# All Slavic Languages: Clitic position



## Teyata

I have noticed that Macedonian seems to deal with clitics differently than the rest of the Slavic languages. In Macedonian, clitics can come at the beginning of sentences. For example, in Macedonian you can say Го видов/go vidov (I saw it/him), ми се допаѓа/mi se dopagja (It is pleasing to me -> I like it), се викам/se vikam (I call myself -> My name is), etc. But in other Slavic languages this doesn't seem to be the case. For example, even in Bulgarian you can only say Казвам се/kazvam se, знам го/znam go, etc. And in BCS, clitics seem to behave similarly and they are barely comprehensible to me sometimes (e.g. sviđa mi se, uradio sam ga, etc.) 

How do other Slavic languages deal with clitic position? Are there any other languages where clitics can be placed at the beginning of sentences? Would it sound terribly ungrammatical if anyone used initial clitics like this in your language? Also, does anyone have insight into why Macedonian allows for clitics to be placed in such a way? I have a feeling it came primarily from contact with Greek and perhaps other surrounding languages, but I haven't been able to find any resources on the matter.

Thanks!


----------



## jazyk

Czech grammar tells you to place clitic in the second position, which is mostly after the verb (Jmenuji se - I am called, my name is) or after a subject pronoun (Ona se jmenuje - Her name is), but it's very common to hear the clitic in the first position in colloquial Czech.


----------



## Awwal12

Russian doesn't have the analogue of the clitic "se" mentioned above; instead, it uses reflexive verbs with -ся and -сь postfixes.

Как называет*ся* этот корабль? - What is the name of this ship? (However, you cannot ask "как ты называешься", like it happens in the Czech language; you would ask "как тебя зовут" - lit. "how {they} call you"; "Меня зовут Иван" - lit. "{they} call me Ivan")
Я терзаю*сь* этой мыслью. - lit. "I torment myself with this thought".

P.S.: Of course, in some conditions you can just decline pronouns in Russian, including reflective pronoun "себя" (that has all the cases except nominative).
For example:
Я терзаю*сь* этой мыслью = Я терзаю *себя* этой мыслью. (only if a syntactical subject is a semantical subject in the same time; therefore, you cannot say "корабль называет себя", because a ship here surely isn't a semantical subject)
Reflective pronouns can be placed before the verb, but extremely rare (mainly in poetical speech) - before the subject.


----------



## Kanes

I don't want to offend anyone but big part of the standardization was targeted at making it as different as possible for political reasons during Yugoslavia. I don't think it was Greek influence here. The position of the clitic sometimes can be matter of style as well, in BG it is : az go vidiah - vidiah go, In MK they just don't move it.


----------



## Orlin

Kanes said:


> I don't want to offend anyone but big part of the standardization was targeted at making it as different as possible for political reasons during Yugoslavia. I don't think it was Greek influence here. The position of the clitic sometimes can be matter of style as well, in BG it is : az go vidiah - vidiah go, In MK they just don't move it.


 
I agree that the standardization of Macedonian was probably carried out in such a way to make standard Macedonian and Bulgarian as different as possible and the reasons were largely political.
On the other hand, your examples only prove that enclitics in Bulgarian usually take the 2nd position in a sentence and word order adapts to the (stylistic) inclusion of the subject pronoun so the enclitic remains in the 2nd place. It is the same in Serbo-Croatian: _ja sam ga video_ vs. _video sam ga_.
It is very strange to me too that a Macedonian sentence can begin with an enclitic, which is completely impossible in Bulgarian and Serbo-Croatian. Or the same words aren't enclitic in Macedonian?


----------



## TriglavNationalPark

In Slovenian, it's possible to begin some sentences with clitics, notably "se":

*Se vidiva!* = We'll (dual) see each other!

*Se strinjam.* = I agree.

Here's what T.M.S. Priestly has to say about Slovenian clitics in Comrie and Corbett's _The Slavonic Languages_ (Routledge):

_"The clitic group occurs in the 'second position' in the clause [...] The 'first position' may also consist of [...] one of a number of optionally deleted elements (ranging from particles to noun phrases); under such circumstances, the clitic group actually occurs in 'first position'."_

Clitics frequently come first in interrogative sentences beacuse the word order of the sentences is reversed (and the interrogative particle *ali* is optional):

*Ste razumeli?* = Did you understand?

*Ga vidiš?* = Do you see him?

*Se dobro počutiš?* = Do you feel well?


----------



## phosphore

In standard Serbian enclitics can never occur in the first position in a sentence. They cannot be placed immediately after a pause or a long noun phrase either. However, in informal speech, they can occur in the first position of interrogative sentences.

*Si dobro?* (for "jel si dobro?", instead of grammaticaly correct "da li si dobro?") = Are you alright?
*Me zezaš?* (for "jel me zezaš?", instead of grammaticaly correct "da li me zezaš?") = Are you kidding me?

I must say however that the comments that Macedonian allows enclitics in the initial position just so to be different from Bulgarian are ridiculous.


----------



## Orlin

phosphore said:


> I must say however that the comments that Macedonian allows enclitics in the initial position just so to be different from Bulgarian are ridiculous.


 
Of course it is non-sense to say this about Macedonian enclitics, we Bulgarians only express an opinion about standardization of Macedonian in general - this conception is generally accepted in Bulgaria and this is mainly a political issue.


----------



## Teyata

I understand that certain aspects of the standardization of Macedonian seem to have been influenced by politics (e.g. the non-use of the ъ (ə, or ɤ̞ apparently) sound/letter, replaced by ` or just a change in vowel sound), but the politics is really a different issue that I wasn't trying to get into.
However, clitic position is a very basic part of a language, something that isn't often changed. For example, can anyone imagine someone re-standardizing American English and making constructions such as "I you love" or "Myself I love" standard? Even if it were done for political reasons, no one would go along with it and it goes completely against the basic SVO order of English. It would be absurd.

My family who now lives in America speaks various Macedonian village dialects, mostly from the southwestern region, and I can assure you they have little regard or use for the literary language which they call "gradski". They also grew up before the language was standardized. They use all sorts of Turkish, Greek, and even made-up words  Yet they always use initial clitics and I will never hear them say anything like "Викам се/vikam se", despite all the other dialectal words and constructs they use. I do believe it's an intrinsic feature of the Macedonian language and not something concocted to fit a political agenda. I say that it may have been influenced by Greek because in Greek clitics can be initial (Σου έδωσα/sou edosa = I gave to you), and Macedonian and Greek have had a lot of contact over the centuries and already share similar grammar in other ways (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balkan_sprachbund)


Moving on, it's interesting to find that it's possible in other languages, it's just colloquial. Except for Russian, but it seems like there is no short form of себя that isn't attached to the end of a word. Are there any short forms for clitics such as me or you (in any declension)? And can these be placed at the beginning of a sentence?
I'm surprised by the idea that si (short form of you are) can come first in a sentence in colloquial Serbian. I thought there were two forms of "to be" in Serbian especially because they behave differently.
Is such a use considered uneducated or simply informal, Phosphore?


----------



## Adnyre

What distinguishes Western Ukrainian dialects from Eastern Ukrainian dialects, Standard Ukrainian and Russian is that they use the clitic "ся" instead of reflexive verbs ending in -ся. It's not something drastically different, just reflexive verbs with "detachable ся". One phrase even made it into Standard Ukrainian: "Як ся маєш?" - "How are you?" But I've never heard anyone putting "ся" at the beginning of a sentence.

I've also heard people use short forms of pronouns like "го" which stands for "його" but is always used before the verb and "му" instead of "йому". These forms are even more clearly dialectal then "ся".


----------



## Duya

Teyata said:


> I'm surprised by the idea that si (short form of you are) can come first in a sentence in colloquial Serbian. I thought there were two forms of "to be" in Serbian especially because they behave differently.
> Is such a use considered uneducated or simply informal, Phosphore?



Just [very] informal, bordering on slang, or in exclamations. As phosphore said, it is possible only if the few words around are dropped, as in: 
Si lud?! (=da li si lud)
Se ujemo. (=ajd pa se ujemo)


----------



## sokol

Teyata said:


> My family who now lives in America speaks various Macedonian village dialects, mostly from the southwestern region, and I can assure you they have little regard or use for the literary language which they call "gradski". They also grew up before the language was standardized. They use all sorts of Turkish, Greek, and even made-up words  Yet they always use initial clitics and I will never hear them say anything like "Викам се/vikam se", despite all the other dialectal words and constructs they use. I do believe it's an intrinsic feature of the Macedonian language and not something concocted to fit a political agenda.


Thank you for your contribution, that's really very interesting as their speech, then, couldn't possibly have been influenced by Macedonian standard language. 
It is a well-known fact that Macedonian standard language mainly was based on western dialects, this - in combination with your evidence concerning clitics - already should be considered sufficient evidence for Macedonian having this feature natively, clitics in first place.

As for Greek influence, well - possibly, but as Slovene shows this needn't be the case.


----------



## Teyata

Adnyre said:


> What distinguishes Western Ukrainian dialects from Eastern Ukrainian dialects, Standard Ukrainian and Russian is that they use the clitic "ся" instead of reflexive verbs ending in -ся. It's not something drastically different, just reflexive verbs with "detachable ся". One phrase even made it into Standard Ukrainian: "Як ся маєш?" - "How are you?" But I've never heard anyone putting "ся" at the beginning of a sentence.
> 
> I've also heard people use short forms of pronouns like "го" which stands for "його" but is always used before the verb and "му" instead of "йому". These forms are even more clearly dialectal then "ся".



That's interesting. I'd suspect it has something to do with Western Ukraine's proximity to Poland, where they also say, for example, "_Jak się masz_?"
What do you mean they are always used before the verb? Do you mean they can be used at the beginning of sentences? In Macedonian/Bulgarian, го is also a short form of него [in BCS it's ga - njega], but the two forms are standard.

Thanks, I understand now, Duya. You wouldn't hear something like "Si dobar." right? The dropped surrounding words are assumed to be part of the idea of the sentence, they just aren't spoken.

Yeah, I believe so too Sokol. At this point, I can't be sure whether it was a native development or an influence from other language(s). Hopefully someone out there has some relevant research or information.


----------



## Bojan

"Si dobar?" is possible, with meaning of "Are you fine?", but it is a slang and it isn't grammatical.


----------



## Adnyre

Teyata said:


> That's interesting. I'd suspect it has something to do with Western Ukraine's proximity to Poland, where they also say, for example, "_Jak się masz_?"
> What do you mean they are always used before the verb? Do you mean they can be used at the beginning of sentences? In Macedonian/Bulgarian, го is also a short form of него [in BCS it's ga - njega], but the two forms are standard.


Oops, yes, you're right, they are used after the verb. I've thought it over and now it seems to me that things are a bit more complicated than I previously thought. But I'm almost sure that these short forms are never used at the beginning of sentences.

Western Ukrainian dialects have many grammatical features which make them "closer" to Polish than to Standard Ukrainian. For instance, they preserved the perfect tense which was reduced to, er..., -l participle in other Ukrainian dialects. ("Чули-сте? Чули-сьмо!" -"Have you heard? We've heard!"); the future tense uses the past participle as well as the infinitive ("буду робив", "буду робити" - "I will do"); conditional forms like "зробив би-м" - "I would do" (not quite sure) and so on. I may have made some mistakes in the examples but it looks like that in general.


----------



## iobyo

God damn that Tito for moving my clitic!


----------



## TriglavNationalPark

Bojan said:


> "Si dobar?" is possible, with meaning of "Are you fine?", but it is a slang and it isn't grammatical.


 
In Slovenian, on the other hand, the *ali* particle (the equivalent of *da li* in BCS) is optional; therefore, such interrogatives are perfectly grammatical: *Si zdrav?* (= Are you healthy?); *Jih vidiš?* (= Do you see them?); *Ga poznamo?* (= Do we know him?), and so on.


----------



## phosphore

Bojan said:


> "Si dobar?" is possible, with meaning of "Are you fine?", but it is a slang and it isn't grammatical.


 
I wouldn't say it isn't grammatical: "ste dobar?", for example, is agrammatical, but "si dobar?" is not, it's just a non-standard, colloquial construction.

So clitics in the initial position in Serbian are possible only in the interrogative sentences with the omitted "jel" (that are even with that "jel" considered non-standard and incorrect by prescriptivists) in informal situations. These sentences also keep the original intonation (of the sentences with "jel").


----------



## Bojan

But how it's grammatical when "dobar" is in masculine and not in neuterine gender, like we had asked a question whether some male is good at something, and not whether he is fine? It should be "(Da li) si dobro?", and not "(Da li) si dobar?", and that's why I hate to hear it.


----------



## phosphore

Honestly, I didn't much attention to that part, since the topic is about enclitics in initial position. Anyway, if native speakers do not perceive this use as agrammatical (except if influenced by the standard language), than it is not: it is as simple as that.


----------



## Teyata

I should have clarified more on the Serbian sentence. When I wrote "Si dobar." I specifically meant it to be a declarative sentence, not a question. As in "Ti si dobar." (You are good [as a characteristic].) Not a question or anything else. I was curious if you could say something like that if it's NOT a question and doesn't have any surrounding dropped words except "Ti".

In Macedonian I don't think this is grammatical but I'm not a native speaker. I always figured that in declarative sentences like that you could only say "Dobar si." I suppose this is one case where Macedonian usually doesn't start with that particular clitic. How do you feel about it Iobyo?

Adynre, do people from other areas of Ukraine understand that Western Ukrainians use Чули-сте as a perfect tense? I think I'd be confused if someone in English created or used a completely new verb tense


----------



## phosphore

Teyata said:


> I should have clarified more on the Serbian sentence. When I wrote "Si dobar." I specifically meant it to be a declarative sentence, not a question. As in "Ti si dobar." (You are good [as a characteristic].) Not a question or anything else. I was curious if you could say something like that if it's NOT a question and doesn't have any surrounding dropped words except "Ti".


 
That would be both incorrect (from the point of standard language) and agrammatical (from the point of native speakers). As I said, inital enclitics, to my best knowlegde, can be encountered only in yes/no questions in colloquial language.


----------



## Adnyre

Teyata said:


> Adynre, do people from other areas of Ukraine understand that Western Ukrainians use Чули-сте as a perfect tense? I think I'd be confused if someone in English created or used a completely new verb tense


It's not that completely different, the only difference is that in Western Ukrainian dialects the past tense is formed by combining the -l participle and something that used to be the present tense form of the auxiliary verb _to be_, while other dialects only use the participle. For speakers of non-Western dialects it would seem that Westerners just add weird endings to the regular past tense verb forms (_ходила-м_ instead of _ходила, чули-сте_ instead of _чули_). That's my own experience since I don't speak any Western Ukrainian dialect. However, the dialects gradually give way to Standard Ukrainian (though influenced by Russian) and are used mostly by the elderly and mostly in the countryside.


----------



## Милан

phosphore said:


> *Si dobro?* (for "jel si dobro?", instead of grammaticaly correct "da li si dobro?") = Are you alright?
> *Me zezaš?* (for "jel me zezaš?", instead of grammaticaly correct "da li me zezaš?") = Are you kidding me?


off topic
*Je l'* and *Je li*  are correct forms.


----------



## phosphore

Милан said:


> off topic
> *Je l'* and *Je li* are correct forms.


 
Sorry, but "je li si dobro?" can by no means be correct, it doesn't make sense at all.


----------



## Милан

phosphore said:


> sorry, but "je li si dobro?" can by no means be correct, it doesn't make sense at all.


У званичном правопису Матице српске стоји да је правилно ЈЕ Л'.
Али мораш имати у виду да је "је ли" (је л')  скраћено од "да ли је".
А ево шта каже Клајн.
Будући да се речца ЛИ пише увек одвојено, и у свом скраћеном облику писаћемо је одвојено и с апострофом уместо изостављеног слова И. Овај облик се углавном користи у говорном језику. Дакле:    • *Да ли си добро? Јеси ли добро? Није ли то прошло? Куда ли си пошао?* 
* • Је ли све у реду?* 
   У складу с тим: 
   •_ *Је л' све у реду?*_


----------



## phosphore

I can't see how could "je li" be shortened "da li je"?

Anyway, transformation of an affirmative or negative sentence into a yes/no question with the particle "li" brings the verb from the original sentence to the initial position and the particle to the second position in the new sentence.

Dobro je. -> _Je li dobro?_
To je sigurno. -> _Je li to sigurno?_
Milan piše. -> _Piše li Milan?_

In the like manner:

Dobro si. -> _Jesi li dobro?_

I don't see how we could generate a phrase like "je li si dobro?". However, "jel si dobro?" represents quite a regular asking pattern in colloquial Serbian. There is no reason to write "je l'" or "jel'" instead of simple "jel" in such questions, since this form "jel" does not come from shortened "je li" and, even more importantly, these sentences do not belong to standard written Serbian.


----------



## Милан

phosphore said:


> I can't see how could "je li" be shortened "da li je"?
> 
> Dobro je. -> _Je li dobro?_ *Da li je dobro?*
> To je sigurno. -> _Je li to sigurno?_ *Da li je to sigurno?*
> Milan piše. -> _Piše li Milan?_ *Da li piše Milan?*
> 
> In the like manner:
> 
> Dobro si. -> _Jesi li dobro?_ *Da li si dobro?*
> 
> I don't see how we could generate a phrase like "je li si dobro?".


I didn't say that we could generate, I said that *jel *doesn't excist in "Pravopis Matice srpske" and also I forgot "Pravopis srpskog jezika". The same goes for *dal*. Correct forms are *da l'* and *da li*. And also in colloquial Serbian I can say many things that are not correct. Like bezveze (correct bez veze) or ustvari (correct u stvari ).
Ne znam kako drugačije da ti objasnim, ali nisam ja pisao pravopise.


----------



## phosphore

There is no parallel between /jel/ and /dal/. There is no analogy with /ustvari/ or /bezveze/ either. Anytime you use the shortened form /dal/ you could use the original form /dali/ and that is why /dal/ should be written "da l'" and not "dal". On the other side, you may substitute /jel/ for /jeli/ only when in the corresponding affirmative sentence you find "je" and only then /jel/ should be written "je l'" (that's what _Pravopis_ says). All other cases in which this /jel/ is found are incorrect from the point of view of a tradional grammar, so they are not written at all. However, as we sometimes need to write them down, when we are talking about the colloquial usage, for example, we should write this little word simply "jel", as we would write any other word that don't belong to standard written language. For instance, that is exactly the case with "jel si dobro?": "je li si dobro?" would be incorrect (and agrammatical, I would say), so we are just writing down something that belongs to the colloquial language.

I see now what you meant by shortened "da li je", but I don't agree on that point either: you could say that "je li" is shortened "da li je" in the same way that "Milan pisaše" is shortened "Milan je pisao", that is the two are shorter ways to say that same thing, but they are nevertheless completely different things. On the other hand, "da l' je" _is_ definitely shortened "da li je" in the right sense of that word.


----------



## Милан

phosphore said:


> I see now what you meant by shortened "da li je", but I don't agree on that point either: you could say that "je li" is shortened "da li je" in the same way that "Milan pisaše" is shortened "Milan je pisao", that is the two are shorter ways to say that same thing, but they are nevertheless completely different things. On the other hand, "da l' je" _is_ definitely shortened "da li je" in the right sense of that word.


Hmm aorist and perfekat. You can't compare this (you are mixing frogs and grandmothers  ). Still, *jel* is incorrect (whether you like it or not). About mine Jesi li dobro (jel si dobro) I think its much better to say Da l' si dobro.


----------

