New Texts in Manuscripts of the 1636 Ruthenian Translation of the Czech Lucidarius (*Olomouc, 1622)

Q4 Arts and Humanities Slavistica Vilnensis Pub Date : 2021-12-30 DOI:10.15388/slavviln.2021.66(2).69
Sergey Temchin
{"title":"New Texts in Manuscripts of the 1636 Ruthenian Translation of the Czech Lucidarius (*Olomouc, 1622)","authors":"Sergey Temchin","doi":"10.15388/slavviln.2021.66(2).69","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article focuses on the textual criticism of the Ruthenian translation of the Czech book entitled Lucidář (Lucidarius), a medieval encyclopedic treatise consisting of the student’s questions and the teacher’s answers, which was most widespread in the Cyrillic manuscript tradition of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland). This translation was made in 1636 from a non-extant edition (*Olomouc, 1622) and is represented by at least nine manuscript copies: five of them have been published and other four still remain practically unknown (kept St. Petersburg and Yaroslavl). All of them are involved in this study aiming to identify cases of a complete substitution of original (translated) texts of the teacher’s answers to some of the student’s questions with new texts. They reflect a critical approach of Ruthenian copyists to the ideas about the world set forth in Lucidarius translated from Czech. The process of replacing some of the texts went on, increasing in extend, during the 18th–early 19th centuries and affected more than half of all the manuscripts under consideration. Consequently, this Ruthenian translation of the Czech Lucidarius is to be characterized as an open textual tradition, since its content was partially (but regularly) adapted by scribes to meet their own cultural needs.","PeriodicalId":33056,"journal":{"name":"Slavistica Vilnensis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Slavistica Vilnensis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/slavviln.2021.66(2).69","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article focuses on the textual criticism of the Ruthenian translation of the Czech book entitled Lucidář (Lucidarius), a medieval encyclopedic treatise consisting of the student’s questions and the teacher’s answers, which was most widespread in the Cyrillic manuscript tradition of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland). This translation was made in 1636 from a non-extant edition (*Olomouc, 1622) and is represented by at least nine manuscript copies: five of them have been published and other four still remain practically unknown (kept St. Petersburg and Yaroslavl). All of them are involved in this study aiming to identify cases of a complete substitution of original (translated) texts of the teacher’s answers to some of the student’s questions with new texts. They reflect a critical approach of Ruthenian copyists to the ideas about the world set forth in Lucidarius translated from Czech. The process of replacing some of the texts went on, increasing in extend, during the 18th–early 19th centuries and affected more than half of all the manuscripts under consideration. Consequently, this Ruthenian translation of the Czech Lucidarius is to be characterized as an open textual tradition, since its content was partially (but regularly) adapted by scribes to meet their own cultural needs.
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
捷克语《卢西达留斯》1636年鲁塞尼亚译本手稿中的新文本(*奥洛穆茨,1622年)
本文的重点是对捷克书的鲁塞尼亚语翻译的文本批评,该翻译名为Lucidář (Lucidarius),这是一部中世纪百科全书式的论文,由学生的问题和老师的答案组成,在波兰立陶宛联邦(立陶宛大公国和波兰王国)的西里尔手稿传统中最为普遍。这个译本是在1636年根据一个不存在的版本(*Olomouc, 1622)翻译的,至少有九份手稿副本:其中五份已经出版,另外四份仍然几乎不为人知(保存在圣彼得堡和雅罗斯拉夫尔)。所有这些人都参与了这项研究,旨在确定用新文本完全替代教师回答学生某些问题的原始(翻译)文本的情况。它们反映了鲁塞尼亚抄写员对《路西大流士》中关于世界的观点的批判态度。在18世纪至19世纪早期,替换一些文本的过程继续进行,范围越来越广,影响了一半以上的手稿。因此,这个鲁塞尼亚语翻译的捷克语《卢西达留斯》被认为是一个开放的文本传统,因为它的内容部分(但定期)被抄写员改编以满足他们自己的文化需求。
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
Slavistica Vilnensis
Slavistica Vilnensis Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Macarius: HTR modelis senoms slaviškoms spausdintoms knygoms iš Rumunijos Crow and Raven in Lithuanian and Slavic Phraseology and Ethnic Culture To the 95th anniversary of Doctor of Philology, Professor Adam Evgenievich Suprun „Aš myliu ir gerbiu visą Čekijos tautą“. Elzės Ožeškienės čekofilinės veiklos pėdsakai, pagrįsti laiškais Edvardui Jelinekui Investigating the Sources of the French Grammar (1724) by Ivan Gorlitsky
×
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