OCS, Polish, and other Modern Slavic languages

[Miguel Carrasquer Vidal]

JoatSimeon at aol.com wrote:

>Exemplia gratia:  the Germanic proper name "Karl" (as in "Charlemagne"),
>which was loaned into Proto-Slavic and became the generic term for "King",
>for obvious reasons.  (Rather as "Caesar" became "Emperor" in several
>languages.)

>This can be dated fairly precisely, since we know Karl the Great's dates
>(742-814).

>It then underwent the characteristic shifts of the various branches of
>Slavic.  Which, of course, it wouldn't do if it had been borrowed later.

>So Common Slavic form would be *korlja, from which we get (Bulgarian) kral,
>(South Slav) kralj, (Russian) korol, (Czech) kral, and (Polish) krol. (Sorry,
>no accents on this email system).

We can simulate them: Russ-Ukr <korol'>, BRus <karol'>, Cze
<kra'l>, Pol <kro'l>, Sorbian <kral> (< Czech), CS *korljU.

>Therefore the characteristic developments of the various Slavic languages
>must post-date the early 9th century, at the very least.  QED.

Except that the date is too late.  E.g. Chernyx, "Istorichesko-
3timologicheskij slovar' sovremennogo russkogo jazyka":

Obychno, slovo <korol'> ob"jasnjajut kak odno iz rannix
zaimstvovanij iz germanskix jazykov (verojatno, dr.-v.-nem.), kak
peredelku na slavjanskoj pochve imeni frankskogo korolja Karla
(Velikogo). Pravda, xronologicheskij moment (v VIII-IX vv.
obshcheslavjanskie perezhivanija uzhe zakanchivalis' ili
zakonchilis', a zdes' predpologaetsja imenno obshcheslavjanskij
process: *karl- > *korl-) vnosit izvestnye trudnosti pri
ob"jasnenija 3togo slova iz <Karl>.

(Usually, the word <korol'> is explained as one of the early
borrowings from the Germanic languages (probably OHG), as a
transformation on Slavic soil of the name of the Frankish king
Karl (Charlemagne). It's true that the chronological moment (in
the XII-IXth. cc. the common Slavic `experiences' were already
ending or had already ended, and what is suggested here is
precisely a common Slavic process: *karl- > *korl-) raises the
known difficulties at explaining this word from <Karl>) [Couldn't
resist giving the Russian because of the nice illustration of
imperfective/perfective aspect: <zakanchivalis' ili
zakonchilis'>]

>Just to illustrate how close the Slavic languages _still_ are, the first line
>of the Lord's Prayer, and keeping in mind that languages get more different
>over time:

A careless transcription is worse than no transcription (I'm
blaming Mallory, not you).  I'll try to set that right, but I
don't have access to all the right sources right now:

>OCS:  Otice nasi ize jesi na nebesichu: da svetitu se ime tvoje.

otIc^e nas^I iz^e jesi na nebesIxU: da sve,titU se, ime, tvoje.

>Polish: Ojcze nasz ktorys jest we niebiesiech: swiec sie imie twoje.

ojcze nasz kto'rys' jest w niebiesiech: s'wie,c' sie, imie, twoje.

>Czech:  Otce nas kleryz jsi v nebesich:  posvet se jmeno tve.

otc^e na's^ ktery'z^ jsi v nebesi'ch: posve^t^ se jme'no tve'.

>Russ:	Otce nas suscij na nebesach:  da svjatitsja imja tvoje.

otc^e nas^ sus^c^ij na nebesax: da svjatitsja imja tvoe.

>Serb:	Oce nas koji si na nebesima:  da se sveti ime tvoje.

oc^e nas^ koji si na nebesima: da se sveti ime tvoje.

>Bulg:	Otce nas, kojto si na nebesata:  da se sveti tvoeto ime.

otc^e nas^, kojto si na nebesata: da se sveti tvoeto ime.

>-- indicative, one would think, fairly clearly, of the closeness of the links
>we're talking about

But careful.  The Russian above, for instance, is just as
idiomatic as English "thy name be hallowed".

>(far closer than between the Romance languages) and of
>reasonably complete mutual comprehensibility if we roll back twelve hundred
>years or so to OCS times.

Allright.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv at wxs.nl
Amsterdam