|
OLD See also: SLAVS (under See also: Languages) will be found a fairly See also: complete account of Old See also: Slavonic in its first See also: form, as it is taken as representing, save for a few peculiarities noticed in their place, the Proto-Slavonic
.
The reasons are there given for believing it to be the dialect of Slays settled somewhere between Thessalonica and Constantinople and represented now by the Bulgarians and Macedonians
.
After the language had been fixed by the See also: original See also: translations of the New Testament and other See also: Church books it was no more consciously adapted to the dialects of the various peoples, but was used equally among the Croats (whose books were accommodated to the
See also: Roman use and written in Glagolitic), Serbs and
Russians
.
These insensibly altered them to make the words easier and allowed their native languages to show through; and the same was the See also: case with the Bulgarians, whose language soon began to lose some of the characteristics of O.S
.
Hence our earliest See also: MSS. already show departure from the norm which can be established by comparison; about a dozen (8 Glagolitic) MSS. and fragments afford trustworthy material dating from the loth and I ith centuries, but even then the S
.
Slays were weak in distinguishing i and y, the Russians mixed up q with u, g with ja and so on; but in the actual texts See also: great conservatism prevailed, whereas any additions, such as colophons or marks of ownership, betray the dialect of the writer more clearly, and such scraps and a few deeds are our earliest authorities for Servian and See also: Russian
.
But the Church language as insensibly modified continued to be the See also: literary language of Croatia until the 16th century, of See also: Russia until 1700, and of See also: Bulgaria, See also: Servia and Rumania until the early See also: part of the 19th century, and is still the liturgical language of Dalmatia, the Balkans, Russia and the Ruthenian Uniates
.
Its literature was enriched in the second generation by the See also: works of See also: Clement, See also: bishop of Ochrida, and See also: John, exarch of Bulgaria, and other writers of the
See also: time of See also: Tsar Simeon, but it is almost all ecclesiastical in character
.
Perhaps the most interesting See also: book in Church Slavonic is the Russian See also: chronicle, but that has many old Russian forms
.
Otherwise certain translations of See also: Greek Apocrypha are of importance, especially when the Greek original is lost, e.g. the Book of See also: Enoch; other Apocrypha in Church Slavonic are said to have been written by Jeremias, a Bogomil See also: priest, but they are probably derived from Eastern See also: sources
.
The Slavonic text of the See also: Bible is not of importance for textual See also: criticism, as the See also: translation was made See also: late, and even so has never been studied from that point of view
.
The whole Bible was not finished till the 15th century, some of the less necessary books being translated from the Vulgate . |
|
|
[back] SLAVERY |
[next] SLAVS |
There are no comments yet for this article.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.
Links to articles and home page are encouraged.