before a hard consonant it is akin to the North and it has also kept the northern pronunciation of g instead of the southern h. So too unaccented e sounds like i or ji.
White Russian, in the governments of Vitébsk, Mohilëv and Minsk, and adjoining parts of Pskov, Smolénsk, Chernígov and Vílna (some 10,000,000 speakers), appears at first so different from Great Russian that it was long classed as a separate division. It was the official language of the Lithuanian principality afterwards merged in Poland and hence was under strong Polish influence. Little R. was under somewhat similar influence, so that the two dialects have approximated in some respects; but originally White Russian was not much nearer Lit. R. than was any other south Gt. R. dialect. In its main characteristic Wh. R. approximates to Polish, but this likeness goes deeper than the surface Polonisms above referred to, as it falls into its natural place in the classification of Slavonic languages by the phenomena of “softening.” Accordingly t and d, when soft or before soft v, become ć and dź, e.g. R. t′ělo, “body,” d′ělo, “deed,” m′edv′ědǐ, “bear,” Wh. R. ćelo, dźelo, m′ adźv′ edz′, Polish ciato, dzieto, niedźwiedź. Other special points which distinguish Wh. R. from the other a dialects are a tendency to confuse u and v and to pronounce either of them as a w, the same sound also taking the place of hard l closing a syllable; r is always hard; f, a sound essentially non-Slavonic, appears as ch or chv, e.g. chrancuz, R. francuz, “a Frenchman,” Chv′odar, R. F′odor, “ Theodore.”
In accidence we may note the preservation of the vocative; of the sibilants before case terminations where R. has restored gutturals by analogy, e.g. locative nazě, rucě, sasě, R. nogě, rukě, sochě, from nogá, “foot,” ruká, “hand,” sochá, “plough”; and of the 3rd sing. pres. ind. in ć for t′, or without any t. V′adz′eć or V′adz′e for R. ved′otŭ, “ leads.”
On the boundary between Wh. R. and the Novgorod dialect the former has the latter's confusion of c and č.
The best account of Wh. R. is E. Karskij, Sketch of the Sounds and Forms of Wh. R. Speech (Moscow, 1886); there is a dictionary by Nosovič (St P., 1875). Bezsonov, Wh. R. Songs (Moscow, 1871), and P. V. Schein in a whole series of publications give good specimens of the dialect.
The Little Russian dialect claims to be a literary language; it has established this claim in Galicia (see Ruthenians), but its use as such is much restricted in Russia. The Little Russians differ from the Great Russians not only in language but in physical type, customs, domestic architecture and folk-lore; but though Russophobes have tried to prove that this is due to the Finnish element in the Great Russians, it cannot be substantiated, and the Little Russians, especially the descendants of the Cossacks, have no small Tatar element in them. For the last three centuries they have been under strong Polish influence, and this has had great effect upon the vocabulary but not much on phonetics or morphology Little Russian is divided into three main groups of dialects; those of Hungary, which show an approximation to Slovak; those of Galicia, which rather recall Polish; and those of the Ukrain and other districts in Russia, which gradually shade into South Great Russian and White R., though the love of the sound a is noticeably absent. Little Russian is rather characterized by itacism; for original y and original i have coincided in a sound between i and y not unlike the Eng. short i, and original ě, also e and even o after having been lengthened in compensation for lost semi-vowels are now represented by i.
Further, Little Russian has reduced the common Russian softening, only keeping it before a and o and i for ě and o, and hardening the consonant before e and original i. In common with Wh. R. it has h for g, a vocative case, gutturals made sibilant before i (for ě) in oblique cases, 3rd sing. without the t, 1st plur. in -mo and -me instead of mŭ, nn for nj, ll for lj, tt for tj, w for u, v and hard l, but all these occur more or less throughout S. Russian and only tend to a superficial resemblance.
These phonetic peculiarities are not universal, but the presence of the narrowed ě, e and o is sufficient to mark a dialect as Little Russian. The Russian alphabet is modified for Little Russian use as г = h and hence ґ = g; є is used for the e which does not soften the preceding vowel, и for the thick and i for the pure i.
Bibliography.—Dictionaries: Dict. of the R. Language, published by the Second Section of the Imperial Academy of Sciences (4 vols., St Petersburg, 1847; new ed., 1891———); V. I. Dahl, Explanatory D. of Living Great R. Language (Moscow, 1880), re-ed. by J. Baudouin de Courtenay (1906); I. I. Sreznevskij, Materials for a Dict. of Old R. Language (to T.) (St P., 1902; Attempt (Opytŭ) at a Great R. Provincial Dict. (Supplement to the old Dict. of the Acad.) (St P., 1852); A. Alexandrow, R.-Eng. and Eng.-R. Dict. (2 vols., St P.); J. Pawlowsky, R.-Deutsches Wörterbuch (Riga, 1900).
Little Russian Dictionary: Eug. Zelechowski, Ruthenisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch (Lemberg, 1886).
Grammars: Th. Buslaev, Historical Grammar of the R. Language (Moscow, 1875); A. Sobolevskij, Lectures on the History of the R. Language (St P., 1891); id., Attempt at R. Dialectology, pt. i. (Gt. and Wh. R.) (St P., 1897); W. R. Morfill, R. Grammar (Oxford, 1887); P. Motti, R. Conversation Grammar (London, 1890); C. R. Reiff, R. Grammar (London, 1883); O. Ásbóth, Kurze R. Grammatik Leipzig, 1900); R. Abicht, Die Hauptschwierigkeiten der R. Sprache Leipzig, 1897); P. Boyer, M. Speranski and S. Harper, Russian Reader (Chicago, 1906).
Little Russian Grammar: St. Smal'-Stockyi and Fed. Gartner, Ruska Grammatyka (Lemberg, 1893); see also Miklosich, Vergl. Gram. d. Slav. Sprachen, passim (Vienna, 1875-83).
Many accented texts are published by R. Gerhard, Leipzig. Th. Buslaev, Historical R. Chrestomathy (Moscow, 1861), gives specimens of Russo-Slavonic, Old R. and Dialects. The chief periodicals containing scientific papers on the R. language are the Sbornik (Miscellany) and Izvestia (Bulletin) of the Second Section of the St P. Academy, and the Zapiski (Transactions) of the Philological Faculties of the Russian universities. Old Russian Texts are published mostly by the Obščestvo L′ubitelej Drevnej Pis′mennosti (Soc. of Lovers of Ancient Literature) in St Petersburg. (E. H. M.)
RUSSIAN LITERATURE. To get a clear idea of Russian literature, it will be most convenient for us to divide it into oral and written. The first of these sections includes the interesting byliny, or “tales of old time,” as the word may be translated, which have come down to us in great numbers, as they have been sung by wandering minstrels all over the country. The scholars who have given their attention to these compositions have made the following division of them into cycles: (1) that of the older heroes; (2) that of Vladimir, prince of Kiev; (3) that of Novgorod; (4) that of Moscow; (5) that of the Cossacks; (6) that of Peter the Great; (7) the Peasant songs. modern period. These poems, if they may be so styled, are not in rhyme; the ear is satisfied with a certain cadence which is observed throughout. For a long time they were neglected, and the collection of them began only towards the conclusion of the 17th century. The style of Russian literature which prevailed from the time of Lomonosov was wholly based upon the French or pseudo-classical school. It was, therefore, hardly likely that these peasant songs would attract attention. But when the gospel of romanticism was preached and the History of Karamzin appeared, a new impulse was given to the collection of all the remains of popular literature. In 1804 appeared a volume based upon those which had been gathered together by Cyril or Kirsha Danilov, a Cossack, at the beginning of the 18th century. They were received with much enthusiasm, and a second edition was published in 1818. In the following year there appeared at Leipzig a translation of many of these pieces into German, in consequence of which they became known much more widely. This little book of 160 pages is important because the originals of some of the byliny translated in it are now lost. Since that time large collections of these poems have been published, edited by Rybnikov, Hilferding, Sreznevskiy, Avenarius and others.
These curious productions have all the characteristics of popular poetry in the endless repetitions of certain conventional phrases—the “green wine,” “the bright sun” (applied to a hero), “the damp earth” and others. The heroes of the first cycle are monstrous beings, and seem to be merely impersonifications of the powers of nature; such are Volga Vseslavich, Mikula Selianinovich and Sviatogor. They are called the bogatyri starshie. Sometimes we have the giants of the mountain, as Sviatogor, and the serpent Gorinich, the root of part of both
