Christina E. Kramer

Macedonian and Bulgarian li questions: Beyond syntax

The distribution of the yes/no-interrogative clitic li in Macedonian and Bulgarian reveals a complex interaction of syntax with non-syntactic factors. The underlying syntactic uniformity of questions with li in the two languages is obscured by a series of prosodic idiosyncracies in one language or the other. In Macedonian, the major prosodic phenomenon affecting the placement of li is the option for certain sequences of words to share a single stress. In Bulgarian, two different prosodic phenomena are relevant: stressing of clitics after the negative element ne and inversion of initial clitics with the following verb. When these factors are controlled for, the syntax of li questions in the two languages is strikingly homogeneous. If no element is focused (i.e., moved to SpecCP), then, in both languages, the tensed verb head-incorporates into li in C. Additional non-syntactic factors, including lexical differences between the two languages in the clitic/non-clitic status of certain auxiliaries and differences in the usage of li questions, are also discussed.

Accommodating Dialect Speakers in the Classroom: Sociolinguistic Aspects of Textbook Writing

Abstract This paper discusses the special problems of developing teaching materials for less commonly taught languages—Macedonian, in particular. I consider materials designed for mixed groups of students with varying degrees of linguistic knowledge and with differing goals for language acquisition, which range from a desire for greater oral fluency in the home environment to rapid acquisition of reading knowledge for scholarly research. I discuss both the choice of pedagogical method and linguistic code. Through the description of course materials I show how to provide access to the standard language, while erecting a bridge from dialect to standard language. I maintain that, while focusing on standard forms, it is particularly helpful to (a) provide cultural support and recognition of dialect variation, and (b) to rely on mixed pedagogic techniques and strategies. Because many heritage speakers come from families of rural background, which left Europe in the early- to mid-twentieth century, many students cannot envision Macedonia as a modern state. Thus, teaching materials need to fill in the cultural gaps, building on students’ home knowledge, while providing a contemporary picture of Macedonia as a modern, multi-ethnic, multi-lingual state. The teaching of history also needs to be integrated in the texts, drills, and supplementary readings. In areas where pronunciation, morphology, and syntactic patterns are in transition, I discuss variation and sociolinguistic factors, but do insist on an understanding of the standard. If we as teachers do not require knowledge of the standard, we perpetuate illiteracy and the use of home language in limited domains.