Древнеболгарские переводные тексты и проблема лексических моравизмов

Ростислав Станков



Rostislav Stankov, Sofia University





In the basis of this book were laid a few articles that deals with kind of words which due to the almost centenary tradition are considered to be “moravian” (i.e. West Slavonic) by origin. The material was extended at the expense of observations over George Hamartolos’ Chronicon. The author intended to “expose” some contemporary scholars that made a new attempt to wide the vocabulary of “moravisms”, they even proposed a new concept of “moravisms”. On that unstable grounds many texts were attached to Moravian period of the Slavonic literature. At the beginning of this work the author assumed that small number of real moravisms exists. The analysis proposed here reveals that most of these words are considered “moravisms” erroneously. Furthermore, it was cleared up that there is no need of such kind of term as “moravism”.


An attention is payed to the problem of location of Magna Moravia because of debate that took place in the last thirty years of the 20th century. This debate together with the analysis of lexical “moravisms” make us to assent a new vision on the beginning of Slavonic literary tradition. Many commonly accepted opinions come from 19th century when Czech tradition struggles for emancipation from German political and cultural domination.


At the end of 19th century a new trend was born: ambition to appropriate somebody else’s cultural tradition. In the 20th century this trend gathers strength and there is no hope that it will ever come to the end. In the centre of this trend is translated literature in Slavia Orthodoxa. Around number of large translated texts there goes long lasted discussion about their origin. On focus is lexical criterion brought to use by A. I. Sobolevskij. The lexical criterion is directly related to the problem of lexical “moravisms”.


The analysis shows that texts like Anonymous Homily in Clozianus, Zakon Sudnyj ljudem, Vita Methodii and others could not be attached to Moravian period of the Slavonic literature. The existing of Czech recension of “Old Church Slavonic” is more then questionable. Neither Sermons on the Gospel by St. Gregory the Dialogist could be bound with 11th century Czech tradition, nor in the first translation of George Hamartolos’ Chronicon could traced any Czech language influence as P. A. Lavrov considered. Attempts to substantiate the existing of East Slavonic (Old Russian) corpus of translated texts must be considered unsuccessful and groundless. The main problem is the wrong terminology related to the first written Slavonic language.



[Back to Index]