Slavic languages (also called Slavonic languages) are the
Indo-European languages spoken by the Slavic peoples. They are thought
to descend from a proto-language called
Proto-Slavic spoken during the
Early Middle Ages, which in turn is thought to have descended from the
earlier Proto-Balto-Slavic language, linking the
Slavic languages to
Baltic languages in a Balto-Slavic group within the Indo-European
Slavic languages are divided intro three subgroups: East, West,
and South, which together constitute more than twenty languages. Of
these, ten have at least one million speakers and official status as
the national languages of the countries in which they are
predominantly spoken: Russian, Belarusian and Ukrainian (of the East
group), Polish, Czech and Slovak (of the West group) and Slovene,
Serbo-Croatian, Macedonian and Bulgarian (of the South group).
The current geographic distribution of natively spoken Slavic
languages covers Eastern Europe, the Balkans,
Central Europe and all
of the territory of Russia, which includes northern and north-central
Asia. Furthermore, the diasporas of many Slavic peoples have
established isolated minorities of speakers of their languages all
over the world. The number of speakers of all Slavic languages
together is estimated to be 315 million.[unreliable source?]
Despite the large extent, the individual
Slavic languages are
considerably less differentiated than Germanic and Romance languages.
2.1 Common roots and ancestry
2.4 Linguistic history
3.3 Length, accent, and tone
3.5 Selected cognates
4 Influence on neighboring languages
5 Detailed list
6 See also
Slavic language tree.
Scholars traditionally divide
Slavic languages on the basis of
geographical and genealogical principle into three main branches, some
of which feature subbranches:
Some linguists speculate that a North Slavic branch has existed as
Old Novgorod dialect
Old Novgorod dialect may have reflected some idiosyncrasies
of this group.
Mutual intelligibility also plays a role in determining
the West, East, and South branches. Speakers of languages within the
same branch will in most cases be able to understand each other at
least partially, but they are generally unable to across branches (for
which it would be comparable to a native English speaker trying to
understand any other Germanic language).
The most obvious differences between the East, West and Slavic
branches are in the orthography of the standard languages: West Slavic
languages (and Western
South Slavic languages
South Slavic languages - Croatian and Slovene)
are written in the Latin script, and have had more Western European
influence due to their proximity and speakers being historically Roman
Catholic, whereas the East Slavic and Eastern South Slavic languages
are written in Cyrillic and, with
Eastern Orthodox or
have had more Greek influence.
East Slavic languages
East Slavic languages such as Russian
have, however, during and after Peter the Great's Europeanization
campaign, absorbed many words of Latin, French, German, and Italian
The tripartite division of the
Slavic languages does not take into
account the spoken dialects of each language. Of these, certain
so-called transitional dialects and hybrid dialects often bridge the
gaps between different languages, showing similarities that do not
stand out when comparing Slavic literary (i.e. standard) languages.
For example, Slovak (West Slavic) and Ukrainian (East Slavic) are
bridged by the Rusyn language/dialect of Eastern Slovakia and Western
Ukraine. Similarly, the Croatian
Kajkavian dialect is more similar
to Slovene than to the standard Croatian language.
Slavic languages diverged from a common proto-language
later than any other group of the
Indo-European language family,
enough differences exist between the various Slavic dialects and
languages to make communication between speakers of different Slavic
languages difficult. Within the individual Slavic languages, dialects
may vary to a lesser degree, as those of Russian, or to a much greater
degree, as those of Slovene.
Part of a series on
List of Indo-European languages
Phonology: Sound laws, Accent, Ablaut
Old Irish glosses
Alternative and fringe
Paleolithic Continuity Theory
Chalcolithic (Copper Age)
Domestication of the horse
Nordic Bronze Age
Painted Grey Ware
Northern Black Polished Ware
Peoples and societies
Religion and mythology
Copenhagen Studies in Indo-European
Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture
The Horse, the Wheel and Language
Journal of Indo-European Studies
Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch
Indo-European Etymological Dictionary
Main article: History of the Slavic languages
Proto-Slavic language, History of Proto-Slavic, and
Common roots and ancestry
Area of Balto-Slavic dialectic continuum (purple) with proposed
material cultures correlating to speakers Balto-Slavic in Bronze Age
(white). Red dots = archaic Slavic hydronyms
Slavic languages descend from Proto-Slavic, their immediate parent
language, ultimately deriving from Proto-Indo-European, the ancestor
language of all Indo-European languages, via a Proto-Balto-Slavic
stage. During the Proto-Balto-Slavic period a number of exclusive
isoglosses in phonology, morphology, lexis, and syntax developed,
which makes Slavic and Baltic the closest related of all the
Indo-European branches. The secession of the Balto-Slavic dialect
Proto-Slavic is estimated on archaeological and
glottochronological criteria to have occurred sometime in the period
A minority of Baltists maintain the view that the Slavic group of
languages differs so radically from the neighboring Baltic group
(Lithuanian, Latvian, and the now-extinct Old Prussian), that they
could not have shared a parent language after the breakup of the
Proto-Indo-European continuum about five millennia ago. Substantial
advances in Balto-Slavic accentology that occurred in the last three
decades, however, make this view very hard to maintain nowadays,
especially when one considers that there was most likely no
"Proto-Baltic" language and that West Baltic and East Baltic differ
from each other as much as each of them does from Proto-Slavic.
Baška tablet, 11th century, Krk, Croatia.
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help
improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources.
Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2010) (Learn
how and when to remove this template message)
The imposition of
Church Slavonic on Orthodox
Slavs was often at the
expense of the vernacular. Says WB Lockwood, a prominent Indo-European
linguist, "It (O.C.S) remained in use to modern times but was more and
more influenced by the living, evolving languages, so that one
distinguishes Bulgarian, Serbian, and Russian varieties. The use of
such media hampered the development of the local languages for
literary purposes, and when they do appear the first attempts are
usually in an artificially mixed style." (148)
Lockwood also notes that these languages have "enriched" themselves by
Church Slavonic for the vocabulary of abstract concepts.
The situation in the Catholic countries, where Latin was more
important, was different. The Polish Renaissance poet Jan Kochanowski
and the Croatian
Baroque writers of the 16th century all wrote in
their respective vernaculars (though Polish itself had drawn amply on
Latin in the same way Russian would eventually draw on Church
14th-century Novgorodian children were literate enough to send each
other letters written on birch bark.
Church Slavonic hampered vernacular literatures, it fostered
Slavonic literary activity and abetted linguistic independence from
external influences. Only the Croatian vernacular literary tradition
Church Slavonic in age. It began with the Vinodol Codex
and continued through the Renaissance until the codifications of
Croatian in 1830, though much of the literature between 1300 and 1500
was written in much the same mixture of the vernacular and Church
Slavonic as prevailed in
Russia and elsewhere.
The most important early monument of Croatian literacy is the Baška
tablet from the late 11th century. It is a large stone tablet found in
Church of St. Lucy, Jurandvor
Church of St. Lucy, Jurandvor on the Croatian island of Krk,
containing text written mostly in
Čakavian dialect in angular
Glagolitic script. The independence of
the continuity of the tradition.
10th–11th century Codex Zographensis, canonical monument of Old
More recent foreign influences follow the same general pattern in
Slavic languages as elsewhere and are governed by the political
relationships of the Slavs. In the 17th century, bourgeois Russian
(delovoi jazyk) absorbed German words through direct contacts between
Russians and communities of German settlers in Russia. In the era of
Peter the Great, close contacts with
France invited countless loan
words and calques from French, a significant fraction of which not
only survived but also replaced older Slavonic loans. In the 19th
century, Russian influenced most literary
Slavic languages by one
means or another.
Proto-Slavic language existed until around AD 500. By the 7th
century, it had broken apart into large dialectal zones.
There are no reliable hypotheses about the nature of the subsequent
breakups of West and South Slavic. East Slavic is generally thought to
converge to one Old Russian or Old East Slavonic language, which
existed until at least the 12th century.
Linguistic differentiation was accelerated by the dispersion of the
Slavic peoples over a large territory, which in Central Europe
exceeded the current extent of Slavic-speaking majorities. Written
documents of the 9th, 10th, and 11th centuries already display some
local linguistic features. For example, the
Freising manuscripts show
a language that contains some phonetic and lexical elements peculiar
Slovene dialects (e.g. rhotacism, the word krilatec). The Freising
manuscripts are the first Latin-script continuous text in a Slavic
The migration of Slavic speakers into the
Balkans in the declining
centuries of the
Byzantine Empire expanded the area of Slavic speech,
but the pre-existing writing (notably Greek) survived in this area.
The arrival of the
Pannonia in the 9th century
interposed non-Slavic speakers between South and West Slavs. Frankish
conquests completed the geographical separation between these two
groups, also severing the connection between
Lower Austria (Moravians) and those in present-day Styria, Carinthia,
East Tyrol in Austria, and in the provinces of modern Slovenia, where
the ancestors of the
Slovenes settled during first colonisation.
Main article: Historical development of the
Slavic languages up to the
See also: Proto-Slavic
The following is a summary of the main changes from
Proto-Indo-European (PIE) leading up to the
Common Slavic (CS) period
immediately following the
Proto-Slavic language (PS).
Satem sound changes:
PIE *ḱ, *ǵ, *ǵʰ → *ś, *ź, *źʰ (→ CS *s, *z, *z)
PIE *kʷ, *gʷ, *gʷʰ → *k, *g, *gʰ
Ruki rule: Following *r, *u, *k or *i, PIE *s → *š (→ CS *x)
Loss of voiced aspirates: PIE *bʰ, *dʰ, *gʰ → *b, *d, *g
Merger of *o and *a: PIE *a/*o, *ā/*ō → PS *a, *ā (→ CS *o, *a)
Law of open syllables: All closed syllables (syllables ending in a
consonant) are eventually eliminated, in the following stages:
Nasalization: With *N indicating either *n or *m not immediately
followed by a vowel: PIE *aN, *eN, *iN, *oN, *uN → *ą, *ę, *į,
*ǫ, *ų (→ CS *ǫ, *ę, *ę, *ǫ, *y). (NOTE: *ą *ę etc.
indicates a nasalized vowel.)
In a cluster of obstruent (stop or fricative) + another consonant, the
obstruent is deleted unless the cluster can occur word-initially.
(occurs later, see below)
Monophthongization of diphthongs.
(occurs much later, see below) Elimination of liquid diphthongs (e.g.
*er, *ol when not followed immediately by a vowel).
First palatalization: *k, *g, *x → CS *č, *ž, *š (pronounced
[tʃ], [ʒ], [ʃ] respectively) before a front vocalic sound (*e, *ē,
*i, *ī, *j).
Iotation: Consonants are palatalized by an immediately following *j:
*sj, *zj → CS *š, *ž
*nj, *lj, *rj → CS *ň, *ľ, *ř (pronounced [nʲ lʲ rʲ] or
*tj, *dj → CS *ť, *ď (probably palatal stops, e.g. [c ɟ], but
developing in different ways depending on the language)
*bj, *pj, *mj, *wj → *bľ, *pľ, *mľ, *wľ (the lateral consonant
*ľ is mostly lost later on in West Slavic)
Vowel fronting: After *j or some other palatal sound, back vowels are
fronted (*a, *ā, *u, *ū, *ai, *au → *e, *ē, *i, *ī, *ei, *eu).
This leads to hard/soft alternations in noun and adjective
Prothesis: Before a word-initial vowel, *j or *w is usually inserted.
Monophthongization: *ai, *au, *ei, *eu, *ū → *ē, *ū, *ī, *jū,
Second palatalization: *k, *g, *x → CS *c [ts], *dz, *ś before new
*ē (from earlier *ai). *ś later splits into *š (West Slavic), *s
Progressive palatalization (or "third palatalization"): *k, *g, *x →
CS *c, *dz, *ś after *i, *ī in certain circumstances.
Vowel quality shifts: All pairs of long/short vowels become
differentiated as well by vowel quality:
*a, *ā → CS *o, *a
*e, *ē → CS *e, *ě (originally a low-front sound [æ] but
eventually raised to [ie] in most dialects, developing in divergent
*i, *u → CS *ь, *ъ (also written *ĭ, *ŭ; lax vowels as in the
English words pit, put)
*ī, *ū, *ȳ → CS *i, *u, *y
Elimination of liquid diphthongs: Liquid diphthongs (sequences of
vowel plus *l or *r, when not immediately followed by a vowel) are
changed so that the syllable becomes open:
*or, *ol, *er, *el → *ro, *lo, *re, *le in West Slavic.
*or, *ol, *er, *el → *oro, *olo, *ere, *olo in East Slavic.
*or, *ol, *er, *el → *rā, *lā, *re, *le in South Slavic.
Possibly, *ur, *ul, *ir, *il → syllabic *r, *l, *ř, *ľ (then
develops in divergent ways).
Development of phonemic tone and vowel length (independent of vowel
quality): Complex developments (see History of accentual developments
in Slavic languages).
Slavic languages are a relatively homogeneous family, compared
with other families of
Indo-European languages (e.g. Germanic,
Romance, and Indo-Iranian). As late as the 10th century AD, the entire
Slavic-speaking area still functioned as a single, dialectally
differentiated language, termed Common Slavic. Compared with most
other Indo-European languages, the
Slavic languages are quite
conservative, particularly in terms of morphology (the means of
inflecting nouns and verbs to indicate grammatical differences). Most
Slavic languages have a rich, fusional morphology that conserves much
of the inflectional morphology of Proto-Indo-European.
The following table shows the inventory of consonants of Late Common
Consonants of Late Proto-Slavic
1The sound /sʲ/ did not occur in West Slavic, where it had developed
This inventory of sounds is quite similar to what is found in most
modern Slavic languages. The extensive series of palatal consonants,
along with the affricates *ts and *dz, developed through a series of
palatalizations that happened during the
Proto-Slavic period, from
earlier sequences either of velar consonants followed by front vowels
(e.g. *ke, *ki, *ge, *gi, *xe, and *xi), or of various consonants
followed by *j (e.g. *tj, *dj, *sj, *zj, *rj, *lj, *kj, and *gj, where
*j is the palatal approximant ([j], the sound of the English letter
"y" in "yes" or "you").
The biggest change in this inventory results from a further general
palatalization occurring near the end of the
Common Slavic period,
where all consonants became palatalized before front vowels. This
produced a large number of new palatalized (or "soft") sounds, which
formed pairs with the corresponding non-palatalized (or "hard")
consonants and absorbed the existing palatalized sounds *lʲ *rʲ
*nʲ *sʲ. These sounds were best preserved in Russian but were lost
to varying degrees in other languages (particularly Czech and Slovak).
The following table shows the inventory of modern Russian:
Consonant phonemes of Russian
This general process of palatalization did not occur in Serbo-Croatian
and Slovenian. As a result, the modern consonant inventory of these
languages is nearly identical to the Late
Common Slavic inventory.
Common Slavic tolerated relatively few consonant clusters.
However, as a result of the loss of certain formerly present vowels
(the weak yers), the modern
Slavic languages allow quite complex
clusters, as in the Russian word взблеск [vzblʲesk] ("flash").
Also present in many
Slavic languages are clusters rarely found
cross-linguistically, as in Russian ртуть [rtutʲ] ("mercury") or
Polish mchu [mxu] ("moss", gen. sg.). The word for "mercury" with the
initial rt- cluster, for example, is also found in the other East and
West Slavic languages, although Slovak retains an epenthetic vowel
A typical vowel inventory is as follows:
The sound [ɨ] occurs only in some languages (Russian and Belarusian),
and even in these languages, it is unclear whether it is its own
phoneme or an allophone of /i/. Nonetheless, it is a quite prominent
and noticeable characteristic of the languages in which it is present.
Russian мышь [mɨʂ] (help·info) and Polish mysz
Common Slavic also had two nasal vowels: *ę [ẽ] and *ǫ [õ].
However, these are preserved only in modern Polish (along with a few
lesser-known dialects and microlanguages; see
Yus for more details).
Polish wąż /vɔ̃ʐ/ and węże /vɛ̃ʐɛ/ "snake,
Other phonemic vowels are found in certain languages (e.g. the schwa
/ə/ in Bulgarian and Slovenian, distinct high-mid and low-mid vowels
in Slovenian, and the lax front vowel /ɪ/ in Ukrainian).
Length, accent, and tone
An area of great difference among
Slavic languages is that of prosody
(i.e. syllabic distinctions such as vowel length, accent, and tone).
Common Slavic had a complex system of prosody, inherited with little
change from Proto-Indo-European. This consisted of phonemic vowel
length and a free, mobile pitch accent:
All vowels could occur either short or long, and this was phonemic (it
could not automatically be predicted from other properties of the
There was (at most) a single accented syllable per word, distinguished
by higher pitch (as in modern Japanese) rather than greater dynamic
stress (as in English).
Vowels in accented syllables could be pronounced with either a rising
or falling tone (i.e. there was pitch accent), and this was phonemic.
The accent was free in that it could occur on any syllable and was
The accent was mobile in that its position could potentially vary
among closely related words within a single paradigm (e.g. the accent
might land on a different syllable between the nominative and genitive
singular of a given word).
Even within a given inflectional class (e.g. masculine i-stem nouns),
there were multiple accent patterns in which a given word could be
inflected. For example, most nouns in a particular inflectional class
could follow one of three possible patterns: Either there was
consistent accent on the root (pattern A), predominant accent on the
ending (pattern B), or accent that moved between root and ending
(pattern C). In patterns B and C, the accent in different parts of the
paradigm shifted not only in location but also type (rising vs.
falling). Each inflectional class had its own version of patterns B
and C, which might differ significantly from one inflectional class to
The modern languages vary greatly in the extent to which they preserve
this system. On one extreme,
Serbo-Croatian preserves the system
nearly unchanged (even more so in the conservative Chakavian dialect);
on the other, Macedonian has basically lost the system in its
entirety. Between them are found numerous variations:
Slovenian preserves most of the system but has shortened all
unaccented syllables and lengthened non-final accented syllables so
that vowel length and accent position largely co-occur.
Russian and Bulgarian have eliminated distinctive vowel length and
tone and converted the accent into a stress accent (as in English) but
preserved its position. As a result, the complexity of the mobile
accent and the multiple accent patterns still exists (particularly in
Russian because it has preserved the
Common Slavic noun inflections,
while Bulgarian has lost them).
Czech and Slovak have preserved phonemic vowel length and converted
the distinctive tone of accented syllables into length distinctions.
Phonemic accent is otherwise lost, but the former accent patterns are
echoed to some extent in corresponding patterns of vowel
length/shortness in the root. Paradigms with mobile vowel
length/shortness do exist but only in a limited fashion, usually only
with the zero-ending forms (nom. sg., acc. sg., and/or gen. pl.,
depending on inflectional class) having a different length from the
other forms. (Czech has a couple of other "mobile" patterns, but they
are rare and can usually be substituted with one of the "normal"
mobile patterns or a non-mobile pattern.)
Old Polish had a system very much like Czech. Modern Polish has lost
vowel length, but some former short-long pairs have become
distinguished by quality (e.g. [o oː] > [o u]), with the result
that some words have vowel-quality changes that exactly mirror the
mobile-length patterns in Czech and Slovak.
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (February
Slavic languages have extensive morphophonemic alternations
in their derivational and inflectional morphology, including
between velar and postalveolar consonants, front and back vowels, and
between a vowel and no vowel.
Main article: Slavic vocabulary
The following is a very brief selection of cognates in basic
vocabulary across the Slavic language family, which may serve to give
an idea of the sound changes involved. This is not a list of
translations: cognates have a common origin, but their meaning may be
shifted and loanwords may have replaced them.
уво / uvo; uho
огањ / oganj
риба / riba
гн(иј)ездо / gn(ij)ezdo
око (óko) (dated, poetic or in set expressions)
modern: глаз (glaz)
око / oko
глава (glavá) "chapter or chief, leader, head"
глава / glava
рука / ruka
ноћ / noć
Influence on neighboring languages
West Slav tribes in 9th–10th centuries
Most languages of the former
Soviet Union and of some neighbouring
countries (for example, Mongolian) are significantly influenced by
Russian, especially in vocabulary. The Romanian, Albanian, and
Hungarian languages show the influence of the neighboring Slavic
nations, especially in vocabulary pertaining to urban life,
agriculture, and crafts and trade—the major cultural innovations at
times of limited long-range cultural contact. In each one of these
languages, Slavic lexical borrowings represent at least 20% of the
total vocabulary. However, Romanian has much lower influence from
Slavic than Albanian or Hungarian. This is because
Slavic tribes crossed and partially settled the territories inhabited
Illyrians and Vlachs on their way to the Balkans.
Although also spoken in neighbouring lands, the Germanic languages
show less significant Slavic influence, partly because Slavic
migrations were mostly headed south rather than west. Slavic tribes
did push westwards into Germanic territory, but borrowing for the most
part seems to have been from Germanic to Slavic rather than the other
way: for instance, the now-extinct
Polabian language was heavily
influenced by German, far more than any living Slavic language today.
The Slavic contributions to
Germanic languages remains a moot
question, though Max Vasmer, a specialist in Slavic etymology, has
claimed that there were no Slavic loans into Proto-Germanic. The only
Germanic languages that shows significant Slavic influence are Yiddish
and the historical colonial dialects of German that were spoken East
of the Oder–Neisse line, such as
Silesian German (formerly spoken in
Silesia and South of East Prussia) and the Eastern varieties of East
Low German, with the exception of Low Prussian, which had a strong
Baltic substratum. Modern Dutch slang, especially the Amsterdam
dialect, borrowed much from
Yiddish in turn. However, there are
isolated Slavic loans (mostly recent) into other Germanic languages.
For example, the word for "border" (in modern German Grenze, Dutch
grens) was borrowed from the
Common Slavic granica. There are,
however, many cities and villages of Slavic origin in Eastern Germany,
the largest of which are Berlin,
Leipzig and Dresden. English derives
quark (a kind of cheese, not the subatomic particle) from the German
Quark, which in turn is derived from the Slavic tvarog, which means
"curd". Many German surnames, particularly in Eastern Germany and
Austria, are Slavic in origin. Swedish also has torg (market place)
from Old Russian tъrgъ or Polish targ, tolk (interpreter) from
Old Slavic tlŭkŭ, and pråm (barge) from West Slavonic
The Czech word robot is now found in most languages worldwide, and the
word pistol, probably also from Czech, is found in
many Indo-European languages, including Greek (πιστόλι,
A well-known Slavic word in almost all European languages is vodka, a
borrowing from Russian водка (vodka) – which itself was
borrowed from Polish wódka (lit. "little water"), from common Slavic
voda ("water", cognate to the English word) with the diminutive ending
"-ka". Owing to the medieval fur trade with Northern Russia,
Pan-European loans from Russian include such familiar words as
sable. The English word "vampire" was borrowed (perhaps via French
vampire) from German Vampir, in turn derived from Serbian vampir,
Proto-Slavic *ǫpyrь, although Polish scholar K.
Stachowski has argued that the origin of the word is early Slavic
*vąpěrь, going back to Turkic oobyr. Several European
languages, including English, have borrowed the word polje (meaning
"large, flat plain") directly from the former Yugoslav languages (i.e.
Slovene, Croatian, and Serbian). During the heyday of the
USSR in the
20th century, many more Russian words became known worldwide: da,
Soviet, sputnik, perestroika, glasnost, kolkhoz, etc. Also in the
English language borrowed from Russian is samovar (lit.
"self-boiling") to refer to the specific Russian tea urn.
The following tree for the
Slavic languages derives from the
Ethnologue report for Slavic languages. It includes the ISO 639-1
ISO 639-3 codes where available.
East Slavic languages:
ISO 639-1 code: be;
ISO 639-3 code: bel;
ISO 639-1 code: uk;
ISO 639-3 code: ukr
Rusyn (a language or a dialect of Ukrainian):
ISO 639-3 code: rue;
ISO 639-1 code: ru;
ISO 639-3 code: rus
West Slavic languages:
Sorbian section (also known as Wendish):
ISO 639-3 code: wen
Lower Sorbian (also known as Lusatian):
ISO 639-3 code: dsb;
ISO 639-3 code: hsb
ISO 639-1 code: pl;
ISO 639-3 code: pol
Silesian (see footnote above):
ISO 639-3 code: szl
ISO 639-2 code: csb;
Slovincian (a language or a dialect of Kashubian)—extinct
ISO 639-3 code: pox
ISO 639-1 code: cs;
ISO 639-3 ces
Knaanic or Judeo Slavic—extinct:
ISO 639-3 code: czk
ISO 639-1 code: sk;
ISO 639-3 code: slk
South Slavic languages:
ISO 639-1 code: bs;
ISO 639-3 code: bos
ISO 639-1 code: hr;
ISO 639-3 code: hrv
ISO 639-1 code: sr;
ISO 639-3 code: srp
Montenegrin (not regulated but official in Montenegro)
ISO 639-1 code: sl;
ISO 639-3 code: slv
ISO 639-1 code: bg;
ISO 639-3 code: bul
ISO 639-1 code: mk;
ISO 639-3 code: mkd
Old Church Slavonic—extinct:
ISO 639-1 code: cu;
ISO 639-3 code: chu
Para- and supranational languages
Church Slavonic language, derived from Old Church Slavonic, but with
significant replacement of the original vocabulary by forms from the
Russian language and other regional forms. The Bulgarian Orthodox
Church, Russian Orthodox Church, Polish Orthodox Church, Macedonian
Orthodox Church, Serbian Orthodox Church, and even some Roman Catholic
Croatia continue to use
Church Slavonic as a liturgical
language. While not used in modern times, the text of a Church
Slavonic Roman Rite Mass survives in
Croatia and the Czech Republic,
which is best known through Janáček's musical setting of it (the
Language families and languages
False Friends of the Slavist
^ Hammarström, Harald; Forkel, Robert; Haspelmath, Martin, eds.
Glottolog 3.0. Jena, Germany: Max Planck Institute
for the Science of Human History.
^ Britannica - Slavic languages
^ According to the data taken from Anatole V. Lyovin, An Introduction
to the Languages of the World, Oxford University Press, New York –
^ Encyclopedia of Rusyn history and culture, p 274, Paul R. Magocsi,
Ivan Ivanovich Pop, University of Toronto Press, 2002
^ cf. Novotná & Blažek (2007) with references. "Classical
glottochronology" conducted by Czech Slavist M. Čejka in 1974 dates
the Balto-Slavic split to −910±340 BCE, Sergei Starostin in 1994
dates it to 1210 BCE, and "recalibrated glottochronology" conducted by
Novotná & Blažek dates it to 1400–1340 BCE. This agrees well
with Trziniec-Komarov culture, localized from
Silesia to Central
Ukraine and dated to the period 1500–1200 BCE.
^ Kapović (2008, p. 94) "Kako rekosmo, nije sigurno je li uopće
bilo prabaltijskoga jezika. Čini se da su dvije posvjedočene,
preživjele grane baltijskoga, istočna i zapadna, različite jedna od
druge izvorno kao i svaka posebno od praslavenskoga".
^ a b c Comrie & Corbett (2002:6)
^ Schenker (2002:82)
^ Comrie & Corbett (2002:8)
^ Hellquist, Elof (1922). "torg". Svensk etymologisk ordbok (in
Swedish). Project Runeberg. Retrieved 2006-12-27.
^ Hellquist, Elof (1922). "tolk". Svensk etymologisk ordbok (in
Swedish). Project Runeberg. Retrieved 2006-12-27.
^ Hellquist, Elof (1922). "pråm". Svensk etymologisk ordbok (in
Swedish). Project Runeberg. Retrieved 2006-12-27.
^ Harper, Douglas. "vodka". Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved
^ Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary. Retrieved 28 April 2008
^ Harper, Douglas. "sable". Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved
^ cf.: Deutsches Wörterbuch von Jacob Grimm und Wilhelm Grimm. 16
Bde. [in 32 Teilbänden. Leipzig: S. Hirzel 1854–1960.], s.v.
Vampir; Trésor de la Langue Française informatisé; Dauzat, Albert,
1938. Dictionnaire étymologique. Librairie Larousse; Wolfgang
Pfeifer, Етymologisches Woerterbuch, 2006, p. 1494; Petar Skok,
Etimologijski rjecnk hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika, 1971–1974, s.v.
Vampir; Tokarev, S.A. et al. 1982. Mify narodov mira. ("Myths of the
peoples of the world". A Russian encyclopedia of mythology); Russian
Etymological Dictionary by Max Vasmer.
^ Harper, Douglas. "vampire". Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved
^ Stachowski, Kamil. 2005. Wampir na rozdrożach. Etymologia wyrazu
upiór – wampir w językach słowiańskich. W: Rocznik Slawistyczny,
t. LV, str. 73–92
^ "Indo-European, Slavic". Language Family Trees. Ethnologue. 2006.
Comrie, Bernard; Corbett, Greville. G. (2002). "Introduction". In
Comrie, Bernard; Corbett, Greville. G. The Slavonic Languages. London:
Routledge. pp. 1–19. ISBN 0-415-28078-8.
Lockwood, W.B. A Panorama of Indo-European Languages. Hutchinson
University Library, 1972. ISBN 0-09-111020-3 hardback,
ISBN 0-09-111021-1 paperback.
Marko Jesensek, The Slovene Language in the Alpine and Pannonian
Language Area, 2005. ISBN 83-242-0577-2
Kapović, Mate (2008). "Uvod u indoeuropsku lingvistiku" (in
Serbo-Croatian). Zagreb: Matica hrvatska.
Novotná, Petra; Blažek, Václav (2007). "Glottochronolgy and its
application to the Balto-Slavic languages" (PDF). Baltistica. XLII
(2): 185–210. Archived from the original (PDF) on 31 October
Schenker, Alexander M. (2002). "Proto-Slavonic". In Comrie, Bernard;
Corbett, Greville. G. The Slavonic Languages. London: Routledge.
pp. 60–124. ISBN 0-415-28078-8.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Slavic languages.
Slavic dictionaries on Slavic Net
Swadesh lists of Slavic basic vocabulary words (from Wiktionary's
Leo Wiener (1920). "Slavic Languages". Encyclopedia
Up to Proto-Slavic
Old Church Slavonic
Cyril and Methodius
West Slavic languages
East Slavic languages
Old East Slavic
South Slavic languages
Separate Slavic dialects
Slavic dialects of Greece
Slavic first palatalization
Slavic second palatalization
Slavic liquid metathesis and pleophony
Ruki sound law
Italics indicate extinct languages.
BNF: cb11932225v (d