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
×
  1. Home
  2. Browse subjects
  3. Language and Linguistics
  4. European language and linguistics
  5. Content listing

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

6046 results in European language and linguistics

Page 76 of 303

  • 5 - Examining Russian-Speaking Identity from Below

  • Ammon Cheskin
  • Book:
    Russian Speakers in Post-Soviet Latvia
    Published by:
    Edinburgh University Press
    Published online:
    05 August 2016
    Print publication:
    18 January 2016, pp 103-128

  • Summary

    В гостях хорошо, а дома лучше

    It's nice to be a guest, but it's better to be at home.

    (Russian saying)

    METHODOLOGY

    A potential pitfall of a discursive approach to the study of national identities is that it can be easy to get carried away with a narrow focus on selected discourses. For example, there might be a temptation to study media discourses in isolation from any consideration of how these discourses are actually integrated into the identities of those people who read (or even those who do not read) the discourses in question. In many respects this again invokes the question of media effects– that is, how much impact do media discourses actually have on people's attitudes and behaviour? Most commonly a discursive approach is based on the ontological assumption that discursive actors create meaning. This, in turn, would indicate that it is important to study the discursive content of specific discursive agents, be they journalists, politicians, academics or any other socially important actors. While this research adheres to a constructivist position, it is also acknowledged that the sheer number of potentially creative agents means that it is impossible to conduct a comprehensive study of discourse for any given topic. It is precisely for this reason that CDA has traditionally focused on the areas deemed to be most discursively significant: the fields of politics and the media. This makes logical sense when consideration is given to the outreach and exposure politicians and journalists can potentially enjoy. Nevertheless, this traditional focus is not without its problems.

    The most obvious potential problem is that, by focusing solely on the moment of production, we can miss the importance of the moment of consumption– for Stuart Hall (1980) encoding and decoding respectively. That is to say that it is possible to examine why and how discursive agents create specific discourses without considering how these discourses are interpreted by their audiences. Moreover, by privileging the moment of production when trying to map out the contours of group identities, there is the possibility of effectively trying to speak on behalf of large groups of individuals without letting them have any input into the conclusions that are drawn.

  • 1 - Introduction

  • Ammon Cheskin
  • Book:
    Russian Speakers in Post-Soviet Latvia
    Published by:
    Edinburgh University Press
    Published online:
    05 August 2016
    Print publication:
    18 January 2016, pp 1-17

  • Summary

    This society has acquired freedom. It has been freed politically and spiritually, and this is the most important achievement that we have yet fully come to grips with. And we haven't, because we haven't learned to use freedom yet. (Gorbachev 1991)

    At the start of Mikhail Gorbachev's tenure as general secretary few could have predicted that, in the space of a few years, Baltic nationalism would emerge as a key centrifugal force in the disintegration of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). By the mid-1980s there had been small pockets of dissent across the three Baltic republics of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. However, the feeling among the Soviet elite was that nationalism was largely (although perhaps not totally) under control. Things changed dramatically soon after Gorbachev came to power. Although never his aim, Gorbachev's ill-fated policies of restructuring (perestroika), openness (glasnost’), and democratisation provided the freedom, opportunities, and impetus needed for Baltic nationalism to thrive once more.

    The National Awakening (Atmoda), as this period has come to be known in Latvia, developed at such speed that it took everyone by surprise. The Baltic Popular Fronts, initially backed by Gorbachev, soon spearheaded a nationalist revival that was able to generate a genuinely mass movement. The sheer degree of mass mobilisation was evident on 23 August 1989, when approximately two million Baltic inhabitants (out of a total population of around eight million) linked arms and formed the Baltic Way, an almost continuous human chain linking the republics’ three capitals– Tallinn, Riga, and Vilnius– and spanning over 600 kilometres. For many people, the fervour of the time, which culminated in the successful (re)acquisition of independence, signified a rebirth of Baltic national identities, freedom from Soviet occupation, and a long-awaited ‘return to Europe’. It was in this period that the hitherto outlawed, national symbols of pre-Soviet independence were rehabilitated and consumed with gusto. In Latvia the maroon, white, maroon flag was proudly displayed throughout the country, underpinning a popular revitalisation of Latvian nationalism and national identity.

    For some, however, the fall of the Soviet Union was far more problematic. What, for example, should the Baltic states’ ethnic Russian populations make of these seismic societal and political changes? Could Russians be part of this extraordinary National Awakening or would their status be under threat from the new political order?

  • 6 - The ‘Democratisation of History’ and Generational Change

  • Ammon Cheskin
  • Book:
    Russian Speakers in Post-Soviet Latvia
    Published by:
    Edinburgh University Press
    Published online:
    05 August 2016
    Print publication:
    18 January 2016, pp 129-148

  • Summary

    Этот День Победы

    Похором пропах,

    Это праздник

    С сединою на висках.

    Это радость

    Со слезами на глазах.

    День Победы!

    This Victory Day

    Thick with the smell of gunpowder,

    This is a celebration

    With grey hair at our temples,

    This is joy

    With tears in our eyes.

    Victory Day!

    (Lyrics to the popular song Victory Day)

    A TALE OF TWO HISTORIES?

    As discussed in Chapter 3, the theme of historical tension and antagonism has been much researched in the Baltic context between the three Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania on the one hand, and Russia on the other. For the Baltic states it is commonly accepted that between these three countries and Russia ‘two narratives of the recent past perennially conflict with one another’ (Kattago 2010: 383). According to the official Baltic narrative of the past, the Baltic states are portrayed as victims of merciless Soviet and Nazi occupations, each of which was equally horrific. The Soviet-Russian narrative rejects the label of occupation and instead highlights the heroic efforts of the Soviet Union in liberating Europe from the evils of fascism.

    This chapter, however, argues for a more nuanced understanding of actual collective memories of Russian speakers in Latvia. Although existing data point to differing and distinct memory positions of the two constructed ‘Latvian’ and ‘Russian-speaking’ communities, it is argued that it is necessary to examine people's perspectives on history in much remember’. This chapter therefore challenges the commonly accepted view that the majority of Russian speakers in Latvia ‘have accepted the vision of history as cultivated by Russia as their own and take it as the basis for their historical vision of Latvia’ (Zelče 2009: 54).

    While there can be little doubt that Russia plays a very significant role in the creation and perpetuation of collective memories for Latvia's Russian speakers, this assertion needs to be challenged on two counts: firstly, it smoothes out any differences that exist within the constructed group of Russian-speakers; secondly, it creates an overly simplified dichotomy between ‘Latvian’ and ‘Russian’ history with no democratic space between the two opposing poles. For example, the above quotation from Vita Zelče continues, ‘this is a crisis situation for efforts to achieve tolerance in regard to history and memory in Latvia.

  • Appendix 1 - Materials Presented to Focus Group Participants for Discussion

  • Ammon Cheskin
  • Book:
    Russian Speakers in Post-Soviet Latvia
    Published by:
    Edinburgh University Press
    Published online:
    05 August 2016
    Print publication:
    18 January 2016, pp 200-203

  • Summary

    1: EXCERPT FROM CHAS 20 SEPTEMBER 2010

    The presence of the Russian language is a peculiarity which we in Latvia need to utilise.

    Latvia, who best understands the peculiarities of Russia, should make the most of these advantages and become a mediator in business contacts and in forming relations between western countries and Russia.

    2: EXCERPT FROM CHAS 6 OCTOBER 2010

    For Russian-speakers the so called ethnic problems– language, education in ones native language, voting rights for non-citizens etc., are no longer so heated, and it seems simply not relevant. Of course they are annoyances; they bring discomfort into our lives. But they are no longer so defining. In Latvia social and economic problems have worsened, which have moved FHRUL's hobby horse– the rights of national minorities– into the background.

    3: EXCERPT FROM CHAS 26 FEBRUARY 2009

    It is a paradox: the government is toughening up its requirements for knowledge of the state language while consecutively reducing the budget of the organisation which is responsible for the issuing of the vital ‘apliecības.’1 Here one does not need to be a political scientist to understand that they are artificially creating impedi- ments and obstacles for Russian-speakers who wish to acquire the required [language] category for their profession. What follows is simple: no language, no job; no job, no income. That means poverty which means the street.

    Who does this benefit? It benefits those who don't need to sit an exam and who have, in the mean time, managed to secure a plush position in the state bureaucracy and local government.

    4: EXCERPT FROM CHAS 11 DECEMBER 2008

    The European Russian forum ‘The EU and Russia: New challenges’ was held in Brussels… One of the participants of the forum was the chairman of the State Duma Committee on Foreign Relations, and vice president of PACE Konstantin Kosachev. ‘Chas’ put a number of questions to him.

    What role does the Russian diaspora have in various countries in the estranged relations between Russia and the EU? I hope the subject of the Russian world will have all the more meaning in Europe. But here it's important to stress that Russia would make a serious mistake if it tried to use the Russian diaspora in a primitive way as a ‘fifth column’.

  • 2 - Discourse, Memory, and Identity

  • Ammon Cheskin
  • Book:
    Russian Speakers in Post-Soviet Latvia
    Published by:
    Edinburgh University Press
    Published online:
    05 August 2016
    Print publication:
    18 January 2016, pp 18-35

  • Summary

    The structured totality resulting from the articulatory practice, we will call discourse. (Laclau and Mouffe 1985: 105)

    In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)

    DISCOURSE

    This research is grounded on a discursive theoretical approach. That is to say that it is interested in how discourses become a central element of personal and group identities. A variety of Russian-speaking discourses from Latvia have been selected for analysis from a wide range of sources including newspaper articles, focus-group discussions, survey data, news articles from political parties, and interviews with Latvian politicians. This analysis traces how various discourses are socially constructed, altered, and challenged over time, and how they relate to personal and group identities.

    Narrowly defined the term ‘discourse’ can be understood in purely linguistic terms. By this definition discourses are instances of language use, either verbally or in written form, or even as gestures. Without question these verbal, written, and gestural ‘texts’ constitute central elements of discourse. Discourse, however, encapsulates more than just language. Fairclough (2003: 3), for example, distinguishes between lexical units and discourse in general. ‘Discourse in general’ is used to acknowledge that language is only ever meaningful within a social context. When, for example, one reads the words ‘man’, ‘woman’, ‘Russian’ and so on, these particular lexical units are only meaningful because the reader has had social experience of these concepts. The reader has a subjective idea of what ‘men’, ‘women’, and ‘Russians’ are, how they act, and even what they look like.

    For this reason many theorists of discourse refer to lexical units as ‘signifiers’. The individual letters that are put together to create a word do not provide any meaning. Instead signifiers are given meaning by the social context that surrounds them. In this respect words do not simply create social realities, but are also constructed by them. For Saussure (1966) a clear distinction is therefore drawn between the signifier and the signified. While the signifier is the linguistic construct which is used to document a concept (R-u- s- s- i- a, for example), the signified refers to the meanings that individuals give to this signifier (the images that are produced by the human mind in response to seeing/ hearing the signifier).

Russian Speakers in Post-Soviet Latvia
  • Discursive Identity Strategies
  • Ammon Cheskin
  • Published by:
    Edinburgh University Press
    Published online:
    05 August 2016
    Print publication:
    18 January 2016
  • This book provides a fresh methodological approach to the study of discourses and discursive strategies, especially within post-Soviet contexts. What makes this project distinctive from a number of other studies of discourse is that it is concerned with the temporally contingent nature of discourses. As such, it outlines a coherent methodology to study the evolution of discourses over time, rather than a single de-contextualised and static time period.

  • Swedification patterns of Latin and Greek affixes in clinical text

  • Gintarė Grigonytė, Maria Kvist, Mats Wirén, Sumithra Velupillai, Aron Henriksson
  • Journal:
    Nordic Journal of Linguistics / Volume 39 / Issue 1 / May 2016
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    07 January 2016, pp. 5-37

  • Swedish medical language is rich with Latin and Greek terminology which has undergone a Swedification since the 1980s. However, many original expressions are still used by clinical professionals. The goal of this study is to obtain precise quantitative measures of how the foreign terminology is manifested in Swedish clinical text. To this end, we explore the use of Latin and Greek affixes in Swedish medical texts in three genres: clinical text, scientific medical text and online medical information for laypersons. More specifically, we use frequency lists derived from tokenised Swedish medical corpora in the three domains, and extract word pairs belonging to types that display both the original and Swedified spellings. We describe six distinct patterns explaining the variation in the usage of Latin and Greek affixes in clinical text. The results show that to a large extent affixes in clinical text are Swedified and that prefixes are used more conservatively than suffixes.

  • IV - Notions of Macedonian Man // Macedonian Woman and Macedonian Language in Scientific Discourse

  • from A - PRAGMATICS OF DISCOURSE
  • Maciej Kawka, Jagiellonian University, Krakow
  • Book:
    Macedonian Discourses
    Published by:
    Jagiellonian University Press
    Published online:
    12 January 2018
    Print publication:
    01 January 2016, pp 37-55

  • Summary

    The notions Macedonian Man // Macedonian Woman // Macedonian People

    In text linguistics, expressions are analyzed on three levels, intratextual, intertextual and metatextual level. Internal (intratextual) analysis concerns text structure and cohesion; intertextual – concerns relationships between different texts; metatextual – concerns an analysis of elements in a certain text which concern the same text, not the real or fictitious world the text addresses. Therefore, a form of scientific texts and discourses is mainly analyzed, not so much their content, historical events or their interpretation.

    The notion of text competes with the notion of discourse, and the borderline between them is not clearly distinguished. And there is voluminous theoretical literature on this topic The most important mark differentiating text from discourse is the fact that the text is a finished product (according to Wilhelm von Humboldt – ergon), and the discourse is a process (energeia); The text, as an already shaped expression, is not interactive, and the discourse, according to the definition, is active. Scientific discourse on the notions of Macedonia and the Macedonian language, is primarily interactive since it requires a confrontation between different opinions of different authors. This trait is basic, and constitutive for the said speech act (speech genre).

    Namely, it is about a more detailed analysis of the scientific discourse concerning the said notions: Macedonia and the Macedonian language and their conceptualization in scientific literature. The term conceptualization implies a process of the creation of a notion based on a general knowledge of the world and a definition of a given word, which arose in the discourse.

    Macedonians

    Macedonians are one of the Slavic peoples who live mainly in Macedonia (formerly a part of Yugoslavia), Greece and Bulgaria and in small number in Albania. Macedonians are mostly Orthodox Christians, although some of them are Muslim. However, for the majority of the population in Europe, the names Macedonia and Macedonian are not associated with the present-day Balkan republic. For them, Macedonia was once a powerful military empire of King Philip II and King Alexander the Great.

  • V - On Poetic Antonyms in the Poem Огнот не знае, пепелта не знае (Fire Does Not Know, Ashes Does Not Know) by Petre M. Andreevski

  • from B - LANGUAGE IN THE DISCOURSE: MACEDONIAN – POLISH
  • Maciej Kawka, Jagiellonian University, Krakow
  • Book:
    Macedonian Discourses
    Published by:
    Jagiellonian University Press
    Published online:
    12 January 2018
    Print publication:
    01 January 2016, pp 205-211

  • Summary

    Antonyms indicate semantic opposition, contrast with another word, antonyms are expressions with opposite meaning, for example hot-cold, smart-stupid, satiated-hungry. Poetic antonimy used by P.M. Andreevski in his poem Fire Does Not Know, Ashes Does Not Know belongs here: ashes instead of, for example: fire : water, athough this kind of juxtaposition is usualy found in sentence antonyms.

    Antonyms take prominent place in structural descriptions of language lexis. Since the very beginning of structural linguistics development, its representatives emphasized the importance and the meaning of this relation for paradigmatic opposition in language (i.e. in the system).

    Placed in lexicographic and word formation descriptions of meaning, the relationships between lexemes, as are the synonyms, antonyms and hyponyms, can established and organize the relations between words, but without any description of the way they function in text. The thesis that the language unites are not autonomous (depending on the context) allowed us to consider them in larger groups of words – semantic fields: paradigmatic (associative) and syntagmatic. Word formation theory also considers words and groups of words in isolation – isolated, i.e. outside of the text. This is especially true when it comes to structural methodology in language description.

    Primary antonyms (these include adjectives and words included in the comparison system, for example nouns: човек (почовек, најчовек) – нечовек (понечовек, најнечовек) can be graded, for example young – old, younger – older, smart – smarter, stupid – more stupid, however, they do not indicate independent opposite qualities since they serve as lexical means for expression of gradation and comparison (for example tall – taller, old – older – oldest) (Antonyms build the paradigm on the basis of their positive pair, and hence, the opposite word will appear in all forms, emphasizing the absence of the characteristic of the positive pair.) Pairs of complementary antonyms are words in which negation of one part carries information that represents anassertion: тој е оженет – тој е неженет (he is married – he is not married). These are lexemes which are mutually excludable and opposing, for example ден и ноќ, жив и мртов (day and night, alive and dead).

  • I - Textual Categories of Time and Space in Folk Tales by Marko K. Cepenkov

  • from C - FOLKLORE
  • Maciej Kawka, Jagiellonian University, Krakow
  • Book:
    Macedonian Discourses
    Published by:
    Jagiellonian University Press
    Published online:
    12 January 2018
    Print publication:
    01 January 2016, pp 233-238

  • Summary

    Textual categories, unlike morphological and syntactical or lexical ones, perform at higher levels of expression and are related to the internal organization and pragmatic properties of text. In regards to grammatical characteristics of textual categories, Danuta Ostaszewska writes that this phenomenon hasn't been linguistically analyzed in detail, yet, primarily because there are not enough scientific texts belonging to different functional styles. Researchers of text structure and cohesion include the following in textual categories: informativeness, modality, delimitation, segmentation, coherence, completeness (integration, unification), completion, linear continuity (continuum), autosemantics, repetition, collection, thematisation. Here, A. Wilkoń also includes the semantic category person, as well as the category author, narrator, reader (receiver), time and space. Therefore – as the author notes – text can be studied as a process, an action (linguistic action) or as a final product. The former being dynamic and the latter a static study. From communicational point of view, the former is considered to be more correct. Among other things, this was decisive for the more frequent research in whether texts perform from dynamic aspect, during their creation, or if they are linguistic products, in which case, those closest to communicational acting should undergo analysis. Folk tales belong to this type of texts.

    Most characteristic trait of South Slavic folk tales collected by Marko K. Cepenkov is the marking of cohesion of narrative text through different linguistic means belonging to author's narration. This is related to the dominant role of the person who wrote the text down and its properties for creative transformation and secondary text editing expressed by the informer, and more often, fulfilled (expressed) from memory

    These include those expressions and linguistic means that primarily fulfill metatextual functions in text merging and concern only the text that follows or proceeds them connecting its elements in cohesive and coherent whole. The following can be found among them:

  • •арно ама (…арно ама Силјан беше фатил еден лош пат; 2/137).

  • VIII - The Macedonian Language in Public Communication

  • from A - PRAGMATICS OF DISCOURSE
  • Maciej Kawka, Jagiellonian University, Krakow
  • Book:
    Macedonian Discourses
    Published by:
    Jagiellonian University Press
    Published online:
    12 January 2018
    Print publication:
    01 January 2016, pp 66-88

  • Summary

    За македонцките работи (On Macedonian Matters) by Krste Petkov Misirkov i.e. How A Political Discourse is Created

    The scientific work of Krste Petkov Misirkov, according to one available bibliography included in the phototypic edition of За македонцките работи58 from 1974, comprises 21 of the more important works of different character. These mainly elaborate cultural problematic and the majority are published in Sofia; two are in the Russian language and are published in Odessa, and for several works, place of publishing is unknown. At the bottom of all these analyses, the book titled За македонцките работи (On Macedonian Matters), published in Sofia in 1903 for the first time, can be conspicuously singled out. Several Macedonian editions of the work have been published so far – the last one in 200359 by the Tabernakul publishing house in Skopje. The same year, the Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts published a parallel Macedonian – English version of Misirkov's work,60 for the 100th anniversary of the first edition.

    In comparison to the numerous different jubilee editions of K.P. Misirkov's work, the work's critical analyses are small in number, given the importance these texts are prescribed in Macedonia. Here, primarily, we should single out the work of B. Korubin, Jазикот на Крсте П. Мисирков (Krste Petkov Misirkov's Language) from 1956, three articles by T. Dimitrovski and one on Misirkov's geographical system by T. Stamatovski.61 In this regard, the urgent need of substantial linguistic elaboration of all Misirkov's texts emerges, not only regarding lexis and graphics, but also morphology, syntax and cohesion62 of expression together with the author's style. To enable these analyses, a full critical edition is necessary, not only of Misirkov's work За македонцките работи, but also of all his texts, and not only by use of samples of the original versions (editio princeps) (phototypes), since these are already discovered in Macedonian philology, but all versions of the texts (editio ne varietur, editio posthuma, editio purificata), historical and linguistic commentary and glossary.

Macedonian Discourses
  • Text Linguistics and Pragmatics
  • Maciej Kawka
  • Published by:
    Jagiellonian University Press
    Published online:
    12 January 2018
    Print publication:
    01 January 2016
  • Essentially being an image of the most substantive problems related to current Macedonistics with a special reflection on text linguistics and linguistics of discourse, this is a book on the language of modern Macedonian discourses (scientific, political, parliamentary, media etc.), on the Macedonian literary text and the language in public communication. Nonetheless, a particular attention is dedicated to the conditions in which the Macedonian standard language was born.
    Maksim Karanfilovski

  • II - Text in the Discourse

  • from B - LANGUAGE IN THE DISCOURSE: MACEDONIAN – POLISH
  • Maciej Kawka, Jagiellonian University, Krakow
  • Book:
    Macedonian Discourses
    Published by:
    Jagiellonian University Press
    Published online:
    12 January 2018
    Print publication:
    01 January 2016, pp 164-176

  • Summary

    Basic Connection Indicators in the Macedonian Language – Anaphoric Function of the Article

    Text linguistics is considered to be a modern area of study in the science of language in which the research subject is not only the text understood and treated as multi-level structure and completely organized multi-dimensionalmacrosign, but also involves its analysis as a linguistic unit, not only as a construction or folding structure, but also its role in the context (the text in the context). It is easy to arrive to the notion of discourse if text is analyzed, as a process and an event, in context.

    The most important problems in text linguistics include:

  • Linearization;

  • Multiple sentence structures;

  • Cohesion and coherence;

  • Subjectivity;

  • Communicability;

  • Dialogicality;

  • Text pragmatics.

    • Research in this discipline is concentrated on the following topics:

  • Communicational character of text conditioning its organization, its semantics and above all, its pragmatics,

  • Creation of text as a multiple sentence unit (a single whole) requiring other non-exclusively linguistic or grammatical categories of description, primarily, processes of acquisition and unification (synthesis) of information that include its linear character (anaphoric and cataphoric relations),

  • Functional sentence perspective,

  • Indirect (immediate) information with implications and presuppositions,

  • Problem of text cohesion and coherence,

  • Typology texts and their genres, types and style variants,

  • Text composition (passages, chapters, paragraphs).

    • The question of connectivity or conjunction of language elements in a text rises as the main problem in linguistic textology, in addition to the role of text-context in and of the paralinguistic elements – prosody and intonation, and nonverbal elements – kinesics, proxemy, haptics, chronemics in text and discourse construction. Accordingly, two kinds of such connectivity can be distinguished: cohesion and coherence. •Cohesion is considered to be a relation between two successive sentence elements or larger text fragments (paragraphs, chapters, larger narrative fragments). We can single out, for example, cohesion in one simple or complex clause. It has superficial indicators (for example conjunctions and metaoperators) and is verbalized as opposite to implications and presuppositions, which are contextually conditioned or derived from the speakers and listeners common knowledge.

  • Conclusion

  • Maciej Kawka, Jagiellonian University, Krakow
  • Book:
    Macedonian Discourses
    Published by:
    Jagiellonian University Press
    Published online:
    12 January 2018
    Print publication:
    01 January 2016, pp 267-267

  • Summary

    Today, the Macedonian language is developing spontaneously. It is changing in accordance with the habits of interpersonal communication, and the number of authors and poets who write original works is increasing. However, it should be emphasized that this hastened development, is under constant linguistic and ethnic pressure, imposed by the Albanians. After the proclamation of independence in September 1991, the majority of the population was Macedonian, and spoke the Macedonian language, however, they represented just over 64% of the population in the Republic. Moreover, the Macedonian language is the main (official) language in the country, liberating itself, at least legally, from former Serbian domination, and today, it strives not to be subjected by anything.

  • Introduction

  • Maciej Kawka, Jagiellonian University, Krakow
  • Book:
    Macedonian Discourses
    Published by:
    Jagiellonian University Press
    Published online:
    12 January 2018
    Print publication:
    01 January 2016, pp 9-10

  • Summary

    Macedonia is a multinational (dominated by a population composed of Macedonians and Albanians), multiethnic, multilingual (dominated by the Macedonian and Albanian languages) and multi-religious (dominated by Orthodox Christianity and Islam) country. Macedonians and Albanians, Turks, Roma, Aromanians and other national and ethnic groups live in this country with a population of two million. Macedonian is the official language used by the majority of the population in the state (70%). Albanian (25.17% of the population), along with the Turkish, Serbian and Croatian languages (during the reign of J. Broz Tito – Serbo-Croatian language) as well as other languages are also in use. Orthodox Christianity is the dominant religion (67% of the population); however, there is also a significant number of Muslims, who represent less than one third of the society. The Macedonian language belongs to the group of South-Slavic languages together with Bulgarian, Serbian, Croatian and Slovenian. It is estimated that the Macedonian language in Macedonia, is spoken by 2 million out of 2.5 million people, together with the Macedonian emigration.

    In the postwar history of the Macedonian language, the need of legal and grammatical status regulation and the destiny of the literary standard, greatly dependent on political motives, were expressed by the highest legislative bodies that strived towards its establishment. State committees that determined the Macedonian alphabet, and the basis for language development, were created. After World War II, when the Macedonian standard was established under the influence of the not so great, but highly influential elites, non-linguistic factors involved in the codification processes were obviously right. This was not so difficult when it came to that small South Slavic republic, subordinate to Belgrade until 1991.

    The creation of the modern Macedonian state was related to three historical events, namely, the Balkan Wars (1912/1913), and the establishment (1943) and the breakup (1991) of the Yugoslav federation. As a result of the Balkan wars, the historical and geographical territory of Macedonia, heretofore belonging to the Turkish state, was divided between three states: Pirin Macedonia was attributed to Bulgaria, Aegean Macedonia to Greece and Vardar Macedonia to Serbia.

Page 76 of 303