7. Glagolitica Clozianus, published by V. Vondral (Prague, There are also a few other fragments.
The other monuments are written in the Cyrillic alphabet and are: I. A short burial inscription, dated 993.
2. The Sava Gospel (Savvina Kniga), published by V. .t'epkin (St. Petersburg, 1903).
3. Codex Suprasliensis, published by Severjanov (St. Peters burg, 1904).
BIBLIOGRAPHY.-Entstehungsgeschichte der kirchenslavischen Sprache, by V. JagiC (Berlin, 1913), gives a mass of reliable miscellaneous information. The best grammars are: V. Vondr5.k, Alt kirchenslavische Grammatik (Berlin, 1912) ; A. Leskien, Grammatik der alt bulgarischen (altkirchenslavischen) Sprache (Heidelberg, 1909), which is more com parative and historical than his Handbuch d. altb. (altk.) Sprache (Heidelberg, 1922). There is also an excellent manual in Polish by J. tog (Lwow-Warszawa-Krakow' 1922) and a Czech translation (Prague, 1928), by B. Havranek, of S. Kul'bakin's ms. grammar, which will soon appear in French as one of the publications of the Institut d'Etudes slaves of Paris. Vondrak's Kirchenslavische Chrestomathie (GOttingen, 191o) is invaluable as a collection of extracts. The dic tionary of F. Miklosich, Lexicon palaeoslovenico-graeco-latinum emen datum auctum (Vienna, 1862-65), has not been replaced, but it must be used with caution, as many words belonging to the later ecclesiastical language of the Slays are quoted.
Bulgarian Language.—Out of Old Slavonic emerged the modern Bulgarian language. Most authorities hold that Bulgarian, together with Serbo-Croat and Slovene, belongs to the Southern branch of the Slavonic languages, but its precise affinities are dis puted. Leskien, in his Serbian Grammar (1914), while admitting certain special affinities with Serbo-Croat, regards it as an inde pendent branch. Belie asserts that it belongs to the Southern branch only because of its geographical position. The most note worthy South Slav development which it shows, is the change of Common Slavonic (C.S.) or and ol, either in initial position or between consonants, to ra and la, and a parallel transposition of consonant and vowel for er and el; but even this characteristic is not conclusive, as it is also partly shared by Czechoslovak, which belongs to the Western branch. As to phonetics, we may note the following features of the literary language: C.S. tj and dj become St and id respectively (a development found in no other modern Slav language) ; the nasal vowels q but Q have become oral, the first having changed into a sound (roughly like that of the vowel in English but), which does not occur in any cognate language; the softening of consonants before front vowels has been, as also in Serbo-Croat, largely given up, nor have the old distinctions of quantity and intonation survived. In this last
feature Bulgarian agrees with Russian, although the accented syl lable often varies in the two languages, and is in marked contrast to Serbo-Croat, where length and intonation are preserved in al most all the dialects of the Kingdom. No less remarkable are the peculiarities in other domains of the grammar, the analytical character of which runs counter to the general trend of Slavonic and shows distinct points of resemblance to the development un dergone by the languages of Western Europe. Thus, whereas the cases are retained in every other Slav language and dialect, Bul garian has discarded them almost as completely as the Romance languages and contents itself with a single case, the nominative, the others being expressed by means of prepositions. Bulgarian has a definite article and has lost the infinitive. Parallels are to be found in the other Balkan languages, both Rumanian and Greek, for example, having fewer cases than the classical languages from which they are descended : Rumanian and Albanian have a post positive article, the uses of which largely agree with that of Bul garian; lastly, the infinitive has entirely disappeared in Greek and has nearly gone both in Rumanian and Albanian.
This agreement with other Balkan languages has led many scholars to believe that Bulgarian has received the impress of a specifically Balkan type. This would seem incontrovertible if the modern language only were in question, but once we consider the earlier stages of the language we encounter difficulties. The lan guage of the first translators of the Bible (see above), the ancestor of present-day Bulgarian, shows no trace whatever of "balkaniza tion." It has a complete case system, no articles, and makes full use of the infinitive. It is therefore best to regard modern Bul garian as having undergone a development parallel with, but not dependent on, that of its neighbours. Some of the other Slav languages show in embryo the same tendencies which Bulgarian has so completely carried through. Serbian, the nearest neighbour of Bulgarian, has not only almost entirely abandoned the infinitive in the spoken language, but makes one case in the plural do duty for three (locative, dative and instrumental).