- Anton Karlgren, Dneprfossernes Nordisk-Slaviske Navne, Copenhagen, 1947, p. 139 (Festskrift udgivet af Københavns Universitet i anledning af Universitetets aarsfest, November 1947), quoted further as K; Knut-Olof Falk, Dneprforsarnas Namn i Kejsar Konstantin VII Porfyrogennelos' De administrando imperio, Lund, 1951, p. 304 (Lunds Universitets Årsskrift. N.F. Avd. 1, Bd. 46., Nr 4), quoted further as F; Yury Šerech, “Sproba vidtvorennja ukrajins'koji movy X storijaččja” (Ukrajina, 5, 1951, pp. 324–330), quoted further as U; Knut-Olof Falk, “Zur Diskussion der konstantinischen Dnjeprschnellnamen” (Meddelanden från seminarierna för slaviska språk, jämförande språkforskning och finsk-ugriska språk vid Lunds Universitet, 2, 1952, pp. 40–68), quoted further as M. The discussion between Falk and Sahlgren in Bygd och Namn, 38 (1950), pp. 138–169, and 39 (1951), pp. 142–160.
- Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Administrando Imperio. Greek text edited by Gy. Moravcsik, English translation by R. J. H. Jenkins, Budapest, 1949, p. 58. Further referred to as MJ. Cf. also the excellent table of the names for the falls in K 15.
- E.g., P. Buzuk, Narys istoriji ukrajins'koji movy, Kiev, 1927, p. 30.
- Cf. Ad. Stender-Petersen, Varangica, Aarhus, 1953, p. 139 ff.
- M. Vasmer, Russisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, 7, refrains from any explanation of the word. The “old-Russian” form agist quoted by him is late (17th-18th century). See X. Loparev, Drevne-russkie skazanija o pticax (Pamjatniki drevnej pis'mennosli, 116, 1896), p. 16; to the same time only can be traced back the form aist (13); both word forms are unknown in the Ukrainian texts of the period, which have busel (9) and hajster (12), the latter being borrowed from Polish.
- Falk (151) asserts that his explanation contradicts the opinion of Meillet in his Études sur l'élymologie et le vocabulaire du vieux slave, 2, Paris, 1905, p. 168. This is, however, a misunderstanding based on the fact that Falk, in all probability, did not read the whole book but used only the index. On pp. 232 and 286 of the same book Meillet rejects his former explanation of the word and accepts Pogodin's interpretation. Unfortunately these pages were not entered in the index.
- Falk contends that a weak b may have been rendered in Greek only by ι. In general, this can hardly be maintained under the conditions of the variegated sound correspondences in Porphyrogenitus' text. But especially in this instance there was a change of ι into ε before ρ in Greek from the Hellenistic period (see M. Vasmer, Die Slaven in Griechenland, Berlin, 1941, p. 243). Falk mentions this book many times as his best authority, and its importance cannot be denied, but Falk apparently read only those chapters whose titles had something to do with the topics he treated.
- V. Jagić, “Studien über das altslovenisch-glagolitische Zographos-Evangelium,” ASPh 2, 1876, p. 258 ff. Cf. also N. van Wijk, “Zu den altbulgarischen Halbvokalen,” ASPh 39, 1925, p. 37.
- Codex Marianus glagoliticus, ed. V. Jagié, Berolini, 1883, p. 434. P. Buzuk, “K voprosu o meste napisanija Mariinskogo evangelica,” IORJaS 23: 2, 1921, p. 119.
- A. Leskien, “Noch einmal b und b in den altkirchenslavischen Denkmälern,” ASPh 27, 1905, e.g., p. 17, 32.
- S. Kuljbakin, “Poluglasnici u Sinajskom Psaltiru,” Južnoslovenski filolog 4, 1924, p. 78.
- In his review of N. Durnovo's book “Oˇerk istorii russkogo jazyka” in IORJaS 32, 1927, p. 312.
- Buzuk, “K voprosu”, 131; N. Trubetzkoy, Allkirchenslavische Grammatik, Vienna, 1954, p. 92 f.
- Falk's theory in its phonological part could be saved if one admits that βερoúτζη is derived not from vbrˆti “to boil,” but from *vereli “to lock,” Ch. Sl. vrěti. Cf. P. Černyx, Istoriˇeskaja grammatika russkogo jazyka, Moscow, 1952, p. 71. Then, however, another link of Falk's approach must fall, namely, the correspondence in meaning between the Old Ukrainian and Old Swedish names of the falls, and the whole explanation of βερoúτζη as the counterpart of λεάντι would need revision. For *vereti and its derivatives cf. Meillet, Études…, 354.
- As for vbruči, it is worth mentioning that it presents one more trap, and Falk did not avoid it. According to the tradition, he considers vbruˇi a participle. But the participle from vbrěti is vhrěti—vhręcii, and not vbručii, as was pointed out, e.g., by L. Bulaxovskij, Voprosy jazykoznanija, 1, 1953, p. 134. The form with Q (> u) in Slavic is undoubtedly old and not confined to East Slavic, but it hardly may be labeled participial.
- P. Skok, Dolazak Slovena na Mediteran, Split, 1934, pp. 112, 234.
- P. Skok, “Ortsnamenstudien zu De administrando imperio des Kaisers Constantin Porphyrogenetos,” Zeitschrift für Ortsnamenforschung, IV: 3, 222 (1928). Even in the spelling of the second component of the Scandinavian names for the falls Porphyrogenitus is inconsistent. We encounter the forms -βoρσί and ϕóρoς (cf. K 21).
- F. Uspenskij, “Vizantijskie vladenija na severnom beregu Černogo morja v IX i X vv.,” Kievskaja Starina, 25:5–6, p. 262 (1889).
- The loss of the initial s- in this word cannot be explained by the rules of Greek phonology because the initial cluster σμ was used in Greek words. Incidentally, it can be mentioned that the name of Minsk has also been seen in this name (V. Danilevič, Očerk istorii Polockoj zemli do konca XIV st., Kiev, 1896, p. 58).
- Povest' vremennyx let, ed. by V. Adrianova-Peretc, I. Moscow-Leningrad, 1950, p. 181.
- Die Slaven in Griechenland, 237, 322.
- The first from O. Šaxmatov, A. Kryms'kyj, Narysy z istoriji ukrajins'koji movy ta xrestomatija, Kiev, 1924 (Zbirnyk 1st.-fil. Viddilu Vseukr. Akad. N auk, 12). The second quoted in footnote 3. V. Rozov (“Issledovanie jazyka južnorusskix gramot XIV i pervoj poloviny XV vekov”, Kievskie Universitetskie Izvestija, 1913, 12, p. 82ff) has shown that quotations from old texts in Kryms'kyj need verification.
- N. Durnovo, “Russkie rukopisi XI i XII vv., kak pamjatniki staroslav-janskogo jazyka,” Južnoslovenski filolog, 4, 1924, pp. 88–90.
- A. Krymskij, Ukrainskaja grammatika, I: 1, Moscow, 1907, p. 120; Je. Tymˇenko, Kurs istoriji ukrajins'koho jazyka, I, Kharkov-Kiev, 1930, p. 177.
- A. Budiloviˇ, Issledovanie jazyka drevneslavjanskogo perevoda XIII slov Grigorija Bogoslova, SPB, 1871, p. 27.
- XIII slov Grigorija Bogoslova v drevne-slavjanskom perevode, (kritiko-paleo-grafičeskij trud A. Budiloviča), SPB, 1875, p. 109.
- N. Durnovo, op. cit., J užnoslovenski filolog, 6. 63.
- Krymskij, 110. Reproduced in Buzuk, Narys…, 58, Tymčenko, 181.
- Cf. E. Karskij, Slavjanskaja kirillovskaja paleografija, Leningrad, 1928, p. 199.
- This is mentioned also in the article by A. Rozenfel'd, “Jazyk Svjatoslavova Izbornika 1073 g.,” Russkij Filologičskij Vestnik, 41, 1899, p. 158, often cited by Falk, though generally of no great scientific value.
- E.g., ourqžiti, ouselenaě in Codex Marianus, 597. Cf. A. Vaillant, Manuel du vieux slave, I, Paris, 1948, p. 73 f.
- A. Šaxmatov, Očerk drevenejšego perioda istorii russkogo jazyka, Petrograd, 1915, p. 181.
- V. Demjančuk, Review of Buzuk's Narys…, Zapysky Ist.-fil. Viddilu Vseukr. Akad. Nauk, XV, 1927, p. 238; cf. also vol. XXIII, 1929, p. 383.
- Altkirchenslavische Grammatik, 84.
- Cf. Durnovo, op. cit., 6, pp. 45, 53.
- Cf. G. Il'inskij, ∑αμβατάς Konstantina Bagrjanorodnogo,” Juvilejnyj zbirnyk no pošanu akad. M.S. Hruševs'koho, II, Kiev, 1928, p. 166 f.
- A Stender-Petersen, op. cit., p. 137, doubts even if this inscription may be considered as early as from the time of Jaroslav the Wise.
- Max Vasmer, “Wikingerspuren in Russland,” Berlin, 1931 (Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse, XXIV), pp. 668 f.; R. Ekblom, “Drei slavische Ortsnamen altnordischen Ursprungs,” Ramovšev Zbornik, Ljubljana, 1950, p. 281 f.
- Vaillant, p. 31. One may also refer to the facts of reverse correspondence (Gr. O—Slavic u, e.g. in zugrafb < ζωγράϕoς, ur arb < ώράριoν, Solomunb < ∑oλoμών, kanunb < кανών, but of course their conclusiveness is still lesser.
- Die Slaven in Griechenland, p. 268. Cf. also p. 240.
- “Ortsnamenstudien…,” p. 229, 235.
- Cf. V. Bidnov, “Do biohrafiji K. Šejkovs'koho j Ol. Rusova,” Praci Ukrajins'-koho istoryčno-filolohičnoho tovarystva v Prazi, 2, p. 25, Prague, 1939.
- Review of Durnovo's book, mentioned in footnote 12.
- Ibid., p. 309. As another representative of a skeptical attitude to Porphyrogenitus's data J. M. Korínek may be mentioned (“Die Herkunft des Karpatennamens und was damit zusammenhängt”, Carpatica Slovaca I/II, Bratislava 1943/1944, p. 151).
- Meillet, Études…, p. 200.
WORD
Volume 11, 1955 - Issue 4: Slavic Word No. 4