Philological faculty

В статье рассматриваются языковые инновации, характерные для переводов XIV в., в рукописях, которые в средневековой письменности связывались с деятельностью митрополита Киприана (†1406): Лествица (РГБ, МДА 152), Псалтырь (РГБ, МДА 142) и Творения Дионисия Ареопагита (РГБ, МДА 144). Объем инноваций в каждом из исследованных текстов различен. Минимальный объем инноваций имеет Псалтырь, максимальный — Лествица. Однако объем исправлений в Лествице неравномерен: в начальной части рукописи инноваций больше, чем в конце кодекса. Творения Дионисия Ареопагита в рукописи МДА 144 никак не связаны с деятельностью Киприана: это список перевода старца Исайи из Пантелеймонова монастыря на Афоне. Объем инноваций в этом переводе занимает среднее положение между Псалтырью и Лествицей. Таким образом, атрибутированные одному лицу тексты могут иметь существенные различия в технике перевода, поэтому критерий атрибуции для описания норм литературного языка XIV в. представляется ненадежным. Подобным образом и понятия “афонская норма” и “тырновская норма” весьма размыты и не имеют точных границ. В связи с этим предлагается исследовать переводы XIV в., опираясь на объем языковых инноваций, представленных в конкретном тексте. Этот критерий был успешно применен М. Г. Гальченко при описании орфографических черт второго южнославянского влияния в русских рукописях XIV–XV вв.

This article deals with the language innovations characteristic of translations of the 14th century as represented in manuscripts regarded by scholars as emanating from the literary activities of Metropolitan Cyprian (†1406): the Ladder of Divine Ascent, the Psalter, and the works of St. Dionysius the Areopagite. The number of innovations is different for each of the texts listed above, the Psalter being the least innovative and the Ladder the most innovative text. Nevertheless the distribution of corrections in the Ladder seems to be irregular, with the initial part containing more innovations than the end of the codex. The works of St. Dionysius the Areopagite represented in MDA 144 (Russian State Library, Moscow) have nothing to do with Cyprian’s literary activities, for this manuscript is a copy of a translation made by Isaiah, a monk at the St. Panteleimonos Monastery on Mount Athos. The number of innovations in this translation lies between those seen in the Psalter and in the Ladder. Thus, a text attributed to the same person may differ significantly in terms of translation technique, which leads to the conclusion that the so-called attributional criterion is unreliable for a description of the written language of the 14th century. Along the same lines, such notions as the Athos norm and the Tarnovo norm are quite fluid and do not have any strictly defined borders. Therefore we suggest that these 14th-century translations have to be examined in the context of the degree to which they illustrate language innovations in a particular text. This criterion has been already successfully applied by M. G. Galchenko for a description of the orthographic features of the Second South Slavic Influence in Russian manuscripts of the 14th–15th centuries.

Pragmatic markers are an integral part of spontaneous spoken speech, however, they still have no systematic scientific description. These speech elements perform mostly pragmatic functions and are characterized by almost complete absence (or significant weakening) of lexical and/or grammatical meaning. The frequency of pragmatic markers in speech exceeds that of almost all content words. Because of that, for the improvement of many current NLP tasks, it is very important to obtain proper systematization of pragmatic markers and to develop effective and reliable schemes for their annotation. In current research, we describe the preliminary set of pragmatic markers categories and present the results of two stages of their pilot annotation made independently by a group of experts.

The dialogue “Xenedemos, or Voices” is a little-known philosophical work by Theodoros Prodromos, an outstanding 12th century Byzantine writer. The objective of the paper is to reveal, who of Byzantine intellectuals of the time could serve as prototypes of the main
protagonists of the dialogue. The historical and logical content of “Xenedemos” is analysed. It
is argued that its main character, named Theokles, encompasses crucial features of Michael
Psellos and John Italos.

«Xenedemos, or Voices» is a little-known philosophical work by Theodoros Prodromos, an outstanding Byzantine writer of the 12th c. The object of the present paper is to analyse style and structure of the dialogue, to describe its historical and cultural context, to define its
specific features. It is demonstrated, that «Xenedemos» according to all criteria belongs to the genre of «platonic dialogue», that it is an original work, which reflect new trends in the 12th c. Byzantine literature. The logical content of «Xenedemos» is analysed; as a result it becomes possible to distinguish two levels in the dialogue  — the didactical level and the analytical level. It is emphasized that the text requires a critical edition and a detailed investigation in the context of the Byzantine logic.