COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF SLAVIC LANGUAGES

SLAVIC STUDIES Slavic Philology Series

NIKOLAI TRUBETZKOY

THE COMMON SLAVIC ELEMENT IN RUSSIAN CULTURE

Edited by Leon Stilman Copyright 1949 by the Ikpartmmt of Slavic Languqp Columk univmity The preparation md publication of the aavsrml seriea of work. wder UyZC -1ES hmrm been madm paseible by m gt~t from the Rockefeller Qoundmtion to the Dapartmat of Slrrie Professof N. Trubetzkoy's study on The Cannon Slavic Eleaent in Russian Culture was included in a volume of his collected writings which appeared in 1927, in Paris, under the general title K #roblcme russkogo scwo#o~~anijo.Tbe article was trans- lated fm the Russian bg a group of graduate students of the Departant of Slavic Languages, Columbia Universi tr, including: Ime Barnsha, Hamball Berger, Tanja Cizevslra, Cawrence G, Jones, Barbara Laxtimer, Henry H. Hebel, Jr., Nora B. Sigerist- Beeson and Rita Slesser, The editor fobad it advisable to eli- atnate a number of passqes and footnotes dealing with minor facts; on the other bad, some additions (mainly chro~ologieal data) were made in a fen iwstances; these additions, ia most instances, were incorporated in tbe text in order to amid overburdening it with footnotes; they are purely factual in nature md affect In no the views and interpretations of tbe author. L. S. CONTENTS

I Popular ad literarp lan@=ge.- Land11.de and d1abct.- Pxot+Slavic: itn dlalnte$ratlon: Bouthorn, Weatern and EwGern Slavi0.- Li torarr landuadem: thelr evolutiarr: their cnlatlon to apoken vernsaulam ..... 11 Old Church Slevonle: Its origiao and Its role.- The early reeensLma.- Old Bulgmrian Church Slavonlc and its progaget1on.- Church Blavoaie in Russia: sound changes; the Eastern and Wentern Russian trnditloa: the the second South Slavic influenca: the uakfled Ruseisn rocenaim ...... 111 bri$ina of secular literarr Russian.- Russian in the Itithuaplaa S*sts and la Huropp.- Western RumsIan aad Western Europe- inflaenee on literex Rusaiaa.- Ruamian and Church Slavonie: their differeatiatlon and their blendin& the spntheels of the vernaaular and the ChurchSlawonic alemn*:ln 1iteraryRoasian. , . Literary lan-gea: of the 3outhhrn and Western 51~8: Bulgarian, Serbo-Croatlan and Slovene: Czech, Pollah; Slovak, Lusatlaa ...... V mralnian snd h~sian.-The aodera Ukrainian litararp laaguade: Its artlflclallty: the break with the Churab Slavonlc and adhartmce ta tho Hestern Slavic tradition a The two troups of 1Lteraxy Im#uagsa: thoas of the Church 81avaio tradition and those of the Westem t~xech-pollah) tradition: their laterrelatione: R~si~borrwln~*OromPolish...... VfI The Church Blavonic element and Its role In literary Ihrsslan.- The Ruaeian-Cburub Slavoaic doublets.- The mtyliatic and semantic variants produced by tbe incor- poration of Church Slavoale sl~tmts..... VIIX The Rtleniaa language aad thm Rutussiatl Cyrillic alphabet in their relation to the other lan#ua$ss of the Bavlet

0 m.*.*r*..m.* Popular and llbarary language.- Language and dia- lect.- Proto-Bl~vlc: Its dislntmgration: Southern, Wantern .ad Enstera 8lavla.- Literary languages: tbalr eV0lution; their relation to spoken vernaeularm. In ray lingttiatic mtndy it is importmat to differentiate )o)ular lamwage mud literary lmguage. It im true thmt every lmgua~ahma ewolrtd from some popular toague mad that tm soma extent it im always axpoaed to tha inflnaaca of populnr teams. Even am, a literary aud popmlmr lrnflage never coiu- cidm collplately .ad follow different path. in tbair damlop- mmt. A popular lm~agatan& tommrd dimlactal frapantatioa; m literary lnnmage, on the contrary, tend. tormrd uniformity. ?he diffurantimtion of a lurm48e cam he either posrmphicml (local differantiation), or aha it 1.7 be daremined by mpe- cinlisatioa in its me. The geo6raphieal factor pradomfnntaa in the diffaraatimtiaa of ppnlar lamguager. There Ire, of conrue, miso certain distinctive femturer in the apeseh of the different trade., occupationr or rnlks of life, but these vmriaacem are lams atroag than the differencem Letween tha dialects of dif farant localities. On the contrary, in the diffarentintion of litarmry 1.~- maga., apeeialitmtioa, not geography, is predominant. Trw, the apameb or tk mriting even of .ell-adtreatad permon. of different puts of a roamtry is never completely unifor*, and the 1mngtl.ge of m litermtp work oftsa betray. the local back- #round of the author. But differences due to apeoialired mna nra mch more prominent in literary l~gumge, such a8 the dif- fermncaa between scientific prome, bflaineaa proae, ballam- lattraa, or poetry. Spoken langunge may be purely litarary, or purely popnlar; or, finnlly,it may be l blend of liternry and populmr elemento in varier. ptopmrtiona. The edmentionnl and cultucml Ierel of ma iadividaal &tar- mino. tbe kind of fmwmge which in for him the moot natural medium md rhicb be user, therefore, 504t freely and correctly, Tbe topic of a coavtraation a1.o playa am important roln. h edncatad parson rill =re with perfect tam2 mud correctnoma the literary lmgtlage in 8 c~n~8r4ltioh(or letter) dmaling with ctrtmin rubjecta, a bland of the literary mud the in diacuraiag other mmttara. and finally, dealing with atill otber topic., he rill ma* jmat aa freely and nmtmrmlly s purely populmr langnrga; the person with whoa the conrerantion is carriad on aIro plmyr a part in the choico of language. Tbua the literary and tba popular languages uaed within one mad the nut national orgmnimr form a complex network corres- ponding to the intmraaetiag lines of sociml intsscourae. If re add that neither the literary nor the popular lmnpmp remain. atatic, bat thmt, oa the contrary, they are in conatant chamgs, ds~ulopingaach in itm own direction4 mnd according to its om law., we will hate the very co~plientedpicture of the lifa of a l.n@mge. fbia pictara could hmrdly be riraalirad ia it4 entirety; we rill, tharmfote, bave to mnaider it in it. dif- farent colponamt elements, hmaian im 8 Slmic laagaagt; it ia, furthenore, .a Bastem Slmvic lmgnage. By mtating that haaimu ia a Slavic lmnguage re maan that tbim language ham dsvsioped through gradmml chmma from r more ancient laagnage, from which, tlromgh a mariea of differoat ch~ges,derelopad 81.0 Polish, Czech, Ssrbo-Croatian, Bmlgarirn, atc. The ancient lmg~agsfrom mhich a11 Slmvic language. developed io born 88 the Conon Sluuic or the Proto-Slavic language, Thia Proto-S1mric lan- mmga war an Indo-3uro)ron l.agtlm6e: it developed by ray of gradual chmgtn from that Indo-European lm@aga, from which, through otber cbnngem, devsloped the lugaages of Xndim md Iraa, Armsairn, Graak md Albmian, tha Italic lan@a~am{with Latin), the Coltic mad Germanic longumgen, the Baltic group (Litboaninn, Lattimb. md the now extinct Old Prammira). Ilhen we nay that Proto-Slmric de~eiopedfrom Tndo-B~ropem. amd Rtlaaimn from Roto-Siawic, re imagine the following pro- ce.8: every liriag popular 1r;npage comprirea 8eraral dimlaatm. emcb hariag tendwcy to aeparats itaelf from tbm other.. Ordinarily, all theam dialects follow a parallel darelopnmt and tlmdarp the mu* chmgaa wre or Ism0 aimltmneoclaalp. But alona with thorn cbrmgss which affect all the dirlsctr belong- in# to s given lanpm~e,other cbmgea tmka place mhiah are limited Lo ? pmttiatllar dialect, or perhapa to & group of aai&boring dialects. In the courma of tire, tbaac individual dialectal change. acclwlmta, and prrall*linr in the deralop- mmt of the dimlaeta is disrupted. la that ersn whan mintilar changta taka place in the differant dialect., they do mot occur in the mum orde~,thua widening the differancorn butmen the dimlectm. Finally, mtngs ia reached *ban thare no Longer appear any chmn~acomn to a11 the dialects of limn lanpaga, and when thoaa chanwr thnt do nppanr effect only neparmte didects or group* of dialect.. At tbi. mhemt the 1.11- @age nay be conaidated ms baring diaintegratsd; it ham ceased to arirt 8s ma entity in the process of Iiupiatie evoXotion, and the indiridnal dialect0 rill henceforth play the part of wch entities in thia proceam. When a siren dimlect baa so dariated ia ita development fram nnigbboring dial act^ that mutual underatanding ia ao loagar porribla. them it 1.7 be coaaidsred that this dialtct ha. become an independent langumge, Conaaq~ently,in mtating that popular Rumaian* ha4 developed fraa Roto-Slmric, we aaaura that Rmsaim, ia anme very ancient atage of ita de~alopmunt. raa o dimlect ~f Proto-Slavic, or, in other tarrs, thmt Proto- Slmric included 8 meparmtu Prow-Rumaim dimlect, jumt .a it included otbar dialect. aueh 88 Proto-Polisb, Proto-Cssch, etc. Siailmrly, in nmrerting that Prota-Slaric developed fram Iado- Europe-, re marnma the axiatencs, within the Indo-Europem langnmge, of rn Proto-Slavic dialact along with otbar dialect.: Proto-Gsrraaic, Proto-Greek, mad others. From the .bore definition of the diainte6rmtion of l.agna&a it follorr that the moment of the laat chmage co-n to a11 the dialect. of m given langtlmga cu be tmken 8s the mowat which at the mue time *ark. tbe beginning of thia dimiategratioa. Aa regardm Proto-Slavic, the laat chmge couon to a11 dim- lects of thin lmnpaga wnm the elimination of the reduced wowsls in weak position. In Proto-Slavic there existed the vary mhort {redm~ed) r01e14: a (fsr) and n (jer3; the first, 5, w.8 yore1 between r mnd n , rnd the rrcond, k, a vowel between i and r. These reduced rorula in certmin poaitloam (for laatmc., at the end of m word or before ayllnble with mu ordinmry, son-reduced van1 rare weak, i.e., aouadad erpcoially abort. In other poai tioaa they were stronl, (8. g., before tbe clumter r or 2 + consonant, or bafore I ayllable with a la or bb). Strong 8 and b had *pproximatsly tha aus length ma other, non- reduced, mhort *ortlr. Tbe Isat sound chmnw common to aIi dialectr of Proto-Slmvic urns the cwlats elimination of the weak 5 adI. Tbia change mffecced m11 Proto-Slmric dim1eeta. but in certain dialact. it oecnrrad earlier tho in other.. The chrnge awrreatly oriai- natad in the South, where the weak 5 and b dirappearad rerf early, mt .ny rate draady in tha alevaatb century (l~cdfy, maybe even in the taath centary); from tho southern Slavs. the elimination of the weak % and b apread to other Slrrr, ramchimg the ~mtdistant part* of tbe S1arie territory (mch m8 tha Rtlasian North) only tmrrda the thirteenth century. Re dimlmctr inte which Proto-Slavic diriatalrated formed three gconpa: the Sortborn Slavic, the Weatern Slmwie, md tbe Saatera Slmvic, or Rum.ian. The haaima, or Eamtera Slwic, Braup includes thee dimlect~:Great haaim, Byelo-haaim, mad Ukrminim. Each of theme ia dividad in- ~mrarala&- dialect.; Great Raaaira, for inmtmn-, include8 Northern Gremt Rwrian, Southern Gremt basiam, mnd the tranuitional Middle Great Rnraira. mure alao eriata a fairly wide area of trauai- tional dialoota fr0r.Gre.t hamima to Byelo-Roaaian and ftor Byelo-Ruaaiaa to Ukraininn; the Byalo-Runaim dialect ray actumlly be regardad ma a oaqwanca of mub-dialect8 foming rn transition bstrecll Great hadmn mnd Ukrainiau. Ail Enatera Slmvic tongnea ara the daacendratm of on* and the ram0 dialect of the Proto-Slavic lmguqa, a dialect which may ba deaigamted ar Co-or Proto-Bcrssim. Tbia hmnRusmimn lam* gawe diaintemrmted, i.e., cemoad to be m single antity in lin- gnistic evolution, batwamn the middle of the twelfth mud the middle of the thirteenth centariesL; at mu7 rmte, after thia tine, one cmnot record may chmagom affecting a11 the Eastera Slavic dialects. Horerer, it mat be rmarkad that emch of the linsuiatic changma taking place after tk period of disintegration of the Proto-Ruaaiau lutmagu had its om liaitm of difftraion. The bouedary linen of them chmgea never coincide with the boua- dariea of any one of the three principal dialsctm. Therefore, theaa dialetta cnnnot be regarded ma entitie. in the hrthar eralmtion; it my be said that Proto-haaim diaiategrated not into tho.* three dimlactm, but rmthar into m indefinite number of nub-dialect6 which can he divided into three group., ordi- narily bermad dialects: Great Fluaaian, Bytlo-h~iwand Ukraiaian. How let ma conaidar the pacalimritiea of the e~mlutionof li ber8ry languages. Each of the literary Imgaagas of contemporary Europe is prevalent in dafiaite Iingcliotic territory rhieb encompas~em ~evaralrtronaly diffarantimtad mpokan dialeetr; noas of the great literary Impage8 of Enrape coincides completely with any of the apksn popular tonguaa. This is due to the fmct that the fuaetion of literary l.nmmge ia eatiraly different from that of a spoken popalmr Ianpage. A literary lanpaga ia m tool of mpiritual culturu; it ia the wdiol of literature proper, mnd of scientific, pbiloaophie, raligioum and political ~bought. 'Lhia ematus a naed for rn rochlary and ayntax lore developed tbm tboac which mffica in ppular rptech. Of couraa, every litermry lmpaga atem. from oome spoken twpa, umudly from that of the citita, soratirem from the folk Imgnags. ht tba literary language ha. to create a lmrga rtock of new mrdn mud tg work at more definite and .pacific syntactic canatrue- tionr khan thoaa mred in popular apaeeb. The popular mame which has provided the bani. for the elaboration of m literary lan@age =my mppaar mm havins baea forcibly distorted in the procasm of rdaptipn. hd the rorm the popular beaia is apparent in a litermry lamgnaw, the attenget -113 be thim impremaion of distortion which may inter- fere rith the free =am of tbe literary lmngtlrga. Furtherpore, new word. introduced into tba literary lmnmagt are ~ometiruacornpornad of lexical elamant. taken from the Tar- nacrlnr; bat it ir often difficult to dioaomoci~tatbeae ole- mnt. froa the original, concrete meaning they bmre in popmlmr apeaeh and the aaaociation with the primary reaming atand* in the my of accepting the term with the mar *ipificurce - the uipificmce which the litarmry language wald givc it, It im tbsrsfora a diaadraatmge for rn littcrrr langnaga to stmmd too cloae to tha popular tongue, and every literary lm- ewe tends in it. davelopment to frat itself from eucb an rraderirablc kinalip. Oa the other hmd, too great m divsr~nea of the li ternry Imgnage frm the contemprary po~hrlangua80 mmy almo become diradrmntage. Aa regard8 both the sound pmttern lad the grammar, the pow- lrr lmnguagsr amtally drvalop more qmickly thmn the litermry tongues, whome cvolotion in theme respects ia artificially delayed by mchool education and by tbt authority of the so- crllad 'clsaaica.' In certain parioda the literary lmngumgc on th~one had, and the p0pd.r apach on the other, corrmspnd te diffmrent mtag-8 of darelopmeat and become incowptible in the linguistic con- uciou~neaaof 4 vople. A conflict may tbtn aria. between the two slemntm: the mritcen language ritb ita coamervatiar, rad the popular npokan language rith its innovations. Such I con- flict may tad either in the victory of the old literary Ian- @age, or in tba triwh of the popular .peach, which than aerres a# 4 bmain for the dorelopent of II new literary lm- -age; finmlly, tba conflict may reault in m corn ~omime. The remotenuma of the standard f iterary lam@mge from may prrtieu- lmr popular dialect contribatea to the diffuaion of one lita- rary Imguogs over the are. of aeverml apoken tongues. The conflict juat mentioned cm break oat at different point8 of the territory of 4 given literrry l*ngnaga, and the earnen- timl rarrotencaa of the litarary laatgnaga fmm ray local dia- lect~may bring about the following situation. It may happen that the living popular dialect from dich the litermry lam- (111mgt bad once devalopd cawletely diaappeara; or, if thia dialect is atill in ass, it may happen that the literary I-- goaga does net take ,root in the area of thin dialect. The r~anltia~sit~atiou will then ba that the literary laagoage which had ddaelaapd from dialect a in area A finally will tmk* root in area B where the ptedwinnnt dialect b atrongly differs from dialect U. Finally, it im a diatinctiva feature of thm avolotion of tha litmrmry Immtr.gma that they are mble to influence macb other even is the mb~enca of tho.. conditionm of rpmec and tire in which living mpoken l.rytl888. ranally influence oaa mother. A li~ingpopmlmr lmnguago can only iufluenca mothar if both are in om at the rum ti- and in pographicmlly contiagsnt arama. For the literary lragnmgaa, homrar, theso conditionu are not aac~~*ary;m litetmry laummga cm ba ~tmaglyiaflmencad by another one, even if it belonged to m much emtlitr period mnd never mar a neighbor pmgra&ically. Th.8. iaflamcer can bm very divmrse in cbaractor; thay rill appemr nor 48 direct borrowingr of indiriduml wrdr. now ma ~11 imitation of mathoda naod in forming mar words or aer myntmc- tic conntrtlction~. All the80 faaturer of the erolutio~of literary langumgem mat ulmaya bs ken in mind in a rtady of the hiatory of the Bum sim I mnguage.

Old Church Blavmic: it6 orldinm md It. role.- The early recenmion6.- Old 3ulgarlm Churob 131s- tomlo md its propagation.- Chnroh Slavoalo in Rumsla: sound ohage.; the E.S%Q~sad the Weatern BuauLau tradftionr the second Sauth Slavic influence: the unified Ru8sl.n recenmlon. Tbe gomalogy of the Rwairn literary l.n,pmge mmt be traced fnr back, to tha time of St. Cyril mnd St. Mothodium, thm Ap- atha of tk Slara. St. Cyril tranrlatad the amp1 rad msveral other text. of the Scripturea .nd of the liturgicml literatmre into the lammago which it ir cumtwmry to call Old Slauouic or Old Chrrch Slatroaic.Thir t.8 a lmngumga artificially dmrivad from the Slavic dimlect of the city of Saloaiko in Mmcadonir. aimdidact belonged to tbs Proto-Bh1g.ri.n group of the South Slaric dimlaeta; it differed from the other dialeeta of that grow in .ma of itr faaturaa mud m1.o ia its gen8r.l contax- two, vary mtohaie even for its ti=. The raraacmlar of tba Brlanika 8kav8 wra mot am adequata mdiu for the tr8nslation of Grad li~mr#icmltestn, .ad St. Cyril and his brothar, St. Mathdiaa, -ha continued hi. work after bin death, had to iutrduea may new wordr into the Salo- nikr Slavic dimlect. These n*~rords were partly taken from the dialect of the Woravimn Slrrs uons whom St. Qtik and St. Yo- tbdirn cmrried an their nimoiommty work, prtly borrowad from tha Greek, md partly nrtifidaily forled from S1nvic elmmentr dter the pmttern of cwraa padin# Gramk -4.. In the fimld of &vatu, St. Cyril md St. kthodiua on the whole preaarvad the bamic femturaa pecu1i.r to tba Slmvic 1mpmga; yet, in mmny in~taueoathey were mnrblo to reaiat the inflranca of the Greek ,original, 40 thmt their Charch Slavomie testa reflect features of Greek agntmz pmrticularly characteristic for the Greek text of the Scriptrrsa. Tbur cue into baing the Church Slawortic lm@mge, a purely litermry lanprga from ita vary inception, lore or lama artifi- ciml, differing assencimlly in it8 vocablrlary, its ayntu, and itm atyliatic faatmres from that living popular tonye, the Sdonika Slavic dialect, which raa it* bakim. It ram precisely thin adherence to tbs older Greek literary linqiatic tradition thmt helped to traaafom the living apoken diolmer of the Sale- nikm S1ma into m Ianguage of apirita.1 cultare, into 4 Ifin@.#* literary in its vary easanct. We hate aeon that the lmrt sound changa cwmon to a11 the dia- lects of the Proto-Slaric Impage ma4 tbs elimination of tbt weak reduced rowel*. The final dirintegratioa of Pro to-SI&ric did not come mbout until after this change, eomn to 811 it. dimlect*. The trnnalation of the Scripture4 and the crention of the Old Church Slavoaic laaprge war nndsrt*ken by the Slaric riaaionariea befors the elitninntion of tbs weak reduced vomaln began, camaeqnantly, befors tht f inml disrolatioa of Cbmn Slnvic. This circamstance ha* to be kmpt in mind in order to amcertain the plmca md 4igaifiernce of Old Church S1avonie ia the himtory of the Slmric lanslpm~~,Old Church Slmrooic em be wnaidsred a4 the litarary language of the end period of tho primitive Slavic lingtliatic unity. At the time of Sts. Cyril md Methaditla the different brancbea of the Ccrron Slmvie lanmage warm atill able to undargo comon changer, amd Conoh Slavic, ma 4 whole, had not ymt comaad to be an entity in linmimtic evolation. It rny be amid. therefore, that aeparmts Slavic langages actnmlly did not yet axiat mt that time; there exiated only mparmta die- Iectr of one coroa Slavic Imgumgs. Thin made poarible tbm cre- ation of one Slavic litermry lammagt comn to the -hole area of Proto-Slavic. Moreorer, it ran posrible to toke any local dimlect ar tho baair of aucb a coma S1arie literary language. St. Cyril took tho Salonika Slavic dimlact a* the bash of thin litermry langumge apparently only for tba rtaaon that ha himaelf was by birth l Salonikm md v4r proficient in thi~particular dialsct. The trmalation of the liturgical book8 and of the Scripture8 *a4 undmttrltam by St. Cyril aot for the pmrpoae of preaching among the Sl~vnof Salonikn, but for preachin8 to the hravimn., rho apoke a dimlast of tho Proto-Cteehom~ovak grOUp, .ad it ia aipificmt thnt tht Ylormriana, hearing the liturgieml aetvice in the Church Sla~oaicmnpe, accepted thin Imnmmge not am a foreign idiom, but actumlly ma lamgmago of their om. Ihe litmrary lmglrrge, deveioptd in the aintb century, very 8oOB 8pre.d mag all the Slav# rho mra courorted to [%rimti- anitv. ft urn& not prestrred, however, by a11 the I%ri*timnirtd Slave: with regard to proanacimtion (8ound-pattern), pmrtly tm araurr and even to rocnbulary, this laagtlags madmrrent eer- tain chmngea mag various Christian Slmvic groups. We know tbat darn Garmra, .a apoken in Berlin, im differ- ent from the hnrs of a Vienneaa apeaiar; or tbat French' aaund. differently in Prmee, in Belgimw, or in Sritserlmnd; tbat the bglinb of Amaricm and of En:oglond art not exoctly the #-a, md w oa. Thi. is ro despite the fact that in the case of rmjor cont~poraryliterary lmpagea, pro~unciationbaa amhittad to tbt unifying inflnence of the mchool syrtam; on the other hand, practically m11 majot modern lanflagas hnra soma caater, usually tkm capitml of the country, which preridem a mtandard pronunciat~onfor other citiea or ateam. Nothing miri1.r exiatsd in the Slavic mrld of the ninth adtenth canturiaa. The city of Saionika, dons dialect had merred ma the foum- datioa for the literary Lougtlmge, ram of no particular irpor- tnnce in tho life of the Slavs; Salonika raa not even a purely Slavic city, It ia natural, tbarefore, that the t*rioue part. of the Chriatianired Slavic world came to diverge conaidarably from the Smlonikra norm, bath in aomd-pattern rad in grmar. In Mncedoaia the Old Church Slmvonic langnaga preatrrod ita original form for r relatively long priod of time; but in othar ragiona. *mriorr cbmgcs ware made at an emrly dmte, adapting the litararp 1.ngnage to the pacnlimritie8 of local .peach. It mat be pointed out, howerar, thmt theso rere not complata admptmtioaa to the phonetica, gramar adrocmbuluy of the local dimlacta, ao that ws can only aped of locml tarianta of one and the srpa Old Cbnrch Slaronic lanpngo, rhicb in spite of local chengaa preac~redits diatincc indivi- duality. mu4 already at a very early period, 8s a re*ult of locnl alterations, OId Church Slavouic produead a aeries of locml rersiona, or rcceariona. we how of aererel anch mdified local rmrietiia which dmritad directly from Old Church Sla- ~onic.a.g., Yaeedoniaa Church Slavmic, whicb was nearest to the old prototype; Cromtian Church Slrronic (both in Glmgol- itic text#), Old h1gmri.n Church Slmvonic, and Ciaeh anrch S1aronie (in the so-called Kiev Lsafldts*), The *Kiev h4fl.rs9 at. s mil tam~onp rl trwrt 01 a rissml aewdi.8 to tb. Catholic 1Wmterd rltoal, bmr r2ttem ta rh. Charel 81a*omlr lugmy.; tbim tmxt is im the Glagolittc a1pLrb.t with particnhrll a~balcform of y le) lor ti. Ofd ChrreL Ilaronic q lor!piaally prm0emr.d: it), rad 01 8 for rbs claq~r.d tbi; tram, !or m-h, o d m 4 n A 1 imtd of 0 d rs - q a A a or R 0 d 8 8 immred of no d r X d a ThIm artkbrinn tbs m- tion that tL. text ru' uritrsm bl a Cweb tr krari~l,for il tlr C-I lugwe It* ud sf aetmlty corrra#wd to rlm OM ClmrcL Slrrmlc q ard rd* lclrreb

8 Of theme imnadiats Leira of the Cld Uaurcb Slmronic litarmry tradition, the Old Ehlgariu lanmap alone prored capable of fnrtber davelopment. me other bramches soon dscmyed amd dka- appeared; one might mention 48 an exception Cromtima Utmrah S1avonic, which sorrivad lmm~rth~ the other., net im its old forr, howaver, but with a wtrong mbirtura of the hlgnriu rarimnt. COnneqaantly, the only centinumtor of the Old Church Slaronia tradition w.8 Old Bulaarirn Chrrch Slrronic. It repre- aemta. hasrer, an axtanaive revision of thm Qld Church Slm- remic lme~lrgs,ondmrtakem in tba Old WI1a&rlmkin#dor under the patronage of tha B1~lgui.ntmnra, pmiticnlmrly under Tmr Siram the Bibliophile, by Bolgarim rod. ad prierta educated in the Elvamtine trmdition, The mlphmbet of St. Cyril'. invention, tha mo-cdbd Gla#oL- itic mlpbrbst, WM replaced by r new alphabet, nmua1ly, though arromeouly, called CyriIlic Im bettar nam mold k 'ShemiaD), colpoaod on the baain of Greek cmpital latter* with tba dditioa of 8 few comidarmbly mlterad latter8 t&#a fmr the Glagolitic alplirba t. me lsxicml compomitiom of Old Chord Siavonie raa altered too: mmmy mew **or were introduead, either mdelad on the pmt- tarn of corrempondin~Graak mrdm or brromd fror the living hi6nrim toawe. Some mrda of Ibrmvimm origia and =me bor- rowing. from the Greek ware eliminated. Certain word., appu- atly obrolm~centor too urkadly dialectal (of hlonikmn or Yorarimn origin) *.re raplaced by otbcr., .ore widely mmod in the cmlloquid lmgmys of the uppar clamam. of the old hl- gmriao kiagdom. The grmr rma 81.0 partly rmmdalad. A. *bole, the Church Slmronic lsapt*gs took on a mar, rod- emirad ad .era nlrgmnt upact. f n thia new grin, it becua not only tbe official lwguaw of the Church mnd of the Bu1- gar;- rtmta, but a180 pomrful inatrt~ntfor the propagn- rion of Byamtima apiritu.1 cultdrm mmng tha Slavic people#+ N-roua trmnslationa from the Greek, mnde in tbu beyday of th* BPl~nrilakiagdom. brmufir to the Slmic mrld the riches of tho splrituml culturc of Bysantim. In the pf0cem8 of the40 trmrlrtirnm, th4 very style of Church S1awonic 1ibr.t~~~9.8 rorked out, a atyle entirely conditioned by the influence of tlm Greek iitermry lmgamg~md the Greek litetmry trmdition. This atyle hmd taken root .(I dwply thmt it ma mmad not only in trmslationa, but in ori6in.l *orka of BaIuarirn author* em well. Tbos tba adherenee to tbm Greek li termry-linyis tic ttdi- BLarmie H 0 b - CncL ' aoci' CLmrcb 8lrro.i~ * r d - C#eL 'usi4, atc ). nr r-rlhd '~ryl. krll*rmn' I. 1-t of litrmiea! tnt mzeprdiq to tha krt8rl ri!rrI) prwnt th mrr Yurm; thi. tart ol thha oi t5. tarnth tatuy I#uqmutiomdLf oi Cuck bri#i& Tbwa 'hy~Mlqm' rhicl bnidm %I. fatm dimeum.d dmr, muas -1 otkr mcmlr, ptm. ti. uiatmca st th* ttr in maria md lohrri. of .wid r.umior at tk Ckrrch &rmic lull h ?LO CLmrcl $QWOB~C ttditiw fm hk~ihU4 Bold. *Wm dild wC tk Wor't,aihtom md tk mR~m.kJktmm .n the -1, mmrfrflm -iru d Clxreb Slawnit d#~t.01 wbortgit tion did n~tolnclr~n, but bacua area stronger aiscs the ti=. of St.. Qril and Uetbdius. Otigi~dly loem1 mdification of Old Church siavonie, the Old Bn1gariu Church Slmtoaie la~gnagain it. turn ram dirs~li- natad uoaa the otbr Slavic moplam, mnderping once again local chmrr mug those peaplea. But the condition. nor rare aowrht different. Firat, the divergence batwe- the Romrn mmd the By;mntiaa Cboreh bacua strongly ruked by that tire, no that tbe Sfwic litnrsi'c lmptlage, which in it. necond, Old BuIgmrian, varrioe bud btmn m irportmt ohmael of Byamtins iaf~uanaa, cmld no longer aped uon6 thoae Slarm rho nor rare under tho mmthority of thm R-mn Cburcb. And meemdly, tha Old Bmlgariaa Church Slavonic language had became mmra myatow- atired .ad definite in it. foru; it, therefore, ao lonmr lent itself to mnjer locd chm~a.%so locml mdmptntionn which werm madm affected mminly the nonnd aystem amd the 8rm.r only to a vary rrall extant. Old Ssrbiu murch Slnronic (mppaariag firat in rmllmcript. of the twalfth csatmry) and old floaaian Church Slowoaic {in manuaeripta frum the eleventh cartury 0.1 were much local mdap- taeionn nf Old Balgerimu Church Slnvonie. A third rmriaat urns Middle hl#arim, which becue prevmlent in hlsaria in th* twelfth century? Of these three, tm died out lea~ingno deacon- d*nto, .ad only one, the Ruosimn branch, nmr~iwmd. E)I1 Rummian moil, the Church ShrnPic lmmyia, brought chiaflp from Balprim, woon underrant certain chm~ip it. .onad pmt- tarn, Tbna tho Chrrch Slaroaic maom1 vorela born ma the luge md oral1 jar) #re r~phcedby the rmlm r md a mhicb dewal- opad in the rpokatl Ruamimn Impage from the primitive Slavic ammalm. Ploaira r {g) , alien to tho.. muthsrn Ruamiam dialoat. into rhono .ram Church Slarouic ru iatrodmoed arrlimst, rma replaced by mu ampirat* F Ib). normal for tho- dialect.. This pronnnciacim spread arm to the northera .re. rhara the mpoken 1am89aga hmd a plomira fl (g). On tha rlmlm, horsrar, Raamirna at firat ntro-u w follow aa ~mctly08 pomaiblm the atmdard

pronuacimtion of the Southern Slmvm, and in old hamian Church Slm~onictext. one + frequently eacount.ra tracer of w rrtifi- cia1 dimcoreion of pronnncimtiom duo to m offort to mprohca Sootham Slavic pronunciation of that timu. It ahomld ba noted that origiamlly the pmnunclation of Cbreb Slavonio vmried in the differant part. of Rpmaimn tarri- tory. Kiev adbarad mat attictly to tba Southern Slmvic .tan- duds, .betsaa in Normrod uad mlso in the momtbraat {Galicia- Imlhynia) the influence of the local sound pattern. ram atrowor kt in general local change. conceraed mainly tho noold pmttrm of the 1mm-i o~emaioadRwmian grammtical ending. occur in text. only a. &ace rimtake.; the Iexicml ceqo~itionof Church S1mrmnic remainad antirmly mnmrched. In 4ach a rlightly modified upte~,Church Slmronic in mcient Urnaim urn0 looked up011 ar the only literary Imymge lad raw maad in original rorkm of Rnmmimn author.. The mncient Rme8inn aurch Slnvonic pronunciation, which at firat *.rid locally, latar aehiared anifopmity. In eomnaction with thm diviaioa of the whole Ruomimn territory between tm~ ~tmtuain tbm fourteenth ctntary, two Ruminn canter. of tho Church Slmvmnic lmgamgo arose: one caatern, in Moaeor, wd the other, reatern, rhicb rm4 finally locmliud in Kiey, ?ha pmnnn- ciatioa and gr-r in bath Center8 rare, on. tha whole, idem- ticml, but the atyls of original lad of tranmlatad work. wma rather different. hriug the awperiod Church Slmronic littrature mms devd- oping awng the Soothern Siar8. In connaction with thio dhrul- opwut, tbm ntyli~ticaof the Umrch Slaronic lanmmga rere gradually wore md more atabilired. But, mr l result of the firltirh coaquaat wad of tba daatructioa of the aoutb Slmvic kingdoam in the lmttsr part of the fomrtesath csntmry, the litarmry activities of the Somthera Slnra rate plmcad in ex- trmouly mmfa*ormble condi tioan. Indi~idudrepenantatire4 of aouth Slavic culture b0g.n to migrmte to Ru~siaat that tine; they were very well rtceirad there, md their litetmry mbili tien were imediataly pat to good u.0. Thir reaalted in mn iafurioa into the tradition of Rumaia of the Srbinm mod Middis 3uigarirn Charah Slavonic trndition mt the very time when, in the Balkan., thio tradition bad bagan t c doc1ina? By tbe aeranteenth contury, the Serbian md blgarira arch Slrronic tradition. hmd completely died out ma iadepadant off- sprimgm of the original Old h1gmri.a Church Sl~vonicabock. &It before thair extinction, they had brought new life to the Church Slmvonic tradition of Aussi m. 13y the asrentstnth century, the Church Slavonic trmditlon hmd mrrirad only in two centat.: in Yomcor and in Kiev, each of the80 canters hmving it. am apharm of inflrenca. The tm trmditiona. tbnt of ka~nmd that of Kiev, were wt entirely identicml. After the Ukraine bad joined Itamcow in the middle of the aerentaenth century, the comximtenem of the EWO tradition. W84 ao longar possible: their uaificmtim became neeeasity. The process of unification, borarer, +ma not a painls~aoaa. nu mctivitier of Kiev acholmra in MOBCOW and the rerimion, under Patriarch Nikoa, of Liturgic text. according to the wemcera standards,. as aot in Lm* mad in Kiev, Lder tbe htb81wk iatlwrcm m cl M lnrm ndo Ii tb 1rtab1l.L.d p- muwiatim, nrroriw rh ortlid mrtrr%.r pra.moi.tim oi -.i. row tbu, a) 1b1 ru roworad km =nth wda u o. H-. rhn mloulr gara ri~to a violant atom. Fiaally, in tba wventuencb een- tuq, the Kiev tradition gained a complete victory tnd firmly ewtabliahed it. rule in bscow, betoring the eomn bmmi.n tradition, rbila the defender. of the tradition of Moaeow, the Old kZi8v#r#, mars driven into the omderground. Haturally, the rietorioum kiev trmdition itaelf naderwent few changea, adjenting itaalf to the new aitnmtion md absorb- in8 wmt of the traits of the Yo~eortradition. Ihmn the colllon Runaim tradition arose from the mion bat- raen the Eastern mad the Weatern tradition, with the Iattur predominating. The corron Ruasfan Cbmreh Slavonie lmguaw, formed in tho sareatoentb century, and which, in tha comrna of the preceding cemturits, had ebaorbed the nwtbarn Slavic ~rrdi- tion, a trmdition by that tine mxtiact, became the only repro- zentatiru of Church S1mronic continuity and the lsnguam of all tho Orthodox SLa~icChurches? Since that taut the Sorthem Slav. hmve amad in Qtthodtrr liturn the Rm~irararaion of liturgie text., with a11 the peculimritiaa of hasinn prosun- cimtion, mran if slightly modified by what may be tarad r nativa 'accent' of the Sosth Slavic rarnacolar tongue.?' In Ruaaim itmelf, Church Slaronic apparently radarrent only ma aound chnnga in the sillteenth century, l chmnge which bron#ht it clarsr to the raeular literary Jmnpege: thim ram the ioms, in proaunciation, of the distinction htreem % (X) mnd d {e)?"

Orl$ina of 8soalar lltsrarr Russian31r-Rwslan in the Libh-fan Wata and In Mumcovg.- Weet8m Rua~iah and Western lgrwpaan influencsa on 1Ltcrra~Ru8eiaa.- Rummian md Church Slavonie: tbelr differantiation ad their blandlug; the sgntheuis of hbh vera8culaP and tbr Churcb Slawaic elammnts ID literary &maim. The Cbnreb S14vonie lamwage im it. Roami*a versim ran tba foundation of wcular literary Ruamiu~mhieh derelopd from it as r resnlt of rn proeeas which re .hall nor i~traee. * n. titq6e 1 m~ 0: RL. hiat. CL-W wici. .pp-tll Will4 direatl im rk%**rr L-iau CLarei lihmit trditiam with .plr caeeamicu to t~ L~iuptol.rei*ti~, ma pmib~ta- imib- ei t~a ~urtm tr44itioa. ** Tbu * (71 in mmaloqa u u lit, ud both bl ud lrl u 4 1.1. cou-ta~ * 0m.r its iatatiw: svLjat, ttj~e k-m SXfr fur 'me ud oitr dimpLlea the mtmk TkOld kfiavmrn -wad tlia dhthctiom, praaltiq I td after coup -urtm w (el. I..., withor1 g.l.tdiuti~~of tb mmut, tho cmwamu h4 thbdilr bforr * m. In pro-kpllu Rud the varioor tm8iwal dialeat. of the h8mi.n llagniga were, in cartaim manaura, thr official lu- mrn@asof tbair raspactire citi.8 and prineipmlitiea. Work. rmligion8 in teaor, or gmn*rally dealing vith apiritu.1 mattera md the Church were rrittmn in Cburcb Simvoric; ma uere, as rule, wan purely litarmy workn. On tha other hmd, datevar rmm wnnaetad with bneine~m mcci- rltiao, or mith practicml lifi - chartar., dead., aeewlmr lmsi818ti~eact., rill., inventorii@, mad the lib - rmm wittea in the local Rnaaira dinleet with the aporedic iatroduetion inta the text of sepmrmts Cbnrch Slawonic mrdm adexpremaionm. With tiw thim writtom lamgnmge, pmraly Rn&aimn in it. losicrl -go- aition and in it. p.rrtienl. nyntactic mnd atylirtic structure, grdually became atabilised. After thm division of hamian tarritmry bmtraam tw gmat atmtaa, Mumcorito ond ti thmmirn-Rasmim, t+a rmcb aecul?r, bm8iae.a-Roaaila languagem dareloped - Weatern Rumion and Mu.- covite. Both laagn.tl.~mwere dm tbe colloquiml lla6uag- of the official. mnd of the rmling clmaaes of thm rampacti+a atrte.. The Wantern Rnmsian secular buainmsa laagua~eras axpeead firnt to r Czech, than to a atroag Poliah irflasnee; the lnttrr are* rith the poloniring of the Runrim ruling c1ma.r~ in Aaasimn territories mder Fbliah d-inion. Nnrlly, thim Warntern Rumsian *ecallar bmminc8m-l8rflags, a1mo.t colpitttly polo~ised,cemaed to be r4ed in offieiml mctm mad rar rnphed by Poliab. It ran nlaa dialodgd by pure Polimh aa the emover- amtionmi 1angu.m of tbe higher clrmmes. Bmt before this final decmy of tha hatern Rraaian ameular-buainrrs 1.sguage. an mttempt was mads to develop it imto mpeci.1 aecalrr-LitarorY l.n(rwrge for =me in mrkm acbolarly or politicml in nmtura, md ml.0 in bellem-lettres; r, csrtmia -ant of Church Slatonie elements urn4 inttoduesd into it for thia porp0.e. The rertllt vra motley and folnl~a~mixture of Poliah mnd Church S1m~onic, apacificmlly Rreaian elemmta baing rlm0.t co3plet.l~ absent. In the wrenteenth century, tbie Church SLavortic-Pol ish- Ueltefn Rurria~rmn still 11.d quit0 axteu~iv~lyas m aeeolar literary lnnpage. Wlt it did mot smrvive lone: in Kb8ni.n territories which reuind oadar the pouur of Polmd, this lu- pmpma didodged by pure Polilh, vhile in arema which joinad Yoacor, it died out, lsmvin#, ho=armr, deep tracaa in the Ranniam literary lmngorga. nibs #.cow .ocular-bnmiaesm lraguaga ma. formd on the bmaim of a middle Grtat RnrLirn dimleet, the diaaet of the city of Yoscow, adbecus not only the official lamp.@ of Yoscow go~mrmenteffieas, ht ah0 the wavarmational imneam of Yomeow officirldom. Bosid*. atrte met.. maliterary work8 rare writ%- in thim langumge, ~rkavith no rneci.1 claim8 to Iitermry ~mlne- for in.taneo, daacriptiona of jouraeya to dimtaat comntrf a#, or the fwu. pupblat of Koto;ikbin. Tba Chrrch SIm*ooie lan-mp tsrainod, bomsver, the literary lm- @age propst, in.rbich not only mrka of religioia sdifitatioa ' *om written, but a1.o mrka of echolarmhip md fiction. Ia the amrentamnth century the Church S1avonic lamwage in it. hacow varaion #a. supr~sdedby the conb8d~ Church. Slaronie lmnpage. derelopad on the basim of tha matern h*aian (Kiev) tradition. This brought mbout ehmngea in the coaveraationd lanmaga of the highst clraaea of Rnaaian aocis- ty am well. Blewnta of the weatera Rum*im aeerlar lla~mga bagan to panetrate into tbia laaptam, partienlrrly into the conrsrmmtion~llutma@e of circlsm of reatera orisntntion. bring Petar'a tire, them grompa aaa~lleda leadinm role. Nmtira Hierltaa mad raatarn Ranairma were riaing to promi- ne~ee.In wmnection ria die, the voambmlary of the convar- mationml lmnem~e6f tba LIghar clanaas (and through !it 8l.0 the mmcm1.r-literary lad burearcratic rocabulmry) received psrmrfnl inf lux of slemau~aof the Wartern Rraaian meculmt- bamimem lanmmgs; this Imammea itmolf, borerer, soon camsed to exist. Ta the borrowin#. from Western Rramimn aeea1.r-baainaas Ian- pago r mltitude of wrdn rma soon added. borrouad fro* *.ti- ou. Rommnce mnd Garmanic lmgnn@m. %urn tha conreraationml- bnainar. lmapmga of tbe higher claraea of Rmmifin society, while rerminiag Middle Great Ru~aimm,hmcovite, in it. pronun- ciation mad grmamr, has lont much of the pmrity of ita &.at Roa~imnfomdmtion in the aphera of vocabalary. me defiritrtion between the dmriaa of U~aicbSlrraaie and of pure Rua~irn,in the first part of the aigbteanth cantory, gonerally reaminad am it h.d beon earlier, with the only dif- ference thmt due to changed cmlturrl-Biatorie.1 condition., mscnlar literature ermcipatod itaelf wra and more from reli- gion. ii teratots; thia raral tad in r area tar diffaren timtion in the realm of lanpmge. In the conrciononer~of ra ehcated Rnmriaa thrra aeta&lly coaxiattd at 1em.t three langnmgta, each rith its pmrticuht mpberm of applicmtion: pare C?inrch Slmvoaie, used in mrship lad in mtka of religious aontmt and finly ma~cimtedwith ths ~pbereof religioai conceptm; Ruaaimn proper, maad in prme- tical buminera lifb and ia discnaming aimplm domatie topics, adamecinted with the sphere of prmctic.1 everyday lihl nnd finally, rimplifiad Church Slavoaic lmn~agansmciatsd dtb redar lamming mud Iicbrmtmre, worm or laon hi&-fhm rad 80lwn but witboat that mptcific quality which ch&rnctecired purely religion. lof tinear? WI.1 mntim ~#tOm lLdm ad tk writtam 1 weDi th CIHUEYMI. 0.- p.nlyR.rim iir *orb& a ~~uc%vmie *-st* which maim to tk~0werUZtW.L - mq. -hub U IDlrBll), w,ate.). pD-*r, tL. Oh*"mi" .Lrr,t it3 a"- ion ue.hif -t I. th.l.r*M fi . L.~w.thu cnmr.t.atid Tbu, I* the migMual eutrm u4 am1at.r. tll 1 cd afIIci.ldOll did mot PO~IE~&with oitL.t th lit-- = th ca.t.r..timqw.. li This lnngmaga of necrlar Jitaratmro ( ' S1m.o-lksrisn' 1 in ita lexical content w.8 pormly Church Slmvonic, differing from the liturgic 1-RW only ia that it firmt nvoidsd md thon el%- nmtad certain .pacifically 'seripturml' words (t.g., a6ie, *, WpS, HBOFR in tbe rerain# of one#, etc. ); but im it. gru- =.tical strnctnra this lanmmga mpproaebed con~ers~tionnl Rrpaaian, htb ia nbmdoning certain apecificslly Church Slavonic forrm [e.~., mcb preterit toma M mm, ri-e; the dud; tba dative in -am; tho plmr.1 in -088, etc. 1, and in maiag apecifieally Rnsaiam flexiona and syntactic conatrmotiona. Of there three Ianmmgsm, which lived towchar in the con- acionmntsm of the edacmted haaim, tbe pure Cbareh Slrwonic atood out a. repmrata liaguirtic entity, rith fixed, firrly defiaad mphare of application. The remaining two - tba purely Ruaaiaa buaine*. lanmaw, .ad tha rirplifiad Church Slaronic of aecalar literatot* - rera per- ceived not an tm diatinct lmnguagea, ht rather 4. two differ- ent atylea of one and the 8UE lmpa@gs; th bomd*ry botwsn tbar gradumily became learn clearly defined. At the mum tima, the pronmci~tionof tb silqfifiad Church S1awonic Lltrrgmaaa appara~tlya1w chub#ed, mppre.uhiag pore Aursiam. Thur, the .me mrd of Chnrcb Sh.*-io orilia ma pro- mouncad differently in a liturgic text adin m s*eulnr text (e.g., in the firmt case with okanie amd in the aacoad with akanir*). Tho gtaumrieml ayatw of the aecolar-litar4ry Inngumga rma alao going through 1mprt.nt chap. whicb worm bringing it ator clobar to the grmnr of tha ~ern~e~lar. Fimmlly, unifomity began to deveiop a1.o in the laxic~l .tack. Isxicsl elmments of the secular-litsrmry l.agmmg~ pene- trated into the apokea bosine~a1rsg.tla~. E~idwtlg the reamon for thir rma the rise 05 tba ~ulturrl11~01 ~f ~ducatod Aoarimna .ad carreaponding change in the topiu of evmryday co~rer~8tioa.Formurly, m*rryda.y conrsramcion revolvad eqeia- miraly in the apbare of plnin, aimplm ratters; conv~ro8tioar dealing with hider aabjecta were ~uaual,ad tbi8 PPP~U~IIOC~ was erphaairad by ahift to 8 different lexical, gtmatital mnd aymtmctic pattern. Bat gradnally new educmtad clram developed, for whicb higher anbjeeta were no lonmr vcoron. A8 a result the boundary batman the 1aapmga of everyday life md 'lofty' literary lmgtlnge (or rather - style1 dismppearad. Word. md phtames peculiar to the mecolar-lrtrrrm~f lmugnage began to be =.ad even in simple, everyday coa~er~ation. - Thur, the npokan lmgoage of oducatsd people gradu.11~ became more li tarary. Conreraely , tha secnlar- li ternry 1nngum- baing rrssifird by tba.slidnation of certain Church Slrromic lexical olerants replaced by correapnding Rnasiaa elanntn. It im aipifielat that chi; happaaed particularly ia the tmae of m~rilinrymrda Ie.g+, nw, m, atc. 1, which are uned4 00 to sped, automaticallye with a minimu of ararmnema in the choice betwema mtylintic a1temmtives. By the mad of tha ei&taenth century, tba apokea lmgtlam mi the leadiul c1a.mem of Ruamirrr dncated aociety hmd bacw .o 'literary* mnd the written Impage wed by them had bacon mo 'rusaifiad* im it. mrphalogy mnd agntax, that the coaleacenca of both them lmguagsr became inevitable. Tornrd the beginning of the nintte*mtb century, thi. com- le~c~ceactually took placa. The eonreraational lan@a#a of the Rummiam iat(h1ipatmia .ma genermlly accepted mr the lite- rary 1nmpmge aud it began to be oead in a11 kind. of rritia~ from private letter. to philawpbicml treatiaan OF Tor-. Of cotlrma, differences curreaponding to rmrioue npbaraa a# nma of thi~Inng~ap did not disappear antirely: md them differonce. determine r greater or 8 l#&atr proportion of Church SI.ron5e elmants in a Ihrmsisn text. Pmt. of tba first half of tba nineteenth century uaad a lmrge number of Church Slaroniq *ads whieb -re ne longer usad in proas (a.g., w, ~BB,om, m,etc. 1. On the ether bandr h8.i~wrda and phrmaan quite emin ptoae were .voided ia poetry. Skien- tific lmgnam included many wra Church S1mrmic word. thnn the lm~ageof belle.-lettrea. Ibia ha~o longer felt, bor- war, n m difference between conversationnl and a apeeific- ally literary l*n@ag~,but marely a4 8 rtyliatic diftsranca, the obaerranc* of whieb hmd nothimg obligrtory mhmt it. It mhy be .aid, tbrraforr, that the aontarporary IRmasim literary llagnam wam the remit of the 6rafting of the old cul cured 'garden grortb' of mtr& Slaronic to the 'wild grortb' of the coareraational lmngnrgm of the ruling clammem of the Rusnimn atmta. The Rm8si.a literary langtlm~ia m direct heir to this Old Church Slavonic [email protected] which was cremted by St.. Cyril and bthodina md became the camon lit.* rary 1rn.r.~ of mll Slavic people. at thm ti- when tbe priu- c~neetadwith the purely natioa.1 hrb-Crmti.n tradition of Da1macimn (Rmgnmnrr) litarmtare of tbe Runaiaaanca. rboae Im- gtlmge was darelopad on the bm8ia of the loeai populnr dialect of Dt~bromik(Rngusa) under the atrong infhanea of Itdim. The nodern Serbo-Croatian literary Imagumw mrooe abmptly, bm~td the folk dialect. The foundat of thin laqaaga ran the daring reformer Vmk Karmd'rib ( 1787- 1862 3. Thaa, in contrmat ta the bimtory of the Ruaaian liturmry lan- guage which r.8 charmcteritod by tha orgmic continuity of it. dtrelopmant, the hiatory of the Serbo-Croatimn literary lmn- wage ir marked by a ahmrp md A cornplat* break with tradition, break which, furthemore, ram roiuntary aad not iqoaed, 'Iba rodern Slovenm literaq lanpmgt ia mlao baaed on the modera rpokon vernacular and likewins doe. not adhere to any old tradition. It ahoutlld only bu noted that thim lmpaga rma expaeed to the inflnaaca of the Sarbo-Cromtirn literary 1m- created by hk~.r.dii<: and tbmt tbim influence ia un- doubtedly atill increasing bec.uas of tbe onion of the Sloranm~ rith the Serb. and Croat* im m single atate. mtba weatern SImtic literary lmnpagus fror the verl beginnin& bad no atrong tie4 rith the Old Church SLavoaic trmditiona. Trna, %himtrndition enterad Bohemia in ita time, but it rma auppteaad and had no dsciai*a infimmnge en the Old Crecb lm- gum-. TBm latter bbew a written 1angm.g~ mra or lea. iade- pendently im tbe thirtamntb csntnry (probably *+en earlier) md it very awn becus not only the Ilapapaof tba atmte bat mlro a litarary langmga. It. basia'raa the living spoken lam- gtlap of the Cacch aobiLity and townsfolk. but it took mbape aa a literary lmprge rainlf in tk prae08. of trmdation fror Latin and partly frm the'Gemrn. Tham laagun6es played tbs 4.w role a. the Greek laamage in the formation of Church Slavenie: new rorda, rhea they were not airple borroringa from Latin and Genmn, rare croatad by oodaling rarnaealar linpis- tic matorial oa Latia and Ganm. Though at firat it had dimleatml vari.tionn, thia Old Czech lmguage gr&dnally bec- more and morn hommgenaoua, confomiae itaelf to the Middle Csach dialact. Through tba metirity of mamy Csach utiter~,e~pecially poets, in the foorteeath century, and that of Jm RUB rad the am-callad Csech Brrthrun, tbs Clrech hapage by the aixteeatb century bcmmo well atabilitad in form. Wlt unfavorable circuartmsem interrupted it. further growth, and for m long tire the Ctach literary tradition dia- appeared namrly completely. hly at the end of :the eighteenth md the balinaing of the nineteanth centnriua did the resaianance of the Czech literary lmapage begin. 'lhe leadera of the Creeb remain~anceturned than not to the coatenpormry apoken dialect., but to the inter- rhpted tradi tioa of the Old C=aeh language of the and of tba mixteenth century. Of courmm, thia l~pagehad to ba modara- locta, thm Poliah literary Imnyam c-ld not be loc.liaad on dialectd rap af Polad. Tho library trditioa of the Poliah lmgnmgm continuad mith- out interruption *-or aincm tho fourteaath century. mi. lit*- rary traditim im bat.elf-contminad: only mt the besinning of it. ati8twee did tha Poiiah litermy immngm mdergo fairly mtromg Caech inflnance. Lmter. hawever, during the wriod of tk Casda remdas~cem raveran iaflummc~ray be obamrred: that of th Polimh lamma- mn the amrly-or-mt-d lodarn Csacb. The Slovak literary l~gnwtrdlditioa hgm qnita lata, in the #ighteanth centrry, at perid of decline of thm Csach ttmditioa, rhea the Cmeh litsrary language wuatmrcely 4nr- ririna in .ma11 nuder of popular pmmphlata. In thim period Slovak bag- to appemr in populmr publicmtKona (writtan, for &a mat par&, by the Jemmita), bmt actually only ma didaetal rarirnt of Cmch. Throu&ont the e1Qbtwntb century. literators in the Slovak lwgaya, on tk whole, -wined on thin lmval rad only in the 1830'. begla la intensive elmbmratim of the modern Slo+mk limrmry Lanmagm on th. barnis of the Middle Slovak dia- lacto. In apite of tha effort. of thm forador* and rain figarea of SlorlL literature to dram noparating liaa betraen Slovak md Caech, the tendency, nmtur.1 for t3u SIormkr, to join the Caaob litarary tradition eoald not be opposed. Tha di ffewncma betrean the Slovak d Czech literary 1wageu are chiefly in gr-ar and phonexica; their roclbolmry ia Jmnt idantiad, mspcimlly ia dmtrnet wrdnolom. The Ltrsatim literary lrngu~m(Upper-Luaatimn rad Lmwar- Luamtinm) da~eloped,it might .be maid, in th* ninet*entk century, aiaca bmfore thi. tila tbero enistad in theme lagomgem only a wall number of taligioum wrkm (tbe oldeat one. belonging to th* aixtmonth osatur).). Yodnrm Crech had vita a atrong iaflu- enca om thm Laaatir~literrry l*amagma, but in the run tbey arq baaad on liviaa folk dialeutm. Th., it may be ..id thar althorn& mad of the prmaant-dmy Imatern Sl*+ie 1itarary lau~mgeaderelqad imdepmdentlp fron n living npoken idioll. revertblama they are a11 bound tmgachor with curtain owniiteruy limmintic traditior. ht this tie ha. the chnrmatmr of mutual inflmaaae ratbmr tbmm of ape- craaion; tba center ~f thim iaf~aoncorw the Cmech litornry luguam, rhiob ia tha Middim bmatroatly influenced Polish. .ad in #dam tima. Slovd md both Lusmtian Langumpa. v - Ukrainian .nd Bursiarr.- The modern Ukrminian lite- rary laa$uags: its arfifieiallty: the break with the Cburuh Slavonio md a&herenae to the Westera 8lavla trrnditf on. Tks dem Ukruwian litmrrry laamage -met be cornaidered in cannectioa with the Wo~tmrmSlavic litermry lumawa, AT thowgb the npoken Ukrminian lurgumge ia elome ralatira of tbe Great Rnaaiaa spoken lutgam~.tho Ukrminim literary 1.r-y. ad- herd not ta the haaim Chureb SAmvomic, but to the Polimh, i.0,. the Wmatera Slavic literary liagniatie crmdition. Thim fact dwerven mpciml atdy. Firor of 111 tk qnsstion mrisae of the cotralmtion betwaan the Ukraiaiau mnd the Great Ruaniao dialect*: are thay indapmr- dent lugmagar or oaig dimlmctr of the 4wlangnage? Strmmgo na it ray aaem, it in ioporaible te mommr thir qmeatioa om the baoi. of linmimtie a~idemmalone. Whether two cloaely ralrtd twgnem are dimlaetm oi onr Irnwaga or t.o iadependent 1.n- g0.p. dapmda on hw macb tho axirtia~gpamatic.1, phnnatic md lexical differancea betrmma thu achnlly iwpudm mutual andarmtrading batwean member. of the tm groups. Tbir cmneot be reamared by .a objective mtaadud. Bverything dopendm on the dagrae. of renaitiritl of rn given people for liagaiatie differ- enran, .ad thia ran.iti~ity vuiem with differeat paopler. It ahomld be notmd. eopscially , ra rmgardr Fibatern Slmrm, thut damre Ukrriaianm md Grant Ranri-r lira aide by sib (im re- cently settled re~ionmmnd om tha athnogrmphic buudary brtwaea tbe two group., m.g., in cartun part. of tba Voroarab and Ilnrak regions) thay uaderatand each otbmr without difficulty, thorn& each apeah hi. om dialecr with hrdly any adjoatrsatr to the dialect of him neighbar. Trum, them tookacta rmaally occur betwean speakera of the Southarm varimty of Gremt Runri*11 on the OM had and the Northern or Eartarn Ukrdmiau dialact. on the other; if the contact mra between a native of the Arch- an& rmgion and w8mtern Ukruaiu, r Ugro-hanira, or 8 Clutsnl from B&@~inr,it mrrt ha rupponed thmt mtrd ardar- ntmndiag .odd bo more Ciffiealt. Ehr t9 tbia it ray be rejoined that Suw ltld a Tyrolian rotlld hardly rodmrrtd each rJar, macb apemking hir om dialact, rmd a Uil~~aead Sicilian would not underntmd each ather mt dl. Thus the differenem betwen the Maaian (Earterm-Slavic) toawe. - Great Bursiur, Byelo-Ruarian .ad Ikrainiea - arm not so gront ma to praraat co~lnicationbat-. the 8peakar8 of theam topema. OIr the other bend, diftswnoaa betrswa tb.r are 31. nlatively recent. Phonetic cbarrcteriatics differentiating the three basic flnaairn dimlectm ua not older thmn tba thittaeath COBCP~~'; voc.buluy differencea, which nr* eapecinlly irpor - tmnt rincm thay interfere loat with mutual c-unicmtiom, do- *eloped primarily in the epoch of Polish rala over Ileatarn Rtrsmia, They coluiet chiefly in tha buge nuder of poioaiamr in the Ukrainiaa md Byelo-flnsniam epokea lmmgumgar, i.e., wrda mad axprtraiona either directly ~rrowudfrom Poiiab or craatmd on Poliah modal. and alien to the Grant Ruaeian apokon dimlmctn. Tht differencer bcewaen the three mmin Eaatern-Slmric dio- lectm are, com~eqmantly, neither very wide, aot of vary old otigin. But ewom if diffmraacma batwaen Great flmsaim mud Ukrai- nimn mre older and wce proforrd than they mctually rra, it would by no raa.4 follow that tbsy call for tha craation of .II htaimim literary langaaga dimtinct from Rmamim. It nmmt h .aid in thin counectio~that there fa no ramson to hlie*a, ma it in mo often dona, that tw dimlmetn, bran mtrongly dif fmrentiated, w4t nuccar mriiy develop t*o dim tiact li ternrp Ianguagea. Tba liriag language. of lodern Europe clemrly contrmdiet tbia via*. hch of the great litarmry 1.n- @age. of Europe (French, Itali~,bgliah, Germso) pravailm in rn territory lirguimticmlly math laam bowganeo=. tham thmt of tho Eartern Slmvie ethnic group. The differoaces between how Gmrman (Pisttdsrrtseh) and High Garman (058rdm~tseh),or the difiereecea betreen rhm dimlectn of Northern Francm mnd of Provence are not oaly atronsar, but d.0 con*idarably older tbmn thoaa betrean Ukraimimn, Byale-Aueeian and Great Rmsaimn. Tha differancam in them three principnl Enatern Simvic din- Iecta are M older thln tbr twalfth conttiry. bmlisnmn lad Hi& Gornmn, m the uther band, mppenr mr two independent md internally differentiated laaguagaa im the anrliart period of medieval German litarntnre (thm hegimming of th* ninth .ad of hbu eighth cantarl rrrpectiv~ly); the differantirtion brtrean French proper mnd Provengnl goes back to the enrliaot period of tbe roianiration of Gaul?. 'Ibu., it rnn not linyi&ticallyaeca88nry to create 4 repa- tata Uktminim literary Impage. All the Ematarn Slmra (Gremt Roaaimmr, Ukrainian. nnd Byelo-Rm~nimnm)coold -11 hmte limited thamralrem to the as0 of 4 aing1m literary iangm#a, eapcially ainc+ repreaantmtivaa of m11 the principd Eamtern Slavic dialmcta took put b the &+alopmant of thia buoa- Ruarira literary lmnpmgm. Fartha-re, ra re hrm rema, there once existed a pmrticalur Wantarn Ru~aimnliterary llagum~., which ended it. independent existence after the amimn of the k tk rold rm4m l*.diyrto xkahwlmtiom of cclm Purim rnnitr 1.1 artic2.m It1 h-) b .kitat itt fw olavioclm PHlolql~ I, Il#fll. rpr cfmlir p#. Ut It. " tbia 1. rto tru of th lyyu nf Imropo. Tb-, th popmlatba of tlr btlurlald. sp.& putll tbm hrhucomiu &&kt 8f tho 6.- lugmap, put1 hbiu tclmlr din to A* 10-hmJ: tWrm niau, kmwer, bat om. liu- tw, Lul. im th"hl. 01 & Ukraine with ~rcory.It. diaappearmce ma* not brought about by aors @*~r~entdintotdiet: the langruga becws melaas. Nererthmleam, l new Ukrnf dm li,terary 1-g~- did arise. 1t at the end of tho aighteanth century, without my kind of gbnatic mnnsction with tha extinct Ierr Rarairn liwrarl layap. I,P.btljmre*aki ia gemrally cgaidered to be tha founder of the new Ukcainina li tarmry 1anm.g.. Thia author amad the poplplmr Ukrdnim dialect spoken in tbe Polta~are- %oa ia him word. (~neida. Ratalka Pol tauko, Hoska&4arivny&, OhInjaaju rurmkinu). btljarar~ki'awork hloap to that poetical genre in which the am of a deliberately popular Ion- wage ia appropriate btcauae it ia jeutifiod by the vary 8rbjeat-oattar af tbs work. The greateat of Ukrainian poet,, Tarra kvbmko, roproducea in mat of his wrkn the apirit mad the ntyh of Ukrmiaim folk poatry, md ia hi. case, too, mrs .ad content wtivmte the ume of tho popnlmr #-ken Impam. ' In thsns poetical work., aa wall a. in the prom aarratiw*. of tho better Ukrainiua m~thorawhich deal with paaannt life, th 1.1lguago in dmlibarately popular, deliberately mn-Iitarary. Writing in this genre, an author conacioualy limit. hiumlf to a ~phermof iangea mad concsptr for which the lexical material of are1088 folk-lmn@qgm provides adequate wur4 of mxpramaian; he chooaea theme which, for it. adequate tremtatst, doem not require mp additions to the actunl ~ocabularyof tha living popnlar ramacdar. There ia no doubt thrt this gmnre demmda much atylirtic .kill on the pmrt of the author. But it in a limited genre md literature cannot be confimed to it, nor can it serve 8. baaim for tba da~elopmntof a true litarmry lnngnas*. A lit*- rary tm~gun~4muat chooaen~ mdequatm mema for tha uaprmaaion of concopta or ahadaa of tbomght which arm .lieu to the think- in6 of the unmducatad pplmr mrmmms and for tbat vary ranaon it ir obvioua tbat the populmr 1.np.p. mmnt lack the mean. neeearnary to exprana aueh concepts. The literary language of the mjority of educated Ultraimirna rma the Ruariam literary lmngtlage. Thia, of course, by no M#$ excluded the uas of purely popular Ukrai~ianin morka of r certain literary part ia which tha author, himself belonging to the intalligeataia, dslibermttly limits hia outlook to tbnt of am unadmcated person. Imitations of folk-~oetr)., t41e8 of folk' life with mn accentnmted ethnographic locml coloring and 41.0 publi~atimapflrportimg to spread scientific or technicmi know- ledge or anme raligiona or politicd idea. among tha belong to tbir gsmra. Bmt certain pmrt of the Ukrminian iatelliyatmia ram not oaatmmt with lmpa~fit to be wed only in a limited lite- rary genre and ranted to take popular Ukrrinira am basis for the cramtiotl of a true literary hpaga capnble of bueming the tool of iatmllecttlal culture to be used by a11 of the 23 Ukrainian fntellipnteia. B~mmtimlly, there =ma nothing UB- aatrrml in thim mapiration toward m national litarmy Iwguage. But in the mttmin-t of tbia goal there was aatorml pmth to be fell4 .ad there rare cmrtrin data in the linwiatie re- ality whiah nhould bare beon considerd. Smcb rn reality warn the Fhnaimn literary langutllgo, creatsd, as M hmre maen. throngh the or~mllnic kimtoricml proasam of the gradurn1 rtrmifieatiom of Church Sla~ole.Thi. hasimn literary lmaer- n.tnrmlly be- e.re the lrnmqu at edecmted Ukrmiaimnm. Bowe+er, due to his- toricnl conditionr, the Rnarian literary laaeaga developed omt of a conbination of the Chnrch Slmronic mlmant with mn Eastern Slavic element which ram not Ukrd~i.~,but Middle Grmmt h4ai.a; it raa thaa definitely Yiddlm Cramt Rusmisa aa ragard= it* phometios, itm grmmr rind, to more mxtant, ita racabrlmry. The normal c~rrrein the creation of l literary lma6uage am . ra Ukrainian bmais meld hare hnthe mnbatitutiem of Wrmi- rim eleremt~for the Yiddle Gremt hodra element* in the Remian literary lmngumgm. But them war no need whnteoarsr to aliminmte the Church S1wonie alawntm of tbe-Rn~nianliternry Iaa~m~81 well, for, a. m shall point oat bdor, it is preciaaly the preaanct of this alamat dieb eanmritutea the chief advmtaga of the hssim literary lmnwmge. This repudia- tion af the Church SInvonie heritme wrnt an mbmndo-t of the entire Ukrainian traditiba, hmomuch ne tha introdmctim of Church Slmroaic iata Rnmmisn mud the proasrvmtion of the purity of the Church Sla~wicInnenga in hami. im wrt closely cm- aectad with tba Ukrmine. Evan ia the pre-Moat@li& period, Kiev, moat of m11, rra concernad 6th the purity of Cbnrch S1m- wnic with the rnmult that Kievaa Church S1mronic rrnuacript~ of that period are recopitable by their paxticelmriy emreful Church Slavonic orthography. Kiar, litarise, set the phonetic mtmdards for 811 other ptavineaa, 8 fact that can be asen froq the adoption of the rpacifienlly South h04i.n mapirate P (hl in the rsmding of litutgieml textr tbronghent Rummi.. Later, at the ti- of Po1i.b deminrtion aad of tbo atroggle againmt the union with Rome, Kiev once more played the part of tha center where the Cburch S1avenic t~rditienW~A not only pra*erwed, but *ere a myhtermtic aorulisation of tbm Church Slmtoalic lanpmgs in it. haaim varaion rra firat oadtrtmksn. Until the tire of Loroaoaov, m11 litermte Rusriana (.nd even non-haaian orthodox S1avo) atmdiqd Chdreh Slrvonic im the Grumar of the Ufrminian ncholmr Mefati *trickif Tbi. cl.rer.tt.tie dmmim to tb~Cbnrcl Ikvoda lwulm 1. mlht4d to cmr t& fmtm of tk eburter ot tL wsthmrm fusiu p.oglr. Borfb Rllmi.. mitam rm tb 0-t rivl ~nrmW~.O ;or thir loft5 ammra rlrtoriai din to tk lwtl RH~UL.TI;. fm t Ie.i tor old samt-m &l.n ~~tuim&?itill rrtorai r.wWI rr cqur%to rC. Ysyomdius ~XZMdbtrw 3-1-1, or im ti. mthmLiu parim will tmb rnr bm wrtrutd with tb hot- htom I; tb mwnrudilo wmw Hftmnntidcr tl. 8tll4 of tb dmtb =:- it- th ai tb iu eamsieYr mob-, *.?i.Mt-rrt vlwr *o- mmmia~* Is tL. rh.twrti mat- litoratm $hi. .p.cii;cllly ~mtlnmbmiu p.tLol 1. 24 Tba sxtsaaion of the ume of Church Slavonie to purely mecu1.r literature nlao originated ia Kior. Ukrminima thaologitnl stu- dents ad ncholara ?e.ra the firat to atteqt writing tbynad *eras in Church Slevonic - and the mcaatry of m11 Flnaaian pottry of the seventeenth .ad early eighteenth ctatariaa cm ba trmcad to thaae rhyaea, with the exception, of cmrse, of folk poetry. Xa the u.w way the rhetoric of the eighteenth century witb i tn Church S1aronicimm rms genetically derirad from tha slopuace of aeholarly Ukralnimn rhetorician8 and aat from the artleaa, if oftan remarkably vivid, aaaaer of kscovite preachera, hraian druar md cowdy 4lao found their origin in the 'interludaa' performed ia Churcb Slaroaic by the atudenta of Ukrainimn naminariea. Thtla, ths -tire tradition at using Church Slmroaic ma la- page of secalar littrmtnre. an we11 ar the forms in rkicb it war the used, were eatabliahtd in the Ukrmine. Ftnaairn litara- tnre froa the time of Pacer the Great raat be considered a. m continmrtion of the Church Slmronic literatura of Western hania (mainly the Ukraine) of the aeranteenth century; Rnsaian literrtuie of the eighteenth century bad no connection with the aptci fically Great Rusaimn, Yttscovite literature before Pater I. ' Conaeptlently, in its Church Sleronic elaimat, the Rusaimn literary lmngtlmgm belong. to tha Ukrainian domain oren mta than it doaa to tha Great Raurian. Rut it in precisely tbia naturml reaemb1ance to the Rurui- litarury lmagumga thmt was mnloirrbla for thoha madarn of the Ukrriaiaa intelli8eat8im rbo advocated the creation of mn inda- pendant Ukraimimn littrnry iurpm~s.Tbey rsfu*sd to follow the natural path which would h8~0Zed to tbt creation of liternry Ukrainian language; they broke .ray aot only fro^ the Great Rurmimn, but mlso from the Churcb Slavonic literary-linguistic tradition, mmd mndastook to develop a litacary 1angm.g. baaed aatirely on the popmlar rsrnmcular lad resembling Rna~ianan little 88 possible. Bbt the popular rocahlary wma iaadeqmte for the axprtanion of all thoaa shndaa of thought which 4 lie- rary lmnguage mat be &la to sxpreaa; the ayntmctic 8tmetmra of tho populmr lmguaga rma too clumay to oatimfy even the mst elementary raquir-enta ef 1iter.t~ atpli~tica.It bacus aecea- amry, therefore, to dhert to soat existing literary liaguiatic tradition, anf ficiently poliahed md refined. 8at ainea the rawaward b7 Ogol. Tkw pacmliu tralr. of Ukr.imiu literary tmta d trr mut nro I&*orlbh8rn~u tor tb eLrrcL Bi.mnfc trrdttlom. The nbricmmhip sly 8. bwnd I& orher fl*L& 01 erltrri 11 puricrlv h -1e -ud paimrirp. lhm Rwiu mrrrdt p~hriyof rL. .trl;wotl oemtm- b~ loth4 iil c- with heat lwiu Icon paimtiv of ra-hta tb Onmt t- it wug*~*tIuU, -tad with Ikraimir. i- pa!mtimt mI tk wntmrl cmmtmrj. Ybe *Lr&i*lsatfo8 oi Gnat tlrulu cmltmro bmru dmring tb w m 01 Ilmluj H*kl.ilo*ler (it rilL mftie* to rmeaL1 ~h.rob ttr ~i.rw%th rwSm of fitrirreh Hitoll ud tlr rod to eu imtimk TtIs elre- 1. **t.-lr hforln=t bm.~.withot tIi. 1i.E Ukraimim Wluarm, m-uh cod b.rd y blr. trL.a mt om Pwmiu mil. Rurnimm ttmdition vma to be avoided, thara remained tha tradi- tion of tha Poliab literary lmnease. And indeed, axcapt for the populiatie literary genre referred to .bra, the Ukrainian literary lmgumge of the preaant day mbouadm in borroringa from the Polish, Thi. derelopmrnt in the history of the Ukrainim literary language seem to hawe remlted in its joining the group of litermry lmgur~aof the Weatom Sloric (Czech-Polinh) tradition.

The two Broups of literary languages: tbosm of tho Churoh SXavmnic mnd thome of %ha Western (~zech-~oli~h] frrdltian: thelr Intmrrelatioaa; Ruamian borrowing; from Pollah. Tba worrey of the Slmric litarnry lnngu.gsa of our day ahown that except for tbe Smrbe-Croatimn and Slerenim lnajpmgem which bale loa t conalection with my li eerrry-linguistic tradi- tion - the prmaemt-day Slavic literary tonpas fmll into two groupr: (1) the group of the Qlarch Slmmic tradition {Rmasirn and Wllgariaab, mnd (2) tbr group of the Poliab-Ctaeb traditioa (Polirh, Czech, Slovak, Upper rad Lower Lrramtimn, and Ultrri- aim). Tbe conneceion batmen the litarmry Impage. of tha firat group ia I conaaction of oabtoken heraditmy nccmmsicm, where- rs the cona~ctionof the literarg tongut. of the aeeoud group is one through influ#nc#. Ibis differaaca i# ha to the diffsr- anee in the time mhm the trmdftioms of the on. or of tba other grwp originmtd. The Old amreh Slmvonic laapam cans into being at the sad of the epoch of Proto-Slavic unity, i.e., ot 4 time rbea tho reparate Slavic toaguer wera relatad to we mother an differ- ent dimlaote of one lmuguage .ad mat ma iadependemt languages. Tharafere, Old Cbnreh Slamnio rn. potentially camSlmvic litermry Impage. Tta trmnaplmtation from Smlonikm to Ematam Bulgaria, from WIlgmrim to Serbia and to hsaim, an well am the intatmetima of corrmrpondin~local inflnaaces raa poanible beeonre in emcb of there .rean Old Chnreh Slaroaic, na ma- agminat the background of the local apoken dinlscta, prodaced the affect not of l foreip idiam, but of a native literary lan~a~s.Evan later, den the iadiridaal popu1.r tonpar bad rlremdy drifted pita far .pnrt, Old Church Slrvonic continued to be treated not a6 M akia idiam, but rarely 88 am anti- qnuted, obsolete national litermry lanpaw. On the contrary, the old Caecb lmapage, whicb w.8 the mun aonree of the Weatern Slavic (~rach-Po1i.b) literary l~gnlg~ tradition, reached the mtrtare of a literary Impage at a time vbe; tbe diffutent Slavic tonporn rare mlttady complately aepnrated from oae mother. Tha tramsplmtntion of Old Csech, into, my, Polmnd, rmm impoaaible; it-cmld mnly exert ari infltl- mace on the Polish vernacular. There are rlao line4 of coantction batreaa the two gronpm of Slavic literary lamemgaa. Xn general, the influence of the Russian literary lurgvaga upon the Weatern Slavic toagnea i. not particalarly important. Even if there ia a certain number of haaiu (Ukrainimn and Bfelo-Ilareimn) .ordm in tba Polid lnngnage, theaa mrda are darirod from the popular and mot the literary tongue to.#., -9, MQB, hubka, etc. 1. Ibo trace. of Rnsmirn iainaaes are sowrhmt atranger in tha Cmcb literary Irn~a8e.Tbe leader8 of the neo-Czech Ranaia- amca (p~rtitu1arlyJmgaann) remdily drum rordu from the hmsian lexicml arock to fill the @.pa thmt rare formed in the Clad laagtlmp during the period of decadanca in it. literary ttaditioa. Tbe creators of tb* SlorlL literary tradition ale0 ireely roaortad to low# from the Raaaian mrd *to&. in the ammu mttificiml ray certmin Church Slaromie rorda - matly thorns used a140 in Rusairn - peeatrated into tha Crach (md poamibly Slorak) liternry laagumga. The oppoaits inflomrce, tbat of Weatern S1mric (Caeeh-Poliah) literary l~gmmgetrmdition upon the hadma, rma by far the atmnpr. We have m1randy mentioned the d*eiaira influemce produced upom literary Rnrsion by the Weat-Rmarim mrmnteenth century litetmry tonee mhich awmrred with poloniun. kt, in additim to tbia roundabout way, literary P01i.h alao directly influmcad Rumaim. Finally, a certain number of Po1i.h word. panatratad rim 13Jelo-Roaaia and the Ukraine into the colloquial apmech of Rosmimn tomapaoplm and theace into the litsrmry lmgunga. Paliah wrdm .re quite nnnroua in literary Rn~aian.hog a9.e are purely Polish word. like BWWS ~monogralr, interlo~edini bio is) frw Polish (knot); adi (billiard-cue) from Polish wj (stick, cudgrt); Oqao~(wholssuls, uitholrt ditcriminationl from Polish @an fan ths whole); cb~ractcrimticmllyPoliab remdalings of Garwan word. like -E ImurhltJ frem Pollsh rgLIBk from Germ- h$; bpryg le#ronl from Polish fartuch from oerman V&UO~; ISPIIIDUL~ (aturch) from Pollah From German mw- d; or Poliab dariwationr from 6.r.m root* like pas (hi tcherl fro* Poliah kuDhni13 from Gem. Kl; paTo88Ixa (to hal), asxist) Pcor Poliab Fatored frol Gemw rathem; ~ODBBT~(to draw) from ~oliobq- from ~ld.~em. ritm, reifan; pUOyirO& (sane rmt); 6ym8 (booth, bod fYoa Pollah bdh frw Oen. e; and anivataally Enropemn words in &air Pm1f.b phonetic ver- mion like anrean tghar*aeyl From F@&E~ nannopTr I#ass$ortl frm -t; qmua lmrrsd el *or vka; nmaL* I$apal from Occasioaally tba Poliah origin ia betrayed only by the posi- tion of the stramm, e,g., in apam'~~~$m(Runmima wuld hmve been npeph- 1. Of particular interest .re word. ob~iouslyof Polid origin, ouch a8

Tkaaa wrd. have ken taken from Poliab; in Pdirh, bowe~mr, tbey are bat poloni wd form of caraapnding Cracb rordm which, in their torn, are lo- trmaslmtionm of the Gmrmm mrdm bhloee, hht, Qeiatliohkeit, bmhner, M~~BT,reohMtig, ete., (or of Lath mrds in other inatmosa). Theme mxrqlaa - mad they could be gremtly multiplied - &om tha penetration into Rumaim through Polish of alerants of tk Old Ctach lit#- rary Inayago, which, in it. tarn, r.8 marked by it. Bpea- dance upom Germla lad. Latin trmditioa?*' Thma, tbs imf1~ancm of the Waitom Slavic (Crech-Polirh) litarmry-languagm trdi- tion upn Rnaaian im ~lnqueationable?*** Uro. loelllf, n u u n o p 4 m orlr la wrlar WML (M1 ** TI. Iwsi~mrd s m n a ir by mo u I-mdamt enbtior a! tb abild lu~wo, u it i. of*.* b.li.ndl it -im & bermui ud ru -hUl alien to OM -1- I* .atand pcrprlu -L d, nla3vm1, rrenrl taJy ircl* th #uluca of r-iolk rlo t-1- D- th rmd Irm tt; highr ~1- Itk ow #*481~1~rmrmumu rmof th pqrl*r *n r m & 6 a - R PW II aJ. 1s th t.y at tb kirk elsun, th rota ui.t.1 i. tm ruirrts tr iitmt fi rn -twYra tk hrma - P A P 1 I.*- an tr Md .,~h- 1.d.eLilUlq thim f8m wuprualost uril rmlaei*.fr F-z th tk ktbuiu ~4flit~; tho ueOM ruiut, bmrd tmbth htmr#iuf of Pdi.4 mallw th SMtbm ad Mtmnlopiu #ant- rbL form L. A cr n Ir 1.r- m tb 9it.t e7-b - ~le~iaak~. -* Th pralu im aaglfaatra b th tam* tht 4 tartrim sdu ot lou tt.ulr tIou irol Lollwr rrd Q.rruie 1it.r W*.r Lm bw. fonra ol l-i" dl, qmiu f-tl, ra kr-%vi* Isllw.em, ud rbat r ratbr I ad.* ol kruq rnleb, LoL, .t&, --'- L.V. traU1 *.to tb -i.IY:t'- tar, "d ohl.yW. rire9t1, ud mat thq, It b" to D. .tad tm th h~rorloi t~ 1it.r~~muiv my* uiortsurmw, ~u .%.dl&rmrj Htth fm litmtrrf lurim tkm wm n fn airwt bordy. im Cma,#., me ~lawrnieelorant md its mla ia 112- ruy hamlan.- The RusrL.n-Churcb B1avonia doubl&Cs. - We stylistla .ad aemmntrio varkaatm produced by the

Of mll tbe wdera Slavic litormry lmnpagaa. Rowaim bar the longeat uainterruptmd tradition. Thim tradition goaa bnck to Old Cbmrcb Qln~o'OILic.i. u., to the CQIIIIOII-S~~~~Cli te~ry1.11- wage af tbo end of the Proto-Slavic mnity. TBia hereditary con- aactiom ritb the age-old trmditiom of r, literary l*nptmge,lendm many advatagoa to the Ihla~imaImpage. The first of thane im that axternd mifomity mad mrability mbith .re preaent onl* in literary laapmgea tbmt remt up- 8 long eatabliahed tradl- tion .ad arm mot dependant oa popular dialacts. Ihin baeame4 eridmnt if one eoqarea tbssm immpa~eswith lane.-• rhieh had ao arch tradition md davalopd froa populmr dimlaetr. Thm, fot example, literary Slovak raa mt firat baaed upoa Ilamtem Slormk; later it beg- to 1e.a on the Middle Slovak dialeet,mad for long tire every writer felt entitlmd to use him native .peach variety, 80 that to thim day thm dialsctml .tnbilisatiar of library Slovak ha. not yet bmsll cmpiotely aabiamd. A similar aitration my Bs obaarrad ia the &rbo-Croatimn literary l.ngtlam, &era tbe rmther arebmic fekcruior dialect, set. up ma r mtudmrd by Vuk YarJZiB, i8 contendim6 with the 10s. mrebmie dorrim dimlsct for recognition ma a li-rary idior. fhi4, fianlly, in aren .ore aeriking L the cam* of iiterrq Istrminiin *ere rh. inatnbility im mo gramt and the vari.ae*m ao irprtrat, thmt under the pnermi awe d Ukrainian there prmcticrlly exist meveral lmagtlngea quit. dimtinct from om0 mother - ~nli&im,Bukmvirim, Carpathe-Ramaim, Eartarn Ultrmiaira. But the chief ad*latwom of Rmarim, rhioh it omes to 1%. tima with Old Cdrurcb SIrnmde, raaids,ir itm intarnml prepartim8. Thd. to the oramic fusion of thm attrch Slrronic eith the haat Auamf m elment in liwrary Iluaaiam, tb rocmbnlary of Rmamina i4 unnaually rich. Tbis richnor* im om in rauces of mrd-meaning. A *hela marim4 of coreapt. in Russiaa admits of two verbal axpre4niosm: oms of Church Slaronic, thm oerof h8mi.n orifim.. The two rmda ara differontinted ia meaning: the Cbrreh Slr waia word baa nuquirmd 4 lad petic orertonm which ia fir 0 4 0 * % 1, *zbRn fr Cbubb BhicIrm vMtl l- hu drm mau a iu mliliou -mlqr. fiw, trt* M p.wtr.td -0 ~olmu bmt th atmr (* tk tint qlhbk of tM himwwd rrgm 1. t..o* d dfmt ks-iw Ira k* Im other inatmncaa the Church S1m~gnicword ham mtrphorie - or mbatract meaning, -bile the Auasiau ha. l more wnerata mi6- nifielace:

There typm of correlatiom ara normal. Only vary rsldol in tha corralmtion rartrad, i.a., the Ransiam mrd p8maaaem rn rpocificmlly poetic ovarmne, while tha Church Slawonic iw swnasd ma prmmic:

The corrslatioa between tk Cbttrch S1amic and tho Groat Wlraimn mlermrt in tbm v00abdary of litermtethmmims .my be reprammated la tha form of aererd anprimpmad lexical atrat.. Thare pa Church Slmronic mrda that harm met bmmm ioearpora-d into tho literary lqngm peopr, r.l., m, w, ms, w,FmI pegJ, #to. We rill cmil th0.e mrdn the 'me-type'. beh wrda ray ba umd in rork of fio- tiom only in the prameaoe of m mp.oiml tbwatia uotiratiom, e. 6. , if the maerrtire proceed. from tba panon of .a Old kliurmt v9r.d im the old text of tha &tiptorma, mm ia kako*'. 'The Saul .d Ange t . Furthat, there arm aarth Slmronie rorda tbnt mppaar emly ia poatry or in prme particulmrly -1- mud porpomm in &tyle, s.g., mcb nu08 of part. of thm body ma w, w, p& -, aslr,, w,new, ~eom,mao, or rorda nucb am arw, ~cla+!ma wt~e8& see. ('w-tme'l. Tba Groat braxu equiralantr of theas mrda (a&, ram, etc.) mrm nomnlly wed in limrmtura mad in conrmtmmtir; thay ara not mlgar or plebmi.lr. Than cb# Church Slatonie words which differ ftol tbmii Gremt Ik~niamcomat*rputm rrely by their fipratite or more &.tract rauin6, 0.8.~upa~%Lllco~, pwrrd-poe-, eqpl, at=. ( 'K~~TE&typm * 1. Tbo next mtrmtun conri8t~of auteh Slaronio mrda dintin- miahable from their Rmsmima aquivdmtr only through their .lightly more 'learnad' qumlity, a8 ~6q(UO'po-), I~-ba), C- (-a), atc. ('~60-typal, - rardrr in ea- mange, aimply doablima the cortsmpoadflrg Great hraian mxda. Finally, &are .re Cburch S1 nronic wrds c~llplatelyaaaimi- 1.-d in the Litsrmry luagpaga, written na wall 18 rpoken, which harm no Great Rursian doublet.; tbers rordr do mot sttgga8t wlamnity or abatrmctioa. Word. of this trto6ory ray ba dividmd into revera1 grmmpm: a) thoas rred in popular .peach, o.g., 0-; b) thors alion to the popular vocabulary due to their very --ins, a. g., W, a?pmsRlt,wen; c) tbosa which exist in tL. litsrrry l.ngmage witboat Grsrt hamian doublet., the lmttar exirting, houarar, ia popular rpmach, e.g., OC~,nm~, 6-I norb- IIOMQ~, U-W (the purely Great hmrirn BOO-, noamkar 6e- ma,-=I =bp& Ire ant orad in the literary 14a&ma6e). Am for Great haaim .ordo, they mmy ba divided into threa urmmpm: a) tboae belonging to the literary langmaga (e. g., FOWPJI, ao6, aosozo, rropomd, ceple~am, Bop1: b] tho40 nned in tbe carmrr&t&onailmgamgcl of edncmtad pr- mna, but not admitted in literature without rpeeinl stylistic mtiratiom (ma,warn, lrpo&.q~m); c) thoma dnich axtat only in populmr apaech ad uy be iatro- dacsd into mrkr af literature only if tbir is motivated by tbe mrbjaot mattax [e.#. , in stories from folk llf8)r thnm BDO?m, Fa-, -emt nm -gar ate. Gtaphicrlly , tba dif Ierent hapratic atrat. nay ba reprrsmnted a8 follow.:

In tb* graph abm, the brrclutrd rord4 mra tborm of CLmrcb S1avonie orifin. Rmtreu tbe Iirsr A and C mrm placed the type* of lexical mlewnts brloatiml to thm britten ednemtad Iragmga, i.e., to tho literary langnne proper; betreen B mnd D - the hxicd alemanta of tka co+vsrsotion~ilmnguaga of educated Ruaaims. Below D md above A .re auch elamant. of the rocmbu- lmry rhicb appear in llter~trreonly if tba mnbjeet-ratter proridem r ~pecimlmotiration for their nma; rorda belomgiag to the type. ktraam A and S, mad between C mud I), are umad in litarrtmra only if it in demired to ebtmin a apeeiml atyliatic coloring. Tba lisam "e hare traead mhkft ~ontinnallrin the proeeaa of the developmeat of the l.apage. Thus many wordr which in Pnabkin's tima rare atill aaad ia ~lemlypoatienl laagomm (i.e., belonged to the '-0-type*) .re nor placed with word# of the 'me-type' awl. Other word. of the 'B~-type' hmve shifted to the '$pa--type,' md .re now usad in M rb- .tract or fierative meaning (e. g., c~par).I)n the other had, -em, no* elmezed am popular, relatively recently was used by admeatad Rrraimna ia con*sramtioa; it h.8, ewsaquantly, ahiftad fror the 'xya~~'to the 'mCTp&-typa.' Pet ether rorda, of the 'm-type, ' hmve risen in rmnk and art noor aaed in tha written Ianpnge even without mpseid stylistic pmrpores? Th.rtSor'm tmumt ot eke mrtut problr of Chnk 81ffmic - kt himeurrelatiou fa tla Ptuhl.~u(o, writtn for himr-, m.r to call for .ar elmcidatlol. Am k .~miror tt. .rqLn 1- im tba twt, ILw. eorrnpoodncn u* rfthr bomblot. prmr I&#.. Chwl ha~eslcW # * ruff, R+... rropomiuil, o?a~mrdomnlmtrd~t)ro~ic.tl,Wtpr mtiy rvlau Wrm aQ m,nomJdtr iCL81. o w 0, 1- I 4 0 e k81. n8pbll. 1U.. n8~#*1. fn tk cue of smslosm tk hwiu toll 18 dta* diffmtiatrd Zrath awcb mno~icLJ th .Ptrlld mpol~qlui~b*Iht I.u*u :torot. 'tofMC 'mt, ud i~mlul~*%eX.t, cwrrspoldir ro CL lL 'rmt, tht, 't&, tml. Imt wl.tr?ar tk mrpLolqicU rm ol wrnlatfoq lnctiad tb24U 08 *iii.mt CLBL *wdm mcr*iviu tb ~mu*miulry. ~u mot L t~. # let. mmldtlb. ha#rum& kt- tk Gr.Puiu.-. Im htuen ua tk CL~L-"$L.m tbn i. .I~L mpmmit,, tb di~f-tiati- i. purl, atylirtic .rd the Cb. w prmld.. dru rlututin of r Iwr 8- or ptiuqulity. Tbna CLUL aponw do net bmloq to th .orwl roubmhW od u ed.wtld P~sim,uwt fl a i.r 8et iua mr t1icIl.r ud UL dir -ill .r.m tka ~l mot mttp mfp1 =-kt* WL.~ *bmn i. a-ie .9.irL.K. md 3, mfyliatie Hft.rcrtia*i ~.%11.tt.tad br tb* dn d # a o I&IIDM) u todrdgrwn r&%ml; ~=U.#AO ldlu-roro6 I-. I. warat t oi ~oarslatiwth buir symoa@~y im p-m bmt tlr CLSL ruimt% brio apr~ialisadrn • IW~lktrrt ~r IH~U~ mndia i .ntinratL.rr~u.colcnt*wuiy: ad*oaw~t-~%ep* er% tw~tmrl;ttpar~r~ (ma! -ropomxur tsllosr!. The Ruasim literary laagrage derive. further ndrmtaga froa chi# fnaion in ita vocabulary of the two baaie tlarmnta - Church Slaronic and Middle Great Ruasinn; it poama.am, in tho firat plmce, I corplete technique for the formation of nor ~rda coined to exprmnr concept. for which there ia no adequate word in tba laaguage. A new rord in either coqnandd fr~two already existing mrda (which rny or ray not be fused into aingle mord), or ia derived with the aid of rariena anf fixes md prefixa. fror mlremdy oxirting word. on the model of other sxiatiag darivmtioaa. lf the new rord is to expreaa a definite concept adegtlately, tba elamants from rhicb !t ia formed rhonld not hmre 8 too definite concrete memning; otherriee, thm aaaocia- tion witb tbim concrete meaning rill interfere with the mccep- tanea of tha mew wrd in ita mpecific aigniBeanee. It im prscioaly in much inatmncea that the Ranaim literary langnmga calla mpoa the Cbnrcb Sluronie alewnta. of it. rord atock. Sinco Cbnrch Slaromic word., with rmre except{ona (much aa caw&),are not araociated ri th coacrmta conesptr rmlntad to everyday life, they ara pmrticnlnrly well amited for thi~ pRFpD.9. That im why Ruaaian aeiantific terminology, for the momt part, *ma created from the Church Slsroaic lexicml materiml. Thma. the term meRDm'Pamue (ramrrlians) ia uadaratood ma the nue- of dehita clmra of mnimalm with certain comon character- iatica, just ma the terms m6.1~or nmw denote other cl*msc* of miralm. Thi. rord ia foraod not fror Great Rorairn, but from Chlrrcb S1ayonic elaaentn. If inmtead of ~~Eo~TBID~BIra emid YOdOlCOY'$OpmB, replncing the Church S1aromic element8 by their Gremt Russian aqui~~lant~,me mould have a word daacrib- ing one of the concrete cb~racteristicsof tbe given ~1.4. of animmln ('milk-feedim6'), but not m generalired term deaig- mating the cla~aa. 8ucb; thia mnld be l remult of the fmct that tho Gramt Rnaaian wrda MmOfrO mad ~CO~MET~augsest prmc- tied .ad conerats conceptm. Other exalplem are prorided by auoh term. mewmil mpb, npecwz~~me~~~,~ame .nd map other.; if purely Great l3usmi.n. aquivalentn rere umed ('w~oB- m~ mporarD 'noame,' 'BJIRBBB~~')it von1d be difficnlc to sliriart* the corresponding concrete memniaga rhicb wuld wake theac word8 inmdequmte ma txpraaaion8 of the concept8 they arm supposd to demo tt. In general, the Iragaage of the exmct and the aocirl acianee8, of philoaopby, atc., often ban to get .may from the concrete in it. tsrminolom, to effmce the uoaml, practical sipificmnca of smpacata words oaed in everyday life. The Ruoaira liternry 1.n- guaea poaaenmaa each Iaxieal rtoek consimtiw of forr~lrof Church Slarmaic origin; tbim Church Slmmnic atock of rordm. root., and form.1 sledmnca, due to the very place they occupy in the liagniatie conacioumwr~of m Russila, .re deprived of thia ooncrateneas. hd this ia an emormum adrrutage. hnaim lltarmry llagmage as wall. LMomomor pointed out quite cmrroctly that differant codinations of the Church Slarmnic and the Grunt hmaian ulewnt of the Roesi.n literary 1.ngu.g~ an- gender stylistic diHerameea. Yet, toroaoaov diatin@iabed only thrae stylea. Actually, there art uny wee. The R11a.i- lite- rary lramaga ii. very rich in otyliatie poaaibilitiem. &d if look. cloaely mt the lexical palette of good hssiam styl- -iat8, ens mat raeogniaa that thin ricbnsaa of stylistic typmm md ahmdem ia po~aiblaonly tbrmmgb the mximteoca of two ale- ranto in the Anaaian literary liquietic c~ns~iom~utms:the Gnreh Slmvonic and the hamiam. Thia in mmmifeat not only ia tho vocmbtllary, but ~AOin the syntactical atructttrs of diflerant acyli.tic type.. Darelopod in the process of trsn~lation~from the Greek, the ayntncticml atruetmre of tha Church Slaronie lmn~age,in its ea*ance rather artificial, clearly dihred from the rather rttdirentary and tharefora little rarid ayntmcticml ntfoetnre of the PUTa Great Ruaeian lmnpage, Wtt tbrougb long eoaxiutence in the linguintic conaciouaneaa of tbe literate R11s.i.a paopls bath the&* *yntaetic ayater. rdjuated themsalram to each other, md, their interaction produced aevsral ayntactieal stylan. The cam- binmtion of theas ditarant oyatmetical styles with the diffarent type. of voenbulary farmed that ricbly rariemtd rainbow ,of atylsm which Ji*tinmi.be. tbo f)R&aian literary lrllgneaa. Tbua, the combination of the Great Rua8i.n adthe Church Sl*vonic eltmentr hr. made the Rnasimn literary 1anp.p m hidly perfectad im.trmment both for abstract thom&t and for mrtiatic cr~atiom.Without the Umrch Sli*omic tradition, tha hurian laa~m8acould mc~rcalyhave reached arch perfection? Iha cmbination of the m~rcbshvonic .ad E)rsat h8~i.nele- rsnta, thin bmaic peculiarity of the harim literary lmpmgs, placer it in an axeeptional situation. It in diffimlt to find mything similar im my ocher literary lmmage. llama, for axuple, the literary lanpngea of the Yoale= ~rld ara m11 bmaod om tha combination of the local vernacular with Arabic, aomttimta on the combinmtion of these tm lineirtic elamenta with the Persia elamnt (a.g., ia the Ibrkinb lita- rmry lapage). But tho mralogy with tha Ftusmian literary Ira- page here ia iacorpltte, because in thtaa inataocaa the lm- gmagea corbinqd are conplstcly dissimilar, not only in rocah-,

Tbo ~~#AIIICUE~aQ tLm C11wb B1.10.ic L.rltwe .II~ k illntrwrd br t,h ?let. 11 tw b.iu I01L m, puticiphn mr40 wt ezimt. A old g~nieighwith rbm p3YUiu ndi 4 u l u*g.*rlfi.l ud-b~-di.~ti- (~ods*uC,c.o*uuY, Otla*~u~, UUff, lO)aWU#, WWoAlPWYU, YO8#YUI #tyYYff) bmt tlqm .o u pmrticipl- t*, i.r. bt& .rila, to cmrrtmd u m rl f- 1*g., thy -not t.L. 4 dimt orjoet ia tk Uau4tiro cwl. Putleipl# uad in tbr Palam lireruf -.ye Lx 0 4 H r( U 1, s 0 4 U t, r 0 f II SI u 1, ate. I we 01 CLvrl Sb~micorigrm, so that Rurlu im rbolly We4t.d to rhI Church Wicbritye im thm mj mrtamt fork luy but also in their entire gruaticml attucttlre: Ardic ia m S-itic Irrrguaga. Persian (41.0 Afghmm, Bindaatmi, red oth*ra) ia Imdo-hropra, while the Thrkimh 1aae.p bmlonga to the Urd-Altaie family. Thaae Imgrngam are 80 different tbnt they ate -able to merge ro as ta produce en organic unity. The *.re im true of the tso alements in the J*pmnaae litermry lummga: thm apoken ~ernmcnlnrlad [%inaaa. 'Ibe latter, am i-lating lmgoagm, 1a 80 differtat in ita entire structore fror Yapaneae which ia mgglotinatira, thnt m org.nic fumion ia im- pmaibla. lsor im tbero eonp1ete analogy between literary Rnsaila mnd the hmce lanmagaa, t.g., French. True, im the French Ira- @a@ re find utilination of htin rocmbolnry ekmntm, re- miniocent of the otilization of Church Slaronie alaaaats in Rusoian: wreorer, the Ftencb lmngom~,which deweloped trol the Vtr1g.r Lntin dialect .poke. in Gmol. in raIated to iitcrmq Lmtia, meb in the amma rny mm the Gremt Amasinn 1mgw.w (on offmpriag of Enrtarn Proto-Slavic) ia related to Chareb 91.- voeic, which at the time of it. inception -4. the colon lib- rmry 14ngaage of tha Slmw*. Nerarrhalers, the mnalogy ia not complete. In the first plmcs, the Ranch lm@a@ differ. meh more from the Lmtia tbmn doe. Reasiaa from Church Shronic. In ameh French prda ma singe, rnneai. droit, eoir;, em, hmt. soartraga. it ia difficult to recoeire their Latin prototype. ar siria, iniaieus, diractn~, wtdsrr, aqua, sltur, siltraticwa; and ma regmrda gramar, tht French lm~mgeis rmdicmlly digmreat fraa Latin. The differ- ea-s batreen the IIIIaaiau ud Church Slaronic Bnrar are not so areat. The phonetic differsnems in moat ca4a11 ware le*sled ~ffby the adjuatmeat of the Chnrcb Slavonic 1.np.p to the Ruaaiao pronmcimtion, and the dihrencus which rare prmserrsd (..r-, - m~b;q - q;&am - WOTO; bp%m ~QW; mWo - more; ~#rcm- pocr; aerrs - a&; ocu - BOC~~),are no unirportlnt that they do not prowent the easy identiffica- tian of the Chtlrch Slavoaie word. ritb the corraapmdiag Ruseiu form. In the aphare of gr-nr, tho Rnaaim lampage has loat mamy form. rbicb eriated in Church Slaronic (o.g., the Church Sln- vonic form8 of worn, Bern, BMOCT0, 8aqaar marMme, MWO- aw, m m, m ww%, mm! me! m-! maom, amme, -Om, dte.). But, in general. Rrsaian praaarvea the ptinci- plea of gr-atic.1 structxlra of the Church Slaronic Iangnmge. Tbia aramt oimilmrity rake. the introduction of Church SIm- vmic alaments iatm the Rmesinn lungagu far emsimr thmt the introduction of slementa of litermry Lntin into French. 'lhe tranch langumga cmtdouble purely French wrda by correa- pondin# Latin forma 8s easily 88 thia ia dons ia Russian, *here it ia. poaaiblo, tor exupla, to cbmge the Rt1mi.n word. mOTO, depr into tha Church S1aroaie forma anam* 6~ for rsraly then to the curaiva (e80pomcb). Finally, during the ti;* o4 Pate r. the mlphabut changed to the civil type, mpproximatin~ * Lmtia Iatterm; thia Russian alphmbet, mftar rarioua riaor ch.ngsm during tho *ightaemch and the firat half of the ainlr- teenth centurie*, fimnlly took on it. praaemt form. It camnot be .aid thmt thia alphabet ia completely mdapted tm the phonetic myatem of the hraian 1aaga.m.' But atill, oring to it# prolonged are, tat I4ussi.n Cyrillic hma cloasly fitted tb. R~a8im1mp.e and ha4 entared in- the aystsm of the lam- page wnaeionsne~mof literate Rmaaiamn. It ma8 stated above that, owing to aerie. of historical cir- c-atancss, the hami- literary 1anpagu bmcua the cemtar of a radimtion extanding to 8 whole ate. of literary Imlpagua of the Soriat Union. Us~allythe rndiation of a literary 1mugn.g. in aceolpmied by the rmdiation of it. alphabet: thur, the Greek alphabet, itmelf eriginmting from the Phoenician, produoad hcin, Inter bthic, and both the Church S1mvoric mlpbabatm, tbe Glmplitic md tba Cyrillic. Latin, in its turn, narrmd aa m bani. for the grnfiic ayatar of mat brope~1.aga.p.. At praaeat, the aue phenomenon of admptation to foreigm 1.n- take. place wi tb &a Rnsmimn mlphabat. 1t im iqortmt, therefore, frol the viewpoint of it. caltmrml role, w debrmine mot 0n1y to what axtent the haaian dpbabet fa mdmptmd to the Russirn lanpmgs, but afap to what mxtent it may aarra mu a basis for alpbmbeta of other la=g~mgeaof Rua.ia. Aad it mat ba 8dritt.d that in thim reapect the Ruaniaa mlphabet prea.nts great potentinli tie. of adaptation. A matiand nlphmbat ia mmallp mdapted to the soand pattern of didareat lmghage by the nae of diaeritioml mark.; aacondly, by giving new rmlmea to the 'muprfluona' lettar. of tho oid mlphubat; md, thirdly, by addim# mew -18. Ibe Rummima m1- phnbt lead. itrelf raadily to m11 them de~ieea.It hnm no diteritied mrks; lettpr. lonpr ia use in the hamila d- phabet fl, 8, I, 8) cwld be given ner value4; to Jose could be mdded amChurch Cyrillic lmttmra mot included in the hraian alphabet. kt it i. auch lema nacm~marg to add nmr eyr- bolo or digrapbm to the Ru~mimnalphabet, tha, for arrqie, te tho Lath which lacks letter. for the aouudr repraaented i8 Rrmmirn by & 4 Vr XJ ate. It ia natmral, thaiafore, tbmt nbola mriea of racmatly originatad .on-Ruaaimn literary laagnmgaa of the Soviet Union =as the hami- mlphmbat mn 8 basim far their mntioaml alphabat.. ' I.#iu wlu k bwd O. IR 9f#itiw th bet- tk mt- J mwr- -W *d tb tim tb .oft *d hrd cop aarutr. t~ timr oi t- tm tdlrXLtutm- w amr tm -it- let.t.L& a8 t lrw mmiurcIf.uIr * R. , :a$, IU: :b-S z= zas, ,,-m, ,,~.-~i.r+sm., tr it? n! tb imitid couoult bud is tL. fin* Int- .sit la th rn- errltm, bmm, i* i. w"6.h 1. .,ufit.t*T. &i*i.r.* mL .& pr .. Sam of theme lmgnagoa, by the vary amtura of their plonoticm, admit of a direct adaptation of the haaim mlphabet withamt any chanpa (e.g. Wordrimian, agaeialiy in it. Erzja dialect). Others le. g., &+a;, Lrumia, Votjek, Zyrjaniu) mdnprad thm Rassiw-mlpbabet with .one chmgom and addition. gf nar letterm. 8 ).aim for amtion.1 alphmbeta of aoa-Ruraimm Impagam of the Soviet Union, the haaimn Cyrillic finds itmelf in eorpeti- tioa with other alphabet.. Soma of th0.e nlphnbeta shonld mr- +im, as the borgian alphabat, hallorad by mrm thmn 8 thon- .lad yemi. of historical trmditiom nnd well adaptad tm tha thorgian moamd symtem. Same of the Yoalen psoplea of the U.S.S.R. used the Arabic dphmbet, mlwmym iwprmetical mod colplmtol~inmdequate i. the cmme of amch lanmnw* as Itabardinian, &&a, ud ocher.. Any chmnp, horaver, wms atronsly oppsmd far raligiora reomus, ud in the cone of Cyrillic 8140 bscaua it ru conaidered a atop toward 'rna~ifi~mtion'.lltmt ia why a modified Latim 41- pbabsr was mdopted, fir8t in ~serbaidf.no in 1922, than ir other Modem aream. herunt bope, bowaver, tbat the fear of 'tuaaification' will grmdumlly be dimaipated; it will then beoore poamiblc to iatrodace odmptatioaa of the Cyrillic - mlutioa tm be preferred for both prmcticml mad cult~ralre.- SO*. .'