Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-08T00:18:03.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

32 - Scripts

from Part 5 - Sociolinguistic and Geographical Approaches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

By
Daniel Bunčić
Edited by
Danko Šipka  and
Wayles Browne
Danko Šipka
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Wayles Browne
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

This chapter shows that the Slavic scripts roughly align with the cultural division between Slavia Orthodoxa and Slavia Latina. Although the Cyrillo-Methodian tradition of the Glagolitic script connected to the Old Church Slavonic language was originally not confined to either of the two areas and the Glagolitic script was used longest in Catholic Croatia, it is nowadays continued in the form of the Cyrillic script, whereas the Latin alphabet in Slavia Latina is based on a completely different, ‘Western’ tradition. However, mutual influences abound and can be seen in script changes and various instances of biscriptality as well as in the introduction of roman type in the West in the sixteenth century, the adoption of its design principles in the ‘civil type’ in the East in the eighteenth century, and the gradual replacement of both blackletter and Old Cyrillic, which was (almost) completed only in the twentieth century.

Keywords

scriptalphabetbiscriptalityCyrillicGlagoliticLatinGreekaljamiado
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics , pp. 675 - 696
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alpatov, V. M. (2015). A Latin alphabet for the Russian language. In Tomelleri, V. S. & Kempgen, S., eds., Slavic Alphabets in Contact, Bamberg: University of Bamberg Press, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
Bircer, S. (2004). Transliteracija russkix grafem v latinicu v ėlektronnoj perepiske na russkom jazyke, Saint Petersburg: Izdatelʹstvo Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta.Google Scholar
Birnbaum, H. (1996). How did Glagolitic writing reach the coastal regions of northwestern Croatia? Croatica 42/43/44, 69–79.Google Scholar
Bláha, O., Dittmann, R., Komárek, K., Polakovič, D., & Uličná, L. (2015). Kenaanské glosy ve středověkých hebrejských rukopisech s vazbou na české země, Prague: Academia.Google Scholar
Bunčić, D. et al. (2016). Biscriptality: A Sociolinguistic Typology, Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Čajka, F. (2011). Církevněslovanská legenda o svaté Anastázii, Prague: Slovanský ústav AV ČR.Google Scholar
Calvet, L.-J. (1999). Pour une écologie des langues du monde, Paris: Plon.Google Scholar
Coulmas, F. (1996). Typology of writing systems. In Günther, H. & Ludwig, O., eds., Schrift und Schriftlichkeit/Writing and Its Use: Ein interdisziplinäres Handbuch internationaler Forschung/An Interdisciplinary Handbook of International Research, Vol. 2, Berlin & New York, NY: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 1380–1387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coulmas, F. (1999). Typology of writing systems. In The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Writing Systems, Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 520–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniels, P. T. (2009). Grammatology. In Olson, D. R. & Torrance, N., eds., The Cambridge Handbook of Literacy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuchsbauer, J. (2021). Litterarum aenigmata: Zur Rekonstruktion des Zeichenbestandes der frühen Glagolica. In Fuchsbauer, J., Stadler, W., & Zink, A., eds., Kulturen verbinden/Connecting Cultures/Sbližaja kulʹtury: Festband anlässlich des 50-jährigen Bestehens der Slawistik an der Universität Innsbruck, Innsbruck: Innsbruck University Press, pp. 83–114.Google Scholar
Fuhrhop, N. & Buchmann, F. (2009). Die Längenhierarchie: Zum Bau der graphematischen Silbe. Linguistische Berichte, 218, 127–155.Google Scholar
Gippius, A. A. & Mixeev, S. M. (2022). Drevnerusskie glagoličeskie nadpisi-graffiti XI–XII vekov iz Novgoroda: № 30–55. Slovo: Časopis Staroslavenskoga instituta u Zagrebu, 72(1), 47–92.Google Scholar
Hercigonja, E. (2006). Tropismena i trojezična kultura hrvatskoga srednjovjekovlja, 2nd ed., Zagreb: Matica Hrvatska.Google Scholar
Isaak der Syrer. (2015). Abhandlungen zur Askese. Band 1 (Facsimile der slavischen Kölner Handschrift aus dem XV. Jahrhundert), Cologne, Weimar, & Vienna: Böhlau.Google Scholar
Jončev, V. & Jončeva, O. (1982). Dreven i săvremenen bălgarski šrift, Sofija: Bălgarski chudožnik.Google Scholar
Kalajdžija, A. (2019). Predstandardni idiom bosanske alhamijado literature, Sarajevo: Institut za jezik.Google Scholar
Kempgen, S. (2015). Die kyrillische Schrift unter dem Einfluss der lateinischen: aktuelle Beobachtungen. In Tomelleri, V. S. & Kempgen, S., eds., Slavic Alphabets in Contact, Bamberg: University of Bamberg Press, pp. 33–58.Google Scholar
Kupfer, F. & Lewicki, T. (1956). Źródła hebrajskie do dziejów Słowian i niektórych innych ludów Środkowej i Wschodnej Europy, Wrocław & Warszawa: Zakład imienia Ossolińskich & Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk.Google Scholar
Leciejewski, J. (1906). Runy i runiczne pomniki słowiańskie, Lviv: Altenberg.Google Scholar
Lesjuk, M. (2014). Stanovlennja i rozvytok ukrajinsʹkoji literaturnoji movy v Halyčyni, Ivano-Frankivsk: Misto NV.Google Scholar
Lindstedt, J., Spasov, L. & Nuorluoto, J., eds. (2008). The Konikovo Gospel – Konikovsko evangelie: Bibl. Patr. Alex. 268 [Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 125], Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica.Google Scholar
Lupić, I. (2019). Najstariji hrvatski latinički molitvenik. Filologija, 73, 47–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macháček, J. & Nedoma, R., Dresler, P., Schulz, I., Lagonik, E., Johnson, S. M., Kaňáková, L., Slámová, A., Llamas, B., Wegmann, D., & Hofmanová, Z. (2021). Runes from Lány (Czech Republic) – The oldest inscription among Slavs: A new standard for multidisciplinary analysis of runic bones. Journal of Archaeological Science, 127 (2021), 105333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2021.105333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazon, A. & Vaillant, A. (1938). L’Évangéliaire de Kulakia: Un parler slave du Bas-Vardar, Paris: Droz.Google Scholar
Meyer, A.-M. (2018). Latinica und Kyrillica im Kontakt – Überlegungen zum Phänomen “Schriftakzent”. In Meyer, A.-M. & Reinkowski, L., eds., Im Rhythmus der Linguistik: Festschrift für Sebastian Kempgen zum 65. Geburtstag, Bamberg: University of Bamberg Press, pp. 361–378.Google Scholar
Miškinene, G. (2001). Drevnejšie rukopisi litovskix tatar (Grafika, transliteracija, perevod, struktura i soderžanie tekstov), Vilnius: Izdatelʹstvo Vilʹnjusskogo universiteta.Google Scholar
Moskovič, V. et al., eds. (2014). Kenaanity: Evrei v srednevekovom slavjanskom mire/The Knaanites: Jews in the Medieval Slavic World, Moscow: Mosty kulʹtury.Google Scholar
Nowak, S. (2003). Schrift auf den Goldbrakteaten der Völkerwanderungszeit: Untersuchungen zu den Formen der Schriftzeichen und zu formalen und inhaltlichen Aspekten der Inschriften. Doctoral dissertation, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen. http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-1735-0000-0006-AEE1–A.Google Scholar
Picchio, R. (1958). La “Istorija slavěnobolgarskaja” sullo sfondo linguistico-culturale della Slavia ortodossa. Ricerche Slavistiche, 6, 103–118.Google Scholar
Pronk, T. (2018). Czech and Sorbian in the 11th–13th century Judeo-Slavic glosses. In Kapetanović, A., ed., The Oldest Linguistic Attestations and Texts in the Slavic Languages, Vienna: Holzhausen, pp. 246–263.Google Scholar
Sampson, G. (1985). Writing Systems: A Linguistic Introduction, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Schlund, K. (2020). Mehr als (nur) eine Schrift: Zwei- und Mehrschriftigkeit in Kroatien, Serbien und Bosnien-Herzegovina. Die Welt der Slaven, 65(2), 363–399.Google Scholar
Trunte, N. (2004). Πρὸς τὸ σαφέστερον: Zu Reformen in der glagolitischen Schrift. In Dürrigl, M.-A., Mihaljević, M., & Velčić, F., eds., Glagoljica i hrvatski glagolizam: Zbornik radova s Međunarodnoga znanstvenog skupa povodom 100. obljetnice Staroslavenske akademije i 50. obljetnice Staroslavenskog instituta (Zagreb–Krk, 2.–6. listopada 2002), Zagreb: Staroslavenski institute, pp. 419–434.Google Scholar
Trunte, N. (2019). Črъtami i rězami čьtěxǫ i gataaxǫ: Zu den Anfängen slavischer Schriftlichkeit. In Matulić, B. & Lupis, V. B., eds., Verba volant, scripta manent: Zbornik u čast akademika Stjepana Krasića O. P., Split, pp. 965–1006.Google Scholar
Tschernochvostoff, G. (1995). Zum Ursprung der Glagolica [1947; edited by Juhani Nuorluoto]. Studia Slavica Finlandensia, 12, 141–150.Google Scholar
Żak, J. (1985). Fundumstände der skandinavischen Goldbrakteaten des 5. bis 6. Jahrhunderts vom Typ C aus Wapno, Großpolen, 1850 [Festskrift till Brita Malmer]. Hikuin, 11, 27–32.Google Scholar
Zaliznjak, A. A. (2010). Iz zametok o ljubitelʹskoj lingvistike, Moscow: Russkïj mïrʺ.Google Scholar
Żurek, P. (2006). Polska głagolica – relikt piśmiennictwa czeskiego czy chorwackiego? In Barciak, A., & Iwańczak, W., eds., Piśmiennictwo Czech i Polski w średniowieczu i we wczesnej epoce nowożytnej, Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego, pp. 209–217.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Scripts
  • Edited by Danko Šipka, Arizona State University, Wayles Browne, Cornell University, New York
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics
  • Online publication: 16 May 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108973021.033
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Scripts
  • Edited by Danko Šipka, Arizona State University, Wayles Browne, Cornell University, New York
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics
  • Online publication: 16 May 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108973021.033
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Scripts
  • Edited by Danko Šipka, Arizona State University, Wayles Browne, Cornell University, New York
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics
  • Online publication: 16 May 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108973021.033
Available formats
×