/

St. Tikhon’s University Review . Series III: Philology

St. Tikhon’s University Review III :4 (34)

ARTICLES

Vdovichenko Andrei

Grice’s cooperative principle in the interpretation of the nt texts

Vdovichenko Andrei (2013) "Grice’s cooperative principle in the interpretation of the nt texts ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2013, Iss. 34, pp. 7-20 (in Russian).

PDF
The dominating concept of the NT language inevitably comes to a conclusion about irregularity (lack of normalization) of the NT texts because of the Semitisms considered as violations of the Greek authenticity. The given theoretical model arising from the structural installations of linguistic research, evidently breaks communicative reality in which Grice’s «cooperative principle» and Leech’s «politeness principle» have to be executed. Instead the dominating view assumes an unrealistic picture of author’s and reader’s activity in which the addressee of NT texts feels strange about the language used by the authors; the authors do not know the language they write; secondary interpreters (researchers) know the language in which the NT texts had to be created, much better than the authors themselves
linguistic interpretation of the NT texts, communicative and structural paradigms of linguistic description, the communicative principles (Grice’s cooperative and Leech’s politeness principles), unrealistic model of communicat
1. Chang-Wook J. The Original Language of the Lukan Infancy Narrative, London, New York, 2004.
2. Deissmann A. Bible Studies, Edinburg, 1901.
3. Deissmann A. Light from the Ancient East, London, 1910.
4. Finegan J. The Archeology of the New Testament, Princeton, 1969.
5. Freyne S. Galilee from Alexander the Great to Hadrian, Edinburgh, 1980.
6. Gehman H. 1951 “Hebraic Character of Septuagint Greek”, in Vetus Testamentum, 1951, vol. 1. pp. 81-90.
7. Grice P. 1975 “Logic and Conversation”, in Syntax and Semantics, New York, 1975, vol. 3: Speech Acts.
8. Horsley G. H. R. 1989 “The Fiction of «Jewish Greek»”, in New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity, 1989, vol. 5, pp. 5-40.
9. Leech G. N. Principles of pragmatics, London, New York, 1983.
10. Meyers E., Strange J. Archeology, the Rabbis, and Early Christianity, Abingdon, Nashville, 1981.
11. Moulton J. H. (ed.) Grammar of New Testament Greek, Edinburg, 1963.
12. Porter S. E. 1997 “The Greek Language of the New Testament”, in Handbook to Exegesis of the New Testament. Ser. «New Testament Tools and Studies», Leiden, New York, Kohln, 1997, pp. 99-130.
13. Schwabe M., Lifshitz B. Beth She'arim, New Brunswick, 1974, vol. 2: The Greek Inscriptions.
14. Sevenster J. Do You Know Greek? How Much Greek Could the First Christians Have Known? Leiden, 1968.
15. Turner N. 1962 “The Language of the New Testament”, in Peake's Commentary on the Bible, Edinburg, 1962, pp. 659-662.
16. Turner N. Grammatical Insights into the New Testament, Edinburg, 1965, pp. 41-58.

Vdovichenko Andrei

Grishchenko Aleksandr

The ethnonymic cognomens of saints in the orthodox Synaxarium: an attempt at a statistical study

Grishchenko Aleksandr (2013) "The ethnonymic cognomens of saints in the orthodox Synaxarium: an attempt at a statistical study ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2013, Iss. 34, pp. 21-39 (in Russian).

PDF
The paper deals with the ethnicity manifesting itself in the list of the saints’ ethnonymic cognomens based on the complete Orthodox Synaxarium (edited by hieromonk Macarius of Simonopetra in French and translated into Russian in 2011) as well as earlier Byzantine and Slavonic Synaxaria. The statistic data reveal that ethnonymic cognomens are an extremely rare type of saints’ nomination in the context of Eastern Christian (Byzantine) hagiographical tradition. Thus, the October and November parts of the Russian Synaxarium by Macarius contain 640 commemorations including 1,196 saints mentioned by their names, and only three with ethnonymic cognomens (Oct. 2 — St. Cassian the Greek the Thaumaturge of Uglich, Nov. 22 — St. Abba the Ishmaelite, 27 Nov. — St. Jacob the Persian). The Synaxarium Ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae of the 10th c. according to the Codex Sirmondianus contains 277 commemorations including 420 named saints . and two ethnonyms among their cognomens (except St. Jacob, Oct. 4 — St. Dometius the Persian). Likewise, the Slavonic-Russian Synaxarium translated from Greek before the early 12th c. has 218 commemorations and 357 named saints — and two ethnonyms. In general, there are only 69 saints with ethnonymic cognomens in the Russian Synaxarium. The main reason for the above statistics could be the fact that belonging to a certain nation was not very significant in Christian life at the time when the Byzantine and Slavonic cult of saints emerged and developed
proper names, ethnonyms, names of inhabitants, Orthodox Church, hagiography, Synaxarium, ethnicity, Greek language, Church-Slavonic language, Russian language
1. Berezovich E. L. 2001 “Russkaja onomastika na sovremennom jetape: kriticheskie zametki” (Russian Onomastic in Modern Stage: Critic Notes), in Izvestija Akademii nauk. Ser. lit-ry i jaz., 2001, vol. 60/6, November-December, pp. 34-46.
2. Bondar' N. I. 2001 “Imja i Bezymjannost' v kontekste oppozicii norma—antinorma” (Name and Nameless in Context of Opposition Norm — Antinorm), in Imja: vnutrennjaja struktura, semanticheskaja aura, kontekst: Tezisy Mezhdunar. nauch. konferencii, Moscow, 2001, vol. 1, pp. 19-22.
3. Vasil'eva N. V. 2007 “Pojetika bezymjannosti (po motivam Milana Kundery)” (Poetics of Nameless (according to Motives of Milan Kundera)), in Nikolaeva T. M. (ed.) Imja: Semanticheskaja aura, Moscow, 2007, pp. 271-288.
4. Dmitriev M. V. 2008 “Konfessional'nyj faktor v formirovanii predstavlenij o «russkom» v kul'ture Moskovskoj Rusi” (Confessional Factor in Forming of Notions about “Russian” in Culture of Moscow Rus’), in Religioznye i jetnicheskie tradicii v formirovanii nacional'nyh identichnostej v Evrope. Srednie veka — Novoe vremja, Moscow, 2008.
5. Droblenkova N. F. 1988 “Velikie Minei Chet'i” (Great Menaion for Reading), in Lihachev D. S. (ed.) Slovar' knizhnikov i knizhnosti Drevnej Rusi, Leningrad, 1988, vol. 2 (vtor. pol. XIV—XVI v.) / 1: A—K, pp. 126-133.
6. Zhivov V. M. Svjatost': Kratkij slovar' agiograficheskih terminov (Saintly: Short Dictionary of Hagiographic Terms), Moscow, 1994.
7. Ivanov S. A. Blazhennye pohaby: Kul'turnaja istorija jurodstva (Saints Foolishes: Culture History of Craziness), Moscow, 2005.
8. Ivanova K. 2008 “Bolgarskaja ” (Bulgarian Vita Literature), in Pravoslavnaja jenciklopedija, vol. 19, pp. 298-304
9. Krys'ko V. B. (ed.) Il'ina kniga. Rukopis' RGADA, Tip. 131 (Il’ina Book. Manuscript of RGADA, Typ. 131), Moscow, 2005.
10. Karpjuk S. G. 2005 “Eshhe raz ob istoricheskoj onomastike klassicheskih Afin: «estestvennye» i «iskusstvennye» onomasticheskie kompleksy” (Again about Historic Onomastic of Classia Athens: “Natural” and “Artificial” Onomastic Complexes), in Issedon: Al'manah po drevnej istorii i kul'ture, Ekaterinburg, 2005, vol. 3, pp. 94-100.
11. Konotop A. B. 2011 “«Bogoizbrannyj novyj Izrail'»: k voprosu o formirovanii srednevekovyh predstavlenij o Russkom gosudarstve kak o carstve «Novogo Izrailja»” (“Elected by God New Israel”: to Question about Forming of Medieval Notions about Russian State as State of “New Israel”), in Dmitriev M. V. (ed.) Evrei i hristiane v pravoslavnyh obshhestvah Vostochnoj Evropy, Moscow, 2011, pp. 125-145.
12. Ljomjetr Zh.-L. 2008 “Martirologi i kalendari — pamjatniki nacional'noj identichnosti?” (Martyrologians and Calenders — Memorials of National Identity?), in Religioznye i jetnicheskie tradicii v formirovanii nacional'nyh identichnostej v Evrope. Srednie veka — novoe vremja, Moscow, 2008.
13. Loseva O. V. Zhitija russkih svjatyh v sostave drevnerusskih Prologov XII — pervoj treti XV vekov (Vitas of Russian Saints in Old Russian Prologs of XII — First Third of XV Centuries), Moscow, 2009.
14. Rudi T. R. 2008 “Zhitija svjatyh” (Vita of Saints), in Pravoslavnaja jenciklopedija, 2008, vol. 19, pp. 283-286.
15. Skljarevskaja G. N. Slovar' pravoslavnoj cerkovnoj kul'tury (Dictionary of Orthodox Church Culture), Moscow, 2008.
16. Steblin-Kamenskij M. I. 1969 “Drevneislandskaja toponomastika kak material k istorii imeni sobstvennogo” (Old Icelandic Toponomastic as Material to History of Proper Names), in Skandinavskij sbornik, Tallin, 1969, vol. 14, pp. 99-105.
17. Tishkov V. A. 2010 “Jetnichnost'” (Ethnicity), in Novaja filosofskaja jenciklopedija, Moscow, 2010, vol. 4: T-Ja, pp. 482-484.
18. Toporov V. N. 1962 “Iz oblasti teoreticheskoj toponomastiki” (From Sphere of Theoretic Toponomastic), in Voprosy jazykoznanija, 1962, vol. 6, pp. 3-12.
19. Pentkovskij A. M. 2011 “Grecheskij original slavjanskogo Sinaksarja i ego lokalizacija” (Greek Original of Slavic Synaxarion and Its Localization), in Krys'ko V. B. (ed.) Slavjano-russkij Prolog po drevnejshim spiskam. Sinaksar' (zhitijnaja chast' Prologa kratkoj redakcii) za sentjabr'-fevral', Moscow, 2011, vol. 2: Ukazateli. Issledovanija, pp. 651-664.
20. Podol'skaja N. V. Superanskaja A. V. (ed.) Slovar' russkoj onomasticheskoj terminologii (Dictionary of Russian Onomastic Terminology), Moscow, 1988.
21. Taft R. F. 2010 “Pochitanie svjatyh v vizantijskoj liturgicheskoj tradicii” (Devoting of Saints in Byzantian Liturgical Tradition), in Ibid. Stat'i, Omsk, 2010, vol. 1, pp. 367-392.
22. Terent'eva E. Ju. 2011 “Nazvanija russkih i bolgarskih pravoslavnyh prazdnikov: Kriterii klassifikacii” (Names of Russian and Bulgarian Orthodox Feasts: Criteria of Classification), in Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. III: Filologija, 2011, vol. 2/24, pp. 90-91.
23. Tkachenko A. A. et al. 2014 “Ioann Predtecha” (John the Baptist), in Pravoslavnaja jenciklopedija, 2014, vol. 24.
24. Fedotova M. A., Turilov A. A. 2007 “Dimitrij . Tvorenija“, in Pravoslavnaja jenciklopedija, 2007, vol. 15, pp. 12-23.
25. Fuzheron I. 2001 “Imja i «bezymennost'» kak prijom rasstanovok sil i vyrazhenija avtorskogo otnoshenija k personazham (na primere rasskazov V. Grossmana)“ (Name and „Namelessness“ as Method of Force Arrangement and Expression of Author’s Attitude to Personages), in Imja: vnutrennjaja struktura, semanticheskaja aura, kontekst: Tezisy Mezhdunar. nauch. konferencii, Moscow, 2001, pp. 153-157, vol. 2.
26. Shukurov R. M. 2008 “Konfessija, jetnichnost' i vizantijskaja identichnost'“ (Confession, Ethnicity and Byzantian Identity), in Religioznye i jetnicheskie tradicii v formirovanii nacional'nyh identichnostej v Evrope. Srednie veka — Novoe vremja, Moscow, 2008, pp. 243-262.
27. Bliss J. Naming and Namelessness in Medieval Romance, Cambridge, 2008.
28. Simon M. Verus Israel: A study of the relations between Christians and Jews in the Roman Empire (AD 135-425), London, 1996.
29. Slovnik jazyka staroslovenskdho (= Lexicon linguae palaeoslovenicae). Ustav pro jazyk cesky, Praha, 1983, vol. 36 (s — sydonjanin).
30. Taft R. F. History of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Roma, 2000, vol. 5: The Precommunion Rites (Orientalia Christiana Analecta; 261).

Grishchenko Aleksandr

Dobrovol'skii Ivan

From the experience of work on the dictionary of contemporary church slavonic

Dobrovol'skii Ivan, Kaluzhnina Nadezhda, Liudogovskii Fedor, Pletneva Aleksandra, Kravetskii Aleksandr, Khitrov Andrei, , , , , (2013) "From the experience of work on the dictionary of contemporary church slavonic ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2013, Iss. 34, pp. 40-57 (in Russian).

PDF
The paper discusses a number of theoretical and practical issues that arose when preparing the dictionary of the contemporary Church Slavonic language. The work on the dictionary is being carried out at Vinogradov Russian Language Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The dictionary covers the entire vocabulary of the main set of liturgical books, drawing on a broader corpus of Church Slavonic texts used as additional sources. The dictionary is primarily orientated towards liturgical texts. It is fi rstly due to the fact that liturgical texts are used exclusively in the Church Slavonic version and the description of their vocabulary is most demanded. Secondly, the dictionary includes fixed metaphors of Christian texts; these metaphors in their most entire form are contained first and foremost in liturgical tests. The interest in metaphors leads to the inclusion of proper names in the dictionary, which is not common in Russian lexicographic tradition. The dictionary is being compiled on the basis of a digitised corpus. The sources of the dictionary are divided into the main and supplementary corpora. The vocabulary of the main corpus is entirely included in the dictionary, while the data of the supplementary corpus is used in certain entries. Lexical data is extracted by means of special software. The paper considers several technical issues that emerged while working with digitised sources. Besides, the paper examines those problems of lexical, morphological and textological variation which the authors have encountered
lexicology, lexicography, the Church Slavonic language, semantics, liturgics, Church Slavonic, Russian, morphology, inflection text analysis, liturgical language
1. Beljakova E. V. Cerkovnyj sud i problemy cerkovnoj zhizni (Church Judgement and Problems of Church Life), Moscow, 2004, pp. 25-27.
2. Dobrushina E. R., Poljakov A. E. 2003 “Korpus cerkovnoslavjanskogo jazyka: vozmozhnosti, metody sozdanija, perspektivy” (Corpus of Church-Slavonic Language: Possibilities, Methods of Creation, Perspectives), in Vestnik PSTGU. Filologija. III, Moscow, 2003, vol. 1/31, pp. 32-44.
3. Korolev P. S. 2012 “Istorija redaktorskih izmenenij cerkovnoslavjanskogo teksta Dejanij i Poslanij apostol'skih v moskovskih pechatnyh knigah XVI—XXI vekov” (History of Editor Changes of Church-Slavonic Text of Acts and Apostle Letters in Moscow Printed Books of XVI–XXI Centuries), in Lingvisticheskoe istochnikovedenie i istorija russkogo jazyka, Moscow, 2012.
4. Kraveckij A. G., Pletneva A. A. Istorija cerkovnoslavjanskogo jazyka v Rossii. Konec XIX-XX v. (History of Church-Slavonic Language in Russia. End of XIX–XX Cent.), Moscow, 2001.
5. Kraveckij A. G. 1991 “Iz istorii Paremejnogo chtenija Borisu i Glebu” (From History of Pariomion Readings to Boris and Gleb), in Tradicii drevnejshej slavjanskoj pis'mennosti i jazykovaja kul'tura vostochnyh slavjan, Moscow, 1991, pp. 42-52.
6. Ljudogovskij F. B. 2003 “Sovremennyj cerkovnoslavjanskij minejnyj korpus: sostav i struktura” (Modern Church-Slavonic Minaion Corpus), in Lingvisticheskoe istochnikovedenie i istorija russkogo jazyka, Moscow, 2003, pp. 500-530.
7. Ljudogovskij F. B. 2006 “Funkcionirovanie i jevoljucija sluzhebnogo i chet'ego variantov cerkovnoslavjanskogo Evangelija v jepohu knigopechatanija: postanovka problemy” (Functioning and Evolution of Service and Reading Variants of Church-Slavonic Gospel in Time of Book Printing: Problem Statement), in Lingvisticheskoe istochnikovedenie i istorija russkogo jazyka. 2004—2005, Moscow, 2006.
8. Ljudogovskij F., svjashh., Pljakin M., diak. 2010 “Hvalebnye gimny podvizhnikam” (Glory Hymns to Devotees), in Zhurnal Moskovskoj Patriarhii, 2010, vol. 6, pp. 70-76.
9. Ljudogovskij F. B. 2010 “Vethozavetnye paremii v sostave sovremennogo cerkovnoslavjanskogo minejnogo korpusa” (Old Testaments Pariomions Consisting in Modern Church-Slavonic Minaion Corpus), in Lingvisticheskoe istochnikovedenie i istorija russkogo jazyka. 2006-2009, Moscow, 2010, pp. 523-545.
10. Ljudogovskij F., svjashh. 2010 “Cerkovnoslavjanskij akafist: struktury i konstanty” (Church-Slavonic Akathistos: Structures and Constants), in Slavjanskie jazyki: edinicy, kategorii, cennostnye konstanty: sb. nauch. statej, Volgograd, 2010, pp. 47-68.
11. Ljudogovskij F., svjashh., Pljakin M., svjashh. 2013 “Zhanr akafista v XXI veke” (Genre of Akathistos in XXI Century), in Popov A. V. Pravoslavnye russkie akafisty, Moscow, 2013.
12. Pljakin M. Kvaziliturgicheskie teksty kak forma sushhestvovanija okolocerkovnogo fol'klora (Quasiliturgical Texts as Form of Existing of Pseudochurch Folklore), in http://www.ruslang.ru/agens.php?id=conf_church-slav090211.
13. Popov A. Pravoslavnye russkie akafisty (Orthodox Russian Akathistos), Moscow, 2013.
14. Tolstoj N. I. Istorija i struktura slavjanskih literaturnyh jazykov (History and Structure of Slavic Literary Languages), Moscow, 1988.
15. Uspenskij B. A. Boris i Gleb: vosprijatie istorii v Drevnej Rusi (Boris and Gleb: Perception of History in Old Rus’), Moscow, 2000.
16. Churilovskij N. F. 1909 “Novaja bogosluzhebnaja kniga: Mineja dopolnitel'naja” (New Service Books: Additional Minaion), in Pribavlenija k Cerkovnym vedomostjam, 1909, vol. 51-52.
17. Mathiesen R. The Inflectional Morphology of the Synodal Church Slavonic Verb, New York, 1972.

Dobrovol'skii Ivan

Lukhovitskii Lev

The mission of st. Michael the Synkellos and the graptoi brothers in 9th–14th century sources: metaphrastic principles and historical memory of iconoclasm

Lukhovitskii Lev (2013) "The mission of st. Michael the Synkellos and the graptoi brothers in 9th–14th century sources: metaphrastic principles and historical memory of iconoclasm ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2013, Iss. 34, pp. 58-73 (in Russian).

PDF
The paper focuses on the common hagiographical dossier of st. Michael the Synkellos and the Graptoi brothers, confessors of the 2nd period of the iconoclast controversy in Byzantium (AD 815–843). The dossier has the following structure: the anonymous 9th century Life of st. Michael, the Metaphrastic Life of the Graptoi Brothers (10th century), the Life of st. Theophanes and Theodore Graptoi by Theodora Raoulaina (ca. 1274–1282), and the Life of st. Michael the Synkellos by Nicephorus Gregoras (1321–1328). The late 9th century Encomium of st. Theodoros by Theophanes of Caesarea is of minor interest since it was not used as a primary source by later hagiographers. While both earlier texts has recently received much scholarly attention, the Palaeologan metaphraseis (i.e. stylistically elevated retellings of earlier Lives) are as a rule neglected by modern scholarship. Nevertheless, if compared with their prototypes, they may contribute to our understanding of the mutual processes of transmission and distortion of historical memory and elucidate the aesthetic demands of the Palaeologan audience. This methodological approach is illustrated by a case-study of an isolated episode (Michael’s and Graptoi’s journey to Rome/Constantinople in early 810s) narrated by each of the four authors. Its complex (if not self-contradictory) structure in the prototype Life didn’t meet the expectations of the Palaeologan literati. Therefore they paraphrased it omitting certain plot-motifs, reducing the number of characters, and adding new features to the protagonist’s psychological portrait, thus both implementing their political agenda and adapting the story to fit the aesthetic demands of their learned audience.
Hagiography, Byzantine literature, Palaeologan period, Symeon Metaphrastes, Nicephorus Gregoras, Theodora Raoulaina, iconoclasm
1. Shmit F. I. Kahrie-Dzhami: Istorija monastyrja Hory, arhitektura mecheti, mozaiki narfikov (Kahrie-Dzhami: History of Monastery Hora, Architecture of Mosque, Mosaics of Narphixes), Sofia, 1906 (Izvestija Russkogo arheologicheskogo instituta v Konstantinopole; 11).
2. Auzepy M.-F. 1994 “De la Palestine к Constantinople (VIIIe - IXe siecles): Etienne le Sabai'te et Jean Damascene”, in Travaux et memoires, Paris, 1994, vol. 12, pp. 183-218.
3. Beyer H.-V. Eine Chronologie der Lebensgeschichte des Nikephoros Gregoras / / Jahrbuch der Osterreichischen Byzantinistik. Wien, 1978. Bd. 27.
4. Cunningham M. B. The Life of Michael the Synkellos: Text, Translation and Commentary, Belfast, 1991 (Belfast Byzantine Texts and Translations; 1).
5. Davis J. 2010 “Anna Komnene and Niketas Choniates «Translated»: The 14th Century Byzantine Metaphrases”, in Macrides R. (ed.) History as Literature in Byzantium: Papers from the 40th Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, University of Birmingham, March 2007, Farnham, Burlington, 2010.
6. Featherstone J. M. 1980 “The Praise of Theodore Graptos by Theophanes of Caesarea”, in Analecta Bollandiana, Bruxelles, 1980, vol. 98, pp. 93-150.
7. Halkin F. Bibliotheca hagiographica graeca, Bruxelles, 1957.
8. Halkin F. Novum auctarium bibliothecae hagiographicae graecae, Bruxelles, 1984.
9. Hinterberger M. 2004 “Les Vies des Saints du XlVe siecle en tant que biographie historique: L'oeuvre de Nicephore Gregoras”, in Odorico P., Agapitos P. A. (eds.) Les Vies des Saints к Byzance: Genre litteraire ou biographie historique? Actes du IIe colloque international philologique «ERMHNEIA», Paris, 6- 8 juin 2002, Paris, 2004 (Dossiers Byzantins; 4).
10. Hinterberger M. 2010 “Hagiographische Metaphrasen: Ein moglicher Weg der Annaherung am die Literarasthetik der fruhen Palaiologenzeit”, in Rhoby A., Schiffer E. (eds.) Imitatio — aemulatio — variatio: Akten des internationalen wissenschaftlichen Symposiums zur byzantinischen Sprache und Literatur: Wien, 22.-25. Oktober 2008, Wien, 2010, pp. 137-151.
11. Hogel Ch. Symeon Metaphrastes: Rewriting and Canonization, Copenhagen, 2002.
12. Kountoura-Galake E. 2002 “Constantine V Kopronymos or Michael VIII Paleologos the New Constantine? The Anonymous Encomium of Saint Theodosia”, in Βυζαντινα συμμεικτα, Αθηνα, 2002, vol. 15, pp 183-194.
13. Nervo Fr. R. 1991 “Teodora Raoulena: Tra agiografia e politica”, in iΣΥΝΔΕΣΜΟΣ: Studi in onore di Rosario Anastas, Catania, 1991, vol. 1.
14. Παπαδοπουλος-Κεραμευς Α. Analekta Ierosolymitikes Stachyologias (), Saint-Petersburg, 1897, vol. 4.
15. Pratsch Th. Der hagiographische Topos: Griechische Heiligenviten in mittelbyzantinischer Zeit, Berlin, New York, 2005 (Millennium Studien; 6).
16. Rapp C. 1995 “Byzantine Hagiographers as Antiquarians: 7th to 10th Centuries”, in Byzantinische Forschungen, Amsterdam, 1995, vol. 21.
17. Rapp C. 1996 “Figures of Female Sanctity: Byzantine Edifying Manuscripts and their Audience”, in Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Washington, 1996, vol. 50.
18. Sevcenko I. 1977 “Hagiography of the Iconoclast Period”, in Bryer A., Herrin J. (eds.) Iconoclasm: Papers Given at the 9th Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, University of Birmingham, March 1975, Birmingham, 1977.
19. Sode C. Jerusalem — Konstantinopel — Rom: Die Viten des Michael Synkellos und der Bruder Theodoros und Theophanes Graptoi, Stuttgart, 2001 (Altertumswissenschaftliches Kolloquium; 4).
20. Sode C. 2004 “Creating New Saints: The Case of Michael the Synkellos and Theodore and Theophanes Graptoi”, in Kountoura-Galake E. (ed.) Oi Eroes tes orthodoxes ekklesias: Oi neoi agioi, 8os-16os aionas, Athena, 2004, pp. 177-189.
21. Talbot A.-M. 1983 “«Bluestocking Nuns»: Intellectual Life in the Convents of Late Byzantium”, in Mango C., Pritsak O. (eds.) Harvard Ukrainian Studies, Cambridge (Mass.), 1983, vol. 7: Okeanos: Essays Presented to I. Sevcenko on his 60th Birthday by his Colleagues and Students, pp. 604-618.
22. Talbot A.-M. 1991 “Old Wine in New Bottles: The Rewriting of Saints' Lives in the Palaeologan Period”, in Curcid S., Mouriki D. (eds.) The Twilight of Byzantium, Princeton, 1991, pp. 15-26.
23. Talbot A.-M. 2011 “Hagiography in Late Byzantium (1204-1453)”, in Efthymiadis S. (ed.) The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography, Farnham, 2011, vol. 1: Periods and Places, pp. 173-195.

Lukhovitskii Lev

Nesterova Ol'ga

The origins and theological grounds of the Origen’s concept of the triple sense of Scripture. Part one: the critics of valentinian doctrine of three human races in Clement of Alexandria

Nesterova Ol'ga (2013) "The origins and theological grounds of the Origen’s concept of the triple sense of Scripture. Part one: the critics of valentinian doctrine of three human races in Clement of Alexandria ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2013, Iss. 34, pp. 74-92 (in Russian).

PDF
The prominent Christian theologian Origen (AD 185–254) is rightly considered as a founder of a new method of biblical exegesis, based on the distinction of three senses of the Holy Scripture. The goal of our research, presented in the cycle of three articles, is to reveal the theoretical origins and the genuine content of this methodological doctrine, in demonstrating, that it was developed by Origen in a context of controversy between Valentinian and proto-orthodox Christians of Alexandria wherein both sides were claiming the apostle Paul’s authority. The first article deals with Valentinian soteriological teaching on the three human races possessing respectively three types of knowledge and its critics in the treatises of Clement of Alexandria, providing a starting point for further reasoning of Origen on the same subject. The second article shows the differences in the attitude of Clement of Alexandria and of Origen towards the Valentinian trichotomy as well as towards the texts of the Scripture involved into discussion. It also contains an analysis of Origen’s treatment of the stemming from Saint Paul opposition of Corinthians and Ephesians as alleged recipients of two different types of knowledge, corresponding to diff erent senses of Scriptural texts. The third article states, that the Origenian doctrine of three senses was founded upon a specific interpretation of the First Epistle to the Corinthians 2–3, where the opposition of the carnal/psychic Christians and the spiritual ones is bounded with the motif of the contrariety of milk and meat, representing two forms of teaching corresponding to the different grades of moral and spiritual progress of the believers.
Origen, Clemens of Alexandria, Valentinians, Bible, exegesis, three senses of Scripture
1. Afonasin E. A. Shkola Valentina. Fragmenty i svidetel'stva (School of Valentin. Fragments and Evidences), Saint-Petersburg, 2002.
2. Nesterova O. E. 2008 “Problemy interpretacii uchenija Origena o treh smyslah Svjashhennogo Pisanija v sovremennoj nauchnoj literature” (Problems of Interpretation of Origen’s Teaching about Three Senses of Holy Scriptures in Modern Scientific Literature), in Rannehristianskaja i vizantijskaja jekzegetika, Moscow, 2008, pp. 26-67.
3. Danielou J. Origene, Paris, 1948.
4. Kaestli J.-D. 1980 “Valentinisme italien et valentinisme oriental: leurs divergences a propos de la nature du corps de Jesus, in Layton B. (ed.) The Rediscovery of Gnosticism, Leiden, 1980, vol. 1: The School of Valentinus, pp. 391-403.
5. Markschies Ch. Valentinus Gnosticus? Untersuchungen zur valentinianischen Gnosis mit einem Kommentar zu den Fragmenten Valentinus, Tubingen, 1992.
6. Thomassen E. The Spiritual Seed. The School of the «Valentinians», Leiden, Boston, 2008.
7. Crouzel H. et Simonetti M. (eds.) Origene. Traite des Principes, Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1978–1984.
8. Pasquier A. 2008 “The Valentinian Exegesis”, in Kannengiesser Ch. (ed.) Handbook of Patristic Exegesis. The Bible in Ancient Christianity, Leiden, Boston, 2008, vol. 1.
9. Quispel G. 2008 “Valentinus and the Gnostikoi”, in Quispel G. Gnostica, Judaica, Catholica: Collected essays of Gilles Quispel, Leiden, 2008, pp. 454-470.
10. Quispel G. 2008 “Presupposes hermeneutiques de la lecture de la Bible juive chez les gnostiques. Etude de quelques procedes exegetiques dans un traite de Nag Hammadi (NH 2, 4)”, in DiTommaso L., Turcescu L. The Reception and interpretation of the Bible in Late antiquity, Leiden, 2008, pp. 369-392.

Nesterova Ol'ga

Savinov Dmitrii

Phonemes /†/ и /w/ in south russian dialects (instrumental phonetic study)

Savinov Dmitrii (2013) "Phonemes /†/ i /w/ in south russian dialects (instrumental phonetic study) ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2013, Iss. 34, pp. 93-109 (in Russian).

PDF
The paper shows that a tone glide which begins with a high vowel and changes to a mid vowel (with a gradual increase in intensity) should be regarded as a characteristic feature of the phonemes /†/ and /w/. A vowel system which consists of seven phonemes can only function with diphthongs [i.. e] and [uo], which are realised as the phonemes /†/ and /w/ respectively. These diphthongs manifest a completely parallel structure. Firstly, it explains the nature of the diphthongal /†/ in South Russian dialects; secondly, it supports the view that the phoneme /w/ appears to be a correlate of the phoneme /†/, which is a result of the trend towards the symmetrisation of the Old Russian language phonological system. This basic similarity between the allophones /†/ and /w/ is only found in dialect systems with a phoneme set containing seven vowel phonemes. The tendency for diphthongs to turn into simple vowels primarily affects the diphthong [i. e] and only secondarily the diphthong [u. o]. The process of monophthongisation leads to the development of asymmetrical vowel systems which are characterised by a statistically significant dominance of the diphthong [i.. e] over the diphthong [uo].
Russian phonetics, dialectology, South Russian dialects, stressed vocalism, phonemes /†/ и /w/, Russian phonetics, dialectology, South Russian dialects, stressed vocalism
1. Avanesov R. I. Russkaja literaturnaja i dialektnaja fonetika (Russian Literature and Dialect Phonetic), Moscow, 1974.
2. Avdeeva M. T. Slovar' ukrainskih govorov Voronezhskoj oblasti (Dictionary of Ukranian Dialects of Voronezhskaja Region), Voronezh, 2012, vol. 2.
3. Bevzenko S. P. Ukrains'ka dialektologija (Ukranian Dialectology), Kiiv, 1980.
4. Beskrovnyj A. M. 1949 “Iz istorii obrazovanija perehodnogo ukrainsko-russkogo dialekta v Voronezhskoj oblasti” (From History of Forming of Transitional Ukranian-Russian Dialect in Voronezhskaja Region), in Mat-ly i issled. po russkoj dialektologii, Moscow, Leningrad, 1949. vol. 2, pp. 312-319.
5. Brok O. 1907 “Opisanie odnogo govora iz jugo-zapadnoj chasti Totemskogo uezda” (Description of a Dialect from South-Western Part of Totemskij District), in Sb. ORJaZ, Saint-Petersburg, 1907, vol. 83/4.
6. Bromlej S. V. 1949 “Nabljudenija nad udarjaemymi glasnymi pri sobiranii materialov po «Programme»” (Observations on Tone Vowels by Gathering Materials for “Program”), in Bjulleten' dialektologicheskogo sektora In-ta russkogo jazyka, Moscow, Leningrad, 1949, vol. 5, pp. 22-51.
7. Vasil'ev L. L. 1929 “O znachenii kamory v nekotoryh drevnerusskih pamjatnikah XVI–XVII vekov. K voprosu o proishozhdenii zvuka o v velikorusskom narechii” (About Meaning of Kamora in Some Old Russian Texts of XVI–XVII Centuries. To Question of Origin of Sound o in Great Russian Dialect), in Sb. po rus. jazyku i slovesnosti, Leningrad, 1929, vol. 1/2.
8. Volkova N. A. Fonetika govorov Posem'ja. Istorija i sovremennoe sostojanie (Phonetic of Dialects of Posem’e. History and Modern State), Cherepovec, 2003.
9. Vysotskij S. S. 1967 “Opredelenie sostava glasnyh fonem v svjazi s kachestvom zvukov v severnorusskih govorah” (Definition of Structure of Vowel Phonemes in Connection with Quality of Sounds in North Russian Dialects), in Ocherki po fonetike severnorusskih govorov, Moscow, 1967. pp. 5-82.
10. Vysotskij S. S. 1977 “Fonemnyj sostav slova kak osnova dlja izuchenija zvukovogo stroja govora” (Phonemic Structire of Word as Basis for Study of Sound System of a Dialect), in Vysotskij S. S. (ed.) Jeksperimental'no-foneticheskie issledovanija v oblasti russkoj dialektologii, Moscow, 1977, pp. 3-52.
11. Galinskaja E. A. Istoricheskaja fonetika russkih dialektov (Historical Phonetic of Russian Dialects), Moscow, 2002.
12. Durnovo N. N. Izbrannye raboty po istorii russkogo jazyka (Selected Works for History of Russian Language), Moscow, 2000.
13. D'jachenko S. V. 2012 “Nabljudenija nad udarnym vokalizmom treh arhaicheskih voronezhskih govorov” (Observatoin on Tone Vocalism of Three Archaic Dialects of Voronezh), in Aktual'nye problemy russkoj dialektologii. Tezisy dokladov Mezhdunarodnoj konferencii 27-28 oktjabrja 2012 g., Moscow, 2012, pp. 36-40.
14. Zhuravlev V. K. 1963 “Iz istorii vokalizma v praslavjanskom jazyke pozdnego perioda” (From History of Vocalism in Preslavonic Language of Late Period), in Voprosy jazykoznanija, 1963, vol. 2, pp. 8-19.
15. Zhuravlev V. K. Diahronicheskaja fonologija (Diachronical Phonology), Moscow, 1986.
16. Kasatkin L. L. Sovremennyj russkij jazyk. Fonetika (Modern Russian Language. Phonetic), Moscow, 2006.
17. Kasatkin L. L. Sovremennaja russkaja dialektnaja i literaturnaja fonetika kak istochnik dlja istorii russkogo jazyka (Modern Russian Dialect and Literary Phonetic as Source for History of Russian Language), Moscow, 1999.
18. Kasatkina R. F. 2000 “Juzhnorusskoe narechie. Novye dannye“ (South Russian Dialect. New Data), in Voprosy jazykoznanija, 2000, vol. 6, pp. 98-109.
19. Klejmenova E. S. Govory juzhnoj chasti Kaluzhskoj obl. Dis. ... kand. filol. nauk (Dialects of South Part of Kaluzhskaja Region. Dissertation), Moscow, 1956.
20. Kodzasov S. V., Krivnova O. F. Obshhaja fonetika (General Phonetic), Moscow, 2001.
21. Kotkov S. I. Juzhnovelikorusskoe narechie v XVII stoletii (South Great Russian Dialect in XVII Century), Moscow, 1963.
22. Kryvshhk1 A. A. Dyjalektalopja belaruskaj movy (Dialectology of Byelorussian Language), Minsk, 2003.
23. Listrova Ju. T. 1955 “K izucheniju kursko-orlovskogo dialekta (govor s. Otskochnogo Dmitrjashevskogo r-na Lipeckoj obl.)” (To Study of Kursk-Orel Dialect (Dialect of village Otskochnoje of Dmitrjashevskij District of Lipeckaja Region), in Uch. zap. Kishinevskogo gos. ped. in-ta, Kishinev, 1955, vol. 4, pp. 197-208.
24. Martine A. Princip jekonomii v foneticheskih izmenenijah (Principle of Economy in Phonetical Changes), Moscow, 1960.
25. Paufoshima R. F. Fonetika slova i frazy v severnorusskih govorah (Phonetic of Word and Phase in North Russian Dialects), Moscow, 1983.
26. Shvtorak G. P. Formuvannja i dialektna diferenshhashhja davn'orus'ko! movi (Forming and Dialect Differentiation of Old Russian Language), Kiiv, 1988.
27. Popov M. B. Problemy sinhronicheskoj i diahronicheskoj fonologii russkogo jazyka (Problems of Synchronic and Diachronic Phonology of Russian Language), Saint-Petersburg, 2004.
28. Kasatkina L. L. (ed.) Russkaja dialektologija (Russian Dialectology), Moscow, 2005.
29. Kasatkina R. F. (ed.) Russkie narodnye govory. Zvuchashhaja hrestomatija. Juzhnorusskoe narechie (Russian Folk Dialects. Sound Chrestomathy. South Russian Dialect), Moscow, 1999.
30. Panova M. V. (ed.) Russkij jazyk i sovetskoe obshhestvo. Fonetika sovremennogo russkogo literaturnogo jazyka. Narodnye govory (Russian Language and Soviet Society. Phonetic of Modern Russian Literary Language. Folk Dialects), Moscow, 1968.
31. Selishhev A. M. Izbrannye trudy (Selected Works), Moscow, 1968.
32. Sidorov V. N. Iz russkoj istoricheskoj fonetiki (From Russian Historical Phonetic), Moscow, 1969.
33. Ter-Avanesova A. V. 2008 “Fragment sistemy imennogo slovoizmenenija i akcentuacii slobodskogo govora” (Fragment of System of Name Inflection and Accentuation of Slobodskoj Dialect), in Mat-ly i issled. po russkoj dialektologii, Moscow, 2008, vol. 3/9, pp. 67-111.
34. Ter-Avanesova A. V. 2001 “Materialy po akcentuacii govora derevni Pustosha (sushhestvitel'nye muzhskogo roda)” (Materials for Accentuation of Dialect of Village Pustosha (Masculine Names)), in Russkij jazyk v nauchnom osveshhenii, 2001, vol. 1/3, pp. 150-167.
35. Fomina T. G. 1982 “K voprosu o kachestve glasnyh fonem , v odnom juzhnorusskom govore (na osnove jeksperimental'nyh dannyh)” (To Question about Quality of Vowel Phonemes , in a South Russian Dialect (on Basis of Experimental Data)), in Sobinnikova V. I. (ed.) Mat-ly po russko-slavjanskomu jazykoznaniju, Voronezh, 1982, pp. 142-149.
36. Fortunatov F. F. Izbrannye trudy (Selected Works), Moscow, 1957, vol. 2.
37. Shahmatov A. A. 1964 “Diftongi uo i Te v velikorusskih govorah” (Diphthongs uo and ie in Great Russian Dialects), in Voprosy jazykoznanija, 1964, vol. 5, pp. 110-120.

Savinov Dmitrii

PUBLICATIONS

Davydenkova Mariia

A dictionary of locutions from liturgical books by protopriest A. I. Nevostruyev

Davydenkova Mariia, Kaluzhnina Nadezhda, Strievskaya Ol'ga, Mazurina Natal'ia, , , (2013) "A dictionary of locutions from liturgical books by protopriest A. I. Nevostruyev ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2013, Iss. 34, pp. 113-135 (in Russian).

PDF
The publication contains the first part of entries beginning in the letter “E” (Russian “Е”). Characteristic features of the edition of the Dictionary, lists of sources, abbreviations as well as explanatory notes were set out in detail in the preceding issues.

Davydenkova Mariia

BOOK REVIEWS

Kliueva Elena

Rev. of Jean-Claude Muhlethaler, Charles d’Orleans, un lyrisme entre Moyen Age et modernite1. P., Editions Classiques Garnier, 2010 — 246 р

Kliueva Elena (2013) Rev. of Jean-Claude Muhlethaler, Charles d’Orleans, un lyrisme entre Moyen Age et modernite1. P., Editions Classiques Garnier, 2010. — 246 r, Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2013, Iss. 34, pp. 139-141 (in Russian).

PDF

Kliueva Elena

CHRONICLE

Marsheva Larisa

Faculty of Philology. The Chair of theory and history of languages: PhD thesis defences (2012–2013)

Marsheva Larisa (2013) "Faculty of Philology. The Chair of theory and history of languages: PhD thesis defences (2012–2013) ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2013, Iss. 34, pp. 145-146 (in Russian).

PDF

Marsheva Larisa

Marsheva Larisa

Monographs on the history of russian dialects

Marsheva Larisa, Rodina Margarita, (2013) "Monographs on the history of russian dialects ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2013, Iss. 34, pp. 147-151 (in Russian).

PDF

Marsheva Larisa

Smirnova Viktoriia

Cistercian art of persuasion (13th–16th centuries): dialogus miraculorum by Caesarius of Heisterbach and its reception

Smirnova Viktoriia, Polo de, (2013) "Cistercian art of persuasion (13th–16th centuries): dialogus miraculorum by Caesarius of Heisterbach and its reception ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia III : Filologiia, 2013, Iss. 34, pp. 152-160 (in Russian).

PDF
The article contains detailed summaries of two presentations made at a Paris conference on the Dialogus miraculorum by Caesarius of Heisterbach. The fi rst presentation, «Dialogus miraculorum as an initial source of Scala coeli by Jean Gobi the Younger (1323–1330)» puts forward a thesis that by the 1320s Caesarius had become an auctoritas for the mendicant orders, to which Jean Gobi, the author of Scala coeli belonged. The main problem discussed in the presentation is the contradiction between Jean Gobi’s statement that he borrows his examples from Caesarius and clear stylistic difference between Caesariuss and Jean Gobi’s rendering of the same exempla. M. A. Polo de Beaulieu compares cases of Jean Gobi uninterrupted quoting of the Alphabetum by Arnold of Liege and points out that the rubrication in Scala coeli is the same as in Alphabetum. This leads to the conclusion that Jean Gobi takes his material not directly from Caesarius but through the agency of his Dominican brother, Arnold. In doing this, Jean Gobi prefers to cite the original source and not to mention Arnold, which shows the trustworthiness of a Cistercian author for a Dominican friar. The second presentation, «Accessit abbatis mei imperium... Belief and theology in Caesarius’ of Heisterbach stories», demonstrates (within the framework of the «narrative theology») that in the 9th Section of the Dialogus by Caesarius the narrative structure reinforced by the dialogue epitomises distinctive features of the Cistercian «aff ective theology»: the emphasis on the idea that the cause of the incarnation of God and of the entire divine activity in the world is love; the idea of the personal union of the Christian and God in the Communion when the heart of the faithful, in which Christ is born anew, is likened to Virgin Mary; the attention to the representation of Christ as an infant and to the human nature of Christ. The significance of personal activity in Cistercian theology is expressed on the level of narration in the fact that Caesar’s characters are not passive bearers of faith but actively aspire to the efficient participation in the Sacrament. The narration helps embody the Cistercian creed, nonetheless the Dialogue contain the doctrine of the scholastic Peter of Poitier.
«Scala coeli», Арнольд Льежский, «Alphabetum narrationum»

Smirnova Viktoriia