Kad si već tu evo i Trnskog govora, iz bugarskih izvora je jasno da ima uprošćeni trojni član, naravno, odmah i pokušaj dovođenja u vezu s “Rodopskim dijalektom” iako je nastao daleko zapadnije pa tu dospeo migracijama stanovništva u vreme Velike seobe Srba.
Zapazimo i kakvim se sve objašnjenjima pribegava radi zaobilaženja konstatovanja jasne činjenice da i govor Trna ima padeže i da se i član menja po padežima. Inače, boljeg dokaza da se u Bugarskoj i
štokavski govori smatraju za bugarski jezik od ovog u nastavku nema:
“
The dialect of Trŭn is represented on the website by one village, Nasalevci. It is part, together with the Belogradčik dialects, of the larger group which has been called “transitional dialects”, also known as “border dialects”, “u-dialects” or “ č-dž dialects”. The first two names derive from the fact that all these dialects are located close to the border with Serbia, and share many traits with the neighboring far eastern Serbian dialects, while the second two names refer to major dialectal traits shared with these neighboring Serbian dialects.”
Zapadnojužnoslovenski govor (refleksi *tj/*dj > ć/đ; svi štokavski fonetski markeri prisutni: ǫ > u, y > i, vъ > u, ę > e, ъ> ь>a; se proglasi za “u-dijalekt”
istočnojužnoslovenskog bugarskog jezika: Balkanski jezički savez ≠ bugarski jezik a kao što se vidi iz priližrnog ni morfologija se ne poklapa - bugarska metoda prebrojavanja padeža dovede do 4 različita padežna oblika i ukupno pet (5) padeža - ima I genitiva I partitivnog genitiva => neuporedivo kraće vreme proveo u Balkanskom savezu od bugarskog jezika.
Uprošćeni lužnički (trojni) član u govoru Trna
Morphology
• One of the most interesting traits of the Trŭn dialect is the existence of a tripartite definite article, with different forms indicating whether the speaker focuses on proximity, distance, or chooses not to emphasize either of these options. Such a distinction is found in the Rhodope dialects as well, where it encompasses a much larger area. There is a formal difference between the two regions, in that the “proximal” form is marked in Trǔn dialects by the formant
/-v-/, whereas it is marked by the formant
/-s-/ in Rhodope dialects. (In both regions the “medial” [= neutral] form is marked by
/-t-/ and the “distal” form by
/-n-/.)
Published sources on the Trŭn dialect assert that both proximal and distal articles occur regularly. Our impression is that they occur much less frequently in Trŭn than in the Rhodopes: in roughly three hours of recording from Nasalevci, only two proximal forms were heard, and no distal forms. Although strictly speaking there is no reason to assert that the existence of proximal articles in a dialect also implies existence of the distal ones, it is generally assumed that this is the case.
Examples:
momèvo (N2: 10),
malòvo (N1: 213)
• Although there are no examples of such three-way deixis in demonstrative pronouns (in which speakers use forms with
/ov-/ to mark the idea of proximity, in addition to the expected “neutral” and “distal” forms, marked with
/t-/ and
/on-/, respectively), it may be assumed that they exist, given the evidence of adverbial forms with the marker
/ov-/.
Examples:
ovakà (N1: 46),
ve (N1: 151)
• The forms of personal pronouns are different. Examples:
1st singular nominative
jà (N1: 59)
3rd singular nominative
òn (N1: 41),
onà (N2: 21),
onò (N1: 124)
3rd singular dative feminine
nèvu (N1: 58)
3rd singular dative feminine short form
vi (N1: 58);
3rd plural nominative
onì [form not attested in these texts]
• The plural ending of masculine nouns is either
/-e/ or
/-i/. This is not surprising, since the Bulgarian Dialect Atlas positions Nasalevci right on the isogloss dividing these two traits.
Examples:
koledarì (N2: 72),
rɤkavè (N1: 224)
• The plural ending of all feminine nouns is
/-e/.
Examples:
svìrke (N1: 48),
tantèle (N1: 224),
dùme (N2, 24)
• Non-nominative forms of feminine nouns, feminine singular adjectives, and masculine nouns signifying animate beings, are in regular use.
Examples:
svàdbu (N1: 42),
bànicu (N1: 43), [masculine animate nouns not represented in these texts]
These forms represent an interesting result in the history of Bulgarian, which gradually lost all case endings in nouns. At the penultimate stage of this development, such nouns had only two case endings (instead of the inherited seven), the nominative case and the so-called casus generalis, which continued the form of the accusative case (“animate accusative” in the instance of the masculine nouns) and was used for all other meanings
• A particularly interesting corollary of the above is the fact that the definite article attached to these forms also shows inherited cases endings (
/-tu/ for feminine and
/-toga/ for animate masculine). Masculine nouns ending in /
-a/ take the same endings as the feminine nouns.
Example:
baštùtu (N1: 124),
drugòtoga (1: 39)
• Plural forms of adjectives and demonstratives distinguish all three genders, with masculine marked by
/-i/, feminine by
/-e/ and neuter by
/-a/.
Examples:
rìdži mustàci (N2: 40);
tèje dùme(N2: 14);
dṛvà dɤ̀lga (N2: 58)
• The ending in all 1st person singular present tense forms is
/-m/, except in the modal verb ‘can’, which has the ending
/-u/.
Examples:
kazùjem (N1, 69),
kàžem (N1: 224) //
mògu (N1: 69)
• The ending in all 1st person plural present tense forms is
/-mo/.
Examples:
pràimo (N2: 52),
tràžimo (N2: 179)
• The ending in all 3rd person plural present tense is
/-u/.
Examples:
otìdu (N1: 38),
kànu (N1: 39),
zbìraju (N1: 9)
• The ending for 2nd person plural aorist tense is
/-ste/.
Example:
obṛkàste (N2: 83)
• There are two different future particles:
ču for 1st person singular and
če for all other persons.
Examples:
jà ču ga nòčem popàrim (N1: 85);
če dòjdemo (N1: 42)
• Verbal nouns end in
/-n’e/.
Example:
jèden’e (N1: 12)
Original na bugarskom:
http://bulgariandialectology.org/locations/nasalevci
