Re: [tied] Yers

From: fortuna11111
Message: 22970
Date: 2003-06-10

Sergey,

Thanks for the informative note, I will take it into consideration.

Eva


-- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Sergejus Tarasovas" <
S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "fortuna11111" <
fortuna11111@...>
> wrote:
>
> > I know about this. Yet was what you call Russian
orthography not
> > under the influence of OCS? Or do you have other,
independent
> > written sources confirming the existence of those Yers in the
> actual
> > language of Russians? Did Russians have a written
language at all,
> > before OSC?
>
> Old Russian texts we have at our disposal are of course
written
> mainly with the Cyrillic, but that doesn't mean they are all
written
> in OCS -- otherwise we coudn't even speak of Old Russian at
all, only
> of the Old Russian version of OSC texts. For instance, the
language
> of the birch bark inscriptions doesn't show any OSC influence
> whatsoever -- neither orthographical nor lexical or
morphological.
> The yers (including word-final ones), BTW, are often rendered
with
> the graphemes <o> (for etymological *U) and <e> (*I) in the
birch
> bark inscriptions. That's not what one would call an OSC
> orthographical influence, is it? The East Slavic loans in Baltic
and
> Baltic Finnish prove the yers were still alive and kicking at the
> time of borrowing (cf., eg., Lith. <kùbilas> 'vat, tub' < ORuss
> <kUbIlU> 'id.' which demonstrates the existence of medial yers
and
> Finnish <käämi> 'spindle, bobbin' < ORuss (Krivichian) <ke^vI>
'id.'
> demonstrates the existence of a word-final yer).
>
> Sergei