Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The local Dialect of Novi Jarylovyči (Region of Černihiv) in the East Slavic Context

Говірка c. Нові Яриловичі (Чернігівщина) у східнослов’янському контексті

  • Published:
Russian Linguistics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Анотацiя

The article provides a linguistic description of the most common dialectal features which typify the dialect of Novi Jaryloviči (former district of Ripky, region of Černihiv). The analysis enhances the empirical material useful for the successive accomplishment of a larger research project focusing on the origin and characterization of those dialects spoken in the northwestern part of the region of Černihiv. These dialects are generally attributed to the northeastern Ukrainian (or Polissian) dialectal territory and, in the specialist literature, are likewise known as “transitional from Ukrainian to Belarusian”. Due to the primarily descriptive approach adopted in this paper, theoretical implications and terminological issues will be discussed elsewhere. The analysis is structured according to the dialectological tradition. After a geo-historical and methodological outline, the most relevant dialectal features will be examined along with the usual linguistic parameters: phonetic-phonology, to a lesser extent derivation, morphology, syntax and lexis. The circumstance that Novi Jaryloviči is also mapped in the Atlas of the Ukrainian Language (settlement N. 1) will facilitate further comparison with other local varieties and will help to identify recent trends and possible undergoing changes in the dialectal area.

Анотацiя

У статті подано лінгвістичний опис найтиповіших діалектних рис, які характеризують говірку Нових Яриловичів колишнього Ріпкинського району Чернігівської області. Аналіз цієї говірки сприяє розширенню емпіричного матеріалу, що є необхідним для виконання ширшого дослідницького проекту про місцеві діалекти, якими розмовляють жителі північно-західної частини Чернігівської області. Ці говірки, відповідно до загальноприйнятої класифікації, належать до північно-східного (або східно-поліського) діалектного масиву і також відомі як «перехідні з української до білоруської мови». Через переважно описовий характер цієї розвідки, деякі теоретичні й дискусійні питання залишаємо поза увагою. Опис структурований відповідно до діалектологічної традиції. Після геоісторичного та методологічного окреслення подано аналіз найрелевантишніх діалектніх особливостей, здійснений на основі звичайних лінгвістичних рівнів: фонетико-фонологічного, меншою мірою словотвірного, морфологічного, синтаксичного і лексичного. Крім того, факт, що с. Нові Яриловичі також скартографовано в «Атласі української мови» (населений пункт № 1), сприяє подальшому порівнянню з іншими місцевими варіантами і є важливим чинником для виявлення більш сучасних тенденцій та можливих латентних змін у дослідженому ареалі.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. These local dialects represent in fact the core of our dialectal data for the accomplishment of a more exhaustive analysis. Furthermore the location of these rural villages form a sort of rough territorial triangle embracing most of the central and north-western part of the former district of Ripky. The latter has been incorporated into the larger district of Černihiv since the administrative reform of 2020.

  2. In a more traditional terminology, these dialects are likewise known as ‘transitional from Ukrainian to Belarusian’. All implications involved in the former definition will be examined elsewhere. On the theoretical-terminological and related issues, see Durnovo et al. (1915); Kurylo (1924); Buzuk (1926); Hancov (1928); Žylko (1953); Shevelov (1953) etc. More recently, see Wiemer and Erker (2012/2013).

  3. https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Novi+Yarylovychi,+Chernihivs'ka,+Ucraina,+15013/Ripky,+Chernihivs'ka,+Ucraina […] (18.02.2022).

  4. http://database.ukrcensus.gov.ua/MULT/Database/Census/databasetree_uk.asp (05.11.2021).

  5. http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/z7503/A005?rf7571=41040 (05.11.2021); http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/z7503/A005?rdat1=21.11.2021&rf7571=41045 (05.11.2021).

  6. Cf. Onac’kyj (1967: 2126–2127); http://izbornyk.org.ua/encycl/euii314.htm (21.11.2021).

  7. We wish to thank Maryna Ostrenok who, at the time of the interviews, had just completed her bachelor’s degree in Ukrainian Studies (Ukrainian Philology) at the National Pedagogical University of Černihiv Taras Ševčenko.

  8. Local mobility refers to the movement and/or temporary permanence within another village of the same district and, occasionally, region.

  9. These people were also selected according to the already mentioned dialectological parameters.

  10. Long exemplificative sentences, made out of four or more constituents, have been numbered and aligned starting from the section on morphology. Short examples have been left in the running text for reasons of space. The grammatical abbreviations mostly orientate on the Leipzig glossing conventions. Additional abbreviations (not listed in the Leipzig system) are: CONJ – conjunction; DIM – diminutive; DISTR – distributive; MOD – modal; NUM – numeral; ORD – ordinal; PREP – preposition; PRON – pronoun; SUB – subordinator.

  11. The area where the akannja and the jakannja originated are still object of controversy in historical linguistic and dialectal studies. For a more detailed account about the historical development of akannja and the different akannja types, see Shevelov (1953, pp. 23–50); Žylko (1963, p. 23); Wexler (1977, pp. 79–83); Kasatkin (2010) etc.

  12. Its phonetic realization is also known as “ikannja”: [i] derived both from *ĕ (˂ѣ˃) and the etymological *о, *е after the loss of the reduced vowels [ъ/ь] (jers) through a stage of diphthongation, e.g. *o ˃ ō ˃ uo [wo] etc. This intermediate stage has been traditionally preserved in some Ukrainian dialects, including central and eastern Polissian, cf. Nazarova (1971); Voronyč, http://litopys.org.ua/ukrmova/um183.htm (31.01.21).

  13. For a closer examination of the evolution of the diphthong(s) both from jat’ and etymological [e], see Shevelov (1979, pp. 193–201; 302–317); Žovtobrjux et al. (1979, pp. 232–242; 273–277).

  14. The coalescence of /i/ and /y/ [ɨ] (˂ы˃) in /y/ [ɪ] (˂и˃) probably originated in the last part of the Old Ukrainian period and began to spread out in Early Middle Ukrainian (in Shevelov’s terminology), thus becoming a distinctive trait of modern Ukrainian which differentiates it from Belarusian and Russian. However, the fusion of these two phonemes did not affect all territories at the same time, and some marginal dialects were not directly involved in this change (Shevelov, 1979, pp. 422–423; Žovtobrjux et al., 1979, pp. 247–257).

  15. A generalized and schematic reconstruction of the dialectal consonantism of the researched area has been omitted in this section since it is still the object of a parallel study.

  16. The degree of palatalization may range between full palatalization and semi palatalization/just softening (Ukr. pom’’jakšennja).

  17. Cf. Belarusian and Russian ≠ from standard Ukrainian.

  18. For further details about its probable origin and area of diffusion, see Wexler (1977, pp. 170–172).

  19. For more details about the rise and relative chronology of the dispalatalization of [r’], see Shevelov (1979, pp. 189–192).

  20. Cf. Standard Ukrainian: -očk-.

  21. http://sum.in.ua/s/pervyj (31.03.2022).

  22. Cf. URMS = Ukrainian Russian mixed Speech also known as (Ukrainian-Russian) “Suržyk”.

  23. Mov = movement vs loc = location.

  24. It can also function as a conjunction ‘if’.

  25. The standard form tež [tjeʒ] ‘also/too’ came up only once. It had never been recorded so far.

  26. The adverb daljoka [da’ljoka] ‘far’ (+1) can also be interpreted as Belarusian.

  27. See Sect. 5 on syntax.

  28. This includes: akannja, consonant palatalization [к˙і], mantainance of the etymological [o], *ĕ (jat’) and *e reflexes, -i and/or -y [ɪ] as plural endings etc. See also Sect. 2 on phonetic aspects.

  29. In dialectal speech, the adjective zdarovyj also refers to physical strength more than just health.

  30. Cf. Russian: zapadnaja gruppa (Rus. западная группа). For this subgroup of South Russian dialects, see: number 7 of the Atlas of the Russian Language (DARJA, 1986, I: map IV).

  31. Cf. se ˂се˃ NOM.SG.N; sej ˂сей˃ etc.

  32. Cf. https://vasmer.slovaronline.com/search?s=%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B9 (07.11.2020).

  33. The form takeje was more frequent in neighbouring villages.

  34. Here the sound change [e] > [o] seems to be restricted to this particular morphological form.

  35. On this and other lexical dialectisms, also see Danylenko (1999, p. 233).

  36. Cf. Ukr. [deruˈnɪ] ˂деруни˃ ‘pancakes’.

  37. Translated by the author. Adaptation to standard Ukrainian: “З ким віку доживати, прийди зерно те жати”.

  38. The historical reasons accounting for these similarities, especially in relation to Belarusian, will be dealt with in a separate contribution. For a preliminary overview, see Del Gaudio (2018b, p. 82).

References

  • Atlas Ukrajins’koji Movy (=AUM) (1984–2001). Matvijas, I. H. et al. (eds.). 3 vols. Kyjiv: Naukova dumka.

  • Bevzenko, S. F. (1980). Ukrajins’ka dialektolohija. Kyjiv: Vyšča škola.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biryla, M. V., & Šuba, P. P. (1985). Belaruskaja hramatyka u dzvjux častkax. Minsk: Navuka i tėkhnika.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzuk, P. A. (1926). Vzajemovidnosyny miž ukrajins’koju ta bilorus’koju movamy. In Ukrajins’ka akademija nauk (Ed.), Zapysky istoryčno-filolohičnoho viddilu, knyha 7–6 (pp. 421–426). Kyjiv: UAN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dal’, V. I. (1866). Tolkovyj slovar’ živago velikorusskago jazyka. 4 Tom. 1–e izd. Moskva: Tipografija Risъ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danylenko, A. (1999). Šče raz pro vysokyj styl’ u Potebnevim perekladi “Odisseji”. Wiener Slawistisches Jahrbuch, 45, 231–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Del Gaudio, S. (2017). An Introduction to Ukrainian Dialectology. Frankfurt am Main etc.: Peter Lang.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Del Gaudio, S. (2018). Belarusian dialectal features in the local north Ukrainian dialect of Vyšneve. Ricerche Slavistiche, 1(61), 113–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Del Gaudio, S. (2018). Between three languages, dialects and forms of mixed speech: language and dialect contacts in Ukrainian-Belarusian transitional area. In L. Salmon, G. Ziffer Giorgio, & M. G. Ferro (Eds.), Contributi italiani al XVI Congresso Internazionale degli Slavisti, Belgrado, 20–27 agosto 2018 (pp. 79–93). Firenze: FUP.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Del Gaudio, S. (2021). Alcune osservazioni sugli elementi bielorussi e russi nel dialetto (nord ucraino) di Vyšneve. In E. Gherbezza, V. Laskova, & A. M. Perissutti (Eds.), Le lingue slave: sviluppi teorici e prospettive applicative. Atti del VIII incontro di linguistica slava, Udine, 10–12 settembre 2020 (pp. 187–211). Roma: Aracne. https://doi.org/10.53136/979125994633110.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Del Gaudio, S. (2022a). The dialect of Vyšneve (Černihiv, Ukraine) in the East Slavic context (1 part). Dialectologia et Geolinguistica (forthcoming). https://doi.org/10.1515/dialect-2022-0002.

  • Del Gaudio, S. (2022b). The local Dialect of Zaderiïvka (Chernihiv) in the East Slavic Context. Ukrajins’ka Mova [special issue] (forthcoming). https://doi.org/10.15407/ukrmova2022.02.082

  • Dialektologicheskii Atlas Russkogo Jazyka (=DARJA) (1989). Centr evropeiskoi časti SSSR, Vol. 2: Morfologiia. Bromlej, S. V. (Ed.). Moskva: Nauka.

  • Dyialektalahichny Atlas Belaruskai Movy (=DABM) (1963). Avanesaŭ, R. I. (ed.). Minsk: Vydavectva Akadėmi Navuk BSSR.

  • Durnovo, N. N., Sokolov, N. N., & Ušakov, D. N. (1915). Trudy Moskovskoj dialektologičeskoj komissii: Vol. 5. Opyt dialektologičeskoj karty russkogo jazyka v Evrope. Moskva: Sinodal’naja Tipografija.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancov, V. (1928). Dialektni meži na Černihivščyni. Zapysky Ukrajins’koho naukovoho tovarystva v Kyjevi, Černihiv i pivnične Livoberežžja. Kyjiv: Deržavne vydavnyctvo Ukrajini.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hrinčenko, B. D. (1996–1997). Slovar’ ukraïns’koї movy (Vols. 1–4). Kyjiv: Dovira (Original work published 1907–1909).

  • Kasatkin, L. L. (2010). Iz istorii akan’ja – jakan’ja v russkom jazyke. Russkij jazyk v naučnom osveščenii, 2, 77–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurylo, O. B. (1924). Praci etnohrafičnoji komisiji: Vol. 21. Fonetyčni ta dejaki morfolohični osoblyvosti hovirky sela Xorobryčiv na Černihivščyni. Kyjiv: Drukarnija Vseukrajins’koji Akademiji Nauk.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysenko, P. S. (1974). Slovnyk polis’kyx hovoriv. Kyjiv: Naukova dumka.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marjejev, D. A. (2019). Atlas sxidnopolis’kyx hovirok (=ASH). Kyjiv: Institut Ukrajins’koji Movy, NAN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marčuk, N. J. (1977). Dijeslivni formy ukrajins’koji literaturnoji movy v jix zv’jazkax z narodnymy hovoramy. In M. A. Žovtobrjux (Ed.), Ukrajins’ka literaturna mova v jiji vzajemodiji z terytorial’nymy dialektamy (pp. 144–166). Kyjiv: Naukova dumka.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nazarova, T. E. (1971). K probleme ukrainskogo ikavizma. Voprosy jazykoznanija, 2, 39–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onac’kyj Je. (1967). Ukrajins’ka mala encyklopedija: Tom 8. Jarylo. Nakladom Administratury UAPC v Arhentyni (pp. 2126—2127). Buenos Aires: Čempion.

  • Samojlenko, L. A. (1971). Sistema slovoizmenenja v pamiatnikax ukrainskoi delovoj pis’mennosti levoberežnoj Ukrainy vtoroj poloviny XVII v. [Avtoreferat kandidatskoj dissertatsij]. Odessa.

  • Shevelov, G. Y. (1953). Problems in the formation of Belorussian. New York: The Linguistic Circle of New York. Supplement to WORD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shevelov, G. Y. (1979). A Historical Phonology of the Ukrainian Language. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voronyč , H. V. Ikavizm. http://litopys.org.ua/ukrmova/um183.htm (31.01.21).

  • Wexler, P. (1977). A Historical Phonology of the Belorussian Language. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiemer, B., & Erker, A. (2012/2013). Übergangs- und Mischdialekte – eine unnötige begriffliche Differenzierung? Zeitschrift für Slavische Philologie, 69(1), 1–54.

  • Zaxarova, K. F., & Orlova, V. G. (2004). Dialektnoe členenie russkogo jazyka (2nd ed.). Moskva: Editorial URSS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Žovtobrjux, M. A., Rusanivs’kyj, V. M., & Skljarenko, V. H. (1979). Istoriia ukraïns’koï movy: Fonetyka. Kyiv: Naukova dumka.

    Google Scholar 

  • Žylko, F. T. (1953). Perexidni hovirky vid ukrajins’koji do bilorus’koji movy v pivnično-zaxidnyx rajonax Černihivščyny. Dialektolohičnyj bjuleten’, IV, 7–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Žylko, F. T. (1963). Fonolohični osoblyvosti ukrajins’koji movy v porivnjanni z inšymy slov’’jans’kymy. Kyjiv: Naukova dumka.

    Google Scholar 

  • Žylko, F. T. (1966). Narysy z dialektolohiï ukraïns’koji movy. Kyjiv: Naukova dumka.

    Google Scholar 

Electronic Sources

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Philology, Chair of Comparative-Typological Linguistics and Romance Philology, University of Kyiv Borys Hrinčenko (Grinchenko), Kyiv, Ukraine

    Salvatore Del Gaudio

Authors
  1. Salvatore Del Gaudio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Salvatore Del Gaudio.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The author (Salvatore Del Gaudio) has no conflicts of interest to declare. I have seen and agree with the contents of the manuscript and there is no financial interest to report. I certify that the submission is original work and is not under review at any other publication.

Competing Interests

No competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Del Gaudio, S. The local Dialect of Novi Jarylovyči (Region of Černihiv) in the East Slavic Context. Russ Linguist 46, 233–257 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-022-09263-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-022-09263-8

Search

Navigation