{"title":"圣杰罗姆在克罗地亚格拉哥利文祈祷书中对路加福音的讲道","authors":"A. Mihaljević, Milan Mihaljević","doi":"10.17846/cl.2020.13.1.51-82","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": MIHALJEVIĆ, Ana – MIHALJEVIĆ, Milan. St. Jerome’s Homilies on Luke’s Gospel in Croatian Glagolitic Breviaries. Two St. Jerome’s homilies on pericopes from the Gospel according to Luke occur in Croatian Glagolitic breviaries. The homily on L 11.4, which was read on the third Sunday in Lent, has been preserved in 19, and the homily on L 16.1, which was read on the eighth Sunday after Pentecost, in 22 breviaries. In some breviaries, the text is shorter and divided into lections differently than in others. In the paper, we will compare the texts from all breviaries, determine the differences between them, and describe the language of both homilies. We will also compare the Church Slavonic text with its Latin original, analyse the translation techniques, and try to determine when the text has been translated from Latin into Church Slavonic. V niektorých breviároch je text kratší a rozdelený na čítania inak ako v ostatných. V štúdii porovnávame texty zo všet-kých breviárov, určujeme rozdiely medzi nimi a popisujeme jazyk oboch homílií. Porovnávame tiež cirkevný slovanský text s jeho latinským originálom, analyzujeme prekladateľské techniky a snažíme sa určiť, kedy bol text preložený z latinčiny do cirkevnej slovančiny. SUMMARY: ST. JEROME›S HOMILIES ON LUKE’S IN CROATIAN GLAGOLITIC BREVIARIES. The aim of this study is to analyse the translations of Jerome’s homilies on L 11.4 and L 16.1 in Croatian Glagolitic breviaries. The first homily has been preserved in 19 breviaries, and the second in 22 breviaries. Nine breviaries have a shorter version of the first homily and eleven breviaries have a shorter version of the second homily. The translation is the same in all codices. Textual differences between the breviaries are neither numerous nor significant. Stemmatological relations between the preserved texts are very complicated, since the redactions are mutually entangled. We can distinguish the northern group of codices from Krk (Vb 1 , Pad, Vb 2 and VO), characterised by the older redaction, from the typical representatives of the southern, more innovative group (Vat 5 , Mosk, and Pt). The transitional group (N 1 , Vat 10 , Dab, Brib, and N 2 ) sometimes has the older reading, sometimes the younger, and sometimes both readings. The errors in the oldest preserved text, from First Vrbnik Breviary (beginning of the 14th century), show that the texts have been copied from an older Glagolitic protograph. Both texts of St. Jerome’s homilies on Luke’s Gospel have been translated from Latin into Croatian Church Slavonic very faithfully. The homilies in younger breviaries follow the Latin original more closely. In some cases, the scribe had changed the original text, which mirrors the Latin original adjusting it to what he probably regarded as the Latin norm. The analysis of the translation technique shows that the translator mostly translated the Latin text following the usual translation norms. By translating the forms and constructions that have no formal correspondent in Croatian Church Slavonic, the translator showed that he was familiar with the most common means of translating these features. In the second homily, there are some parts that the translator probably did not understand. These cases show the translator’s tendency to aberrate from the original in order to make the text more understandable. Due to the facts: 1. that in the texts the construction of absolute dative, which was obsolete after the 13th century, is attested, 2. that the oldest breviary in which the texts have been preserved is from the end of the 13th or the beginning of the 14th century, 3. that the errors in that breviary attest that it has been copied from an earlier Glagolitic protograph, we can conclude that the texts have been translated at the latest in mid-13th century, most probably immediately after the reform of liturgical books and the formation of the plenary missal and breviary.","PeriodicalId":142049,"journal":{"name":"Konštantínove listy/Constantine's Letters","volume":"76 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"St. Jerome’s Homilies on Luke’s Gospel in Croatian Glagolitic Breviaries\",\"authors\":\"A. Mihaljević, Milan Mihaljević\",\"doi\":\"10.17846/cl.2020.13.1.51-82\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\": MIHALJEVIĆ, Ana – MIHALJEVIĆ, Milan. St. Jerome’s Homilies on Luke’s Gospel in Croatian Glagolitic Breviaries. Two St. Jerome’s homilies on pericopes from the Gospel according to Luke occur in Croatian Glagolitic breviaries. The homily on L 11.4, which was read on the third Sunday in Lent, has been preserved in 19, and the homily on L 16.1, which was read on the eighth Sunday after Pentecost, in 22 breviaries. In some breviaries, the text is shorter and divided into lections differently than in others. In the paper, we will compare the texts from all breviaries, determine the differences between them, and describe the language of both homilies. We will also compare the Church Slavonic text with its Latin original, analyse the translation techniques, and try to determine when the text has been translated from Latin into Church Slavonic. V niektorých breviároch je text kratší a rozdelený na čítania inak ako v ostatných. V štúdii porovnávame texty zo všet-kých breviárov, určujeme rozdiely medzi nimi a popisujeme jazyk oboch homílií. Porovnávame tiež cirkevný slovanský text s jeho latinským originálom, analyzujeme prekladateľské techniky a snažíme sa určiť, kedy bol text preložený z latinčiny do cirkevnej slovančiny. SUMMARY: ST. JEROME›S HOMILIES ON LUKE’S IN CROATIAN GLAGOLITIC BREVIARIES. The aim of this study is to analyse the translations of Jerome’s homilies on L 11.4 and L 16.1 in Croatian Glagolitic breviaries. The first homily has been preserved in 19 breviaries, and the second in 22 breviaries. Nine breviaries have a shorter version of the first homily and eleven breviaries have a shorter version of the second homily. The translation is the same in all codices. Textual differences between the breviaries are neither numerous nor significant. Stemmatological relations between the preserved texts are very complicated, since the redactions are mutually entangled. We can distinguish the northern group of codices from Krk (Vb 1 , Pad, Vb 2 and VO), characterised by the older redaction, from the typical representatives of the southern, more innovative group (Vat 5 , Mosk, and Pt). The transitional group (N 1 , Vat 10 , Dab, Brib, and N 2 ) sometimes has the older reading, sometimes the younger, and sometimes both readings. The errors in the oldest preserved text, from First Vrbnik Breviary (beginning of the 14th century), show that the texts have been copied from an older Glagolitic protograph. Both texts of St. Jerome’s homilies on Luke’s Gospel have been translated from Latin into Croatian Church Slavonic very faithfully. The homilies in younger breviaries follow the Latin original more closely. In some cases, the scribe had changed the original text, which mirrors the Latin original adjusting it to what he probably regarded as the Latin norm. The analysis of the translation technique shows that the translator mostly translated the Latin text following the usual translation norms. By translating the forms and constructions that have no formal correspondent in Croatian Church Slavonic, the translator showed that he was familiar with the most common means of translating these features. In the second homily, there are some parts that the translator probably did not understand. These cases show the translator’s tendency to aberrate from the original in order to make the text more understandable. Due to the facts: 1. that in the texts the construction of absolute dative, which was obsolete after the 13th century, is attested, 2. that the oldest breviary in which the texts have been preserved is from the end of the 13th or the beginning of the 14th century, 3. that the errors in that breviary attest that it has been copied from an earlier Glagolitic protograph, we can conclude that the texts have been translated at the latest in mid-13th century, most probably immediately after the reform of liturgical books and the formation of the plenary missal and breviary.\",\"PeriodicalId\":142049,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Konštantínove listy/Constantine's Letters\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Konštantínove listy/Constantine's Letters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17846/cl.2020.13.1.51-82\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Konštantínove listy/Constantine's Letters","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17846/cl.2020.13.1.51-82","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
: MIHALJEVIĆ, Ana - MIHALJEVIĆ,米兰。圣杰罗姆在克罗地亚格拉哥利文祈祷书中对路加福音的讲道。根据路加福音,圣杰罗姆的两篇关于伯利克里的讲道出现在克罗地亚格拉哥利文的祈祷书中。在大斋节的第三个星期日的11月11日和在五旬节后的第8个星期日的16月1日的讲道被保存在了22个祈祷书中。在一些缩略词中,文本较短,并且分为不同的选段。在本文中,我们将比较所有祈祷书的文本,确定它们之间的差异,并描述两种讲道的语言。我们还将比较教会斯拉夫语文本与其拉丁语原文,分析翻译技巧,并试图确定文本何时从拉丁语翻译成教会斯拉夫语。V niektorých breviároch je text kratší a rozdelený na čítania inak ako V ostatných。V štúdii porovnávame textzo všet-kých breviárov, ujeme rozdiely medzi nimi a popisujeme jazyk boch homílií。Porovnávame tieje cirkevný slovanský text s jeho latinským originálom, analyzujeme prekladateľské techniky a snažíme sa ur ikv, kedy bol text preložený z latin in do cirkevnej slovan in。摘要:圣杰罗姆的布道路加在克罗地亚格拉哥利文祈祷。本研究的目的是分析翻译的杰罗姆的讲道在L 11.4和L 16.1在克罗地亚格拉哥利语祈祷。第一次讲道被保存在19个祈祷书中,第二次讲道被保存在22个祈祷书中。9本祈祷书是第一次讲道的简短版本,11本祈祷书是第二次讲道的简短版本。所有抄本的译文都是一样的。经文之间的差异既不众多也不显著。保存文本之间的系统关系非常复杂,因为编校是相互纠缠的。我们可以区分Krk (Vb 1, Pad, Vb 2和VO)的北部抄本(以较旧的版本为特征)和南部更具创新性的典型代表(Vat 5, Mosk和Pt)。过渡基团(n1, Vat 10, Dab, Brib和n2)有时有较老的解读,有时有较年轻的解读,有时两者都有。最早保存下来的《第一Vrbnik Breviary》(14世纪初)文本中的错误表明,这些文本是从更古老的格拉哥利斯原稿复制而来的。圣杰罗姆关于路加福音的两篇布道文都被非常忠实地从拉丁语翻译成克罗地亚教会斯拉夫语。在较年轻的祈祷书的说教遵循拉丁原始更密切。在某些情况下,抄写员修改了原始文本,这反映了拉丁语原文,将其调整为他可能认为是拉丁语规范的内容。对翻译技巧的分析表明,译者大多是按照通常的翻译规范来翻译拉丁文本的。通过翻译克罗地亚教会斯拉夫语中没有正式对应的形式和结构,译者表明他熟悉翻译这些特征的最常用方法。在第二篇讲道中,有一些部分可能是译者没有理解的。这些例子表明,为了使文本更容易理解,译者倾向于偏离原文。由于事实:1;在这些文献中,绝对和格的结构在13世纪以后就被淘汰了,这一点得到了证实。保存文本的最古老的祈祷书是从13世纪末或14世纪初开始的。该祈祷书中的错误证明它是从早期的格拉哥利文原稿复制的,我们可以得出结论,这些文本最迟在13世纪中期被翻译,最有可能是在礼仪书改革和全体弥撒经书和祈祷书形成之后。
St. Jerome’s Homilies on Luke’s Gospel in Croatian Glagolitic Breviaries
: MIHALJEVIĆ, Ana – MIHALJEVIĆ, Milan. St. Jerome’s Homilies on Luke’s Gospel in Croatian Glagolitic Breviaries. Two St. Jerome’s homilies on pericopes from the Gospel according to Luke occur in Croatian Glagolitic breviaries. The homily on L 11.4, which was read on the third Sunday in Lent, has been preserved in 19, and the homily on L 16.1, which was read on the eighth Sunday after Pentecost, in 22 breviaries. In some breviaries, the text is shorter and divided into lections differently than in others. In the paper, we will compare the texts from all breviaries, determine the differences between them, and describe the language of both homilies. We will also compare the Church Slavonic text with its Latin original, analyse the translation techniques, and try to determine when the text has been translated from Latin into Church Slavonic. V niektorých breviároch je text kratší a rozdelený na čítania inak ako v ostatných. V štúdii porovnávame texty zo všet-kých breviárov, určujeme rozdiely medzi nimi a popisujeme jazyk oboch homílií. Porovnávame tiež cirkevný slovanský text s jeho latinským originálom, analyzujeme prekladateľské techniky a snažíme sa určiť, kedy bol text preložený z latinčiny do cirkevnej slovančiny. SUMMARY: ST. JEROME›S HOMILIES ON LUKE’S IN CROATIAN GLAGOLITIC BREVIARIES. The aim of this study is to analyse the translations of Jerome’s homilies on L 11.4 and L 16.1 in Croatian Glagolitic breviaries. The first homily has been preserved in 19 breviaries, and the second in 22 breviaries. Nine breviaries have a shorter version of the first homily and eleven breviaries have a shorter version of the second homily. The translation is the same in all codices. Textual differences between the breviaries are neither numerous nor significant. Stemmatological relations between the preserved texts are very complicated, since the redactions are mutually entangled. We can distinguish the northern group of codices from Krk (Vb 1 , Pad, Vb 2 and VO), characterised by the older redaction, from the typical representatives of the southern, more innovative group (Vat 5 , Mosk, and Pt). The transitional group (N 1 , Vat 10 , Dab, Brib, and N 2 ) sometimes has the older reading, sometimes the younger, and sometimes both readings. The errors in the oldest preserved text, from First Vrbnik Breviary (beginning of the 14th century), show that the texts have been copied from an older Glagolitic protograph. Both texts of St. Jerome’s homilies on Luke’s Gospel have been translated from Latin into Croatian Church Slavonic very faithfully. The homilies in younger breviaries follow the Latin original more closely. In some cases, the scribe had changed the original text, which mirrors the Latin original adjusting it to what he probably regarded as the Latin norm. The analysis of the translation technique shows that the translator mostly translated the Latin text following the usual translation norms. By translating the forms and constructions that have no formal correspondent in Croatian Church Slavonic, the translator showed that he was familiar with the most common means of translating these features. In the second homily, there are some parts that the translator probably did not understand. These cases show the translator’s tendency to aberrate from the original in order to make the text more understandable. Due to the facts: 1. that in the texts the construction of absolute dative, which was obsolete after the 13th century, is attested, 2. that the oldest breviary in which the texts have been preserved is from the end of the 13th or the beginning of the 14th century, 3. that the errors in that breviary attest that it has been copied from an earlier Glagolitic protograph, we can conclude that the texts have been translated at the latest in mid-13th century, most probably immediately after the reform of liturgical books and the formation of the plenary missal and breviary.