WIENER SLAVISTISCHES JAHRBUCH, Band 49 /2003, I 03- I I 8

by Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien

@ 2004

STELA MANOVA (WrEN)

An input-oriented approach
to inflection class assignment
illustrated with Bulg arian nominal infl ectiod

This paper deals with inflection class assignment within input-oriented morphology
(section I). After a definition of the basic theoretical concepts (section II) used in the
discussion, the inflectional categories of Bulgarian nominal morphology are presented
(section III). Section IV gives a brief explanation of the notion morphological organiza-
tion and serves as an introduction to sections V and VI where semantic and formal (pho-
nological and morphological) criteria for classification of Bulgarian nominal inflection
are tackled. Section VII exemplifies an input-oriented model of Bulgarian declensional
classes. The final section VIII summarizes-the results of the application of the newly-
suggested approach and draws conclusions.2

I. IxrnooucrroN
We speak of inflectional classes if a language expresses inflectional pro-
perties in more than one way. As for a definition of inflectional class, in the li-
terature, inflectional class is usually identified as a set of all wordsilexemes se-
lecting the same inflection (cf. Wurzel 1984, Aronoff 1994; Dressler 20033).
Inflection class assignment is a kind of data organization. The way we or-
ganize a set of elements can vary according to task, environment, audience,
etc.. since all these govern the choice of criteria for the classification of the ma-
terial we have. In regard to inflection class assignment, different studies on in-
flectional morphology also operate with different criteria. This means different
systems (and numbers) of inflectional classes in one and the same language in
different authors. Compare, for example for Russian verbs, Isaöenko (1982)
and Dressler & Gagarina (1999). Whereas Isaöenko (1982) connects the thema-

I
This paper is part ofproject P - 10366 supported by a research grant from the Aus-
trian National Bank and supervised by Professor H. Miklas. A version of the paper was
presented at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistics Association of Austria, 6-8 Decem-
ber.2003.
j University of Vienna.
Abbreviations: AUG - augmentative, C * consonant, DEF - definite form, DIM -
diminutive, FEM - feminine, MASC - masculine, NEUT - neuter, SG - singular, PL -
plural, PRES - present, LW - loanword.
' In Dressler (2003), the definition of inflectional class is further specified with the
condition for the same morphonological generalizations in all paradigms constituting an
inflectional class (microclass in his framework).
104 Stela Manova
tic marker of the infinitive with the present inflection of the verb and defines
l0 inflectional classes, Dressler & Gagarina (1999) take as a basis for their
classification "the correlation between the (open) stem (OS) of the infinitive
and the close stem (CS) of the present/future (1. Sg.)" (p.757), and thus come
to a system of29 verbal classes.
From the theoretical point of view, Isaöenko (1982) represents input-
oriented morphology based first on the phonological make-up of the infinitive
(the input) and then on the inflection added, while Dressler & Gagarina (1999)
use output-oriented morphology. For the model of Isaöenko, in order to de-
termine the inflectional class of a verb, it is often enough to know the termina-
tion of the infinitive. He distinguishes befween five productive and five unpro-
ductive verbal classes, the productive ones defined as follows (INFINITIVE, 1
SG PRES, 3 SG PRES): class l: -A)at', -(j)aju, -(j)aet; class 2: -et', -eju, -eet;
class 3: -ovat', -uju, -uet & -evat', -(j)uju, -(j)uet; class 4: -nut', -nu, -net/-nöt;
class 5: -it' , -(j)u, -ll. This model is easy to use, since here the present tense in-
flection can be predicted on the basis of the thematic maker of the infinitive
(-a-, -e-, -ova-, etc.).In contrast, if we wish to apply the classification criterion
by Dressler & Gagarina (1999), we first need the output form (l SG pRES ac-
cording to the authors), then we have to compare it with the input (infrnitive)
-
in order to see the relation befween the stem of the output (the present stem /
"close stem") and that of the input (the infinitive stem / "open stem"), and only
afterwards we will be able to establish the inflectional class of a given verb.
consider the definitions of two of the three major classes (macroclases in the
terminology of Dressler & Gagarina 1999): l) "OS (open stem) ends in a vo-
wel (V) vs. CS (close stem) has consonant (C) addition to the OS"; 2) ,,OS
ends in v vs. cs without this v". Such a method has two disadvantages: it ne-
glects the present thematic markers of Russian verbs which are inflection (i.e.
constitutive feature for inflection class assignment) and it requires a proficien-
cy level in Russian.
In regard to Bulgarian nominal inflection, an example of an input-orient-
ed morphological rule is the statement 'all nouns with singular forms terminat-
ing in -a take the plural suffix -i' .By contrast, an example of output-oriented
morphology will be the rule 'Bulgarian nominal inflection possesses the fol-
lowing productive plural suffixes: -i, -ove, -a, -te,, because here only the out-
put is specified. Rules of the second type are the usuat ones in morphological
descriptions for native speakers, since due to their language-competence, na-
tive speakers can distinguish between correct and incorrect forms and thus al-
ways produce correct ones only. output-oriented rules are not suitable for non-
native speakers, as they have a less reliable intuition than native speakers for
existing and non-existing forms and with an output-oriented rule non-native
speakers can produce only forms which they already know. put differently,
 Bulgarian nominal inflection 105

output-oriented-morphology is a bad choice for language-learning purposes

and for language processing.
The present paper is the first presentation of a project on Bulgarian mor-
phology which has the ambition to suggest morphological description relevant
for native speakers as well as for non-native speakers, and even for persons
with no competence in Bulgarian at all. This can be managed only within
input-oriented morphology with rules based on general knowledge and/or ele-
mentary linguistic competence. Such rules are of two types: semantic and for-
mal. An example of a semantic rule is the hypothetic rule 'all ethnics have, let
us say, -l plural', whereas formal rules can be illustrated with the already-men-
tioned rule 'all words with singular forms terminating in -a take the plural suf-
fix -i'. Such formal and semantic rules are easily accessible, due the fact that
everybody has an idea of what 'ethnics' or 'singular' means and can judge
whether a word terminates in -a. Formal rules can also involve elementary lin-
guistic competence, e.g. distinguishing between vowels and consonants, be-
tween monosyllabic and polysyllabic words, or making a decision whether a
word terminates in a given morpheme (segment).
As for the theoretical framework of this paper, it is situated within a re-
vised version of Natural Morphology (Dressler et al. 1987, for inflectional
morphology Wurzel 1984 [989]; Dressler 1997) based on Manova (2003). In
regard to Bulgarian nominal inflection, this contribution elaborates on Manova
& Dressler (2001). However, owing to the specific orientation of the present
investigation including also suitability for language-learning purposes, here, in
contrast to Manova & Dressler (2001), a significant reduction of the number of
the inflectional classes is made, on the basis of eliminating the criterion of mor-
phonological uniformity of an inflectional class. This decision is motivated by
the mere fact that morphonological changes affect the whole morphological
system of a language, i.e. since the same morphonological rules operate in in-
flection, derivation and compounding, in case of a full morphological investi-
gation of a language, as the project on Bulgarian morphology is, morphonolo-
gical rules can (and should) be discussed in detail only once.

lI. Tpnlan{orocy
A basic form of a word is the least marked form in its paradigm from
which all other forms can be derived. The basic form of a Bulgarian noun is its
singular indefinite form which coincides with the citation form (the form listed
in dictionaries) of a noun. The fact is seen as an argument in favour of input-
oriented morphology, since having the basic form of a noun in a dictionary and
following the approach suggested in this paper, one can easily produce all in-
flectional forms of the respective noun.

..aIsaöenko (1982:221) also motivates his choice of scheme of inflectional classes

with its appropriateness for language learning.
106 Stela Manova
Morphological rules are realizations of the following morphological tech-
niques (cf. Manova 2003; see also Dressler et al. 1987):
(l)Addition:X)X+Y
(2) Substitution: X + Y ) X+Z
(3)Modification:X)X'
(4)Conversion:X)X
(5)Subtraction:X+Y)X
For the purposes of this paper, we will defrne inflectional class as a set of
all existing basic forms of words (in our case a set of all basic forms of nouns)
which exhibit certain formal and/or semantic similarities and share the same in-
flectional paradigm (including the inflection of basic forms). This usually im-
plies the use of a single morphological technique, except in cases of phonologi-
cal or morphonological modifications such as, e.g. stol'chair' ) PL stolöve
with a stress change or uöenik'pupil' ) PL uöenic-i with a palatalization, both
modified after the addition of plural suffixes.

III. BncnrunN NoMTNAL TNFLECTToN

Modern Bulgarian possesses the following inflectional categories:
l. Three genders (MASC, FEM, NEUT) which are not morphologically
expressed by rule, but manifested in syntactic agreement:
dobär möä'good man'
good-MASC man-MASC

dobr-a äen-a' goodwoman'

good-FEM woman-FEM

dobr-o neil-o 'good thing'

good-NEUT thing-NEUT

As can be seen from these examples, Bulgarian gender agreement repre-

sents to a great extent alliterative concord (on alliterative concord, see corbett
l99l: I 17-119). The tendency toward alliterative concord can also be observed
within the singular definite nominal phrase where Bulgarian inflects for defin!
teness the first constituent of the phrase (i.e. the adjective), thus dobrijato mdio
'the good man', dobr-a-ta äen-a'the good woman', dobr-o-to neit-o ,the good
thing'.

2. Two numbers (SG & PL), and the category of count plural (count pL),
the latter only with masculine non-humans terminating in consonants. count
PL is used after cardinal numerals. For example:
stol'chair' ) PL stol-ove, mnogo stol-ove (PL) 'many chairs,,
however, pet stol-a (count PL) 'five chairs'
 Bulgarian nominal inflection 107

kotarak'Tom-cat' ) PL kotarac-i, dva kotqrak-a (count PL) 'two Tom-

cats'

The category of count plural is still productive, and loanwords which sa-
tisfy the above-mentioned criteria also have count forms:
maö'match' ) PL maö-oye, count PL maö-a
kompj utdr' computer' ) PL kompjutr- i, count PL kompj utdr- a

Of course, the condition for non-humans holds for loanwords as well, e.g.
student'student' ) PL studenl-i, count PL*student-a.

3. The category ofdefiniteness expressed by an affix in postposition, as is

typical for Balkan languages:
MASC SG s/o/ 'chair' ) SG DEF stol-ät for subject and predicative
positions and stol-a for objects, direct as well as indirect, PL stol-ove )
PL DEF stol-ove-te.
FEM SG äena'woman' ) SC DEF iena-ta,PL äen-i ) PL DEF äen-i-te
NEUT SG selo 'village' ) SG DEF selo-to,PL sel-a ) PL DEF sel-a-ta

To sum up, the full inflectional paradigm of a Bulgarian noun consists of

the following forms: SG, SG DEF, PL, PL DEF. This means that all nouns
which show the same inflection for the expression of these categories belong to
the same inflectional class.
Of the above-cited morphological techniques, for the expression of plu-
ral, Bulgarian uses addition (uöitel'teacher' ) PL uöitel-l), substitution (masa
'table' ) PL mas-i) and subtraction (bdlgarin'a Bulgarian' ) bdtgari). Defi-
niteness is always expressed by addition only (uöitel ) uöitel-jat, masa )
masa-ta, bdlgarin ) bdlgarin-ät,PL uöiteli ) uöiteli-te, masi ) masi-te, bdl-
gari ) bdlgari-te). Bulgarian has no plurals of the fype G. Lehrer,teacher' )
die Lehrer, Apfel 'apple' ) die Äpfel. In other words, all categories of Bulga-
rian nominal inflection are overtly marked in a highly iconic way, except the
plural of ethnics in -in formed after a subtractive rule. In the whole system
there is a single case of suppletion öovek 'human being' ) xora, however
sometimes also öovec-i, the latter stylistically marked as colloquial and expres-
sive.

IV. MonpHor-ocrcAl oRGANrzAloN

under morphological organization I understand any organization of mor-
phological data which follows given, either semantic or formal criteria, or a
certain combination of both. Due to the fact that the semantics of inflectional
categories is more abstract and relational than that of derivational categories,
formal criteria are usually applied to inflectional data, whereas for derivation,
semantic criteria are more typical. An example of semantic organization of de-
 108 Stela Manova
rivational data is the well-known traditional division of nouns into nomina
agentis, nomina instrumenti, nomina actoris, etc. Note that this division classi-
fies the output of a derivational change and is therefore output-oriented. A rule
of the type'all words derived by the suffix -tel' are nouns' is an example of a
formal rule in derivation, also output-oriented.
The discussion below explores possible semantic (section V) and formal
(section VI) criteria for data organization in inflection.

V. Sr.vaNrrc cRrrERrA
Since output of derivation serves as input of inflection, in this section we
will try to establish whether semantic criteria organizing derivational oueut
can be used for inflection class assignment (i.e. for inflectional input). First, we
will see whether it is possible that semantic groups such as nomina agentis, no-
mina instrumenti, nomina loci, etc. include only nouns belonging to the same
inflectional class. Let us consider the following examples (SG, SG DEF ) pL,
PL DEF):
Nomina agentis:
pekar'baker', pekar-j at ) p e kar- i, pe kar, i -te
mrönkal-o' grumbling person', mr dnkal-o-to ) mr änkal-a, mr dnkal-a-ta
zabravan'chuckle-hea d', z abrav an- dt ) zabravan- ovc i, zabravan-ovc i-
te
mdrmorko'grouser', märmorko-to ) mdrmorko-vci, mdrmorko-vci-te,
etc.
Nomina instrumenti:
xladilnik'refrigerator', xladilnik-dt ) xladilnic-i, xladilnic-i-te
ostrilk-a'pencil sharpener', ostrilk-aia ) ostrilk-i, ostrilk-i-te
s metal-o'abacus', s metal-o-to ) smetal-a, s metal-a- ta, etc.
Nomina loci:
a' reading room', ö it al n-j a-t a ) ö it al n- i, ö it aln- i_t e
ö it aln-j
letiit-e'airport', letii t-eio ) letiit-a, let iit-a-ta
umivalnik'washbasin', umivalnik-ät ) umivalnic-i, umivalnic-i-te, etc.

As can be seen from these instances, semantically-related derivations can

be built with different derivational suffixes, the latter select different inflectio-
nal suffixes by rule, and thus allot nouns into different inflectional classes. of
course, Bulgarian (cf. Radeva l99l) also has other semantic groups in deriva-
tion, but their members belong to different inflectional classes as well.
In fact, such behaviour of derivation is in consonance with its prototypi-
cal properties. If derived nouns enter only one inflectional class, the derivatio-
nal meaning they carry could have been expressed by inflection class assign-
ment, i'e. inflectionally. However, if a category is expressed inflectionally, ii is
inflectional and not derivational. Nevertheless, since derivation and inflection
constitute a cline, we can expect that the output ofborderline derivational cate-
 Bulgarian nominal infl ection 109

gories such as diminutives or augmentatives (called also non-prototypical deri-

vation, because no word-class change takes place, cf. Dressler 1989) could be-
long to the same inflectional class. Moreover Old Church Slavic had one in-
flectional class (-gl- stems) comprising only nouns denoting offspring of ani-
mals to which some linguists assign also all Old Bulgarian diminutives (cf.
Georgiev 1985). However, in the morphological system of modem Bulgarian
the status of diminutives has changed, and now neither diminutives nor aug-
mentatives form inflectional classes of their own, as can be seen from the fol-
lowing examples:
Diminutives:
kniga'book'
kniäk-a, kniäk-ala ) kniäk-i, kniäk-i-te
kniäle, kniäle-to ) kniZle-ta, kniäle-ta-ta
Augmentatives:
mdZ'man'
mdiiSt-e, möäiite-to ) mäZiit-a, mdiist-a-ta
mdiag-a, mdiag-a-ta ) mö|ag-i, mdäag-i-te

Looking for semantic criteria for inflection class assignment, one inevi-
tably comes to the category of gender which is traditionally thought as cogni-
tive and therefore semantically-organized (cf. Corbett l99l; Doleschal 1993).
The clearest case of a cognitive rule for gender assignment is when gender re-
flects sex, i.e. all males are masculine and all females feminine. In accordance
with this rule, one could expect that at least nouns denoting persons with the
same sex would take the same inflection. Unfortunately, in modem Bulgarian
even this simple rule does not hold. Consider the following examples of male
humans:
MASC mdä'man', mdZ-dt ) mdZ-e, möä-e-te
MASC gospod-in 'Mister', gospod-in-dt ) gospod-a, gospod-a-ta
MASC ricar'knight', ricar-jat ) ricar-i, ricar-i-te
MASC dj ado' grandfather', dj ado+o ) dj ado-v c i, dj ado-vc i - te
MASC bait-a'father', bast-a-ta ) bait-i, bait-i-te

Surprisingly to some extent, even in cases of the same final segments,

nouns denoting males belong to different inflectional classes:
MASC dj ado' grandfather', dj ado-t o ) dj ado-v c i, dj ado-vc i-te
MASC & NEUT5 pl kol-o'piccolo' , pikol-o-to ) pikol-a, pikol-a-ta

However, the semantic criterion involving the natural sex of an animate

noun can successfully be used for females:

5
Note that different dictionaries assign different genders (either masculine or neu-
ter, or both) to LWs denoting male humans and terminatingin -o, -e or other vowels
(e.9. dendi, guru).
110 Stela Manova
FEM ien-a 'woman', äen-a-ta ) ien-i, äeni-te
FEl'4 säprug-c 'wife', säprug-a-ta ) söprug-i, sdprug-i-te
FEM bab-a 'grandmother', bab-a-ta ) bab-i, bqb-i-te
FEM lel-ja' aunt', lel-ja-ta ) lel-i, lel-i-te
FEM uöitelk-a 'female teacher', uöitelk-a-ta ) uöitelk-i, uöitelk-i-te
FEM lövic- a'lioness', ldv ic-a-ta ) ldvic-i, lävic-i-te

Except for this class of females, it seems that there exists no clear seman-
tic criterion on which an inflectional class could be organized. Therefore now
we will use another strategy: neglecting gender, we will group nouns denoting
humans (indigenous words, loanwords, diminutives and augmentatives) ac-
cording to their termination.
Indigenous words:
FEM äen-a'woman', äen-q-ta ) äen-i, ien-i-te
MASC bast-a'father', bait-a-ta ) bqit-i, bait-i-te
Loanwords:
MASCpai-a 'pasha', pa|-a-ta ) pai-i, paf-i-te
MASC pap-a 'pope', pap-ala ) pap-i, pap-i-te
Diminutives and augmentatives:
MASC äen-a'woman' ) DIM FEM äeniök-a, äeniök-a-ta ) äeniök-i,
äeniök-i-te
MASC mää'man' ) AUG MASC mdäag-a, mdiag-a-ta ) mäiag-i,
mdäag-i-te

For these nouns, we can formulate the following rule: all nouns terminat-
ing in -a are inflected for number after a substitution of their final -a with the
suffix -i and for definiteness after the addition of the definite articles -ta and -te
for singular and plural respectively.
A similar observation can be made for nouns in -e:
Indigenous words:
NEUT momöe'boy', momöe-to ) momöe-ta, momöe-ta-ta
NEUT momiöe'girl', momiöe-to ) momiöe-ta, momiöe-tq-ta
Loanwords:
MASC atqie 'attachö', ataie-to ) ataie-ta, qtaie-ta-ta
MASC & NEUT krupie'croupier', krupie-to ) krupiela, krupielaia
MASC & NEUT kjure'Catholic priest', kjure-to ) kjure-ta, kjure-ta-ta
Diminutives and augmentatives:
MASC mdi'man' ) DIM NEUT möäle, mdäle-to ) mdäle-ta, mdäle-
ta-ta
FEM äen-a'woman' ) DIM NEUT äenöe, äenöe-to ) PL äenöe-ta,
ienöe-ta-ta
 Bulgarian nominal infl ection 111

The examples of nouns in -a and -e undoubtedly show that substantives

with different sex (gender respectively) but with the same termination belong
to the same inflectional class. It seems that for inflection class assignment in
Bulgarian, the termination of the noun is more important that its gender. It
should be noted that this observation challenges the traditionally gender-orient-
ed system of inflectional classes that can be found in all sources on Bulgarian
morphology written by native as well as by foreign linguists (cf. basic sources
on Bulgarian morphology such as Andrejöin 1978; Maslov 1981, Andrejöin et
al. 1983, Scatton 1984; Stojanov 1994; Feuillet 1996; Hauge 1999; Radeva et
aI.2003), the only exception being an article on gender and declensional class
in Bulgarian by Manova & Dressler (2001).
A group of words which are of significant importance for the morphology
of any language are loanwords. The way(s) in which loanwords are integrated
into the inflectional system ofa language is/are essential evidence for the orga-
nization of the inflectional system of this language. Since the above-cited
examples of nouns in -a and -e include loanwords and due to lack of space, I
will not give any new instances of inflected loanwords. It seems that only piko-
io is problematic for the assumption of the termination of a noun as a main cri-
terion for inflection class assignment in modem Bulgarian. However, compare
the inflectional forms of pikolo with those of ogledalo'mirror' and kino'cine-
ma', all ending in -o:
SG pikol-o'piccolo', pikol-olo ) pikol-a, pikol-a-ta
SG ogledal- o'mirror', ogledal-o-to ) ogledal-a, ogledal-ala
SG kin-o'cinema', kin-o-to ) kin-a, kin-a-ta

Such examples lead us to the next section.

VI. Fonvar- cRrrERrA

Formal criteria are phonological or morphological by nature.
Phonological criteria have to do with the phonological make-up of a
noun (e.g. whether a noun ends in a vowel or in a consonant, or whether it is
monosyllabic or polysyllabic).
Since -C, -A)a, -o and -e are all possible terminations of indigenous
nouns in Bulgarian, the phonological criterion defines the following nominal
classes: nouns terminating in consonants, nouns in -e,in-o, and in -e. Traditio-
nally and as usual for south Slavic languages, nouns in -C are further subdivid-
ed into monosyllabic and polysyllabic which leads to a system of five major
classes in modern Bulgarian (see table I below).
Morphological criteria concern the morphological sffucture of the noun.
After a morphological criterion, all nouns derived with the same suffix belong
to the same inflectional class. If we neglect the existence of morphological cri-
teria for inflection class assignment, a polysyllabic noun such as bdlgarin'(a)
Bulgarian', which terminates in a consonant, should belong to inflectional class
112 Stela Manova
2a and have the plural *bälgannl. However, the correct plural of bdlgarin is
bdlgari (2b), formed after a subtraction of the word-final -n, and it is a morpho-
logical rule (derivation with the [singulative] suffix -in) which distinguishes
such nouns from all other polysyllabics in a consonant. The same motivates the
postulation of class 2c comprising nouns with the suffix -an and the plural suf-
fix -ovci, instead the expected suffix -i assigned according to the phonological
criterion.
A combination of a phonological criterion (e.g. nouns consisting of more
than two syllables) and a morphological criterion (e.g. derived with the suffix
-ne) distinguishes nouns such as söupvane'breaking' (class 5b) from nouns
such as prane 'washing, laundry' (class 5a) which are also derived with the
suffix -re. The two types of nouns in -ne in class 5a and class 5b respectively
have the same definite article in the singular and in the plural, however due to
their different diachronic origin, they have now different plural forms, thus
prane 'washing, laundry', prane-to ) prane-ta, prane-tq-ta, but söupvan-e
'breaking', söupvane-to ) söupvan-ija, söupvan-ija-ta, i.e.like stradani-e 'suf-
fering', stradani-e-to ) stradani-ja, stradani-ja-ta (see 5c).
Of course, classes defined on morphological criteria can be seen as se-
mantically organized and this because the common derivational suffix has
some semantics. However, here postulation of semantically organized inflectio-
nal classes is false, since such inflectional classes include only some of the
nouns with a given semantic meaning. For example, the existence of an inflec-
tional class of ethnics in -lri does not mean that there exist no other derived and
non-derived nouns denoting ethnics. In modem Bulgarian, we also find iet .(a)
Czech', öex-ät ) öex-i, öex-i-te (see 1.6 in the list ofexceptions), avstriec ,(an)
Austrian', avstriec-dt ) avstrijc-i, avstrijc-i-te (class 2a), etc. Nevertheless,
the semantic criterion can be useful in case of hesitation whether a noun is de-
rived with a given suffix or not. For example, sdrbin'(a) Serbian' is an ethnic
noun, therefore has the subtractive plural sdrbi, i.e. as is usual for class 2b,
whereas the semantics of ispolin'colossus, giant' does not fit to the semantic
pattern ethnics (class 2b), thus its plural is ispolin-i, i.e. class 2a. The semantic
contrast between ispolin and class 2b is due to the mere fact that the noun r'spo-
lin is not derived with the suffix -ln. The same explains why verikan'giant' and
pelikan'pelican', both terminating in -an, have plural forms of class 2a (veri-
kan-i, pelikan-l respectively) instead of those of class 2c, the latter including
only pejoratives with the suffixes -arz.

VII. Bulcen rAN DECLENSToNAL cLASSES

The above-cited formal and semantic criteria allotted Bulgarian nouns
into l1 classes (1;2a,b,cd;3;4a,b;5a,b,c), cf. table 1 below. Due to lack of
space, each class is illustrated with a single native & LW example (if there are
any). Multiple examples for a given class are shown where different
terminations and genders are found; for such classes all possible terminations
 Bulgarian nominal inflection 113

and genders are exemplified. Note that LWs prove productivity (cf. Dressler
1997), therefore productive classes are only these where LWs occur. For
convenience, in table l,
all productive classes are marked by and 'p'
underlined. All possible morphonological changes occurring in the respective
class are also noted in table l. In the list below, a noun is given with all its
forms: SG, SG DEF )
PL, PL DEF. For more examples, see Manova &
Dressler (2001).

Major class 1: Monosyllables in C

grad'city,town', grad-dt ) grad-ove, grad-ove-te, broj 'issue, number,
copy', bro-jat ) bro-eve, bro-eve-te
Regardless of their termination monosyllabic LWs always take the plural suffix
-ovei
akt, akt-ät ) akt-ove, paj, paj-at ) paj-ove, paj-ove-te

Major class 2: Polysyllables in C

Clas s 2 a: prozorec'window', prozorec-ät ) prozorc-i, prozorc-i-te,
uöitel' teacher', uöitel-j at ) uöitel-i, uö itel- i-te
LW s: lektor' lecturer', I ektor-dt ) lektor-i, lektor- i-te
Class 2b: angliöanin 'Englishman', angliöanin-öt ) angliöani,
angliöani-te
C Iass 2 c: gotovan 'idler', gotovan-ät) gotovan-ovci,gotovan-ovci-te
C I a s s 2 d : pesen'song', pesen-ta ) pesn-i, pesn-i-te, rodost'joy',
radost-ta ) radost-i, radost-i-te

Major class 3: Nouns terminating in -a

FEM: kol-a'car', kol-a-ta ) kol-i, kol-i-te, lel-ja'aunt', lel-jaaa ) lel-
i, lel-i-te
MASC: bait-a 'father', bait-a-ta ) bait-i, bast-i-te, sddi-ja Judge',
sddi-ja-ta ) sddi-i, södi-i-te
LWs: FEM: zal-a 'hall', zal-a-ta ) zal-i, zal-i-te, organizaci-ja'organi-
zation', or ga ni z ac i -j al a ) or ganiz aci - i, or gan i z a c i - i - t e
MASC: mmaradä-a 'maharaja', maxaradi-q-ta ) maxqradä-i,
maxaradä-i-te

Major class 4'. Nouns terminating in -o

C I a s s 4 a: sel-o'village',sel-o-to) sel-a,sel-a-ta
LWs: NEUT: bjur-o 'bureau', bjur-o-to ) bjur-a, bjur-a-ta, radi-o
'radio', radi-o-to ) radi-a, radi-a-ta
MASC: iigol-o'gigolo', äigol-olo ) äigol-a, äigol-ala
C I ass 4b: djado'grandfather', djado-to) djado-vci,djado-vci-te
n4 Stela Manova
Major class 5: Nouns terminating in -e + LWs
in -i, -(j)u
C I a s s 5 a'. pole'field', pole-to ) polela, pole-ta-ta, momöe'boy',
momöe-to ) momöela, momöe-ta-ta
LWs: NEUT: pjure'mash', pure-to ) pjure-ta, pjure-ta-ta, taksi'taxi',
tal$üto ) taksi-ta, tal<si-ta-ta, ragu 'ragout', ragu-to ) ragu-ta, ragu-
ta-ta, interuju' interview', interuj u-to ) interuj u-ta, interuju-ta-ta
MASC: mosju' monsieur', mosju-to ) mosj u-la, mosju-ta-tq (colloquial)
FEM: lej di' lady', lej di-to ) lej di-ta, lej di-ta-ta (colloquial)
C I a s s 5 b'. iziskvan-e'requirement', izislwan-e-to ) iziskvan-ija,
izislcvan-ijalo
C I a s s 5 c: sdrc-e'heart',sdrc-e-to) sdrc-a,sdrc-a-ta
uöiliit-e'school', uöiliit-e1o ) uöiliit-a, uöiliit-a-ta
izvesti-e'news, message, information', izvesti-e-to ) izvesti-ja, izvesti-
ja-ta
s dbr ani -e'meeting, assembly', s äbr ani- e- t o ) s dbr ani-j a, s dbr ani-j at a

Table I has the following exceptions numbered after the regular

classes:

Note: If there is only a single noun listed, it means that the respective rule has no
other exceptions. Nouns marked by an exclamation mark (!) have two different plural
forms: a regular one, as usual for the respective inflectional class, and another one
which constitutes an exception, e.g. Ll. lrog'horn' )
PL rog-a (exception) & rog-ove
(class l). Everywhere only the peculiar forms are noted, all other forms are to be built
following a given rule or the pattern of the respective regular class. Addition is noted
with '+' and the suffix that has to be added (e.g. +-a), for a substitution rule, only the
respective suffix is written (e.g. -esa).

L l. PL +-a [2 nouns onlyf: krak'leg' , lrog'horn' (also rogove)

1.2. PL +-e [5 nouns onlyl: mdZ 'man' , car 'tsar' , knjaz 'prince',kral 'king' ,
kon'horse'
1.3. PL +-ifta 15 nouns only]: kraj 'end', sdn 'dream', kdr 'freld', lpät 'road'
(päti 'times'), tdvor 'yard' (dvori, dvorove), lkup 'p|le, heap' (kupove),
p let'hedge' (p letove)
t.

1.4. brat 'brother' ) PL bratja

1.5. zet 'brother-in-law' ) PL zet'ove
1.6. PL *-i: new loanwords such asfilm,fakt + some ethnics: öex'a Czech',
ived'a Swede'
l.7.PL +-i, ART +-ta: FEM: frost 'bone', etc. BUT gad, gad-öt / gad, gad+a
'reptile (symbolic)' ) gad-ove, gad-ove-te; tel, tel-dt / tel, tel-ta'wire'
) tel-ove, tel-ove-te; prax, prm-dt / prax, prax-ta 'dust, powder' )
prax-oye, prax-ove-te * count PL forms tri praxa 'three [types] of
powder'
 Bulgarian nominal inflection 115

1.8. ART +-ja(t) [only the listed nouns]: den'day', zet'brother-in-law', kon
'horse', kr al' king', p dt' road', s dn' dream', c ar' tsar'
2a.7. nomer'number, size, trick' ) PL nomera
2a.2. PL +-ove f3 nouns only]: ujatdr 'wind' ) vetrove, centdr 'center' )
centrove, ogdn'fire' ) ogn'ove
2a3. r.beglec'escapee' ) PL begdlci (begleci), mdrtyec'dead person' ) PL
mdrtävci
2a.4. potomdk 'ancestor' ) PL potomci, momdk 'lad' ) PL momci
2a.5. kamäk 'stone' ) PL kamdni
2a.6. tbodil'prickle, thorn, thistle' t PL bodili'thistles', bodli'prickles,
thorns'
2a.6. r.mednik 'copper (cauldron)' ) PL menci, mednici
2a.7 . t öovek 'human being' ) PL xora, sometimes also the expressive öoveci
2b.7. gospodin 'Mister' ) PL gospoda
2b.2. turöin'Turk' ) PL turci
2c.1. politikan 'dabbler in politics, intriguer' ) PL politikani
3.1. PL -e + palatahzation 12 nouns only]: röka 'hand' ) räce, noga'foot' )
noze
3.2.PL -e &.PL -i [2 nouns onlyf: l,ovca 'sheep', lsvinja'sow'
3.3. PL -i + palatalizationf2 nouns only]: vladika 'bishop' ) vladic-i, patrika
'patriarch' ) patric-i
4a.1. PL -i + palatalization [2 nouns only]: oko'eye' ) oöi, tao'ear' ) uii
4a.2. PL -i äivotno 'animal', yodoraslo 'seaweed', nasekomo 'insect', delimo
'dividend'
4a.3. PL -esa 14 nouns onlyl: öudo 'wonder', Ldörvo'tree, wood' ) därvesa
(old, poetic), dörveta 'trees', ddrvq 'wood, firewood', t.slovo 'word,
speech' ) slovesa'words', slova 'speeches, words', ltjato 'body' >
telesa (old), tela
4a.4.1. PL -a & PL -e: lkrilo'wing', lkoljano'knie' ) kolena, kolene
4a.4.2. t.ramo'shoulder' ) PL ramena, ramene
4a.5. PL -a & PL -eta f3 nouns only]: tkolelo'wheel', tkdlbo'sphere, ball',
t tärkal
o'wheel, circle'
5a.l l.nebe'sky, heaven' ) PL nebeta, nebesa (poetic) 'heaven'
5a.2. PL -(e)na [7 nouns only]: vreme'time, weather', pleme ,trtbe,, seme
'seed', ime 'name', zname 'f1ag', streme'sturrup', tbreme.burden' )
bremena, bremeta
5a.3. lbate 'elder brother, uncle' ) PL batevci, bateta (colloquial)
5a.4. dete'child' ) PL deca
5a.5. cvete'flower' ) PL cvetja

VIII. Corlclusrou
The formal mechanism of Bulgarian nominal inflection can be represent-
ed by the general templates of the morphological techniques of addition and
116 Stela Manova
substitution: X ) X + Y or X + Y ) X + Z (except for class 2b). While plural
indefinite forms are built with the help of both techniques, definite forms, be
they singular or plural, are always additive by nature.
Formal input-oriented rules can successfully allot nouns into inflectional
classes in modern Bulgarian. Of all formal rules, phonological ones are of par-
ticular importance for Bulgarian nominal inflection. Such rules specify the
phonological make-up of a noun and thus define five major inflectional classes:
1. monosyllables in consonants; 2. polysyllables in consonants; 3. nouns in -a;
4. nouns in -o; 5. nouns in -e, each with a single productive pattern. Here, in
contrast to Wurzel (1989: 58), we consider the final -a, -o, -e of a basic form of
a noun to be inflection, and therefore distinguish between classes 2d (polysylla-
bic in consonants) and 3 (nouns in -a), and between 4a (nouns in -o) and 5c
(nouns in -ce, -iite, -(n)ie). The members of each pair take the same inflection,
but differ in basic forms and in morphonological alternations which they allow
for.
Semantic criteria are secondary and gender is important only for agree-
ment. of course, it is possible to suggest a gender-oriented system of inflectio-
nal classes, as all linguists, except Manova & Dressler (2001), have done so
far. However, a system of inflection class assignment where gender is the main
criterion is unnecessarily complicated and needs l6 instead of here-postulated
I I inflectional classes.
In fact, only unproductive classes can be seen as organized on semantic
criteria (2b,2c,4b, 5b) and even in such cases semantics is a result of some
(formal) morphological criterion/a, since semantic relations are due to deriva-
tion(s) with the same suffix(es). Moreover, semantically organized classes do
not include all nouns ofa given semantic group, because there also exist nouns
derived with other suffixes expressing the same semantics and/or non-derived
nouns which can be assigned to the respective semantic pattern.
on the other hand, semantics can be useful for establishing exceptions of
regular classes. The most frequent exceptions in Bulgarian declension are prag-
matically motivated and denote animal and human body parts with high token
frequency (l.l; 3.1; 4a.1; 4a.4). Semantic organization can also be postulated
for the exceptions in L2 (nouns connected with the man's status in the society),
pragmatically-important animals (3.2), church titles (3.3) or for the three nouns
in 4a.5 which all mean something round.
It seems that in cases of unproductive classes and isolated patterns (de-
scribable by minor rules and classified as static morphology (lists of forms) in
the literature, cf. Dressler 2003) semantic clues come to remind us that we have
to do with unproductive morphology.
 Bulgarian nominal infl ection n'l
References
Andrejöin 1978: Ljubomir Andrejöin, Osnovna bälgarska gramatika, Sofrja
Andrejöin - Asenova * Georgieva 1983: Ljubomir Andrejöin - Petja Asenova - Elena

;t..f :91il?;tiil'ro"'ffi'xäTjx,Kil;"*"""ijabärgarskikniZo-
Aronoff 1994: Mark Aronoff, Morphology by Itself: Stems and Inflectional
Classes (: Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 22), Cambridge MA
Corbett 199 I : Greville G. Corbett, Gender, Cambridge
Doleschal 1993: Ursula Doleschal, Genus als grammatische und textlinguistische
Kategorie: Eine kognitiv-funktionalistische Untersuchung des
Russischen, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Vienna
Dressler 1989: Wolfgang U. Dressler, Prototypical differences between inflec-
tion and derivation, Zeitschrift fiir Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft
und Kommunikationsforschung 42, 3 -| 0
Dressler 1997: Wolfgang U. Dressler, On Productivity and Potentiality in
Inflectional Morphology, CLASNET Working Papers 7,2-22
Dressler 2003: Wolfgang U. Dressler, Latin static morphology and paradigm
families, in: Brigitte L. M. Bauer, & Georges-Jean Pinault, A
Festschrift for \üerner Winter on the Occasiön of his 80th Birth-
day, Berlin, 87-99
Dressler - Mayerthaler - Panagl- Wurzel 1987: Wolfgang U. Dressler - Willi Mayer-
thaler - Oswald Panagl - Wolfgang U. Wurzel, Leitmotifs in
Natural Morphology, Amsterdam
Dressler -
Gagarina 1999: Wolfgang.U. Dressler - Natalija V. Gagarina, Basic ques-
tions in establishing the verb classes of conttmporary Russian,
in: .L, Fleishman et al. (eds.), Essays in poetics, Literary History
and Linguistics. Presented to V. V. Ivanov on the Occasion of
His Seventieth Birthday, Moscow, 754-760
Feuillet 1996 : Jack Feuillet, Grammaire synchronique du bulgare, paris
Georgiev 1985: vladimir Georgiev, Preosmisleni pädezni fo-rmi,' in: vladimir
Georgiev, Problemi na bälgarskija ezik, Sofrj4 164-168
Hauge 1999: Kjetil.Rä. Hauge, A _Short Grammar of Contemporary Bulgar-
ran, Bloomington, Ind.
1982:
Isaöenko v. Isaöenko, Die russische sprache der Gegenwart. Formen-
A.
lehre, 4 Auflage, München
Manova2003: stela Manov4 conversion and subtraction in Bulgarian, Rus-
sian and Serbo-Croatian, phD Thesis, University of Vienna
Manova - Dressler 2001: Stela Manova - wotfgang u. Dressler, Gendär and declensio-
nal class in Bulgarian, Wiener Linguistische Gazette 67_69, 45_
8l
Maslov I 981 : Jurij Maslov, Grammatika bolgarskogo jazyka,
Moskva
Vasilka _Radeva, Slovoobrazuväneto v "bäigaiskija kniZoven
_S.
Radeva 1991:
ezik, Sofrja
Radeva - walter - Penöev - comati 2003: vasilka Radeva - Hilmar walter - Jordan
Penöev - Sigrun C_oma!i, Bulgarische Grammatik: Morpholo_
gisch-syntaktische Grundzüge, Hamburg
scatton 1984: Earnest A. Scatton, A Rifeience Grämmar of Modern Bul-
garian, Columbus, Ohio
Stojanov 1993: Stolan Stojanov-, Gramatika na bälgarskija kniZoven ezik, Sohja
Wurzel 1984: Wol8ang U. Wurzel, Flexionsmörphoiogie und Naturiichköit:
ein Beitrag zur morphologischen'Theoiiebildung (: Studia
Grammatica, 2l), Berlin (English translation: Infleitiönal Mor-
phology and Naturalness, Dordrecht 1989)
ll8 Stela Manova

;-
,r.
- o:= o
iq4+2 + +

9v
c d +=
r-€ o o l
-oc!-' o 6 c
ci:
z€ 352 + +

Itr
l>
lt, a ,i Li
o o
sli,? E 3ä + + +

.o
q.-

; !1.= \
Y ä.- S 9
? E 6-YA o
;2=Ed€
ai o >
€e + + +

l€
sl,
I LO

Et
o oE
.. o
.9
6
6
+ r .qä +

1 E
.9
I
dcr
t- oE
.lY 3i +
'
.. o
.=d +

o
-{:
3EJ>
E
g ,b
s 5; ?H i ä: +

o
.a
U6
q,
.c < .Y,
3r > g + + +

cx
OE
'5q
U o -^
!o'
OE <: €€?
N'T + ?:i.oE +

1 t NX
c
.9 PF =.onct;
dl a:
I
IU \n: -!d
$lv f
,. .
NO=
F 1.F 'i d -
.E +-t+ +-:Id -a^- +
t ol o^ .2
-o
32
E I o_a o-
o
tr I Jc !
-co f od
I V',.d
o- G t o; d
'T I 6= u
1,.
-lY ?- o 3€ 3 dEs
!) iCö -=^
-oz
-
6al +\+ +
o=
!a
-: cü o6 o9
ro qK
=
F
!
c -!o E:=
€i!E
3
Ssr ä ;<E lllt
\a 2 c dto ! 2E;n-; d*