Liturgický jazyk, jazykové vedomie a identita v prostredí cirkvi byzantsko-slovanského obradu na Slovensku (Na príklade slovenských gréckokalolíkov)
Liturgical Language, Language Conscience and Identity in the Context of the Byzantine-Slavonic Rite in Slovakia: the Example of Slovak Greek Catholics

Summary/Abstract: The present paper thesis is aimed at describing the relationships between languages, cultures, ethnic minorities and religious traditions that were formed between the Slavic East and West in the Carpathian region, paying special attention to the region of the Eastern Slovakia and the Transcarpathian region of Ukraine (former Subcarpathian Rus). As far as ethnicity, confession, culture and language of the above mentioned region is concerned, it is very heterogenous. None of the following names fully express it – Uhorská Rus, Podkarpatská Rus, Prešovská Rus, Prjaševščyna, Ruthenia, Rusínia. Each name reflects only certain social-political situation, regardless of the ethnic, language as well as confessional situation in the discussed area. In this area with ethnical, language and confessional diversification, there exists no stereotype or attribute, based on which this region could be uniquely identified as a separate area. In reality, such identification is not possible due to communities of Slovaks, Hungarians, Ukrainians, Poles and Romanians living in the Carpathian area. Each of the following communities clearly identifies itself as well as its neighbors through its/their own language & historical, cultural and social-political attributes. Identification of an individual with his/her region (region nowadays called Carpathian – this term is artificial, too) cannot be applied here as a binder either. In this area, each resident of this region clearly and concretely declares his/her identity historically, i.e. in accordance with his/her language, ethnicum and confession. Even nowadays, the stereotype of the used language significantly influences identification of the individual with the concrete (closest) entity, community. So, language still is a valid ethno-identificational value. Identity within community is conditioned/influenced by different historical-social situation and its evolution was convergent in attempt to identify itself with the closest entity based on common language, history, area and culture. Within the Carpathian region, this process is applied according to the classic scheme that of course does not exclude mobility processes conditioned by the existence of bi(tri)lingualism, confessional processes determined by (anti)reformation, latinisation or acceptance of the Church union in the environment of the Byzantine Church, etc. Other variations of ethnical mobility conditioned e.g. confessionally in addition to language, are not to be excluded, too. A possibility of a free identification of an individual with the community is applied; there is certain priority of the features of the community, which is higher than the priority of individuality functioning within the community. The community offers a possibility to be original, diverse. Such particularities (e.g. stereotype of the used liturgical language, affiliation of an individual to a religious community, local patriotism, etc.) cannot be understood as a relevant sign of ethnical identification. When considering such particularities, one should take a complex view of all attributes of a relevant group culture, which usually consists of features understood as shared by certain entity. In this context, it is possible to explain the processes that have led to the identification of an individual with another entity based on his/her confessional tradition, though other conditions (language, common history, culture, area) provided the individual with the option to identify himself/herself with his/her own ethnicum. Byzantine Catholics in Vojvodina could be used as a suitable example. From the language point of view, Byzantine Catholics of Vojvodina could be characterized as Slovaks inhabiting the East Slovakian region of Šariš and Zemplín. Their leave of Slovakia for Vojvodina took place in 18th century – dating of their leave is similar to the leave of Slovakia by Slovak Protestants. Confessional belonging of the Byzantines of Vojvodina caused their isolation and gradual identification according to their confessional belonging (ruska vira). In general, belonging to a confessional tradition and using the liturgical language of the Byzantine Church in the Carpathian region do not serve as an identification sign for its users. Church Slavic language, used as a liturgical language by the liturgies of the Byzantine rite, always carries signs of its national variant or subvariant of the relevant reduction of the liturgical Church Slavic; in the liturgical Church Slavic language, language conscience of the users of a relevant entity is apparent. Such broadly viewed spectrum of the research interest is the most suitable area for application of methods of interdisciplinary research. When examining the Carpathian region, cooperation of linguists, culture researchers, ethnology researchers as well as historians is necessary because this is the only way to reveal the undiscovered and almost unknown horizons. Cyrillic manuscripts of Carpathian provenance (most frequently of the East Slovakian, Transcarpathian and Lemko region) prove the influence of the local East Slovakian as well as Subcarpathian dialects on the Church Slavic - penetration of lexical, morphological as well as phonetic specialties of the dialect is proven. Performance of the Slovak language conscience in the Church Slavic of the Ukrainian redaction can be proven at the phonetic as well as morphological level. Records of the liturgies and the most frequently recited prayers in the Church Slavic in the environment of Slovak believers of the Byzantine-Slavic rite realized during field research in years 1999–2009 in the Eastern Slovakia verify the infiltration of the language conscience of the Slovak users. Nowadays, without a systematic and complex research, it is not possible to objectively examine this ethnically and confessionally mixed area represented by the mixture of languages and cultures. Here a typical European area is concerned, motivating and inspiring the experts. We are talking about the area that has been paid significant attention to by the state as well as scientific institutions since the formation of Czechoslovakia in 1918. Areas of former Subcarpathian Rus and current Eastern Slovakia are in scope of research of many scientists not exclusively because of their Ruthenian and Ukrainian ethnic affiliation; in this region, Slovaks represent the autochthonic and continuous portion of the population – it is possible to track their existence far back to the 5th century. Communities of Germans, Hungarians, Gypsies and Poles play significant role in this area, too. Therefore it is absurd for these communities to live in isolation, without any interactive cultural influence. The opposite trend is obvious, which may seem as relatively conflicting seem from the outside, but in its complexity it represents a balanced entity based on intercultural, interconfessional and interethnic communication and mobility. Even Slovak inhabitants of the Byzantine Catholic confession living in this area are direct descendants of the original inhabitants, who settled in the western Carpathians approximately in the same era as the ancestors of today's Ruthenians or Ukrainians. In the Carpathian area inhabited by Slovaks, Ruthenians, Ukrainians, Gypsies and Hungarians, the label 'rusnák, rusnáci' should not be expressly accepted as a qualifier of ethnical belonging of its owner – the label is a mark of the believer of the Byzantine Church. Numerous records prove the above assertion. The records were gathered by conscripts, who as early as in the 18th century were trying to map the population of the Habsburgs' monarchy. According to them as well as many other unconcerned observers 'from outside', all Ruthenians and Slovak Byzantine Catholics are members of one so-called 'Russian' nationality. A traditional principle called stereotype in the modern scientific understanding has been applied here. In fact, for conscripts not understanding the language situation, usage of Cyrillic script and Church Slavic during liturgies invoked the illusion of the Russian language and allowed people to consider all believers of the Russian faith, i.e. Byzantine-Slavic ritual tradition, to be Ruthenians. The criterion of liturgical language became the qualifier. In the majority of parishes, instead of the language of homily, pastoral, liturgical, Church Slavic language was used and even nowadays, this leads to errors.

• Details
• Contents