol. 153,4], Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.Google Scholar
Kittel, B., Lindner, D., Tesch, S., & Hentschel, G. (2010). Mixed language usage in Belarus. The sociostructural background and language choice. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 206, 47–71.Google Scholar
Kluge, F. (1913). Urgermanisch. Vorgeschichte der altgermanischen Dialekte [Grundriss der germanischen Philologie 2], Strasbourg: K. J. Trübner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kochmann, S. (1967). Polsko-rosyjskie kontakty językowe w zakresie słownictwa w XVII wieku, Wrocław, Warsaw, & Kraków: Zakład narodowy im. Ossolińskich.Google Scholar
Kollár, J. (1844). Ueber die literarische Wechselseitigkeit zwischen den verschiedenen Stämmen und Mundarten der slavischen Nation, 2nd ed., Leipzig: Otto Wigand.Google Scholar
Leinonen, M. (2006). The Russification of Komi. Slavica Helsingiensia, 27, 234–245.Google Scholar
Liskovec, I. V. (2009). Trasjanka: A code of rural migrants in Minsk. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13, 396–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lunt, H. G. (1987). On the relationship of Old Church Slavonic to the written language of Early Rus’. Russian Linguistics, 11, 133–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martynov, V. V. (1963). Slavjano-germanskoe leksičeskoe vzaimodejstvie drevnejšej pory, Minsk: Izdatel’stvo Akademii Navuk BSSR.Google Scholar
Mečkovskaja, N. B. (2007). Lingvističeskij kiberpank v russkom internete: funkcii i vidy jazykovoj igry s anglijskimi zaimstvovanijami. Slavistična revija, 54(1/2), 47–64.Google Scholar
Meillet, A. (1926). Le vocabulaire slave et le vocabulaire indo-iranien. Revue des Etudes Slaves, 6, 165–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menovščikov, G. A. (1964). K voprosu o pronicaemosti grammatičeskogo stroja jezyka. Voprosy jazykoznanija, 1964–1965, 100–106.Google Scholar
Molnár, N. (1985). The Calques of Greek Origin in the Most Ancient Old Slavic Gospel Texts, Cologne & Vienna: Böhlau.Google Scholar
Moser, M. (1998). Die polnische, ukrainische und weißrussische Interferenzschicht im russischen Satzbau des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Moser, M. (2002). Čto takoe – “prostaja mova”? Studia Slavica Hungarica, 47, 221–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Namsaraeva, S. (2014). Border language: Chinese Pidgin Russian with a Mongolian ‘accent’. Inner Asia, 16, 116–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevskaja, I. (2000). Shor-Russian contact features. In Gilbers, D. J., Nerbonne, J., & Schaeken, J., eds., Languages in Contact, Amsterdam & Atlanta, GA: Rodopi, pp. 283–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Offord, D. (2015). French and Russian in Catherine’s Russia. In Offord, D., Ryazanova-Clarke, L., Rjéoutski, V., & Argent, G., eds., French and Russian in Imperial Russia, 2 vols., Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oglezneva, E. A. (2007). Russko-kitajskij pidžin: opyt sociolingvističeskogo opisanija, Blagoveshchensk: Amurskij gosudarstvennyj universitet.Google Scholar
Oglezneva, E. A. (2014). “Kitajskij russkij …” (K voprosu o sovremennyx formax russko-kitajskogo jazykovogo vzaimodejstvija). Slavica Helsingiensia, 45, 162–174.Google Scholar
Otten, F. (1985). Untersuchungen zu den Fremd- und Lehnwörtern bei Peter dem Großen, Cologne & Vienna: Böhlau.Google Scholar
Perexval’skaja, E. V. (2008). Russkie pidžiny, Saint Petersburg: Aletejja.Google Scholar
Pfandl, H. (2002). Wie gehen die slawischen Sprachen mit Anglizismen um? (Am Beispiel des Russischen, Tschechischen und Slowenischen). In Muhr, R. & Kettemann, B., eds., EUROSPEAK. Der Einfluss des Englischen auf europäische Sprachen zur Jahrtausendwende, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 117–154.Google Scholar
Pronk-Tiethoff, S. (2013). The Germanic Loanwords in Proto-Slavic, Amsterdam & New York, NY: Rodopi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rathmayr, R. (2002). Anglizismen im Russischen: Gamburgery, Bifšteksy und die Voucherisierung Rußlands. In Muhr, R. & Kettemann, B., eds., EUROSPEAK. Der Einfluss des Englischen auf europäische Sprachen zur Jahrtausendwende, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 155–180.Google Scholar
Rozwadowski, J. (1915). Stosunki leksykalne między językami słowiańskimi a irańskimi. Rocznik Orientalistyczny, 1, 95–110.Google Scholar
Saarikivi, J. (2006). Substrata Uralica: Studies on Finno-Ugrian Substrate in Northern Russian Dialects, Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
Sandfeld, K. (1930). Linguistique balkanique, problèmes et résultats, Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Schaller, H. W. (1975). Die Balkansprachen. Eine Einführung in die Balkanphilologie, Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Shapiro, R. (2012). Chinese Pidgin Russian. In Ansaldo, U., ed., Pidgins and Creoles in Asia, Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 1–58.Google Scholar
Smith, M. (2006). The Influence of French on 18th Century Literary Russian. Semantic and Phraseological Calques, Oxford & Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Sobolev, A. N. & Domoselickaja, M. V., eds. (2005–2010). Malyj dialektologičeskij atlas balkanskix jazykov. Serija leksičeskaja, 4 vols, Munich: Otto Sagner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, D. (2005). Taimyr Pidgin Russian (Govorka). Russian Linguistics, 29, 289–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, D. (2009). The Taimyr Pidgin Russian morphology enigma. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(3), 378–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, D. (2012). Tajmyr-Pidgin-Russisch: Kolonialer Sprachkontakt in Nordsibirien. Munich, Berlin & Washington, DC: Otto Sagner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, D. (2013a). Die Trasjanka und die Regiolektalisierung des Russischen in Weißrußland. Zeitschrift für Slawistik, 58, 169–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, D. (2013b). Ein soziohistorischer Modellentwurf des Balkansprachbunds. In De Dobbeleer, M. & Vervaet, S., eds., (Mis)Understanding the Balkans. Essays in Honour of Raymond Detrez, Ghent: Academia Press, 137–155.Google Scholar
Stern, D. (2015). ‘Nado minimum!’ – Mediating respectability at informal markets on the Russian-Chinese border. Inner Asia 17, 5–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, D. (2016). Negotiating goods and language on cross-border retail markets in the postsocialist space. In Kamusella, T., Nomachi, M., & Gibson, C., eds., The Palgrave Handbook of Slavic Languages, Identities and Borders, London: Palgrave MacMillan, pp. 495–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, G. (1996). Towards a history of Modern Czech purism: The problem of covert Germanisms. Slavonic and East European Review, 74(3), 410–420.Google Scholar
Thomason, S. G. & Kaufman, T. (1988). Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uspenskij, B. A. (1983). Diglossija i dvujazyčie v istorii russkogo literaturnogo jazyka. International Journal of Slavic Linguistics and Poetics, 27, 81–126.Google Scholar
Van der Meulen, R. (1909). De Hollandsche zee- en scheepstermen in het Russisch, Amsterdam: Müller.Google Scholar
Van der Meulen, R. (1959). Supplement op de Hollandsche zee en scheepstermen in het Russisch, Amsterdam: Noord-Hollandsche Uitgevers Maatschappij.Google Scholar
Vath, B. (2013). Review of Gvozdanović 2009. Historische Sprachforschung, 126, 313–319.Google Scholar
Veenker, W. (1967). Die Frage des finnougrischen Substrats in der russischen Sprache, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Winter, W. (1978). The distribution of short and long vowels in stems of the type Lith. ė́sti : vèsti : mèsti and OCS jasti : vesti : mesti in Baltic and Slavic languages. In Fisiak, J., ed., Recent Developments in Historical Phonology, The Hague: Mouton, pp. 431–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witkowski, W. (1999). Słownik zapożyczeń polskich w języku rosyjskim, Kraków: Universitas.Google Scholar
Wójtowicz, M. (1993). Anglijskie leksičeskie zaimstvovanija v russkom jazyke Petrovskoj èpoxi. Studia Rossica Posnaniensia, 24, 151–160.Google Scholar
Xelimskij, E. A. (1987). Russkij govorka mesto kazat’ budem (tajmyrskij pidžin). In Vardul‘, I. F. & Belikov, V. I., eds., Vozniknovenie i funkcionirovanie kontaktnyx jazykov, Moscow: Nauka, pp. 84–93.Google Scholar
Xelimskij, E. A. (2000). “Govorka” – Tajmyrskij pidžin na russkoj leksičeskoj osnove. E. A. Xelimskij: Komparativistika, Uralistika. Lekcii i stat’i, Moscow: Jazyki russkoj kul’tury, pp. 378–395.Google Scholar
Zeller, J. P. (2015). Phonische Variation in der weißrussischen “Trasjanka”. Sprachwandel und Sprachwechsel im weißrussisch-russischen Sprachkontakt, Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag.Google Scholar
Zemskaja, E. A. (2001). Jazyk russkogo zarubež’ja. Obščie processy i jazykovye portrety, Moscow & Vienna: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul’tury.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×