Shortly after the death of Methodius, the German clergy once again gained prominence in the Moravian region. In conjunction with Pope Stephen V's decree to ban the Slavonic liturgy, a German Viching was placed as successor to Methodius. This contradicted Methodius' own wish to be succeeded by the native Moravian Gorazd. During this period of German dominance, the disciples of Methodius were persecuted relentlessly, some being driven from the country, others being sold into slavery. This effectively stamped out the last remnants of the original missionary work of Sts. Cyril and Methodius in the regions of their earliest travels. The OCS ecclesiastic tradition was only able to survive outside the reaches of the Moravian empire, in those areas where the disciples of the two saints were able to find refuge.
Initially the influence of the saints' work spread to Bohemia, Croatia, and Bulgaria. These regions were soon followed by Bosnia and Serbia. After Christian conversion took foothold in the region of Kyiv (Russian Kiev), Bulgarian missionaries brought the Slavonic liturgy to the Russian speaking peoples late in the tenth century. This liturgy even spread to non-Slavic Rumania, where it was in use in the churches until the sixteenth century. In the process of this expansion, the Church Slavonic language took on local attributes and ceased to be as homogeneous as it appears in our earliest texts. In most regions to which it spread, the Church Slavonic language became the basis for the earliest literary language of the respective regions. It is therefore not to be viewed simply as the language of the Church in Slavic-speaking areas, but as the common thread unifying the inchoate stages of several developing literary traditions.
The following passage is Matthew 4:1-5, relating the temptation of Jesus in the desert. It is worth noting, in verse 4, that where English has a passive construction 'it is written', OCS employs an active verb pishetu' 'he/it writes'. This translates a Greek passive perfect gegraptai 'it has been written'.
One will also notice the orthographic convention of using letters of the alphabet to denote numerals, as in verse 2. The system is based on the Greek method, whereby the first nine letters of the alphabet denote the units 1, 2, 3,... 9; the next nine denote the tens 10, 20, 30,... 90; the following letters the hundreds 100, 200, 300,... 900. Thus the number 11 is written by taking the letter for 10, and following it by the letter for 1. The situation, however, is complicated by the fact that the sequence of the Glagolitic and the Cyrillic alphabets differed slightly. Hence the Glagolitic symbol which k transcribes has the numerical value 40; however, within the Cyrillic alphabet, k has the value 20. The passage below is a Cyrillic rendering of an original Glagolitic manuscript, hence k denotes the number 40.
togda iisusu' vu'zvedenu' bystu' dukhomi' vu' pustyn'jo^ iskusiti se^ otu' neprije'zni | i poshti' se^ di'nii k i noshtii k poslje'di' vu'zlaka |
i pristo^pi ku' n'emu dije'volu' iskushae^ i i retche ashte synu' esi bozhii ri'tsi da kamenie se khlje'bi bo^do^tu' |
onu' zhe otu'vje'shtavu' retche pishetu' ne o khlje'bje' edinomi' pozhivetu' tchlovje'ku' nu' o vsemi' glagolje' iskhode^shtiimi' idz ustu' bozhii |
togda poe^tu' i dije'volu' vi' sve^ty gradu' i postavi i na krilje' tsru'k'bi'nje'emi' |
i glagola emu ashte synu' esi bozhi'i pusti sebe dolu | pishetu' bo je'ko ag'elomu' svoimu' zapovje'stu' o tebje' i na ro^kakhu' vu'zu'mo^tu' te^ da ne kogda prje'tu'kneshi o kameni' nogo^ svojo^ |
retche zhe emu iisusu' paky pishetu' ne iskusishi gospoda boga svoego |
paky poje'tu' ego neprije'zni' na goro^ vysoko^ dzje'lo i pokaza emu vi'sje' tsje'sari'stbije' mira i tslavo^ ego |
i glagola emu vi'sje' si dami' ti ashte padu' poklonishi mi se^ |
togda glagola emu iisusu' otidi dije'vol'e | pishetu' bo gospodju bogu svoemu poklonishi se^ i tomu edinomu posluzhishi |
togda ostavi ego dije'volu' i se ag'eli pristo^pishe^ i sluzhaakho^ emu |
togda iisusu' vu'zvedenu' bystu' dukhomi' vu' pustyn'jo^ iskusiti se^ otu' neprije'zni | i poshti' se^ di'nii k i noshtii k poslje'di' vu'zlaka | i pristo^pi ku' n'emu dije'volu' iskushae^ i i retche ashte synu' esi bozhii ri'tsi da kamenie se khlje'bi bo^do^tu' | onu' zhe otu'vje'shtavu' retche pishetu' ne o khlje'bje' edinomi' pozhivetu' tchlovje'ku' nu' o vsemi' glagolje' iskhode^shtiimi' idz ustu' bozhii | togda poe^tu' i dije'volu' vi' sve^ty gradu' i postavi i na krilje' tsru'k'bi'nje'emi' | i glagola emu ashte synu' esi bozhi'i pusti sebe dolu | pishetu' bo je'ko ag'elomu' svoimu' zapovje'stu' o tebje' i na ro^kakhu' vu'zu'mo^tu' te^ da ne kogda prje'tu'kneshi o kameni' nogo^ svojo^ | retche zhe emu iisusu' paky pishetu' ne iskusishi gospoda boga svoego | paky poje'tu' ego neprije'zni' na goro^ vysoko^ dzje'lo i pokaza emu vi'sje' tsje'sari'stbije' mira i tslavo^ ego | i glagola emu vi'sje' si dami' ti ashte padu' poklonishi mi se^ | togda glagola emu iisusu' otidi dije'vol'e | pishetu' bo gospodju bogu svoemu poklonishi se^ i tomu edinomu posluzhishi | togda ostavi ego dije'volu' i se ag'eli pristo^pishe^ i sluzhaakho^ emu |
(Matthew 4:1) Then was Jesus led up of the spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. (2) And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungered. (3) And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. (4) But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (5) Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, (6) And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands shall they bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. (7) Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. (8) Again the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; (9) And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. (10) Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. (11) Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.
Section 16 of Lesson 4 discussed v- and n-stem nouns. There are three other types of consonant stems: s, nt, r. These all share the characteristic genitive ending -e. As with the other consonant stem nouns, the endings of the i-declension often replace these endings, and in the later stages of OCS the i-declension replaces the e-declension.
All s-stem nouns are neuter, with the N/A/V sg. ending -o. Because this ending coincides with o-stem neuters, the two declensions are confused. Many nouns display forms from both declensions. In the remaining oblique cases of the s-stem declension, the affix -es- joins root to ending. slovo 'word' illustrates the declension.
Jers in strong position may be promoted to full vowels, so that one finds alternate forms I sg. slovesemi', D pl. slovesemu', L pl. slovesekhu'. Conflation with the i-declension produces the forms G L sg. slovesi. The forms D sg. slovu and N/A/V pl. slova result from interference with the o-stem neuters.
The nouns oko 'eye' and ukho 'ear' are members of this declension. The -e- of the affix -es- causes the changes k > tch and kh > sh of the root-final consonants: G sg. otchese, ushese. Plural forms are rare, and they more often form the dual according to the i-declension.
|N A V Du.||otchi||ushi|
The nt-stem nouns are diminutives referring to living beings. All the nouns of this type are neuter. The affix intervening between root and ending is -e^t < -ent-, which in the nominative simplifies to -e^. The paradigm for otrotche^ 'child' is given below. Many of the forms, however, are not attested.
Some nouns ending in -ti' and properly belonging to the i-declension show case endings from this declension: dese^ti' 'ten' has L sg. dese^te, N pl. dese^te, G pl. dese^tu', I pl. dese^ty.
Only two feminine nouns belong to the r-stem declension: mati 'mother' and du'shti 'daughter'. mati will illustrate the declension.
The form matere also appears for the A sg. The I sg. materi'jo^ shows conflation with the i-declension. The G sg. materi is also found.
The numeral tchetyre is a member of this declension:
One finds the alternate G pl. form tchetyri'.
The comparative adjective has both short and long forms. The short form derives from the earlier suffix *-ji's, cf. Lat. mag-is. The long from adds a preceding -je'-, resulting in *-je'ji's. The i', which derived from an original short-i, subjects the s in both forms to the RUKI law, yielding -ji'sh and -je'ji'sh.
The nominative singular masculine form loses the final sh, leaving -ji' and -je'ji'. The long form -je'ji' is written -je'i in the Cyrillic script. The short form nominative, however, is used only as a definite (long-form) adjective, where the pronoun ji' is added. This results in the ending -ji'ji', which is written -ii, with palatalization of the preceding consonant resulting from the jot.
The short form adds the suffix -ji'sh to the base of the word, to which are appended the usual adjective endings. The nominative adds -ji'ji'. In all forms the presence of the -j- results in palatalization of the preceding consonant. Many adjectives ending in -i'k-, -u'k-, or -ok- form the comparative by means of the short form suffix, before which the -i'k-, -u'k-, or -ok- are dropped. For example, vysoku' 'high' uses the comparative base vysh- 'higher'. The paradigm is as follows.
|N V Sg.||vyshii||vyshe||vyshi'shi|
|N V Du.||vyshi'sha||vyshi'shi||vyshi'shi|
|N V Pl.||vyshi'she||vyshi'sha||vyshi'she^|
The long form adds the suffix -je'ji'sh- to the word base. The je' here derives from an original long-e, so that a preceding velar consonant is palatalized according to the rules of First Palatalization. In this situation the suffix -je'ji'sh- is then replaced by -aji'sh-. For example, star-u' 'old' forms the comparative star-je'ji'sh-, but ubog-u' 'poor' forms ubozh-aji'sh- < *ubozh-je'jish- < *aubag-e:-ji'sh-. The comparative of staru' 'old' illustrates the declension.
|N V Sg.||starje'i||starje'je||starje'ishi|
|N V Du.||starje'isha||starje'ishi||starje'ishi|
|N V Pl.||starje'ishe||starje'isha||starje'ishe^|
Several comparatives derive from stems whose positive form had fallen into disuse by the time of the OCS documents. The corresponding positive adjective forms were taken from other stems. The following are common examples.
|velii, veliku'||bol'ii 'bigger'||bol'e||bol'i'shi|
|mu'nogu' 'many'||ve^shtii 'larger, more'||ve^shte||ve^shti'shi|
|malu' 'small'||mi'n'ii 'smaller'||mi'n'e||mi'n'i'shi|
|blagu', dobru'||lutchii 'better'||lutche||lutchi'shi|
|zu'lu' 'bad'||gor'ii 'worse'||gorje||gor'i'shi|
The superlative of adverbs is formed by adding the prefix nan- to the comparative, e.g. paky 'again', patche 'more', nanpatche 'the most'. The superlative of adjectives is most often expressed by means of the comparative in conjunction with a genitive denoting the point of reference for the comparison: vi'sje'khu' bol'ii 'biggest of all'. An absolute superlative is formed by use of the adverb dzelo 'very' with the positive degree of the adjective, or by means of the prefix prje'- added to the positive: sve^tu' 'holy', prje'sve^tu' 'holiest'.
The relative pronoun is formed by appending the enclitic zhe 'but, and' to the forms of the third person pronoun *i 'he'. The pronoun is declined, while the enclitic remains invariable. In contrast to the third person pronoun, the nominative forms of the relative pronoun do occur.
|N A Du.||jazhe||izhe||izhe|
As with the third person pronoun, a prothetic n- occurs when used with prepositions, e.g. vu' n'i'zhe 'in which'.
The interrogative pronoun is declined only in the singular. The masculine and feminine forms are the same, while the neuter has a separate stem.
ku'to means 'who?', referring to masculine or feminine substantives; tchi'to means 'what?'. tchi'to has variant forms for some of the oblique cases: G tchesogo, tchi'so, tchi'sogo; D tchi'somu, tchemu, L tchesomi'.
The interrogative adjective is kyi, koje, kaja 'which?, what sort of?'. The declension is given below.
|N A Du.||(kaja)||-||-|
There are variant forms: N sg. masc. ky, G sg. fem. koje^, D sg. fem. koi, A sg. fem. kojo^, I sg. fem. kojo^, and G pl. koikhu'.
The possessive interrogative adjective tchii, tchija, tchije 'whose' follows the same declension.
In addition to the meaning 'who?, what?', the pronouns ku'to, tchi'to may have the indefinite meanings 'anybody, anything', respectively.
The prefix nje'- imparts indefinite meaning to the word to which it is attached. ku'to 'who?' becomes nje'ku'to 'someone', tchi'to 'what?' becomes nje'tchi'to 'something'. Similarly, the prefix ni- imparts a negative meaning: niku'to 'no one', nitchi'to 'no thing'. These prefixes were still flexible in OCS, so that prepositions may come between prefix and base word: nje' u kogo 'with someone', ni o komi'zhe nerodishi 'you care for no one'.
Past tenses other than the imperfect and aorist were formed by means of periphrastic constructions. These were based on the l-participle used in conjunction with a corresponding tense of 'to be'. The future was also at times expressed with constructions using an auxiliary verb.
The IE perfect formation survives in OCS only in the form vje'dje' 'I know' < *voidai, corresponding to Lat. vidi, Grk. (w)oida, Skt. veda. The perfect of other verbs is formed in OCS by using the corresponding l-participle of the verb plus the present tense of 'to be', that is, finite forms built from the stem es-. The participle takes its gender and number from the subject. For example, the perfect of nesti, -so^, -seshi 'carry' is as follows.
|1st Sg.||neslu'||neslo||nesla jesmi' 'I carried'|
|2||neslu'||neslo||nesla jesi 'you carried'|
|3||neslu'||neslo||nesla jestu' 'he/it/she carried'|
|1st Du.||nesla||neslje'||neslje' jesvje' 'we two carried'|
|2||nesla||neslje'||neslje' jesta 'you two carried'|
|3||nesla||neslje'||neslje' jeste 'they two carried'|
|1st Pl.||nesli||nesla||nesly jesmu' 'we carried'|
|2||nesli||nesla||nesly jeste 'you carried'|
|3||nesli||nesla||nesly so^tu' 'they carried'|
The exact difference between the OCS perfect and aorist is still a matter of scholarly debate. Many state that the perfect in OCS denotes a past action whose result is still relevant in the present. This is distinct from the aorist, which denotes a past action without regard to the time of the speaker. The oft-quoted example in support of this distinction comes from the story of Jairus' daughter in Mark 5:22-43. The messengers tell Jairus du'shti tvoje' umrje'tu' 'your daughter has died', where umrje'tu' is the third singular aorist form. However Jesus later says nje'stu' umru'la nu' su'pitu' 'she is not dead, but sleeps', where nje'stu' (= ne jestu') umru'la is the perfect, and su'pitu' is present. One must be cautious, however, in asserting that such a distinction was felt in OCS, because here both the aorist umrje'tu' and the perfect (jestu') umru'la translate the Greek aorist apethanen. The fact that the OCS perfect often translates the Greek aorist, together with the fact that later Slavic languages use the l-participle construction for the simple past, suggest that the OCS perfect may have expressed the past generally and without reference to the present time of the speaker.
The pluperfect denotes an action which occurred prior to a point of time in the past. It is formed analogously to the perfect, replacing the present tense of the auxiliary 'be' with its imperfect or aorist form. nesti, -so^, -seshi 'carry' serves as an example.
|1st Sg.||neslu', -lo, -la||bje'akhu' / bje'khu'||'I had carried'|
|2||neslu', -lo, -la||bje'ashe / bje'||'you had carried'|
|3||neslu', -lo, -la||bje'ashe / bje'||'he/it/she had carried'|
|1st Du.||nesla, -lje', -lje'||bje'akhovje' / bje'khovje'||'we two had carried'|
|2||nesla, -lje', -lje'||bje'asheta / bje'sta||'you two had carried'|
|3||nesla, -lje', -lje'||bje'ashete / bje'ste||'they two had carried'|
|1st Pl.||nesli, -la, -ly||bje'akhomu' / bje'khomu'||'we had carried'|
|2||nesli, -la, -ly||bje'ashete / bje'ste||'you had carried'|
|3||nesli, -la, -ly||bje'akho^ / bje'she^||'they had carried'|
The auxiliary 'be' is also found in the perfect: neslu' bylu' jesmi' 'I had carried'.
Future time was usually expressed using the present tense form of the verb. Another construction existed, however, which involved the infinitive used in conjunction with a finite form of one of the verbs vu'tche^ti, natche^ti 'to begin', imje'ti 'to have', khotje'ti 'to will'. For example, one finds glagolati imatu' 'he will speak', nenavidje'ti se^ natchi'no^tu' 'they will despise one another'.
A periphrastic future construction is occasionally formed by using the present participle with a form of byti, bo^do^, bo^deshi 'be, become'. For example the verb mli'tchati, -tcho^, -tchishi 'be silent' forms a future bo^deshi mli'tche^ 'you will be silent'; and zhiti, zhivo^, zhiveshi 'live' forms the future zhivu' bo^deshi 'you will live'.
The present tense also fills the function of the future perfect. There is, however, a periphrastic formation of the future perfect given by the l-participle in conjunction with a finite form of byti, bo^do^, bo^deshi 'be'. For example, tchitati, -ajo^, -ajeshi 'read' forms a future perfect tchitalu' bo^do^ 'I will have read'; the future perfect of roditi, -zhdo^, -dishi 'give birth' is found in to vu'sko^jo^ se^ i rodili bo^demu' 'then for what shall we be born?'
The nominative is the case of the subject and of adjectives or substantives predicated to the subject. Thus in bje'ashete bo rybarja 'for they two were fishermen', the predicate rybarja is in the nominative. The nominative is also used abosolutely for naming. This includes titles such as evangelie otu' luky 'the Gospel according to Luke', as well as predicates with verbs of naming: si' velii naretchetu' se^ 'he will be called great', where velii 'great' is nominative in agreement with the subject.
The vocative is the case used for direct address. For example, dushe 'soul!' is vocative in the phrase reko^ dushi moei dushe 'I will say to my soul, Soul!...'. Distinct forms for the vocative are found only in the singular of masculine and feminine nouns. In other numbers the form is the same as the nominative. The nominative is in fact often found in instances where a distinct vocative form would be expected.