LANGUAGE CONTACTS AND INTERFERENCES IN THE CAKAVIAN - KAJKA VIAN SPEECHES OF THE DUGA RESA AREA

Bitne čakavske i kajkavske razlučnice dugoreških ikavsko-ekavskih govora na fonetsko-fonološkoj, prozodijskoj, morfološkoj i leksičkoj razini. Prostor i granice genetski i tipološki podjednakih govora i znanstvena literature o njima. Odnos osobina tih govora prema tipičnim čakavskim ikavsko-ekavskim govorima i prema tipičnim starijim kajkavskim govorima. Kriteriji za određivanje bitnih čakavsko-kajkavskih različnosti. Veći prodor kajkavskih jezičnih elemenata u “Pavuriji” nego u drugim dugo- reŠkim naseljima. Ponešto novoštokavskoga nanosa iz susjednih govora i standardnoga jezika (artikulacija ć i đ i dr.). Zaključci.In the Cakavian-Kajkavian speeches of the Duga Resa area characteristics of all three dialects of the Croatian language - the Cakavian, Kajkavian and Stokavian are observable. However, they are not of the same genetic and typological rank. In spite of inter-lingual and extra-lingual processes and social pressures, the Cakavian discriminating characteristics are still dominant in the structure of those speeches. They fully encompass their categories, i.e. without parallel realizations from superstratum or ad-stratum, much more often then the characteristics of other dialects. In spite of their frequency, Kajkavian discriminating characteristics did not sig - nificantly penetrate the original Cakavian structure - there is almost always a Cakavian equivalent realized parallel with the Kajkavian discriminating characteristics. Stokavian characteristics (with the exception of the articulation of consonants c and d) make in those speeches only a thin, surface layer. The Duga Resa area speeches are distinguished between themselves only by the amount of non-Cakavian characteristics. It is obvious that in earlier times all of those originally Cakavian speeches took over the same Kajkavian characteristics, and the Stokavian language elements entered later from neighboring Stokavian speeches and from the standard language. The author proves these conclusions by dialectical data on the phonetic, phonological, prosodic, morphological and lexical level of these speeches