scholarly journals Analysis of a few verbs (based on the 16–17th century texts of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania)

2014 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Anželika Smetonienė
Keyword(s):  
Musical Instrument ◽  
17Th Century ◽  
Word Formation ◽  
Slavic Language ◽  
Old Russian ◽  
Wind Instrument ◽  
Language Data ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Grand Duchy

This article analyses a few borrowed verbs found in the ancient Lithuanian writings of the 16–17th century Grand Duchy of Lithuania. They are: bū̃bnyti, -ija, -ijo ‘to beat a drum, to beat or knock with something; fig. to speak widely', sū̃dyti, -ija, -ijo ‘to investigate a case in court, to judge; to condemn; to solve, consider; to advise', triū̃byti, -ija, -ijo ‘ to blow a trumpet, to tootle; to cry, to shout loudly; to gulp, to guzzle, to slurp. Their cognates bū̃bnas ‘a drum; fig. a bleak place with no grass, a shore, a bank; the colour of (playing) cards, sū̃das ‘a public, state body to consider court cases, a court; court premises; court proceedings; court decision, verdict, punishment; judge; expression of opinion, assessment, triūbà ‘a wooden or metal pipe-shaped wind instrument, a pipe (musical instrument), a horn, trumpet; a pipe; a curb; a chimney pipe; binoculars'. Some Lithuanian suffixes (e.g., -avo-) are more common only in verbs of a foreign origin, whereas -y-/-i- are equally frequent in the composition of Lithuanian derivatives formed from non-borrowed nouns. On the basis of the principles of word formation in Lithuanian and by means a comparison with the Slavic language data, the present article is an attempt to show how such verbs formed from borrowed root segments and the suffixes -y-/-i- can be interpreted. The Slavic language data were obtained from the etymological and historical dictionaries of Old Belarussian, Old Ukrainian, Old Polish, Old Russian and the dictionaries of Belorussian, Ukrainian, Polish, Russian dialects and the Slavic proto-language.

В дополнение к списку межславянских лексических заимствований в русском приказном языке XVII в.

2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-49
Keyword(s):  
17Th Century ◽  
Great Depth ◽  
Written Language ◽  
Russian Language ◽  
Slavic Language ◽  
Slavic Languages ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
History Of ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Grand Duchy

Данная статья посвящена проблематике сложных межславянских языковых контактов в XVII в. и продолжает цикл публикаций автора на эту тему. Исследование опирается на историко-филологи-ческие методы, которые помогают установить направление языкового влияния при контактирова-нии генетически родственных языков. Успешному применению указанных методов способствует использование данных исторических словарей восточнославянских и западнославянских языков с большой глубиной диахронии и широким кругом памятников письменности разных жанров и различного происхождения. Эта информация помогает выявлять межславянские заимствования и верифицировать результаты предшествующих исследований.В публикации на материале дипломатической корреспонденции Московского государства рас-сматривается происхождение и история четырех лексем: навезенье ‘пребывание в неволе, в плену, в заключении’, надарити / надарыти ‘одарить, наделить чем-л.; подарить что-л.’, новокрещенецъ / но-вокщенецъ ‘тот, кто недавно крестился, принял христианство; лицо, перешедшее в христианство из другого вероисповедания’, новообранный ‘вновь избранный, новоизбранный’ во всех контактиро-вавших языках: русском, польском, письменности Великого княжества Литовского, а также белорус-ском и украинском языках. Цель автора – доказать, что эти слова являются лексическими заимство-ваниями из польского языка. Исследование основано на тщательном сопоставлении данных разного типа словарей русского, белорусского, украинского и польского языков, что позволило доказать неисконность рассматриваемых лексем в русском языке и установить источник заимствования, а также выявить посредническую роль письменности ВКЛ в польско-русских языковых контактах.В результате анализа материала было установлено, что все четыре лексемы, вероятнее всего, яв-ляются полонизмами, при этом слова надарити / надарыти, новокрещенецъ / новокщенецъ и ново-обранный проникли в русский письменный язык XVII в., по-видимому, благодаря посредничеству письменности ВКЛ. Кроме того, для лексемы надарити / надарыти была конкретизирована хро-нологическая характеристика, а для слова новообранный удревнено время появления его в русском письменном языке.Материалы данной публикации могут быть использованы для дополнения и уточнения информа-ции этимологических и исторических словарей славянских языков.This paper is devoted to the problems of complex inter-Slavic language contacts in the 17th century and continues the author’s cycle of publications on this topic. The study is based on historical and philological methods that help to establish the direction of language influence when genetically related languages contact. The successful application of these methods is facilitated by the use of historical dictionaries of the West Slavic and East Slavic languages with a great depth of diachrony and a wide range of written monuments of different genres and various origins. This information helps to identify inter-Slavic language borrowings and verify the results of previous studies.The paper examines the origin and history of four words found in the Muscovite diplomatic correspondence: navezenie ‘captivity, imprisonment’, nadariti / nadaryti ‘to give, to bestow’, novokreščeniec ‘neophyte; Anabaptist’, novoobrannyj ‘newly elected’ in all contacting languages: Russian, Polish, the written language of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as well as Belarusian and Ukrainian. The author aims at proving that these words are lexical borrowings from the Polish language. The study is based on a careful comparison of data of various types of dictionaries of the Russian, Belarusian, Ukrainian, and Polish languages, which made it possible to prove the foreign origin of these tokens in the Russian language and to establish the source of borrowings as well as to identify the intermediary role of the written language of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in Polish–Russian language contacts.As a result of the study, it was found that all four lexemes are Polonisms. It was also established that the words nadariti / nadaryti, novokreščeniec, and novoobrannyj were introduced to the Russian written language of the 17th century, most likely due to the mediation of the written language of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. In addition, the time of appearance of the word nadariti / nadaryti in the Russian written language was specified, and an earlier chronology was established for the word novoobrannyj.The materials in this publication can be used to supplement and clarify the information of the etymological and historical dictionaries of the Slavic languages.

scholarly journals Lithuanian aspirations for an equality with the Crown in the 17th century. An attempt to systematize

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 181-187
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Ziober
Keyword(s):  
Local Government ◽  
17Th Century ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Government Institutions ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Vice Chancellors ◽  
Grand Duchy

AbstractThe activity of representatives of the elites of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which sought equality with the Crowners, but also the defense of their prerogatives was present from the first days after the signing of the Lublin Union. Analyzing this issue, it should be remembered that the Crown and Lithuania were separated state bodies, which union did not merge into one country, but formed a federal state. They were characterized by a separate treasury, army, offices, judiciary, law, local government institutions, i.e. basically everything that determines the administrative independence of the country. Lithuanians wanted to guarantee the same rights as the Crown nobility had, however, remaining separate. Thus, offices were established having the same prerogatives in the Crown and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, such as the Grand and Field Hetman, Chancellor and Vice-Chancellors, Treasurer and Grand and Court Marshal, as well as a number of land and town dignities and dignitaries. The first of these were allocated appropriate seats in the senate, behind their crown counterparts, which caused quarrels between Poles and Lithuanians. However, manifestations of activity guaranteeing and “reminding” Poles of Lithuania’s separateness from the Crown were evident throughout the entire existence of the federal Commonwealth.

scholarly journals The Image of Lithuania in English Publications in the 17th Century

2011 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-118
Author(s):  
Gintautas Sliesoriūnas
Keyword(s):  
Detailed Analysis ◽  
English Language ◽  
Close Contact ◽  
17Th Century ◽  
Related Issue ◽  
Historical Sources ◽  
English Society ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Grand Duchy ◽  
West European

In the 17th century, as contacts between citizens of England, which was gaining increasing importance in Europe, and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL) intensified, the phenomenon of the image of Lithuania in English and Scottish societies, as well as the level of their knowledge about the GDL, became more important. The issue of mentioning Lithuania in West European historical sources and the related issue of the image of Lithuania in the region in the 16th–17th centuries has already been analysed in Lithuania, albeit not thoroughly enough. However, the question of the image of Lithuania in English publications in the 17th–18th centuries still requires more detailed analysis. This article discusses Lithuania-related facts that could have been familiar not only to the narrow circle of people that were in close contact with the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, but also to wider well-read English and Scottish society. The few educated members of English society who had an interest in learning more about Lithuania had access to publications in various languages published in different countries. However, this article dwells almost exclusively on publications in the English language dating from the 17th century that facilitated the rendering of knowledge and opinions about Lithuania to a much wider circle of people who read in the English language.

scholarly journals Loanwords in the catechism of M. Petkevičius (1598): slavisms of unknown origin

2017 ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
Anželika Smetonienė
Keyword(s):  
Unknown Origin ◽  
Old Russian ◽  
Slavic Languages ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Grand Duchy

There are only few studies on lexis of catechism of M. Petkevičius (PK) (1598), even if this is the second book in Lithuanian language in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the first hymnal in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. J. Kruopas concluded vocabulary of this catechism and noted it's loanwords, however, an origin of these words has not been explained. Also, there is no list of equivalents of these borrowed words in Slavic languages, because aim of J. Kruopa's work wasn't to determinate origin of loanwords. The object of this article is Slavic loanwords in the PK, the aim – to specify and to list Slavisms of unknown origin and their equivalents in the Slavic languages. To achieve the aim the following objectives were set: to collect all borrowed words and Slavic stem words from the selected text; to determinate criteria, that can indicate origin of Slavisms, and to classify Slavisms depending on their origin. In total separate 410 Slavic stem lexemes were found in the catechism of M. Petkevičius. After all these lexemes were generalized (e. g. only forms without prefixes are presented), 344 words left: 30 revealed itself to be hybrids, 149 – Slavisms of unknown origin. It only confirms once again that sometimes it is not possible to determine the path of Slavisms into Lithuanian language due to the similarity of the Slavic languages, and therefore it is possible only to give chronologically accurate equivalents of the loanwords of the PK in the Old Russian, Ruthenian and Polish languages.

scholarly journals Słowniki w Wielkim Księstwie Litewskim – przyczynek do historii (zachodnio)ruskiej leksykografii i leksyki

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 ◽  
pp. 109-125
Author(s):  
Lilia Citko
Keyword(s):  
17Th Century ◽  
Focus Of Attention ◽  
16Th Century ◽  
Loan Words ◽  
History Of ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Grand Duchy

Dictionaries in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania – a Contribution to the History of (Western)Ruthenian Lexicography and Word-Inventory In the article an attempt to describe the oldest Western Ruthenian dictionary has been made. The analysis is based on the following texts: 1) Leksis s tolkovanīem slovenskikh mov prosto  of the first part of the 16th century, 2) Leksis siriech rechenïia v"krat"tsie s"bran(")ny. I īz slove(n)skago iazyka naprosty(ĭ) ruskīĭ diale(k)t istol(")kovany L,Z  by L. Zizaniy (Vilno 1596), 3) Leksīkon slavenorosskīĭ ī imen tl"kovanīe  by P. Berynda (Kiev 1627), 4) Sinonima slavenorosskaia (the end of the 17th century). The focus of attention is directed to lexicographic specificity of the antique texts, the elements of their macro- and microstructures, sources and techniques of material documentation, which made it possible to observe the evolution of lexicographers` methodological procedure in the range of the structure of an entry, e.g.: efforts to introduce grammatical information, qualifiers (mostly etymological and stylistic), and material exemplification.Dictionaries, which were essentially used to learn the language of liturgical celebration, contained religious vocabulary. It should be noted, however, that their authors introduced Ruthenian words of various thematic groups and stylistic registers to the translated parts of lexicons. In Berynda`s dictionary Polish loan words appeared as entries. Słowniki w Wielkim Księstwie Litewskim – przyczynek do historii (zachodnio)ruskiej leksykografii i leksykiW artykule podjęto próbę charakterystyki najstarszych słowników zachodnioru­skich na podstawie kilku źródeł: 1) Leksis s tolkovanīem slovenskikh mov prosto z pierwszej połowy XVI w.; 2) Leksis siriech rechenïia v"krat"tsie s"bran(")ny. I īz slove(n)skago iazyka naprosty(ĭ) ruskīĭ diale(k)t istol(")kovany L,Z  W. Zizaniego (Wilno 1596); 3) Leksīkon slavenorosskīĭ ī imen tl"kovanīe  P. Beryndy (Kijów 1627); 4) Sinonima slavenorosskaia  (koniec XVII w.). Głównie uwagę skupiono na specyfice leksykograficznej zabytków, elementach ich makro-i mikrostruktury, źródłach oraz sposobach dokumentacji materiału. Pozwoliło to zaobserwować pewną ewolucję warsztatu metodologicznego leksykografów w zakresie budowy artykułu hasłowego, jak np. próby wprowadzania informacji gramatycznej, kwalifikatorów (głównie etymologicznych, stylistycznych) oraz egzemplifikacji materiałowej.Słowniki, przeznaczone zasadniczo do nauki języka liturgicznego i lektury ksiąg cerkiewnych, gromadziły przede wszystkim leksykę religijną. Należy jednak zauważyć, że do przekładowej części leksykonów ich autorzy wprowadzali słownictwo ruskie należące do różnych grup tematycznych i rejestrów stylistycznych. W charakterze wyrazów hasłowych słownika Beryndy mogły występować również pożyczki polskie.

scholarly journals Кириллический рукописный учебник древнееврейского языка (список XVI в.) и его учебно-методические приемы

2013 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 7-34
Author(s):  
Сергей Юрьевич Темчин
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Word Formation ◽  
Song Of Songs ◽  
16Th Century ◽  
Learning Material ◽  
15Th Century ◽  
Presentation Methods ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
High Level ◽  
Grand Duchy

В статье обосновывается характеристика недавно обнаруженного рукописного кириллического учебника древнееврейского языка, созданного совместными усилиями православных и иудейских книжников, как учебного пособия, с методической точки зрения значительно превосходящего иные восточнославянские двуязычные справочные материалы того же времени. С этой целью подробно описаны применяемые в нем приемы, направленные на такую подачу языкового и сопутствующего текстового (религиозно-культурного) материала, которая облегчила бы его усвоение потенциальным читателем. Методическую сторону рассматриваемого памятника письменности следует признать одним из результатов еврейского вклада в его создание.Ключевые слова: Великое княжество Литовское, кириллическая письменность, иудейско-христианские отношения, древнееврейский язык, руськамова, библейские переводы, жидовствующие....Sergei TemchinCyrillic 16th-century manuscript “Manual of Hebrew” and its teaching methods A concise Manual of Hebrew, recently discovered in a Cyrillic manuscript miscellany of the 3rd quarter of the 16th century (Moscow, the Russian State Archive of Early Acts, F. Mazurin collection (f. 196), inventory 1, No 616, f. 124–130) is very important for the history of the Ruthenian written culture in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The Manual of Hebrew comprises material of three different kinds: a) some excerpts from the original Hebrew Old Testament text (Ge 2.8, 32.27–28; Ps 150; So 3.4 (or 8.2), 8.5; Is 11.12) written in Cyrillic characters; b) a bilingual Hebrew–Ruthenian vocabulary with explanatory notes; c) small quotations from the Ruthenian text of three Old Testament books (Genesis, Isaiah, Song of Songs).The meta-language used in the Manual of Hebrew is Ruthenian. The translations present in the Manual had been made directly from Hebrew. A comparison of the quotations from the Song of Songs found in the Manual and all the known Cyrillic and Glagolitic versions of this book (referring to both the manuscript and the printed sources of different periods) reveals their principal coincidence with the Ruthenian translation found in the Vilnius Old Testament Florilegium (Vilnius, Wróblewskie Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences, F 19–262). The originals of the two manuscripts probably originated in the 2nd half of the 15th century in the circle of the learned Kievan Jew Zachariah ben Aaron ha-Kohen who is also known as Skhariya, the initiator of the Novgorod movementof the Judaizers (1471–1504).The Cyrillic Manual of Hebrew is a clear evidence of this language being taught/learned in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania during the late 15th–early 16th century. The learning material and its presentation methods reveal a quite elaborate (although inconsistently implemented) pedagogical approach which puts the Manual aside from the rest of early East Slavic glossaries of the same or earlier date. Thus, the Manual presents, among other features: a) a number of original Hebrew texts written in Cyrillic, divided into small portions (each with a Ruthenian translation) which are then put together to form a continuoustext; b) certain trilingual glossary entries where Hebrew, “Greek” (in reality Slavic borrowings from Greek) and Slavic words are juxtaposed, while in other cases double translations in two different Slavic languages (Ruthenian and Old Church Slavonic) are given; c) some long elaborated definitions, sometimes containing synonymous variants or alternative translations; d) information about the sources of variant Hebrew forms or their meanings; e) information on certain grammatical (gender, plural, possessive) forms and word formation (compounds), etc.It is beyond doubt that the Cyrillic manuscript “Manual of Hebrew” is a result of joint efforts of Jewish and East Slavic bookmen, but the relatively high level of pedagogical and linguistic sophistication of the joint result is to be ascribed to the Jewish compilers of the Manual rather than to their East Slavic co-authors.

scholarly journals The Death Penalty in Magdeburgian Cities of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the Late-16th and Early-17th Century

2015 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-110
Author(s):  
Gitana Zujienė
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
17Th Century ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Grand Duchy

In the article, based on the acts of Magdeburg Law and the court books of Magdeburgian cities, the issue of the death penalty in Magdeburgian cities of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania is analysed. The most often imposed death penalties are discussed. There is an analysis of which crimes they were given for. Their use is compared with data from Poland and some Magdeburgian cities in Western Europe.

scholarly journals Lublin Union in the context of narrative minimalism and legal historical contents in the end of 16th – the first half of 17th century

2019 ◽  
pp. 22-30
Author(s):  
V. V. Halubovich
Keyword(s):  
Eastern Europe ◽  
17Th Century ◽  
Public Law ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Public ◽  
Documentary Sources ◽  
History Of ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Grand Duchy

The article analyzes the information about Lublin 1569 Union from the narrative and documentary sources that date back to the reign of the first monarchs of Vasa dynasty. The author defines main contexts of the term «union» use in the sejm constitutions and documentation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania congresses. The direct correlation between the estimates of the Union at different levels of state representative institutions of the Commonwealth is revealed. The Lublin Sejm of 1569 was a key event in the history of Eastern Europe, but in the historical works (chronicles and annals) of the second half of 16th – early 17th century information about it and its decisions are concise and general. At the end of 16th – the first half of 17th century the memory of Lublin Union was not mainly broadcast by narrative channels. In keeping the memory about 1569 events legal deeds and state institutions decisions were of considerable importance. The result of the state union with Poland was the approval of the public law standards that could not be ignored by any representative of the so-called political people of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the following centuries. The author maintains that as a whole the Grand Duchy of Lithuania gentry did not question the correctness of the 1569 choice, took and defended «Lublin myth», as under those conditions it had more benefits than losses.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document