1. Vukoja, Vida. 2014. The Corpus of the Croatian Church Slavonic Texts and the Current State of Affairs Concerning the Dictionary of the Croatian Redaction of Church Slavonic Compiling. Proceedings of the XVI EURALEX International Congress: The User in Focus. 15–19 July 2014, Bolzano/Bozen. Andrea Abel, Chiara Vettori and Natascia Ralli (Eds.). 1221–1235. (full text available at:


    Croatian Church Slavonic is a literary, bookish idiom used in Croatia from the XI/XII until the XVII c. based on the Old Church Slavonic, an idiom created by Sts. Cyril and Methodius, and shaped by the Croatian vernacular.

    The Croatian Church Slavonic corpus consists of the texts excerpted from 11 breviaries, 4 missals, 3 psalters, 3 rituals, 15 miscellanies. It also incorporates all 26 fragments dated from the period up to and including the XIII c. and several auxiliary sources. The corpus was created over a period of thirty years (from 1959 to the early 1990s) at the Old Church Slavonic Institute in Zagreb. It is a historical, referential, representative paper card-file of excerpts. It is also a parallel corpus, as it contains Latin and Greek parallel texts, those that were identified as closest to the actual source texts for the translational Croatian Church Slavonic texts.

    The Dictionary of the Croatian Redaction of Church Slavonic has been compiled on the basis of the Croatian Church Slavonic corpus. The fascicles of the Dictionary have been published since 1991. So far, fascicles 1 (1991)–19 (2012), with the dictionary articles A–ŽRЬTVA (according to the Old Cyrillic alphabet) have been printed.

  2. Vukoja, Vida. 2014. Rječnik crkvenoslavenskoga jezika hrvatske redakcije u kontekstu crkvenoslavenske leksikografije. Šesti hrvatski slavistički kongres. (The Dictionary of the Croatian Redaction of Church Slavonic in the context of Church Slavonic lexicography) Vukovar – Vinkovci, 10.–13. rujna 2014. 45–46.


    Since 1991, the Old Church Slavonic Institute in Zagreb has been publishing the Dictionary of the Croatian Redaction of Church Slavonic. It is a historical, multi-fascicled, referential dictionary of the Croatian Church Slavonic language based on the parallel corpus of Croatian Church Slavonic monuments (with Greek and Latin parallel texts whenever determined) from the period of XI/XII to XVI c.

    Lexicographers of several Slavic countries compile dictionaries of the Church Slavonic idioms. The Czech and Bulgarian paleoslavistic lexicographical communities are in the forefront because of the intensity of their activities in the Church Slavonic field. However, the compilers of the Macedonian Church Slavonic ought to be mentioned too, and there are other more or less successful attempts of compiling dictionaries of particular Church Slavonic idioms in other countries as well (Ukraine, Serbia). Two groups of Church Slavonic lexicographical works should be differentiated: one, focused on the canonical, Old Church Slavonic texts, and the other, focused on a particular Church Slavonic language system specific for particular Slavic peoples. The Dictionary of the Croatian Redaction of Church Slavonic belongs to the latter group, as it is based on the texts that belong to the Croatian Church Slavonic language system.

    The presentation shows data on the features of the Dictionary of the Croatian Redaction of Church Slavonic, its compiling, and its corpus. These data are compared with the features of other dictionaries, which are particularly important among paleoslavistic lexicographic undertakings (computer and paper corpora) and publications, in order to achieve a better understanding of the place and importance of the Dictionary of the Croatian Redaction of Church Slavonic and its corpus within the whole paleoslavistic lexicography.

  3. Vela, Jozo. 2014. Čestica že u hrvatskoglagoljskim tektovima. (The particle že in Croatian Glagolitic texts). Šesti hrvatski slavistički kongres. Vukovar – Vinkovci, 10.–13. rujna 2014. 41.


    The particle že is one of the most frequently used and one of the most recognizable words in the texts written in the Croatian Church Slavonic language. It usually appears as an emphatic or a connective particle with a wide semantic range: from cumulative to adversative, and from illative to explanatory/causative, used in such a manner that it sometimes developed into a real conjunction of the sentence. With similar frequency we may also find it as an affix to different types of words and in some of these cases it competes with the Croatian vernacular -r(e). Starting with the etymology of this word together with the comparison of its use in Old Church Slavonic, Croatian Church Slavonic and contemporary Slavic languages, in this presentation I shall endeavor to reveal the original meaning of the Croatian Glagolitic particle že and to present its use and its meanings in the Croatian Church Slavonic language, along with the reference to its Greek and Latin translational equivalents. In the end, I will raise an issue of its possible sociolinguistic status in Croatian Glagolitic texts.

  4. Kovačević, Ana. 2014. (In collaboration with Zrinka Kolaković, Institut für Slawistik, Universität Regensburg) Između pragmatike i gramatike: izbor aspekta u oblikovanju imperativa. (Zwischen Pragmatik und Grammatik: Aspektwahl in Bildung des Imperativs). Šesti hrvatski slavistički kongres. Vukovar – Vinkovci, 10.–13. rujna 2014.


    Zur Untersuchung der Beziehung zwischen Grammatik und Pragmatik wird Lehmanns (2009) Formal-funktionale Theorie des Aspeksts gebraucht. Der Vergleich des Standes in heutigen slavischen Sprachen beruht auf Dickeys (2000) Theorie der Ost-Westlichen Isoglosse.

    Seit mehreren Jahren schreiben russische Aspektologen über die Pragmatik der Aspektwahl im Imperativ, genauer gesagt über eine höfliche oder unhöfliche Färbung des Imperativs, was davon abhängt, welcher Aspekt benutzt wird. In kroatischen Grammatiken demgegenüber steht lediglich, dass das Verbot öfter mit den imperfektiven, während der Befehl sowohl mit den perfektiven als auch mit den imperfektiven Verben ausgedrückt wird. (Barić 1997: 226). Genauere Informationen über die Implikationen der Aspektwahl im Imperativ, kann man eher beiläufig finden in Arbeiten, die sich nicht ausschließlich mit diesem Thema beschäftigen. Z. B. stellt Riđanović (1976) heraus, dass in Fällen, denen eine emotionale Nuance beigefügt ist, perfektive Verben im Imperativ mit den imperfektiven getauscht werden, was auch das Beispiel „Gubi se odavdje!“ zeigt.

    Mit dem Vortrag versuchen wir auf folgenden Fragen zu antworten: 1) Welche Bedeutung drückt der Imperativ der α Verben aus (z.B. doći, pomoći)? 2) Welche Bedeutung drückt der Imperativ der β Verben aus (z.B. dolaziti, pomagati)? 3) Welche Bedeutung drückt der Imperativ der diffusen Verben und ihrer Aspkektpartner aus (po/jesti, na/pisati)? 4) In welcher Beziehung stehen Imperativ und Negation? 5) Der heutige Zustand im kroatischen Standard wird mit den historischen Idiomen des Kroatischen verglichen.

    Die Angaben werden sowohl mit Hilfe von Grammatiken und aspektologischer Literatur als auch durch Recherche des kroatischen Korpuses und der Analyse von Texten aus Mittelelalter gemacht.

  5. Kovačević, Ana. 2016. Negative concord varieties in early Slavic: The case of Croatian Church Slavonic. SLE 2015 – 48th Annual Meeting. Leiden (Nizozemska), 2.–5. rujna 2015.


    Whereas the phenomenon of negative concord (NC) is widely recognized in contemporary Slavic languages, the same is not the case with historical stages of particular Slavic idioms. In order to explore early Slavic NC, Croatian Church Slavonic (CCS) has been investigated. It is a language based on Old Church Slavonic (OCS) and created by strong influence of the Croatian vernacular, used as literary language from the end of XI. c. until 1561. Written in Glagolitic script, the CCS texts are mostly direct translations from Latin (less often Italian or Czech) or indirect translations (through OCS heritage) from Greek (Mihaljević, Reinhart 2005).

    This investigation is carried out in the framework of the basic linguistic theory (Dryer 2006). The data were provided from the referential CCS corpus containing Latin and Greek source texts alligned to respective CCS translations and containing 62 CCS sources, both manuscripts and incunabula (Nazor 2000). The corpus has shown to be reliable basis for wide range of linguistic investigations (Vukoja 2012).

    The aim of this paper is to detect the range of the NC phenomena in CCS. In the most familiar variety of NC, the NC proper, the presence of the negative marker ne is optional in CCS when n-words are placed before the verb, e. g. nikomu (ne) sudiste (Reinhart 1993, Kovačević 2013). In this respect CCS agrees with OCS, but differs from contemporary Croatian. However, it has turned out that NC proper is not the only NC variety in CCS. Owing to the fact that the vast majority of CCS texts were translated from Latin (which is a well-known non-NC language) or were adjusted to correspond to the Latin source texts, a whole range of different NC phenomena in CCS were detected through contrastive CCS and Latin analysis. This means not only the combination of n-words with ne, but also with ni ('neither', 'nor'), bez ('without') and neže ('than'). Furthermore, the combination of two n-words without any sentential negative marker has been attested. That feature, known as negative spread, is generally absent from contemporary Slavic languages (Giannakidou 2000) with contemporary Croatian not only lacking that, but also paratactic negation, i.e. combination of n-words with bez, construction recognized in some other contemporary Slavic languages like Czech or Polish (Zeijlstra 2004). The paper will bring some new information about these diachronic NC differences among Slavic idioms.

    Finally, the questions of language contact and syntactic borrowing are adressed. Some scholars who did not pay attention to the word-order rule have argued that the absence of the sentential negative marker in NC proper should be interpreted as Latin influence (Maretić 1910). But the thorough consideration of the NC phenomenon reveals the whole range of differences between Latin and Slavic and makes it improbable that any language can influence such a distinctive feature as negation in another language. In other words, it can only encourage some choices where choice is possible.


    Dryer, Matthew S. 2006. Descriptive theories, explanatory theories, and Basic Linguistic Theory. In Felix K. Ameka, Alan Dench & Nicholas Evans, eds. Catching Language: Issues in Grammar Writing. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 207–234.

    Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2000. Negative .... Concord? Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 457–523.

    Kovačević, Ana. 2013. Red riječi i negacija u hrvatskome crkvenoslavenskome jeziku. Rasprave: Časopis Instituta za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje 39: 497-508.

    Mihaljević, Milan & Johannes Reinhart. 2005. The Croatian Redaction : Language and Literature. Incontri Linguistici 28: 31–82.

    Maretić, Tomo. 1910. Jezik slavonskijeh pisaca. Prilog istoričkoj gramatici hrvatskoj ili srpskoj. Rad JAZU 180: 146–233.

    Nazor, Anica. 2000. Popis izvora. In Rječnik crkvenoslavenskoga jezika hrvatske redakcije (I. svezak, a vrêdь). Zagreb: Staroslavenski zavod Hrvatskoga filološkog instituta, XXXI–XXXVI.

    Reinhart, Johannes. 1993. Untersuchungen zur Syntax des Kroatisch-Kirchenslavischen. Das glagolitische Missale romanum. Habilitationsschrift zur Erlangung der Lehrbefugnis an der Universität Wien. Wien: Universität Wien.

    Vukoja, Vida. 2012. O korpusu Rječnika crkvenoslavenskoga jezika hrvatske redakcije i njegovu odnosu prema korpusima hrvatskoga jezika. Filologija 59: 207–229.

    Zeijlstra, Hedzer Hugo. 2004. Sentential Negation and Negative Concord. Utrecht: LOT.

    CCS corpus. Available as paper card-file at the Old Church Slavonic Institute, Zagreb (Croatia).

  6. Kovačević, Ana. 2016. Duplex negatio negat in Croatian (Church Slavonic): a historical and cross-linguistic perspective. (Linguistisches Forum an der Universität Regensburg, 18. 05. 2016). Regensburg: Universität Regensburg. Invited lecture.

  7. Klenovar, Marija, Ana Kovačević i Jozo Vela. 2016. Istraživački izazovi obrade Rječnika crkvenoslavenskoga jezika hrvatske redakcije. (Research challenges of the Dictionary of the Croatian redaction of Church Slavonic compiling). Crkvenoslavenska i hrvatska povijesna leksikografija, Međunarodni znanstveno-stručni skup, Zagreb, 29. lipnja – 1. srpnja 2016., Knjižica sažetaka. Zagreb: Staroslavenski institut. 37–38.


    Dictionary articles of the Dictionary of the Church Slavonic Language of Croatian redaction contain four scripts (Angular Glagolitic, Early Cyrillic, Greek alphabet and Latin script) and five language idioms (Croatian Church Slavonic, Croatian, English, Ancient Greek and Latin). The content of the dictionary article is structurally synthesized on the basis of the analysis of the lemma examples from the corpus created in the Old Church Slavonic Institute primarily for the purpose of the above mentioned dictionary compilation. The corpus is referential and parallel, i.e. it brings recognized Ancient Greek and Latin parallel texts alligned with Croatian Church Slavonic translations. If an example of the lemma comes from the text with more then one Croatian Glagolitic version, all the attested lemma forms are given, and also – whenever they exist – its Ancient Greek and/or Latin parallel lexem(s). The goal is to display semantic and grammatical identity of the Croatian Church Slavonic lemma exhaustively. When assessed as needed, encyclopedic or grammatical information (in Latin) is given. Whenever possible, references are notified to synonymous lemmas.

    Owing to the fact that a Dictionary user is not familiar with the practical lexicographic work that precedes publishing, this presentation will in short describe the compiling course and principles: from the head word establishing (grammatical normalization), semantical and grammatical description, examples choice criterion to the last infor­mation about whether the compiled word is attested in three different historical dictionaries (Slovník jazyka staroslověnského, Miklošič’s Lexicon palaeoslovenico-graece-latinum and JAZU’s Dictionary of the Croatian or Serbian language). Moreover, the main difficulties, i. e. challenges of the Dictionary compiling will be presented, exemplified and problematized together with the options for overcoming them.

    Key words: Croatian Church Slavonic, historical lexicography, compiling, grammatical analysis, semantical analysis

  8. Turkalj, Lucija. 2016. O pretvorbi kartičnoga mjesnoga kataloga Rječnika crkvenoslavenskoga jezika hrvatske redakcije u strojno čitljiv oblik. (On the conversion of the Source-card catalog of the Dictionary of the Croatian Redaction of Church Slavonic into a Machine-Readable Form). Crkvenoslavenska i hrvatska povijesna leksikografija, Međunarodni znanstveno-stručni skup, Zagreb, 29. lipnja – 1. srpnja 2016., Knjižica sažetaka. Zagreb: Staroslavenski institut. 70–71.


    The presentation describes the conversion of scanned images of the source-card catalog of the Dictionary of Church Slavonic Language of Croatian Redaction corpus into machine-readable form. The hand-printed text recognition (ICR) has been conducted by the computer program for the automatic processing of hand-printed structured forms. The images have been imported, joined into smaller units related by context and location in the source and matched with the document type definitions that define the principles of identification and processing of documents, and which provide options such as the creation of character sets and an addition of dictionary lists. In the recognition of the text documents, special attention was paid to: the main Croatian Church Slavonic texts, the Church Slavonic word tokens in proper and lemmatized forms, written in Cyrillic script, accompanied by grammatical description, the source location data of the excerpts, written in Latin alphabet. The Greek and Latin parallel texts and their word forms, often written in cursive handwriting and thus practically machine unreadable have been added manually, in the form confirmed in reliable printed or electronic editions. The outcome of the machine reading process is a recognized and verified machine-readable source-card text, exported into the XML file format with preserved structural and descriptive information.

    Key words: Croatian Church Slavonic language, corpus of the Dictionary of The Croatian Redaction of Church Slavonic, source-card catalog, data cap­ture, ICR recognition

  9. Vukoja, Vida. 2016. Demarkacija i vrednovanje pojedinih vrsta leksikografskoga rada. (Demarcation and evaluation of some lexicographic work). Crkvenoslavenska i hrvatska povijesna leksikografija, Međunarodni znanstveno-stručni skup, Zagreb, 29. lipnja – 1. srpnja 2016., Knjižica sažetaka. Zagreb: Staroslavenski institut. 73–74.


    The current state in sciences and the academic community raises the question (again) of the position of the so-called academic or scholarly/scientific lexicography. It is especially evident in the domain of the most demanding lexicographical works.

    Problem of demarcation, one of the consistent themes of the philosophy of science, shows as one of the pivotal points in the context of shaping the scholarly lexicography in the present and future. Whether some or all works of that lexicography will be consistently classified as scholarly, professional, or as something else, can have a decisive impact on whether works (those already started and those still not begun) of scholarly lexicography will be created or not.

    Key words: demarcation, academic or scientific lexicography

phone: +385 1 2220025