In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

BOOK NOTICES 769 specialists. Worth's book provides evidence for the latter fact. The bibliography is divided into seven sections, of which the third, 'Derivational types and models', is the most important, for it is under this heading that works treating individual prefixes and suffixes are listed unit-by-unit. Someone using the bibliography to search the literature on the suffix -ka, e.g., will find 58 items listed (items 1423-80, pp. 109-13). Other sections deal with the form and meaning aspects of word-formation (§§2 and 4, respectively), general theoretical treatments (§1), conversion (§5, 'Derivation of and from parts of speech'), dialect studies (§6), and foreign influences (§7). An author index comprises §8. The cut-off date for the bibliography is 1973, but Worth declares (pp. xxi, xxiii) his intention of expanding and computerizing the work. The present version, meanwhile, is so thorough and so useful that its acquisition is highly recommended for researchers either in the Russian language, for whom questions of derivation are of utmost importance (in phonology and syntax as well as morphology), or in general derivational morphology, where no modern language offers more complex or more interesting data than Russian. [Philip J. Regier, USC] Etimoloski slovar slovenskega jezika: prva knjiga, A-J. By France Bezlaj. Ljubljana: Mladinska Knjiga, 1976. Pp. xxx, 235. Dinars 450. This is the first volume of a projected fourvolume etymological dictionary of the Slovenian language. In his introduction, Bezlaj writes (vii) that the compilation of such a work was among the first plans made after the establishment of the Slovene Academy of Sciences in 1939. For the first yearbook of the Academy, Fran Ramovä prepared 20 sample entries and described the design of the dictionary ; this was to include all the literary, historical, and dialect lexicon which, regardless of origin, had been adopted by the common language. The chief stress was to be on Slovenian documentation ; for other languages, reliance was to be placed on more widelyrecognized etymological dictionaries. At that time, the state of Slovenian linguistics was unfortunately such that it was impossibleto collect either the historical or the dialect material in an appropriate fashion. A more modest collection of data was available from the older dictionaries and from specialized literature about Slovenian; but as a result of the exceptional development of Slavic lexicology in the past two decades, relatively few entries in the present volume are limited to references to the older dictionaries. Interestingly enough, B points out that the common Slavic word stock is relatively modest, apparently not exceeding 1,700 fundamental words; but every Slavic language has (in addition to borrowings, derivatives, and innovations) a fixed number of characteristics, which can easily be proved to be Proto-Slavic. Since the initiation of the dictionary, B has been working at the task of excerpting the scientific literature for material appropriate for the dictionary. Thus the source material consulted is extensive; I estimate some 800 books and periodicals are listed in the bibliography. According to B (viii), the dictionary is designed not only for the trained linguist but also for the educated non-specialist who may wish to use it. Still, there are features which, it seems to me, would make it difficult for the layman. For example, the standard Slovene word for 'through' is cez, but this does not occur as a dictionary entry. One must look rather under irez (88) where we find the definition, plus a statement that the literary form is tez. B has written elsewhere (XII Seminar Slovenskega Jezika, literature in kulture, ed. by H. Glusic, p. 14 [Ljubljana, 1976]) that he has found even more new stems, elements of word formation, and semantic characteristics which show the close relationship of Slovenian with the Baltic languages. He is to be congratulated on bringing these to the attention of the users of his dictionary. Unfortunately, the dictionary is marred by a large number of misprints. B himself complained to me, during my visits to Ljubljana, that whenever he would correct the galleys and then ask for a new set, new errors crept in as old errors were corrected. The dictionary is, nevertheless, a fundamental contribution to the field of Slavic etymology; it serves...

pdf

Share