The study of the links between the style of Ruthenian deeds from the second half of the 16th – the mid-17th centuries and their Polish counterparts have just been started in Ukrainian historical linguistics. This paper aims to analyse the role of Polish acts and act language in the development of certain linguistic formulas in the Ruthenian privilege deeds from the second half of the 16th – the mid-17th centuries. The sections of inscriptio, promulgatio, salutatio, sanctio, datum, and subscriptio are at the heart of the research. At the stylistic level, in Ukraine the Ruthenian privilege deeds were proved to clearly follow the Polish documents, possibly due to the expansion of the Polish documents and the language: compulsory and prestigious among educated people. The influence manifests itself in the following way: the deeds where the inscriptio has a list of addressees became typical; the promulgatio went after the inscriptio; the salutatio received Polish-like linguistic formulas and – if this section appears – there was no promulgatio; the new prohibition formulas in the sanctio as well as the absence of corroboratio and vice versa; the establishment of formula sequence in the datum as well as the fixation of three date variants (short, medium, and expanded), and the modification of the datum formulas according to the Polish pattern; the Ruthenian deed subsciptio cogenty influenced by the Polish document (inter alia, king’s Latin signatures, Polish pattern of Ruthenian signatures); the presence of some clichés (not related to certain clauses) either formed according to the Polish pattern or used in the Ruthenian acts with expansion of such patterns; the support of verbal amplification as a mean of stylistic precept.
The article draws attention to the Slavenrosska phonetics analysing the Slavenorosski insertions in Polish graphics in Lazar Baranovych’s theological treatise “Notiy pięć ran Chrystvsowych pięс” (1680). These insertions reflect the epoch’s tendencies in pronouncing the Slavenorosski texts by the speakers of Northern Ukrainian (Eastern Polisyen) patois, e.g. prove the well-established pronunciation of ѣ as [і]. The pronunciation of labials, velars, pharyngeal and [н’] before the front vowel [і] was systematicallysoft. The sibilant sounds, on the contrary, were hard (the corresponding letters were always followed by a y, not an i). The variations ri/ry, ti/ty, li/ly, si/sy, di/dy show an [и] sound that replaced the former [i], and the history of language corroborates this fact. The document presents the palatalized pronunciation of velars as well as the pharyngeal before the front vowel (it surely was an [i]) replacing their hard pronunciation before vowels). The hard pronunciation of consonants before an [e] and the fricative pronunciation of Slavenorosska г was confirmed. The Cyrillic щ was pronounced as a combination of two hard sibilants [шч]. The treatise recorded the hard pronunciation of the final stem sound [р] while the etymologically soft pronunciation inside the stem remains systematically intact. The document records the hard pronunciation of [ц] at the stem end of masculine nouns. The nominative and accusative forms of singular masculine adjectives are mostly pronounced with a reduced final [ǐ]. Proper names of Greek origin could have a fricative or, less frequently, a plosive pronunciation in lieu of γ, ѳ mainly sounded as [фт]. In the king’s name, it was transliterated as th.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.