Macedonian Dialects

The realisation of scholarly assignments related to the linguistic-geographical presentation of the features of the popular language and its diversity is certainly one of the more serious linguistic disciplines, which requires not only expertise but also resoluteness to invest outstanding efforts and great precision, equal to those of the filigree making. Hence, we tend to assess the results achieved by Academician Bozhidar Vidoeski (1920-1998) in this sphere from several aspects - not only as findings important for Macedonian linguistic studies, but also as cornerstones in the development of Macedonian dialectology. Concretely speaking, we should stress that Academician Vidoeski did research into the Macedonian dialects with great patience for more than four decades. In the first post-war years he travelled all over Macedonia, mainly on foot, from one village to another, collecting materials for the basics of Macedonian dialectology. This research was synchronic and diachronic, for he tried to present not only the differences between contemporary Macedonian speeches but also the development of Macedonian as a distinct language The creation of a general national language, i.e. raising popular language to the level of a literary language, is one of the most important, not to say the most important segment of a nation’s cultural life, especially when it goes together with the state-creation, which undoubtedly represents a turning point in one’s national history. The creation of new states and languages has rarely been cordially welcomed, and the Macedonian language and state were not an exception, as this act affected certain hegemonistic aspirations. Such complicated conditions, as a rule, contribute to the appearance of strong, enthusiastic and persistent personalities who approach the realisation of common national interests uncompromisingly and leave a mark on their time with their activities. In the case of Macedonia, these persons’ task was not an easy one, for they were supposed to prove that being late in realising the already manifested efforts to create a separate state and a national literary language did not give anybody the right to think or behave as if the seats had already been taken, i.e. that the Balkan map had already been tailored and the situation was definite. Such strong personalities who opened up wide paths to the development of the new Macedonian culture, especially through promoting the new, while at the same time the oldest, Slavonic literary language – Macedonian, were certainly represented by Krste P. Misirkov and Blazhe Koneski. Bozhidar Vidoeski was among the first students of Prof. Blazhe Koneski, and he soon became his closest associate. Their joint initiatives at the Faculty of Philosophy, and later at the Faculty of Philology, used to determine not only the developmental directions at the Macedonian Language Department, but also the projects of Macedonian linguistics in general for decades. The results of the above co-operation are many-sided. Yet, we will illustrate them most directly through Academician Vidoeski’s creative participation in the well-known "Historical Phonology of the Macedonian Language" by Academician Koneski, published in English. The above-mentioned works, collected in three volumes under the same title, "The Dialects of the Macedonian Language", published by the Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts, can be divided into two groups: monographic descriptions of distinct dialectal regions (most often at all levels: phonetic-phonological, morpho-syntactic and lexical), and monographs of certain linguistic phenomena and their destiny within the dialectal diversity of the Macedonian popular language. What prevails in the first maturing stage of Prof. Vidoeski’s dialectological research is a series of monographic descriptions of certain dialectal regions – the Poreche dialect (1950), Northern Macedonian dialects (1. The Kumanovo-Kratovo group of dialects, 2: The dialect of the Skopska Crna Gora region) (1954); the Kichevo dialect (1957); the Kumanovo dialect (1961), to mention but a few. Soon, on the basis of his broadened knowledge gained from the this research, Vidoeski went for a more complicated elaboration - synthesis of the specific features of selected linguistic areas, which serve as a basis in the classification of the Macedonian dialects. The following monographic descriptions fall into this group: "Basic Dialectal Groups in Macedonia" (1960-1964); "Macedonian Dialects in the Light of Linguistic Geography" (1962-1963); "Dialectal Differentiation of the Macedonian Language (1970); "Dialectal Centre and Dialectal Periphery of the Macedonian Linguistic Area" (1976); "On the Differentiation of Dialects in the Skopje Region" (1985). A separate group of monographs elaborate in detail certain more important grammatical features (of course, at dialectal level, with the methods of linguistic geography): "Pronominal Forms in the Macedonian Dialects" (1965); "Accentual Systems in the Macedonian Dialects"(1969); "Descendants of the Vocal ‘r’ and ‘l’ in the Dialects of the Macedonian Language" (1970). "Vocal Systems in the Macedonian Literary and Dialectal Language" (1991). Of course, parallel with his other activities, Prof. Vidoeski continued his monographic presentation of the yet unexamined dialects: "Debar Dialects" (1984); "Bitola Speech" (1985); "The Razlog Dialect in Vuk’s Notes and Today" (1988); "Petrich Dialect" (1989). Worth noticing for its synthetic approach to the problems of Macedonian dialectological studies is his three-volume edition "Dialectology of the Macedonian Language." Its first volume was promoted some time ago as a posthumous edition. It consists of two parts: General Overview, and Western Dialects (monographs of basic speech complexes). The first, general part contains ten papers which, each in a different way, describe the dialectal differentiation of the Macedonian language. Regardless of the different aspects of analysing the problems, one can find certain points of contact among the papers. The first three, "Dialectal Differentiation of the Macedonian Language", "Stages of the Dialectal Differentiation of the Macedonian Language", and "Formation of the Macedonian Dialects", offer a comprehensive survey and a richly documented register of the ways and periods of differentiation of the Macedonian dialectal system. This means that the author does not stop at merely depicting the synchronic status of popular speech features, but also analyses the historical context, at the same time offering a reconstruction of the developmental stages. When speaking of the origin of various dialectal features, Vidoeski divides them into two groups: "Most of them appeared as a consequence of the internal development of the Macedonian language. However, there is a number of phenomena that appeared under the influence of the neighboring languages, such as the non-Slavonic Aromanian (Vlach), Albanian, Greek, somewhat later the Turkish language, and, of course, the Slavonic Bulgarian and Serbian, especially in the sphere of transitional speeches." As Vidoeski stresses, of greater importance for the dialectal differentiation of the Macedonian language are those innovative features that appeared as a result of internal processes within the language. Most of these features have been restricted to the Macedonian terrain and do not exceed the boundaries of the Macedonian linguistic territory. They have been deployed mainly in the central and western regions. Generally speaking, within the boundaries of the western dialect, there are two clear-cut areas, one of which is central, covers a larger territory and has an insignificant internal differentiation, while the other one is peripheral and contains numerous isoglosses of dozens of micro-systems. The zone bordering the Albanian linguistic territory manifests the greatest diversity, especially in the southwest (Macedonian-Albanian-Greek region) where there is greater concentration of Aromanian ethnic elements. What has contributed to the internal differentiation of the Macedonian dialects are those innovative specific features that have developed under the influence of the Balkan non-Slavonic languages. Some of these features have spread throughout the entire Macedonian territory and have become common Macedonian features. They are also characteristic of the Bulgarian language, and appear even in eastern and southern Serbian dialects. This means that they have become common Balkan features. However, there is a certain number of linguistic phenomena, as Vidoeski explains, of the above kind (Balkanisms), that have appeared on Macedonian terrain and remained within the Macedonian linguistic boundaries, covering greater or smaller areas. Some of these features have penetrated deeply into the dialect’s structure and have become relevant for the dialectal differentiation. The more one goes east or north, the smaller the frequency of these Balkanisms. Thus, the diminutive-expressive suffix -ule, the use of the preposition od with a possessive meaning, the deletion of the preposition vo, and the use of the pronominal form mu for feminine gender, appear only in the western speeches. The use of the preposition na with a direct object can be found in an even smaller area. As a summary of the above-mentioned group of papers, Vidoeski concludes that most of the linguistic innovations, i.e. their focal point, is located in central and western Macedonia. From this centre they have spread in all directions, but this spread was not balanced. Part of the dialectal innovations remained within smaller areas, some broke through as far as the linguistic periphery, or only to a portion of it, while only a small number crossed the linguistic boundaries. According to Prof. Vidoeski, there are places in the linguistic periphery where the innovations have fully prevailed, forcing the old features to disappear. However, there are also areas along the linguistic periphery where the old features have continued to exist. Today we can find most of the archaic features in the linguistic areas bordering the Albanian and Greek languages. In this entire area, instead of the old Slavonic groups -tj and -dj, the old -sht and -zhd have been preserved, not only in the stems but also in the derivative and grammatical morphemes. In this way, two kinds of speeches have been formed: central and peripheral. The central ones, with their innovative dialectal features manifest themselves as progressive, while the peripheral ones, which still contain some of the old features within them, manifest themselves as archaic.