ZINAIDA PAKHOLOK

Lutsk Human Development Institute of the Open International University “Ukraine”

ORCID id: orcid.org/0000-0002-8911-5909

Fields of research: philology, philosophy, psychology, cultural science, country study.

DOI: doi.org/10.35321/all86-03

UKRAINIAN FORMATION IN THE SCIENTIFIC HERITAGE OF MIKOŁAJ KRUSZEWSKI

The Formation of the Ukrainian Language in the Scientific Heritage of Mikołaj Kruszewski

A N N O T A T I O N

The article for the first time examines the Ukrainian works in the scientific heritage of Mikołaj Kruszewski, who was born in a Polish-German family, spent his childhood and adolescence in Ukraine, received primary education and was influenced by the Ukrainian ethnos, which did not have the status of statehood at that time. Ukrainians could not freely develop their language, culture and science, teach children in their native language. The disputable question was whether the Ukrainian language is independent or it is a dialect of the Russian language. Without engaging in polemics, Kruszewski used the Ukrainian beliefs that he recorded in Volyn in the work “Spelis as a form of Russian folk poetry”, as well as the Ukrainian vocabulary to compare with other Indo-European languages in research “On “analogy” and “folk etymology” (“Volksetymologie”)”, “On the question of the guna. A study in the domain of Old Slavic vocalism”, “Über die Lautabwechslung”, “An Outline of Linguistic Science”.

K E Y W O R D S: Mikołaj Kruszewski, Volyn, latter half of the ¹⁹th century, the Ukrainian language, folklore, comparative linguistics.

A N N O T A T I O N

This article analyzes for the first time the works devoted to the Ukrainian language that constitute the scientific heritage of Mikołaj Kruszewski. Born into a Polish-German family, Mikołaj

Straipsniai / Articles

89

ZINAIDA PAKHOLOK

Kruszewski spent his childhood and adolescence in Ukraine, where he received his primary education. The Ukrainian ethnic group, which at that time did not have its own statehood, had a significant influence on him. Ukrainians could not freely develop their language, culture, and science or teach children in their native language. There was debate over whether the Ukrainian language was an independent language or a dialect of Russian. Without engaging in polemics, in his work Conjurations as a Form of Russian Folk Poetry M. Kruszewski drew on Ukrainian beliefs collected in Volhynia, as well as Ukrainian vocabulary, which he compared with other Indo-European languages in his works On “Analogy,” Folk Etymology, On the Question of the Guna: A Study in the Field of Old Slavic Vocalism, On Sound Alternation, An Outline of Linguistic Science.

KEYWORDS: Mikołaj Kruszewski, Volhynia, second half of the 19th century, Ukrainian language, folklore, comparative linguistics.

1. INTRODUCTION

Modern linguistics, producing new ideas, makes use of the heritage of representatives of linguistic scholarship whose value has not diminished in the globalized world. Such a scholar was N. V. Kruszewski^¹, who, in the apt definition of I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay, “belonged to the linguists—‘philosophers,’ i.e., to linguists striving for generalizations, striving to discover and formulate general laws of linguistic life. The factual material was also provided by the Aryan languages, […] he possessed an extraordinary ability to use factual information for his scientific generalizations” (Бодуэн де Куртенэ 1963: 146)^².

It was I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay who first recognized the significance of N. V. Kruszewski for science (Бодуэн де Куртенэ 1888; 1889). Later, F. F. Zelinsky drew attention to the future linguist’s student work (Зелинский 1897); V. A. Bogoroditsky described his membership in the Kazan Linguistic School (Богородицкий 1939); M. V. Cherepanov analyzed questions of phonetics (Черепанов 1958); R. Jakobson characterized the scholar’s role in the development of phonology (Jakobson 1960) and general linguistics (Jakobson 1965). The author of the monographic study, D. Radwańska-Williams, investigated N. V. Kruszewski’s linguistic theory (Radwańska Williams 1993). In addition to those mentioned

^¹ This article uses the traditional Russian scholarly forms of the names and patronymics of the two researchers: Nikolai Vyacheslavovich Kruszewski and Ivan Alexandrovich Baudouin de Courtenay.

^² Here, the Russian-language translation of I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay’s article is cited (Baudouin de Courtenay 1888; 1889).

90

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Ukrainian Formation in Scientific Heritage of Mikolaj Kruszewski

Alongside the pioneers in studying the ideas of N. V. Kruszewski, there is a substantial encyclopedic, reference, educational, and scholarly literature devoted to this outstanding figure (Миколай Крушевский 2005).

Having studied the pages of N. V. Kruszewski’s brief biography, published his correspondence (Пахолок 1999; 2000), translated his first work into Ukrainian (Крушевський 2002), republished translations of the hymns of the Rigveda (Крушевський 2004), compiled a bibliographic index (Миколай Крушевський 2005), and popularized his creative heritage (Пахолок 2019), we drew attention to the Ukrainian content that had not been studied by linguists, historians, or cultural scholars.

The relevance of this study lies in revealing another facet of the broad scope of the principles of a scholar who used examples from the Ukrainian language, which at that time had no state status, to demonstrate its belonging to the Indo-European language family.

The aim of the article is to examine the Ukrainian layer in the scholarly activities of N. V. Kruszewski. To this end, the following tasks must be addressed: on the basis of archival and printed sources, to reveal the reason for the emergence of Ukrainian content in the work of N. V. Kruszewski and to describe how interest in the Ukrainian language and culture was reflected in his works.

The scholarly novelty of the study lies in posing and resolving the problem demonstrating that the Russian language and culture were not N. V. Kruszewski’s only living environment and frame of reference, despite his established status as a representative of Russian scholarship.

2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

To ensure the reliability of the study, a triangulation approach was selected, entailing an examination from different perspectives of the problem of the emergence and use of Ukrainian material in the scholarly activities of N. V. Kruszewski.

Initially, attention was focused on the biographical aspect.

Information was selected from printed and archival sources, and official documents were studied. Then, using the method of biographical analysis, the way of life and living environment were reconstructed, as were life situations and the most significant periods of time.

The social aspect is closely connected with the biographical aspect, since an individual always interacts with people and responds to social phenomena. The historical method, which reflected

Straipsniai / Articles

91

ZINAIDA PAKHOLOK

the socio-historical situation and causal political connections became the main focus at the second stage of the work.

When beginning to study the scientific aspect of the linguist’s practical activity, we realized that personal and social elements were realized in it; therefore, we used methods and techniques of cognition: analysis and synthesis, analogy, generalization, and description.

The effectiveness of methodological triangulation consists in clearly defining the issue under consideration; conducting the research in stages; and ensuring the comprehensiveness of the system, in which each part can complement the others but cannot exist separately.

3. REASONS FOR THE EMERGENCE OF UKRAINIAN CONTENT

Biographical aspect. The linguist’s origins are connected with the ancient Polish Kruszewski family, whose lineage goes back to the 15th century and some of whose members had long lived in Volhynia.

N. V. Kruszewski’s father, Wacław Kruszewski (1808–1878), a nobleman bearing the Abdank coat of arms, was born in Zaslav in Volyn, now called Iziaslav. Having become a military officer, he took part in the Polish Uprising of 1831, after which he was exiled to Kazan. He left the service with the rank of rotmistrz. His civilian career was spent as a town governor in Ostroh, Ovruch, Lutsk, and Kovel. In Wacław Kruszewski’s family, the memory of insurgent traditions always lived on, and a patriotic atmosphere prevailed.

The mother of N. V. Kruszewski, Rozalia Notken (1833–1899), was born in Kyiv and belonged to the German merchant estate; she owned a family estate in the village of Solotvyn in Kovel County, Volhynia Governorate (Пахолок 2002: VIII–IX).

Nikolai Kruszewski was born on 6(18) December 1851 in Lutsk and was baptized in the Lutsk Cathedral Roman Catholic Church—the Church of St. Peter and Paul. His parents chose the name for their firstborn according to the church calendar and associated it with the city, which had been under the patronage of Saint Nicholas since the 12th century.

N. V. Kruszewski’s childhood passed in Lutsk, Kovel, and Solotvyno, as his contemporary Y. I. Kraszewski wrote, “in our cheerful and fertile Volyn, which, clothed in green groves and gilded fields, striped with rivers and blue streams, basks peacefully in the sun, unconcerned about its tomorrow, cutting down green groves, scattering

92

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Ukrainian Formation in Scientific Heritage of Mikołaj Kruszewski

the golden grain of its fields and allowing its rivers and ponds to become overgrown” (Kraszewski 1978: 153).

It is known that a person’s identity is connected with the place where they live. This connection is “mysterious, but evident. Or rather, undeniable, but enigmatic. It is governed by the genius loci known to the ancients, the spirit of place, which connects intellectual, spiritual, and emotional phenomena with their material environment. For modern people, the principal points of application and manifestation of cultural forces are cities. Their appearance is determined by the spirit of place, and the perception of it is purely subjective” (Вайль 2008: 9). According to Roman mythology, every man had his own genius, or guardian spirit. It may be assumed that the place of birth determined N. V. Kruszewski’s fate. His formation took place in the post-reform period of rapid socioeconomic changes, which were reflected in Lutsk’s appearance through the emergence of new commercial and public institutions, bank buildings, joint-stock companies, and educational establishments.

Despite new developmental trends, the city’s landmark remained Lubart’s Castle—a testimony to the fact that in 1320 Lutsk became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Nikolai knew this fact because in 1862 he entered the first grade of the Lutsk County Noble School. It was located next to Lubart’s Castle. It is possible that the ancient architectural structure awakened Nikolai’s interest in history.

N. V. Kruszewski’s father was Polish, while his mother was German; the family spoke three languages: Polish, German, and Russian. It was none other than his parents who contributed to the future linguist’s language training, which continued at the school through the study of Russian, French, German, and Latin. The school’s substantial library was of great importance for the pupils’ education and development; it contained mainly books in Polish and Latin: religious and philosophical works, and books on history, geography, mechanics, mathematics, and painting, as well as descriptions of cities, biographies of famous artists, and belles-lettres.

Throughout his period of study at the school, Nikolai Kruszewski lived in rented accommodation in Lutsk, and during holidays returned home to Solotvyno, since in 1861 his father retired and the entire family moved from Kovel to this village.

Nikolai lived continuously in Volyn until 1866, when he entered the Kholm Greek Catholic Gymnasium; five years later, he became a student at the Faculty of History and Philology of the University of Warsaw. After completing his studies, the graduate took a position as a teacher of ancient languages at the Troitsk Gymnasium in Orenburg Governorate, and only in 1878 did he move to Kazan.

Straipsniai / Articles

93

ZINAIDA PAKHOLOK

The climate of Kazan suited neither N. V. Kruszewski nor his family. This is attested by letters addressed to I. V. Tsvetaev, a former lecturer at the University of Warsaw: on April 29, 1879, “I count the days and hours until I can leave Kazan as soon as possible: I am terribly tired and have felt unwell all spring”; on March 9, 1881, “In the summer I want to go to my homeland with my family, despite the fact that with small children it is not especially convenient to lead a nomadic way of life”; on May 5, 1881, “Do you have in the Kyiv council any friends to whom you could recommend me, in case, after receiving my master’s degree [the defense will be on May 17], I were to seek an assistant professorship in Kyiv? My family and I have already endured so much from the local climate, and we are so drawn closer to our homeland, that moving to Kyiv is the height of my dreams [...]. At the end of May or the beginning of June I intend to set out for my homeland with my family...”; on February 5, 1884, “This year I will not even be able to rest: I am expecting an addition to the family and therefore cannot go to the countryside for the summer with the whole family. I think I will go alone for two weeks” (Пахолок 1999: 167, 170, 175).

In Kazan, I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay became N. V. Kruszewski’s mentor and friend, writing to A. A. Kotlyarevsky on 7(19) May 1881: “...he is in poor health, and the Kazan climate is very harmful to him. That is why he would like to move to some other university city, especially one in the south. His cherished dream is the possibility of serving in Kyiv, the city closest to his homeland (the Volyn Governorate). It is true that he shares with me the original sin of ‘Polonism’; but at the same time he shares with me the trait of keeping away from all politics, and, moreover, has the following advantages over me: 1) he is partly Little Russian (a native of the Volyn Governorate) and loves this country as his homeland...” (Бодуэн де Куртенэ 1881а: 4 об.).

Social aspect. N. V. Kruszewski is considered a Polish and Russian linguist by origin and scholarly activity. But he was born and formed in the territory of Ukraine, which at that time did not have the status of statehood. Ukrainian lands found themselves within two empires—the Russian and the Austrian.

The multinational Volyn belonged to the Russian Empire. Ukrainians constituted the majority of the population; Jews, Russians, Poles, Germans, Czechs, Bulgarians, and Karaites lived alongside them. However, the indigenous ethnos settled not in the cities but predominantly in rural areas. One of the reasons for this settlement pattern was the Russifying policy of the tsarist government, which was based on displacing the Polish nobility with Russians and on the activity of Russian merchants, who enjoyed state support. In urban institutions, administrative business was conducted in Russian. The Orthodox Church was Russian-speaking (Прищепа 2010: 79–80).

94

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Ukrainian Formation in Scientific Heritage of Mikołaj Kruszewski

The functioning of the Ukrainian language and culture was under the constant control of a government working to destroy them. To outline the picture of Ukrainophobia in the second half of the 19th century, we will cite the most striking examples.

Thus, in 1857, an instruction appeared for the trustees of the Kyiv and Vilna educational districts stipulating that teachers of history in gymnasiums and district schools were to be exclusively Russian. On June 21, 1863, the editor of the influential newspaper «Московские ведомости», M. N. Katkov, wrote: “Ukraine has never had a distinct history, has never been a distinct state; the Ukrainian people are a purely Russian people, an indigenous Russian people, an essential part of the Russian people, without which it cannot remain what it is […]. There has never been a Little Russian language, and despite all the efforts of the Ukrainophiles, it still does not exist” (Катков 1863: 328).

The anti-Ukrainian reaction culminated in the Valuev Circular, an order issued by the Minister of Internal Affairs of the Russian Empire, P. A. Valuev, on 18(30) July 1863, suspending the printing in Ukrainian of religious and educational literature and literature intended for elementary reading. Censorship permitted only works of belles-lettres. In the following year, 1864, on 14 July, the Statute on Primary Schools was adopted, providing for instruction exclusively in Russian. In 1869, a law appeared providing salary supplements for officials sent to Ukraine to russify the local population. The continuation of this discriminatory policy was the Ems Ukaz, signed by Emperor Alexander II on 18(30) May 1876 in the German city of Bad Ems. The ukaz prohibited teaching, record-keeping, the use of Ukrainian in music and in churches during sermons, the printing and import from abroad of books printed in Ukrainian, and the staging of Ukrainian-language theatrical performances and concerts throughout the Russian Empire. This humiliating ukaz was not repealed, but ceased to operate after the First Russian Revolution of 1905–1907 (Лизанчук 2008: 11–13).

In the documents listed, instead of Ukrainian language, the term “Little Russian dialect” was used, since in the 19th century it referred to the name of the totality of East Slavic dialects across much of the territory of present-day Ukraine. In Russian linguistics, the concept was widespread that in the 12th century the “common Russian language” divided into three dialects: southern Little Russian, middle (Belarusian and southern Great Russian), and northern (northern Great Russian). With regard to the East Slavic languages other than Russian, the problem of nomenclature in determining whether a variety was a language or a dialect was controversial; therefore, heated debates were conducted

Straipsniai / Articles

95

ZINAIDA PAKHOLOK

from the second half of the 19th century until the beginning of the 20th century. Many philologists, in particular S. K. Bulich, a graduate of Kazan University who became a professor in St. Petersburg, argued that “On strictly scientific grounds, one cannot but take a negative view of the theory proclaiming the Little Russian dialect an independent Slavic language” (Булич 1896: 485). Yet three decades earlier, the renowned historian M. I. Kostomarov had written in defense of the Ukrainian language: “…the boundary between what should be called a dialect and what a language—you will not believe it, gentlemen—is, by the same criteria, a dialect for you and a language for us. You will point to features it shares with Great Russian; we will point to features it shares with Polish and ask you: why, then, is Polish not also a dialect?” (Костомаров 1990: 144).

Considering the position of the Ukrainian language in the second half of the 19th century, it becomes clear that N. V. Kruszewski, having been born and lived in Volhynia, could not study Ukrainian, but he acquired background knowledge by hearing spoken language in the streets of Lutsk and Kovel, in the market square near the Lutsk County Noble School, and in everyday life in the village of Solotvyn.

The scholarly aspect consists in the use of Ukrainian materials in the works of N. V. Kruszewski, who did not engage in polemical battles with researchers but used the terms Little Russia, Little Russian, and Little Russian dialect, along with the realities associated with them.

The linguist’s scholarly heritage is small but thematically diverse: studies of folklore; linguistic sections related to phonetics, morphology, word formation, and etymology; and translations of hymns from the Rigveda. The scholar, who died young, managed to write a total of 15 works. In five of them, he used not only the background knowledge he had acquired from speakers of Ukrainian but also the theoretical knowledge gained in Kazan; therefore, we shall examine this aspect in greater detail.

4. REFLECTION OF INTEREST IN THE UKRAINIAN LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

N. V. Kruszewski’s first scholarly work, «Incantations as a Form of Russian Folk Poetry», was written during his final year at the University of Warsaw under the guidance of Professor M. A. Kolosov. This young scholar was a graduate of Kharkiv University, and his teachers were the Ukrainian philologists and educators P. A. Lavrovsky and N. A. Lavrovsky; A. A. Potebnya, founder of the Kharkiv linguistic school, a Slavist and ethnographer. M. A. Kolosov’s sphere of interests, shaped by such

96

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Ukrainian Formation in Scientific Heritage of Mikołaj Kruszewski

The advocates included the Old Church Slavonic language, the Old Russian language and literature, the Russian vernacular and oral folk art, and the poetic art of the Eastern Slavs. Consequently, questions connected with the Ukrainian language and folklore were not foreign to him. The topic proposed to Nikolai Kruszewski for his graduation essay lay within the sphere of interest of M. A. Kolosov, who believed that “...the worldview contained in a language is distinctive for each people” (Kolosov 1871: 244).

The student approached the writing of the scholarly work responsibly. In a letter to his former teacher at the University of Warsaw, I. V. Tsvetaev, dated 15(27) June 1875, he recalled: “While working on my candidate’s dissertation, I became acquainted with Russian folk poetry and, in general, with folk epic and the linguistics connected with it” (PAKHOLOK 1999: 163).

Kruszewski sought to explain the material collected in the book “Great Russian Charms” (Maikov 1869). Analyzing the 22nd charm, he attempted to uncover the nature of primitive thinking: “Together with food and drink, a person takes into himself love, illness, and so forth. The idea of the possibility of such a mechanical transfer of the quality of one object to another, with regard to illnesses, was evidently reinforced by observation [...]. The Little Russian remedy used by girls is completely analogous to this...” (Kruszewski 1876: 36). The author supports the theoretical conclusion with an example drawn from “Proceedings of the Ethnographic and Statistical Expedition to the Western Russian Region” (Trudy 1872), where a magical action is described that required one to “...find a root from which an oak and a birch grow together, take a pinch of moss from the former and from the latter, place it on the left hand, and say: ‘May you cling to me as that oak clings to the birch’; this is repeated three times. Upon returning home, the moss is dried and, having been ground into powder, is given to drink” (Kruszewski 1876: 36–37).

The research text uses the toponyms “Malorossiya” and “Volyn Governorate.” For example, when discussing hunting charms, the author refers to the recently published “Collection of Little Russian Charms” (Efimenko 1874) and writes: “wolves in Malorossiya are called ‘St. Yuri’s horts’” (Kruszewski 1876: 68).

In the course of preparing his candidate’s dissertation, Kruszewski made use of his own material, evidently collected no later than 1874 in Solotvyno, since the work is dated 25 January 1875. The beginning researcher included three beliefs in the essay and clearly and consistently indicated their attribution: “If the hair of a particular individual is threaded through the head of a toad and it is buried in the ground, then, as the hair decays, the person from whose head it was taken will also wither, and ultimately must die. I recorded this belief in the Volyn Governorate”;

Straipsniai / Articles

97

ZINAIDA PAKHOLOK

“I recorded in the Volyn Governorate the interpretation of a dream: if a woman dreams of a fish, she will become pregnant”; “In dreams, the moon signifies marriage. I recorded this interpretation in the Volyn Governorate” (Kruszewski 1876: 4, 35, 40–41).

As a scholar, N. V. Kruszewski established himself in Kazan over eight years—from 1878 to 1886. During this period, his mentor, colleague, and friend was I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay, who devoted attention to the Ukrainian language not only in the works “A Few Words on the Comparative Grammar of the Indo-European Languages” (Бодуэн де Куртенэ 1881) and “A Survey of the Slavic Linguistic World in Connection with Other Aryan (Indo-Germanic) Languages” (Baudouin de Courtenay 1884), but also at meetings of the circle that came to be known as the Kazan Linguistic School, where the study of the phoneme became the starting point of its development and influenced not only the way sound problems were studied but linguistic methodology as a whole (Jakobson 1960: 1).

During his first year at Kazan University as an extraordinary professorial scholarship holder, N. V. Kruszewski began studying the phonetic and morphological features of the Ukrainian language; for this purpose, he translated the Lithuanian fairy tale “Who Can Lie Better?” into the Solotvyno village dialect known to him (Kruszewski 1882: 33). The translation and analysis remained unpublished in the scholar’s manuscripts preserved at the St. Petersburg Branch of the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

To obtain the title of privat-docent, N. V. Kruszewski had to submit a scholarly work and deliver one lecture on a subject of his own choice and another assigned by the faculty. For the lecture, he chose a topic that, after delivering it, he developed into the article “On ‘Analogy’ and ‘Folk Etymology’ (‘Volksetymologie’),” and published it in the journal of his first academic supervisor, M. A. Kolosov (Крушевский 1879).

Developing the idea of the role of morphological assimilation in the systematization of the morphological elements of language, N. V. Kruszewski gave the example of the Polish word žarzęwie (Russian огнище, from žar), which, following words with the prefix za– (za–lesie), changed into zarzewie. He then stated: “The Little Russian залізо instead of *желізо is explained in exactly the same way” (Крушевский 1879: 113), calling this assimilation prefixal.

Considering various types of assimilation, the author drew attention to lexical assimilation and described a special type of it, assonation, in which less frequently used forms of an inflected word are assimilated to the more frequently used forms. Among Polish, Russian, and one Czech example, Kruszewski cited: “Little Russian вівтóрок (gen. вівтóрку) instead of втóрок” (Крушевский 1879: 116).

98

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Ukrainian Formation in Scientific Heritage of Mikolaj Kruszewski

At the master’s examination on 10 April 1880, the examinee received from I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay two written assignments in the comparative grammar of the Indo-European languages and Sanskrit (Baudouin de Courtenay 1880). The first assignment contained eight tasks requiring him to provide, as evidence, 5–10 words from O. Storozhenko’s Ukrainian story “The Mezhyhirsky Grandfather” (Storozhenko 1863). He began completing the task with the following preamble: “First of all, I should note that when speaking about the sounds and forms of the Little Russian story assigned to me, I primarily have in mind the Volyn dialect of the Little Russian dialect, which is more familiar to me (more precisely, the dialect of the village of Solotvyno in Kovel district, Volyn Governorate)” (Kruszewski 1880: 13). He then analyzed words from different parts of speech in the story and drew conclusions about the relationship between letters and sounds. The demanding examiner deemed this written response satisfactory.

In his master’s dissertation “On the Question of the Guna. A Study in the Field of Old Slavic Vocalism,” N. V. Kruszewski analyzed not only the reflection of Indo-European vocalism in Old Slavic, but also established the relationship between alternations and form formation and word formation. His attention was directed toward identifying the regularities operating in language: “If, in some system of forms, some forms have the sound z and others s, then either the former are assimilated (morphologically) to the latter, or the latter to the former.

Cf. the conjugation пеку, могу in the Russian literary language and the vernacular n’екý Little Russian móжу n’ек’ош móжеш n’ек’от móже n’ек’ом móжемо n’ек’оте móжете n’екýм móжут” (Крушевский 1881: 17).

Describing the meaning of the root –строк–, he gave examples from Ancient Greek and Sanskrit, compared it semantically with the word о–ток, and then wrote: “The name of the river Stryi also belongs to this root, as Baudouin de Courtenay rightly observed” (Крушевский 1881: 72). This river is located in Ukraine. The name “Stryi” denotes not only a right tributary of the Dniester but also a city in Lviv Oblast, whose first written mention dates from the 14th century.

Straipsniai / Articles

99

ZINAIDA PAKHOLOK

The first page of N. V. Kruszewski’s written answer in the master’s examination at Kazan University on 10 April 1880. National Archive of the Republic of Tatarstan, f. 977, Historical-Philological Faculty, 1160, fol. 13.

100

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Ukrainian Formation in Scientific Heritage of Mikolaj Kruszewski

Seeking to make his ideas accessible to European scholars, N. V. Kruszewski reworked the introduction to his master’s dissertation and published the book “On Sound Alternation” at his own expense in German (Kruszewski 1881)^³. In discussing examples of assimilation, he gave the example of the conjugation of the Ukrainian verb “могти,” using the Latin alphabet for the convenience of the German-speaking reader (Kruszewski 1881: 24–25).

Realistically perceiving the situation in which he found himself, on May 6 (18), 1884, he confidentially informed Jan Karłowicz: «...circumstances force us to write in Russian for bread, but for science we must write in German» (Пахолок 2000: 228).

In his opus magna “An Outline of Linguistic Science,” N. V. Kruszewski, when examining the structure of language and the laws according to which it develops, does not overlook Ukrainian linguistic material, especially in historical phonetics.

Analyzing the declension of the word волк in his doctoral dissertation, he drew attention to the fact that case forms did not always have the same combination of sounds in the root. To confirm this conclusion, he proposed two forms from Old Slavic and Ukrainian: “…in the dialect most closely related to Great Russian, the Little Russian dialect, we find the combination воукрядом с воуцу-...” (Крушевский 1883: 109).

The dissertation author characterized the system of conjugations of stems with velars пеку, могу and concluded, based on the dialect of Volhynia Governorate, that Ukrainian has an alternation simplification analogous to Sanskrit, Slovenian, and Serbian (Крушевский 1883: 111).

N. V. Kruszewski proceeded from the conviction that a process of system ordering operates in language; therefore, when considering different stem forms, he distinguished three types: disordered; in the process of becoming ordered; and ordered. He assigned examples from Polish and Ukrainian (ноуа, ноци, нози, ноцу, ногою, у нози) to the first type (Крушевский 1883: 111–112).

In the section “History of Words,” among Russian and French examples, the researcher gave one example each from Latin (sumpsi) and Ukrainian (павук), in which secondary sounds arose phonetically (Крушевский 1883: 126), and drew attention to sound changes in constantly reproduced words: “Little Russian піднебенье (palate), cf. Polish rodniebienie” (Крушевский 1883: 128).

^³ We believe that his genetic connection with his mother was reflected in this translation; archival information about her is scarce and does not allow us to say more about her role in the linguist’s life.

Straipsniai / Articles

101

ZINAIDA PAKHOLOK

5. CONCLUSIONS

Thus, we can summarize what has been presented above. N. V. Kruszewski was born into a Polish-German family in Volyn, where the indigenous Ukrainian-speaking population constituted the majority. He developed as a person in this region, received his primary education there, and considered it his homeland. Later, in distant Kazan, he dreamed of finding work closer to home and repeatedly came with his family in the summer to spend holidays at his mother’s estate.

In the second half of the 19th century, Ukrainian schools, the press, scholarly literature, and theater were prohibited on the basis of the Valuev Circular and the Ems Ukaz. The Ukrainian language did not have the status of a state language and was therefore not taught in educational institutions. At first, N. V. Kruszewski’s knowledge of this language was merely background knowledge.

At that time, Ukraine was called Малороссия. The question of whether the Ukrainian language was independent or a dialect of the Russian language was disputed. The most common terms were «малороссийское наречие» and «малорусское наречие». Kruszewski used these terms.

The scholar applied his knowledge of the Ukrainian language and culture for scholarly purposes. In his student essay «Заговоры как вид русской народной поэзии», he referred to Ukrainian-language works, used the toponyms «Малороссия» and «Волынская губерния», and included three beliefs collected by him in the village of Solotvyno.

In Kazan, N. V. Kruszewski studied the phonetic and morphological features of the Ukrainian language; for this purpose, he translated the Lithuanian fairy tale «Кто сумеет лучше лгать?» into the Solotvyno dialect known to him.

The linguist’s interest in the Ukrainian language was shared and supported by his mentors M. A. Kolosov and I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay; therefore, N. V. Kruszewski used Ukrainian content in his research and, in his master’s examination, completed assignments based on a Ukrainian literary text.

In the works “On ‘Analogy’ and ‘Folk Etymology’ (‘Volksetymologie’),” “On the Question of the Guna. A Study in the Field of Old Slavic Vocalism,” “Über die Lautabwechslung,” and “An Outline of Linguistic Science,” N. V. Kruszewski drew on Ukrainian vocabulary, alongside examples from Ancient Greek, Latin, Polish, Russian, Sanskrit, Serbian, Slovenian, French, and Czech, to illustrate his reflections and conclusions on word formation, phonetics, and etymology. The Ukrainian examples are few and are often accompanied by an indication of the region of use known well to the author.

102

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Ukrainian Formation in Scientific Heritage of Mikołaj Kruszewski

The Ukrainian content in N. V. Kruszewski’s research testifies to the author’s linguistic erudition and desire, by revealing the potential of a non-state language, to place it on a level with other Indo-European languages.

ЛИТЕРАТУРА

Baudouin de Courtenay Jan 1884: Übersicht der slavischen Sprachenwelt im Zusammenhange mit den andern arioeuropäischen (indogermanischen) Sprachen, Leipzig: T. O. Weigel.

Baudouin de Courtenay Jan 1888: Mikołaj Kruszewski, ego życie i prace naukowe. – Prace filologiczne 2(3), 837–849.

Baudouin de Courtenay Jan 1889: Mikołaj Kruszewski, ego życie i prace naukowe. – Prace filologiczne 3(1), 116–175.

Boduen de Kurtene Ivan 1880: Бодуэн де Куртенэ, Иван. Задачи для письменных ответов Н. В. Крушевского по сравнительной грамматике ариоевропейских языков и по санскриту [Zadachi dlya pismennikh otvetov N. V. Krushevskogo ro sravnitel’noi grammatike arioevropeiskikh yazykov i po sanskritu]. Национальный архив Республики Татарстан. – ф. 977 Историко-филологический факультет, 1160, л. 11–12 об. [Natsionalnyi arkhiv Respubliki Tatarstan. – f. 977 Istoriko-filologicheskii fakultet, 1160, l. 11–12 ob.].

Boduen de Kurtene Ivan 1881: Бодуэн де Куртенэ, Иван. Несколько слов о сравнительной грамматике индоевропейских языков [Neskol’ko slov o sravnitel’noi grammatike indoevropeiskikh iazykov]. – Журнал Министерства народного просвещения [Zhurnal Ministerstva narodnogo prosveshcheniia] 213, 269–321.

Boduen de Kurtene Ivan 1881a: Бодуэн де Куртенэ, Иван. Письмо А. А. Котляревскому 7(19) мая 1881 года [Pis’mo A. A. Kotliarevskomu 7(19) maja 1881 goda], РНБ ОР. – ф. 386, № 19, л. 4–4 об. [RNB OR. – f. 386, № 19, l. 4–4 ob.].

Boduen de Kurtene Ivan 1963: Бодуэн де Куртенэ, Иван. Николай Крушевский, его жизнь и научные труды. Бодуэн де Куртенэ И. А [Nikolai Krushevskii, ego zhizn’ i nauchnye trudy. Boduen de Kurtene I. A.] – Избранные труды по общему языкознанию [Izbrannye trudy po obshchemu yazykoznaniyu] 1, Москва: Издательство АН СССР [Moskva: Izdatel’stvo AN SSSR] 1, 146–202.

Bogoroditskii Vasilii A. 1939: Богородицкий, Василий А. Казанская лингвистическая школа (1878–1939 гг.) [Kazanskaia lingvisticheskaia shkola (1878–1939 gg.)]. – Труды Московского института истории, философии и литературы [Trudy Moskovskogo instituta istorii, filosofii i literatury] 5, 265–294.

Straipsniai / Articles

103

ZINAIDA PAKHOLOK

Bulich Sergei K. 1896: Булич, Сергей К. Малорусское наречие [Malorusskoe narechie]. – Энциклопедический словарь Брокгауза и Ефрона [Entsiklopedicheskiy slovar’ Brokgauza i Efrona] 18–A, 485–487.

Cherepanov Mikhail V. 1958: Черепанов, Михаил В. Вопросы фонетики в трудах Н. В. Крушевского: из истории Казанской лингвистической школы [Voprosy fonetiki v trudakh N. V. Krushevskogo: iz istorii Kazanskoi lingvisticheskoi shkoly]. – Ученые записки Глазовского государственного педагогического института им. В. Г. Короленко [Uchenye zapiski Glazovskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo instituta im. V. G. Korolenko] 7, 27–67.

Chubinskii Pavel P. 1872: Чубинский, Павел П. Труды этнографическо-статистической экспедиции в Западно-Русский край [Trudy etnografichesko-statisticheskoi ekspeditsii v Zapadno-Russkii krai] 1, Санкт-Петербург: [б. и.] [Sankt-Peterburg: [b. i.]].

Efimenko Petr S. 1874: Ефименко, Петр С. Сборник малороссийских заклинаний [Sbornik malorossiyskikh zaklinaniy]. – Чтения в Императорском Обществе Истории и Древностей Российских при Московском университете [Chteniya v Imperatorskom Obshchestve Istorii i Drevnostey Rossiiskikh pri Moskovskom universitete] 1, 1–70.

Jakobson Roman 1960: Kazańska szkoła polskiej lingwistyki i jej miejsce w światowym rozwoju fonologii. – Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego 19, 1–34.

Jakobson Roman 1965: L’importanza di Kruszewski per lo sviluppo della linguistica generale. – Ricerche Slavistiche 13, 3–23.

Katkov Mikhail N. 1863: Катков, Михаил Н. Передовая статья [Peredovaia statia]. – Московские ведомости [Moskovskie vedomosti] 136, 326–330.

Kolosov Mitrofan A. 1871: Колосов, Митрофан А. Вступительная лекция [Vstupitelnaya lektsiya]. – Варшавские университетские известия [Varshavskie universitetskie izvestiya] 4, 236–251.

Kostomarov Nikolai I. 1990: Костомаров, Николай И. Правы ли наши обвинители? (По вопросу об издании книг научного содержания на южнорусском языке) [Pravu li nashi obviniteli? (Po voprosu ob izdanii knig nauchnogo soderzhaniia na iuzhnorusskom iazyke)]. – Український історичний журнал [Ukrainskyi istorychnyi zhurnal] 7, 140–146.

Kraszewski Jósef 1978: Latarnia czarnoksięska. Obrazy naszych czasów, Krakow: Wydawnictwo Literackie.

104

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Ukrainian Formation in Scientific Heritage of Mikolaj Kruszewski

Krushevskii Nikolai V. 1876: Крушевский, Николай В. Заговоры как вид русской народной поэзии [Zagovory kak vid russkoi narodnoi poezii]. – Варшавские университетские известия [Varshavskie universitetskie izvestiia] 3, 3–69.

Krushevskii Nikolai V. 1879: Крушевский, Николай В. Об «аналогии» и «народной этимологии» («Volks etymologie») [Ob «analogii» i «narodnoi etimologii» («Volks etymologie»)]. – Русский филологический вестник [Russkii filologicheskii vestnik] 2(3), 109–120.

Krushevskii Nikolai V. 1880: Крушевский Николай В. Письменный ответ по сравнительной грамматике ариеевропейских языков [Pismennyi otvet po sravnitelnoi grammatike arioevropeiskikh yazykov]. Национальный архив Республики Татарстан. – ф. 977 Историко-филологический факультет, 1160, л. 13–15 [Natsionalnyi arkhiv Respubliki Tatarstan. – f. 977 Istoriko-filologicheskii fakultet, 1160, l. 13–15].

Krushevskii Nikolai V. 1881: Крушевский, Николай В. К вопросу о гуне. Исследование в области старославянского вокализма [K voprosu o gune. Issledovanie v oblasti staroslavianskogo vokalizma]. – Русский филологический вестник [Russkii filologicheskii vestnik] 5, 1–109.

Krushevskii Nikolai V. 1882: Крушевский, Николай В. Отчет о занятиях сравнительным языкознанием Н. Крушевского за время от 15 декабря 1878 г. по 1 октября 1879 г. [Otchet o zaniatiakh sravnitel’nym iazykoznaniem N. Krushevskogo za vremia ot 15 dekabria 1878 g. po 1 oktiabria 1879 g.] – Известия и ученые записки Императорского Казанского университета [Izvestiia i uchenye zapiski Imperatorskogo Kazanskogo universiteta] 1/2, 32–36.

Krushevskii Nikolai V. 1883: Крушевский, Николай В. Очерк науки о языке [Ocherk nauki o iazyke], Казань: Типография Императорского Казанского университета [Kazan’: Tipografiia Imperatorskogo Kazanskogo universiteta].

Krushevskii Nikolai V. 2002: Крушевский, Николай В. Замовляння як вид російської народної поезії [Zamovlіannia yak vyd rosiiskoi narodnoi poezii], Луцьк: Вісник і Кᵒ [Lutsk: Visnyk i Кᵒ].

Krushevskii Nikolai V. 2004: Крушевський, Миколай В. Вісім гімнів Рігведи [Visim himniv Rihvedy], Луцьк: Терен [Lutsk: Teren].

Krushevskii Nikolai V. 2005: Крушевський, Миколай В. Біобібліографічний покажчик [Biobibliiohrafichnyi pokazhchyk], Луцьк: Терен [Lutsk: Teren].

Kruszewski Nikolay 1881: Über die Lautabwechslung, Kasan: Universitatsbuchdruckerei.

Straipsniai / Articles

105

ZINAIDA PAKHOLOK

Lyzanchuk Vasyl’ V. 2008: Лизанчук, Василь В. Хроніка нищення українства: мови, культури, духовності [Khronika nyshchennia ukrainstva: movy, kultury, dukhovnosti]. – Мандрівець [Mandrivets] 6, 4–24.

Maikov Leonid N. 1869: Майков, Леонид Н. Великорусские заклинания [Velikorusskie zaklinaniia]. – Записки Императорского Русского Общества по отделению этнографии [Zapiski Imperatorskogo Russkogo Obshchestva po otdeleniiu etnografii] 2, 417–580.

Pakholok Zinaida A. 1999: Пахолок, Зинаида А. Плоды забвения, или Кто зажжет свечу?: письма Н. В. Крушевского И. В. Цветаеву [Plody zabveniia, ili Kto zazhzhet svechu?: pis’ma N. V. Krushevskogo I. V. Tsvetaevu]. – Русский Исторический Вестник [Russkii Istoricheskii Vestnik] 2, 159–182.

Pakholok Zinaida A. 2000: Пахолок, Зинаида А. Письма Николая Крушевского к Яну Карловичу [Pis’ma Nikolaja Krushevskogo k Janu Karlovichu]. – Русский Исторический Вестник [Russkii Istoricheskii Vestnik] 3, 221–232.

Pakholok Zinaida A. 2002: Пахолок, Зінаїда А. Дебют видатного лінгвіста. Крушевський М. Замовляння як вид російської народної поезії [Debiut vydatnogo lingvista. Krushevsky M. Zamovlannia yak vyd rosiiskoi narodnoi poezii], Луцьк: Вісник і К°, VII–XXXV [Lutsk: Visnyk i K°, VII–XXXV].

Pakholok Zinaida A. 2019: Пахолок, Зінаїда А. Дослідження та популяризація творчості мовознавця з Волині Миколая Крушевського [Doslidzhennia ta populiaryzatsiia tvorchosti movoznavtsia z Volyni Mykolaia Krushevskoho]. – Краєзнавство [Kraieznavstvo] 4, 116–132.

Pryshchepa Olena P. 2010: Прищепа, Олена П. Міста Волині у другій половині XIX – на початку XX ст. [Mista Volyni u druhii polovyni XIX – na pochatku XX st.], Рівне: ПП ДМ [Rivne: PP DM].

Radwańska Williams Joanna 1993: A paradigm lost: the linguistic theory of Mikołaj Kruszewski, Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Storozhenko Oleksa P. 1863: Стороженко, Олекса П. Українські оповідання [Ukrainski opovidannia] 1, Санкт-Петербург: Типография П. А. Кулиша [Sankt-Peterburg: Typografiia P. A. Kulysha], 131–137.

Vayl Petr 2008: Вайль, Петр. Гений места [Geniy mesta], Москва: КоЛибри [Moskva: KoLibri].

Zelinskii Faddei F. 1897: Зелинский, Фаддей Ф. О заговорах: история развития заговора и главные его формальные черты [O zagovorakh: istoriia razvitiia zagovora i glavnye ego formalnye cherty]. – Сборник Харьковского историко-филологического общества [Sbornik Kharkovskogo istoriko-filologicheskogo obshchestva] 10, 1–58.

106

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVI

Ukrainian Formation in Scientific Heritage of Mikolaj Kruszewski

Ukrainiečių kalbos formavimasis Mikolajaus Kruševskio moksliniame palikime

SANTRAUKA

Straipsnyje analizuojami Mikolajaus Kruševskio mokslinio palikimo darbai, skirti ukrainiečių kalbai. Šie darbai tiriami trimis aspektais: biografiniu, socialiniu ir moksliniu. Lingvistas gimė Voluinėje lenko ir vokietės šeimoje, kur daugumą sudarė vietinė ukrainiečių populiacija. Jo asmenybę formavosi šiame regione. Voluinę jis laikė savo gimtine. Vėliau, jau dirbdamas tolimojoje Kazanėje, kartu su šeima jis nuolat grįždavo vasaroti į Voluinėje likusius motinos namus.

Tuo metu Ukraina neturėjo valstybingumo statuso. Šalis buvo vadinama Mažąja Rusija. Buvo diskutuojama, ar ukrainiečių kalba yra nepriklausoma kalba, ar rusų kalbos tarmė. Dažniausiai vartoti terminai buvo Mažosios Rusijos tarmė ir Mažosios Rusijos tarmė. M. Kruševskis taip pat vartojo šiuos terminus.

Mokslininkas pritaikė ukrainiečių kalbos ir kultūros žinias mokslo tikslams. Savo studentiškoje esė Užkalbėjimai kaip rusų liaudies poezijos forma jis rėmėsi ukrainiečių kalbos darbais, vartojo toponimus Mažoji Rusija ir Voluinės provincija ir aptarė Solotvyno kaime paties surinktus žmonių tikėjimus. Gyvendamas Kazanėje, M. Kruševskis studijavo fonetinius ir morfologinius ukrainiečių kalbos požymius. Šiuo tikslu į Solotvyno tarmę jis išvertė lietuvių liaudies pasaką Kas moka geriau meluoti. Magistrantūros egzamino metu jis turėjo atlikti aštuonias Jano Bod<u>u</u>eno de Kurtenė jam duotas užduotis apie apsakymą ukrainiečių kalba. M. Kruševskis rėmėsi ukrainiečių kalbos žodynu, iliustruodamas savo įžvalgas ir išvadas žodžių darybos ir fonetikos srityje, kurias aptarė savo darbuose Apie analogiją, Liaudies etimologija, Gunos klausimu: Senųjų slavų vokalizmo tyrinėjimai, Apie garsų kaitą, Kalbotyros apybraiža.

Ukrainietiškas turinys Mikolajaus Kruševskio tyrimuose liudija autoriaus kalbinę erudiciją ir troškimą atskleisti šios nevalstybinės kalbos potencialą, paverčiant ją lygiaverte kitoms indoeuropiečių kalboms.

Įteikta 2021 m. gruodžio 24 d.

ZINAIDA PAKHOLOK Lutsk Human Development Institute of the Open International University “Ukraine” 43020, Ukraine, Lutsk 5, G. Gongadze Str. [email protected]

Straipsniai / Articles

107