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).