Michael Moser’s research while affiliated with University of Vienna and other places

Most typically, the integration of interslavic loan words functions on the morphological, not on the phonological level, provided that the morphemes are etymo-logically transparent from an interslavic perspective. Therefore, a philological approach offers the most important criteria for establishing which words can most probably be regarded as interslavic loans. If a word is testified for the first time exclusively in translations from another Slavic language or in texts that were written by authors who were well acquainted with Polish, Ukrainian, or Belarusian, it is most likely to be a loan. In this article, the words строгий 'rigorous', порядок 'order', причина 'reason' and гречный 'kind' are analyzed in order to demonstrate some typical characteristics of Polish loans in Russian. 0. Vorbemerkung. Zwischenslavische Lehnwörter wurden am häufigsten nach morphologischen Prinzipien integriert 1 . Die wichtigsten Kriterien für die Entscheidung, ob man es bei analogen Bildungen mit phonologisch nicht ausge-wiesenen zwischenslavischen Lehnwörtern, mit gemeinsamem Erbgut oder zufäl-ligen Parallelbildungen zu tun hat, stellt eine philologische Herangehensweise an die slavische Sprachgeschichte bereit, zu deren herausragenden Vertretern der hier geehrte Prof. Dr. István Nyomárkay gehört.

According to Andrej Anatol´evic Zaliznjak, the evidence for the particle toas a “relativizator”, as it is encountered in Old East Slavic texts and in particular in the Novgorod birch bark documents merely up to the first half of the 13th century, can be used as a more or less irrefutable argument for the authenticity of the Igor's tale, where it appears once in connection with kotoryj. As linguistic knowledge about the usage of to as a “relativizator”in East Slavic has been acquired only recently, no falsificator would have allegedly been able to use kotoryj to perfectly in accordance with pre-1250 Old East Slavic syntax. A comparative view, however, as it was once initiated, but then abandoned by Zaliznjak (1981) himself, demonstrates that to as an enforcing particle and also to as a “relativizator”in particular has been widely used in other Slavonic languages. Który to as such is known to Old, Middle and Modern Polish, as well as to Middle Ruthenian. Therefore, those who believe that there are polonisms in the Igor's tale, which prove it to be a falsification, could also use the evidence of kotoryj to in the Igor's tale as an argument for their own purposes. The significance of the “relativizator”to, thus, seems to be limited. Analogically, the same holds true for some other syntactic arguments put forward by the Moscow linguist in his latest book, namely as regards the enclitic elements in the Igor's tale. According to Andrej Anatol´evic Zaliznjak, the evidence for the particle toas a “relativizator”, as it is encountered in Old East Slavic texts and in particular in the Novgorod birch bark documents merely up to the first half of the 13th century, can be used as a more or less irrefutable argument for the authenticity of the Igor's tale, where it appears once in connection with kotoryj. As linguistic knowledge about the usage of to as a “relativizator”in East Slavic has been acquired only recently, no falsificator would have allegedly been able to use kotoryj to perfectly in accordance with pre-1250 Old East Slavic syntax. A comparative view, however, as it was once initiated, but then abandoned by Zaliznjak (1981) himself, demonstrates that to as an enforcing particle and also to as a “relativizator”in particular has been widely used in other Slavonic languages. Który to as such is known to Old, Middle and Modern Polish, as well as to Middle Ruthenian. Therefore, those who believe that there are polonisms in the Igor's tale, which prove it to be a falsification, could also use the evidence of kotoryj to in the Igor's tale as an argument for their own purposes. The significance of the “relativizator”to, thus, seems to be limited. Analogically, the same holds true for some other syntactic arguments put forward by the Moscow linguist in his latest book, namely as regards the enclitic elements in the Igor's tale.

The Middle Ruthenian (Middle Belarusian and Middle Ukrainian) period is an important stage in the development of the Ukrainian and Belarusian languages. It is characterized by several significant innovations on all linguistic levels. Of utmost significance is the broad functionality of Middle Ruthenian as a literary language, particularly beginning from the second half of the 16th up to the middle of the 17th century.