OLD CHURCH SLAVONIC ( /sləˈvɒnɪk/ , /slæˈ-/ ), also known as
OLD CHURCH SLAVIC (/ˈslɑːvɪk, ˈslæv-/ ; often abbreviated to
OCS; self-name словѣ́ньскъ ѩꙁꙑ́къ, slověnĭskŭ
językŭ), was the first Slavic literary language . The 9th-century
Saints Cyril and Methodius are credited with
standardizing the language and using it in translating the
* 1 History * 2 Script
* 3 Phonology
* 3.1 Consonants * 3.2 Vowels * 3.3 Phonotactics * 3.4 Morphophonemic alternations
* 4 Grammar
* 5 Basis and local influences
* 5.1.1 Moravian recension
* 5.2.1 Bulgarian recension * 5.2.2 Macedonian recension
* 5.3 Later recensions
* 5.3.1 Serbian recension * 5.3.2 Russian recension * 5.3.3 Middle Bulgarian * 5.3.4 Bosnian recension * 5.3.5 Croatian recension
* 6 Canon * 7 Sample text * 8 Authors
* 9 Nomenclature
* 9.1 Modern Slavic nomenclature
* 10 See also * 11 References * 12 Bibliography * 13 External links
A page from the Flowery Triod (Triod' cvetnaja) from about 1491, one of the oldest printed Byzantine-Slavonic books, National Library of Poland .
The language was standardized for the mission of the two apostles to
As part of the preparation for the mission, in 862/863, the
Glagolitic alphabet was created and the most important prayers and
liturgical books , including the Aprakos Evangeliar (a Gospel Book
lectionary containing only feast-day and Sunday readings), the Psalter
Acts of the Apostles
In 885, the use of Old
Church Slavonic in
Apart from the Slavic countries, Old
Church Slavonic has been used as
a liturgical language by the
Romanian Orthodox Church
Church Slavonic was written with the Glagolitic
alphabet , but later Glagolitic was replaced by Cyrillic , which was
developed in the
First Bulgarian Empire
For Old Church Slavonic, the following segments are reconstructible. The sounds are given in Slavic transliterated form rather than in IPA, as the exact realisation is uncertain and often differs depending on the area that a text originated from.
LABIAL DENTAL PALATAL VELAR
PLOSIVE p b t d
t͡s d͡z t͡ʃ
s z ʃ ʒ x
NASAL m n nʲ
* The letter щ denoted different sounds in different dialects and is not shown in the table. In Bulgaria, it represented the sequence /ʃt/, and it is normally transliterated as št for that reason. Farther west and north, it was probably /c(ː)/ or /tɕ/ like in modern Macedonian, Torlakian and Serbian/Croatian. * /dz/ appears mostly in early texts, becoming /z/ later on. * The distinction between l, n and r, on one hand, and palatal l', n' and r', on the other, is not always indicated in writing. When it is, it is shown by a palatization diacritic over the letter: л҄ н҄ р҄.
Oral vowels Front unrounded Back unrounded Back Rounded
i ɯ u
Nasal vowels FRONT BACK
* Accent is not indicated in writing and must be inferred from later
languages and from reconstructions of
* The pronunciation of yat ě differed by area. In
Several notable constraints on the distribution of the phonemes can be identified, mostly resulting from the tendencies occurring within the Common Slavic period, such as intrasyllabic synharmony and the law of open syllables. For consonant and vowel clusters and sequences of a consonant and a vowel, the following constraints can be ascertained:
* Two adjacent consonants tend not to share identical features of manner of articulation * No syllable ends in a consonant * Every obstruent agrees in voicing with the following obstruent * Velars do not occur before front vowels * Phonetically palatalized consonants do not occur before certain back vowels * The back vowels /y/ and /ъ/ as well as front vowels other than /i/ do not occur word-initially: the two back vowels take prothetic /v/ and the front vowels prothetic /j/. Initial /a/ may take either prothetic consonant or none at all. * Vowel sequences are attested in only one lexeme (paǫčina 'spider's web') and in the suffixes /aa/ and /ěa/ of the imperfect * At morpheme boundaries, the following vowel sequences occur: /ai/, /au/, /ao/, /oi/, /ou/, /oo/, /ěi/, /ěo/
As a result of the first and the second Slavic palatalizations, velars alternate with dentals and palatals. In addition, as a result of a process usually termed iotation (or iodization), velars and dentals alternate with palatals in various inflected forms and in word formation.
ALTERNATIONS IN VELAR CONSONANTS ORIGINAL /k/ /g/ /x/ /sk/ /zg/ /sx/
FIRST PALATALIZATION AND IOTATION /č/ /ž/ /š/ /št/ /žd/ /š/
SECOND PALATALIZATION /c/ /dz/ /s/ /sc/, /st/ /zd/ /sc/
ALTERNATIONS IN OTHER CONSONANTS ORIGINAL /b/ /p/ /sp/ /d/ /zd/ /t/ /st/ /z/ /s/ /l/ /sl/ /m/ /n/ /sn/ /zn/ /r/ /tr/ /dr/
IOTATION /bl'/ /pl'/
/žd/ /žd/ /št/ /št/ /ž/ /š/ /l'/ /šl'/ /ml'/ /n'/ /šn'/ /žn'/ /r'/ /štr'/ /ždr'/
In some forms the alternations of /c/ with /č/ and of /dz/ with /ž/ occur, in which the corresponding velar is missing. The dental alternants of velars occur regularly before /ě/ and /i/ in the declension and in the imperative, and somewhat less regularly in various forms after /i/, /ę/, /ь/ and /rь/. The palatal alternants of velars occur before front vowels in all other environments, where dental alternants do not occur, as well as in various places in inflection and word formation described below.
As a result of earlier alternations between short and long vowels in roots in Proto-Indo-European , Proto-Balto-Slavic and Proto-Slavic times, and of the fronting of vowels after palatalized consonants, the following vowel alternations are attested in OCS: /ь/ : /i/; /ъ/ : /y/ : /u/; /e/ : /ě/ : /i/; /o/ : /a/; /o/ : /e/; /ě/ : /a/; /ъ/ : /ь/; /y/ : /i/; /ě/ : /i/; /y/ : /ę/.
Vowel:∅ alternations sometimes occurred as a result of sporadic loss of weak yer , which later occurred in almost all Slavic dialects. The phonetic value of the corresponding vocalized strong jer is dialect-specific.
Main article: Old Church Slavonic grammar
As an ancient Indo-European language, OCS has a highly inflective morphology. Inflected forms are divided in two groups, nominals and verbs. Nominals are further divided into nouns, adjectives and pronouns. Numerals inflect either as nouns or pronouns, with 1-4 showing gender agreement as well.
Nominals can be declined in three grammatical genders (masculine, feminine, neuter), three numbers (singular, plural, dual ) and seven cases : nominative , vocative , accusative , instrumental , dative , genitive , and locative . There are five basic inflectional classes for nouns: o/jo-stems, a/ja-stems, i-stems, u-stems and consonant stems. Forms throughout the inflectional paradigm usually exhibit morphophonemic alternations.
Fronting of vowels after palatals and j yielded dual inflectional class o : jo and a : ja, whereas palatalizations affected stem as a synchronic process (N sg. vlьkъ, V sg. vlьče; L sg. vlьcě). Productive classes are o/jo-, a/ja- and i-stems. Sample paradigms are given in the table below:
Sample declensional classes for nouns
SINGULAR DUAL PLURAL
GLOSS STEM TYPE NOM VOC ACC GEN LOC DAT INSTR NOM/VOC/ACC GEN/LOC DAT/INSTR NOM/VOC ACC GEN LOC DAT INSTR
"city" o m. gradъ grade gradъ grada gradě gradu gradomь grada gradu gradoma gradi grady gradъ graděxъ gradomъ grady
"knife" jo m. nožь nožu nožь noža noži nožu nožemь noža nožu nožema noži nožę nožь nožixъ nožemъ noži
"wolf" o m vlьkъ vlьče vlьkъ vlьka vlьcě vlьku vlьkomь vlьka vlьku vlьkoma vlьci vlьky vlьkъ vlьcěxъ vlьkomъ vlьky
"wine" o n. vino vino vino vina vině vinu vinomь vině vinu vinoma vina vina vinъ viněxъ vinomъ viny
"field" jo n. polje polje polje polja polji polju poljemь polji polju poljema polja polja poljь poljixъ poljemъ polji
"woman" a f. žena ženo ženǫ ženy ženě ženě ženojǫ ženě ženu ženama ženy ženy ženъ ženaxъ ženamъ ženami
"soul" ja f. duša duše dušǫ dušę duši duši dušejǫ duši dušu dušama dušę dušę dušь dušaxъ dušamъ dušami
"hand" a f. rǫka rǫko rǫkǫ rǫky rǫcě rǫcě rǫkojǫ rǫcě rǫku rǫkama rǫky rǫky rǫkъ rǫkaxъ rǫkamъ rǫkami
"bone" i f. kostь kosti kostь kosti kosti kosti kostьjǫ kosti kostьju kostьma kosti kosti kostьjь kostьxъ kostъmъ kostъmi
"home" u m. domъ domu domъ/-a domu domu domovi domъmь domy domovu domъma domove domy domovъ domъxъ domъmъ domъmi
Adjectives are inflected as o/jo-stems (masculine and neuter) and a/ja-stems (feminine), in three genders. They could have short (indefinite) or long (definite) variants, the latter being formed by suffixing to the indefinite form the anaphoric third-person pronoun jь.
Synthetic verbal conjugation is expressed in present, aorist and imperfect tenses while perfect, pluperfect, future and conditional tenses/moods are made by combining auxiliary verbs with participles or synthetic tense forms. Sample conjugation for the verb vesti "to lead" (underlyingly ved-ti) is given in the table below.
Sample conjugation of the verb vesti "to lead" PERSON/NUMBER PRESENT ASIGMATIC (SIMPLE, ROOT) AORIST SIGMATIC (S-) AORIST NEW (OX) AORIST IMPERFECT IMPERATIVE
1 sg. vedǫ vedъ věsъ vedoxъ veděaxъ
2 sg. vedeši vede vede vede veděaše vedi
3 sg. vedetъ vede vede vede veděaše vedi
1 dual vedevě vedově věsově vedoxově veděaxově veděvě
2 dual vedeta vedeta věsta vedosta veděašeta veděta
3 dual vedete vedete věste vedoste veděašete
1 plural vedemъ vedomъ věsomъ vedoxomъ veděaxomъ veděmъ
2 plural vedete vedete věste vedoste veděašete veděte
3 plural vedǫtъ vedǫ věsę vedošę veděaxǫ
BASIS AND LOCAL INFLUENCES
Part of a series on the
EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCH
* Structure * Theology (History of theology ) * Liturgy * Church history * Holy Mysteries * View of salvation * View of Mary * View of icons
* Crucifixion / Resurrection / Ascension of Jesus
* Seven Ecumenical Councils :
* First * Second * Third * Fourth * Fifth * Sixth * Seventh
* Other important councils:
* Quinisext Council * Constantinople IV * Constantinople V * Jassy * Jerusalem
* History of Orthodox Theology
* (20th century (Neo-Palamism) )
* Contemplative prayer
* Essence vs. Energies
* Differences from the Catholic Church * Opposition to the Filioque * Opposition to papal supremacy
Liturgy and worship
* Divine Liturgy * Divine Services
* Paschal cycle * 12 Great Feasts * Other feasts:
* The four fasting periods:
Athanasius of Alexandria
Ephrem the Syrian
* v * t * e
Written evidence of Old
Church Slavonic survives in a relatively
small body of manuscripts , most of them written in First Bulgarian
Empire during the late 10th and the early 11th centuries. The language
has a Southern Slavic basis with an admixture of Western Slavic
features inherited during the mission of
Saints Cyril and Methodius to
The only well-preserved manuscript of the Moravian recension, the
Kiev Folia , is characterised by the replacement of some Southern
Slavic phonetic and lexical features with Western Slavic ones.
Manuscripts written in the
Second Bulgarian Empire
* Most significantly, the yer (extra-short ) vowels: /ĭ/ and /ŭ/ * Nasal vowels : /ɛ̃/ and /ɔ̃/ * Near-open articulation of the yat vowel (/æ/) * Palatal consonants /ɲ/ and /ʎ/ from Proto-Slavic *ň and *ľ * Proto-Slavic declension system based on stem endings, including those that later disappeared in attested languages (such as u-stems) * Dual as a distinct grammatical number from singular and plural * Aorist , imperfect , Proto-Slavic paradigms for participles
Old Church Slavonic is also likely to have preserved an extremely archaic type of accentuation (probably close to the Chakavian dialect of modern Serbo-Croatian), but unfortunately, no accent marks appear in the written manuscripts.
The Southern Slavic nature of the language is evident from the following variations:
* morphosyntactic use of the dative possessive case in personal pronouns and nouns: 'рѫка ти' (rǫka ti, "your hand"), 'отъпоущенье грѣхомъ' (otŭpuštenĭje grěxomŭ, "remission of sins"); periphrastic future tense using the verb 'хотѣти' (xotěti, "to want"); use of the comparative form 'мьнии' (mĭniji, "smaller") to denote "younger".
* morphosyntactic use of suffixed demonstrative pronouns 'тъ, та, то' (tŭ, ta, to). In Bulgarian and Macedonian these developed into suffixed definite articles.
Old Church Slavonic has some extra features in common with Bulgarian:
* Near-open articulation of the Yat vowel (ě); still preserved in the Bulgarian dialects of the Rhodope mountains ; * The existence of /ʃt/ and /ʒd/ as reflexes of Proto-Slavic *ť (< *tj and *gt, *kt) and *ď (< *dj). * Use of possessive dative for personal pronouns and nouns, as in 'братъ ми' (bratŭ mi, "my brother"), 'рѫка ти' (rǫka ti, "your hand"), 'отъпоущенье грѣхомъ' (otŭpuštenĭje grěxomŭ, "remission of sins"), 'храмъ молитвѣ' (xramŭ molitvě, 'house of prayer'), etc. * Periphrastic compound future tense formed with the auxiliary verb 'хотѣти' (xotěti, "to want"), for example 'хоштѫ писати' (xoštǫ pisati, "I will write").
PROTO-SLAVIC OCS BULG. CZECH MACED. POL. RUS. SLOVAK SLOVEN. CRO./SERB.
*dʲ ʒd ʒd z ɟ dz ʑ dz j dʑ
*ɡt/kt, *tʲ ʃt ʃt ts c ts tɕ ts tʃ tɕ
The language was standardized for the first time by the mission of
the two apostles to
In the Prague fragments the only Moravian influence is replacing /ʃt/ with /ts/ and /ʒd/ with /z/. This recension is exemplified by the Kiev Folia. Certain other linguistic characteristics include:
* Confusion between the letters Big yus (Ѫ) and Uk (оу) - this occurs once in the Kiev Folia, when the expected form въсоудъ vъsudъ is spelled въсѫдъ vъsǫdъ * /ts/ from Proto-Slavic *tj, use of /dz/ from *dj, /ʃtʃ/ *skj * Use of the words mьša, cirky, papežь, prěfacija, klepati, piskati etc. * Preservation of the consonant cluster /dl/ (e.g. modlitvami) * Use of the ending –ъmь instead of –omь in the masculine singular instrumental , use of the pronoun čьso
FIRST BULGARIAN EMPIRE
Old Church Slavonic language is developed in the First Bulgarian Empire and was taught in Preslav (Bulgarian capital between 893 and 972), and in Ohrid (Bulgarian capital between 991/997 and 1015). It did not represent one regional dialect but a generalized form of early eastern South Slavic , which cannot be localized. The existence of two major literary centres in the Empire led in the period from the 9th to the 11th centuries to the emergence of two recensions (otherwise called "redactions "), termed "Bulgarian" and "Macedonian" respectively. Some researchers do not differentiate between manuscripts of the two recensions, preferring to group them together in a "Macedo-Bulgarian" or simply "Bulgarian" recension. Others, as Horace Lunt , have changed their opinion with time. In the mid-1970s, Lunt held that the differences in the initial OCS were neither great enough nor nor consistent enough to grant a distinction between a 'Macedonian' recension and a 'Bulgarian' one. A decade later, however, Lunt argued in favour of such a distinction, illustrating his point with paleographic, phonological and other differences. The development of Old Church Slavonic literacy had the effect of preventing the assimilation of the South Slavs into neighboring cultures, which promoted the formation of a distinct Bulgarian identity.
The manuscripts of the Bulgarian recension or "Eastern" variant are among the oldest of the Old Church Slavonic language. This recension was centred around the Preslav Literary School . Since the earliest datable Cyrillic inscriptions were found in the area of Preslav , it is this school which is credited with the development of the Cyrillic alphabet which gradually replaced the Glagolic one. A number of prominent Bulgarian writers and scholars worked at the Preslav Literary School, including Naum of Preslav (until 893), Constantine of Preslav , John Exarch , Chernorizets Hrabar , etc. The main linguistic features of this recension are the following:
* The Glagolitic and Cyrillic alphabets were used concurrently. * In some documents the original supershort vowels ъ and ь merged with one letter taking the place of the other. * The original ascending reflex (rь, lь) of syllabic /r/ and /l/ was sometimes metathesized to ьr, ьl; or a combination of the ordering was used. * The central vowel ы y merged with ъи ъi. * Sometimes the use of letter ⟨Ѕ⟩ (/dz/) was merged with that of ⟨З⟩ (/z/). * The verb forms нарицаѭ, нарицаѥши (naricajǫ, naricaješi) were substituted or alternated with наричꙗѭ, наричꙗеши (naričjajǫ, naričjaješi).
The manuscripts of the Macedonian recension or "Western" variant are among the oldest of the Old Church Slavonic language. The recension is sometimes named Macedonian because its literary centre, Ohrid, lies in the historical region of Macedonia . At that period, administratively Ohrid formed part of the province of Kutmichevitsa in the First Bulgarian Empire until the Byzantine conquest . The main literary centre of this dialect was the Ohrid Literary School , whose most prominent member and most likely founder, was Saint Clement of Ohrid who was commissioned by Boris I of Bulgaria to teach and instruct the future clergy of the state in the Slavonic language. The language variety that was used in the area started shaping the modern Macedonian dialects . This recension is represented by the Codex Zographensis and Marianus , among others. The main linguistic features of this recension include:
* Continuous usage of the
Glagolitic alphabet instead of Cyrillic
* A feature called "mixing (confusion) of the nasals" in which
/ɔ̃/ became after /rʲ lʲ nʲ/, and in a cluster of a labial
consonant and /lʲ/. /ɛ̃/ became after sibilant consonants and /j/
* Wide use of the soft consonant clusters /ʃt/ and /ʒd/; in the
later stages, these developed into the modern Macedonian phonemes /c/
* Strict distinction in the articulation of the yers and their
vocalisation in strong position (ъ > /o/ and ь > /e/) or deletion in
* Confusion of /ɛ̃/ with yat and yat with /e/
* Denasalization in the latter stages: /ɛ̃/ > /e/ and /ɔ̃/ >
/a/, оу, ъ
* Wider usage and retention of the phoneme /dz/ (which in most other
Main article: Church Slavonic
Later use of the language in a number of medieval Slavic polities resulted in the adjustment of Old Church Slavonic to the local vernacular, though a number of Southern Slavic, Moravian or Bulgarian features also survived. Significant later recensions of Old Church Slavonic (referred to as Church Slavonic ) in the present time include: Slovene , Croatian , Serbian and Russian . In all cases, denasalization of the yuses occurred; so that only Old Church Slavonic, modern Polish and some isolated Bulgarian dialects retained the old Slavonic nasal vowels.
The Serbian recension was written mostly in Cyrillic, but also in
Glagolitic alphabet (depending on region); by the 12th century the
Serbs used exclusively the Cyrillic alphabet (and
* Nasal vowels were denasalised and in one case closed: *ę > e, *ǫ > u, e.g. OCS rǫka > Sr. ruka ("hand"), OCS językъ > Sr. jezik ("tongue, language") * Extensive use of diacritical signs by the Resava dialect * Use of letters i, y for the sound /i/ in other manuscripts of the Serbian recension
Due to the annexation of
The Russian recension emerged after the 10th century on the basis of the earlier Bulgarian recension, from which it differed slightly. Its main features are:
* Substitution of the nasal sound /õ/ with * Merging of letters ę and ja
The line between OCS and post-OCS manuscripts is arbitrary, and terminology varies. The common term "Middle Bulgarian" is usually contrasted to "Old Bulgarian" (an alternative name for Old Church Slavonic), and loosely used for manuscripts whose language demonstrates a broad spectrum of regional and temporal dialect features after the 11th century.
* Use of letters i, y, ě for the sound /i/ in Bosnian manuscripts
* Denasalisation of PSl. *ę > e, PSl. *ǫ > u, e.g. Cr. ruka : OCS rǫka ("hand"), Cr. jezik : OCS językъ ("tongue, language") * PSl. *y > i, e.g. Cr. biti : OCS byti ("to be") * PSl. weak-positioned yers *ъ and *ь in merged, probably representing some schwa-like sound, and only one of the letters was used (usually 'ъ'). Evident in earliest documents like Baška tablet . * PSl. strong-positioned yers *ъ and *ь were vocalized into a in most Štokavian and Čakavian speeches, e.g. Cr. pas : OCS pьsъ ("dog") * PSl. hard and soft syllabic liquids *r and r′ retained syllabicity and were written as simply r, as opposed to OCS sequences of mostly rь and rъ, e.g. krstъ and trgъ as opposed to OCS krьstъ and trъgъ ("cross", "market") * PSl. #vьC and #vъC > #uC, e.g. Cr. udova : OCS. vъdova ("widow")
The core corpus of Old Church Slavonic manuscripts is usually referred to as canon. Manuscripts must satisfy certain linguistic, chronological and cultural criteria to be incorporated into the canon: they must not significantly depart from the language and tradition of Constantine and Methodius, usually known as the Cyrillo-Methodian tradition.
For example, the Freising Fragments , dating from the 10th century, show some linguistic and cultural traits of Old Church Slavonic, but they are usually not included in the canon, as some of the phonological features of the writings appear to belong to certain Pannonian Slavic dialect of the period. Similarly, the Ostromir Gospels exhibits dialectal features that classify it as East Slavic , rather than South Slavic so it is not included in the canon either. On the other hand, the Kiev Missal is included in the canon even though it manifests some West Slavic features and contains Western liturgy because of the Bulgarian linguistic layer and connection to the Moravian mission.
Manuscripts are usually classified in two groups, depending on the alphabet used, Cyrillic or Glagolitic. With the exception of the Kiev Missal and Glagolita Clozianus, which exhibit West Slavic and Croatian features respectively, all Glagolitic texts are assumed to be of the Macedonian recension:
Kiev Missal (Ki, KM), seven folios, late 10th century
Codex Zographensis , (Zo), 288 folios, 10th or 11th century
Codex Marianus (Mar), 173 folios, early 11th century
All Cyrillic manuscripts are of the Bulgarian recension and date from the 11th century except for the Zographos, which is of the Macedonian recension:
* Sava\'s book (Sa, Sav), 126 folios
Codex Suprasliensis , (Supr), 284 folios
Enina Apostle (En, Enin), 39 folios
* Hilandar Folios (Hds, Hil), 2 folios
* Undol'skij's Fragments (Und), 2 folios
* Macedonian Folio (Mac), 1 folio
* Zographos Fragments (Zogr. Fr.), 2 folios
Here is the Lord\'s Prayer in Old Church Slavonic:
CYRILLIC TRANSLITERATION TRANSLATION
Отьчє нашь· ижє ѥси на нєбєсѣхъ: да свѧтитъ сѧ имѧ Твоѥ· да придєтъ цѣсар҄ьствиѥ Твоѥ· да бѫдєтъ волꙗ Твоꙗ ꙗко на нєбєси и на ꙁємл҄и: хлѣбъ нашь насѫщьнꙑи даждь намъ дьньсь· и отъпоусти намъ длъгꙑ нашѧ ꙗко и мꙑ отъпоущаѥмъ длъжьникомъ нашимъ· и нє въвєди насъ въ искоушєниѥ· нъ иꙁбави нꙑ отъ нєприꙗꙁни: ꙗко твоѥ ѥстъ цѣсар҄ьствиѥ и сила и слава въ вѣкꙑ вѣкомъ Аминь჻
Otĭče našĭ Iže jesi na nebesěxŭ. Da svętitŭ sę Imę Tvoje da pridetŭ cěsar'ĭstvije Tvoje da bǫdetŭ volja Tvoja jako na nebesi i na zeml'i. Xlěbŭ našĭ nasǫštĭnyi daždĭ namŭ dĭnĭsĭ i otŭpusti namŭ dlŭgy našę jako i my otŭpuštajemŭ dlŭžĭnikomŭ našimŭ i ne vŭvedi nasŭ vŭ iskušenije nŭ izbavi ny otŭ neprijazni. Jako Tvoje jestŭ cěsar'ĭstvije i sila i slava vŭ věky věkomŭ. Aminĭ.
Our father Thou Who art in heaven. May hallowed be Thy Name may come Thy empire may become Thy will as in heaven, also on Earth. Our supersubstantial bread give us this day and release us of our debts as we also release our debtors, and do not lead us to temptation but free us from the evil. As Thine is the empire and the power and the glory unto the ages of ages. Amen.
The history of Old
Church Slavonic writing includes a northern
tradition begun by the mission to
Old Church Slavonic's first writings, translations of Christian liturgical and Biblical texts, were produced by Byzantine missionaries Saint Cyril and Saint Methodius , mostly during their mission to Great Moravia .
The most important authors in Old
Church Slavonic after the death of
Methodius and the dissolution of the Great Moravian academy were
Ohrid (active also in Great Moravia), Constantine of
Chernorizetz Hrabar and
John Exarch , all of whom worked in
The name of the language in Old
Church Slavonic texts was simply
Slavic (словѣ́ньскъ ѩꙁꙑ́къ, slověnĭskŭ
językŭ), derived from the word for
The term Old Macedonian is occasionally used by Western scholars in a regional context.
The obsolete term Old Slovenian was used by early 19th century
scholars who conjectured that the language was based on the dialect of
MODERN SLAVIC NOMENCLATURE
Here are some of the names used by speakers of modern Slavic languages:
* Belarusian : старажытнаславянская мова (staražytnasłavianskaja mova), ‘Old Slavic’ * Bulgarian : старобългарски (starobălgarski), ‘Old Bulgarian’, старославянски (staroslavjanski), ‘Old Slavic’ * Bosnian : staroslavenski / старослaвенски, ‘Old Slavic’ * Croatian : staroslavenski, ‘Old Slavic’ * Czech : staroslověnština, ‘Old Slavic’ * Macedonian : старословенски (staroslovenski), ‘Old Slavic’ * Polish : staro-cerkiewno-słowiański, ‘Old Church Slavic’ * Russian : старославянский язык (staroslavjánskij jazýk), ‘Old Slavic language’ * Serbian : старословенски / staroslovenski, ‘Old Slavic’ * Slovak : staroslovienčina, ‘Old Slavic’ * Slovene : stara cerkvena slovanščina, ‘Old Church Slavic’ * Ukrainian : старослов’янська мова (staroslovjans'ka mova), ‘Old Slavic’
CHURCH SLAVIC EDITION of , the free encyclopedia
* ^ Hammarström, Harald; Forkel, Robert; Haspelmath, Martin; Bank, Sebastian, eds. (2016). "Church Slavic". Glottolog 2.7 . Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. * ^ A B Wells, John C. (2008), Longman Pronunciation Dictionary (3rd ed.), Longman, ISBN 9781405881180 * ^ Jones, Daniel (2003) , Peter Roach, James Hartmann and Jane Setter, eds., English Pronouncing Dictionary, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 3-12-539683-2 CS1 maint: Uses editors parameter (link ) * ^ Waldman & Mason 2006 , p. 752: "There is disagreement as to whether Cyril and his brother Methodius were Greek or Slavic, but they knew the Slavic dialect spoken in Macedonia, adjacent to Thessalonika." * ^ Cizevskij 2000 , p. 27.
* ^ After the
* Alexander, June Granatir (2005). "Slovakia". In Richard C. Frucht,
ed., Eastern Europe: An Introduction to the People, Lands, and
Culture, Volume 2: Central Europe, pp. 283–328. Santa Barbara, CA:
ABC-CLIO . ISBN 978-1-576-07800-6 .
* Birnbaum, Henrik (1991). Aspects of the Slavic Middle Ages and
Slavic Renaissance Culture. New York, NY: Peter Lang. ISBN
* Cizevskij, Dmitrij (2000) . Comparative History of Slavic
Literatures. Nashville, TN:
Vanderbilt University Press . ISBN
* Crampton, R. J. (2005). A Concise History of
Wikibooks has a book on the topic of: OLD CHURCH SLAVONIC
Wikimedia Commons has media related to OLD CHURCH SLAVONIC .
OLD CHURCH SLAVONIC REPOSITORY of
Church Slavonic Online, a comprehensive tutorial at the A.
Richard Diebold Center for Indo-European Language and Culture,
Linguistics Research Center,
University of Texas at Austin
* v * t * e