Lupus in etymologia : Vuk Karadžić’s opus in the pages of the Concise etymological dictionary of the Serbian language

Abstract

У раду је систематски представљен допринос Вуковог Српског рјечника, као и целокупног Вуковог корпуса, Приручном етимолошком речнику српског језика (ПЕРСЈ). Тај допринос се огледа у сва три сегмента одреднице новог речника, а пре свега у првом, документационом, и у трећем, аргументативном, јер за многе речи из основног лексичког фонда српског језика обрађене у ПЕРСЈ у Српском рјечнику и другим Вуковим списима налазимо прве потврде и/ли примере употребе илустративне за њихово изворно значење и културноисторијски контекст у којем су настале. Посебно су истакнути случајеви када Вук пружа податке значајне за доношење етимолошког суда, који се даје у другом делу одреднице ПЕРСЈ.

This paper presents a systematic overview of what the Concise etymological dictionary of the Serbian language (CEDSL) owes to the magnificent opus of Vuk Karadžić (Vuk). This contribution is directly or indirectly reflected in all three segments of this dictionary’s lemma. What this looks like is illustrated by examples of particular lemmata. The first part of the CEDSL lemma typically refers to Vuk’s Srpski rječnik (The Serbian dictionary, in some of its editions) as a source of the first fixation of words hitherto unattested (s.vv. нокшир, швалер). The first edition of that dictionary is also the single source of obscene lexicon, which is also treated in CEDSL.In the first, but also in the third part of the lemma, excerpts from folklore (lines of epic poems, proverbs, etc.) collected by Vuk are used as illustrations of the use of the words analysed (e.g. бисер, бора, брада; алат). The third part of the lemma, reserved for various comments and discussion, abounds with data from Vuk’s Rječnik and from his wider corpus. Various formal aspects (phonetic, morphological and word-formation ones) are quoted and interpreted or else those related to semantics (original meaning, obsolete and regional meanings, semantic developements) of the words analyzed (e.g. макнути, опна; ваљати; камен; брдо; ганути, ној; поклон; кашика, новац). This part of the lemma can include facts related to the cultural history of words (e.g. задужбина). Etymological judgement is provided in the second part of the CEDSL lemma. It happens frequently that exactly Vuk’s data contribute to establishing the ultimate etymology, or at the very least point the pursuit of the final etymon in a certain direction. At times the very fact of presence or absence of a word in the Rječnik is indicative of its chronology and/or its status within the Serbian language (e.g. завет; одличан), and occasionally the origin of a word is implicated by Vuk’s information about its geographic distribution (e.g. кафа, но). But of the greatest consequence are instances when Vuk’s examples, by the way of their form or meaning, most directly influence the formulation of etymological judgement (e.g. кликнути, орити се). Vuk’s entire corpus, and especially his Srpski rječnik, enters into a specific symbiosis with CEDSL: to a large extent, and in many aspects, Vuk’s material enriches CEDSL which, in its turn, sheds new light onto deeper layers of lexical and cultural riches hidden in Vuk’s Srpski rječnik. Keywords: Serbian language, etymology, lexicography, Srpski rječnik, Vuk Karadžić.