| Sažetak | Ciljem je rada opisati fonologiju i morfologiju novoštokavskih ikavskih govora Vrpolja, Kninskoga Polja i Knina, kojima govore isključivo Hrvati. Istraživanje je potaknuto složenom etnolingvističkom slikom u kojoj se ti govori nalaze, te se opisuju promjene i razlike u govorima svih triju naselja. Podrobnije, pokazuje se da se, uz neke razlike, dobro čuva govor u starosjedilaca, koji su u Kninskoj krajini ostali tijekom Domovinskoga rata, i u povratnika koji su se poslije njega onamo vratili, da zbog utjecaja istočnohercegovačkih govora Srba u različitoj mjeri postoje razlike u fonologiji i u morfologiji govora triju naselja te među starijim i mlađim ispitanicima. U tu svrhu snimao se spontani govor te su provođeni opsežni dijalektološki upitnici (od kojih je uslijed pandemije koronavirusa samo dio sniman), a u analizu uključena je i usputno prikupljena građa. Istraživanju sam pristupio i kao izvorni govornik vrpoljskoga govora, a kombinacijom tih pristupa uz usporedbe s drugim govorima dobiven je opsežan opis fonoloških i morfoloških značajka novoštokavskih ikavskih govora Vrpolja, Kninskoga Polja i Knina, koji uz utjecaj susjednih istočnohercegovačkih govora Kninske krajine na nekim mjestima dobro čuvaju veliku većinu značajka novoštokavskih ikavskih govora u cjelini, napose onih u Republici Hrvatskoj. I u fonologiji i u morfologiji posvjedočene su konzervativne (npr. neoakut) i inovativne crte (npr. povlačenje starijih sinkretiziranih DLI mn., koji su posve iščeznuli u Kninu), što govore čini pomalo specifičnima u narječnome krajoliku premda se većina značajka novoštokavskih ikavskih govora čuva na svim jezičnim razinama, od fonologije do leksika. |
| Sažetak (engleski) | Due to a widely known and complicated ethno-linguistic structure of Kninska krajina before the Croatian War of Independence and after it being much more famous than its dialectal landscape, which has not been investigated much or has been so very poorly, the aim of this research is to describe a part of the dialects of Kninska krajina, i.e. the Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects of Vrpolje, Kninsko Polje and Knin. The research deals extensively with their phonology and morphology, which exhibit some archaic (e.g. the neo-acute tone in phonology, more closely in the field of prosody) and some innovative traits (e.g. a retreat of older levelled dli. pl. endings on nouns, which has been completed in the dialect of Knin). Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects are spoken exclusively by Croats and the Eastern Herzegovinian dialects exclusively by Serbs, and since speakers of Serbian ethnicity migrated for the most part from Kninska krajina in the wake of the Operation Storm (August 1995) the speakers of Croatian ethnicity and their Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects remained the only ones that could be dialectologically investigated. As it is also shown, the pre-War Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects of Vrpolje, Kninsko Polje and Knin have been exhibiting an influence upon the post-War immigration of speakers, mostly from Bosnia and Herzegovina, who are also largely speakers of their own local Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects. This is exhibited e.g. in a more widespread use of the Ikavian forms than was the case earlier and in the spreading of the unreduced infinitive forms, which are a dominant trait of the Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects of Vrpolje, Kninsko Polje and Knin. The dialects of Vrpolje, Kninsko Polje and Knin are investigated here because the areas where they are spoken form a cohesive urban structure, although due to the Serbian population being in the majority in Kninsko Polje and Knin in the pre-War time and during the War the speakers of the Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects were sometimes physically separated into several groups that preserved the dialects on their cohesive territory (the east of Kninsko Polje and Velići-Marići-Bilići in Kninsko Polje and Strana (the Side) in Knin). Also, the Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialect of Potkonje in Kninska krajina is briefly mentioned in some side-notes for the sake of comparison. For the need of data collection, we have primarily used the casual speech recordings and several dialectological questionnaires, whereof the general one was modelled after the one designed for Hrvatski jezični atlas. In addition, casual notes on the dialects taken along the way are also used as a source. Under assumption of the existence of some differences in the idioms of the natives (that remained in Kninska krajina during the duration of the War) and the returnees (that migrated at some point during the War and subsequently returned) and in the phonology and the morphology of the three dialects and, furthermore, between older and younger speakers, twelve interviewees were elected from each of the three areas, totalling thirty-six for the entire corpus. They were at the same time divided into three groups depending on age: the older, the middle and the younger generation of speakers. While casual speech recordings were all successfully made during the course of the research (2020-2022), due to the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic only a handful of smaller questionnaires could be recorded. All the data were used and extremely helpful, and although most traits are shown to be kept mostly or sometimes only by the older speakers, for the neo-acute tone there were some instances of the younger speakers retaining more of it. The neo-acute tone is pretty rare in the Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialect group taken as a whole, and in the three Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects in Kninska krajina it appears in a handful of categories. The phonology is, generally taken, more or less typical of the Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialect group. The three Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects of Kninska krajina have a five-vowel system, consonant system has copious substitutions of h (although sometimes kept, as in the dialect of Bitelić in Sinjska krajina) and exhibits a change of f predominantly into v, although it is somewhat rarer than elsewhere in Dalmatinska zagora. The dialect of Strana in Knin has merged the two affricate pairs into two middle sounds, again more kin to the ones in the dialect of Sinj in Sinjska krajina than of Imotski in Imotska krajina, all within the scope of Dalmatinska zagora. M does not shift into n when word-final, a trait typical of the neighbouring NeoŠtokavian Ikavian dialects of Vrlička krajina and of Badanj in Drniška krajina. Also, simplification of consonant clusters is somewhat rarer than in the neighbouring Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects. The prosody includes four tones with variation in length and fall/rise, and the rare neo-acute tone as a fifth component and is somewhat more frequent in a couple of cases than in the rest of the categories and examples, and it is said that it could be preserved into the speech of the next generation of speakers. The morphology is also largely typical of the Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialect group. The most obvious difference or departure is a retention of the older dli. pl. endings in nouns solely by older speakers and they are completely lost in the dialect of Knin. However, the e-type noun system's dli. pl. -ami (now mostly: -ama) is an areal trait shared by the three Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects, the Eastern Herzegovinian dialects and Ikavian Čakavian and Ikavian-Ekavian Čakavian dialects in the northern Dalmatia and in Gacka. Numeral forms like dvánājst are another trait shared by the neighbouring Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects of Vrlička krajina and of Badanj in Drniška krajina. Apart from some similarites to the neighbouring Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects of Vrlička krajina and of Badanj in Drniška krajina and peculiarities shared by some NeoŠtokavian Ikavian dialects in Sinjska krajina (Bitelić, Sinj), there are a handful of influences from the Eastern Herzegovinian dialects of Kninska krajina due to a long coexistence with NeoŠtokavian Ikavian dialects there, e.g. in the accent of infinitive forms such as rèći and dóći (both appearing facultatively) and in the accent of past participles like dȑ̥žā (masc.) and dȑ̥žāla (fem.). Similarities to other Neo-Štokavian Ikavian dialects, on the other hand, are noted predominantly not only in the phonology and the morphology, but also in the syntax and the vocabulary. |
