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

This article deals with the paper Lermontov’s Philosophical Novel by I. I. Vinogradov (1930–2015). This paper, which has a history longer than half a century — due to three reissues (1964, 1987, 2005), — came to be innovative both in the study of Lermontov, and in literary criticism. In the context of development of literature studies, this work was pioneering, because the philosophical element in Lermontov’s texts was discussed by scholars solely on the material of longer poems or lyrical poems, if at all. It is established that the infl uence of Vinogradov’s paper is divided into the three directions, i.e. the impact on the activity and world outlook of the critic himself, emergence of a whole range of studies analysing Lermontov’s metaphysics, revival on the Russian soil of the philosophical method in literary criticism. Publication of the article on the philosophical novel in the mid-1960s was in accordance with the zeitgeist, which is particularly evidenced by the use of the Aesopian language. Having defined the genre of the novel A Hero of Our Time as philosophical, Vinogradov hinted that collisions of the previous century well relate to the current time. The underlying objective of the critic was to identify in the novel of the 19th century such experience that would be spiritually signifi cant for people of the 20th century. My study draws the conclusion that the paper in question is not limited to the scientifi c, critical and literary components, because the text, literary in its essence, is adjacent to philosophical. The article of 1964 demonstrates revitalising of the philosophical or, speaking more strictly, of the religious-philosophical direction in literary criticism.

I. I. Vinogradov, Lermontov, literary criticism, philosophical direction

1. Biul’-Zedginidze N. (1996) Literaturnaia kritika zhurnala «Novyi mir» A. T. Tvardovskogo (1958– 1970 gg.) [Literary Criticism of the Journal Novyi Mir of A. T. Tvardovsky (1958‒1970)]. Moscow (in Russian).
2. Bogatyreva L., Isupov K. (2014) “Nasledie M. Iu. Lermontova i sovremennoe lermontovedenie” [Lermontov’s Legacy and Present-Day Studies of Lermontov], in Tvorchestvo M. Iu. Lermontova v kontekste sovremennoi kul’tury [Lermontov’s Literary Works in the Context of Present- Day Culture]. St Petersburg, pp. 5–17.
3. Bogomolets V. (1958) “K voprosu o fi losofskoi problematiku v lirike M. Iu. Lermontova pervoi poloviny 1830 gg.” [On Philosophical Issues in Lermontov’s Lyrics of the Former Half of the 1830s]. Uchenye zapiski LGPI im. A. I. Gertsena, vol. 168/1, pp. 91–113 (in Russian).
4. Brodskii N. (1941) “Filosofskie osnovy poezii Lermontova” [Philosophical Foundation of Lermontov’s Poetry]. Literatura v shkole, № 4, pp. 23–32.
5. Dobrenko E., Kalinin I. (2011) “Literaturnaia kritika i ideologicheskoe razmezhevanie epokhi ottepeli: 1953–1970” [Literary Criticism and Ideological Faction of the Period of the Thaw: 1953‒1970], in Istoriia russkoi literaturnoi kritiki: sovetskaia i postsovetskaia epokha [History of Russian Literary Criticism: Soviet and Post-Soviet Period]. Moscow, pp. 417–476 (in Russian).
6. Isupov K. (2014) “Metafi zika Lermontova” [Lermontov’s Metaphysics], in K. Isupov (ed.) M. Iu. Lermontov: pro et contra. Antologiia [M. Lermontov: Pro and Contra. Anthology], vol. 2. St Petersburg, pp. 53–73 (in Russian).
7. Manuilov V. (1963). “Geroi nashego vremeni Lermontova kak realisticheskii roman” [A Hero of Our Time by Lermontov as a Realistic Novel], in M. Iu. Lermontov. Voprosy zhizni i tvorchestva [Lermontov. Issues in the Study of Life and Literary Work]. Ordzhonikidze. pp. 25–35 (in Russian).
8. Markovich V. (1963). “Problema lichnosti v romane Lermontova «Geroi nashego vremeni»” [Problem of Personality in Lermontov’s Novel A Hero of Our Time]. Izvestiia AN Kaz. SSR. Seriia obshchestvennykh nauk, vol. 5, pp. 63–75 (in Russian).
9. Mentsel’ B. (2006) “Grazhdanskaia voina slov. Rossiiskaia literaturnaia kritika perioda perestroiki” [Civil War of Words. Russia’s Literary Criticism of Perestroika Period]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
10. Mikhailova E. (1941) “Ideia lichnosti u Lermontova i osobennosti ee khudozhestvennogo voploshcheniia” [Lermontov’s Idea of Personality and Special Features of its Literary Expression]. Zhizn’ i tvorchestvo M. Iu. Lermontova, vol. 1, Moscow, pp. 125–162 (in Russian).
11. Pul’khritudova E. (1964) “«Demon» kak fi losofskaia poema” [Demon as a Philosophical Poem], in Tvorchestvo M. Iu. Lermontova [Lermontov’s Literary Work], Moscow, pp. 76–105 (in Russian).
12. Soifer V. Zhizn’ i sud’ba Igoria Vinogradova [Life and Fate of Igor’ Vinogradov], available at http://novymirjournal.ru/index.php/projects/preprints/179-soifer-vinogradov (27.01.2019) (in Russian).
13. Stepanian K. Igor’ Vinogradov. Dukhovnye iskaniia russkoi literatury [Igor’ Vinogradov. Spiritual Quest of Russian Literature], available at http://znamlit.ru/publication.php?id=2998 (27.01.2019) (in Russian).
14. Vinogradov I. (1987) Dukhovnye iskaniia russkoi klassiki [Spiritual Quests of Russian Classics]. Moscow (in Russian).
15. Vladimirskii A. Put’ russkoi literatury [Path of Russian Literature], available at http://ps.1september.ru/article.php?ID=200508630 (27.01.2019) (in Russian).

Zenova Elizaveta

This article deals with patterns in the choice of the grammatical number of the predicate in synonymous constructions of the type te, kto prishel vs. te, kto prishli ‘those who came’ (singular vs.plural of the verb) in Russian. It contains a statistical, grammatical and semantic analysis of sentences with these structures based on examples from the Russian National Corpus. We investigate both constructions with predicates expressed by verbs and constructions with predicates expressed by adjectives, participles, predicatives, as well as by adjectival pronouns. The article presents results of our analysis of the occurrence of these constructions in texts by various authors of the 19th — 21st centuries and reveals a previously unknown regularity, namely the dependence of the number of the predicate on the case of the head pronoun. It also checks the hypotheses about the dependence of the number of the predicate on its semantics, tense and part of speech, none of which having been confi rmed. The authors of the article are concerned with the character of sentences with predicate in the plural in terms of the language standard, since such sentences are often regarded as substandard by the school language standard, which is discordant with the opinion of authoritative linguistic reference literature. The school standard and scientifi c codifi cation disagree here, this being the reason why the study of the actual usage is particlularly interesting. Corpus analysis demonstrates that both the system and the usage are in line with the less rigid variant of standard-language restrictions, which leads to specifi c hypercorrectness in editorial practice. This is a term introduced by the authors to refer to correcting the already correct variant for the variant which is also correct and preferable from a subjective point of view of the editor, but does not refl ect the author’s intention.

Russian language, syntax, grammar, сorpus linguistics, dependent clause, relative clause, agreement, agreement in number, predicate, Standard Russian

1. Alekhina M. (1989) Sintaksis slozhnogo predlozheniia sovremennogo russkogo literaturnogo iazyka [Syntax of the Complex Sentence of the Contemporary Standard Russian]. Moscow, 1989 (in Russian).
2. Babaitseva V., Maksimov L. (1987) Sovremennyi russkii iazyk v trekh chastiakh. Ch. 3: Sintaksis. Punktuatsiia [Contemporary Russian Language, in Three Parts. Pt. 3: Syntax. Punctuation]. Moscow (in Russian).
3. Graudina L., Itskovich V., Katlinskaia L. (2004) Grammaticheskaia pravil’nost’ russkoi rechi. Stilisticheskii slovar’ variantov [Grammatical Correctness of the Russian Speech. Stylistic Dictionary of Variants]. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Kholodilova M. (2015) “Soglasovanie s vershinoi otnositel’nykh konstruktsii i obosoblennykh imennykh oborotov v russkom iazyke”. Russkii iazyk v nauchnom osveshchenii, vol. 30, № 2, pp. 74–97 (in Russian).
5. Kholodilova M. (2017) “Otnositel’nye predlozheniia” [Relative Clauses], in Materialy k korpusnoi grammatike russkogo iazyka. Vyp. II. Sintaksicheskie konstruktsii i grammaticheskie kategorii [Materials for the Corpus Grammar of the Russian Language, 2: Syntactic Patterns and Grammatical Categories]. Moscow, pp. 205–279 (in Russian).
6. Panov M. (ed.) (1968). Fonetika sovremennogo russkogo literaturnogo iazyka. Narodnye govory [Phonetics of the Contemporary Russian Language. Urban Varieties]. Moscow (in Russian).
7. Pozharitskaia S., Dobrushina E. (2017). “Orfoepicheskii vzgliad na nekotorye variantnye iavleniia russkogo literaturnogo iazyka v epokhu korpusnoi lingvistiki” [Orthoepic View on Certain Variable Phenomena of the Russian Standard Language in Era of Corpus Linguistics], in Komp’iuternaia lingvistika i intellektual’nye tekhnologii [Computational Linguistics and Intellect Technologies], vol. 2. Moscow, pp. 372–384 (in Russian).
8. Shvedova N. (ed.) (1980) Russkaia grammatika [Russian Grammar]. Moscow (in Russian).
9. Sidorova M. (2014) “Zakonomernosti vybora edinstvennogo ili mnozhestvennogo chisla glagola v konstruktsiiakh tipa te, kto prishel / te, kto prishli” [Patterns in the Choice of the Singular vs. Plural Verb in Constructions te, kto prishel / te, kto prishli”], in M. Remneva et al. (eds.) Russkii iazyk: istoricheskie sud’by i sovremennost’ [Russian Language: History and Modern Time]. Moscow, pp. 313–314 (in Russian).
10. Sidorova M. (2017) “Osobennosti vybora konstruktsii tipa te/vse, kto prishel/prishli v tekstakh raznykh avtorov na baze NKRIa” [Features of the Choice of Constructions of the Type te/vse, kto prishel/prishli in Texts of Various Authors Based on Russian National Corpus”, in XXVII Ezhegodnaia bogoslovskaia konferentsiia PSTGU: Materialy [27th Annual Theological Conference of St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University for the Humanities]. Moscow, pp. 275–276 (in Russian).

Dobrushina Ekaterina

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

Sidorova Mariya

*According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.

Russian foundation of fundamental research 9-012-00200

Memory of a person contains various kinds of information about the word and its link to related words. To the topical (in terms of functioning) information pertains the unity, full or partial, of their phonological and morphemic set-up, similarity of morphological features, semantic properties and syntactic behaviour. What is more important for the storage of the interrelated group and access to it: formal or semantic link between the units? Results of psycholinguistic studies are classifi ed into those which testify to the equal signifi cance of the form and meaning of related words for the topicalisation of information in mental lexicon and those according to which it is only the formal processing of the word that takes place during the access to the mental representation of the word. Based on the material of a group of Russian verbs and their prefi xed and suffi xed derivatives, this article studies which general information is more important for the lexical access to the primary word in the Russian language, i. e. the structural similarity of the verb with its prefi xed derivative or predictability of the change in semantics as to the suffi xed derivative. A psycholinguistic experiment employing the technique of morphological priming has been conducted. Its results have shown that the predictability of semantics is more important in accessing the representation of the primary verb in memory. The experiment has shown that even a short-time activisation of the suffi xed derivative before reading the primary verb is suffi cient for this verb to be recognised faster than in the case of preliminary activisation of the prefi xed verb. This leads to the conclusion that regular and predictable modifi cations in the sense are more important for the arrangement of related words than their shared phonological and morphological features.

related words, word formation, lexical access, morphological priming, form and meaning

1. Alegre M., Gordon P. (1999) “Frequency Eff ects and the Representational Status of Regular Infl ections”. Journal of Memory and Language, vol. 40, pp. 41‒61.
2. Alexeeva S., Slioussar N., Chernova D. (2018). “StimulStat: a Lexical Database for Russian”. Behavior Research Methods, 50, 2305.
3. Bertram R., Baayen H., Schreuder R. (2000) “Eff ects of Family Size for Complex Words”. Journal of Memory and Language, vol. 42, pp. 390‒405.
4. Bondarko A. (1971) Vid i vremia russkogo glagola (znachenie i upotreblenie) [Tense and Aspect of the Russian Verb (Semantics and Usage)]. Moscow (in Russian).
5. Boudelaa S., Marslen-Wilson W. (2015) “Structure, Form, and Meaning in the Mental Lexicon: Evidence from Arabic”. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, vol. 30, № 8, pp. 955‒992.
6. Butterworth B. (1983) “Lexical representation”, in B. Butterworth (ed.) Language Production, vol. 2, London, pp. 257‒294.
7. Caramazza A., Laudanna A., Romani C. (1988) “Lexical Access and Infl ectional Morphology”. Cognition, vol. 28, pp. 297‒332.
8. Endresen A., Janda L., Kuznetsova J., Lyashevskaya O., Makarova A., Nesset T., Sokolova S. (2012) “Russian Ppurely Aspectual’ Prefi xes: Not so ‘Empty’ After All?”. Scando-Slavica, vol. 58, № 2, pp. 231‒291.
9. Feldman L., Soltano E., Pastizzo M., Francis S. (2004) “What do Graded Eff ects of Semantic Transparency Reveal about Morphological Processing?”. Brain and Language, vol. 90, № 3 (1), pp. 17‒30.
10. Feldman L., Milin P., Cho K., Moscoso Del Prado M., O’Connor P. (2015) “Must Analysis of Meaning Follow Analysis of Form? A Time Course Analysis”. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9.
11. Forster K., Davis C. (1984) “Repetition Priming and Frequency Attenuation in Lexical Access”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, vol. 10, № 4, pp. 680‒698.
12. Frost R., Forster K., Deutsch A. (1997) “What Can we Learn from the Morphology of Hebrew? A Masked-Priming Investigation of Morphological Representation”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, vol. 23, № 4, pp. 829‒856.
13. Giraudo H., Grainger J. (2000) “Effects of Prime Word Frequency and Cumulative Root Frequency in Masked Morphological Priming”. Language and Cognitive Processes, vol. 15, pp. 421‒444.
14. Gorbova E. (2010) Aktsional’nost’ glagol’noi leksiki i aspektual’nye grammemy: voprosy vzaimodeistviia [Actionality of Verbal Lexis and Aspectual Grammemes: Issues in their Interaction]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
15. Gorbova E. (2011) “Russkii vid v kontekste futuruma” [Russian Aspect in Context of Futurum], in Verbal Aspect: Grammatical Meaning and Context. Third Conference of the International Commission on Aspectology of the International Committee of Slavists. Paduya, pp. 35‒36.
16. Hastie T., Tibshirani R. (1990) Generalized Additive Models. Chapman & Hall/CRC.
17. Janda L., Endresen A., Kuznetsova J., Lyashevskaya O., Makarova A., Nesset T., Sokolova S. (2013) Why Russian Aspectual Prefi xes Aren’t Empty: Prefixes as Verb Classifiers. Bloomington.
18. Kuperman V., Van Dyke J. (2013) “Reassessing Word Frequency as a Determinant of Word Recognition for Skilled and Unskilled Readers”. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Human Perception and Performance, vol. 39, № 3, pp. 802‒823.
19. Marslen-Wilson W., Tyler L., Waksler R., Older L. (1994). “Morphology and Meaning in the English Mental Lexicon”. Psychological Review, vol. 101, № 1, pp. 3‒33.
20. Milin P., Kuperman V., Kostić A., Baayen R. (2009) “Words and Paradigms Bit by Bit: An Information-Theoretic Approach to the Processing of Infl ection and Derivation”, in J. Blevins (ed.) Analogy in Grammar: Form and Acquisition. Oxford, pp. 214‒252.
21. Moscoso del Prado M., Bertram R., Häikiö T., Schreuder R., Baayen R. (2004) “Morphological Family Size in a Morphologically Rich Language: the Case of Finnish Compared with Dutch and Hebrew”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, vol. 36, pp. 1271‒1278.
22. Pollatsek A., Hyönä J., Bertram R. (2000). “The Role of Morphological Constituents in Reading Finnish Compound Words”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, vol. 26, pp. 820‒833.
23. Pulvermüller F. (2002) The Neuroscience of Language. Cambridge.
24. Rastle K., Davis M., New B. (2004) “The Broth in my Brother’s Brothel: Morpho-Orthographic Segmentation in Visual Word Recognition”. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, vol. 11, pp. 1090–1098.
25. Riekhakainen E. (2014) “Vidovye pary glagolov i assotsiativnye sviazi v mental’nom leksikone nositelia russkogo iazyka” [Aspectual Pairs of Verbs and Associative Links in Mental Lexicon of a Speaker of Russian]. XLII Mezhdunarodnaia filologicheskaia konferentsiia, Sankt-Peterburg, 11‒16 marta 2013 g.: Izbrannye trudy [XLII International Conference in Philology. St. Petersburg, 11‒16 March 2013. Selected Articles]. St Petersburg, pp. 265‒274 (in Russian).
26. Rusakova M., Sai S. (2003) “Vidovaia para russkogo glagola v individual’nom leksikone i rechevoi deiatel’nosti” [Aspectual Pair of the Russian Verb in Individual Lexicon and Speech Acts], in N. Bogdanova, B. Osipova (eds.) Grammaticheskaia i leksicheskaia semantika [Grammatical and Lexical Semantics]. St Petersburg, pp. 116‒128 (in Russian).
27. Schreuder R., Baayen R. (1995) “Modeling Morphological Processing”, in L. Feldman (ed.) Morphological Aspects of Language Processing. Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 131‒154.
28. Shvedova N. et al. (eds.) (1980). Russkaia grammatika, 1: Fonetika. Fonologiia. Udarenie. Intonatsiia. Slovoobrazovanie. Morfologiia [Russian Grammar, 1: Phonetics, Phonology, Stress, Intonation, Word Formation]. Moscow (in Russian).
29. Sichinava D. Vid [Aspect], available at http://rusgram.ru/%D0%92%D0%B8%D0%B4 (accessed 20.05.2018; in Russian).
30. Slioussar N., Chuprina A. (2016) “How Derivational Links Aff ect Lexical Access: Evidence from Russian Verbs and Nouns”. Italian Journal of Linguistics, vol. 28/1, pp. 115‒136.
31. Taft M., Forster K. (1975) “Lexical Storage and Retrieval of Prefi xed Words”. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, vol. 14, pp. 638‒647.
32. Taft M. (2004) “Morphological Decomposition and the Reverse Base Frequency Effect”. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 57A, pp. 745‒765.
33. Traficante D., Burani C. (2003). “Visual Processing of Italian Verbs and Adjectives: the Role of Inflectional Family Size”, in H. R. Baayen, R. Schreude (eds.). Berlin, pp. 45–64.
34. Zalizniak A., Mikaelian I. (2012) “O nekotorykh diskussionnykh momentakh aspektologicheskoi kontseptsii Lory Iandy” [Some Controversial Issues in Laura Janda’s Aspect Theory’. Voprosy iazykoznaniia, 6 (in Russian).
35. Zalizniak A., Mikaelian I., Shmelev A. (2015) Russkaia aspektologiia: V zashchitu vidovoi pary [Russian Aspectology: In Defense of the Aspectual Pair]. Moscow (in Russian).

Chuprina Anastasia

This paper presents a translation of the early Christian poem Visio Dorothei preserved in a papyrus copy from the Bodmer Collection (Pap. Bodmer, 29). This poem is written in hexametres and dates back to the middle of the 4th century. Its author is supposedly St. Dorotheus of Tyre, who suff ered torment in the time of Julian the Apostate. The poem narrates from the fi rst person about the vision of the Palace of God, which is arranged in the same way as the Imperial Palace. The protagonist serves as a guard, leaves his post, for which he is punished, and receives the post of the gatekeeper again, together with an order to transmit his vision in songs. The symbolism of the Vision is close to that of the Gnostics. The poem contains numerous lacunae. This work is one of the earliest Christian poetic texts written in hexametres.

Vision of Dorotheus, vision, hexametre, Dorotheus of Tyre, Imperial Palace, Early Christian poetry, late ancient literature

1. Agosti G. (1996–1997) “Contributi critico-testuali all’interpretazione della Visio Dorothei”. Analecta papyrologica, vol. 8‒9, pp. 47–60.
2. Bremmer J. (1988) “An Imperial Palace Guard in Heaven: The Date of the Vision of Dorotheus”. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, vol. 75, pp. 82–88.
3. Gelzer Th. (1988) “Zur Visio Dorothei. Pap. Bodmer, 29”. Museum Helveticum : schweizerische Zeitschrift für klassische Altertumswissenschaft, vol. 4/4, pp. 248–250.
4. Hurst A., Reverdin O., Rudhardt J. (eds.) (1984) Papyrus Bodmer XXIX, Vision de Dorothéos. Genéve.
5. Hurst A., Rudhardt J. (eds.) (1999) Papyri Bodmer XXX–XXXVII: “Codex des Visions”: poè mes divers (Bibliotheca Bodmeriana). München.
6. Jones A., Martindale J. (1971) The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire. Vol. 1: A. D. 260–395. Cambridge.
7. Kessels A., Van der Horst P. (eds.) (1987) “The Vision of Dorotheus (Pap. Bodmer 29)”. Vigiliae Christianae, vol. 41/4, pp. 313–359.
8. Livrea E. (1986) “Review: Vision de Dorothéos. Édité avec une introduction, une traduction e des notes par André Hurst, Olivier Reverdin et Jean Rudhardt”. Gnomon, vol. 58/8, pp. 687–711.
9. Livrea E. (1992) “Esichio e la Visione di Dorotheos”. Glotta, vol. 70/1–2, pp. 71–81.
10. Lukhovitskii L., Artiukhova T. (2007) “Dorofei”, in Pravoslavnaia entsiklopediia, vol. 16. Moscow, 2007, pp. 23–24 (in Russian),
11. Moreschini C., Norelli E. (2005) Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature, vol. 2. Peabody.
12. Van Berchem D. (1986) “Des soldats chrétiens dans la garde imperial: observations sur le texte de la Vision de Dorothéos (Papyrus Bodmer XXIX)”. Studii clasice, vol. 24, pp. 155–163.
13. Vian F. (1985) “A propos de la Vision de Dorothéos”. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, vol. 60, pp. 45–49.

Alexandrova Tatiana

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

This publication contains a fragment of the French-Russian Thesaurus of Religious Lexis that covers the language of Catholicism and Orthodoxy (and, to a lesser extent, Protestantism).

Zhukovskaia Nadezhda

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

The “Dictionary of Locutions from Liturgical Books” by Protopriest A. Nevostruev, completed in the middle of the 19thcentury and never published, can be regarded both as a signifi cant achievement of Church Slavonic studies and as a valuable lexicographic source. The manuscript is kept in the Russian State Library. The decrepit state of the manuscript has determined the necessity of its urgent study and edition. The signifi cance of this project is primarily due to the fact that the text of the dictionary is being made accessible to linguists for the fi rst time. The orthography and grammar of the dictionary refl ect the linguistic views of the time of its creation and can be of interest for those who study the history of Russian linguistics. This paper contains another part of dictionary entries beginning in letter N. The characteristic features of the publication of this Dictionary, the lists of sources, abbreviations and symbols were described in detail in the previous issues of St. Tikhon’s University Review. All previously published parts of the Dictionary together with the critical apparatus can be found at the website of the Faculty of Philology at St. Tikhon’s University for the Humanities: http://pstgu. ru/faculties/philological/science/slov_Nevostr/.

Church Slavonic Dictionary, Nevostruev, lexicography, Church Slavonic language, liturgical books, parallel Greek versions, translations of the Old Testament

1. G. A. Bogatova (ed.) (1983). Slovar’ russkogo iazyka XI–XVII vv. Vyp. 10. Moscow.
2. Rahlfs А. (ed.) (1979) Septuaginta. Stuttgart.
3. Rahlfs А., Hanhart R. (eds.) (2006) Septuaginta. Stuttgart.

Davydenkova Maria

Kaluzhnina Nadezhda

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

Strievskaya Olga

Mazurina Natalia

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

Strievskaya Maria

This paper presents new material for the dictionary of the present-day dialect of Staroshvedskoye (Gammalsvenskby), the only Scandinavian dialect in the territory of the former Soviet Union. The present-day state of this dialect has not been described in linguistic literature. The only source of data on Gammalsvenskby is fi eldwork with speakers of the dialect. The main objective of this work is to present material recorded in the interviews in the most complete way possible and to describe the state of the vocabulary and infl ection in the dialect. The entries include the following information: type of infl ection; translation; phrases, sentences and short texts illustrating the usage (with initials of the informants). In many cases full paradigms are given as well. They include all phonetic and morphological forms that have occurred in the interviews.

language documentation, documentary linguistics, fi eld linguistics, endangered language, Swedish dialects, Swedish dialects of Estonia, Gammalsvenskby, dialect dictionary

1. Lagman H. (1971) Svensk-estnisk språkkontakt. Stockholm.
2. Mankov A. (2014) A Scandinavian Island in a Slavonic Linguistic Environment. The Dialect of Gammalsvenskby: Nouns. Slovene, vol. 3/1, pp. 120–170.
3. Mankov A. (2014) “Dialekt sela Staroshvedskoe: opyt sostavleniia slovaria ischezaiushchego iazyka (a — brist-bäin)” [“The Dialect of Gammalsvenskby: Compiling a Dictionary of an Endangered Language (a — brist-bäin)”]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia III: Filologiia, № 38, pp. 91‒130 (in Russian).

Mankov Alexander

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

This study was carried out in 2018 as part of the project "The Dialect of Gammalsvenskby" funded by the Foundation for the Development of St Tikhon's University for the Humanities. I am grateful to Tamara Torstendahl Salytjeva, director of the Russian-Swedish Centre, Russian State University for the Humanities, without whose help this study would have been impossible.