10. Text reading

10.1. Introduction to text reading

This section provides a synchronic and diachronic analysis of Matthew 5.11–14 from the New Testament as found in Codex Zographensis. The manuscript is now located in the Russian National Library (Saint Petersburg). It was written around 1000 AD in the Glagolitic script.

The Glagolitic text of Codex Zographensis with a Cyrillic transliteration can be found at the site of the University of Sofia; it can also be found at Wikisource (Glagolitic original and Cyrillic transliteration).

The Codex Zographensis is phonologically rather conservative compared to other manuscripts, but with regard to morphology and lexicon it is more innovative. The reduced vowels ĭ ŭ are mostly preserved, although they sometimes have disappeared in weak position and turned into e o in strong position (see 3.4.12). Palatal [rʲ ʎ ɲ] are (inconsistently) written with the “kamora” diacritic: р҄ л҄ н҄, as they are in Codex Suprasliensis.

Abbreviations in the text (e.g. ⱍⰽ҃ⱏⰻ / чк҃ꙑ) have been resolved in the Cyrillic transliteration (чловѣкꙑ).

Abbreviations:

• Glag.: Glagolitic original, punctuation retained
• Cyr.: Cyrillic transliteration, “modern” punctuation
• translit.: Roman transliteration, “modern” punctuation
• morph.: Morphological analysis
• lexeme: dictionary headword
• CS: Common Slavic reconstruction/transponat
• PS: Proto-Slavic reconstruction/transponat
• PBS: Proto-Balto-Slavic reconstruction/transponat
• PIE: Proto-Indo-European reconstruction/transponat
• Gk.: Greek original
• Eng.: English translation

10.2. OCS text reading 1: Matthew 5.11

10.2.1. Text reading 1: text

10.2.2. Text reading 1: commentary

blaženi

• OCS blažiti is derived from blagŭ ‘good’ < CS *‍bȏlgŭ, cf. substantivised neuter *‍bȏlgo > Ru. dial. adv. bólogo ‘well, good’, Cz. blaho ‘bliss’, Po. błogo ‘good, happiness’, BCMS blȃgo ‘wealth, money’
• the root *‍bȏlg- has no clear etymology

jegda

• from relative stem PIE *‍i̯e/o-; cf. CS *‍kogda adv. ‘when?’, from PIE *‍kʷe/o-; and CS *‍togdà adv. ‘then’, from PIE *‍te/o-
• the Slavic *‍g is unexpected; cf. Lith. kadà ‘when; because’, Ved. kadā́ adv. ‘when?’; however, Lith. kadà originally contained a final nasal, as shown by kadángi ‘as, because’, East Lith. dial. kadù, OPr. kadan ‘when’ (Derksen 2002: 11)
• according to Derksen (2008), 227, the suffix is CS *‍gŭda, which may be from *‍goda, gen.sg of *‍gȍdŭ ‘(right) time’

ponosętŭ

• CS *‍po < PS, PBS *‍pa is perhaps from PIE *‍h₂po, ablaut variant of *‍h₂apo in Ved. ápa adv. ‘away, from’, Gk. ἀπό prep. ‘from’, Lat. ab prep. ‘from’, Goth. af prep. ‘from’
• CS *‍nosi- < PS *‍nasei̯- < PIE *‍h₁nok̑-éi̯e-
• iterative formation (6.8) from CS *‍nes- ‘carry’ < PS *‍nes- < PIE *‍h₁nek̑- -PIE *‍h₁nek̑- also in Lith. nèšti nešù ‘carry’; OAv. subj. nīš nāšāmā ‘they will carry out’; Gk. ἐνεγκεῖν ‘bring’

vĭsěkŭ

• from CS *‍vĭśakŭ, from PS *‍u̯iˈxāku via the Second Palatalisation

iz

• Gk. ἐξ prep., Lat. ex prep.
• *‍i in Balto-Slavic is unclear

iždenǫtŭ

• OCS žd from *‍zg by the First Palatalisation (3.4.1) is regular and indicates that PS *‍g was palatalised to *‍dž, which then became CS *‍ž; cf. PS *‍drazg(i)i̯- (CS *‍droždž(ĭ)j-) ‘yeast’ > OCS droždię pl.f, Bulg. dróždie, Ru. dróžži n, Ukr. driždži, Po. drożdże pl.f
• CS prs. stem *‍žene- < PS *‍gene- with *‍ž from *‍g by the First Palatalisation (3.4.1), thematicised from PIE *‍gʷʰen- ‘slay’
• CS inf. *‍gŭn-(a̋-) < PS *‍gun- < PBS *‍gun- < PIE *‍gʷʰn̥-, originally the preconsonantal variant, with development of PIE *‍n̥ to PBS *‍un (not *‍in, the normal development) (3.2.6)
• Lith. genù giñti ‘drive, urge’, OPr. guntwei ‘chase, drive’, prs.1pl gunnimai; Skt. hánti ‘strike, slay’; Gk. θείνω ‘kill’

zŭlŭ

• probably related to Lith. (Žem.) atžū́lus (a.p. 1) and atžūlùs (a.p. 3) ‘rude’, although PS *‍u vs. PBalt. *‍ṵ̄ requires an explanation

glagolŭ

• reduplicated version of the root *‍gol-, also in CS *‍gȏlsŭ ‘voice’
• Lith. galsas ‘echo’ (attestation?); OHG kallōn ‘chatter’; Welsh galw ‘call’

na

• Lith. nuõ ‘from’, Latv. nùo ‘from’, OPr. no, na ‘onto, against’
• further etymology unclear; Vasmer compares Av. ana ‘upwards’, Goth. ana ‘on, at’, Gk. ἀνά prep. ‘on, up along’, ἄνω ‘upwards’

na vy

• in PS and CS the preposition was accented as a consequence of Šaxmatov’s Law (see 3.2.7)

lŭžǫšte

• related to Latv. lùgt (long *‍ū) ‘request, invite’; Derksen (2015: 295) suspects Lith. lūgóti ‘request, beg’ to be a loan from Latvian
• from (apparent) PIE *‍lugʰ-, zero grade of *‍leu̯gʰ-, also in Goth. liugan ‘lie’, ONor. ljúga ‘lie’ etc.; the root is only attested in Balto-Slavic and Germanic
• with regular loss of the weak reduced vowel: Ru. lgátʹ, 1sg lžú etc.; Po. łgać, 1sg łžę etc.
• in the suffix of the present active participle Slavic has generalised PIE *‍-onti̯-, originating in the feminine (e.g. gen.sg *‍-ont-i̯ah₂-s), except in nom.sg.m–n PS *‍u̯edən (CS *‍vedy) < PIE *‍-ont-s (see 7.4)
• the Baltic languages have also generalised *‍-onti̯- (e.g. gen.sg.m sùkančio), except in some forms, e.g. nom.sg.m suką̃s ‘turning’, acc.sg.m sùkantį, nom.sg.n suką̃
• in the i̯e/o-verbs, PS *‍i̯an should have become CS *‍ję (3.4.2), but this has been replaced with *‍jǫ by analogy with the e/o-verbs, e.g. PS *‍u̯edanti̯e > CS *‍vedǫtʲe

mene

• the correspondence with OAv. mə̄.nā, YAv. mana points to PIE *‍méne; cf. Ved. máma, with -m- by assimilation

radi

• probably a borrowing from Iranian; cf. OPers. rādiy ‘for the sake of’

10.3. OCS text reading 2: Matthew 5.12

10.3.1. Text reading 2: text

10.3.2. Text reading 2: commentary

raduite

• from CS *‍ra̋dŭ ‘glad’
• also found in Germanic: OEng. rót ‘glad’, ONor. rǿtask ‘be glad’
• Lith. rõdas, rodùs indecl. adj. ‘glad, pleasant’ is borrowed from Polish or Belarusian
• apparently PIE *‍rohd- or *‍rah₂d-
• PBS *‍i̯āi̯ > *‍i̯ēi̯ > PS *‍i̯ī > CS *‍ji

sę

• in Slavic the reflexive pronoun (including possessive *‍svòjĭ) refers to any subject: first, second and third person, and singular, dual and plural
• OPr. sien, encl. -sin, also contains a nasal and points to long *‍ē, i.e. PBS *‍sēm
• PIE perhaps had tonic *‍su̯é and encl. *‍se (as well as 1sg *‍mé, *‍me and 2sg *‍tu̯é, *‍te), but the original distribution is not preserved anywhere

veselite

• from CS *‍vȅselŭ adj. ‘happy’
• Latv. vȩsȩls ‘healthy, whole’
• Ved. vásu- adj. (f vásvī-) ‘good’; OAv., YAv. vohu-, vaŋhauu° ‘good’; Gk. gen.pl ἐᾱ́ων ‘good things’, in the phrase δωτῆρες / δω̃τορ ἐάων found in Homer and Hesiod, ‘giver(s) of good(s)’ (see Barnes 2024); OIr. dat.pl feib ‘in excellence’; CLuw. wāšu‑ ‘good’, Pal. wāšu‑ ‘good, well’
• PIE *‍h₁u̯ésu-

jako

• nom–acc.sg.n of jakŭ adj. ‘which’
• contains PIE rel. pron. *‍i̯o-
• formed like tako (see below)

mŭzda

• with ŭ for etymological *‍ĭ (see Vaillant 1964: 54)
• PIE *‍misdʰó-, also in Ved. mīḷhá- n ‘fight, booty, profit’; OAv. mižda-; Gk. μισθός m ‘hire, pay’; Goth. mizdo f ‘wages’

mnoga

• also mŭnog-
• in general, the reduced vowels are relatively well preserved in the Codex Zographensis, but they are sometimes omitted in weak position
• the word seems to be related to Goth. manags adj. ‘much’ and OIr. menic ‘often’
• according to Boutkan (and Derksen, Schrijver, Kroonen) we are dealing with a North European substrate word

nebesexŭ

• CS *‍nȅbo is a neuter s-stem
• PIE *‍nébʰos, also in Ved. nábhas- n ‘fog’; Gk. νέφος ‘cloud’; Hitt. nepiš- n ‘sky’
• Lith. debesìs m–f i-stem (a.p. 3b) ‘cloud’ and Latv. debess f i-stem ‘cloud’ have unexpected d-
• the ending -exŭ from *‍-ĭxŭ is the i-stem ending, which was introduced in the consonant stems

tako

• originally nom–acc.sg.n of takŭ adj. ‘such’
• PIE *‍tah₂-ko-, also in Lith. tóks (f tokià) (a.p. 3; dial. a.p. 1) ‘such’; cf. Lat. tālis ‘such’

bo

• Lith. bà ‘for’; bè ‘for’
• Goth. ba ‘that not, if not’
• apparently PIE *‍bʰó

tako bo

• Vasil’ev–Dolobko’s Law (see 3.2.7): CS *‍tȃko + *‍bò → *‍tako bò
• Čud. táko, né tako, tako žè, tako bò, tako lì, tako tì

izgŭnašę

• cf. iždenǫtŭ v. 11

proroky

• from pro-rešti pfv ‘to prophesy’
• calque from Greek προφήτης

iže

• i- < CS *‍i < PS *‍i̯əi̯, from PIE rel. pron. *‍i̯o-, with PS ending *‍-əi̯ < pre-PS *‍-ai̯s < PIE pron. ending *‍-oi̯ plus analogical plural marker *‍-s

• že < PIE *‍gʰ/gʷʰe, also in Ved. ptcl. ha

běšę

• perhaps from *‍bʰu̯-ē-, consisting of PIE *‍bʰuh₂- ‘to be’ and stative suffix *‍-eh₁- (cf. Vaillant 1966: 65–66)

prěžde

• comparative form of prědŭ prep. ‘before’, an extension of prě- prefix ‘over, very’
• Ru. dial. peréž; Cz. příze
• the re and žd of standard Ru. préžde show that the word is a borrowing from Church Slavonic

10.4. OCS text reading 3: Matthew 5.13

10.4.1. Text reading 3: text

10.4.2. Text reading 3: comments

solĭ

• CS *‍sȏlĭ < PS *‍ˌsali < PBS *‍ˌsal-
• Latv. sā̀ls f i-stem ‘salt’ is from PBS *‍sāl-
• PIE *‍sal- (or *‍sh₂al-), also in Gk. ἅλς (gen ἁλός) m ‘salt’, f ‘sea’; Arm. ał i-stem ‘salt’; Lat. sāl (gen salis) m (n) ‘salt’, TochB salyiye ‘salt’ etc.
• with extension in *‍-d-: OCS sladŭkŭ adj. ‘sweet’; Lith. saldùs adj. ‘sweet’; Arm. ałt i-stem / u-stem ‘salt’; Goth. salt n ‘salt’

zemi

• from zemlʲa ‘earth’, with epenthetic l (∅ > l /[+lab]_jV)
• dat zemi without l may be an archaism, as the insertion of *‍j may not have taken place before *‍i; variant zemlʲi may have l from zemlʲa etc. (e.g. Vaillant 1950: 70)
• CS *‍zemlʲà < PS *‍zemˈi̯ā < PBS *‍źem-, also in Lith. žẽmė (a.p. 2), Latv. zeme, OPr. semme
• PIE *‍dʰg̑ʰem-, also in Ved. kṣám- f ‘earth’, Gk. χθών f ‘earth’, Hitt. tēkan m ‘earth’

obujějetŭ

• the verbal prefix o- is identical with the preposition o-, ob- ‘on’, probably from PIE *‍h₂m̥bʰi, although the initial vocalism is unexpected (*‍m̥ should yield OCS ę or, more rarely, ǫ; see 3.2.6)
• Glagolitic does not distinguish between *‍ě and *‍ja, which are traditionally transcribed ⟨ѣ⟩ – in a Cyrillic original the form would have been written ⟨обѹяетъ⟩
• from bujĭ adj. ‘mad, foolish’ – here it is a calque on Gk. μωρ-αίνω ‘am silly, foolish; become insipid’
• cf. YAv. cpv. baoiiō ‘longer’; Ved. cpv. bhū́yas- ‘more, bigger’
• from PIE *‍bʰou̯h₂-i̯o-, to *‍bʰu̯eh₂- ‘to become’

čimĭ

• the old instrumental singular form *‍či (preserved as a particle) < *‍kʷ-íh₁, plus the normal instrumental singular ending *‍-mĭ

ničĭsomuže

• formed on the basis of the genitive form, če/ĭso, plus dative singular ending ‑omu
• česo ‘of what?’ is the only Slavic form that preserves the old genitive singular ending *‍‑eso, also seen in Gk. (Hom.) τέο, Goth. ƕis
• elsewhere in non-personal pronouns Slavic has CS *‍-ogo < PS *‍-aga, which may or may not be etymologically related to PIE *‍-osi̯o
• dat.sg -omu goes back to PIE *‍-osmoei̯, cf. Ved. tásmai, with unclear loss of *‍s in Slavic

bǫdetŭ

• CS *‍bǫ̋detĭ||ŭ
• somehow from *‍bʰu̯eh₂-, but *‍n and *‍d/dʰ are unexplained

ničĭsomuže bǫdetŭ

• ‘it will not be (good) for anything’ (Vaillant 1964: 188)
• in sentences containing a pronoun (or pronominal adverb) formed with ni- and -že the negation ne is obligatory if the verb precedes the pronoun (adverb) (e.g. ne jęsomŭ ničesože ‘we did not take anything’), but facultative if the verb follows the pronoun (adverb), as in this sentence

kŭ

• possibly related to Ved. kám ptcl. (after datives)

kŭ tomu

• ‘in addition; (here) but’

nŭ (Vaillant’s addition; not in manuscript)

• cf. OCS nyně, nŭně adv. ‘now’
• PIE *‍nú(h), also in Lith. nù, nũ ‘now, today’; Ved. nú, nū́ ‘now’; Gk. νυ encl. emphatic ptcl.; Goth. nu ‘now’; Lat. nudiūstertius adv. ‘three days ago’; Hitt. nu ‘now’

da

• perhaps from PIE aor.inj.3sg *‍dóh₃-d, or aor.inj.2sg *‍dóh₃-s; this requires analogical reintroduction of *‍ā in Proto-Slavic, if one believes that pre-PS *‍-ās > PS *‍-ə̄ > OCS ‑y (as per Olander 2012) – from PIE *‍deh₃- ‘give’
• alternatively from PIE *‍do-h₁ and related to OEng. tō prep. ‘to’, OIr. do prep. ‘to’ (Derksen 2008: 94)

isypana

• from iz- and sypati ‘to pour, to strew’
• sypati is an iterative formation (6.8) to CS *‍sűti (sŭ̏pǫ sŭpètĭ) ‘pour, strew’ < PS *‍sāu̯p-tēi̯ (sup-); the acute tone of the infinitive indicates a laryngeal, but the root does not seem to contain one
• PIE *‍seu̯p-, also in Lith. sùpti supù ‘to rock’; Lat. īn-sipiō ‘throw in’
• Lith. sū́poti ‘to rock, cradle’ probably reflects an independently created lengthened grade

vŭnŭ

• originally accusative singular of a noun *‍vŭ̀nŭ, cf. CS vŭně̀ ‘outside’, which looks like the locative singular of that noun
• perhaps related to Ved. ván- ‘tree’, YAv. vanā- f ‘tree’

popirajema

• iterative (6.8) from po-pĭrati (1sg po-pеrǫ) ‘trample, suppress’
• Rix et al. (2001): 585–586 with n. 9: PIE *‍spʰerh- ‘kick’ has split in two in Slavic: OCS prěti (1sg pĭrǫ) ‘push’ and pĭrati (1sg perǫ) ‘step; tread’; related to Lith. spìrti spiriù ‘kick’, Ved. sphuráti, Lat. spernō ‘despise’ etc.
• Derksen (2008), 427–428: identical with pĭrati perǫ ‘wash’ from PIE *‍per-, also in Ved. pŕ̥t‑ (f ‘battle; fight’ (considered to be of unclear etymology by Mayrhofer 1992–2001: 2: 160); however, in Rix et al. (2001): 473, PIE *‍per‑ is considered to be a separate root also attested in Armenian (aor. ehar ‘beat’) and Baltic (per̃ti periù ‘to beat’)
• the present passive participle CS *‍-om-, *‍-jem- from PS *‍-am- probably reflects PBS *‍‑mn‑, also in Lith. prs. pass. ptcp. -ama- (e.g. nẽšamas), OPr. poklausīmanas ‘being heard’, which reflects the PIE *‍-mh₁no- participle (Nowak 2017)

člověky

• Bulg. čovék, Ru. čelovék, Po. człowiek
• CS *‍čĭlově̋kŭ is perhaps from older *‍čelově̋kŭ; there seems to be a tendency for unaccented *‍e to become *‍ĭ in palatal environments (Kortlandt 2011b), although the precise conditioning is unclear
• often regarded as a compound containing *‍čel- (related to CS *‍čelʲadĭ ‘servants’) and *‍věk- (related to Lith. vaĩkas ‘child’)

10.5. OCS text reading 4: Matthew 5.14

10.5.1. Text reading 4: text

10.5.2. Text reading 4: comments

světŭ

• related to the Lithuanian verb šviẽsti ‘shine’, from PBS *‍ˌśu̯ai̯t‑
• a similar formation to OCS světŭ is seen in Ved. śvetá- adj. ‘white; bright’

miru

• OCS mirŭ ‘world’ and mirŭ ‘peace’ are probably originally the same word
• a Baltic cognate is found in OLith. mieras ‘peace’, Latv. miêrs ‘peace’; the accentuation of the Latvian word reflects a Proto-Balto-Slavic acute syllable (9.6.2), i.e. PBS *‍mḛi̯rá‑, indicating the former presence of a laryngeal
• PIE *‍meih‑ro‑ may belong to a PIE root *‍mei̯h‑ also seen in PS *‍ˈmēi̯lə (CS *‍mi̋lŭ) adj. ‘sweet; dear’, Lith. míelas ap. 3 ‘nice; sweet’, Latv. mĩļš ‘nice; sweet’, OPr. mijls ‘sweet; dear’; and in Lat. mītis adj. ‘soft; gentle’
• the different tones of CS *‍mȋrŭ (BCMS mȋr) and CS *‍mi̋lŭ (BCMS mȉo) do not constitute a problem (pace Havlová, Erhart & Janyšková 1989–2018: 8: 478), but simply reflect the operation of Meillet’s Law (3.3.2) in *‍mȋrŭ
• the o-stem dative singular ending OCS ‑u goes back to PS *‍‑āu̯ (CS *‍‑u), probably from PBS *‍ōi̯ < PIE *‍‑oei̯ (cf. Gk. ἀγρ‑ῷ ‘field-dat.sg’)

ne

• the negation OCS ne < PS *‍ne (CS *‍ne) is inherited from PBS *‍ne (cf. Lith. nè, Latv. ne) from PIE *‍ne (cf. Lat. ne‑sciō ‘I do not know’, ne-quis ‘not one’, Goth. ni, Ved. ná, YAv. na‑uua ‘or not’)

možetŭ

• PS *‍mag‑ ‘be able’ is related to Lith. magė́ti ‘please’ (3ps mãga) and OPr. massi ‘be able’ [if not a borrowing from Slavic; see Derksen (2008): 321]
• the Baltic and Slavic forms go back to PBS *‍mag‑ from PIE *‍magʰ‑, also seen in Ved. maghá‑ m ‘power’, Goth. 3sg mag ‘is able’ and Gk. μάχομαι ‘fight’, μηχάνη ‘instrument’
• some authors disconnect the Greek forms and reconstruct o-grade for Balto-Slavic and Germanic, explained from a former perfect form (Derksen 2008: 321)

gradŭ

• PS *‍ˌgardə (CS *‍gȏrdŭ||e) (a.p. c) ‘fortification; town’ is from PBS *‍ˌgarda‑ also seen in Lith. gar̃das (a.p. 4) ‘enclosure’, from PIE *‍gʰordʰo‑
• PIE *‍gʰordʰo‑ is found in Ved. gr̥há- m ‘house’, Go. gards m. ‘house’

ukryti

• the preverb u‑ is identical to the preposition u ‘by; at’
• it can be traced back to PBS *‍au̯, also in Lith. au- ‘away’, Latv. au- ‘away’
• from PIE *‍h₂au̯, also in Ved. áva adv ‘down; off’, Lat. au‑ pref ‘away’
• OCS kryti is related to OEng. pst hrēad ‘cover’, ptcp hroden, ONor. ptcp hroðenn, from PIE *‍kréu̯h-dʰe-

vr[ŭ]xu

• written vrxu, but should be corrected to vrŭxŭ or vrĭxŭ (see 2.2)
• originally the locative singular form of PS *‍u̯irˈxu (CS *‍vĭ́rxŭ) m u-stem (a.p. b) ‘top’
• identical with Lith. viršùs m (a.p. 4) ‘top’, Latv. vìrsus m ‘upper part; top’
• the x of Slavic and š of Lithuanian reflects PBS *‍š from PIE *‍s through the ruki change (3.2.3), triggered by the *‍r
• the root *‍u̯ers‑ is also seen in Ved. várṣman‑ m ‘top’, OIr. ferr ‘better’, Goth. wairs ‘worse’

gory

• related to Lith. girià f (a.p. 2) ‘woods’ and Latv. dziŗa ‘woods’, both with zero-grade of the root
• from PIE *‍gʷr̥, also in Ved. girí- m ‘mountain’

stoję

• while the exact formation of stojati is uclear, it is obvious that the verb is derived from PIE *‍steh₂‑ ‘stand’, also in OCS stati ‘stand’