No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The period of Ottoman rule, pejoratively termed the ‘Turkish yoke’, is often regarded in the Balkans – a region divided by quests for self-definition – as a period of darkness and suffering. Given the paucity of South Slavic historical records, scholars have sought to corroborate evidence of the ‘yoke’ in ‘historical paratexts’, fragmentary records of historical events to be found in the margins of Church Slavonic manuscripts and early printed books. With the Ottoman Empire on the verge of collapse in the first decades of the twentieth century, scholars and folklorists from the several splintered nations that form the Balkans became very interested in archiving and compiling these paratextual materials into published compendia, a trend which continues up to the present day. They believed that conserving these presumed eyewitness testimonials would preserve the core of the nation, an idea that has been transmitted largely unchallenged. These paratexts are seen as ‘writing from below’ which records facts about the suffering brought about by Ottoman rule. Present scholarship in the Balkans has interpreted ‘znatise’ (‘let it be known’), the formulaic expression that announces some of these annotations, as indicative of a self-conscious tendency to create historically truthful records of the South Slavs under Ottoman rule. However, one only needs to sift through these various records to be struck by the repetitions and the limited scope of the patterns that pervade a majority of these inscriptions as opposed to the range of observations that could be expected to result from an autobiographical impulse. This thesis accounts for these patterns and challenges the dominant interpretation of these paratexts by locating them within the larger writing traditions to which they belonged. By interrogating the relationship between paratextual writing and Church Slavonic historiography, this study provides an alternative framework which explains and brings together sources that have otherwise been left disparate and scattered. The formula ‘let it be known’ is to be understood not as testimony but rather as apocalyptic prophecy. The thesis demonstrates that historical paratexts mainly recorded those events -- such as natural disaster, famine, the outbreak of disease and celestial phenomena -- that were understood as portents and figured in apocalyptic literature. In this light, the clergy’s tone towards the military successes and the Ottoman reign is shown to be determined by an apocalyptic understanding of history. We also see how South Slavic attitudes towards the Ottomans were diverse with references to the Sultan ranging from ‘son of perdition’ (Antichrist) to ‘Tsar’ depending on the political relations between a diocese and the Ottoman administration. The thesis also provides new readings of three important paratextual accounts: (i) Monk Isaija’s colophon of 1371 (ii) Deacon Dimitar’s colophon of 1466 and (iii) the self-narratives of Mihail of Kratovo written between 1649 and 1660. The labels of ‘truthfulness’, ‘factuality’, and ‘sincerity’ that have been attributed to these first person accounts are questioned by demonstrating the socially strategic and ambiguous nature of these paratexts.

Cette thèse procède à une comparaison des expressions figées entre les langues BCMS (bosniaque/bosnien, croate, monténégrin, serbe) et le français en vue de la traduction. Dans la première partie, l'étude commence par la définition des expressions figées et des critères de figement. Après avoir fait le point sur la question des langues BCMS, on présente le corpus des expressions figées en BCMS et en français, avec leur répartition dans différents domaines culturels et la distinction de trois types d'expressions : calques, expressions transparentes, expressions opaques. La seconde partie est consacrée à l'analyse comparative des expressions figées en BCMS et en français. Elle commence par un parcours de leurs différentes origines, puis on examine les fondements culturels des expressions figées, en fonction de différents domaines fournisseurs. On développe ensuite une analyse linguistique comparée des expressions figées, en détaillant les noms composés et les différentes locutions (verbales, adjectivales etc.) et en intégrant la dimension rhétorique, notamment les métaphores. Pour finir, après une mise au point générale sur la traduction, on examine les problèmes d'interprétation et les différentes solutions de traduction des expressions figées dans les deux sens, entre français et BCMS. / This thesis makes a comparison between the idioms of the BCMS languages (Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, Serbian) on the one side, and the French language on the other, in the domain of translation.In the first segment, the study begins with the definition of idioms and the criteria for fixation. After the explanation of differences among BCMS languages, we present the corpus of idioms in BCMS and in French, with their distribution within different cultural domains, while distinguishing among three types of idiomatic expressions: literal, transparent, and opaque.The second part is devoted to the comparative analysis of idioms in BCMS and French. It begins with a record of their different origins, after which we examine the cultural foundations of expressions, depending on different domains. We develop a comparative linguistic analysis of idioms, giving details on various compound names and phrases (verbal, adjectival, etc.), and integrating the rhetorical dimension, including metaphors. Finally, after an overall focus on translating, we examine issues found in interpretation and translation solutions for different idioms between French and BCMS.

On effectue une analyse de la langue du droit de l’Union européenne (UE), en comparant, dans une visée contrastive, les tournures et structures caractéristiques du français avec celles du BCMS, et on aborde certaines problématiques liées à la traduction des textes juridiques de l’UE dans cette langue autrefois dénommée serbo-croate, et aujourd’hui connue sous un sigle reprenant les initiales des dénominations : bosniaque, croate, monténégrin et serbe. Cette étude se fonde sur une approche analytique d’un corpus parallèle constitué de quatre versions linguistiques (anglaise, française, croate et monténégrine) de l’Accord de stabilisation et d’association entre les Communautés européennes et leurs États membres d’une part, et la République du Monténégro, d’autre part. Ce document se rattache au droit conventionnel de l’UE et constitue le pilier du processus de stabilisation et d’association dans le cadre duquel s’effectue l’intégration des pays des Balkans occidentaux au sein de l’UE. / We analyse EU legal language, compare and contrast French characteristic structures with those of BCMS and examine problems related to the translation of EU legal texts into this language, formerly named Serbo-Croatian and today known by the initials of the names: Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin and Serbian. This research is based on an analytical approach to a parallel corpus consisting of four language versions (English, French, Croatian and Montenegrin) of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Montenegro, of the other part. This document is part of the EU’s international agreements which is a pillar of the Stabilisation and Association process, the framework for the integration of Western Balkan countries into the EU.

This dissertation analyses when, how and why Turkish loanwords became incorporated into Bosnian and Bulgarian, as seen in the writings of the seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Bosnian and Bulgarian Franciscans. I analyse Bosnian works (religious and secular) by Matija Divkovic, Ivan Bandulavic, Pavo Posilovic Mošunjanin, Mihovil Radnic, Stjepan Margitic Markovac, Lovro Braculjevic, Filip Lastric, Nikola Marcinkušic Lašvanin, Marko Dobretic, Bono Benic, and Grgo Ilijic-Varešanin. As a Bulgarian counterpart, I analyse three eighteenth-century Bulgarian Franciscan manuscripts and the works of Petar Bogdan Bakšic and Filip Stanislavov. The dissertation consists of eight chapters. The first chapter gives background information on Turkish presence in Bosnia and Bulgaria, the history of the Franciscans in Bosnia and Bulgaria, short biographies of each of the writers whose works are analysed, phonology and orthography. The second chapter focuses on the complications regarding establishing earliest attestations for turkisms in Bosnian and Bulgarian. The third chapter discusses the nominal morphology of turkisms in Bosnian and Bulgarian. This chapter analyses why turkisms developed the gender that they did when borrowed from a language that does not have gender as a category. Chapter four addresses the verbal morphology of turkisms in Bosnian and Bulgarian. Verbal prefixes are discussed in detail, as are Turkish voiced suffixes in Bulgarian. The fifth chapter analyses adjectives and adverbs, with focus on gender and number agreement. The sixth chapter addresses the use of Turkish conjunctions. The seventh chapter looks at the motivation, semantics and setting of turkisms in Bosnian and Bulgarian. The conclusion addresses how morphology, semantics, motivation and setting of turkisms relate to their chronology in Bosnian and Bulgarian and how these areas differ from language to language.