Editing Old Novgorod dialect (section)

==Linguistic features==
The short birch-bark texts are written in a peculiar Slavic [[vernacular]], reflecting living speech, and almost entirely free of the heavy [[Church Slavonic]] influence seen in the literary language of the period. Some of the observed linguistic features are not found in any other Slavic dialect, representing important [[Proto-Slavic language|Proto-Slavic]] archaisms.

Zaliznyak differentiates the Old Novgorod features that were already known before the discovery of the birch bark letters and those that have been ascertained after their study during the last few decades such as the following:

# [[Ts–ch merger]] (''tsokanye'')
# secondary [[Slavic liquid metathesis and pleophony|pleophony]], e.g. мълъвити as opposed to мълвити
# retention of stem-final *x in Proto-Slavic *vьx- "all" (spelled вехь) whereas other Slavic languages have undergone the third progressive palatalization, e.g. вьхо<ref>I.e. the progressive palatalization did not take place; cf. ''vьx-'' "all" as opposed to modern Russian ''vs-''</ref> ({{harvcoltxt|Zaliznyak|1995|pp=38–39}})
# lack of the [[Slavic second palatalization]] in root-final position,<ref>{{harvcoltxt|Zaliznyak|1995|pp=37–38}}</ref> e.g. рукѣ, моги<ref>E.g. Proto-Slavic *rěka "river" was in dative singular *rěk-ě which was not reflected as **rěcě in Old Novgorod dialect but has been retained as ''rěkě''.</ref>
# the change ''vl’'' > ''l’'', e.g. Яколь, Яковлев{{clarify|reason=Did Яковлев transform to Яколь? If not, what was the original form?|date=July 2017}}
# nominative singular masculine of o-stems ''-e'',<ref>{{harvcoltxt|Zaliznyak|1995|pp=82–87}}</ref> e.g. Иване, посаднике, хлѣбе{{efn|Instead of ''-ъ'' found in all the other Slavic dialects and reconstructed for Late Proto-Slavic, and that has been subsequently lost in a [[Havlík's law|weak]] word-final position,; e.g. Old Novgorod dialect ''brate'' "brother" : modern Russian ''brat''.}}
# genitive singular of а-stems in "soft" ''-ě'', instead of the "hard" ''-y'',<ref>{{harvcoltxt|Zaliznyak|1995|pp=81–82}}</ref> e.g. бес кунѣ. The same substitution is found in the accusative plural of o-stems and a-stems.<ref>{{harvcoltxt|Zaliznyak|1995|pp=92}}</ref>
# replacement of "hard" и by their "soft" counterparts in other non-nominal cases, such as the dual and plural of the imperative,<ref>{{harvcoltxt|Zaliznyak|1995|pp=122}}</ref> nominative singular masculine of the present active participle,<ref>{{harvcoltxt|Zaliznyak|1995|pp=122–123}}</ref> and pronominal endings (e.g. тиxъ instead of *тѣxъ)<ref>{{harvcoltxt|Zaliznyak|1995|pp=111–112}}</ref>
# absence of palatalization of the stem with the new -ѣ and -и desinences, as in [[Old East Slavic]]
# nominative-accusative plural of а-stems in ''-ě'', e.g. кобылѣ, сиротѣ

Features of the Old Novgorod dialect ascertained by the philological study in the last decades are:
# lack of the Slavic second palatalization in root-initial position, e.g. кѣл-, хѣр-<ref>Cf. also ''kьrky'' "church" which has remained ''kьrky'' : modern Russian ''cerkov''.</ref>
# a particular reflex of Proto-Slavic *TьRT, *TъRT clusters, yielding TьRьT, TъRъT. However, in some dialects these yielded TroT, TreT.
# West-Slavic-like reflex of *TоRT clusters, e.g. погродье versus погородие
# the change ''ml’'' > ''n’'', e.g. емлючи > енючи
# no merger of nominative and accusative singular of masculines regardless of animacy, e.g. Nom. sg. погосте : Acc. sg. на погостъ
# Proto-Slavic ''*kv, *gv'' clusters were retained as in [[West Slavic languages]] instead of being transformed to ''cv, zv'' before front vowels as in other East Slavic dialects<ref>E.g. ''květ-'' "flower" : modern Russian ''cvet'', ''gvězda'' "star" : modern Russian ''zvezda''.</ref>

Often the [[orthography]] is domestic (as opposed to bookish), using ''[[Yer|ъ]]'' and ''[[O (Cyrillic)|о]]'' on the one hand and ''[[Soft sign|ь]]'' and ''[[Ye (Cyrillic)|е]]'' on the other synonymously (about 50% of birchbark manuscripts from the mid-12th to the late 14th century).

The Novgorod material is divided by Zaliznyak into seven chronological groups:

{| class="wikitable"
|+Periodization of Old Novgorod birchbark letters by A. Zaliznyak
|-
!Class
!Period
|-
|A
|11th century to approx. 1125
|-
|B I
|approx. 1125–1160
|-
|B II
|approx. 1125–1160
|-
|C
|1220s–1290s
|-
|D I
|approx. 1300–1360
|-
|D II
|approx. 1360–1400
|-
|E
| 15th century
|}