Abstract:
A study of the so-called zero-forms of the present tense 3rd person singular and
plural (without inflectional -tь) in the birch bark manuscripts has once again attracted
the attention of researchers to this grammatical phenomenon. Andrey Zaliznyak
established the zero-forms usage positions and their range and functions,
and he arrived at the conclusion that they are Novgorod dialectisms. Analysis
of the Old Slavonic and written sources of the Russian Southwest found similarities
with the Novgorod birch bark manuscripts, so the zero-forms should be
considered Proto-Slavic dialectisms, inherited by different Old Russian dialects
and tracing back to the injunctive and the conjunctive, its later substitute. At the
same time, data correlation showed the narrowness of the birch bark manuscripts’
discursive range. A. Zaliznyak discovered several jе ‘is’ word forms in a supposedly
enclitic function. He noted, however, that there was a lack of material for
drawing final conclusions. The present paper provides evidence of the jе word
form usage in the function of Wackernagel enclitics in different sources, especially
in the 11th century Sinaiskii Paterik (Pratum spiritual), where, as it turns out, this
type of enclitic was closely related with an interrogative sentence type, not always
functioning as a link-verb and meaning a non-factive action of supposition. The jе
word form is also used widely in a non-enclitic position, where it has a non-actual,
primarily gnomic, present tense meaning.
