In this paper it will be argued that the “so-called” paradigm of the First Imperative of Tungusic is secondary. The functions attributed to the First Imperative may have been originally conveyed by particles or structures which are preserved in Manchuric. However, they were grammaticalized and modeled into a paradigm only in Common Tungusic.

The present article rectifies a noticeable lacuna in the analysis of the Mandinka verbal system and offers a detailed discussion of the meaning of the KAŊ locution (i.e. of the analytical expression be + infinitive + kaŋ) as well as a presentation of its most relevant structural properties. First, the author demonstrates that there are no structural or contextual restrictions on the use of the formation. It may be employed in all kinds of environments: transitive and intransitive or affirmative and negative. It likewise tolerates various types of roots, admitting dynamic, static and adjectival predicates. Second, in respect to the semantic content, although the progressive value of the periphrasis clearly predominates various refinements are necessary. The progressive meaning – limited to the present and past temporal sphere – can also be also portrayed as repeated and frequentative. Adjectival predicates are invariably employed with a dynamic transitory-ingressive force. However, certain static verbs employed in the KAŊ form regularly denote continuous situations. Additionally, the periphrasis may indicate general, durative and extended in time activities, corresponding to Indo-European simple tenses. Finally, it also appears with the force of an inclusive perfect.

National stereotypes, as with any stereotype, are a simplified representation of the external world. These simplified images find their reflection and are preserved in the language, in words, metaphors, proverbs, and phraseology. In Upper Sorbian paremiology a self-stereotype of the Sorb is found, a man who primarily sees himself in a positive light, as good, honest, devoted and faithful. A “true” Sorb is also hospitable and pious. The most important component of the sense of identity is, however, the linguistic distinctiveness, which is stressed in the proverbs and expressions. The self-evaluation is formulated against a clear stereotype of the German, who is treated as a “foreigner”, as well as a symbol of oppression. This stems from the common history and the co-existence of the two nations. However, the image of the German emerging from the Upper Sorbian proverbs is not exclusively negative. There is no ethnocentrism in the Sorbs’ self-stereotype as, despite stressing their own positive traits, they are objective and have a critical attitude towards their own vices. A clearly negative feature of the Sorbs, which appears regularly in the collected material, is the imitation of German customs. In order to describe such representatives of the Sorbian nation a pejorative ethnonym Němpula is used.

The purpose of the paper is to analyse linguistic practices of specifically one group of English Facebook users – the speakers of Indian English. As one of the most thoroughly studied members of the so-called New Englishes group, Indian English is believed to demonstrate a number of characteristic features resulting especially from the prolonged English-Hindi language and culture contact. Following a brief outline of the history and current position of English in India the paper examines in detail characteristic features of Indian English found in the Facebook material collected from fan pages and private messages: changes in spelling and pronunciation of English words, use of abbreviations, characteristic features of nativised Indian English grammar, language errors, as well as some typical sociolinguistic features of that variety of English, notably forms of address, culture-specific elements, and code-switching.

This paper is an edition of an article by Władysław Kotwicz (1872–1944) entitled Les voyelles longues dans les langues altaïques, which the author could not publish himself during wartime and did not live to publish after the War was over. The edition is designed to read almost as if published by Kotwicz, but without falsifying the actual manuscript. Also, a brief archival description is provided and the history of the last four years of the text has been reconstructed, based mostly on Kotwicz’s correspondence.