Linguistica Brunensia. 2024, vol. 72, iss. 2, pp. 19-39, 2024
Arriving in today’s Austria – and thereby also in today’s Eastern Tyrol –, the Slavs left a layer... more Arriving in today’s Austria – and thereby also in today’s Eastern Tyrol –, the Slavs left a layer of loans
in the toponomastic landscape of these areas. Like all loanwords, they bear witness to the phonetic
influence of two languages. In the present case, these are Slavic and Bavarian. By identifying the
sound changes undergone and missed, we are able to narrow down the time in which the respective
word has been borrowed to a frame between a few centuries and a few decades. For this purpose, the
date of occurrence of as many changes as possible must be known for both languages. As an example,
Feistritz from Slavic «bystrica» shows the effect of the New High German diphthongisation and
thereby reveals to have been integrated into Bavarian before 1100 AD. At the same time, the loan has
f for Slavic b, which is a substitution effective only after 770 AD. We can therefore claim that Feistritz
must have entered the Bavarian language just in between those two dates. Following the concept of
my “Slavia Tirolensis” paper series, the present paper provides a number of toponomastic Slavisms
in Eastern Tyrol along with their etymologies and the history of sound changes undergone from the
Slavic input to today’s South Bavarian output. For each name, an estimation is given about the time
frame in which the name must have been integrated. In most of the presented cases, this frame starts
after 1050 AD, which can be concluded from the fact that they no longer exhibit accent retraction
onto the first syllable. This in turn means that the language contact in the relevant regions of Eastern
Tyrol only started as late as this date.
Uploads
Papers by Emanuel Klotz
in the toponomastic landscape of these areas. Like all loanwords, they bear witness to the phonetic
influence of two languages. In the present case, these are Slavic and Bavarian. By identifying the
sound changes undergone and missed, we are able to narrow down the time in which the respective
word has been borrowed to a frame between a few centuries and a few decades. For this purpose, the
date of occurrence of as many changes as possible must be known for both languages. As an example,
Feistritz from Slavic «bystrica» shows the effect of the New High German diphthongisation and
thereby reveals to have been integrated into Bavarian before 1100 AD. At the same time, the loan has
f for Slavic b, which is a substitution effective only after 770 AD. We can therefore claim that Feistritz
must have entered the Bavarian language just in between those two dates. Following the concept of
my “Slavia Tirolensis” paper series, the present paper provides a number of toponomastic Slavisms
in Eastern Tyrol along with their etymologies and the history of sound changes undergone from the
Slavic input to today’s South Bavarian output. For each name, an estimation is given about the time
frame in which the name must have been integrated. In most of the presented cases, this frame starts
after 1050 AD, which can be concluded from the fact that they no longer exhibit accent retraction
onto the first syllable. This in turn means that the language contact in the relevant regions of Eastern
Tyrol only started as late as this date.
in the toponomastic landscape of these areas. Like all loanwords, they bear witness to the phonetic
influence of two languages. In the present case, these are Slavic and Bavarian. By identifying the
sound changes undergone and missed, we are able to narrow down the time in which the respective
word has been borrowed to a frame between a few centuries and a few decades. For this purpose, the
date of occurrence of as many changes as possible must be known for both languages. As an example,
Feistritz from Slavic «bystrica» shows the effect of the New High German diphthongisation and
thereby reveals to have been integrated into Bavarian before 1100 AD. At the same time, the loan has
f for Slavic b, which is a substitution effective only after 770 AD. We can therefore claim that Feistritz
must have entered the Bavarian language just in between those two dates. Following the concept of
my “Slavia Tirolensis” paper series, the present paper provides a number of toponomastic Slavisms
in Eastern Tyrol along with their etymologies and the history of sound changes undergone from the
Slavic input to today’s South Bavarian output. For each name, an estimation is given about the time
frame in which the name must have been integrated. In most of the presented cases, this frame starts
after 1050 AD, which can be concluded from the fact that they no longer exhibit accent retraction
onto the first syllable. This in turn means that the language contact in the relevant regions of Eastern
Tyrol only started as late as this date.