Language

1
Language Identity in the Balkans

• Chapter 2 Serbo-Croatian
• United or not we fall

2
2.0 IntroductionThe precarious language union

• Joint language for Serbs, Croats, and
  Montenegrins created in mid-19th c
  
• 1st Yugoslavia (1918-41) ethnic animosity between
  Serbs Croats
  
• 1941 Nazi puppet Independent State of Croatia
  proclaimed a pure (non-Serbian) Croatian
  language
  
• Socialist Yugoslavia -- unified language was
  recreated as foundation for ethnic unity

3
2.0 IntroductionThe precarious language union,
contd.

• The language union of Serbo-Croatian endured
• Centripetal forces on the level of Yugoslav
  federation, reinforced by objective linguistic
  facts
  
• Centrifugal forces on the level of Yugoslav
  republics seeking autonomy and sharpening ethnic
  divisions

4
2.0 IntroductionThe precarious language union,
contd.

• External identity (as seen from without) as a
  single language was strong
  
• Internal identity (as seen by rival ethnic
  groups) was precarious
  
• Attempts to fortify linguistic identity have
  consistently failed
  
• The various ethnic groups were never able to
  consistently promote a single dialect
  
• Unity was undermined by compromises that did not
  satisfy all language planners

5
2.1 Models for unified languages

• Weak internal identity made it possible for
  language planners from rival groups to contest
  the norms, dialect base, and sociolinguistic
  structure of the language
• Pluricentricity -- when there are competing
  standard norms for a language (Norwegian,
  Chinese, English, Hindi/Urdu, Dutch/Flemish,
  Armenian)

6
2.1 Models for unified languages, contd.

• Contrastive self-identification -- rival groups
  seek to differentiate themselves
  
• Bosnians declared the exsitence of a Bosnian
  language
  
• Croats emphasized unique Croatian features
• Serbs tried to prove that Serbs living in Croatia
  spoke differently from their Croat neighbors

7
2.1 Models for unified languages, contd.

• Three language unity models
• Centrally monitored unity
• Government imposed unity
• Pluricentric unity

8
2.1.1 Centrally monitored unity

• A language academy, state-sponsored institute, or
  government ministry bears responsibility for
  unity of standard language, and also produces
  official grammars, dictionaries, and textbooks
  (e.g., France)

9
2.1.1 Centrally monitored unity, contd.

• 1850 Vienna Literary Agreement established joint
  literary language for Serbs and Croats, based on
  Southern dialect (neo-stokavian ijekavian -- the
  one dialect shared by all ethnic groups)
• 1867 Yugoslav Academy of Sciences and Arts
  (Zagreb) promoted unification of Yugoslav peoples
  by language
  
• By 1901 Academy had produced grammar,
  dicitonaries, orthographic manual

10
2.1.1 Centrally monitored unity, contd.

• 1878 Serbian state gains independence
• 1886 Serbian Royal Academy of Sciences and Arts
  sanctioned Belgrade-Novi Sad dialect, competing
  with Zagreb norm
  
• Unity was possible when Serbia was weak and
  divided, but once it gained independence,
  pluricentrism and competition arose

11
2.1.2 Government-imposed unity

• In totalitarian systems the head of state or a
  state ministry assumes direct control over
  language policy (e.g., Stalin in USSR, Franco in
  Spain)

12
2.1.2 Government-imposed unity, contd.

• 1918-29 Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes
  suffered constant crises
  
• 1929 King Alexander renamed it Kingdom of
  Yugoslavia and attempted to do away with
  traditional ethnic identifications to create
  unity -- Croats feared that this meant they would
  be absorbed by Serbs, for them Yugoslavism
  Serbian agenda

13
2.1.2 Government-imposed unity, contd.

• New regime sought to enforce language unity
• 1930 Belics orthographic manual decreed by
  Kingdoms Ministry of Education
  
• King was assassinated and Croatian orthographic
  manual was permitted
  
• Language policies imposed in both Fascist
  Independent State of Croatia and Titos
  Yugoslavia
  
• Titos Yugoslavia is pluricentric with two
  standards

14
2.1.3 Pluricentric unity

• States with more than one cultural center with a
  literature and/or language norm (e.g.,
  Dano-Norwegian New Norwegian, also language
  equal rights in Spain, varieties of German, and
  Chinese)
• Serbo-Croatian -- initial standardization
  reversed centuries of natural Abstand development
  for Orthodox vs. Catholics

15
2.1.3 Pluricentric unity, contd.

• 1954 Novi Sad Agreement -- attempt to formalize
  linguistic brotherhood unity -- agreed on
  compromise and tolerance of local varieties
  
• 1974 Federal Constitution allowed local varieties
  to gain official status in constituent republics
  Croatian (Western variant), Serbian (Eastern
  variant), Bosnia-Herzegovinian, Montenegrin
• BUT every step towards unity aroused controversy
  and ethnic rivalry

16
2.2 Controversies connected with Serb/Croat
language accords

• Two significant ( controversial) language
  conferences
  
• 1850 Vienna Literary Agreement
• Dedicated largely to status planning, not
  specific linguistic points
  
• Promoted unified standard for Serbs and Croats
  despite fact that there was no precedent for
  normative works
  
• 1954 Nov Sad Agreement
• Revision of 1850 Agreement
• Considered many specific points

17
2.2.1 The Literary Agreement (1850)

• Prior to 1850 the Croatian and Serbian literary
  languages had been diverging
  
• Croats used a variety of dialects
• Serbs wrote in artificial Slaveno-Serbian
• Literary Agreement came about as a historical
  coincidence, because the agendas of language
  reformers Croat Ljudevit Gaj (1809-72) and Serb
  Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic (1787-1864) overlapped

18
2.2.1 The Literary Agreement (1850), contd.

• Croat Ljudevit Gaj (1809-72)
• Leader of Illyrian Movement to preserve Croatian
  rights within Hungary, lay basis for Croatian and
  pan-South Slavic unity
  
• Illyrian South Slavic
• Sought to unify Croatian Latin orthography and
  elevate Dubrovnik Stokavian dialect

19
2.2.1 The Literary Agreement (1850), contd.

• Serb Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic (1787-1864)
• Independently proposed a reform of Serbian based
  on essentially the same SW dialect as Gaj
  
• Collected folk songs, wrote grammar and
  dictionary (1818)
  
• Believed that literary language should be based
  on vernacular
  
• Introduced simplified orthography

20
2.2.1 The Literary Agreement (1850), contd.

• Contents of Agreement
• Better to elevate a dialect to literary status
  than have an artificial standard
  
• Southern dialect is the literary standard
• Velar fricative h is always written (a compromise
  for Vuk, since his usage omits it)
  
• Velar fricative h is not used in Gpl of nouns
• Syllabic r is written simply as r (prst)

21
2.2.1 The Literary Agreement (1850), contd.

• The Agreement was not a binding document
• Vuk (and others on both sides) signed it, but Gaj
  did not and was lukewarm about it
  
• Serb and Croat linguists (vukovci) worked at
  Yugoslav Academy of Sciences and Arts in Zagreb
  to create joint literary language

22
2.2.1 The Literary Agreement (1850), contd.

• The Agreement did not specify the name for the
  language
  
• 1861 Croatian Sabor suggested Yugoslav
• Vienna authorities suggested Serbian-Illyrian
  (Cyrillic) and Serbian-Illyrian (Latin)
  
• Other suggestions Croatian or Serbian,
  Serbian, Illyrian
  
• They never did agree on a name, all the way up to
  the abandonment of a joint language in 1991

23
2.2.1 The Literary Agreement (1850), contd.

• More problems
• Vojvodina Serbs (those attached to the
  Slaveno-Serbian) opposed Vuks efforts
  
• Croat nationalists considered cooperation with
  Vuk to be a surrender of Croatian identity
  
• Some Croat linguists rejected the selection of a
  Southern dialect as standard and suggested an
  artificial standard that would combine elements
  from various dialects

24
2.2.2 The Novi Sad Agreement (1954)

• Some background
• Serbs adapted Vuks reforms to their urban
  dialects of Belgrade and Novi Sad (the Eastern
  dialect)
  
• 1913 Jovan Skerlic suggested
• A single standard with elements from Zagreb and
  Belgrade
  
• Serbs switch completely to Latin script
• Croats adopt Eastern, rather than Southern
  dialect
  
• A more ambiguous compromise was basis of Novi Sad
  Agreement

25
2.2.2 The Novi Sad Agreement (1954), contd.

• Conclusions of Novi Sad Agreement
• There is one language with Zagreb (Western
  ijekavian Latin) and Belgrade (Eastern ekavian
  Cyrillic) variants of equal status (hrvatosrpski
  srpskohrvatski)
• Name of language must refer to both Serb and
  Croat
  
• Matica srpska Matica hrvatska will produce new
  dictionary
  
• Collaboration on common terminology and
  orthography by universities academies
  
• Croato-Serbian will be allowed natural
  development, no texts will be converted from one
  variant to the other

26
2.2.2 The Novi Sad Agreement (1954), contd.

• 1960 joint Pravopis published in both Zagreb
  Novi Sad
  
• 1967 first volume of joint dictionary, but in
  competition with controversial 1966 1-vol Serbian
  dictionary (with clear Serbian nationalist
  agenda) and Croatian declaration of a Croatian
  literary language
• Joint dictionary project fell apart, books with
  ethnic agendas were burned, and people were
  imprisoned

27
2.2.2 The Novi Sad Agreement (1954), contd.

• Croats sought greater independence from Belgrade
  -- 1971 Croatian spring movement
  
• Muslim Slavs given status of constituent nation,
  thus equating religious and ethnic identity and
  creating forerunner to Bosniac identity

28
2.2.2 The Novi Sad Agreement (1954), contd.

• Novi Sad Agreement failed because it did not
  resolve
  
• Choice of an appropriate standard dialect
• Agreement concerning alphabets and writing
  systems
  
• Issues of vocabulary

29
2.3 The power of competing dialects

• Diverse dialects make it hard to choose a
  standard
  
• Mutually intelligible, divided into three main
  groups according to the word for what
  
• tokavian (to) - the largest group, continues to
  grow
  
• Ekavian - large W group including Belgrade
• Ijekavian - large E group (Sarajevo), used by
  most Muslim Slavs, Montenegrins, Serbs West of
  Drina, and most Croats
  
• Ikavian - smaller group in NW and NE
• Kajkavian (kaj) - small Northern area around
  Zagreb
  
• Cakavian (ca) - extreme NW and islands off coast

30
The tokavian dialects and ethnicity An overview

• Ekavian, Ijekavian, and Ikavian variants had been
  formed prior to Ottoman invasions in 14th-15th c,
  which spurred mass migrations, causing a mixing
  of dialectal affiliations across ethnic and
  religious lines
• By the time of the Literary Agreement and Novi
  Sad Agreement, ethnic, religious and dialect
  types had become blurred

31
2.3.2 Dilemmas of dialects Ownership and
citizenship?

• 1850 Literary Agreement promoted
  tokavian-ijekavian Eastern Herzegovina
  (Southern) dialect of Dubrovniks medieval
  literature and Serbias epic poetry
• Gaj Karadzic agreed on use of
  tokavian-ijekavian standard with variations

32
2.3.2 Dilemmas of dialects Ownership and
citizenship?

• Four critical periods
• 1836-99 tokavian-ijekavian standard for W and S
  tokavian areas
  
• 1913-39 promotion of Eastern tokavian-ekavian
  (Serbian) at expense of tokavian-ijekavian
  
• 1954-74 Southern dialect becomes synonymous with
  Western (Croato-Serbian) variant of joint
  language and boundaries between E and W are
  disputed
• 1991-present four successor languages have all
  claimed ownership of tokavian-ijekavian

33
2.3.3 Standard pronunciations, variants, or idioms

• Serbian (eastern) and Croatian (western) written
  languages were each associated with two
  standard pronunciations both could be spoken
  as either ijekavian or ekavian, but Croats
  opposed giving ekavian an official status for the
  Croatian variant, since they perceived this as a
  Serbian intrusion
• Montenegrin and Bosnian-Herzegovinian (Muslim
  Slav) standard written and spoken variants were
  asserted also in 1974

34
2.4 The writing on the wall Alphabets and
writing systems

• 1850 Literary Agreement did not specify the
  alphabet to be used, implying both would be used
  
• 1954 Novi Sad Agreement specified that both
  alphabets would be used
  
• Still, alphabets have been a sore point, along
  with political implications of orthography

35
2.4.1 A multiplicity of alphabets

• Croatian has used Glagolitic, Cyrillic, Latin,
  and even Arabic (Bosnian), but strongest
  association is with Latin (modified by Gaj)
  
• Serbs use Cyrillic (modified by Vuk, though his
  use of j was initially controversial)
  
• Alphabet issue viewed as conflict Catholic
  (Croatian) vs. Orthodox (Serbian) churches
  
• In Yugoslavia, Serbs were competent in both
  scripts, but Croats knew only Latin
  
• Lack of agreement on alphabet was impediment to
  unifed language

36
2.4.2 Spell-bound Clashes over spelling rules

• The spelling of a language can be shaped by
  various ideologies
  
• Etymological (archaic, links to historical
  texts)
  
• Morphological (clarity of roots, suffixes, etc.)
• Phonological (spelled as pronounced)
• Although Serbs and Croats used phonological
  orthography, they were not unified on how to
  carry it out

37
2.4.2 Spell-bound Clashes over spelling rules,
contd.

• Croatian spelling had been chaotic, Serbian had
  been etymological
  
• Both Vuk and Gaj wanted to write the way you
  speak
  
• Vuk was accused of attacking Orthodoxy, but his
  efforts were appreciated abroad and he was a hero
  in Yugoslavia
  
• Discrepancies between Croatian and Serbian
  spellings persisted

38
2.5 Vocabulary A reflection of divergent
aproaches to identity

• Lexical differences are central to distinguishing
  the Western vs. Eastern variants
  
• Croatian -- policy of purism
• Use of archaic or newly-coined Croatian words
• Serbian -- policy of integrating words from
  vernacular
  
• Rejection of bookish or artificial words

39
2.5.1 Croatian purism

• Croats tried to protect their ethnic core in the
  lexicon
  
• Reaction to German borrowings in spoken
  Kajkavian
  
• Emulation of Czech/Slovene language revival
• Introduction of neutral new words
• Elimination of Serbian elements

40
2.5.2 The supremacy of the vernacular for the
Serbs

• Serbian lexicon is based on an oral literature,
  incorporating words from the popular language

41
Divergent attitudes towards foreign borrowings

• Croats under foreign (German Hungarian-speaking)
  rule 800 years, Serbs under Ottoman (Turkish)
  rule 500 years
  
• Catholic Croats borrowed from Latin Orthodox
  Serbs borrowed from Greek, Russian, Church
  Slavonic Muslim Slavs borrowed from Turkish,
  Arabic
• Some words from ALL of these sources are present
  in BOTH variants

42
2.6 The turbulent history of the language union
A chronology

• 1850-1920s unified language evolved with little
  controversy
  
• 1930-41 breakdown of ethnic relations
• 1941-45 Fascist Croatia opens up a divide
• 1945-60 Pursuit of brotherhood unity
• 1960s Yugoslav federation language begin to
  disintegrate

43
2.6 The turbulent history A chronology, contd.

• Croatians claim that unity was imposed,
  artificial, and never existed
  
• By 1974 Serbs negotiated unified language out of
  existence
  
• But Yugoslav expats STILL believe their native
  language is Serbo-Croatian, and outside observers
  continued to recognize a Serbo-Croatian language

44
Conclusions

• Prior to 1850 Serbs and Croats had radically
  different literary traditions
  
• Both sides refused to compromise on dialects,
  alphabets, orthography, and lexicon
  
• Montenegrins Muslim Slavs emerge as groups with
  own identity, linking language to ethnicity
  
• Four successor languages emerged from nearly
  identical dialects (stokavian/ijekavian)
  Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian, and Montenegrin