RAZPRAVE -- ARTICLES
Vera MITRINOVI'C, K slovensko-severnoslovanskim jezikovnim vzporednicam, stikom in povezavam -- On Slovene-North Slavic Linguistic Parallels, Contacts and Connections
Janko KOS, Vrste, zvrsti in tipi postmodernistične literature -- Poetic Categories, Genres and Types of Postmodernist Literature
Rastko ŠUŠTARŠIČ, Naglas in poudarek v angleščini in slovenščini -- Accent and Stress in English and Slovene
Miran HLADNIK, Temeljni problemi zgodovinskega romana (2. del) -- The Basic Problems of the Historic Novel (Part II)
Antonia BERNARD, Jernej Kopitar: Reimški evangelij (zgodovinski predgovor) -- Jernej Kopitar: The Reims Gospel (Historical Introduction)
OCENE -- ZAPISKI -- POROČILA -- GRADIVO
REWIEWS -- NOTES -- REPORTS -- MATERIALS
Aleksander SKAZA, Akademik prof. dr. Bratko Kreft (Zapis ob devetdesetletnici) -- Academician Prof. Bratko Kreft (On the Occasion of his Ninetieth Birthday)
Erika KRŽIŠNIK, Zbirka Mali frazeološki rječnici in Hrvatsko-slovenski frazeološki rječnik -- Series Mali frazeološki rječnici and Hrvatsko-slovenski frazeološki rječnik
Vladimir OSOLNIK, Novo v srbskem jezikoslovju: Trije novi srbski pravopisi -- Recent Developments in Serbian Linguistics: Three New Serbian Orthographies
Darja GABROVŠEK - HOMŠAK, Bibliografija Jožeta Koruze -- The Bibliography of Jože Koruza
Jožica ČEH, Bibliografija Gregorja Kocijana -- The Bibliography of Gregor Kocijan
The present paper comes to the conclusion that postmodernism, just as other literary movements, developed a specific relationship among poetic categories, i.e., lyric, narrative or dramatic. While in modernism narrative prose and lyrical poetry developed evenly, with drama remaining in the background for a long time, it seems that in postmodernism narrative genres were prevailing over dramatic and lyric ones. This notion is supported by the fact that literary scholarship has not found reliable criteria for determining the way in which postmodernist lyric differs from modernist and for defining the line between postmodernist drama and drama of earlier literary periods, including modernism. The paper attempts to suggest some possible solutions to the problem of how to make these distinctions, which are seemingly necessary for the explanation of postmodernism in Slovene literature. According to the previous studies, Slovene postmodernism thrived particularly in the lyric category.
The specific character of postmodernism is also revealed in the development of literary genres and forms. While a novel was a predominant genre of modernist narrative, postmodernism developed numerous forms of short narrative prose besides a novel. This specific feature prevailed in the development of Slovene postmodernism as well. In lyric styles the specifics of postmodernism are revealed in the revival of the sonnet, gazelle, elegy and other traditional forms, without the traditional spirit, but rather in form of parody, pastiche and palimpsest. Among genres of postmodernist drama, Slovene postmodernist literature (Milan Jesih, Ivo Svetina) includes a special variant of absurd drama and a new form of poetic drama, reviving proven dramaturgical patterns based in spiritual history (Geisteswissenschaft), which was essential to postmodernism.
Postmodernist literature can be internally analyzed with the aid of typological criteria. In the past, mostly ideological models were used to make the distinction between "progressive" and "conservative" postmodernism, but most of these explanations proved to be doubtful. The paper attempts to determine the extent to which the already known typologies can be used for ahistorical analyses of postmodernism. It comes to the conclusion that such an analysis could apply either Lotman's pair of "aesthetics of identity" and "aesthetics of opposition", or Curitius' distinction of classicism and mannerism as well as a three-part typological system, which classifies postmodernist authors--including Slovene ones--into three basic typological groups: veristic, classical, and hermetic; an important factor of this typology is the postmodernist application of the trivial literature genres.
Finally, the paper shows that one of the major research goals is defining the national characteristics of postmodernist literature... An overview of American, English, French, Italian or Latin American literatures shows that in each of them postmodernism is based in specific literary tradition, which explains its national specifics. This also applies to Slovene postmodernism, which is characterized by the relatively important role that lyric and even drama played in it, and by the proliferation of short narrative prose rather than a novel.
The position of the prefixes do- and pri- with verbs of approach places Slovene, as the furthest northwestern extension of the South Slavic languages, in a close relationship to the entire Slavic north, especially with the West Slavic languages. This idea was entertained by F. Bezlaj, F. S#199avsky, N. I. Tolstoj, Z. Stieber, and P. Ivi'c. The Slavic tribes that occupied the Slovene territory were ethnically heterogeneous. Slovene features are seen in morphology, the prefix vy- and in word-formation, too. These type of Slovene peculiarities continue on the territory of the western Serbo-Croatian dialects, as F. Ramovš pointed out and M. Hraste, P. Ivi'c, I. Popovi'c and B. Finka confirmed with Croatian dialect material. The entire region is characterized by Slavic lexical archaisms (cf. esp. the work of M. Tentor). The connections between Slovene and Kajkavian are particularly close, the ones between Slovene and ^akavian somewhat less so.
This situation is also reflected in the formation of verbs of approach with the prefix pri-. Štokavian has in this case the prefix do-. In some areas, i.e., Kajkavian and sometimes in Slovene the prefix pri- competes with the prefix do-. Therefore, in the Slovene Literary Language only the general adlative prefix pri- is preserved, a feature typical of the North Slavic areal. The prefix pri- had at an earlier date spread further to the southeast, but then yielded to the prefix do-, which had spread from the East.
The liturgy in the vernacular was a unique privilege of the Slavs living in the area under the authority of the Roman Patriarchy. This 9th c. language is hardly intelligible to present-day Slavs, including Russians. As the documents show, Slavic liturgy of both rites was created in the Roman Patriarchy and was then transmitted to the Russian descendant of the Eastern Rite. The credit for the Slavic liturgical language, which greatly upset Salzburg Church authorities, goes mainly to Archbishop Methodius. Liturgy in the vernacular was accepted with great enthusiasm by the South ("Ilyrian") Slavs.
The early history of Slavs in Southern Europe, particularly in Pannonia, is relatively well documented; this is also true for Cyril's and Methodius' work.
Two kinds of writing systems were developed for Slavic liturgical language, i.e., Cyrillic and Glagolitic. Glagolitic is at least as old as Cyrillic, and not much younger, as Dobrovský believed. This is clearly demonstrated by the OCS documents that were unknown to Dobrovskyý. Disagreements between the Slavic apostles Cyril and Methodius on the one hand and the "German" Church on the other were rooted in the fact that at the time of the Apostles' arrival, almost all the Slavs in Moravia and Pannonia had been Christians for two or three generations, in large part baptized by the "German" Church. After Methodius' death his priests were driven out of Pannonia; they found refuge in Bulgaria, which was more favorably disposed to their work. Ecclesiastic literature flourished in Bulgaria, and the manuscripts which were later copied by Serbs and Russians survive to the present day. They can be divided into four groups: (1) Pannonian, (2) Bulgarian, (3) Serbian or Croatian, (4) copies of mixed provenience, originating from between the 14th and the 15th cc.
Part of this common OCS heritage is also the Reims Manuscript, which had a very eventful history but by its age and inner value falls behind of some other already known manuscripts, and, possibly, some that are yet to be discovered.
In a number of comparable grammatical phrases and syntactic structures, the place of primary stress in English differs from that in Slovene, which, from the point of view of intonation analysis, corresponds to differences in the position of the nucleus within a word group. In non-verbal phrases with final primary stress in English, the main differences between the two languages occur in combinations with the adverb not (Sl. ne) (eg. not a lawyer--ne pravnik) and with question words, used as adverbs or pronouns (eg. how long--kako dolgo); in non-verbal phrases with non-final primary stress in English, on the other hand, the main difference can be observed in the combination proposition + personal pronoun, eg. won't write--ne bom pisal; aren't on the table--niso na mizi; isn't my father--ni moj oče); or on the main verb in English and the initial question qord in Slovene (eg. who has come--kdo je prišel?; what did Peter read?--kaj je Peter bral?). When the primary stress in English is in non-final position, it is again in the above mentioned structures that Slovene has a different place of primary stress, eg. in hope not--upam, da ne, how are you?--kako si?).
The differences are reflected in the position of the nuclear syllable in a word group. While final position of the nucleus (ie. with the nucleus on the last lexical item--noun, adjective, adverb or verb) is by far the most common possibility, non-final position prevails in Slovene in word gropus with words of negation and with question words. It should be noted, however, that (in particular if minor differences in stress degree are neglected), there are a great number of cases where the stress patterns of English and Slovene tend to coincide, which undoubtedly serves to Slovene learners as valuable support in mastering English accentuational patterns and, consequently, also in dealing with an important aspect of English sentence intonation.