--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Grzegorz Jagodzinski"
<grzegorj2000@...> wrote:
> Complete lack of both 2nd and 3rd palatalization in the Novgorod
dialect is
> rather commonly known - thus Novgorod does differ from the rest of
Slavic
> ethnolects; see for example
> ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Novgorod_dialect. Wikipedia is not
always of
> little value (and if it even is, why don't you correct it, but
everyone can
> be a Wikipedist), especially when authors cite sources like here.
Of course,
> most literature on Novgorod is in Russian.
Lots of statements that are "rather commonly known" are wrong or not
completely right. It does not do to rely for such things on
Wikipedia, which is extremely useful for getting oriented but which
remains a secondary or tertiary source unfit for serious scholars to
rely on.
Whereas Novgorod does not show the effects of the Second Regressive
Palatalization, the Progressive Palatalization is present in exactly
the same cases as elsewhere in Slavic, notably in the
Russian/Belorussian area, with the exception of the pronoun
meaning 'all', which is conspicuous because its high textual
frequency, but which is a single item.
The relevant material (which is still expanding) is presented and
evaluated by Andrej Zaliznjak in the following publications:
Balto-slavjanskie issledovanija 1981 (1982), 61-80.
Novgorodskie gramoty na bereste (iz raskopok 1977-1983 gg.), Moskva:
Nauka, 1986, 111-119.
Novgorodskie gramoty na bereste (iz raskopok 1984-1989 gg.), Moskva:
Nauka, 1993, 195-198.
Drevnenovgorodskij dialekt. Moskva: S^kola "Jazyki russkoj
literatury", 1995, 37-39.
Drevnenovgorodskij dialekt. Vtoroe izdanie, pererabotannoe s uc^etom
materiala naxodok 1995-2003 gg., Moskva: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul'tury,
2004, 41-47.
There is no treatment of the material in other languages than
Russian, but Zaliznjak's interpretation has been adopted by literally
everybody interested in the subject and has often enough been
referred to in publications in English, e.g. by Henrik Birnbaum or
others.
Willem