3. The Synthesis of Cultural and Linguistic Traditions: The Slavenorossiiskii Language and Its Functioning

301 Russian literary norm, and even while remaining in principle an ecclesiastic tongue, at the same time it turned out to be a necessary component of the new Russian culture. Without reference to the church tongue it was impossible to achieve correctness, purity, and abundance — those qualities which were to give Russian parity with European languages. It turned out that European beauties blossomed not on distant shores but right here at home, within the churchyard of the Greek Orthodox Slavonic church, any association with which had earlier been forbidden. As a consequence of this new perception, the church tradition was now considered the preserve not only of pure faith but of pure language. An author unsure of the correctness of his writing or experiencing difficulty in selecting words was supposed to look directly to church books. Insofar as Russian and Church Slavonic were declared to have the same nature, Russian’s nature was held to be imprinted in church books; here it was expressed in pure and unchanging form. Hence church books were transformed into a constant standard with which to measure the literary language and which shielded it from the danger of betraying its nature and becoming impure. Lomonosov wrote that “the Russian language will remain in full strength, beauty and richness, firm and inaccessible to change and decline as long as the Russian church will be adorned by singing the glory of God in the Slavonic tongue” (Lomonosov, IV, 230; VII2, 591). Trediakovskii expressed precisely the same idea: “our Slavenorossiiskii language... can never be irremediably harmed: literary Slavonic will maintain it, preserve it, and save it from injury unwaveringly and for all time.” And in another place he wrote that “the Russian language is one of the Slavonic languages, and indeed the most integral (tseleishii) of them, if it hasn’t been spoiled; however, nothing will harm it forever: its shield and buttress is our immortal church tongue” (1773, 241 and 372). And so the Church Slavonic literary and linguistic tradition was fully reinstated, and this could not help but have important culturological consequences.