Dolna Sekirna

TRANSITIONAL: Trŭn

            The dialect of Trŭn is represented on the website by three villages, Dolna Sekirna (DS), Glavanovci (G), and Nasalevci (N). It is part, together with the Belogradčik dialects, of the larger group which has been called “transitional dialects”, also known as “border dialects”, “Belogradčik-Trŭn dialects”, “u-dialects” “č-dž dialects”. This group is located close to the border with Serbia, and the latter two names refer to major dialectal traits shared with the neighboring far eastern Serbian dialects.

            Whichever name is used for this larger dialect group, it is striking that there is so little internal variation, especially given the fact that the northern group, represented here by the Belogradčik dialect (Rajanovci, Repljana, Salaš, Stakevci and Vŭrbovo) and the southern group, represented here by the Trŭn dialect (Dolna Sekirna, Glavanovci and Nasalevci), are located relatively far apart and divided by a mountain range Because the differences that do exist are noteworthy, the two groups are here described separately.

            The list below summarizes the salient features of the Trŭn dialect group. It is based on the speech of the three villages mentioned above, with examples taken from the texts presented on this site.

            Abbreviations: the capital letter refers to the village, as noted above; the following number identifies the text from that village (e.g. N1 = Nasalevci 1, G2 = Glavanovci 2), and the number after the colon identifies the line within the text where the cited form occurs.

 

Phonology

• The historical Slavic vowel “jat” always appears as /e/.

            Examples: vrèla (N1: 87), lèp (N1: 11), ulèznu (DS2: 3), cèlata (G2: 7)

• The historical sequence “ja” (including the sequence “post-alveolar + a”) is preserved with very few exceptions.

            Examples: čàšku (N1: 38), jàgništa (N2: 117) povojničàrke  (DS1: 52) // čèkam (N1: 71), edù (N1: 46), jèli (G1: 7)

• The historical Slavic “back nasal” always appears as /u/.

            Examples: sùbotu (N1: 6), nàruku (N1: 204), mùško (G2: 47), skùpo (G1: 114), mùka (DS2: 44)

• The historical Slavic “back jer” appears as /ɤ/ as in many other Bulgarian dialects.

            dɤ̀ž (G1: 74), lɤ̀žu (DS 3: 100)

• The historical Slavic “front jer” appears as /ɤ/. This complete merger of the two is found only in this dialectal group.

            Example: kvasɤ̀c (N2: 76), dɤ̀n (G1: 32), ovɤ̀s (G1: 106), limɤ̀c (G1: 106), stàrɤc (DS3: 81)

• The early South Slavic syllabic liquids remain unchanged, except that syllabic /ḷ/ is replaced by /u/ after bilabial consonants.

            Examples: cṛ̀kvu (N1: 7), gṛbìnu (N1: 45), obṛ̀čamo (G3: 37); vḷ̀na (N1: 199), kḷ̀ca (G3: 48) // pùno (N2: 71), muzè (N2: 119), vùnata (G3: 26), mùzli (DS3: 14)

• The Proto-Slavic sequences /*tj/ and /*dj/ appear as /č/ and /dž/, respectively.

            Examples: nòčem (N1: 85), lèču (G1: 107); ridžà (N2: 25), ràdžuje (G1: 111)

• The early South Slavic sequence “/čr/ + front jer” appears as /cṛ/.
            Example: cṛnà (N2: 21), cṛ̀n (G1: 18)

• Early South Slavic “epenthetic /l/” is not lost, as it is in most other Bulgarian dialects.

            Examples: zeml’àno (N2: 141), spràvl’aju (N1: 12)

• The consonant /x/ is lost in most positions; it is replaced by /j/ after a front vowel, and by /v/ after the vowel /u/.

            Examples: òro (N1: 49), ràni (N1: 103), isplèto (DS3: 101); drèja (DS3: 104); razdùva (G1: 84)

• Before a vowel, the sequence /jk/ is replaced by /k’/.

            Examples: màk’a (N1: 102, G3: 24), devòk’a (N1: 109)

• The sequence /tj/ is replaced by /k’/.           

            Examples: prùk’e (G1: 93), bràk’a (G2: 43)

• The consonant /f/ is replaced by /v/.

            Examples: vamìlijata (N1: 29), vùrn’a (DS2: 21), kavènce (N1: 38)

    It does not appear even as an voiceless allophone of /v/.

            Example: òvce (N1: 11)

• Voiced obstruents may appear word-finally.

            Example: dɤ̀lɤg (N1: 216), bòb (G3: 69), skròb (G1: 21), lèb (G1: 24)

• Soft consonants occur rarely, and never in masculine definite forms or in verbal endings (contrary to most other Bulgarian dialects).

            Examples: prijàtelɤ (N1: 90), kànu (N2: 71)

     In fact, only /k/, /g/, /l/, and /n/ have soft correlates at all.

• The sequence /mn/ is dissimilated to /ml/ in word-initial position, and to /vn/ in other positions

            Examples: mlògo (N2: 56) // stòvni (N1: 58), gùvno (G1: 109), tɤ̀vno (DS3: 30)

 

Accent

• The accent frequently occurs on the ending in some polysyllabic masculine nouns.

            Examples: koledarì (N2: 72), rɤkavè (N1: 224), soborjè (DS3: 115)

• The accent fails to shift to the article in monosyllabic masculine singular nouns.

            dɤ̀žɤt (G3:34), rèdɤt (G1: 61)

• In some adjectives the stress is on the ending.

            Examples: golò (N1: 175), debelò (N2: 65), golemò (DS2: 21)

• The accent advances to the theme vowel in L-participles, regardless of whether there is a syllabic prefix or not.

            Examples: oratìla (N2: 16), oženìl (N1:82), izvikàli (DS2: 103), ostanàlo (G3: 40), stiskàli (G3: 45)

 The same advancement occurs in aorist forms, except that the accent is retracted to the initial syllable (or a verbal prefix) in 2nd and 3rd singular forms. Examples:

            kazà (N1: 54), didzà (G3: 27), kṛstìmo (DS 1: 68) // 3rd singular  iznàpisa (N2: 10), ùplaši (G2: 26), nàpravi (DS2: 18)

• The accent is retracted from the theme vowel in the present of many 2nd conjugation verbs.

            Examples: dàri (N1: 45), obikòli (N2: 168), umòriš (G1: 66)

• The accent is retracted to the initial syllable in the imperative forms.

            Examples: pòpari (N1: 93), ìdi (N1: 180), pòkaži (DS2: 119)

 

Morphology

• One of the most interesting traits of the Trŭn dialect is the existence of a tripartite definite article, with different forms indicating whether the speaker focuses on proximity, distance, or chooses not to emphasize either of these options. Such a distinction is found in the Rhodope dialects as well, where it encompasses a much larger area. There is a formal difference between the two regions, in that the “proximal” form is marked in Trǔn dialects by the formant /-v-/, whereas it is marked by the formant /-s-/ in Rhodope dialects. (In both regions the “medial” [= neutral] form is marked by /-t-/ and the “distal” form by /-n-/.)

     Published sources on the Trŭn dialect assert that both proximal and distal articles occur regularly. Our impression is that they occur much less frequently in Trŭn than in the Rhodopes: in roughly seven hours of speech from the three villages, only two proximal forms were heard, and no distal forms. Although strictly speaking there is no reason to assert that the existence of proximal articles in a dialect also implies existence of the distal ones, it is generally assumed that this is the case.

            Examples: momèvo (N2: 10), malòvo (N1: 213)

• Although there are no examples of such three-way deixis in demonstrative pronouns (in which speakers use forms with /-ov-/ to mark the idea of proximity, in addition to the expected “neutral” and “distal” forms, marked with /-t-/ and /-on-/, respectively), it may be assumed that they exist, given the evidence of adverbial forms with the marker /-ov-/.

            Examples:  ovakà (N1: 46), ve (N1: 151)

• The forms of personal pronouns are different. Examples:

            1st singular nominative jà (N1: 59)
            3rd singular nominative masculine òn (N1: 41, DS2: 9)
            3rd singular nominative feminine onà (N2: 21), DS2: 120)
            3rd singular nominative neuter onò (N1: 124)
            3rd singular dative feminine nèvu (N1: 58)
            3rd singular dative feminine short form vi (N1: 58); voj (DS2: 120)
            3rd plural nominative onì (DS2: 142, G1:70)
            3rd plural dative n’ìm (DS2: 125)

• The final consonant is preserved in the definite article of singular masculine nouns

            Examples: pustin’àkɤt (G3: 29), dɤ̀žɤt (G3: 34), litàkɤt (N1: 230), zèlnikɤt (DS 2: 123)

• The plural ending of masculine nouns is either /-e/, /-je/, or /-i/.

            Examples: rɤkavè (N1: 224) // soborjè (DS3: 115) // koledarì (N2: 72)

• The plural ending of feminine nouns is /-e/.

            Examples: svìrke (N1: 48), tantèle (N1: 224), dùme (N2, 24), zmìje (G1: 75), pòrte (DS3 17)

• Non-nominative forms of feminine nouns, feminine singular adjectives, and masculine nouns signifying animate beings, are in regular use.

            Examples: svàdbu (N1: 42), bànicu (N1: 43), kràvu (DS3: 58) vòdu (G2: 16); gòspoda (DS2: 151)

        These forms represent an interesting result in the history of Bulgarian, which gradually lost all case endings in nouns. At the penultimate stage of this development, such nouns had only two case endings (instead of the inherited seven), the nominative case and the so-called casus generalis, which continued the form of the accusative case (“animate accusative” in the instance of the masculine nouns) and was used for all other meanings,

• A particularly interesting corollary of the above is the fact that the definite article attached to these forms also shows inherited cases endings (/-tu/ for feminine and /-toga/ for animate masculine). 

            Example: baštùtu (N1: 124), popàtoga (G2: 26), drugòtoga (N1: 39)

• Plural forms of adjectives, demonstratives, and the L-participle distinguish all three genders, with masculine marked by /-i/, feminine by /-e/ and neuter by /-a/. 

            Examples: rìdži mustàci (N2: 40); tèje dùme (N2: 14); dṛvà dɤ̀lga (N2: 58), ednà selà (DS2: 46); ne sù umrèla (DS1: 14)

• The ending in all 1st person singular present tense forms is /-m/, except in the modal verb ‘can’, which has the ending /-u/.

            Examples: kazùjem (N1, 69), kàžem (N1: 224), plàšim (G3: 18), pèrem (DS2: 94) // mògu (N1: 69. G2: 36)

• The ending in all 1st person plural in all tenses forms is /-mo/.

            Examples of present tense: pràimo (N2: 52), tràžimo (N2: 179), obṛ̀čamo (G3: 37)

            Examples of aorist tense: izokàmo (G2:50), stàdomo (DS 2: 59)

            Examples of imperfect tense: imèemo (G1: 10), čùvaemo (DS 3: 58)

• The ending in all 3rd person plural present tense is /-u/.

            Examples: otìdu (N1: 38), kànu (N1: 39), zbìraju (N1: 9), pištù (G3: 45),  kràdnu (DS 2: 64)

• The ending for 2nd person plural aorist tense is /-ste/.

            Example: obṛkàste (N2: 83), umorìste (G1: 67)̀

• The ending for 3rd person plural aorist tense is /-še/.

            Example: iskràdoše (DS2: 45), izèdoše (G3: 28), pisàše (DS2: 18)

• The suffix /-na/ is normally dropped from aorist and L-participle forms, though some verbs allow variation.

            Example: sède (DS1: 51),  tṛ̀glo (G1: 126), // [no examples in these texts of preserved -na]

• There are two different future particles: ču for 1st person singular and če for all other persons.

            Examples: jà ču ga nòčem popàrim (N1: 85), ču oblečèm (DS3: 107); če dòjdemo (N1: 42)

• Verbal nouns end in /-n’e/.

            Example: jèden’e (N1: 12), kṛštan’è (G2: 21), kovàn’e (G2: 67)

 

References:

     Gospodinkin, Dimitŭr. 1921. Trŭnčanite i trŭnskijat govor. Izvestija na Seminara po slavjanska filologija 4: 148-211.

     Petričev, Dimitŭr. 1931. Prinos kŭm izučavane na trŭnskija govor. Izvestija na Seminara po slavjanska filologija 7: 35-75.