Accents as Orthographic Signs in Orthography and Textbook Literature – a Methodical Review

Abstract

In this paper, the author analyzes the orthographic rules for writing accents in the textbooks of Serbian grammar at primary and secondary level, as well as in orthographic manuals. At the forefront, there are rules for the use of accent marks in written text. The analysis will cover examples from literature (poetry and prose) to determine in which situations the accents should be placed on the written text and what its function is. The orthoepic norm is an essential part of linguistic standardization. Primarily, it refers to spoken language as one of two forms of realization of standard (literary) language and implies rules for pronunciation of words, i.e. their accents. This orthoepic standardization implies rules for the distribution of accents in the Serbian language, and as such is entered into all three basic pillars of our standard language - in normative grammars, orthography manuals, and normative dictionaries (the exception being, for example, the syllable superlatives of an adjective, like the najjednostavniji), that the accent carriers are vowels or the syllable r (eg. prvi), that the accent cannot be on the last syllable, that monosyllables can only have descending accents (eg. put) and not accentuating accents. Finally, it was systemically resolved that the foreign words entered into the Serbian language are to be adapted to our accent (eg fr. Ruso and not Ruso, lit. Brazauskas and not Brazauskas).

Students come across the accents in the primary school first. Within the area of correct (spoken) speech, some important features of the accents are given. It is not written at the time, it is not introduced as a graphic / spelling sign, but rather by emphasizing the style in which students are emphasized in the place of the stress. For example PRI-po-vet-ka, gra-MA-ti-ka. Already at that age, for the first time, it is emphasized that different stresses can change the meaning of words, e.g. O-ba-vi-ti („to do something“) and o-BA-vi-ti („to wrap something“), and to mark another form of the same word, which is most commonly associated with declension, e.g. i-ME-na (nominative plural) vs. I-me-na (genitive singular) Later, in six grade, accent marks are introduced, first long ones, as students can more easily recognize them. Again, quite correctly, it is pointed out that, based on the length of the accented syllable, two homonyms can be distinguished, e.g. skUp - noun: skUUp - adjective; kAda - adverb: kAAda - noun, or with a recorded accent, e.g. mlada - noun meaning „bride“: mlada - adjective in feminin. Although they are part of the orthoepic norm, accents are also part of orthography, because the spelling norm puts them in spelling signs, along with the break sign (...), apostrophe (`), genitive sign (ˆ), and other, auxiliary, signs (e.g. in the current spelling of 2010). A note about accent writing in the text is already found in Milan Petrovic (orthography manual from 1914), which states that accent characters are used in writing together with the length character and apostrophe, when two words differ only in accent from another, e.g. grad and grad. The analysis of the spelling literature showed that over time the instruction on writing accents has been lost, and thus in the current Matica srpska’s orthography, although they are orthographic sings, there is no indication when they should be written, thus making them categorized as orthographic. The examples we have shown in the paper prove that accent writing is motivated not only by the meaning of words (primarily in terms of homonymy), but is sometimes also part of stylistic means of expression, when the poet consistently adheres to the metric pattern and even changes the standardized quantity and quality of the accent of a word. Based on these examples from literature, both poetry and prose, the paper recommends that the orthography manuals emphasize in the orthography manual that the emphasis in the text is noted when it is phonologically relevant.