FREE delivery to all EXCLUSIVE BOOKS stores nationwide. FREE delivery to your door on all orders over R450. Excludes all international deliveries.
|
This product is either out of print or out of stock. Add it to your wishlist and we will automatically let you know if it comes back into stock. Add to Wishlist
This product is either out of print or out of stock. Add it to your wishlist and we will automatically let you know if it comes back into stock. Add to Wishlist
This study surveys the address systems of the modern Slavic languages, encompassing both free address (vocative phrases) and bound address (pronominal and quasi-pronominal), with occasional reference to non-standard varieties. The analysis rests on a proposed “naming template” — a fixed-order schema of element types (status, kinship, role, forename, patronymic, surname, etc.) — that governs the composition of address strings in both referential and vocative use. The template serves not only as a descriptive inventory but also as a predictive device, accounting for the admissibility, anomaly, and markedness of attested and unattested combinations. The diachronic dimension traces, among other things, the promotion of role terms to status terms, the rise and decline of elaborate bound-address systems (V-, P-, and O-address) under German, Polish, and inter-Slavic influence, and the effects of socialist-era language planning on address conventions.
This study surveys the address systems of the modern Slavic languages, encompassing both free address (vocative phrases) and bound address (pronominal and quasi-pronominal), with occasional reference to non-standard varieties. The analysis rests on a proposed “naming template” — a fixed-order schema of element types (status, kinship, role, forename, patronymic, surname, etc.) — that governs the composition of address strings in both referential and vocative use. The template serves not only as a descriptive inventory but also as a predictive device, accounting for the admissibility, anomaly, and markedness of attested and unattested combinations. The diachronic dimension traces, among other things, the promotion of role terms to status terms, the rise and decline of elaborate bound-address systems (V-, P-, and O-address) under German, Polish, and inter-Slavic influence, and the effects of socialist-era language planning on address conventions.
