Apostrof (Apostrophe) as a Means of Disambiguation in Number According to Antistih (Anti-Verse) Principle

Aleksandr Bolshakov
{"title":"Apostrof (Apostrophe) as a Means of Disambiguation in Number According to Antistih (Anti-Verse) Principle","authors":"Aleksandr Bolshakov","doi":"10.15688/jvolsu2.2023.4.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author of the article considers the development of the differentiating function of the apostrof (apostrophe), which is realized in the contemporary Church Slavonic language in the pronominal paradigm. The comparison of facts in grammars and old-printed editions shows that the application of apostrophe-dissimilator was not presupposed by the Grammar of 1648, and appeared in the course of the work of the Moscow Print Yard correctors (from the Service Book of 1655). It first appeared in the forms yazhe, izhe with the support of productive forms (ya, i), then it spread to the forms im, imzhe (by external analogy with other forms of DatPl) and further to the rest of the pronominal homoforms (by internal analogy). The development of this spelling innovation was consistently reflected in the Moscow editions of the second half of the 17 th century up to its stage-by-stage codification in grammars of 1721, 1723, 1725 and 1733. The pronominal nature of the apostrophe-dissimilator predetermined the limitations in its functioning; however, the acquisition of a differentiating function became a necessary stage in the formation of the system of antistih (anti-verse) in its modern form. The expansion of apostrophe functioning, which has a precedent in the Grammar by F. Maximov (1723), may contribute to the logical completion of this formation. Also, the obtained data on the development of the apostrof (apostrophe) differentiating function can be used to identify Moscow editions along with other innovations, introduced in the period of the Nikon's correctors work.","PeriodicalId":42545,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Volgogradskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta-Seriya 2-Yazykoznanie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik Volgogradskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta-Seriya 2-Yazykoznanie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2023.4.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The author of the article considers the development of the differentiating function of the apostrof (apostrophe), which is realized in the contemporary Church Slavonic language in the pronominal paradigm. The comparison of facts in grammars and old-printed editions shows that the application of apostrophe-dissimilator was not presupposed by the Grammar of 1648, and appeared in the course of the work of the Moscow Print Yard correctors (from the Service Book of 1655). It first appeared in the forms yazhe, izhe with the support of productive forms (ya, i), then it spread to the forms im, imzhe (by external analogy with other forms of DatPl) and further to the rest of the pronominal homoforms (by internal analogy). The development of this spelling innovation was consistently reflected in the Moscow editions of the second half of the 17 th century up to its stage-by-stage codification in grammars of 1721, 1723, 1725 and 1733. The pronominal nature of the apostrophe-dissimilator predetermined the limitations in its functioning; however, the acquisition of a differentiating function became a necessary stage in the formation of the system of antistih (anti-verse) in its modern form. The expansion of apostrophe functioning, which has a precedent in the Grammar by F. Maximov (1723), may contribute to the logical completion of this formation. Also, the obtained data on the development of the apostrof (apostrophe) differentiating function can be used to identify Moscow editions along with other innovations, introduced in the period of the Nikon's correctors work.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
根据反诗原则,撇号作为数字消歧义的一种方法
在当代教会斯拉夫语中,撇号(撇号)的区分功能是在代词范式中实现的。对语法中的事实和旧印刷版本的比较表明,撇号-区别符的应用并不是1648年的语法所预设的,而是在莫斯科印刷厂校对的工作过程中出现的(来自1655年的服务手册)。它首先出现在yazhe, izhe形式中,并有生产形式(ya, i)的支持,然后传播到im, imzhe形式(通过与其他形式的DatPl的外部类比),并进一步发展到其他代词同构形式(通过内部类比)。这种拼写创新的发展一直反映在17世纪下半叶的莫斯科版本中,直到1721年、1723年、1725年和1733年逐步编纂成语法。撇号-异化器的代词性质决定了其功能的局限性;然而,在现代形式的反诗体系形成过程中,微分功能的获得成为一个必要的阶段。撇号功能的扩展,在F. Maximov(1723)的《语法》中有先例,可能有助于这种形式的逻辑完成。此外,获得的关于撇号(撇号)区分功能发展的数据可用于识别莫斯科版本以及尼康校正工作期间引入的其他创新。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
50.00%
发文量
87
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Verbal Collocations with Components “(Nouveau) Coronavirus” and “COVID-19” in French The Metaphor of the State and Ways of Expressing It in Russian Official Speech Style as a Relational Polyvalent Category Objectification Features of Social Exclusion and Social Inclusion Categories in the Russian Language (Exemplified by “Glubinka” and “Glush” Concepts) Methods for Estimating the Language Conflict Potential
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1