Animal Phraseology in the Dialect of Dob pri Pliberku (Aich im Jauntal) in Carinthia, Austria

SLOVENE: Prispevek prikazuje pomenske razlike, podobnosti in enakosti med frazeološkimi enotami z živalskimi poimenovanji v sestavi, kakor jih uporabljajo govorci vzhodnopodjunskega narečja v vsakdanji govorici, in knjižnimi, normiranimi živalskimi frazeološkimi enotami, kakor jih najdemo v slovarjih in zbirkah pregovorov in rekov. Pri obravnavi gradiva se avtorica s pridržkom odloča za t. i. frazeologijo v širšem smislu, ki vključuje stavčne pregovore in reke, pomensko nepretvorjenih frazeoloških sestav ne upošteva. Poudarek prispevka je na prikazovanju aktualnih pomenov, v katerih narečni govorci uporabljajo živalske frazeološke enote. Podlago za pričujočo študijo je tvorila terenska raziskava, pri kateri je avtorica spraševala 18 informatorjev. Pri poznavanju frazeoloških enot spol anketirancev ni igral vloge, starost pa. Potrjena je bila domneva, da poznajo mlajši govorci manj frazeoloških enot kot starejši. Na splošno se zdi, da so spraševane živalske frazeološke enote relativno na danem področju dobro znane. Glede na pomenska razmerja med narečnimi in knjižnimi frazeološkimi enotami z živalskimi poimenovanji v sestavi ugotavlja avtorica, da se le-te večinoma popolnoma ali vsaj zelo ujemajo. Nadalje se je izkazalo, da je pri aktualizaciji v govoru uporabljanje frazeoloških enot bolj podvrženo variiranju kot v knjižnem jeziku. Pri raziskavi na terenu so narečni govorci avtorici narekovali tudi frazeološke enote, katerim v knjižni slovenščini ni našla ustreznic. Avtorica to pojmuje kot znak in dokaz za živost narečja. ENGLISH: The paper demonstrates the semantic similarities, differences, and identity among phraseological units containing animal names in their structure, as employed in everyday speech by speakers of the eastern Podjuna dialect of Slovene in comparison with those of literary, normalized Slovene animal phraseology as found in dictionaries and collections of proverbs and sayings. In the treatment of the material the author has, with some reservation, included phraseology in a wide sense, i.e., sentential proverbs and sayings, but not semantically untransformed phraseological structures. The study is based on fieldwork conducted by the author with eighteen native informants. Knowledge of the phraseological units, it turns out, was not conditioned by gender, but by age. The assumption that younger speakers know fewer phraseological units than older speakers was confirmed. In general, it appears that the phraseological units about which the informants were asked are relatively well-known in this area. With respect to the semantic relationship between dialectal and standard phraseological units with animal names in their structure, the author finds that these mostly agree completely, or at least to a very high degree. Further, it seems that when used in actual speech, the phraseological units are more likely to vary than in the standard language. In the fieldwork, the author also elicited from dialect speakers phraseological units that have no equivalents in the standard language. The author takes this as evidence of the vitality of the dialect