English and Russian both have words derived from Greek hupóstasis ‘sediment; foundation; substance; (in Christian use) any of the persons of the Trinity.’ The Christian sense is basic to both English hypostasis and Russian ипостась (ipostás’). Looks like an easy case for bilingual equivalence, eh? Think again, and consider these sentences from “Stovelore in Russian Folklife” by Snejana Tempest, whose Russian seems to have taken precedence over her English:
“In Russian folk tales the stove frequently appears as a female character endowed with a specific, if varying, name. In this hypostasis, her main role is to reward respectful attention on the part of children by extending them protection in her bosom in case of danger.”
“Different hypostases of the Russian dragon slayer—a brave protagonist of fairy tales and legends who rescues his bride-to-be from the clutches of the dragon—bore names which pointed to their connection with the stove: Ivan Popialov, Matiusha Pepel’noi, Zapechnyi Iskr, Ivan Zapechnik (from the Russian words for ashes and stove).”
Whereas the English word has remained a technical term in philosophy and theology, unknown (I would venture to say) to 99.9% of the speakers of the language, the Russian word has entered common use in the extended sense ‘role, capacity’—the only definition in Katzner. The Oxford dictionary, stuck in an earlier era, defines it as ‘hypostasis,’ which helps not at all when trying to read modern texts. Another example of the perils of treating lookalikes as synonyms. (And another example of the havoc wrought by the lack of editing in books these days; even the laziest of copyeditors would query the use of “hypostasis” in the Tempest article, and it should definitely have been changed to “capacity” in the first sentence and “version” or perhaps “avatar” in the second.)
Incidentally, the Russian word, in the old spelling [ѵпостась] with initial izhitsa, is the last entry in Dahl‘s great Russian dictionary.
Recent Comments