The Old Church Slavonic word
‘box, coffin’ can be derived from Protobulgarian *
, a synonymous form of the related Turkic word
‘id.’ which in turn was the source of Hung.
‘coffin’. The Church Slavonic and the Hungarian words came from different Turkic dialects and were borrowed into the respective languages under different geographical and chronological circumstances, though both of them can be considered ancient, pre-ninth-century loanwords.
Authors:Людмила В. Братухина and Александр Ю. Братухин
The paper is devoted to analyzing examples of the use of constructions “O + locative”, which have the meaning of “basis of activity, instrument”. Our interest in these examples is due, firstly, to the fact that this meaning of the preposition O is completely absent in modern Russian. Secondly, in some cases, this construction found in Old Slavonic texts is replaced in Church Slavonic by the construction “ВЪ + locative”, which is a calque from the ancient Greek construction “έν + dative” (often having the meaning of “a tool”) but this substitution is inconsistent. Thirdly, the constructions “O + locative” and “BЪ + locative” appear in the Old Slavonic manuscripts in parallel. The main aim of the study is to identify the shades of meaning that the creators of Old Slavonic texts distinguished in the ancient Greek construction “έν + dative”, choosing “O + locative” as a variant of translation; and to determine whether the indicated meaning of the preposition O was original in the Slavic languages or this preposition was acquired in the process of translating Biblical texts.
The research is based on the Sinai Psalter, the Zographic and Ostromir Gospels, the Ostroh and Elizabethan Bibles as well as the examples (contained in the dictionaries of the Old Slavic, Old Russian, and Church Slavonic languages) from the Mariinsky Four Gospels, Assemaniev’s Gospel, Savin’s book, Euchology of Sinai, and Supralsky manuscript.
The construction “έν + dative” is translated not only by “O + locative”. The former is also regularly translated by constructions of the instrumental case without a preposition (in Old Slavonic and Church Slavonic texts). The possibility of forming of the meaning of the action source under the influence of the construction “OTЪ + genitive” is also considered. In general, the dynamics of evolution of the meaning of “O + locative” is traced in the paper. It is concluded that the analyzed “O + locative” construction acquired the meaning of “basis of activity, instrument” at the time of the creation of Old Slavonic Bible translations. This is due to the process of reflection on the text, which became possible with the appearance of the written Slavonic language and the comparison of this construction with a simple instrumental case, combinations of “OTЪ + genitive” and “BЪ + locative”, which in some cases acted as synonymous and could be chosen by translators either spontaneously or with the aim to express nuances of meaning. This is demonstrated with the elimination of ancient Greek tracing, as well as the reverse replacement of “O + locative” by “BЪ + locative”. The instrumental case without a preposition was similar to “O + locative” in the expression of the causal meaning as well as in indicating the source of the action; the con- struction of “OTЪ + genitive”, in addition to the similarity of meaning, in terms of spelling and phonetics also resembled “O + locative”. The construction “O + locative” turned out to be more stable in the cases of indicating an animate source or basis of activity.
Szőke 2007 = Szőke Lajos: Loanwords in the Synodal ChurchSlavonic Gospels and Psalms. Studia Slavica Hung . 52 (2007): 395–402.
TESz = Benkő Loránd (szerk.): A magyar nyelv történeti-etimológiai szótára I–IV. Budapest, 1967
In this paper, the author analyzes the structure, word formation, and meaning of Church Slavonic lexical elements with semantics of worship and rites on the basis of secular written documents which served as a source for the Dictionary of the Ukrainian language in the 16th and the first half of the 17th centuries and for the Historical Dictionary of the Ukrainian language edited by Ye. Tymchenko. The use of Church Slavonic lexicalized phrases and idioms are also studied. The development of semantics of Church Slavonic words in present-day Ukrainian and in liturgical practice is considered as well.
The present paper is based on materials of different genres and different styles of Ukrai- nian written monuments of the 16th and the 17th centuries (acts, court documents, wills, deeds, documents of church and school fraternities, chronicles, works of religious, polemi- cal and fiction, memos of scientific and educational literature, liturgical literature, episto- lary heritage, etc.) which are included in the source database of the Dictionary of Ukrainian language of the 16th century and the first half of the 17th century and its unique lexical card index, which is stored at the Ukrainian Language Department in the I. Krypiakevych Institute of Ukrainian Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (Lviv). The composition and structural organization of Church Slavonic lexemes meaning ‘God; God’s face’ as well as their origin and history are studied.
It was found that the register of this vocabulary included more than fifty phonetic and graphic Church Slavonic elements expressing the concept of ‘God; God’s face’ different in word-forming structure. The main attention is paid to the etymological analysis of the studied tokens, which was primarily to clarify their semantic etymon. It is established that the analyzed Church Slavonicisms are mostly semantic loans from the Greek language, which preserved their semantics from ancient times to the Old Ukrainian period.
It is observed that some studied tokens often act as core components of various two-, three-, or four-membered lexicalized phrases. The most active multifunctional core com- ponent was the token Lord. It is established that fixed phrases and phraseologisms are of different types in structure, mostly two-component noun + adjective phrases (sporadically, there are other lexical-grammatical models, too: “noun + noun”, “preposition + adjective”). Much less observable are three-component formations (“noun + verb + pronoun“, “verb + pronoun + noun“) and four-component models (“verb + preposition + pronoun + noun”).
It was found that the Church Slavonic words attested in the Ukrainian memos of the 16th and the 17th centuries did not undergo significant semantic changes in the process of formation of religious vocabulary. Some Church Slavonicisms have gone through a partial semantic modification, and some have acquired new semantics due to fixed phrases. Some words that point to God’s face are characterized by polysemy and synonymy.
The evolution of the analyzed Church Slavonicisms is different. Some of them have survived to our time and are actively used in the Ukrainian literary language or dialects, while others function only in a special area: in the church practice of the Byzantine rite (Orthodox Church of Ukraine, Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church).
The paper claims that in Old Church Slavonic documents imperfect forms undergo processes of transfer and congruence, their full forms being ousted by shortened forms of the imperfect. The history of imperfect forms is well reflected in the Codex Suprasliensis on the one hand, and Savvina Kniga on the other. Classical documents and material from the Codex Assemanianus are studied insufficiently regarding shortened and full imperfect forms. The present paper intends to examine the correlation of shortened and full imperfect forms as well as to reveal the morphological peculiarities of the imperfect in the Codex Assemanianus with respect to the significance of this document in the history of Old Church Slavonic gospel translations.
This paper deals with the issue of using Latin and “Slavensky” (Russian and Church Slavonic) languages in the primary ecclesiastical education in the 18th century. By the 1740s, seminary education in Latin had established itself in Russia. But primary teaching of reading and writing in Russian and Church Slavonic remained traditional until the end of the 18th century, regardless of where the teaching was taking place: at home or at a Russian school at a seminary. The Russian schools were organised for teaching illiterate or semiliterate children. But by the end of the 18th century, several seminaries attempted to reorganise them into ecclesiastical schools where Russian would be the only language of instruction. Junior classes at seminaries were fully focused on teaching Latin, however, Latin was by no means a complete replacement for Russian. The main method of instruction was translation, and the administrations of many seminaries demanded attention to the quality of students’ translations into Russian. Therefore, Russian and Latin were functionally distributed in primary education. Only the Church Slavonic language was practically excluded from teaching after the primary courses of reading and church singing, and it preconditioned its conservation as a language used only for church services and led to the extinction of the hybrid form.