Search results

1

Пели ли православные восточные славяне XV-XVI веков псалмы по-древнееврейски

100%

Темчин С.

Latopisy Akademii Supraskiej

|

2012

|

vol. Język naszej modlitwy- dawniej i dziś

|

issue 3

19-26

EN

The Vilnius Old Testament Florilegium has been preserved as part of manuscript F 19-262 (Vilnius, The Wróblewskie Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences), dating back to the first third of the 16 th century (after 1517) and comprising Old Testament books (Job, Ruth, the Psalter, the Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, Lamentations, Daniel, and Esther) which, except the Psalms, had been translated from Hebrew into Ruthenian. The author argues that these are in fact the third volume of the Tanakh in a Ruthenian translation produced during the 2 nd half of the 15 th century in Kiev. There is reason to think that unlike the rest of the Old Testament books which were translated into Ruthenian, the Psalms of this corpus were originally written in Hebrew using the Cyrillic characters. A small portion of this Cyrillic transcription (Psalm 150) is found in the Cyrillic Manual of Hebrew which is preserved in an East Slavic miscellany of the 3 rd quarter of the 16 th century (Moscow, Russian State Archive of Early Acts, F. Mazurin collection (f. 196), inventory 1, No 616, f. 124-130) and textually related to the Vilnius Old Testament Florilegium. At least some psalms must have been sung or recited in Hebrew by certain groups of East Slavs in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Novgorod the Great, and Muscovy during the 15th -16th centuries.

2

Przerwanie czy przetrwanie (staro)białoruskiej tradycji piśmienniczej w XVIII wieku? Przyczynki do dyskusji nad rozwojem literackiego języka białoruskiego na materiale wydań bazyliańskich drukarni z Supraśla i Wilna

100%

Getka J. A.

Studia Białorutenistyczne

|

2020

|

vol. 14

EN

The article presents elements of simple speech, the 18th century Ruthenian language, the testaments to which are the religious texts of that period published by the Basilian printing office in Supraśl (Sobranije pripadkov, 1722, Kratkoje soslovije, 1759, Pouczenije o obrjadach, 1788). The analysis of the Supraśl texts is supplemented by an analysis of a text published by the monastic printing office in Vilnius (Ecphonemata Liturgiey Greckiey 1671) in the Church Slavonic language but using the Latin script. Due to a variety of factors: whether political ones or scholarly stereotypes, religious texts were omitted in language research (on simple speech, Ruthenian language) and the Belarusian writing of the 18th century. The linguistic features recorded therein point to the necessity of revising the axiom, popularised in the 1960s by prominent researchers of the Belarusian language: Arkadz Zhurausky and Ivan Kramko and upheld by other researchers, regarding the disappearance of the Old Belarusian language in the 18th century. Their thesis was constructed on the basis of an analysis of the following factors: graphic, grammatical, orthographical, lexical, and those relating to genre. The crowning argument for the break in the continuity of tradition was an enumeration of specific features of the Old Belarusian writing which are absent in modern literary Belarusian. In accordance with the data obtained from the analysed Basilian publications, one ought to speak of an evolutionary character of the development of the literary Belarusian language.

PL

W niniejszym artykule zaprezentowano elementy prostej mowy, ruskiej mowy XVIII wieku, świadectwem której są teksty o charakterze religijnym z tego okresu wydane w bazyliańskiej drukarni w Supraślu (Sobranije pripadkov, 1722, Kratkoje soslovije, 1759, Pouczenije o obrjadach, 1788). Analiza języka tekstów supraskich została uzupełniona analizą tekstu, wydanego w drukarni zakonnej w Wilnie (Ecphonemata Liturgiey Greckiey 1671), w języku cerkiewnosłowiańskim, jednak z zastosowaniem czcionki łacińskiej. Ze względu na różnego rodzaju czynniki: polityczne czy stereotypy naukowe teksty o charakterze religijnym były pomijane w badaniach nad językiem (prostą mową, ruską mową) i piśmiennictwem białoruskim XVIII wieku. Zarejestrowane w nich cechy językowe świadczą o potrzebie rewizji upowszechnionego w latach 60. XX wieku przez wybitnych badaczy języka białoruskiego: Arkadzia Żurauskiego i Iwana Kramko i podtrzymanego przez innych badaczy, aksjomatu na temat zaniku języka starobiałoruskiego w XVIII wieku. Swoją tezę skonstruowali oni na podstawie analizy czynników: graficznego, gramatycznego, ortograficznego, leksykalnego oraz gatunkowego. Koronnym argumentem za zerwaną ciągłością tradycji było wyliczenie specyficznych cech piśmiennictwa starobiałoruskiego, nieobecnych we współczesnym literackim języku białoruskim. Zgodnie z danymi z analizowanych druków bazyliańskich należy mówić o ewolucyjności procesu rozwoju białoruskiego języka literackiego.

RU

У дадзеным артыкуле прадстаўлены элементы старабеларускай мовы XVIII ст., якія выступаюць у рэлігійных тэкстах гэтага перыяду, выдадзеных у базыльянскіх тыпаграфіях Супрасля (Sobranije pripadkov, 1722, Kratkoje soslovije, 1759, Pouczenije o obrjadach, 1788). Аналіз мовы супрасльскіх тэкстаў быў дапоўнены аналізам тэксту, надрукаванага ў манастырскай друкарні ў Вільні (Ecphonemata Liturgiey Greek 1671) на царкоўнаславянскай мове, аднак з выкарыстаннем лацінскага шрыфта. З-за розных фактараў (палітычных і навуковых стэрэатыпаў) творы рэлігійнага характару ігнараваліся пры вывучэнні беларускай мовы і пісьменнасці XVIII ст. Даследаванне пісьмовай спадчыны гэтага перыяду не былі прадметам актыўнага навуковага зацікаўлення з-за падтрыманага Аркадзем Жураўскім, Іванам Крамко і іншымі мовазнаўцамі тэзіса пра заняпад у XVIII ст. старабеларускай пісьмовай традыцыі. Галоўным аргументам для разрыву пераемнасці традыцыі быў погдяд, што спецыфічныя асаблівасці старабеларускай літаратуры (графічныя, граматычныя, арфаграфічныя, лексічныя і жанравыя) адсутнічаюць у сучаснай беларускай літаратурнай мове. Праведзены аналіз мовы старадрукаў вядзе да змены аксіёмы наконт развіцця беларускай літаратурнай мовы. Тэзіс пра разрыў у моўна-пісьмовай традыцыі прапануецца замяніць тэзісам пра эвалюцыйны характар развіцця беларускай літаратурнай мовы.

3

„Mowa ojców potrzebna od zaraz” „Iż Rusi słuszna rzecz dla nabożeństwa po grecku i po słowieńsku uczyć się” (Lithos, Kijów 1644)

88%

Chynczewska-Hennel T.

Latopisy Akademii Supraskiej

|

2012

|

vol. Język naszej modlitwy- dawniej i dziś

|

issue 3

41-47

EN

After the Union of Lublin in 1569 the Polish Kingdom and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania formed one state. The Russian remained the official language of the Grand Duchy and it was guaranteed that the inhabitants of the Duchy could remain orthodox. It was feared that the nobles would convert to the Roman Catholicism and at multiple occasions the deputies from Grand Duchy as well as Cossacks had to defend their rights for their own language and faith. In the polemical literature of the end of the XVI and the first half of the XVII century concerning the Union of Brest much concern was expressed for or against the use of the Church Slavonic – particularly by Peter Skarga and Ivan Vishensky. Peter Mohyla in the orthodox Academy of Kiev, founded by himself, particularly insisted on teaching, among other subjects, Latin and Polish as he thought that an educated orthodox Russian should feel a rightful citizen of the Polish state and participate in the religious and political life of the country.

Refine search results

2 Latopisy Akademii Supraskiej

1 Studia Białorutenistyczne

1 Chynczewska-Hennel T.

1 Getka J. A.

1 Темчин С.

1 2020

2 2012

Пели ли православные восточные славяне XV-XVI веков псалмы по-древнееврейски

Przerwanie czy przetrwanie (staro)białoruskiej tradycji piśmienniczej w XVIII wieku? Przyczynki do dyskusji nad rozwojem literackiego języka białoruskiego na materiale wydań bazyliańskich drukarni z Supraśla i Wilna

„Mowa ojców potrzebna od zaraz” „Iż Rusi słuszna rzecz dla nabożeństwa po grecku i po słowieńsku uczyć się” (Lithos, Kijów 1644)