American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages

Russian Folklore by Y. M. Sokolov; Catherine Ruth SmithReview by: Michael KlimenkoThe Slavic and East European Journal, Vol. 12, No. 3 (Autumn, 1968), pp. 381-382Published by: American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European LanguagesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/304042 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 22:55

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages is collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to The Slavic and East European Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.31 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:55:54 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Reviews 381 Reviews 381

many Slavic dialects can boast one book on their history, not to speak of two?) In fact, however, Dezs6 "in certain respects" departs from Painkevyc (sometimes he mentions this fact, as in the classification of the Transcarpathian dialects [17], more often he does not), most radically in positing diphthongs as a stage in the development of o and e in the syllables before lost jers. Pankevyc emphatically (and rightly) denied their existence (e.g., in the above book, 94), while Dezs6, not so emphatically but repeatedly assumes them (e.g., 50, 107, 109), though nothing in his materials bespeaks their presence at any time. In both cases, the deviations of Dezs6 seem to come not from a spirit of rebellion but rather of conformism and caution: both revisions of the older views are current among the linguists of today's Soviet Ukraine and their followers (see, e.g., J. Dzendelivs'kyj, Konspekt lekcij z kursu ukrajins'koji dialektolohiji, I [Uzhorod, 1965], 18; I. Patrut, Fonetica graiului huful din valea Sucevei [Bucharest, 1957], 35f., 78). The syntax is also treated by Dezso uncritically according to the pattern of Soviet (school) grammars. In the same vein of caution, he never mentions the controversial and thorny problem of when and under which circumstances the Ukrainian (Eastern Slavic) population first appeared in Trans- carpathia.

There are some elementary mistakes in the book: penjaz' was not an original -jo- stem (in such a case we would have *penjaz), oci not an s-stem in the dual, dity not a t-stem (p. 132) ; in zal' holodnyx the adjective is in the genitive, not the accusa- tive (p. 146), and many more.

In spite of its confusing language, its spirit of excessive compliance with the officially recognized, its fear of pioneering, its factual errors, and its many unjustified views, Dezso's book "in certain respects" enriches Ukrainian historical dialectology.

The books ends with a useful list of Hungarian settlement names in Transcar- pathia with their Slavic counterparts (the author does not mention the wave of re- namings after 1945), a bibliography (articles in periodicals are unfortunately cited without dates), and several maps.

George Y. Shevelov, Columbia University

Y. M. Sokolov. Russian Folklore. New Intr. and Bibliography by Felix J. Oinas. Tr. by Catherine Ruth Smith. Hatboro, Pa.: Folklore Associates, 1966. 760 pp., $12.50.

This book was originally published in 1950 as part of the Russian Translation Project of the American Council of Learned Societies. At that time it was widely and favorably reviewed in the general press as well as some professional journals, but somehow failed to get the attention it deserves from Slavists. First published as a text in 1938, reprinted in 1941, it has since been replaced in the USSR by another textbook. The book has, nevertheless, retained its value.

In its final form the book was written by Jurij Sokolov (1889-1941) alone; it originated, however, from his collaboration with his brother Boris (1889-1930), who likewise devoted his whole life to the study of folklore. The latter is largely responsible for the sections on historiography of folklore, byliny, and tales.

The initial scholarly outlook of the two brothers was formed under the influence of the Historical School, which dominated the study of literature and folklore in Russia at the turn of the century. In the thirties, Jurij, alone, had to adapt himself to a Marxist orientation. The adaptation, however, had small impact on the book as

many Slavic dialects can boast one book on their history, not to speak of two?) In fact, however, Dezs6 "in certain respects" departs from Painkevyc (sometimes he mentions this fact, as in the classification of the Transcarpathian dialects [17], more often he does not), most radically in positing diphthongs as a stage in the development of o and e in the syllables before lost jers. Pankevyc emphatically (and rightly) denied their existence (e.g., in the above book, 94), while Dezs6, not so emphatically but repeatedly assumes them (e.g., 50, 107, 109), though nothing in his materials bespeaks their presence at any time. In both cases, the deviations of Dezs6 seem to come not from a spirit of rebellion but rather of conformism and caution: both revisions of the older views are current among the linguists of today's Soviet Ukraine and their followers (see, e.g., J. Dzendelivs'kyj, Konspekt lekcij z kursu ukrajins'koji dialektolohiji, I [Uzhorod, 1965], 18; I. Patrut, Fonetica graiului huful din valea Sucevei [Bucharest, 1957], 35f., 78). The syntax is also treated by Dezso uncritically according to the pattern of Soviet (school) grammars. In the same vein of caution, he never mentions the controversial and thorny problem of when and under which circumstances the Ukrainian (Eastern Slavic) population first appeared in Trans- carpathia.

There are some elementary mistakes in the book: penjaz' was not an original -jo- stem (in such a case we would have *penjaz), oci not an s-stem in the dual, dity not a t-stem (p. 132) ; in zal' holodnyx the adjective is in the genitive, not the accusa- tive (p. 146), and many more.

In spite of its confusing language, its spirit of excessive compliance with the officially recognized, its fear of pioneering, its factual errors, and its many unjustified views, Dezso's book "in certain respects" enriches Ukrainian historical dialectology.

The books ends with a useful list of Hungarian settlement names in Transcar- pathia with their Slavic counterparts (the author does not mention the wave of re- namings after 1945), a bibliography (articles in periodicals are unfortunately cited without dates), and several maps.

George Y. Shevelov, Columbia University

Y. M. Sokolov. Russian Folklore. New Intr. and Bibliography by Felix J. Oinas. Tr. by Catherine Ruth Smith. Hatboro, Pa.: Folklore Associates, 1966. 760 pp., $12.50.

This book was originally published in 1950 as part of the Russian Translation Project of the American Council of Learned Societies. At that time it was widely and favorably reviewed in the general press as well as some professional journals, but somehow failed to get the attention it deserves from Slavists. First published as a text in 1938, reprinted in 1941, it has since been replaced in the USSR by another textbook. The book has, nevertheless, retained its value.

In its final form the book was written by Jurij Sokolov (1889-1941) alone; it originated, however, from his collaboration with his brother Boris (1889-1930), who likewise devoted his whole life to the study of folklore. The latter is largely responsible for the sections on historiography of folklore, byliny, and tales.

The initial scholarly outlook of the two brothers was formed under the influence of the Historical School, which dominated the study of literature and folklore in Russia at the turn of the century. In the thirties, Jurij, alone, had to adapt himself to a Marxist orientation. The adaptation, however, had small impact on the book as

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.31 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:55:54 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

382 The Slavic and East European Journal 382 The Slavic and East European Journal

a whole. Materials collected and studied earlier were not re-interpreted in accordance with Marxist dogma. Marxist interpolations appear in the Introduction, and in passages about Soviet folklore, less so elsewhere. They remain a foreign body and are easily recognizable. A case in point is his treatment of the mythological system of the Eastern Slavs. The basic treatment favors the School of Borrowing, while the Intro- duction acclaims the Anthropological School, favored by Marxists.

Sokolov primarily treats material collected in Russia in the nineteenth and twen- tieth centuries, with no attempts to trace it back to Common Slavic and Indo-European origins. At the same time, one can clearly recognize the Sokolovs' familiarity with West European scholarship on the study and collection of folklore. By any standard, it is a very important work by well-trained scholars. No book in America or Western Europe can match their work in this field.

The highly valuable Introduction presents very adequately the history of the discipline and its dominant trends. In the discussion of materials, genres are typically presented in a scheme that begins with the history of field work, the origins of the material, continues with the personality of the narrator, or singer, and his artistic performance, and ends with a discussion of structure and style. The presentation is in two unequal parts-pre-Soviet (157-610) and Soviet.

The translation is fairly good, not necessarily smooth, seldom an obstacle to com- prehension. Some overly long sentences could have been broken down. Inconsistencies and outright mistakes include the following: of Batiya (p. 330), Rybanikov (p. 335) for Rybnikov, The Tale of Ersha the Fish's Son (434, 432) for Ersh Ersh's Son, or better, Ruff, Ruff's Son. Luka 2idjata is somehow spelled Luke Thidyata (p. 42, fn. 3). The word skomorox might have been left untranslated (cf. troubadour, Minnesiinger).

The book is provided with a very good bibliography, updated by Professor Oinas, who has also written a Foreword for this edition.

Michael Klimenko, University of Kansas

Laszlo Szab6, comp. and ed. Kolalappische Volksdichtung: Texte aus den Dialekten in Kildin und Ter. (Abhandlungen der Akad. der Wissenschaften in Gottingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse, Dritte Folge, 68.) G6ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1967. 153 pp., DM 22.

The study of the Kola Lapp language (spoken by about 1800 persons) began in the third quarter of the last century by A. Genetz and I. Halasz and has been carried on by T. I. Itkonen, E. Itkonen, and G. M. Kert. The most extensive text collections have been made by T. I. Itkonen and Kert.

The material for L/aszlo Szab6's Kola Lapp texts was gathered in Leningrad in 1964 from young Lapp women (24-30 years of age) who were studying or working in the scholarly institutions there. Although the informants had, in several cases, been away from their native villages for a long time, their stories betray the same original freshness as do those told by older people. This was attributed by one of the youthful informants to the fact that Lapp children "grow up in fairy tales."

The texts in Szab6's collection are given in phonetic transcription in Lapp and have a parallel German translation. They can thus be used by linguists and folklorists alike. Some of them deal with the life, customs, and superstitions of the Lapps. The majority, however, are fairy tales and legends.

The Kola Lapp tales and legends belong to the general Lapp tradition and are

a whole. Materials collected and studied earlier were not re-interpreted in accordance with Marxist dogma. Marxist interpolations appear in the Introduction, and in passages about Soviet folklore, less so elsewhere. They remain a foreign body and are easily recognizable. A case in point is his treatment of the mythological system of the Eastern Slavs. The basic treatment favors the School of Borrowing, while the Intro- duction acclaims the Anthropological School, favored by Marxists.

Sokolov primarily treats material collected in Russia in the nineteenth and twen- tieth centuries, with no attempts to trace it back to Common Slavic and Indo-European origins. At the same time, one can clearly recognize the Sokolovs' familiarity with West European scholarship on the study and collection of folklore. By any standard, it is a very important work by well-trained scholars. No book in America or Western Europe can match their work in this field.

The highly valuable Introduction presents very adequately the history of the discipline and its dominant trends. In the discussion of materials, genres are typically presented in a scheme that begins with the history of field work, the origins of the material, continues with the personality of the narrator, or singer, and his artistic performance, and ends with a discussion of structure and style. The presentation is in two unequal parts-pre-Soviet (157-610) and Soviet.

The translation is fairly good, not necessarily smooth, seldom an obstacle to com- prehension. Some overly long sentences could have been broken down. Inconsistencies and outright mistakes include the following: of Batiya (p. 330), Rybanikov (p. 335) for Rybnikov, The Tale of Ersha the Fish's Son (434, 432) for Ersh Ersh's Son, or better, Ruff, Ruff's Son. Luka 2idjata is somehow spelled Luke Thidyata (p. 42, fn. 3). The word skomorox might have been left untranslated (cf. troubadour, Minnesiinger).

The book is provided with a very good bibliography, updated by Professor Oinas, who has also written a Foreword for this edition.

Michael Klimenko, University of Kansas

Laszlo Szab6, comp. and ed. Kolalappische Volksdichtung: Texte aus den Dialekten in Kildin und Ter. (Abhandlungen der Akad. der Wissenschaften in Gottingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse, Dritte Folge, 68.) G6ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1967. 153 pp., DM 22.

The study of the Kola Lapp language (spoken by about 1800 persons) began in the third quarter of the last century by A. Genetz and I. Halasz and has been carried on by T. I. Itkonen, E. Itkonen, and G. M. Kert. The most extensive text collections have been made by T. I. Itkonen and Kert.

The material for L/aszlo Szab6's Kola Lapp texts was gathered in Leningrad in 1964 from young Lapp women (24-30 years of age) who were studying or working in the scholarly institutions there. Although the informants had, in several cases, been away from their native villages for a long time, their stories betray the same original freshness as do those told by older people. This was attributed by one of the youthful informants to the fact that Lapp children "grow up in fairy tales."

The texts in Szab6's collection are given in phonetic transcription in Lapp and have a parallel German translation. They can thus be used by linguists and folklorists alike. Some of them deal with the life, customs, and superstitions of the Lapps. The majority, however, are fairy tales and legends.

The Kola Lapp tales and legends belong to the general Lapp tradition and are

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.31 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:55:54 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions