Online Encyclopedia


Online Encyclopedia
Originally appearing in Volume V25, Page 237 of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.
Spread the word: it!
PRIMARY. SECONDARY. Non-Thematic. Thematic. Plur. Sing. Du. Plur. Sing. Du. Plur. -mi -(m) -ve -mu -(m) -vi-mil -le -fl -ta -te -(s) -ta -le -gtl -tI -te -(n)ti -(t) -te -(nt) 1st Sing. In thematic verbs the vowel + m has given q, but there has been a tendency to replace it according to the non-thematic analogy, which has necessitated changes in 1st plur. 2nd Sing. -si has given -sI everywhere but in O.S. 3rd Sing. -If has been dropped everywhere but in Russian, where the literary language has ta. The Dual only survives in Serb, Sorb, Slovene and O.S., and in these the forms are confused. 1st plur. -mu has developed afull vowel where the 1st sing. has replaced the -m. The secondary endings have lost their -m, -s, -t and-nt by phonetic change. Non-thematic presents are, jesmf, dui, sum; daml (redupl. for *dadml), &≊ jams, edo; vemi, Sanskr. vedmi, " I wit "; imami (new form of emo), " I have." The aorist has no augment; it is sigmatic and non-sigmatic. The latter or 2nd aor. (cf. Horn. impf. pee, Opt) survived only in consonant stems and that in O.S. and Old Cech, peke=Erevoov. It was common in the 2nd and 3rd sing. (where the -s- forms would not be clear) pece <*peke-s,*peke-t = &co-a es, EreQOe. The sigmatic aorist very rarely and only in consonant stems in O.S. keeps its -s-, vesiii <*vedsli. In sterns ending in k, r or a. vowel, s > ch; bychi = g¢vva and this ch >s before g. The ordinary later form for consonant stems inserts a vowel, vedochu. The aorist has survived in S. Slavonic and in Sorb, and is found in the older stages of the other tongues. The same languages (except Slovene) have kept the impf. which was present in Proto-S1. but does not go back to I.E., being formed on the analogy of the aor. With the aor. has coalesced the opt. bind, " be," used with the 2nd past part. to make a conditional. Stem of pres. part. act. ends in -nt- but the consonant decl. has become an -jo- decl., so we have vezy < I.E. *yeghonts=Exwv, gen. vezgsta < *vezontja as against EXovros. Pres. part. pass. ends in -mu; it has survived more or less in Russian, elsewhere is obsolescent. Past part. act. I. is formed with I.E. -yes-; nom. sing. masc. -yos (d&.4) gave u, vedu, having led, byvu, having been; but in fem. and oblique cases formed as from -jo- stem s remained, hence Russian vedfij, byvsij. Past part. act. II. in -1 cf. Lit. bibulus from bibo, used with an auxiliary to form past and conditional. Past part. pass. in -t-or -n-; tertu=tritus. Znanu=known. I.E. future having been lost, futurity is expressed by an auxiliary btd¢ (ero) chofiq (will), &c. with the inf. or by the pres. form of the perfective verb. The passive is. expressed either by the use of the passive participles or by the reflexive sg, which can refer to the 1st and 2nd persons as well as to the 3rd. Syntactical peculiarities of the Slavonic languages that may be noted are a tendency to use the genitive instead of the accusative (which has often coincided in form with the nominative) in the case of living beings, masculine -o- stems, and in the plur.; the use of the genitive for the accusative or even nominative in negative clauses; the dative absolute and the dative as subject to an infinitive; the instrumental instead of the nominative asa predicate, and in etude oblique the preservation of the tense of the original statement instead of our way of throwing it into the past. In the use of the verbs the development of " aspects" makes up for the few tenses. Actions (or states) expressed by a verbal form have a beginning, a continuance and an end. There are, however, some (momentaneous) actions whose beginning and end come together and allow no continuance. All verbs fall into two great divisions, imperfective, which express the continuance of an action, without regard to its beginning or end, and perfective, which express the points of beginning or ending. The continuance of an action may be unbroken or may consist of like acts which are repeated. So imperfective verbs are divided into durative, as nesti, " to be carrying," and iterative, as nositi, " to be wont to carry "; the repeated acts of the iterative can either be each of them momentaneous, e.g. Cech, slrrileti, " to shoot," i.e. " be firing single shots," or each have some continuance, e.g. nositi above, or we can even express the occasional repetition of groups of momentaneous actions, e.g. Cech. sirilivati, " to have the habit of going out shooting." Among perfective verbs we have (1) momentaneous, expressing action which has no continuance, kriknqti, " to give a cry," sesti, " to take a seat "; (2) finitive, expressing not the continuance of the action, though that there has been, but its end or completion, naplzlniti, " to fill to the brim "; (3) ingressive, expressing the moment of beginning an action, vial' ubiti, " to fall in love with." As perfective verbs do not express continuance, an idea implied in the present, they cannot require a present form, so this is used for perfective futures; e.g. sgd¢ (pres. form from perfective sesti) =" I shall take.a seat," as opposed to imperfective bqdq sideti, ". I shall be sitting." If a preposition is compounded with a durative verb as nesti, " to carry " (in general), " to be carrying," it makes it perfective, as iznesti, " to carry out " (one single action 'brought to a conclusion), so Eng. " sit " is usually imperfective, " sit down " perfective. If an iterative has a preposition it is mostly used as a durative; iznositi can mean " habitually to carry out " but more often=" to be carrying out," that is, it supplies the imperfective form to iznesti. The development of this system has enabled some Slavonic languages, e.g. Russian, to do with only two tenses, pres. and past, to each verb morphologically considered, perfective and imperfective verbs supplementing each other; e.g. if we take a Greek verb, the pres. (ind. and infin.) and imperf, correspond to the present, inf. and past of a Russian imperfective verb; the aor. indic. and inf. are represented by the perfective past and infin., which has also to do duty for the Greek perfect and plup.; the future and the future perfect in Greek do not express the same distinctions as the imperfective future and perfective future (in form a present)' in Sl., the Greek giving chronological order of action, but not giving the distinction of aspect, though the future perfect is naturally perfective.. The prepositions are very much like those in other I.E. languages both in actual forms and in use. The formation of the sentence is not naturally complicated; but SI. has in times past been largely influenced by Greek, Latin and German with their involved periods; latterly there has been a tendency to follow the simpler models of French and English. Such being the Slavonic languages as a whole and regarded in their relationship to I.E..,, they may now be considered in their relationship to each other, and some of the principal characteristics enumerated upon which their internal classification has been founded. More or less complete accounts of each language will be found,under its name. Distinctive, Points of Different Si. Languages.'—I. (II, 't). The fate of the Proto-S1. half vowels u, i, still preserved in O.S., e. g. sonic, " sleep,", dlnl, " day," is various; as a rule they disappear, u entirely (though when final still written in R.), I leaves a trace by softening the preceding consonant. But if needed to eke out 1'Bulg.=Bulgarian =Cech; Kas.=Kasube; Lit. R. = Little Russian; P. = Polish; • R.—Russian, i.e. Great Russian; Ser. Servian; Wh. R. =White Russian. Sing. Du. 1. -ms -ve 2. -si -la 3. -ti -te consonants, in Sorb, Slovak, Lit. R. and mostly in Gt. ,R., u, i develop into full vowels o, e—R. sonu, gen. sna; d'eni, gen. dn'a. In Polish and Cech both > e, but in P. i softens the preceding cons., in C. it usually does not—P. sen, dzien; C. sen, den; in Slovene and Ser. they are not distinguished, Slovene u, a or e, san, dan or den= Ser. a, san, dan, gen. dana, Ser. keeping the middle vowel which is elsewhere dropped. Bulgarian varies dialectically. II. (y.) y only remains in Gt. Russian, Polish and Sorb though still written in Cech; it has elsewhere become i, but in Polish it becomes i after k and g, in Sorb and R. after k, g, ch—O.S. kysnqti, " go sour," gybnati, " perish," chytru, " cunning "; P. kisnae, ginac, chyter; R. kisnuti, gibnuti, chit'eru. (a) r is always a lingual trill, never alveolar. In S. Slay. it is only softened before j and s—O.S. zorja, " dawn." In N.W. and E. Slay. r became r' before I, i, e, g, 'e and j. Russian and Slovak have remained at this stage, C., Polish, Kas. have made r into r' (rz) in which r and g are run into one. (See Table I.) But C. srdce, trh, vlk,•slnce; P. serce, targ, wilk, slonce; R. s'erdce, torgu, volkiiu, solnce. (e) Proto-S1. ru, ri, la, li had in S. Slay. and partly in C. the same fate as r, 1; in Polish and R. the vowel comes after the liquid. O.S. bruvi, "brow," kristu, "cross, plug, " flesh," sliza, '" tear "; Ser. brv, krst, put, sego; Slovene, brv, krst, polt, solza; C. brv, but plet'; P. brew, krzest, plea, (s)tza; R. brovi, kr'estu, plots, sl'eza. (j) Proto-Sl. -or-, -ol-, -er-, -el- before a consonant. (i.) Type art, olt (ert, ell are not certain) beginning a word.—The liquid mostly comes first, sometimes the same vowel persists in all languages, e.g. Proto-Sl. *ordlo (Lithu. arklas, aratrum), O.S., Bulg., Ser., Slovene, R. ralo, C. Polab. P., radio. But Proto-Sl. *eldii (Lithu. eldija), O.S. ali/diji, ladiji, "boat," Ser., Slovene, ladja, R. lodija, C. Lodi, Polab, liid'a and *orvn (Pruss. arwis), O.S. ravine, " even," Ser. ravan, Bulg. Slovene, raven, R. rov'enu, C. rovny,P. rawny show Russian agreeing with N.W. Slav against S. Slay. The difference probably depends on intonation. (ii.) Type tort, toll, tent, tell with a consonant before as well: i a e g c .1 O.S. . . . avers, " beast " veriti, " believe " remeni, " strap " tresa trgseli, " tremo " reka, " river " zorja, "dawn " . Russian zveri ver'iti r'em'eni tr'asu tr'as'osi rzeka zor'a Polish . . . zwierz wierzyc rzemien Own trzgsiesz rzeka zorza P. g for orig. q does not soften—P.rgka: O.S. raka, " hand." In Sorb such a change only happened after k, p, t, in which case High S. has s (written r), Low S. s, but in Low S., r after k, p, t becomes i even before hard vowels: Proto-S1. tri, "three," High S. tsi, Low S. tsi; Proto-S1. kraj, " edge," High S. kraj, Low S. ksaj. (b) 1 occurs in three varieties, l, 1, 1', but each language has generally either middle 1 alone or else I and 1'. Lit. R. and Bulg. have all three. 1 has been arrived at in C. and Slovene by the loss of the distinctions, perhaps under German influence; Ser. has 1 and 1', final 1>o; but t occurs in dialects of all languages and was no doubt in O.S., Proto-Sl. and even rialto-Slay. It has a velar and a labial element and in most languages tends to appear as o, u, v or w, though this is only written in Ser. and Lit. R. O.S. dale, " gave," R. data, Lit. R. dav, Wh. R. dav, _daw, P. dal (dialect day), C. dal, Ser. dao. 1' is very soft, like Fr. ville. (c) N.W. Slay. keeps -ii- -di-whereas S. Slay. (except some cases of Slovene padl, pletla, &c.) and R. drop the t and d—C. padl, " fell," radio, " aratrum," pled, " plaited" ; O.S. and R. pall, ralo, plelu, but R. drops 1 of masc. sing. past,part. II. after other consonants. O.S. neslii, C. nesl, R. n'esii, " carried." (d) Proto-Sl. r, 1 or perhaps sir, ir, id, it gave S. Slay., and Slovak r, l written in O.S. 71, la, li indifferently, though soft Proto-S1. O.S. Bulg. usu. Ser. Slovene. u, ou; e, C. Sorb, High, Low. R. P. Kasube. an, on; en, en. a; e. u, or el; e. u; e. a, o; e, C. u; a, je; e, e. u; ja. e, a; jg, jct. q; *manka, " pain " mqka nauka muka maka, monka, muka muka niuka maka maka *monka, " flour " maka miinka maka maka, muka mouka muka muka maka mqka *desemti, " ten " deseti deseti deset deset deset d&esae, gases d'es'ati dziesile diiesic *penes, " five " pgti pets pet pet pet gee, peg p'ati piae> pica pic or psinc the various treatments of this combination are among the chief criteria for classification, esp. the Russian speciality called full vocalism (polnoglasie) tarot, tolot, teret, telet (or tolot, telot) which is probably archaic, is one of the chief reasons for putting Russian in a separate division; Polish and Sorb come nearest to it, with trot, Clot, tret,.tlet, but the N.W. division is not uniform as Kasube and the extinct Polab have the interesting forms tort, tlat, trit, flat, which are partly archaic, partly a transition to the most novel forms of the southern group to which Cech and Slovak in this particular accede, trat, flat, tret, tlet, but after e and z Cech has flat for tlet. Deviations due to intonation have not been set forth. (See Table II.) Proto-Sl. Stem. R. P. Polab, Kas. C. S. Si. e.g. O.S. *gord- " hortus," " town " gorodu grad gord hrad grade *molt- " hammer " . . molotu mfot mlat mlat mlatiie *berg- Ger." berg," " shore" b'er'eg~ brzeg brig bieh brzgu *melk- " milk " . . . moloko mleko mlak— mleko mleko *helm- " helm " . . . (Kas.) glob Blab slemu *gelb- " groove " . . . glebes sel'ema or selomu gelobu glob IV. The Prato-Slavonic nasals a and c could be either long or short. This distribution is fairly kept in languages which have quantity and governs the results in Polish in which the nasal sound is preserved. The examples below show the main representatives. Traces of nasal pronunciation survive in Bulgarian, Slovene and Kasube. (See Table III.) and hard may once have been distinguished. Of this group Slovene and Ser. later allowed the l to become ol,, ou or u. Sorb, Polish and R. developed various vowels, partly according to the original quality, partly according to other influences, e.g. O.S. sridice, " heart," trugu, " market," vigil," wolf," slunice, " sol "; Ser. srdce, trg, vuk, sunce; Slovene srdce, trg, yolk, svince; In Kasube a remains; g becomes nasalized i or i and this may lose the nasal or restore it as a full n or m; it has also nasalized all the other vowels and has the power of using nasals in loan-words, e.g. testamat, as did O.S. e.g. kolgda, kalendae, sgdu=sund. Polab has a and g—ronka, O.S. raka, " hand," mengsie=mgsa, " carnis," but swante=svgtu, " holy." V. Softening (Palatalization, &c.).--Nothing has so much affected Slavonic speech as the effect of 1, i, e, e, g and j on pre-ceding consonants, and the variations produced are among the chief points of difference between the languages. (a) The gutturals felt this first of all, k, g, ch, become (I.) I, i, g and (II.) c, dz(z), s, and these changes are universal (see Io, kv a, b above) except that after the separation of the Slays the same process was continued in the S. and E. branches even when a v intervened, whereas the N.W. branch remained untouched. Proto-Sl. *kvetit, "flower," *gvezda, "star" (vulchvi), magi; O.S. cvClh, dzvesda, (vlittsvi); R. cvetzx, zvezda; but Cech kvet, hvezda; P. kwiat, gwiazda. (b) The action of j was the most general, influencing the dentals in all languages and in some the labials as well, whereas U ~t the narrow vowels act on the dentals only and that not in all languages. The results of Proto-Sl. tj, dj in O.S. and Bulg. are the most surprising, giving gt', M', by way of gc and z"dz (as is shown by their agreeing with the results of Proto-Sl. tiand systematic writing of the latter only came in from the 14th century. The fate of the half vowels we have seen (I.). Traces of former long vowels are very clearly to be seen in Sorb, Polish and Lit. R., and less clearly in Bulg. and Gt. R., all of which have lost distinctions of quantity; Slovene can have long vowels only under the accent. In Kasube, C., Slovak and Serbo-Cr. there are also unaccented long syllables. Russian has kept the place of the original accent best, next to it Bulgarian; consequently it seems very capricious, appearing on different syllables in different flexions, but it has become merely expiratory. In Slovene it is still musical, but is, so to speak, steadier. For the Proto-Slay. O.S. Bulg. Mac. Serbo-Croat and Slovene. C. P. R. *svetja, " candle " . svegt'a svegta svek'a svijel'a svjeca sveca svice gwieca sveca *medja," boundary" . mezd'a mezda meg'a med'a media meja meze miedza m'eza *pektj, " stove " : . pear pall pee pet pet piec p'ecl *mogtj, " power " mogti mogti moe ntoc mac moc moll stj, skj, e.g. preligt'enA, " deceived," igt'" I seek," cf. R. talent's, iglu). Some Macedonians have the strange result k' and g'. Among the Serbo-Croats we find every grade between!, d', and c', dz', or c, di, the Slovenes having c', j (our y), the Cechs and Sorbs c, z, the Poles and Polabs c, dz, and the Russians c and z; the fate of ktj and gtj has been the same as that of tj throughout. (c) Before the narrow sounds i, i., e, e and the descendants of 6 there has resulted a later softening which has gone farthest in r. d. Low Sorb, producing g and f, and in High Sorb and Polish, 'e and tit, not so far in Gt. R. where t' d' remain, Wh. R. is intermediate with nbw e, dz, now t', d'; in C. even t' d' only come before i, i and C. In S. Slavonic this effect is dialectical. C. telo, " body," delati, " make," deset, " ten "; P. ciao, dzielo, dziesigc; High Sorb, driesac; Low Sorb, eiaseg; Wh. R. celo, dcelo, diegac; Gt. R. t'elo, d'elo, d'es'ati. (d) S, z, at, before j gave g, i, n' throughout (No. ro, c, d, above). Before the narrow vowels they give .f, z, n in Sorb, '' `' n' Polish, Slovak and Russian, but Cech has no s or 2 or A before e nor always before 1; S. Slavonic has n' before j. Other-wise in it such softening is only dialectical, but Bulgarian forms a transition to Russian. (e) In Polish and Sorb we have the labials p', b' (f'), v', m' softening before j and the narrow vowels, in Cech only before e, in Slovak nowhere. In S. Slavonic they only soften P. b. I v. before j and then the j appears as 1' (pl', bl' vl', ml'), m' invariably in Serb, generally in Slovene, generally too in Russian, but there before the narrow sounds of newer formation they can all be softened in the ordinary way (p', b', f', a', m'), in Bulgarian this 1 has disappeared and we have p', b', v', m'. But O.S. followed the S. Slay. rule; and the l was probably once present in N.W. Slay. It remains everywhere in one or two roots—O.S. pl'ujq (vrruw for splulo), R. pl'uju, P. plujg, otherwise O.S. zeml'a, R. z'eml'a, P. ziemia, " humus." On the whole the various languages do not differ much in principle in the treatment of j, but softening before 1, i, e, e, g, seems to have its extreme point in P., Kas. and Polab, spreading from them to Sorb, White Russian and Gt. Russian; Cech, Slovak and Lit. Russian have it in a far less degree, and in S. Slavonic it is very little developed. VI. Right across the Slavonic world from W. to E. g has become h, leaving the N. and the S. untouched. This change is found in Cech, Slovak, High but not Low Sorb, is traceable in Polish, and characteristic in White, South Gt. Russian and Lit. Russian, also in the Russian pronunciation of Ch. Slavonic. The h produced is rather the spirant gh than the true aspirate. Low Sorb, R., O.S., &c., gora, P. gora, "mountain." C., Slovak, High Sorb, Wh. and Lit. R. horn.intonations Serbo-Croat is the chief guide, but here the accent intonation is spread over two syllables, in Croatian (ca dialect), the main stress is usually on the old place, in Servian (Bo dialect) it has shifted back one. In N.W. Slavonic, with the exception of Kasube in which it is free, the accent is fixed, in C., Slovak and Sorb on the first syllable of the word, in Polish on the penultimate. On the whole it may be said that the geographical classification of the Slays into N.W., S. and E. Slays is justified linguistically, though too much stress must not be laid upon it as the lines of division 'are made less definite by the approximation of the languages which come next each other, the special characteristics of each group are generally represented in dialects of the others if not in the written languages; also some peculiarities (e.g. VI., g>h) run right across all boundaries, and secondary softening runs from N. to S., becoming less as it goes away from Poland (V., c). In fact, the triple division might be purely arbitrary but for the fact that the belt of Germans, Magyars and Rumanians has made impossible the survival of transitional dialects connecting up Cech with Slovene, Slovak with Servian, Russian with Bulgarian. Slovak, as it were, just fails to be a universal link: in the north Russian and Polish have much in common, but Lithuania made some sort of barrier and the difference of religion favoured separate development. In the north Polish is closely connected with Kasube, and this with Polab, making the group of L'ach dialects in which the nasals survived (IV.). The two Sorb dialects link the L'achs on to the Cechs and Slovaks, the whole making the N.W. group with its preference for c, z, s as against c, z, .f (which were perhaps unknown to Polab, V. b), its b' as against bl' (V. e), its keeping kv' and gv' (V. a), tl and dl (III. c), its i (III. a, not in Slovak) and the fixed accent (VIII. not in Kas.). The whole group (except Sorb) agrees with R. in having lost the aor. and impf. Yet C. and Slovak agree with S. Slay. in trat, tret (III, f, ii.) in survival of r and (III. d) and of quantity (VIII.). Again, Slovene has occasional ti, dl (III. c), and its accent and quantity are not quite southerly, but its many dialects shade across to Croat and Servian, and they must all be classed together for the fate of tj, dj (V. b) and a, g (IV.). The Sopcy and Macedonians, among their numerous dialects, ' make a bridge between Servian and Bulgarian. The special mark of the latter is tj, dj > gt, Ed, which is the main philological argument for making O.S. Bulgarian. In general S. Slay. shows less soft letters than N.W. and E. (V. c and d). It shares with Russian bl < bj (V. e), tl, dl > 1 (III. c), kv', gv'>ca zv (V. a) and the general loss of a, g (IV.), and is closer to it in the fate of tj, dj (V. b). Bulgarian, especially in some dialects, is, as it were, a transition to Russian, e.g. in accentuation. Russian stands by itself by its tarot, tolot (III. f, ii.) and its y>h. treatment of tj and dj (V. b) and the place of its accent (VIII.) in all of which it is rather archaic, while je>o, ju>u (VII.) is its own innovation. In its secondary softenings Lit. R., Gt. R. and Wh. R. make a gradual bridge between S. Slav and Polish (V. c-e). In common with Polish, R. further has the retention of y (II.) and the loss of the aor. and impf. Finally, within historic time certain dialects have influenced others through literary and political intercourse. O.S. has influenced all the Orthodox Slays and the Croats, so that Russian is full of words with O.S. forms pronounced a la Russe (q>u, g> ja, .ft' > H., &c.). Cech has almost overshadowed Slovak and early afforded literary models to Polish. Polish has overshadowed Kasube and much influenced Little and White Russian and Great Russian in a less degree. Russian has in its turn supplied modern Bulgarian with a model. Again, other tongues have contributed something; in common Slavonic there are already German loan words, and others have followed in various periods, especially in Cech and Polish, while the very structure of Slovene and Sorb has been affected. Polish has adopted many Latin words. Bulgarian and Servian received many Turkish words. Russian took over many Eastern words in the Tatar period, and the common vocabulary of Western civilization since the time of Peter the Great, but on the whole, though the Slav easily takes to a fresh language, he has kept his own free from great admixture. 1876 ). 4. Literary History: A. N. Pypin and Spasowicz, Istoria savjanskich Literatur (2nd ed., St P., 1879) ; W. R. Morfill, Slavonic Literature (S.P.C.K., London, 1883). 5. O.S. Grammar, &c.: F. Miklosich, Altslovenische Formenlehre in Paradigmen (Vienna, 1874); A. Leskien, Handbuch der altbulgarischen (altkirchenslavischen) Sprache (with Texts) (4th ed., Weimar, 1905), Russian trans. with account of Ostromir Gospel by Scepkin and aachmatov (Moscow, 189o); V. Vondrak, Altkirchenslavische Grammatik (Berlin, 1900); F. Miklosich, Lexicon Palaeoslovenicum-Graeco-Latinum (Vienna, 1862–1865). 6. O.S. Texts. Evangelium Zographense (glag.), ed. Jagic (Berlin, 1879); Evangelium Marianum (glag.), ed. Jagic (St P.,1883) ; Evangelium Assemani (glag.), ed. trncic (Rome, 1878); Psalterium et Euchologium Sinaitica (glag.), ed. Geitler (Agram, 1882–1883) ; Glagolita Clozianus, ed. Vondrak (Prague, 1893) ; " Fragmenta Kieviana " (glag.), ed. Jagic, Denkschr. k. Akad. d. W., Phil.-list. Kl. xxxviii. (Vienna, 1890); Codex Suprasliensts (cyr.), ed. Miklosich (Vienna, 1851); Evangelium Savvae (cyr.), ed. Scepkin (St P., 1900); Evangelium Ostromiri (cyr.), ed. Savvinkov (St P., 1889). 7. Alphabets: P. J. Safai-ik, Uber den Ursprung and Heimat des Glagolismus (Prague, 1858) ; I. Taylor, The Alphabet, vol. ii. (London, 1883); L. Geitler, Die albanesischen and slavischen Schriften (facsimiles) (Vienna, 1883); V. Jagic, Cetyre Paleograficeskia Statji (Four Palaeographical Articles) (St P., 1884); Id. " Zur Entstehungsgeschichte der kirchenslavischen Sprache," in Denkschr. d. k. Akad. d. Wiss., Phil.-hist. Kl. xlvii. (Vienna, 1902); id." Einige Streitfragen 5." (numerical value and nasals in slag.), in Arch. f. sl. Phil. xxiii. (1901); A. Leskien, " Zur glagolitischen Schrift," ib. xxvi. (1905); A. Bruckner, " Thesen zur Cyrillo-Methodianischen Frage," ib. xxvii. (1906); E. Th. Karskij, Ocerk Slavjanskoj Kirillovskgj Paleografii (Outline of SI. Cyrillic Palaeography) (Warsaw, 1901). (E. H. M.)
End of Article: PRIMARY
PRIMAGE (adopted from the Fr. primage, from prime, ...
PRIMATE (from Low Lat. primas=one who held the firs...

Additional information and Comments

There are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click and select "copy." Paste it into a website, email, or other HTML document.