The lexical part of this literature is more defective. Most of the existing dictionaries are merely short and unsatisfactory vocabularies. The most ancient is the work of P. Berynda, _Lex. Slaveno-Russicum_, Kief 1627. More in use at present are the _Kratkoi Slowar Slavjanskoi_, or 'Short Slavic Dictionary,' by Eugenius, St. Petersb. 1784; and the larger 'Church Dictionary' by Alexejef, 4th ed. St. Pet. 1817-19. A dictionary of this dialect for the special use of foreigners, does not yet exist.[27] In modern times considerable attention has been devoted to the examination of the Old Slavic language and its relation to its kindred dialects. Antiquarian and paleographical researches have been happily combined with philological investigations; and the eminent names which are found among these diligent and philosophical inquirers, insure the best prospects to their cause.[28] FOOTNOTES: [Footnote 1: See below in the History of the Russian Language, and the so called _Improvement_ of the Bible and church books.] [Footnote 2: In modern times this view has been defended principally by Russian philologists, the Metropolitan Eugene, Kalajdovitch, etc.] [Footnote 3: See his _Kyrill und Method_, Prague, 1823. Schlözer considers likewise the Old Slavic as a Bulgarian dialect of the ninth century. See his Northern History, p. 330. In another place he calls it the mother of the other Slavic languages; see his Nestor, I. p. 46.] [Footnote 4: In his Grammar of the Slavic Language in Carniola, Carinthia, and Stiria.] [Footnote 5: _Jahrbücher der Literatur_, Vienna, 1822, Vol. XVII. Grimm is of the same opinion; see the Preface to his translation of Vuk Stephanovitch's Servian Grammar.] [Footnote 6: See above, p. 11.] [Footnote 7: This view Schaffarik takes in his work on _Slavic Antiquities_, and in his _Slavic Ethnography_. Palacky, a distinguished Bohemian scholar, adopted the same opinion in his _History of Bohemia_, Prague 1836. Both were combatted in a furious review by Kopitar, in Chmel's _Oestr. Geschichtsforscher_, III. 1838; printed separately under the title: _Der Pannonische Ursprung der Slavischen Liturgie_. etc.] [Footnote 8: Dobrovsky's _Entwurf zu einer allgemeinen Slavischen Etymologie_, Prague 1812. See also the _Slovanka_ of this celebrated scholar.] [Footnote 9: Schlözer's Nestor, III. p. 224.] [Footnote 10: Rakoviecky, in his edition of the _Pravda Russka_, Warsaw 1820-22. Katancsich, _Specimen Philologiæ et Geographiæ_, etc. 1795. See also Frähn's publication, "Ueber die alteste Schrift der Russen," St. Petersb. 1835; where a specimen is given of the form of writing which the Arabian author Ibn Abi Jakub el Nedim ascribes to the Russians. This writer lived at the close of the tenth century. He quotes as his authority an envoy sent from some Caucasian prince to the king of the Russians.] [Footnote 11: As in modern Greek; see also Bullmann's Gram. § 3. 2.]