Die Sprache des Bärenkultes im Obugrischen By MarianneSZ. Bakró-Nagy (review)

242 LANGUAGE, VOLUME 57, NUMBER 1 (1981) be caused by typographical errors, slips of the pen, dialectal forms introduced by 19th century immigrants, or the influence of Russian and Bulgarian on the highly-educated Miladinov brothers. Despite these difficulties, T's work is a valuable contribution to the study of Macedonian historical dialectology and the roots of the literary language. [Victor Friedman, University ofNorth Carolina, Chapel Hill.] Spracherhaltung und Sprachwechsel als Probleme der interlingualen Soziolinguistik : Studien zur Mehrsprachigkeit der Zigeuner in der Sowjetunion . By Harald Haarmann. Hamburg: Buske, 1979. Pp. 212. DM 28.00. On the basis of the detailed ethnic and linguistic statistics provided by the published 1970 census returns for the USSR, Haarmann correlates the first and second language of the 175,335 Soviet Gypsies (Romany, Russian, language of the Union Republic, other language) with various other factors: localization (Union Republic, and in some instances oblast'), urbanization , and sex. One interesting general result is that, in most instances, the language of the Union Republic exerts a stronger attraction on Gypsies than does Russian; in Transcarpathia , the strongest attraction is from Hungarian. Explanations for the observed correlations, even where plausible, are necessarily somewhat speculative, given the secondary nature of the research. H notes two main limitations on his work, deriving from limitations of his primary source. The census statistics concern only language knowledge (defined as conversational ability), not language use. Since statistics on second language were included for the first time in the 1970 census, it is not yet possible to gain a dynamic perspective on bilingualism in the USSR. One development on which one would have welcomed H's comment is the rise in the proportion of Gypsies speaking Romany as their first language , from 59.3% (1959 census) to 70.8% (1970 census)—either a remarkably unique development for a non-Russian language of the USSR, or an indication that Soviet authorities too have problems keeping count of their Gypsy population . [Bernard Comrie, USC] Bibliography of Hungarian linguistic research in the United States and Canada. By Andrew Kerek. (Hungarian reference shelf, 5.) Oxford, OH: American Hungarian Foundation , 1979. Pp. 28. $3.50. Listing 249 titles (with a cut-off date of 1977), this bibliography was designed to supplement and update John Lotz's 1967 Magyar nyelvészeti kutatások az Amerikai Egyesült Allamokban [Hungarian linguistic research in the United States]. It focuses on American and Canadian linguistic research, regardless of place of publication ; at the same time, it excludes material reprinted in these countries but originally published elsewhere. However, this questionable policy is inconsistently applied, since English translations of works written in Hungary are included (cf. item 40), while American and Canadian contributions to various Finno-Ugric congresses are missing. Some master's theses and doctoral dissertations are listed; but they are only a sporadic representation of the actual number. Joseph Szeplaki's compilation of master 's theses related to Hungarian studies, published in the same series, does not appear in Kerek's bibliography. Arbitrarily chosen, a few unpublished manuscripts are included (e.g. item 243). Cui bono? Lack of annotations, inconsistencies in spelling and capitalization, and sloppy use of diacritics further limit the usefulness of this publication. [Marianna D. Birnbaum , UCLA.] Die Sprache des Bärenkultes im Obugrischen . ByMARiANNESZ. BakróNagy . (Bibliotheca Urálica, 4.) Budapest : Akadémiai Kiadó, 1979. Pp. 141. $12.50. The special, 'professional' vocabulary of the bear cult among the Ob-Ugrians is here investigated by BN. After an introduction, discussing generally-held views about taboo language, she identifies the central question of her study: do the many hundreds of Ob-Ugrian words referring to the bear, or to events related to bear ceremonies, prove that the animal was indeed a revered totem among the Voguls and Ostyaks? Section I lists 486 items related to the bear cult, each containing a German gloss and bibliographic references to occurrences in the Ob- BOOK NOTICES 243 Ugrian collections cited. Next, BN deals with deliberate word deformation, applying phonetic change in order to 'mislead the bear'. The third section is devoted to word formation; here BN contends that the secret vocabulary of the cult contains no new coinages, but that partially changed words, introduced...