Evidence is presented that Serbo-Croatian, in contrast to other Slavic languages with lexical prosody, is developing a prosodic system in which stressed inflectional suffixes are avoided and stress is becoming a property of the word stem....
moreEvidence is presented that Serbo-Croatian, in contrast to other Slavic languages with lexical
prosody, is developing a prosodic system in which stressed inflectional suffixes are avoided
and stress is becoming a property of the word stem. Five case studies are shown in which stress
is moving from from inflectional suffixes to stems.
bèžīte >> bežíte (conf. Slovenian bežíte)
In a large class of verbs with a short rising accent in the present tense, the forms for 1PL and
2PL traditionally allowed the stress on the theme vowel: bežímo ‘we run’, bežíte ‘you(PL) run’
(conf. bèž-a-ti ‘to run’, bèž-ī-m ‘I run’). Nowadays this pattern is vanishing from standard
Serbo-Croatian and only bèžīmo/bèžīte is possible. We refer to normative work recognising the
decline of bežímo/bežíte and analyse a recent social media hype after a Serbian politician uttered
‘Gdȅ bežíte?’ ‘Where are you running to?’. An analysis of the ensuing parodies of his statement
shows that modern standard speakers applied the pattern to verbs in which it was never possible
(e.g. zviždíte, for actual zvíždite ‘you(PL) whistle’), which we interpret as evidence that the old
generalisations are not internalised in these speakers and that the modern Serbo-Croatian
grammar only derives bèžīmo, bèžīte.
grȁdōvā >> gradóvā, grȁdovima >> gradòvima (conf. Slovenian gradôvi)
As amply attested in normative work, the paradigm grȁdovi~gradóvā~gradòvima
‘towns.NOM~ACC~DAT.INS.LOC’ has been replaced by grȁdovi~grȁdōvā~grȁdovima,
thereby creating a new accentual paradigm. We also show that for modern speakers the pattern
with the stressed interfix -ov- is not even considered familiar for the DAT.INS.LOC and
familiar but extremely archaic for the GEN form. The pattern in -óvā is now also possible (in
parodies) in words where it was never possible, e.g. robóvā ‘slaves.GEN’ for actual ròbōvā.
kȁmenu >> kamènu, pȍglēdu >> poglédu
The singular locative suffix -u is traditionally considered tone-attracting in accentless nouns,
e.g. kȁmēn ‘stone’ and pȍglēd ‘gaze’. This pattern is unfamiliar to most modern speakers for
the words with a short penult (e.g. kamènu), while for long penults (e.g. poglédu) the pattern
has survived in some fixed expressions, but it is considered impossible outside of them e.g. (u
tvojem pȍglēdu *poglédu ‘in your gaze’). Tellingly, the tone-attracting property of the suffix
has survived in monosyllables, where it never leads to a stress shift (conf. klûb~klúbu
‘club.NOM~LOC’).
pȕtovati >> putòvati
In most standard varieties in Serbia, the denominal verbs of the type putòvati ‘to
travel’~pùtujēm ‘I travel’ are moving to the new type pȕtovati~pùtujēm. The new infinitive
prosody is clearly based on the past participle pȕtovao. Tellingly, these verbs do not join the
existing falling type rȁdovati~rȁdujēm because the present tense pùtujēm already had stress on
the stem.
Formal Description of Slavic Languages 12.5 University of Nova Gorica
December 2017
66
ˈžena >> žeˈna, ˈkonja >> koˈnja, ˈselo >> seˈlo, ˈželim >> žeˈlim
Finally, we present a small case study from the stress standard varieties which developed in
cities outside the Neo-Štokavian area (we present data from Zagreb, Rijeka, Pula, Bor and Niš).
In all these varieties, although final stress is allowed (e.g. in kriˈstal) and stressed inflectional
endings of the type žeˈlim are widely attested in surrounding dialects, stressed inflectional
endings are entirely absent. As a consequence, these varieties are unique in Serbo-Croatian (and
possibly also entire Slavic) for having lost any prosodic prominence on inflectional endings
while having lexical prosody.
Based on the 5 cases studies, we analyse the general move towards stem-stressed prosody as
the final step in a chain of language changes initiated by the Neo-Štokavian retractions, which
were automatic and contrast-preserving, but led to a massive removal of stress from inflectional
endings. We also consider the possibility that the changes in question were accelerated by the
fact that Neo-Štokavian has been the standard since mid-19th century. Finally, we discuss the
general reasons behind this language change in terms of markedness and, more specifically, the
constraints proposed within the Optimality Theory (e.g. in Kager 2000).
References
Kager. René, 2000. Stem stress and peak correspondence in Dutch. In J. Dekkers, F. van der Leeuw & J. van de Weijer (Eds.),
Optimality Theory: Phonology, Syntax, and Acquisition (pp. 121-150) (30 p.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
