re: Vegliot Vocalism
- <--- Daniel Prohaska skrzypszy:
<> Glad to hear that! :-) I've got some more stuff coming up. Comments
<> welcome anytime.
<No comments at the time, just one question: are Dalmatian and Vegliot
<actually synonyms of each other, or is Vegliot part of something
<bigger that we call Dalmatian? Just wondering.
Jan, Vegliot is the old Romance dialect (+1898) of the island of Krk
(Veglia). Inhabitants of the island did not refer to the language as
Dalmatian. The same seems the case in Dubrovnic (Ragusa) where the
language was always called Ragusean. Maybe when the Slavs settled and
the dialect continuum of Dalmatian Romance was severed the speakers
referred to the names of the localities rather than expressing a feeling
of connectedness. After the Slavic settlement the Dalmatian Romance
dialects were very much city languages, rurally the south Slavic variety
had assimilated Romance speakers and city-Dalmatian was slowly replaced
by the Venetian dialects of Italian probably through long periods of
diglossia. There are 13th, 14th, and 15th century writings (usually
letters) from Ragusa and the language is quite different from what we
find of Vegliot in the 19th century though there is common ground. The
word for 'father' also goes back to Vulgar Latin *TATA rather than
*PATRE and the phoneme /a/ has been raised, too. However in Ragusean the
/a/ has been raised to the front rather than to the back as in Vegliot
which is why we find Ragusean <teta> as opposed to Vegliot <tuota>.
Ragusean also preserves <-u> for VLatin -U where Vegliot shows apocope
of it. It is unclear though when Vegliot apocope took place - so maybe
VL -U was still present at the Time Ragusean was recorded. In a
con-world the Dalmatian dialect continuum can be reconstructed. This is
my eventual goal, but I would like to set up a sound con-Vegliot first
and extrapolate from there.
<Unfortunately, Vegliot/Dalmatian is mostly neglected in most works I
<own about Romance linguistics. P. Boyd-Bowman's extremely interesting
<and useful "From Latin to Romance in Sound Charts" does not mention
<it at all (nor does it mention Romanian, for that matter). And D.
<Lincoln Canfield & J. Cary Davis' "An Introduction to Romance
<Linguistics" only mentions it briefly.
I managed to get my hands on the first two volumes of Lausberg's
"Romanische Sprachwissenschaft" which are about sound development. The
three volumes appear to be required learning for Romance philology
students at the university of Vienna. The volumes are in pocket format,
out of print and very hard to read as you almost need a magnifying glass
- but what's in them is very useful! They give numerous examples and try
to cover both the standard Romance languages as well as some major
dialectal developments. Where there are attest words of relevance
Vegliot developments are very much included, which of course was a great
asset to me.
<I may come back to you later with some Low Saxon place names I've
<been working on lately. Perhaps you'd like to review the orthography.
Oh, any time - but I can't promise I can be of help - I'll gladly try
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]