§ 12. Language as social phenomenon, as the most important means human communication performs a number of social functions in people's lives.

The word "function" (from Lat. . function– “execution”) has multiple meanings. In general use, it can denote the following concepts: meaning, purpose, role; duty, terms of reference; work, type of activity; a certain phenomenon that depends on another, basic phenomenon and serves as a form of its manifestation, implementation. The word is used in various ways as a scientific term, i.e. has a number of special meanings. As a linguistic concept, it is also used ambiguously. According to some linguists, in Lately in the science of language, this term (along with the term “structure”) has become the most ambiguous and stereotyped.

Composite linguistic term“function of language”, or “linguistic function”, denotes the purpose, purpose, or “purpose, potential orientation of the language system to meet the needs of communication (communication) and the needs mental activity". Following V. A. Avrorin, the concept of language function can be defined as "the practical manifestation of the essence of language, the implementation of its purpose in the system social phenomena, a specific action of language, determined by its very nature, something without which language cannot exist, just as matter does not exist without movement."

When we talk about language functions in a general theoretical sense, we mean, first of all, the functions of language in general, language as a universal phenomenon, i.e. functions inherent different languages. The specific functions of individual languages ​​associated with the special conditions of their functioning should not be confused with them. You can compare such functions of the Russian language as, for example: to be a means of interethnic communication between the peoples of Russia or the Soviet peoples (in former USSR), act as one of the international languages, etc. In general linguistics, including the course “Introduction to Linguistics,” those functions that are manifested in any language, are carried out or can be carried out by each language are usually considered.

Sometimes varieties of language that serve different spheres of human activity are considered as linguistic functions, i.e. speaks of the language performing the functions of the folk spoken language, oral form literary language, the language of science and technology, the language of culture, art, the language of social and political life, or the function of the language used in various fields social and political life, about the function of the language of instruction in primary, secondary schools and universities, etc. In similar cases It would be more correct to talk not about the functions of language, but about the areas of its application.

Speaking about linguistic functions, one should distinguish between such functions of language as a means of human communication, as an integral system, and the functions of the elements of this system - different linguistic units, their types, for example, the function of a word, sentence, speech sound, word stress, etc. Here we will only talk about the language functions themselves.

The main, most important function of language is considered to be communication function, or communicative(from lat. communicatio– “communication, message”). This function refers to the purpose, purpose of language to serve as a means of communication between people, their transmission of messages, and exchange of information. In the process of communication through language, people convey to each other their thoughts, feelings, desires, moods, emotional experiences, etc.

The presence of a communicative function in language is due to the very nature of language; this function finds its expression in the generally accepted understanding of language as the most important means of human communication. The communicative function is “the original, primary one, for the sake of which human language appeared”; This idea is expressed in the above statement by K. Marx and F. Engels that “language arises only from need, from the urgent need to communicate with other people.”

Language exists and functions insofar as it realizes its purpose - to serve as a means of communication between people. If, due to certain conditions, a language ceases to fulfill this purpose, it ceases to exist or (if written language is available) remains in the form of a dead language, as discussed above.

In order to exchange information and thoughts about the reality around us, about specific objects and phenomena, it is necessary to create, form, construct appropriate thoughts that do not exist in ready-made form, but appear only as a result of human mental activity, carried out (mainly or only) with using language, as discussed in the previous section. Let us recall that units of thinking (concepts, judgments) are expressed by linguistic means (words and sentences). On this basis, a special function of language is identified - thought-forming function, or constructive(from lat. constructio"construction"), sometimes called the mental, or function of the instrument of thinking. This function of language, unlike the communicative one, is not recognized by all linguists. According to some linguists, the constructive function belongs not to language, but to thinking.

Usually thoughts are formed, constructed by a person for the purpose of transmission to others, and this is only possible if they have a material expression, a sound shell, i.e. expressed by linguistic means. “In order for... a thought to be transmitted to another, it is necessary to express this thought in a form accessible to perception; it is necessary for the thought to receive material embodiment. The most important means for this... is human language.” It is language, being closely related to abstract thinking, that provides the ability to “transmit any information, including general judgments, generalizations about objects not present in the speech situation, about the past and future, about fantastic or simply untrue situations.” Thus, it should be recognized that, along with the functions discussed above, language also performs function of expressing thoughts, or, more simply, expressive function, which is also called expressive(from lat. expressio- "expression"), or explicative(from lat. explicatio– “explanation, deployment”).

Expressing his thoughts, judgments about the world around him, about various objects and phenomena of reality, the speaker can simultaneously express his attitude to the content of speech, to the reported facts, events, etc., his feelings, emotions, experiences or empathy in connection with the reported information . This is most clearly manifested in artistic, poetic speech and is comprehended through special selection, purposeful use of various means of the national language, “specific art organization linguistic material." For these purposes, such linguistic means are used, such as: introductory words and phrases, modal particles, interjections, significant words with emotional, expressive, stylistic overtones, figurative meanings of words, word-forming affixes with evaluative meaning, word order in a sentence , intonation (for example, the intonation of joy, admiration, anger, etc.) In this regard, a special function of language is highlighted - the function of expressing emotions, feelings, experiences and moods, or, more simply, “the function of expressing the feelings and will of the speaker,” which in specialized literature is usually called artistic, poetic, aesthetic, emotional, or emotive. This function of language can be defined as “the ability of language to act as a form of art, to become the embodiment of an artistic concept,” “to serve as a means of embodying an artistic concept, a means of creating work of art" ; its essence is that "language, acting as a form of verbal art, becomes the embodiment of an artistic concept, a means figurative reflection reality, refracted in the mind of the artist."

Language is not only a means of reflecting reality, objects and phenomena of the surrounding world, a means of expressing human thoughts, feelings, emotions, etc., but also the main means and most important source of knowledge of the world, the processes and phenomena occurring in it. In other words, language performs cognitive function, or, otherwise, gnostic, epistemological(from Greek gnosis"knowledge, cognition" and logos– “word, teaching”), cognitive(cf. lat. cognoscere- "to know, to know" cognitum– “to know, to know”).

The simplest way to know outside world is sensory perception, but not all objects, their signs, properties, etc. are perceived and cognized by the senses. In particular, abstract concepts such as space, movement, speed, etc. are completely inaccessible to sensory perception. And only a very superficial idea can be obtained about specific objects with the help of the senses. Deep and comprehensive knowledge of the world around us is possible only with the help of language.

The participation of language in the knowledge of reality is manifested, as is known, in the process of thinking, in the formation of concepts and judgments that are expressed in words and sentences. Without the participation of language and linguistic means, scientific and research activities of people are unthinkable, as a result of which our knowledge is constantly enriched new information, new information about the world around us, about the phenomena being studied.

In the process of cognition, communication between people for the purpose of exchanging information and experience plays an extremely important role. Such an exchange is possible not only through direct communication orally, but also when reading books, newspapers, magazines, while listening to radio programs, watching TV shows, movies, theatrical productions and so on. The process of cognition is carried out especially intensively during studies, during training sessions. All this is possible with the participation of language.

As noted above, language is not only a means, but also a source of knowledge about the world around us. “Language itself carries information embedded in its signs.” All significant units of language - morphemes, words, phrases, sentences - contain some information. “The content side of the meaningful units of language, i.e. the meanings of words and components of words, the meanings of phrases, the semantics of sentence structures, is a picture of the world processed by human thought (in each language in some ways) that has developed as a result of long-term analytical, cognitive activities of many previous generations."

The source of human knowledge is not only specific units of language, but also certain linguistic categories, in particular grammatical ones. So, for example, a noun as a part of speech designates an object (in in a broad sense), or objectivity, adjective - a sign of an object, numeral - number, number of objects, verb - action, process. The same can be said about the lexico-grammatical categories of nouns, adjectives and other parts of speech, about the categories of number, gender, animation, degree of comparison, tense, mood, etc.

It should be noted that the cognitive function of language (as well as the constructive function) is not recognized by all scientists. Some linguists believe that “this function is characteristic of human thinking, and language is only a tool that is used in the process of its implementation,” that language does not perform a cognitive function, but only the function of a means of cognition. It seems, however, that this difference is not fundamental. After all, language is not only educational tool but also a means of communication. It is generally accepted that language performs the function of communication, or communicative function, precisely due to the fact that it is means communication between people; it can equally be argued that language as a means of cognition performs a cognitive function.

Closely related to the cognitive function of language accumulative function(cf. lat. accumulatio– “accumulation, dumping in a heap”), i.e. the function of accumulating, consolidating and transmitting social experience, or “a means of consolidating and transmitting the achievements of human thinking, human knowledge.” The essence of this function is that “language, in a certain sense, accumulates in itself the social experience of mankind and knowledge acquired in the process of life,” which “is deposited primarily in significant vocabulary, but to a certain extent also in grammar, which reflects to a greater or lesser extent the least indirect connection and relationship of reality." With the help of language, acquired knowledge and experience are distributed between people and become common property. different nations, are passed on from generation to generation, which ensures the accumulation and constant enrichment of experience and knowledge, the development of science, technology, etc. “If language did not make such a transfer of knowledge possible, then each generation would have to start from scratch in the development of knowledge, and then there would be no progress in science, technology, or culture.”

Some linguists, along with the named functions of language, also identify and describe such functions as regulatory, i.e. “a function that regulates relationships between people in the process of communication”; phatic (or contact, contact-establishing), nominative (nominal) and some others, which, in our opinion, are not of particular interest.

• Cm.: Jacobson R. Development of a target model of language in European linguistics during the period between two wars // New in linguistics. 1965. Issue. 4. P. 377.
• Kiseleva L. A. Communicative language functions and semantic structure of verbal meaning // Problems of semantics. M., 1974. P. 67.
• Avrorin V. A. Functions of the language. P. 354; His own. ABOUT subject of sociolinguistics. P. 34.
• Cm.: Kostomarov V. G. The problem of social functions of language and the concept of “world language” // Sociolinguistic problems of developing countries. M., 1975. S. 241–242.

Continuation. Started in No. 42/2001. Printed in abbreviation

11. COMMUNICATION FUNCTION

The most important function of language is communicative. Communication means communication, exchange of information. In other words, language arose and exists primarily so that people can communicate.

Let us recall the two definitions of language given above: as a system of signs and as a means of communication. There is no point in pitting them against each other: these are, one might say, two sides of the same coin. Language carries out its communicative function due to the fact that it is a system of signs: it is simply impossible to communicate in any other way. And signs, in turn, are intended to convey information from person to person.

Actually, what does information mean? Does any text (remember: this is the implementation of a language system in the form of a sequence of signs) carry information?

Obviously not. Here I am, passing by people in white coats, and accidentally hear: “The pressure has dropped to three atmospheres.” So what? Three atmospheres – is it a lot or a little? Should we rejoice or, say, run for the hills?

Another example. Having opened the book, we come across, let us say, the following passage: “Destruction of the hypothalamus and the upper part of the pituitary stalk as a result of neoplastic or granulomatous infiltration can cause the development of the clinical picture of ND... In a pathological study, insufficiency in the development of supraoptic neurons of the hypothalamus was less common than paraventricular ones; a reduced neurohypophysis was also detected.” It’s like a foreign language, isn’t it? Perhaps the only thing we will take away from this text is that this book is not for us, but for specialists in the relevant field of knowledge. It doesn't provide any information for us.

Third example. Is the statement “The Volga flows into the Caspian Sea” informative for me, an adult? No. I know this well. Everyone knows this well. Nobody doubts this. It is no coincidence that this statement serves as an example of banal, trivial, hackneyed truths: it is of no interest to anyone. It is not informative.

Information is transmitted in space and time. In space - this means from me to you, from person to person, from one nation to another... In time - this means from yesterday to today, from today to tomorrow... And “day” here should not be taken literally , but figuratively, in general: information is stored and transmitted from century to century, from millennium to millennium. (The invention of writing, printing, and now the computer has made a revolution in this matter.) Thanks to language, the continuity of human culture is carried out, the accumulation and assimilation of experience developed by previous generations occurs. But this will be discussed below. For now, let us note: a person can communicate in time and... with himself. Really: why do you need a notebook with names, addresses, birthdays? It was you “yesterday” who sent a message to your “today” self for tomorrow. What about notes and diaries? Without relying on his memory, a person gives information “for preservation” to the language, or more precisely, to its representative – the text. He communicates with himself over time. Let me emphasize: in order to preserve himself as an individual, a person must communicate - this is a form of his self-affirmation. And as a last resort, in the absence of interlocutors, he must communicate at least with himself. ( This situation familiar to people who have found themselves cut off from society for a long time: prisoners, travelers, hermits.) Robinson in famous novel D. Defoe, until he meets Friday, begins to talk with a parrot - this is better than going crazy from loneliness...

We have already said: the word is also, in a sense, a deed. Now, in relation to the communicative function of language, this idea can be clarified. Let's take the simplest case - the elementary act of communication. One person says something to another: asks him, orders him, advises him, warns him... What dictates these speech actions? Caring for the good of your neighbor? Not only. Or at least not always. Usually the speaker has some kind of self-interest in mind, and this is completely natural, such is human nature. For example, he asks the other person to do something instead of doing it himself. For him, the deed, as it were, turns into a word, into speech. Neuropsychologists say: talking man must first of all suppress, slow down the excitation of some centers in his brain that are responsible for movements and actions (B.F. Porshnev). It turns out deputy actions. Well, is the second person the interlocutor (or, in other words, the listener, the addressee)? He himself, perhaps, does not need what he will do at the request of the speaker (or the reasons and grounds for this action are not entirely clear), and nevertheless he will fulfill this request, translate the word into real action. But in this you can see the beginnings of the division of labor, the fundamental principles of human society! This is how the greatest American linguist Leonard Bloomfield characterizes the use of language. Language, he said, allows one person to perform an action (action, reaction) where another person experiences a need for this action (stimulus).

So, it’s worth agreeing with the idea: communication, communication through language, is one of the most important factors that “created” humanity.

12. THINKING FUNCTION

But a speaking person is a thinking person. And the second function of language, closely related to the communicative one, is the function thinking(in another way - cognitive, from lat. cognition– ‘cognition’). They often even ask: what is more important, what comes first – communication or thinking? Probably, the question cannot be posed this way: these two functions of language determine each other. To speak means to express one's thoughts. But, on the other hand, these thoughts themselves are formed in our heads with the help of language. And if we remember that among animals, language is “already” used for communication, but thinking as such is not “yet” here, then we can come to the conclusion about the primacy of the communicative function. But it's better to say this: the communicative function educates, “nurtures” the mental. How should this be understood?

One little girl put it this way: “How do I know What I Think? I’ll tell you, then I’ll find out.” Truly, through the mouth of a child the truth speaks. Here we come into contact with the most important problem of the formation (and formulation) of thought. It is worth repeating once again: a person’s thought at its birth is based not only on universal content categories and structures, but also on the categories of a specific language unit. Of course, this does not mean that, besides verbal thinking, there are no other forms of intelligent activity. There is also figurative thinking, familiar to any person, but especially developed among professionals: artists, musicians, performers... there is technical thinking - the professional dignity of designers, mechanics, draftsmen, and again, to one degree or another, not alien to all of us. Finally, there is objective thinking - we are all guided by it in a lot of everyday situations, from tying shoelaces to unlocking the front door... But the main form of thinking that unites all people in the overwhelming majority life situations, is, of course, linguistic, verbal thinking.

It’s another matter that words and other units of language appear in the course of mental activity in some kind of “not their own” form, they are difficult to grasp and isolate (of course: we think much faster than we speak!), and our “inner speech” (this is a term introduced into science by the wonderful Russian psychologist L.S. Vygotsky) is fragmentary and associative. This means that the words here are represented by some of their own “pieces” and they are connected to each other differently than in ordinary “external” speech, and in addition, images are interspersed into the linguistic fabric of thought - visual, auditory, tactile, etc. P. It turns out that the structure of “internal” speech is much more complex than the structure of “external” speech that is accessible to observation. Yes it is. And yet, the fact that it is based on the categories and units of a specific language is beyond doubt.

Confirmation of this was found in various experiments, especially actively carried out in the middle of our century. The subject was specially “puzzled” and, while he – to himself – was thinking about some problem, his speech apparatus was examined from different angles. Either they scanned his throat and oral cavity with an X-ray machine, or with weightless sensors they took the electrical potential from his lips and tongue... The result was the same: during mental (“silent!”) activity, the human speech apparatus was in a state of activity. Some shifts and changes were taking place in him - in a word, work was going on!

Even more characteristic in this sense is the evidence of polyglots, that is, people who are fluent in several languages. Usually they easily determine at any given moment in which language they are thinking. (Moreover, the choice or change of the language on which the thought is based depends on the environment in which the polyglot is located, on the very subject of the thought, etc.)

Famous Bulgarian singer Boris Hristov, long years living abroad, considered it his duty to sing arias in the original language. He explained it this way: “When I speak Italian, I think in Italian. When I speak Bulgarian, I think in Bulgarian.” But one day, at a performance of “Boris Godunov” - Christov sang, naturally, in Russian - the singer came up with some idea in Italian. And he unexpectedly continued the aria... in Italian. The conductor was petrified. And the public (it was in London), thank God, did not notice anything...

It is curious that among writers who speak several languages, authors who translate themselves are rarely found. The fact is that for a real creator, translating, say, a novel into another language means not just rewriting it, but change mind, to re-experience, to write anew, in accordance with a different culture, with a different “view of the world.” Irish playwright Samuel Beckett, a Nobel laureate, one of the founders of the theater of the absurd, created each of his works twice, first in French, then in English. But at the same time he insisted that we should be talking about two different works. Similar arguments on this topic can also be found in Vladimir Nabokov, who wrote in Russian and English, and other “bilingual” writers. And Yu.N. Tynyanov once justified himself about the heavy style of some of his articles in the book “Archaists and Innovators”: “Language not only conveys concepts, but is also the process of their construction. Therefore, for example, retelling someone else’s thoughts is usually clearer than telling your own.” And, therefore, the more original the thought, the more difficult it is to express it...

But the question naturally arises: if a thought in its formation and development is connected with the material of a specific language, then does it not lose its specificity, its depth when transmitted by means of another language? Is translation from language to language and communication between peoples even possible then? I will answer this way: the behavior and thinking of people, with all their national flavor, is subject to some universal, universal laws. And languages, with all their diversity, are also based on some general principles (some of which we have already observed in the section on the properties of a sign). So, in general, translation from language to language is, of course, possible and necessary. Well, some losses are inevitable. So are acquisitions. Shakespeare in Pasternak's translation is not only Shakespeare, but also Pasternak. Translation, according to a well-known aphorism, is the art of compromise.

All that has been said leads us to the conclusion: language is not just a form, a shell for thought, it is not even means thinking, but rather it way. The very nature of the formation of thought units and their functioning largely depends on language.

13. COGNITIVE FUNCTION

The third function of language is educational(its other name is accumulative, that is, cumulative). Most of what an adult knows about the world came to him with language, through the medium of language. He may have never been to Africa, but he knows that there are deserts and savannas, giraffes and rhinoceroses, the Nile River and Lake Chad... He has never been to a metallurgical plant, but he has an idea of ​​how iron is smelted, and perhaps also about how steel is made from iron. A person can mentally travel through time, access the secrets of the stars or the microcosm - and he owes all this to language. His own experience, obtained through the senses, constitutes an insignificant part of his knowledge.

How is it formed? inner world person? What is the role of language in this process?

The main mental “tool” with the help of which a person understands the world is concept. A concept is formed in the course of a person’s practical activity thanks to the ability of his mind to abstract and generalize. (It is worth emphasizing: animals also have lower forms of reflection of reality in consciousness - such as sensation, perception, representation. A dog, for example, has an idea of ​​​​its owner, his voice, smell, habits, etc., but a generalized one The dog does not have the concept of “owner,” as well as “smell,” “habit,” etc.) The concept is detached from the visual-sensory image of the object. This is a unit of logical thinking, the privilege of homo sapiens.

How is a concept formed? A person observes many phenomena of objective reality, compares them, and identifies various features in them. He “cuts off” the unimportant, random signs, distracts himself from them, but adds up the significant signs, sums them up - and a concept is obtained. For example, comparing various trees - tall and short, young and old, with a straight trunk and with a curved one, deciduous and coniferous, shedding leaves and evergreen, etc., he identifies the following characteristics as constant and essential: a) these are plants ( generic sign), b) perennial,
c) with a solid stem (trunk) and d) with branches forming a crown. This is how the concept of “tree” is formed in the human mind, under which all the variety of observed specific trees is subsumed; it is this that is enshrined in the corresponding word: tree. A word is a typical, normal form of existence of a concept. (Animals have no words - and concepts, even if there were grounds for their emergence, have nothing to rely on, nothing to gain a foothold in...)

Of course, it takes some mental effort and probably a lot of time to understand that, say, a chestnut tree under the window and a dwarf pine tree in a pot, a twig-sapling of an apple tree and a thousand-year-old sequoia somewhere in America are all "tree". But this is precisely the main path of human knowledge - from the individual to the general, from the concrete to the abstract.

Let us pay attention to the following series of Russian words: sadness, upset, admire, education, passion, treatment, understand, disgusting, openly, restrained, hate, insidious, justice, adore... Is it possible to find anything in common in their meanings? Difficult. Unless they all mean some abstract concepts: mental states, feelings, relationships, signs... Yes, that’s true. But they also have, in a sense, the same story. All of them are formed from other words with more specific – “material” – meanings. And, accordingly, the concepts behind them are also based on concepts of a lower level of generalization. Sadness derived from bake(after all, sadness burns!); grieve– from bitter, bitterness; upbringing– from nourish, food; enthusiasm– from attract, drag(that is, ‘drag along’); justice– from right(i.e. ‘located on the right hand’), etc.

This is, in principle, the path of semantic evolution of all languages ​​of the world: generalized, abstract meanings grow in them on the basis of more specific, or, so to speak, mundane meanings. However, for every nation, some areas of reality are divided in more detail than others. It is a well-known fact that in the languages ​​of the peoples inhabiting the Far North (Lapps, Eskimos), there are dozens of names for different types snow and ice (although there may not be a generic name for snow at all). Bedouin Arabs have dozens of names for different types of camels - depending on their breed, age, purpose, etc. It is clear that such a variety of names is caused by the conditions of life itself. This is how the famous French ethnographer Lucien Lévy-Bruhl wrote about the languages ​​of the indigenous people of Africa and America in his book “Primitive Thinking”: “Everything is presented in the form of image-concepts, that is, a kind of drawings where the smallest features are fixed and indicated (and this is not true only in relation to all objects, whatever they may be, but also in relation to all movements, all actions, all states, all properties expressed by language). Therefore, the vocabulary of these “primitive” languages ​​must be distinguished by such a wealth of which our languages ​​give only a very distant idea.”

Just don’t think that all this diversity is explained solely by exotic living conditions or the unequal position of peoples on the ladder of human progress. And in languages ​​belonging to the same civilization, say, European, you can find any number of examples of different classifications surrounding reality. So, in a situation in which a Russian will simply say leg(“Doctor, I hurt my leg”), the Englishman will have to choose whether to use the word leg or word foot- depending on what part of the leg we are talking about: from the hip to the ankle or the foot. A similar difference is das Bein And der Fu?– presented in German. Next, we will say in Russian finger regardless of whether it is a toe or a finger. And for an Englishman or a German this "different" fingers, and each of them has its own name. What is a toe called in English? toe, finger on hand - finger; in German – accordingly die Zehe And der Finger; however, the thumb has its own special name: thumb in English and der Daumen in German. Are these differences between fingers really that important? It seems to us, Slavs, that we still have more in common...

But in Russian, blue and cyan colors are distinguished, and for a German or Englishman this difference looks as insignificant, secondary, as for us, say, the difference between red and burgundy color: blue in English and blau in German it is a single concept “blue-blue” (see § 3). And it makes no sense to ask the question: which language is closer to the truth, to the real state of affairs? Every language is right, because it has the right to its own “vision of the world.”

Even languages ​​that are very close and closely related every now and then reveal their “independence.” For example, Russian and Belarusian are very similar to each other, they are blood brothers. However, in Belarusian there are no exact correspondences to Russian words communication(it is translated as adnosins, that is, strictly speaking, ‘relationships’, or how wear and tear, that is, ‘intercourse’) and connoisseur(it is translated as connoisseur or how amatar, that is, ‘amateur’, and this is not quite the same thing)... But it is difficult to translate from Belarusian into Russian shchyry(this is both ‘sincere’ and ‘real’ and ‘friendly’) or captivity(‘harvest’? ‘success’? ‘result’? ‘effectiveness’?)... And there are a whole dictionary of such words.

Language, as we see, turns out to be a ready-made classifier of objective reality for a person, and this is good: it, as it were, lays the rails along which the train of human knowledge moves. But at the same time, the language imposes its classification system on all participants in this convention - it is also difficult to argue with this. If we were told from an early age that a finger on a hand is one thing, and a toe on a completely different thing, then by adulthood we would probably already be convinced of the validity of just such a division of reality. And if we were only talking about fingers or limbs, we agree “without looking” with other, more important points of the “convention” that we sign.

At the end of the 60s, on one of the islands of the Philippine archipelago (in the Pacific Ocean), a tribe was discovered living in Stone Age conditions and in complete isolation from the rest of the world. Representatives of this tribe (they called themselves tasaday) did not even suspect that, besides them, there were other intelligent beings on Earth. When scientists and journalists began to closely describe the world of the Tasadays, they were struck by one feature: in the language of the tribe there were no words like war, enemy, hate... The Tasaday, as one journalist put it, “learned to live in harmony and harmony not only with nature, but also with each other.” Of course, this fact can be explained this way: the original friendliness and goodwill of this tribe found its natural reflection in the language. But language did not stand aside from public life, it left its mark on the formation of the moral norms of this community: how could the newly minted tasaday learn about wars and murders? We and our languages ​​signed a different information “convention”...

So, language educates a person, shapes his inner world - this is the essence of the cognitive function of language. Moreover, this function can manifest itself in the most unexpected specific situations.

American linguist Benjamin Lee Whorf gave such examples from his practice (he once worked as a fire safety engineer). In a warehouse where gasoline tanks are stored, people behave carefully: they do not light a fire, do not flick lighters... However, the same people behave differently in a warehouse that is known to store empty (in English empty) gasoline tanks. Here they show carelessness, they may light a cigarette, etc. Meanwhile, empty gasoline tanks are much more explosive than full ones: gasoline vapors remain in them. Why do people behave so carelessly? – Whorf asked himself. And he answered: because the word calms them, misleads them empty, which has several meanings (for example, the following: 1) ‘does not contain anything (about vacuum)’, 2) ‘does not contain something’...). And people unconsciously seem to replace one meaning with another. From such facts arose a whole linguistic concept - the theory of linguistic relativity, which asserts that a person lives not so much in the world of objective reality, but in the world of language...

So, language can be the cause of misunderstandings, mistakes, misconceptions? Yes. We have already talked about conservatism as the original property of a linguistic sign. The person who signed the “convention” is not very inclined to then change it. And therefore, linguistic classifications often diverge from scientific classifications (later and more accurate). We, for example, divide the entire living world into animals and plants, but systematologists say that such a division is primitive and incorrect, because there are still at least fungi and microorganisms that cannot be classified as either animals or plants. Our “everyday” understanding of what minerals, insects, and berries are does not coincide with the scientific one; to be convinced of this, just look in an encyclopedic dictionary. Why are there private classifications? Copernicus proved back in the 16th century that the Earth revolves around the Sun, and language still defends the previous point of view. We say: “The sun rises, the sun sets...” - and we don’t even notice this anachronism.

However, one should not think that language only hinders the progress of human knowledge. On the contrary, he can actively contribute to its development. One of the largest Japanese politicians of our time, Daisaku Ikeda, believes that it was the Japanese language that was one of the main factors that contributed to the rapid revival of post-war Japan: “In the development of modern scientific and technological achievements that have been coming to us for a long period from European countries and the USA, a huge The role belongs to the Japanese language, the flexible mechanism of word formation contained in it, which allows us to instantly create and easily master the truly huge number of new words that we needed to assimilate the mass of concepts that poured in from outside.” The French linguist Joseph Vandries once wrote about the same thing: “A flexible and mobile language, in which grammar is reduced to a minimum, shows thought in all its clarity and allows it to move freely; an inflexible and ponderous language hampers thought.” Leaving aside the controversial issue of the role of grammar in the processes of cognition (what does “grammar is reduced to a minimum” mean in the above quote?), I hasten to reassure the reader: you should not worry about this or that particular language or be skeptical about its capabilities. In practice, each means of communication corresponds to its own “view of the world” and sufficiently satisfies the communicative needs of a given people.

14. NOMINATIVE FUNCTION

Another extremely important function of language is nominative or nominative. In fact, we have already touched upon it when reflecting in the previous paragraph on the cognitive function. The fact is that naming is an integral part of cognition. A person, generalizing a mass of specific phenomena, abstracting from their random features and highlighting the essential ones, feels the need to consolidate the acquired knowledge in words. This is how the name appears. If not for it, the concept would remain an ethereal, speculative abstraction. And with the help of a word, a person can, as it were, “stake out” the surveyed part of the surrounding reality, say to himself: “I already know this,” hang up a name sign and move on.

Consequently, the entire system of concepts that has modern man, rests on the naming system. The easiest way to show this is with the example of proper names. Let's try to throw out all proper names from courses in history, geography, literature - all anthroponyms (this means names of people: Alexander the Great, Columbus, Peter I, Moliere, Afanasy Nikitin, Saint-Exupery, Don Quixote, Tom Sawyer, Uncle Vanya...) and all toponyms (these are names of places: Galaxy, North Pole, Troy, City of the Sun, Vatican, Volga, Auschwitz, Capitol Hill, Black River...), – what will remain of these sciences? Obviously, the texts will become meaningless, and the person reading them will immediately lose orientation in space and time.

But names are not only proper names, but also common nouns. Terminology of all sciences - physics, chemistry, biology, etc. - these are all names. The atomic bomb could not have been created if the ancient concept of “atom”* had not been replaced by new concepts - neutron, proton and other elementary particles, nuclear fission, chain reaction, etc. - and all of them were fixed in words !

The characteristic confession of the American scientist Norbert Wiener is known about how the scientific activity of his laboratory was hampered by the lack of an appropriate name for this direction search: it was unclear what the employees of this laboratory were doing. And only when Wiener’s book “Cybernetics” was published in 1947 (the scientist came up with this name, taking as a basis the Greek word meaning ‘helmsman, helmsman’), the new science rushed forward by leaps and bounds.

So, the nominative function of language serves not just to orient a person in space and time, it goes hand in hand with the cognitive function, it participates in the process of understanding the world.

But man is a pragmatist by nature; he seeks, first of all, practical benefits from his affairs. This means that he will not name all the surrounding objects in a row in the hope that these names will someday come in handy. No, he uses the nominative function deliberately, selectively, naming first of all what is closest to him, most often and most important.

Let us recall, for example, the names of mushrooms in Russian: how many of them do we know? White mushroom (boletus), boletus(in Belarus it is often called grandma), boletus (redhead), milk mushroom, saffron milk cap, oiler, chanterelle, honey fungus, russula, trumpet... – there will be at least a dozen. But these are all healthy, edible mushrooms. What about the inedible ones? Perhaps we distinguish only two types: fly agarics And toadstools(well, not counting some other false varieties: false honey mushrooms and so on.). Meanwhile, biologists claim that there are much more varieties of inedible mushrooms than edible ones! People simply don’t need them, they are uninteresting (except for narrow specialists in this field) - so why waste names and bother yourself?

One pattern follows from this. Any language must have gaps, that is, holes, empty spaces in the picture of the world. In other words, there must be something not named- something that is not important to a person (yet) is not necessary...

Let's look in the mirror at our own familiar face and ask: what is this? Nose. And this? Lip. What's between the nose and lip? Mustache. Well, if there is no mustache, what is this place called? The answer is a shrug (or the sly “The place between the nose and lip”). Okay, one more question. What is it? Forehead. And this? Back of the head. What's between the forehead and the back of the head? In reply: head. No, the head is the whole thing, but what is this part of the head called, between the forehead and the back of the head? Few people remember the name crown, most often the answer will be the same shrug... Yes, something should not have a name.

And one more consequence follows from what has been said. In order for an object to receive a name, it must enter into public use and step over a certain “threshold of significance.” Until some time it was still possible to get by with a random or descriptive name, but from now on it is no longer possible - a separate name is needed.

In this light, it is interesting, for example, to observe the development of means (tools) of writing. History of words pen, pen, fountain pen, pencil and so on. reflects the development of a “piece” of human culture, the formation of corresponding concepts in the minds of a native Russian speaker. I remember how the first felt-tip pens appeared in the USSR in the 60s. Then they were still rare, they were brought from abroad, and the possibilities of their use were not yet entirely clear. Gradually, these objects began to be generalized into a special concept, but for a long time they did not receive their clear name. (There were names like “plakar”, “fiber pencil”, and there were variations in spelling: felt-tip pen or marker?) Today, a felt-tip pen is already a “established” concept, firmly entrenched in the corresponding name. But quite recently, in the late 80s, new, somewhat different writing tools appeared. This, in particular, is an automatic pencil with an ultra-thin (0.5 mm) lead that extends with clicks to a certain length, then a ballpoint pen (again with an ultra-fine tip), which writes not with paste, but with ink, etc. What are their names? Yes, so far - in Russian - no way. They can only be characterized descriptively: approximately as is done in this text. They have not yet entered into everyday life widely, have not become a fact of mass consciousness, which means that for the time being we can do without a special name.

A person’s attitude towards a name is generally not simple.

On the one hand, over time, the name becomes attached, “sticks” to its subject, and in the head of the native speaker there arises the illusion of the originality, the “naturalness” of the name. The name becomes a representative, even a substitute, of the subject. (Even the ancient people believed that a person’s name is internally connected with himself and forms a part of him. If, say, the name is harmed, then the person himself will suffer. This is where the ban, the so-called taboo, on using the names of close relatives came from.)

On the other hand, the participation of a name in the process of cognition leads to another illusion: “if you know the name, you know the object.” Let's say I know the word succulent- therefore, I know what it is. The same J. Vandries wrote well about this peculiar magic of the term: “Knowing the names of things means having power over them... Knowing the name of a disease is already half of curing it. We should not laugh at this primitive belief. It still lives in our time, since we attach importance to the form of diagnosis. “I have a headache, doctor.” - “This is cephalalgia.” “My stomach doesn’t work well.” “It’s dyspepsia”... And patients feel better only because a representative of science knows the name of their secret enemy.”

Indeed, often in scientific discussions one witnesses how disputes on the essence of a subject are replaced by a war of names and a confrontation of terminologies. The dialogue follows the principle: tell me what terms you use, and I will tell you which school (scientific direction) you belong to.

Generally speaking, the belief in the existence of a single correct name is more widespread than we imagine. This is what the poet said:

When we clarify the language
And let's name the stone as it should,
He himself will tell you how he came into being,
What is its purpose and where is the reward.

When we find a star
Her only name is
She, with her planets,
Will step out of muteness and darkness...

(A. Aronov)

Isn’t it true, this reminds me of the words of the old eccentric from the joke: “I can imagine everything, I can understand everything. I even understand how people discovered planets so far from us. There’s just one thing I can’t understand: how did they know their names?”

Of course, one should not overestimate the power of a name. Moreover, one cannot equate a thing with its name. Otherwise, it won’t take long to come to the conclusion that all our troubles stem from incorrect names and if we just change the names, everything will immediately get better. Such a misconception, alas, cannot escape a person either. The desire for wholesale renaming is especially noticeable during periods of social upheaval. Cities and streets are renamed, instead of some military ranks others are introduced, the police become the police (or, in other countries, vice versa!), technical schools and institutes in the blink of an eye are rebaptized into colleges and academies... This is what the nominative function of language means, this is what faith is person in the title!

15. REGULATORY FUNCTION

Regulatory the function unites those cases of language use when the speaker aims to directly influence the addressee: to induce him to take some action or to prohibit him from doing something, to force him to answer a question, etc. Wed. statements such as: What time is it now? Do you want some milk? Please call me tomorrow. Everyone to the rally! May I never hear this again! You will take my bag with you. No need for unnecessary words. As can be seen from the examples given, the regulatory function has at its disposal a variety of lexical means and morphological forms ( special role the category of mood plays here), as well as intonation, word order, syntactic structures, etc.

I note that various kinds of incentives - such as a request, order, warning, prohibition, advice, persuasion, etc. - are not always formalized as such, expressed using “own” linguistic means. Sometimes they appear in someone else's guise, using linguistic units that usually serve other purposes. Thus, a mother can express her request to her son not to come home late, directly, using the imperative form (“Don’t come late today, please!”), or she can disguise it as a question (“What time are you going to be back?”), and also under reproach, warning, statement of fact, etc.; let’s compare statements such as: “Yesterday you came late again...” (with a special intonation), “Look - now it’s getting dark early”, “The metro is open until one o’clock, don’t forget”, “I’ll be very worried”, etc. .

Ultimately, the regulatory function is aimed at creating, maintaining and regulating relationships in human micro-collectives, that is, in the real environment in which the native speaker lives. Focusing on the addressee makes it similar to the communicative function (see § 11). Sometimes, along with the regulatory function, the function is also considered phatic*, or contact-setting. This means that a person always needs to enter into a conversation in a certain way (call out to the interlocutor, greet him, remind him of himself, etc.) and leave the conversation (say goodbye, thank him, etc.). But does establishing contact really boil down to exchanging phrases like “Hello” and “Goodbye”? The phatic function is much broader in its scope, and therefore it is not surprising that it is difficult to distinguish it from the regulatory function.

Let's try to remember: what do we talk about during the day with others? Is all this information vital for our well-being or directly influencing the behavior of the interlocutor? No, for the most part these are conversations, it would seem, “about nothing”, about trifles, about what the interlocutor already knows: about the weather and about mutual acquaintances, about politics and about football for men, about clothes and children for men. women; now they have been supplemented by comments on television series... There is no need to treat such monologues and dialogues ironically and arrogantly. In fact, these conversations are not about the weather and not about “rags”, but about each other, about you and me, about people. In order to occupy and then maintain a certain place in a micro-team (and this includes family, a circle of friends, a production team, housemates, even companions in a compartment, etc.), a person must talk with other members of this group.

Even if you accidentally find yourself in a moving elevator with someone, you may feel a little awkward and turn your back: the distance between you and your companion is too small to pretend that you do not notice each other, and to start a conversation too in general, it makes no sense - there is nothing to talk about, and the ride is too short... Here is a subtle observation in the story of the modern Russian prose writer V. Popov: “In the mornings we all went up in the elevator together... The elevator creaked, went up, and everyone in it was silent. Everyone understood that they couldn’t stand like that, that they had to say something, say something quickly, in order to defuse this silence. But it was still too early to talk about work, and no one knew what to talk about. And there was such silence in this elevator, even if you jumped out while walking.”

In relatively permanent, long-term teams, establishing and maintaining verbal contacts is the most important means of regulating relationships. For example, you meet your neighbor Maria Ivanovna on the landing and say to her: “Good morning, Marya Ivanna, you’re early today...”. This phrase has a double bottom. Behind its “external” meaning one can read: “I remind you, Maria Ivanovna, I am your neighbor and would like to continue to remain on good terms with you.” There is nothing hypocritical or deceitful in such greetings; these are the rules of communication. And all these are very important, simply necessary phrases. We can figuratively say this: if you don’t praise the new beads on your friend today, and she, in turn, tomorrow doesn’t ask how your relationship with a certain mutual friend is developing, then in a couple of days a slight chill may run between you, and in a month you may even lose your girlfriend altogether... Would you like to try an experiment? Take my word for it.

Let me emphasize: communication with relatives, friends, neighbors, companions, and co-workers is necessary not only to maintain certain relationships in micro-teams. It is also important for the person himself - for his self-affirmation, for his realization as an individual. The fact is that the individual plays in society not only some permanent social role (for example, “housewife”, “student”, “scientist”, “miner”, etc.), but also constantly tries on different social “ masks”, for example: “guest”, “passenger”, “patient”, “adviser”, etc. And this whole “theater” exists mainly thanks to language: for each role, for each mask there is its own means of speech.

Of course, the regulatory and phatic functions of language are aimed not only at improving relations between members of a microcollective. Sometimes a person, on the contrary, resorts to them for “repressive” purposes - in order to alienate, push away his interlocutor. In other words, the tongue is used not only for mutual “stroking” (this is a term accepted in psychology), but also for “pricks” and “blows”. In the latter case, we are dealing with expressions of threat, insults, curses, curses, etc. And again: social convention is what establishes what is considered rude, offensive, humiliating for the interlocutor. In the Russian-speaking criminal world, one of the most powerful, deadly insults is “goat!” And in the aristocratic society of the century before last, the words scoundrel was enough to challenge the offender to a duel. Today, the language norm is “softening” and the bar for the repressive function is rising quite high. This means that a person perceives only very strong means as offensive...

In addition to the linguistic functions discussed above - communicative, mental, cognitive, nominative and regulatory (to which we “added” the phatic), we can distinguish other socially significant roles of language. In particular, ethnic function means that language unites an ethnic group (people), it helps to form a national identity. Aesthetic function turns text into a work of art: this is the sphere of creativity, fiction– it has already been discussed before. Emotionally expressive function allows a person to express his feelings, sensations, experiences in language... Magical(or incantatory) function is realized in special situations when the language is endowed with a kind of superhuman, “otherworldly” power. Examples include conspiracies, gods, oaths, curses and some other ritual types of texts.

And all this is not yet the full “range of responsibilities” of language in human society.

Tasks and exercises

1. Determine what functions of language are implemented in the following statements.

a) Kryzhovka (signboard on the railway station building).
b) Rediscount (sign on the store door).
c) Hello. My name is Sergey Alexandrovich (teacher entering class).
d) An equilateral rectangle is called a square (from the textbook).
e) “I won’t come to training on Wednesday, I won’t be able to.” - "You must Fedya, you must" (from a conversation on the street).
f) May you fail, you damned drunkard! (From an apartment squabble).
g) I studied the science of parting In the simple-haired complaints of the night (O. Mandelstam).

2. In one film “from life abroad” the hero asks the maid:

- Is Mrs. Mayons at home?
And receives the answer:
- Your mother is in the living room.

Why does the questioner call his mother so formally: “Mrs. Mayons”? And why does the maid choose a different name in her answer? What language functions are implemented in this dialogue?

3. What language functions are implemented in the following dialogue from V. Voinovich’s story “Life and extraordinary adventures soldier Ivan Chonkin"?

We were silent. Then Chonkin looked at the clear sky and said:
– Today, apparently, there will be a bucket.
“There will be a bucket if there is no rain,” said Lesha.
“There is no rain without clouds,” noted Chonkin. - And it happens that there are clouds, but there is still no rain.
“It happens like that,” agreed Lesha.
On this they parted.

4. Comment on the following dialogue between two characters in M. Twain’s novel “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.”

-...But if a person comes up to you and asks: “Parle vous France?” – what do you think?
“I won’t think of anything, I’ll take him and hit him on the head...

Which language functions “do not work” in in this case?

5. Very often a person starts a conversation with words like listen, do you know (do you know) or by addressing the interlocutor by name, although there is no one next to him, so this appeal also does not make much sense. Why is the speaker doing this?

6. Physics teaches: the main colors of the solar spectrum seven: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet. Meanwhile, the simplest sets of paints or pencils include six colors, and these are other components: black, brown, red, yellow, green, blue. (When the set is “expanded,” blue, orange, violet, lemon, and even white appear...) Which of these pictures of the world in to a greater extent reflected in the language – “physical” or “everyday”? What linguistic facts can confirm this?

7. List the names of the fingers on your hand. Do all names come to your mind equally quickly? What is this connected with? Now list the names of the toes. What is the conclusion? How does this fit with the nominative function of language?

8. Show yourself where the person’s shin, ankle, ankle, wrist are located. Was this task easy for you? What conclusion follows from this about the relationship between the world of words and the world of things?

9. The following law operates in language: the more often a word is used in speech, the wider its meaning (or, in other words, the more meanings it has). How can this rule be justified? Demonstrate its effect using the following Russian nouns denoting body parts as an example.

Head, forehead, heel, shoulder, wrist, cheek, collarbone, arm, foot, leg, lower back, temple.

10. A tall and large person in Russian can be called something like this: atlas, giant, giant, hero, giant, colossus, Gulliver, Hercules, Antaeus, brute, big man, big man, elephant, closet... Imagine that you are tasked with choosing a name for a new ready-to-wear store large sizes(from 52nd and above). Which title(s) will you choose and why?

11. Try to determine what concepts historically underlie the meanings of the following Russian words: guarantee, antediluvian, literally, proclaim, disgusting, restrained, liberated, compare, distribution, inaccessible, patronage, confirmation. What pattern can be seen in the semantic evolution of these words?

12. Below is a number of Belarusian nouns that do not have one-word correspondences in the Russian language (according to the dictionary “Original Words” by I. Shkraba). Translate these words into Russian. How to explain their “originality”? What function of language (or what functions) does the presence of such non-equivalent words correlate with?

Vyrai, paint, klek, grutsa, kaliva, hanger, garbarnya.

13. Can you accurately determine the meaning of such words in Russian as brother-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, sister-in-law? If not, why not?

14. In the book “Wild-growing useful plants of the USSR” (M., 1976) one can find many examples of how scientific (botanical) classification does not coincide with everyday (“naive”) classification. Thus, chestnut and oak belong to the beech family. Blueberries and apricots belong to the same family, Rosaceae. Walnut (hazel) belongs to the birch family. The fruits of pear, rowan, and hawthorn belong to the same class and are called apples.
How to explain these discrepancies?

15. Why does a person, in addition to his own name, also have various “middle names”: nicknames, nicknames, pseudonyms? Why should a person, when becoming a monk, renounce his worldly name and accept a new one - a spiritual one? What language functions are implemented in all these cases?

16. There is an unwritten rule that students adhere to when preparing for exams: “If you don’t know it yourself, explain it to a friend.” How can we explain the effect of this rule in relation to the basic functions of language?

*In Ancient Greek a-tomos literally meant 'indivisible'.

(To be continued)

Functions of language - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Language Functions" 2017, 2018.

THE SCIENCE OF LANGUAGE

Linguistic Sciences

As a result of the interaction of linguistics with other sciences, related sciences, scientific directions and corresponding scientific disciplines arise that study language in its connections and relationships with other social or natural phenomena, such as linguistic philosophy (philosophy of language, philosophy of “ordinary language”), sociolinguistics ( social linguistics), ethnolinguistics, extralinguistics (external linguistics), psycholinguistics (metalinguistics, exolinguistics), neurolinguistics, mathematical linguistics, computational (computer, engineering) linguistics, linguistic statistics (linguistic statistics), etc. Linguistic philosophy arose at the intersection of linguistics and philosophy. As an integral scientific direction, it was formed in Great Britain in the middle of the 20th century. The main task of the corresponding scientific discipline is “the study of the general philosophical basis of language and speech” in order to define philosophically significant concepts (such as “good”, “evil”, “duty”, “knowledge”, “meaning”, etc.), “based on on the contexts of use of the corresponding words in everyday speech,” as well as to identify special rules for “the functioning of language in everyday communication.” Sociolinguistics develops at the intersection of linguistics, sociology, social psychology and some other sciences. It studies the problems of the public use of language and the social conditions of its development, causal connections between languages ​​and other phenomena of social life, such as production, science, culture, economics, politics, ideology, state, law, etc. Sociolinguistics solves a number of specific issues directly related to the social nature of language: the role of language in the life of society, social functions language, social differentiation of language, influence of different social factors on the change and development of language, social aspects of bilingualism and multilingualism, language policy, i.e. measures taken by the state, public and other organizations related to the preservation or change of language norms, etc. Ethnolinguistics combines linguistics with the history of the people, ethnography . It emerged as an independent scientific direction at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. from ethnography. She studies “the relationship between language and people and the interaction of linguistic and ethnic factors in the functioning and development of language”, “language in its relation to culture”, the content (“plan of content”) of culture, folk psychology and mythology using linguistic methods. There are two known variants of ethnolinguistics - American and German. American ethnolinguistics studies the problems of the relationship of language with the culture, way of life, customs, and beliefs of peoples; German ethnolinguistics studies the relationship of language with the psychology of the people, which determines the creative power and spirit of the language. Ethnolinguistics has been widely developed in American science since the 70s of the 19th century. in connection with the intensive study of the life of Indian tribes. Extralinguistics is a scientific direction, a branch of linguistics that studies “the totality of ethnic, socio-historical, social, geographical and other factors as inextricably linked with the development and functioning of language.” Psycholinguistics as a special scientific direction was formed in the 50s of the 20th century. as a result of the application of psychological methods, psychological experiments in relation to human speech activity. In terms of the subject of research, it is close to linguistics, and in terms of research methods - to psychology. This scientific direction arose in the USA, and then spread to many other countries, including the USSR. Psycholinguistics studies human speech activity; it studies the processes of speech formation and perception. More precisely, the subject of this scientific discipline can be defined as “the process of speech from the point of view of content, communicative value, adequacy of the speech act to a given communicative intention” or as “features of the content side of language in connection with the thinking and social life of the speaking group.” Psycholinguistics solves such specific linguistic issues as such, such as: patterns of language acquisition (speech development in children, bilingualism, etc.), problems of speech influence (in particular, in propaganda work, in the activities of the media), etc. Neurolinguistics as a scientific direction and scientific discipline arose at the intersection of linguistics and neuroscience. Based on linguistic data, she studies the language system in relation to the activity of the human brain, as well as language-related areas and functions of the central nervous system. The connection between linguistics and literary criticism is to a certain extent found in such philological disciplines as stylistics and textual criticism. The tasks of these disciplines include the study of both literature (in the broad sense of the word) and linguistic means used in texts of different styles and genres. Applied linguistics is called “a direction in linguistics that deals with the development of methods for solving practical problems related to the use of language.” Such tasks are: creating a written language for a particular language; improvement of written systems of different languages; creating writing systems for the blind; creation of phonetic transcription systems (transcriptions oral speech, foreign words, etc.); creation of shorthand speech recording systems; teaching writing and reading; teaching a non-native language; development of language teaching methods; compilation of dictionaries different types; streamlining, unification and standardization of scientific and technical terminology; automatic text processing, in particular for machine translation; automation of information work, creation of automated information retrieval systems; linguistic support for automated control systems (ACS); creation of systems that ensure human-machine communication in natural language; annotating and summarizing scientific and other information; linguistic decipherment of unknown scripts and written texts.

Linguistics and Social Sciences

Linguistics is one of the social sciences. It is clear that it is closely related to such social sciences as history, economic geography, psychology and pedagogical sciences. The connection between linguistics and history (the science of the development of human society) is understandable, since the history of language is part of the history of the people. Especially clearly visible are the connections with the history of society in the vocabulary of the language, the sphere and nature of the functioning of the language, primarily the literary one. The connection between linguistics and history is two-way: historical data provide a specific historical consideration of language changes, linguistic data are one of the sources in the study of such historical problems, such as the origin (ethnogenesis) of a people, the development of the culture of a people and its society at different stages of history, contacts between peoples. Linguistics is associated, in particular, with such historical disciplines as archeology, which studies history from material sources - tools, weapons, jewelry, utensils, etc., and ethnography - the science of the life and culture of peoples. Linguistics comes into closest contact with ethnography when studying dialect vocabulary - the names of peasant buildings, utensils and clothing, objects and tools Agriculture, crafts. The connection between linguistics and ethnography is manifested not only in the study of material culture, but also in the classification of languages ​​and peoples, in the study of the reflection of national identity in language. Linguistics is closely related to literary studies (literary theory, literary history and literary criticism). The connection between linguistics and literary criticism is especially noticeable in such disciplines as stylistics and the history of literary language, as well as in the development of problems of fiction. However, there is a significant difference between the linguistic and linguistic approach and the methods of studying literary text. A literary critic studies language as a component of an artistic form, as a primary element of literature, as the art of words. Linguist studies artistic text as a manifestation of the author’s speech activity, as a fact language norm and functional style. Functional stylistics studies the choice and use of linguistic means in works of art. Language as a fact of an individual’s speech activity is the subject of study in psychology and linguistics.

Linguistics and natural sciences

Of the natural sciences, linguistics comes into contact mainly with human physiology and anthropology. Particularly important for linguistics is the theory of speech activity, created by Russian physiologists I.M. Sechenov and I.P. Pavlov. The words that a person hears and sees represent a second signaling system - a specifically human form of reflection of reality. The second signaling system is signal signals. The interests of linguists and anthropologists converge in two cases: firstly, in the classification of races and languages ​​and, secondly, in studying the question of the origin of speech.

Basic functions of the language

Communicative function The most important means of human communication is language. It acts as an instrument of communication, thus performing a communicative function. Communicating with each other, people convey their thoughts, expressions of will, feelings and emotional experiences, influence each other in a certain direction, and achieve common mutual understanding. Language gives people the opportunity to understand each other and establish joint work in all spheres of human activity. Language has been and remains one of the forces that ensure the existence and development of human society. Language acts as a means of communication both when one person speaks (monologue speech) and when two or more people speak (dialogical and group speech). Communication can be not only oral, but also written. Cognitive and accumulative functions The purpose of language to be a means of expressing, transmitting and storing content is called its cognitive function. The cognitive function is manifested not only in the communication of individuals, it is revealed in the linguistic experience of the people, ensuring for descendants the preservation of a wide variety of knowledge - about society and nature, about thinking and language. The function of language to reflect and preserve knowledge is called accumulative. Communicative, cognitive and accumulative functions are the main social functions of language as the most important means of communication. The remaining features are optional; they belong not to the language as a whole, but to its variants and styles.

FEATURES OF VERBAL COMMUNICATION

Human-Animal Communication: Key Differences

To understand human nature, the differences between the language and communication of people and the languages ​​and communicative activities of animals are especially significant. The main of these differences are as follows: 1. Language communication between people is biologically irrelevant, that is, insignificant in biological terms. It is characteristic that evolution has not created a special speech organ, and this function uses organs whose original purpose was different. If speech sounds were caused by physiological necessity, that is, they were biologically motivated, then the content of speech could not go beyond the limits of information about the biological state of the individual. The biological irrelevance of sounding speech has allowed people to develop secondary means of encoding linguistic information - such as writing, Morse code, naval flag alphabet, relief-dot alphabet for writing and reading Braille for the blind, etc., which increases the possibilities and reliability of linguistic communication. 2. Language communication of people, unlike animal communication, is closely related to cognitive processes . In animals, orientation (cognitive) processes are separated from those mechanisms and organs with the help of which signs-messages are generated in animal communication. Orientation occurs as a result of the work of the senses, without the participation of communication systems. A separate sign-message of an animal arises as a reaction of an individual to an event that has already happened, already perceived (“recognized”) by the senses, and at the same time as a stimulus for a similar reaction (or to a similar emotional state) in other individuals (to whom the message is addressed). In such a message there is no information about what caused this signal; L. S. Vygotsky said that a frightened gander, seeing danger and raising the entire flock with a cry, does not so much report what he sees as infect it with his fear (Vygotsky 1982 , 18). In this case, for example, in a herd of monkeys, “the sound of danger will be the same for a snake, a turtle, a rustling in the bushes; in the same way, the sound of well-being remains the same, whether it refers to the appearance of the sun, food, or the return of one to the herd of its members" (Tich 1970, 230-231). A different picture is observed in human cognitive activity. Already perception, i.e. one of the first stages of sensory cognition, in humans is mediated by language: “... language is, as it were, a kind of prism through which a person “sees” reality... projecting onto it with the help of language the experience of social practice” (Leontyev 1972, 153). Memory, imagination, and attention function primarily on the basis of language. The role of language in the processes of thinking is extremely important. The formation of a thought is a continuous verbal and mental process in which the brain mechanisms of both thinking and speech are involved. 3. Linguistic communication of people, in contrast to the communicative behavior of animals, is characterized by an exceptional richness of content. Here, in principle, there are no restrictions on the semantics of possible messages. Timeless, eternal and momentary, general and individual, abstract and concrete, rational and emotional, purely informative and motivating the addressee to action - all conceivable types of content are accessible to language. “Language is the ability to say everything” (A. Martinet). In contrast to the qualitative and quantitative unlimitedness of the content of linguistic communication, only expressive information is available to animal communication (i.e. information about the internal - physical, physiological - state of the sender of the message) and information that directly affects the recipient of the message (call, motivation, threat, etc.) . P.). In any case, this is always “momentary” information: what is reported occurs at the moment of communication. Thus, the content of animal communication is limited to operational and exclusively expressive information - about what is happening only with the participants in communication and only during communication. As for various and vital information of a timeless or long-term nature (for example, information that allows one to distinguish dangerous things, find edible things, etc.), such information is transmitted genetically in animals. This achieves, on the one hand, information support for the normal state of the population, and on the other, information communication between generations of animals. The hereditary assimilation of the experience of previous generations is exceptionally reliable, but this is also associated with the poverty and routineness of genetically transmitted information. Human society is characterized by a different ratio of biological and social information. Genetically perceived information is also significant in human behavior, but the determining role - both in the activities of an individual and in the life of society - is played by information transmitted in the process of linguistic communication. 4. A number of features in its structure are associated with the richness of human language (in comparison with animal communication systems). The main structural difference between human language and animal languages ​​is its level structure: parts of words (morphemes) are made from sounds, words are made from morphemes, and sentences are made from words. This makes people’s speech articulate, and the language – meaningfully capacious and at the same time compact semiotics. Thanks to the ability to combine words in different ways, language provides people with inexhaustible resources for expressing new meanings. Unlike human language, in biological semiotics there are no signs of different levels, i.e. simple and complex, composed of simple ones. Thus, according to zoopsychology, the languages ​​of monkey herds use about 30 sound signals corresponding to 30 standard situations (meanings), while all signs are not decomposable into significant components. In linguistic terms, we can say that in animal communication, a separate message is both a “word” and a “sentence,” i.e., the message is not divided into significant components, it is inarticulate. The single-level structure of biological semiotics limits their content to a set of initial values, since complex signs(i.e., composed of simple ones) are impossible.

LANGUAGE SIGN

Language as a system of signs

1. Language: “word” and “deed”

Language surrounds a person in life, accompanies him in all his affairs, whether he wants it or not, is present in all his thoughts, participates in his plans... Actually, speaking of the fact that language accompanies all human activities, let’s think about the stable expression “word and deed”: is it worth contrasting them at all? After all, the boundary between “deed” and “word” is conditional and blurred. It’s not for nothing that there are people for whom “the word” is case, their profession: these are writers, journalists, teachers, educators, you never know who else... And from their own own experience we know: the success of one or another undertaking largely depends on the ability to speak, persuade, and formulate one’s thoughts. Consequently, “word” is also a kind of “deed”; speech is included in the general system of human activity.

True, an adult gets so used to the language that he doesn’t pay attention to it—as they say, he doesn’t see it point-blank. Knowing our native language and using speech seems to us as natural and unconditional as, say, the ability to frown or climb stairs. Meanwhile, language does not arise in a person on its own; it is a product of imitation and learning. It is enough to take a closer look at how a child at the age of two or three years masters this system: every week, every month new words, new constructions appear in his speech - and yet he is still far from being fully competent... And if there were no people around adults who consciously or unconsciously help a child master this new world for him, would he still remain languageless? Alas, yes. There is a lot of documentary evidence of this - cases when a child, due to certain tragic circumstances, finds himself deprived of human society (for example, getting lost in the forest and ending up among animals). At the same time, he could survive as a biological individual, but he irrevocably lost the right to be called a human: as a rational being, he could no longer succeed. So the story with Mowgli or Tarzan is a beautiful fairy tale. Nature carries out even more cruel experiments, sometimes producing human beings deprived of sight and hearing. And since a child is deaf, he cannot develop sound speech- therefore, in this case we are dealing with deaf-blind creatures. And so it turns out that such a child can be formed into a human personality through long-term and purposeful work, however, provided that teachers (and in Russia there is a whole school - Professor I.A. Sokolyansky) teach this child language. Which language? Almost on the only sensory basis possible for him - language based on touch. This serves as another confirmation of the idea that without society, language cannot arise, and without language, a full-fledged personality cannot be formed.

Modern man as a biological species is called in Latin Homo sapiens, that is, a reasonable person. But homo sapiens exists at the same time Homo loquens(homo lokvens) – a speaking person. For us, this means that language is not just a “convenience” that a rational being invented to make its life easier, but a prerequisite for its existence. Language is an integral part of a person’s inner world, his spiritual culture, it is a support for mental actions, one of the foundations of mental connections (associations), an aid for memory, etc. It is difficult to overestimate the role of language in the history of civilization. You can remember about this famous aphorism German existentialist philosopher Martin Heidegger: “Language creates man” - or repeat after the Russian scientist Mikhail Bakhtin: “Language, the word is almost everything in human life.”

Naturally, such a complex and multifaceted phenomenon as language can be approached from different angles and studied from different angles. Therefore, linguistics (synonym - linguistics, from the Latin lingua - ‘language’) is growing not only “in depth”, but also “in breadth”, capturing adjacent territories, coming into contact with other, neighboring sciences. From these contacts new, intermediate and very promising disciplines are born. Their names alone are worth it: mathematical linguistics and linguostatistics, linguogeography and ethnolinguistics, historical poetics and textual criticism... Some of these subsidiary sciences - such as socio- and psycholinguistics - have already found their place in the structure (nomenclature) of human knowledge, received recognition of society, others - such as neurolinguistics - retain a taste of novelty and exoticism... In any case, one should not think that linguistics stands still, and even more so that it is only engaged in inventing new rules that complicate the life of the common man : where, say, should you put a comma, and where should you put a dash, when to write Not with an adjective together, and when - separately... I admit, linguistics also has to deal with this, and yet its most important tasks are different: the study of language in its relationship with objective reality and human society.

And although the phenomenon of language seems self-evident, it is necessary to somehow define it from the very beginning. From all the variety of existing definitions, we will select for further discussion the two most common and comprehensive: language is a means of human communication and language is a system of signs. These definitions do not contradict each other; rather, on the contrary, they complement each other. The first of them talks about what language is used for, the second – about what it is. And we will begin our conversation precisely with this second aspect - with the general principles of the structure of language. And only then, having become familiar with the basic rules for the organization of this phenomenon and having talked about its diverse roles in society, we will return to the question of the structure of language and the functioning of its individual parts.

The functions of natural human language are their purpose and role in human society. The idea of ​​the functions of language changes historically in accordance with changes in views on the nature of language, on its relationship with being and consciousness:

Language was originally seen as a means of denoting things;

Then, as a means of expressing and transmitting universal thought;

As a means of generating ideas;

As a means of dividing and perceiving existence, and each nation has its own [Zubkova 2003, p. 19].

Currently, all scientists are unanimous in recognizing the multifunctionality of language, but there is unity on the question of which functions to highlight. The functions of language mean all types of functioning of linguistic phenomena.

Understanding a function as the intended purpose of an object used by a subject, many researchers distinguish:

Functions of language as a social phenomenon;

Functions of language as a system of signs;

Particular functions in specific communication situations.

We will proceed from the fact that the functions of a national (ethnic) language (Language) or its variants (dialects, sociolects, etc.) and the functions of signs of a language system are phenomena of different orders. Thus, for any ethnic language the important functions are:

Ethnic, which consists in the formation of ethnic self-awareness,

National-cultural (accumulative, recording and transfer of cultural experience).

We can talk about the functioning of a particular ethnic language as a means of international, interethnic communication, about the language performing the function of the state language, about the functioning of languages ​​in various spheres of human activity - scientific, everyday, etc., as well as in private communication situations - in situations of appeal, request, promise, etc.

Studying the essence of natural human language is impossible without considering its functions, because it is in the functioning that the nature of such a complex phenomenon as human language is revealed. The functions of human language are basic, essential universal functions inherent in any ethnic language.

Language is a necessary condition for the formation and development of human society and man himself, therefore Edward Sapir (1884 - 1939) named the creative function as the main function of language.

TO basic functions human language and concrete ethnic languages functions usually include:

Communicative (to be a means of communication, exchange of information),

Mental (serve as a means of forming and expressing thoughts, activity of consciousness);

Expressive (express feelings, emotions).

Basic functions find their manifestation in private functions.

The main purpose of human language as a means of communication is the transmission of information in space and time. People communicate and interact in all types of activities - practical, cognitive, spiritual. Communication is a social process. It serves to form society and performs a connecting function. Communication activity is the most important aspect of human social behavior. Communication involves socialization, mastery of experience and language. Thanks to language, the continuity of human culture is carried out, the accumulation and assimilation of experience developed by previous generations occurs.

Specific manifestations of the communicative function are private functions. The private functions of the language include the following functions:

Phatic (contact establishing),

Appeal (appeals),

Voluntary (expression of will),

Directive (influence function),

Suggestive (impact on the psyche of another person),

Regulatory (creation, maintenance and regulation of relationships in the human micro-team),

Interactive (the use of linguistic means in the linguistic interaction of communicants in order to influence each other);

Magical (spellcasting), the use of linguistic means in the practice of shamans, psychics, etc.

Other private communicative functions can be identified.

The mental function of language is associated with the formation, expression and transmission of mental content. Language is not just a form, a shell for thought, but also a way of human thinking.

The cognitive (cognitive) function consists of using linguistic expressions to process and store knowledge in the memory of the individual and society, to form a picture of the world.

Language has an interpretive (interpretative) function, which consists in revealing the deep meaning of perceived linguistic statements (texts).

There is also an aesthetic (poetic) function, which is realized mainly in artistic creativity, when creating works of art.

The metalinguistic (meta-speech) function is to convey messages about the facts of the language and speech acts in it.

In addition to the above-mentioned functions of language, we can distinguish the functions of linguistic units as components of the language system. Thus, the main function of the word is the nominative function, the function of naming objects of the objective and spiritual world. The generalizing, classifying functions of nominative units are associated with the cognitive function.

A.A. Leontyev distinguishes between the functions of language and the functions of speech.

Regulatory (communicative), any communication can be considered as an attempt to regulate the behavior of others. There are three variants of the regulatory function: individual-regulatory, collective-regulatory and self-regulatory.

Cognitive, which has two aspects – individual (a means of mastering socio-historical experience and social (construction, accumulation and organization of socio-historical experience of mankind);

A national-cultural function, language records realities specific to a given culture.

The functions of speech, according to A.A. Leontiev, include:

Magic function;

Diacritic, associated with abbreviation, compression of a message in a certain communicative situation;

Emotional and aesthetic function. Emotional and aesthetic experiences are evoked in the addressee not at the level of the dictionary, but through a combination of these means in a speech work.

3. FROM THE HISTORY OF LINGUISTICS

General linguistic problems are gradually being realized. The centers of interest of linguistic thought are changing.

Linguistics, like any other science, stands on a foundation laid in the distant past. In the history of linguistics one can find examples of correct guesses about language that laid the foundations of modern linguistics.

In antiquity, three so-called “traditions” developed: Greco-Roman, Indian and Chinese. European science has its origins in the first tradition, the ideas of ancient Greek philosophers. Those ancient sources that have survived allow us to trace the development of the doctrine of language, starting from Plato (428-348 BC). One of the most important questions in Greek philosophy was the question of whether language is structured “by nature” or “by custom.” Those phenomena were considered to be arranged “by nature”, the essence of which, eternal and unchangeable, lies outside of man. Those phenomena that were accepted due to certain customs and traditions were considered to be arranged “according to custom,” i.e. by virtue of an implied agreement between members of society. In relation to language, the antinomy “by nature” vs. “according to custom” was reduced to the question of the nature of the name, whether there is a connection between the thing denoted by the word and the sound form of the word. Adherents of the “natural” view of language argued for the existence of such a connection. The existence of various methods of “natural” communication was recognized: imitation of animal sounds with words, natural phenomena and so on. It was believed that certain sounds express certain properties of objects and phenomena. Among the sounds, gentle, sharp, liquid, courageous, etc. stood out. Thus, the sound [r] was considered sharp, hence the presence of [r] in words such as cut, tear, roar, roar etc., is naturally (by nature) explained (motivated) by the phenomena that are denoted by these words. Motivated names were considered “correct names” because they supposedly reflected the characteristics inherent in things. Correct names were given by the Gods, and the Gods could not give incorrect names, because they knew the essence of the thing being named. And if the name was given by people (“by establishment”), then these were random names that did not reflect the nature of the thing being named.

In the II century. BC. there was a debate about how "regular" the language was. In language, although the changes of most words are subject to regular rules, or patterns, there are numerous exceptions. Regularity (cf.: table–tables, pillar - pillars) the Greeks called analogy, and irregularity (cf.: person - people, child - children) – an anomaly. Analogists have focused their efforts on identifying different models by which words can be classified. Anomalists, without denying certain regularities in the formation of words, pointed to numerous examples of irregular word forms.

The teachings of the Greeks were based on written texts. Oral speech was considered dependent on written speech. It was believed that literate people preserve the purity of the language, and illiterate people spoil the language. This idea of ​​language lasted for more than 2 thousand years.

In addition to the Greco-Latin tradition, the Indian tradition arose in antiquity. Here, classical texts were also studied, dictionaries of obsolete words, and commentaries on the texts were compiled. Ancient Indian grammarians studied ancient sacred texts - Vedic hymns written in Sanskrit. Scientists paid great attention the study of phonetics, since it was necessary to create rules for the accurate oral reproduction of Vedic hymns. The ancient Indian classification of speech sounds is more developed and accurate than all the classifications known to us that were proposed in Europe until the 18th century. Panini's grammar (IV century BC), according to Lyons, is far superior in its completeness, consistency, and conciseness to all grammars written up to the present time. This grammar is generative in nature. Following the rules of grammar in in the prescribed manner, it was possible to generate certain speech products.

The Romans were strongly influenced by Greek culture in all areas of science, art, and literature. Latin grammarians adopted Greek models almost entirely. The similarity of the Greek and Latin languages ​​confirmed the point of view according to which grammatical categories, according to the ancient Greeks, are universal for language in general. The Latin grammars of Donatus and Priscian were used as Latin textbooks until the 17th century.

In medieval Europe, Latin occupied an extremely important place in education. A good knowledge of Latin was necessary for both secular and ecclesiastical careers. Latin was not only the language of the Holy Scriptures and the Catholic Church, but also the international language of diplomacy, science, and culture.

The Renaissance was characterized by interest in national languages ​​and literature. The literature of classical antiquity was considered as the source of all cultural values ​​of civilization. During this period, grammars of national languages ​​appeared. Classical teaching was transferred to new European languages.

Scientific linguistics of modern times seeks to explain in a rational way the laws of language construction. In 1660, the “General Rational Grammar” (Grammar of Port-Royal) by A. Arnauld and C. Lanslot appeared in France. The purpose of this grammar is to prove that the structure of language is based on logical foundations, and various languages– these are variants of one logical rational system.

Sometimes it is believed that Scientific research The language originated only in the 19th century. Only in the 19th century. the facts became the subject of careful and objective consideration [Lyons 1978]. Scientific hypotheses began to be built on the basis of carefully selected facts. A special method for studying facts was developed - the comparative historical method.

The highlighting of historical justifications was characteristic at that time not only of linguistics, but also of other sciences, both natural and humanities.

At the end of the 18th century. It has been proven that Sanskrit, the sacred language of India, is related to ancient Greek, Latin and other languages. In 1786, W. Jones noted that Sanskrit reveals such similarities in roots and grammatical forms with the named languages ​​that cannot be explained by coincidence. This similarity is so striking that one cannot help but come to the conclusion that these languages ​​have common source, which may no longer exist. This discovery required a scientific explanation. Reliable methodological principles were needed to identify the kinship of languages.

Related languages ​​come from the same common base language and belong to the same family of languages. The further we go into antiquity, the fewer differences are found between the languages ​​being compared

Comparativists relied primarily on grammatical correspondences. We considered words from the main vocabulary, since “cultural” words are often borrowed. Languages ​​that are in geographical or cultural contact easily borrow words from each other. Often certain realities or concepts adopted by one people from another retain their original names.

Comparative scientists study not just the similarity of linguistic elements, but regular correspondences. Regular correspondences between the sounds of words that are similar in meaning in different languages ​​are formulated in the form of sound laws.

The development of linguistic science occurred in close connection with the general cognitive work of man. The formation of the subject of the science of language went through myths, philosophy, grammar, and rational grammar. Milestones in the history of linguistic thought are the concepts of V. von Humboldt and F. de Saussure.

W. von Humboldt (1767 – 1835) is sometimes recognized as the founder of general linguistics, the creator of the philosophy of language in the 19th century. Humboldt’s concept is a turning point in the development of the theory of linguistics. Based on Humboldt's ideas, many subsequent concepts were developed in the 20th century. Humboldt put forward fruitful ideas in many areas of theoretical linguistics: language and people, language and thinking, language and languages, etc. He warned against the absolutization of his ideas, but descendants did not always take this into account.

Humboldt noted that sound language played a decisive role in the development of man as a new biological species and as a thinking social being. The creation of language is due to the internal need of humanity. Language is not only an external means of communication between people, but it is inherent in human nature itself [Humboldt 1984, p. 51]. Language is simply a passive instrument for representing thought, but it participates in the formation of thought itself. A representation transformed into a word ceases to be the exclusive property of one subject. Passing on to others, it becomes the property of everyone human race. According to Humboldt, the structure of languages ​​among the human race is different because the spiritual characteristics of peoples are different. Language, according to Humboldt, turns into a special world, lying between the world of external phenomena and the inner world of man. We are talking about a system of meanings fixed in language. Humboldt emphasizes the unity of all languages, the existence general laws from development and actual functioning. This unity is due to the influence of universal characteristics of thinking. Humboldt's idea of ​​the universality of human languages ​​is complemented by the idea of ​​their ethnic determinacy.

According to Humboldt, thinking is not just dependent on language, it is, to a certain extent, conditioned by each individual language. Each language describes around the people to which it belongs, from which a person is given the opportunity to emerge only insofar as he enters the circle of another language in the same place, p. 80]. Mastering a foreign language could be likened to gaining a new position in a previous vision of the world.

Revealing the essential characteristics of language, Humboldt used a dialectical method of presenting them in the form of antinomies. Antinomy is a contradiction between two mutually exclusive objects or qualities, the pattern of each of which is rationally provable. Such a complex phenomenon as language cannot be described without resorting to this method. Thus, when describing language, the following antinomies are established: objective and subjective, individual and collective, social and psychological, activity and static, understanding and misunderstanding, etc.

In the XIX–XX centuries. linguistics was dominated by the scientistic model, introduced by the natural sciences into linguistic comparativism, structuralism, and generativism.

For most linguistic theories of the twentieth century. The principle of priority of synchronic description of language is characteristic, which assumes that historical considerations are not essential for the study of a certain state of language. This approach to the analysis of language was proclaimed by F. de Saussure (1857-1913). Saussure draws an analogy with the game of chess. In a chess game, positions on the board are constantly changing. However, at any given moment in time, the position is completely described by indicating the places occupied by the chess pieces. How the party participants arrived at this position (specific moves, their number, order, etc.) is completely unimportant for describing the position itself. It can be described synchronically, without referring to previous moves. The same, according to Saussure, is true of language.

All languages ​​are constantly changing, but the states of a language can be described independently of each other. Each state of language can and should be described in itself, without regard to what it developed from or what can develop from it.

The concept of historical development of language (linguistic change) is most fruitfully used on a macroscopic scale, i.e. when comparing temporary states that are sufficiently distant from each other [Lyons 1978]. On a microscopic scale, i.e. When comparing two linguistic states of a language that are quite close to each other, it is impossible to draw a clear boundary between diachronic and synchronic variability.

F. de Saussure drew the attention of linguists to the systematic nature of language. Each language is a set of interconnected subsystems that form a system of language, a system of relations. Elements of the language system - sounds, words, etc. – have significance only insofar as they are in a relationship of equivalence and opposition with each other. Saussure contrasted language and speech and called on linguists to first describe language as the most stable thing in linguistic activity. This is what was done within the framework of the systemic-structural paradigm in the twentieth century.

Linguistics, starting from Saussure, has posed the task of selecting something stable and orderly from the fluid linguistic experience. Systemic-structural linguistics sought to reveal the integrity and discreteness of its object. The objective of the study was to extract virtual language units (phonemes, morphemes, etc.) from the text based on the opposition method and taking into account distribution (environment, context).

In the second half of the twentieth century, there was an expansion of ideas and approaches of American linguistics, primarily the idea of ​​generativism, developed under the influence of the ideas of Noam Chomsky. N. Chomsky included in the range of linguist research a description of the linguistic intuition of a native speaker. Linguistic theory came to be understood as the study of the workings of human thinking and its connection with language. The idea of ​​innate grammar, deep and surface structures was put forward, and the generative grammar technique was developed.

In the last decades of the last century, the interests of linguists increasingly focused on studying the role of man in language, on the use of language by man (pragmalinguistic aspect).

Recent postmodern science fundamentally rejects any objective criteria, proclaiming the unlimited subjectivity of each act of linguistic interpretation, the unlimited reading of the same text. One must look for a pattern in a fluid continuum. Efforts to reject tradition and build a “different linguistics” often lack a foundation. Analysis of language forces one to turn to positivism. Linguistics continues to go its own way. Individual “fluid” associations remained outside of linguistic analysis, because it is not known what methods to study them with.