Katana VentraIP

Old Church Slavonic

Formerly in Slavic areas under the influence of Byzantium (both Catholic and Orthodox)

9th–11th centuries; then evolved into several variants of Church Slavonic including Middle Bulgarian

chur1257  Church Slavic

53-AAA-a

Historians credit the 9th-century Byzantine missionaries Saints Cyril and Methodius with standardizing the language and undertaking the task of translating the Gospels and necessary liturgical books into it[9] as part of the Christianization of the Slavs.[10][11] It is thought to have been based primarily on the dialect of the 9th-century Byzantine Slavs living in the Province of Thessalonica (in present-day Greece).


Old Church Slavonic played an important role in the history of the Slavic languages and served as a basis and model for later Church Slavonic traditions, and some Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic churches use this later Church Slavonic as a liturgical language to this day.


As the oldest attested Slavic language, OCS provides important evidence for the features of Proto-Slavic, the reconstructed common ancestor of all Slavic languages.

Nomenclature[edit]

The name of the language in Old Church Slavonic texts was simply Slavic (словѣ́ньскъ ѩꙁꙑ́къ, slověnĭskŭ językŭ),[12] derived from the word for Slavs (словѣ́нє, slověne), the self-designation of the compilers of the texts. This name is preserved in the modern native names of the Slovak and Slovene languages. The language is sometimes called Old Slavic, which may be confused with the distinct Proto-Slavic language. Different strains of nationalists have tried to 'claim' Old Church Slavonic; thus OCS has also been variously called Old Bulgarian, Old Croatian, Old Macedonian or Old Serbian, or even Old Slovak, Old Slovenian.[13] The commonly accepted terms in modern English-language Slavic studies are Old Church Slavonic and Old Church Slavic.


The term Old Bulgarian[14] (Bulgarian: старобългарски, German: Altbulgarisch) is the designation used by most Bulgarian-language writers. It was used in numerous 19th-century sources, e.g. by August Schleicher, Martin Hattala, Leopold Geitler and August Leskien,[15][16][17] who noted similarities between the first literary Slavic works and the modern Bulgarian language. For similar reasons, Russian linguist Aleksandr Vostokov used the term Slav-Bulgarian. The term is still used by some writers but nowadays normally avoided in favor of Old Church Slavonic.


The term Old Macedonian[18][19][20][21][22][23][24] is occasionally used by Western scholars in a regional context.


The obsolete[25] term Old Slovenian[25][26][27][28] was used by early 19th-century scholars who conjectured that the language was based on the dialect of Pannonia.

These phonemes were written and articulated differently in different recensions: as (/t͡s/) and (/d͡z/) in the Moravian recension, (/t͡s/) and (/z/) in the Bohemian recension, /⟨щ⟩ ([ʃt]) and ⰆⰄ/⟨жд⟩ ([ʒd]) in the Bulgarian recension(s). In Serbia, ⟨Ꙉ⟩ was used to denote both sounds. The abundance of Middle Ages toponyms featuring [ʃt] and [ʒd] in North Macedonia, Kosovo and the Torlak-speaking parts of Serbia indicates that at the time, the clusters were articulated as [ʃt] & [ʒd] as well, even though current reflexes are different.[52]

^a

/dz/ appears mostly in early texts, becoming /z/ later on.

^b

The distinction between /l/, /n/, and /r/, on one hand, and palatal /lʲ/, /nʲ/, and /rʲ/, on the other, is not always indicated in writing. When it is, it is shown by a palatization diacritic over the letter: ⟨ л҄ ⟩ ⟨ н҄ ⟩ ⟨ р҄ ⟩.

^c

Most significantly, the (extra-short) vowels: /ɪ̆/ and /ʊ̆/

yer

: /ɛ̃/ and /ɔ̃/

Nasal vowels

articulation of the yat vowel (/æ/)

Near-open

/ɲ/ and /ʎ/ from Proto-Slavic *ň and *ľ

Palatal consonants

Proto-Slavic declension system based on stem endings, including those that later disappeared in attested languages (such as u-stems)

as a distinct grammatical number from singular and plural

Dual

imperfect, Proto-Slavic paradigms for participles

Aorist

Written evidence of Old Church Slavonic survives in a relatively small body of manuscripts, most of them written in the First Bulgarian Empire during the late 10th and the early 11th centuries. The language has an Eastern South Slavic basis in the Bulgarian-Macedonian dialectal area, with an admixture of Western Slavic (Moravian) features inherited during the mission of Saints Cyril and Methodius to Great Moravia (863–885).[56]


The only well-preserved manuscript of the Moravian recension, the Kiev Missal, or the Kiev Folia, is characterised by the replacement of some South Slavic phonetic and lexical features with Western Slavic ones. Manuscripts written in the Second Bulgarian Empire (1185–1396) have, on the other hand, few Western Slavic features.


Though South Slavic in phonology and morphology, Old Church Slavonic was influenced by Byzantine Greek in syntax and style, and is characterized by complex subordinate sentence structures and participial constructions.[56]


A large body of complex, polymorphemic words was coined, first by Saint Cyril himself and then by his students at the academies in Great Moravia and the First Bulgarian Empire, to denote complex abstract and religious terms, e.g., ꙁълодѣꙗньѥ (zъlodějanьje) from ꙁъло ('evil') + дѣти ('do') + ньѥ (noun suffix), i.e., 'evil deed'. A significant part of them wеrе calqued directly from Greek.[56]


Old Church Slavonic is valuable to historical linguists since it preserves archaic features believed to have once been common to all Slavic languages such as:


Old Church Slavonic is also likely to have preserved an extremely archaic type of accentuation (probably close to the Chakavian dialect of modern Serbo-Croatian), but unfortunately, no accent marks appear in the written manuscripts.


The South Slavic and Eastern South Slavic nature of the language is evident from the following variations:


Old Church Slavonic also shares the following phonetic features only with Bulgarian:

Confusion between the letters Big yus ⟨Ѫѫ⟩ and Uk ⟨Ѹѹ⟩ – this occurs once in the Kiev Folia, when the expected form въсоудъ vъsudъ is spelled въсѫдъ vъsǫdъ

/ts/ from Proto-Slavic *tj, use of /dz/ from *dj, /ʃtʃ/ *skj

Use of the words mьša, cirky, papežь, prěfacija, klepati, piskati etc.

Preservation of the consonant cluster /dl/ (e.g. modlitvami)

Use of the ending –ъmь instead of –omь in the masculine singular , use of the pronoun čьso

instrumental

Role in modern Slavic languages[edit]

Old Church Slavonic was initially widely intelligible across the Slavic world.[130] However, with the gradual differentiation of individual languages, Orthodox Slavs and, to some extent, Croatians ended up in a situation of diglossia, where they used one Slavic language for religious and another one for everyday affairs.[131] The resolution of this situation, and the choice made for the exact balance between Old Church Slavonic and vernacular elements and forms is key to understanding the relationship between (Old) Church Slavonic and modern Slavic literary languages, as well as the distance between individual languages.[132]


It was first Russian polymath and grammarian Mikhail Lomonosov that defined in 1755 "three styles" to the balance of Church Slavonic and Russian elements in the Russian literary language: a high style—with substantial Old Church Slavonic influence—for formal occasions and heroic poems; a low style—with substantial influence of the vernacular—for comedy, prose and ordinary affairs; and a middle style, balancing between the two, for informal verse epistles, satire, etc.[133][134]


The middle, "Slaveno-Russian", style eventually prevailed.[133] Thus, while standard Russian was codified on the basis of the Central Russian dialect and the Moscow chancery language, it retains an entire stylistic layer of Church Slavonisms with typically Eastern South Slavic phonetic features.[135] Where native and Church Slavonic terms exist side by side, the Church Slavonic one is in the higher stylistic register and is usually more abstract, e.g., the neutral город (gorod) vs. the poetic град (gd) ('town').[136]


Bulgarian faced a similar dilemma a century later, with three camps championing Church Slavonic, Slaveno-Bulgarian, and New Bulgarian as a basis for the codification of modern Bulgarian.[133] Here the proponents of the analytic vernacular eventually won. However, the language re-imported a vast number of Church Slavonic forms, regarded as a legacy of Old Bulgarian, either directly from Russian Church Slavonic or through the mediation of Russian.[137]


By contrast, Serbian made a clean break with (Old) Church Slavonic in the first half of the 1800s, as part of Vuk Karadžić's linguistic reform, opting instead to build the modern Serbian language from the ground up, based on the Eastern Herzegovinian dialect. Ukrainian and Belarussian as well as Macedonian took a similar path in the mid and late 1800s and the late 1940s, respectively, the former two because of the association of Old Church Slavonic with stifling Russian imperial control and the latter in an attempt to distance the newly-codified language as further away from Bulgarian as possible.[138][139]

(Ki, KM), 7 folios, late 10th century

Kiev Missal

(Zo), 288 folios, 10th or 11th century

Codex Zographensis

(Mar), 173 folios, early 11th century

Codex Marianus

(Ass), 158 folios, early 11th century

Codex Assemanius

(Pas, Ps. sin.), 177 folios, 11th century

Psalterium Sinaiticum

(Eu, Euch), 109 folios, 11th century

Euchologium Sinaiticum

(Clo, Cloz), 14 folios, 11th century

Glagolita Clozianus

Ohrid Folios (Ohr), 2 folios, 11th century

Rila Folios (Ri, Ril), 2 folios and 5 fragments, 11th century

The core corpus of Old Church Slavonic manuscripts is usually referred to as canon. Manuscripts must satisfy certain linguistic, chronological and cultural criteria to be incorporated into the canon: they must not significantly depart from the language and tradition of Saints Cyril and Methodius, usually known as the Cyrillo-Methodian tradition.


For example, the Freising Fragments, dating from the 10th century, show some linguistic and cultural traits of Old Church Slavonic, but they are usually not included in the canon, as some of the phonological features of the writings appear to belong to certain Pannonian Slavic dialect of the period. Similarly, the Ostromir Gospels exhibits dialectal features that classify it as East Slavic, rather than South Slavic so it is not included in the canon either. On the other hand, the Kiev Missal is included in the canon even though it manifests some West Slavic features and contains Western liturgy because of the Bulgarian linguistic layer and connection to the Moravian mission.


Manuscripts are usually classified in two groups, depending on the alphabet used, Cyrillic or Glagolitic. With the exception of the Kiev Missal and Glagolita Clozianus, which exhibit West Slavic and Croatian features respectively, all Glagolitic texts are assumed to be of the Macedonian recension:


All Cyrillic manuscripts are of the Preslav recension (Preslav Literary School) and date from the 11th century except for the Zographos, which is of the Ohrid recension (Ohrid Literary School):

: стараславянская мова (starasłavianskaja mova), 'Old Slavic language'

Belarusian

: старобългарски (starobalgarski), 'Old Bulgarian' and старославянски,[140] (staroslavyanski), 'Old Slavic'

Bulgarian

: staroslověnština, 'Old Slavic'

Czech

: старословенски (staroslovenski), 'Old Slavic'

Macedonian

: staro-cerkiewno-słowiański, 'Old Church Slavic'

Polish

: старославянский язык (staroslavjánskij jazýk), 'Old Slavic language'

Russian

: staroslovenski / staroslavenski, Serbo-Croatian Cyrillic: старословенски / старославенски, 'Old Slavic'

Serbo-Croatian Latin

: staroslovienčina, 'Old Slavic'

Slovak

: stara cerkvena slovanščina, 'Old Church Slavic'

Slovene

: староцерковнослов'янська мова (starotserkovnoslovjans'ka mova), 'Old Church Slavic language'

Ukrainian

Outline of Slavic history and culture

List of Slavic studies journals

History of the Bulgarian language

Church Slavonic language

Old East Slavic

List of Glagolitic manuscripts

Proto-Slavic language

Slavonic-Serbian

by Todd B. Krause and Jonathan Slocum, free online lessons at the Linguistics Research Center at the University of Texas at Austin

Old Church Slavonic Online

by Nicolina Trunte, free online 418-page textbook of Old Church Slavonic (scroll down)

Ein praktisches Lehrbuch des Kirchenslavischen. Band I: Altkirchenslavisch

on AATSEEL

Medieval Slavic Fonts

Old Slavic data entry application

Corpus Cyrillo-Methodianum Helsingiense: An Electronic Corpus of Old Church Slavonic Texts

Research Guide to Old Church Slavonic

Bible in Old Church Slavonic language – Russian redaction , (PDF) Archived 2019-07-16 at the Wayback Machine, (iPhone), (Android)

(Wikisource)

(in Macedonian)

Old Church Slavonic and the Macedonian recension of the Church Slavonic language, Elka Ulchar

Old Bulgarian Language Archived 2016-03-05 at the Wayback Machine, Sofia, Bukvitza, 2012. English, Bulgarian, Italian.

Vittore Pisani

Philipp Ammon: in: Sjani (Thoughts) Georgian Scientific Journal of Literary Theory and Comparative Literature, N 17, 2016, pp. 248–56

Tractatus slavonicus.

on YouTube

Agafia (Ага́фия). Hermit Surviving in Russian Wilderness for 70 years

an online collection of introductory videos to Ancient Indo-European languages produced by the University of Göttingen

glottothèque – Ancient Indo-European Grammars online

(Unicode Technical Note no. 41), 2015-11-04, accessed 2023-01-04.

Church Slavonic Typography in Unicode