Original scientific paper

The relation between Old Church Slavonic and “lingua vernacular” in the Croatian Middle Ages

Katarina Lozić Knezović orcid.org/0000-0002-1999-010X ; Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Split
Gordana Galić Kakkonen ; Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Split

Abstract

Bilingualism between the Church Slavonic (CS) and other Croatian idioms and Latin
is based on the fact that they are two different languages, and these two systems never
interefered in manuscripts. There are no examples of Latin liturgical texts in which rubrics
are written in Croatian, as we often find that rubrics of liturgical codices are written in
lingua vernacula, and the text in CS. This shows that the scribes see CS and lingua
vernacula as higher and lower idioms. Thus, the Latin language was always experienced
as a foreign and as such was in use, separated from the variants of Croatian. It performed
all functions: official legal texts, liturgy and literature. Furthermore, in the Croatian Middle
Ages, the relationship between the Croatian Church Slavonic (CCS) and lingua vernacula
was diglossia, more accurately, including the transitional type of language, triglossia in
which there were high, medium and low variations. All variants of Croatian have their own
names and are different. There was the CCS, with high literary features. However, that
language never satisfied all the requirements that one standard language must meet.
There were two lower ranks of language which also had their scopes: Chakavian- -Church
Slavonic (-Kajkavian) amalgam and Chakavian. Their scopes are socially well-defined.
In some areas they negligibly overlap, but they never had a function of a high variant
CCS – liturgy. It was used at the highest, official level, in the liturgical, biblical and ritual
texts; it had determined scope. It was stable and highly regarded both in culture and in
terms of language, and equally valuable as Latin. It was the highest version for liturgical
use, as well as the language of miscellanies, where it was used only in texts of biblical
content. It didn’t have native speakers (no one normally uses a high variant in everyday
communication) and was taught only by formal education, primarily because it was a
written language, language of literature. For private or informal reading a transitional
type of language was used, the hybrid structure, Chakavian-Church Slavonic (-Kajkavian)
amalgam as a literary language, super regional version found in miscellanies, the
medium variant; a kind of link between the CCS and lingua vernacula. Non-liturgical
literary works, written by the late 14th Century in CCS were mainly created in Glagolitic
monastery scriptoriums. Kajkavian elements were not involuntary. We find them in
Petrisov zbornik. The tendency of that language is directed toward national, primarily
Chakavian. Lingua vernacula, Chakavian or Chakavian-Kajkavian (Chakavian-Štokavian)
language, the lowest variant, is used for everyday life, charters and testaments, especially
in legal documents from 14th century; apart from Latin, the only representative of
the administrative style; standardized to a certain degree (its norm is unwritten, but
noticeable). We find it in epigraphy, graffiti, in the rubrics of codices, in notes on the
margins of manuscripts, colophons, etc. It sometimes had elements of CS, but only as
feature of higher style. Finally, it dominated both Latin and CCS; it eventually became
very expressive, multi-functional and stylistically developed linguistic form, despite the
opinion that the low variant was inappropriate for any valuable written expression. In bilingualism, borrowing terms has never occurred with Latin. However, in triglossia
that was intentional. This confirms that the scribes have not experienced CS as a foreign
system in relation to Chakavian and Chakavian-Church Slavonic (-Kajkavian) amalgam,
as they have Latin. Confirmation for this is the name of Kožičić’s Missal: Missal hruacki,
not Missal (Old or Church) Slavionic. Then, scholars in the Vrbnik Capitol School studied
Latin and Croatian school, and not (Old) Slavonic. Besides, there was never Chakavian-
-Latin amalgam as Chakavian-Church Slavonic (-Kajkavian).

Keywords

Croatian Middle Ages; bilingualism; diglossia/triglossia; Croatian Oldchurchslavonic language; Chakavian-Oldchurch Slavonic (-Kajkavian) amalgam; Croatian language; lingua vernacula

Hrčak ID:

86320

URI

https://hrcak.srce.hr/86320

Publication date:

15.12.2010.

Article data in other languages: croatian

Visits: 2.870 *