Biblijski pogledi, Vol. 27 No. 1-2, 2019.
Izvorni znanstveni članak
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE PHILOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE PROTESTANT ARTIKULI (1562)
Stjepan Damjanović
; Sveučilište u Zagrebu, Filozofski fakultet
Sažetak
The linguistic composition of books in the past was as a rule influenced by the type of
language used in the earlier books of the same function. Decisions had to be made on
which books would serve as models, and when several models clashed, either a single one had to be selected or more of them adopted in alternate fashion. At the same time,
there was the matter of contemporary linguistic practice to be considered as well. In the
analysed text we can also observe the pattern of the past + the present, the present be-
ing rather diverse. If one sets out to refresh the language of the old books, the choice of
linguistic solutions needs to be done carefully. Ignoring the linguistic idiom used by the
larger groups of speakers could result in an unwelcome decline of readership and have
the opposite effect from the original intention — the book reaching out to as wide an audi-
ence as possible. That does not necessarily include utilizing all available sources to the
same degree. Taking characteristic elements (ča— kaj — što, etc.) that will make the text
more familiar to the readers using the idiom in question is always a good idea. However,
the sporadic encounter of Old Church Slavonic idioms at many levels of Artikuli does
not at all signify their language veering from tradition. It only points to a novel, different
tradition where the elements of the Croatian idioms have long since become a stable and
occasionally even dominant part of the language. Both Fancev and other linguists claim
the majority of analysed texts to be predominantly lkavian, based on the frequency of
the yat reflex. At the same time, the presence of ekavisms is also greater than expected,
which could be ascribed to the fact that yat and e vowel were often interchangeable in the
linguistic past, but there could be other reasons as well. For instance, if in Artikuli there is
an infinitive peti (41b, 66b), or a present form sedam from the verb sesti (92b), or delaju
(2b), or the noun bolezan (70b), or nedele (991)), or the adjective tesan (3a, 65a), and if
the roots of these words are always or mostly Ekavian in Artikuli, one should bear in mind
that the situation is similar in the Glagolitic texts which are older than the Protestant ones.
Therefore, they would sooner appear to be a literary element rather than the influence of
the translator’s speech, which does not mean that such solutions do not sometimes coin-
cide with those dialects. The different situation is with those ekavisms that appear in the
roots where the yat reflex is ordinarily much more often lkavian, such as Ienas! (2b), Iep
(38a, 78 b), Iepši (61b), mesec (23a), nemški (81a). Here, the link to Chakavian lkavian-
Ekavian dialects is more direct, but the influence of the Slovenian template cannot be
neglected either.
Ključne riječi
philological analysis; Old Church Slavonic; Kajkavian; Chakavian; Shtokavian
Hrčak ID:
275296
URI
Datum izdavanja:
3.12.2019.
Posjeta: 428 *