Introduction

Modern Russian is one of the richest languages ​​in the world. Its greatness is created by a huge vocabulary, a wide ambiguity of words, a wealth of synonyms, inexhaustible possibilities of word formation, numerous word forms, peculiarities of sounds, mobility of stress, clear and harmonious syntax, and a variety of stylistic resources. It is necessary to distinguish between the concepts of the Russian national language and the literary Russian language. The national language - the language of the Russian people - covers all spheres of people’s speech activity, regardless of education, upbringing, place of residence, profession; it includes dialects, special vocabulary, jargons, that is, the Russian national language is heterogeneous: it contains special varieties of language.

Literary language and dialects

Literary language (standard) is a standardized language that has rules that all members of society are required to observe. Dialect (dialect) is the smallest territorial variety of language, spoken by residents of several regions. A combination of dialects is called an adverb.

A respectful attitude towards the literary language is understandable and justified: thereby one realizes its cultural value and social significance. And the reasons for the disdainful attitude towards dialects go back to the Soviet past. At the time of collectivization, all sides village life were updated, replaced, and as a result, the traditional and linguistic cultures of the peasantry suffered equally.

Literary language constantly influences dialects, and they are gradually destroyed. But everything is interconnected, in turn, dialects complement the standard language and even partially merge into its composition. For example, the word “bagel” was borrowed from southern Russian dialects. “If the literary language were torn away from dialects, from the “soil”, then it, like Antaeus, would lose all its power and would become like a dead language, which is now the Latin language...” (L.V. Shcherba)

The age of the dialects is different: some are very ancient, others are younger. Dialects of primary education are dialects that were widespread in the territories of the early settlement of East Slavic tribes in the time frame from the 6th to the end of the 16th century, that is, where the language of the Russian nation took shape - in the center of the European part of Russia. In the spaces that were inhabited later than the 16th century, where people moved from everywhere, dialects of secondary education were formed. Due to the mixing of people, a synthesis of dialects occurred. A striking example This includes the dialects of the Middle and Lower Volga region, Kuban, the Urals, and Siberia, for which the central dialects are “mother”.

Forms of existence of language. Literary language. Stylistic resources of the Russian literary language Functional styles.

Literary language– the highest (model and processed) form of the national language. In terms of its cultural and social status, the literary language is opposed to territorial dialects, vernacular, social and professional jargons, and slang. Literary language is formed in the process of language development, therefore it is a historical category. Literary language is the language of culture; it is formed when high level its development. Literary works are created in a literary language, and cultural people also speak. Borrowed words, jargon, cliches, clericalism, etc. clog the language. Therefore, there is codification (the creation of norms), creating order and preserving the purity of the language, showing a pattern. The norms are enshrined in dictionaries of the modern Russian language and grammar reference books. The modern Russian literary language is at a high stage of its development; as a developed language, it has an extensive system of styles.

The process of formation and development of the national literary language is characterized by a tendency to expand its social base and bring closer the book-written and folk-spoken styles. It is no coincidence that the Russian literary language in a broad sense is defined in time from A. S. Pushkin to the present day: it was A. S. Pushkin who brought together the colloquial and literary languages, laying the basis for various styles literary speech language of the people. I. S. Turgenev, in a speech about Pushkin, pointed out that Pushkin “alone had to complete two works, which in other countries were separated by a whole century or more, namely: to establish a language and create literature.” Here it should be noted the enormous influence that outstanding writers in general have on the formation of the national literary language. A significant contribution to the development of the English literary language was made by W. Shakespeare, Ukrainian by T. G. Shevchenko, etc. For the development of the Russian literary language, the work of N. M. Karamzin, about whom A. S. Pushkin spoke in particular, became important. According to him, this glorious Russian historian and writer “turned it (the language) to the living sources of the folk word.” In general, all Russian classic writers (N.V. Gogol, N.A. Nekrasov, F.M. Dostoevsky, A.P. Chekhov, etc.) participated to one degree or another in the development of the modern Russian literary language.

The literary language is usually the national language. It is based on some pre-existing form of language, usually a dialect. The formation of a literary language during the formation of a nation usually occurs on the basis of one of the dialects - the dialect of the main political, economic, cultural, administrative, and religious center of the country. This dialect is a synthesis of various dialects (Urban Koine). For example, the Russian literary language was formed on the basis of the Moscow dialect. Sometimes the basis of the literary language becomes a supra-dialectal formation, for example, the language of the royal court, as in France. The Russian literary language had several sources, among them we note the Church Slavonic language, the Moscow official language (the business state language of Moscow Rus'), dialects (especially the Moscow dialect), and the languages ​​of the great Russian writers. The significance of the Church Slavonic language in the formation of the Russian literary language was noted by many historians and linguists, in particular L. V. Shcherba in the article “Modern Russian Literary Language” said: “If the Russian literary language had not grown up in the atmosphere of Church Slavonic, then that wonderful poem would have been unthinkable Pushkin’s “The Prophet,” which we still admire to this day.” Speaking about the sources of the modern Russian literary language, it is important to talk about the activities of the first Slavic teachers Cyril and Methodius, their creation of Slavic writing, and the translation of liturgical books on which many generations of Russian people were brought up. Initially, our Russian written culture was Christian; the first books in Slavic languages ​​were translations of the Gospel, Psalter, Acts of the Apostles, Apocrypha, etc. The Russian literary tradition is based on Orthodox culture, which undoubtedly affected not only works of fiction, but also the literary language.

“The foundations for the normalization of the Russian literary language were laid by the great Russian scientist and poet M. V. Lomonosov. Lomonosov unites in the concept “ Russian language» all varieties of Russian speech - command language, live oral speech with its regional variations, styles folk poetry– and recognizes the forms of the Russian language as the constructive basis of the literary language, at least two (out of three) of its main styles” (Vinogradov V.V. “Main stages in the history of the Russian language”).

The literary language in any state is distributed through schools, where children are taught in accordance with literary norms. For many centuries, the Church also played a major role here.

Concepts of literary language and language fiction are not identical, since literary language covers not only the language of fiction, but also other implementations of language: journalism, science, public administration, oratory, some forms colloquial speech. The language of fiction in linguistics is considered as a broader concept for the reason that works of fiction can include both literary linguistic forms and elements of territorial and social dialects, jargon, argot, and vernacular.

Main features of a literary language:

The presence of certain norms (rules) of word usage, stress, pronunciation, etc. (moreover, the norms are stricter than in dialects), compliance with these norms is generally binding, regardless of the social, professional and territorial affiliation of the speakers of a given language;

The desire for sustainability, for the preservation of general cultural heritage and literary and book traditions;

The adaptability of literary language to denote the entire amount of knowledge accumulated by humanity and to the implementation of abstract, logical thinking;

Stylistic richness, which consists in an abundance of synonymous means that allow one to achieve the most effective expression of thought in various speech situations.

The means of literary language appeared as a result of a long and skillful selection of the most accurate and significant words and phrases, the most appropriate grammatical forms and constructions.

The main difference between the literary language and other varieties of the national language is its strict normativity.

Let's turn to such varieties of the national language as dialect, vernacular, jargon, argot and slang, and try to identify their features.

Dialect(from the Greek dialektos - conversation, dialect, adverb) - a type of a certain language used as communication by persons connected by a close territorial, social or professional community. There are territorial and social dialects.

Territorial dialect- part of a single language, a really existing variety of it; contrasted with other dialects. The territorial dialect has differences in sound structure, grammar, word formation, and vocabulary. These differences can be small (as in Slavic languages), then people speaking different dialects understand each other. The dialects of languages ​​such as German, Chinese, and Ukrainian are very different from each other, so communication between people speaking such dialects is difficult or impossible. Examples: pan (Eastern Ukraine) – patennya (Western Ukraine); names of stork in different parts of Ukraine: blacktail , leleka ,bociun , Botsian etc.

Territorial dialect is defined as a means of communication between the population of a historically established region with specific ethnographic characteristics.

Modern dialects are the result of centuries of development. Throughout history, due to changes in territorial associations, fragmentation, unification, and regrouping of dialects occur. The most active formation of dialects occurred during the era of feudalism. With the overcoming of territorial fragmentation, old territorial boundaries within the state are being broken, and dialects are becoming closer together.

Changes in different eras relationships between dialects and literary language. Monuments of feudal times, written on the basis vernacular, reflect local dialect features.

Social dialects– languages ​​of certain social groups. For example, the professional languages ​​of hunters, fishermen, potters, merchants, group jargons or slangs of pupils, students, athletes, soldiers, etc., mainly youth groups, secret languages, argot of declassed elements, differing from the national language only in vocabulary.

Social dialects also include variants of the language of certain economic, caste, religious, etc. that differ from the national language. population groups.

Professionalisms- words and phrases characteristic of people of one profession and which, unlike terms, are semi-official names of concepts of a given profession. Professionalisms are distinguished by great differentiation in the designation of special concepts, objects, actions related to a given profession, type of activity. These, for example, are the names used by hunters for some of the properties of dogs: appetizing, polite, upper instinct, viscosity, deep crawling, smoky, unhearing, tearing, perek, walking, urge, toughness etc.

Vernacular– a colloquial language, one of the forms of the national language, which represents the oral non-codified (non-normative) sphere of national speech communication. Vernacular speech has a supra-dialectal character. Unlike dialects and jargons, speech that is generally understandable for speakers of the national language exists in every language and is communicatively significant for all speakers of the national language.

Vernacular is contrasted with literary language. Units of all language levels are represented in common parlance.

The contrast between literary language and vernacular can be traced in the area of ​​stress:

percent(space.) – percent(lit.),

agreement(space.) – CONTRACTS(lit.),

deepen(space.) – deepen(lit.),

Ringing(space.) – It's calling(lit.),

bookend(space.) – Endpaper(lit.) etc.

In the area of ​​pronunciation:

[right now] (spacious) – [ Now] (lit.),

[pshol] (spacious) – [ pashol] (lit.)

In the field of morphology:

want(space.) – want(lit.),

choice(space.) – elections(lit.),

ride(space.) – drive(lit.),

theirs(space.) – their(lit.),

here(space.) – Here(lit.)

Common speech is characterized by expressively “lowered” evaluative words with a range of shades from familiarity to rudeness, for which there are neutral synonyms in the literary language:

« shy away» – « hit»

« blurt out» – « say»

« sleep» – « sleep»

« drag» – « run away»

Vernacular is a historically developed speech system. In the Russian language, the vernacular arose on the basis of the Moscow colloquial Koine. The formation and development of vernacular speech is associated with the formation of the Russian national language. The word itself was formed from what was used in the 16th-17th centuries. phrases “simple speech” (the speech of a commoner).

Colloquial vocabulary, from one point of view, is an area of ​​illiterate speech that is entirely outside the boundaries of the literary language and does not represent a unified system. Examples: mother, nurse, clothes, cologne, business(with a negative value), slimy, ailing, spin around, be angry, from afar, the other day.

From another point of view, colloquial vocabulary is words that have a bright, reduced stylistic coloring. These words make up two groups: 1) everyday vernacular, words that are part of the literary language and have a reduced (compared to colloquial words) expressive and stylistic coloring. Examples: dunce, carrion, slap, tattered, potbellied, sleep, yell, foolishly; 2) rude, vulgar vocabulary (vulgarisms), located outside the boundaries of the literary language: bastard, bitch, rude, mug, vile, slam etc.

There is also literary vernacular, which serves as the border between the literary language and the colloquial language - a special stylistic layer of words, phraseological units, forms, figures of speech, endowed with a bright expressive coloring of “lowness”. The norm of their use is that they are allowed into the literary language with limited stylistic tasks: as a means of socio-verbal characterization of characters, for a “reduced” expressive characterization of persons, objects, events. Literary vernacular includes only those speech elements that have become entrenched in the literary language as a result of their long-term use in literary texts, after a long selection, semantic and stylistic processing. The composition of literary vernacular is fluid and constantly updated; many words and expressions have acquired the status of “colloquial” and even “bookish,” for example: “ everything will work out», « whiner», « nerd».

Conversational vocabulary– words that have a slightly reduced (compared to neutral vocabulary) stylistic coloring and are characteristic of spoken language, i.e. the oral form of a literary language, speaking in conditions of relaxed, unprepared communication. Colloquial vocabulary includes some nouns with suffixes - ah, – tai, – street(s), – un, – w(a)), – ysh, – yag(a), – yak etc. ( bearded man, lazy man, dirty guy, loudmouth, conductor, baby, poor fellow, fat man); some adjectives with suffixes – ast–, – at–,

–ovat – ( toothy, hairy, reddish); a series of verbs in - nothing(to be sarcastic, to be fashionable); some verbs with prefixes for –, on– and postfix – Xia(to chat, to look into, to pounce on, to visit); nouns and verbs formed from phrases: free rider< without a ticket, record book < grade book, bulletin < be on the ballot, as well as many others. In dictionaries these words are marked “colloquial”. All of them are uncommon in official business and scientific styles.

Jargon- a type of speech used in communication (usually oral) by a separate relatively stable social group, uniting people based on profession (jargon of drivers, programmers), position in society (jargon of the Russian nobility in the 19th century), interests (jargon of philatelists) or age (youth jargon). Jargon differs from the common language by its specific vocabulary and phraseology and the special use of word-formation devices. Part of the slang vocabulary belongs not to one, but to many (including disappeared) social groups. Moving from one jargon to another, the words "common fund" can change form and meaning. Examples: " darken"in argo - " hide the loot", later - " be cunning"(during interrogation), in modern youth slang - " speak unclearly But", " prevaricate».

The vocabulary of jargon is replenished in different ways:

due to borrowings from other languages:

dude- guy (gym)

head- bash in Tatar word head

shoes– shoes from shoes (English)

ban(computer jargon) - a software ban on the use of a certain Internet resource, imposed by the administrator from English. to ban: expel, exile

hustle – play computer games from English game

pin - play computer games from him. spiel

by abbreviations:

basketball– basketball

liters– literature

physical education- physical training

zaruba– foreign literature

diser– dissertation

by rethinking common words:

« jerk" - go

« unfasten» – give part of the money

« wheelbarrow» – car

Jargon can be open or closed. According to O. Jespersen, in open groups (youth) jargon is a collective game. In closed groups, jargon is also a signal that distinguishes friend and foe, and sometimes a means of conspiracy (secret language).

Jargon expressions are quickly replaced by new ones:

50-60s of the twentieth century: money - tugriks

70s of the twentieth century money - coins, money(s)

80s of the twentieth century and at the present moment - money, green, cabbage etc.

Jargon vocabulary penetrates into the literary language through vernacular and the language of fiction, where it is used as a means of speech characterization.

Jargon is a means of contrasting oneself with the rest of society.

Argo – special language limited social or professional group, consisting of arbitrarily selected modified elements of one or more natural language. Argo is used more often as a means of hiding objects of communication, and also as a means of isolating a group from the rest of society. Argo is considered a means of communication among declassed elements, widespread among the underworld (thieves' argot, etc.).

The basis of argot is a specific vocabulary that widely includes foreign language elements (in Russian - Gypsy, German, English). Examples:

Fenya- language

feather - knife

tail - surveillance

stand on guard, stand on the lookout - stand guard during the commission of a crime, warning of approaching danger

bucks– dollars, foreign currency

in kind- Right

settling tank– the place where pre-sale preparation of a stolen car is carried out

move with your girl- steal a car

box- garage

registration– illegal connection to the car’s security system

great-grandfather - Land Cruiser Prada

work as a horse - transport the loot from the owner's apartment.

Slang– 1) the same as jargon, slang is more often used in relation to the jargon of English-speaking countries; 2) a set of jargon that makes up a layer of colloquial speech, reflecting a familiar, sometimes humorous attitude towards the subject of speech. Used in casual communication: mura, dregs, blat, buzz.

Elements of slang quickly disappear, being replaced by others, sometimes passing into the literary language, leading to the emergence of semantic and stylistic differences.

The main problems of the modern Russian language in the communicative sphere: obscene vocabulary (foul language), unjustified borrowings, jargon, argotisms, vulgarisms.

The Russian language is the national language of the great Russian people. In national languages ​​that developed over large territories, local dialects or dialects are usually distinguished. They also exist in the national Russian language. There are two main dialects on the territory of Russia: Northern Russian and Southern Russian. They differ from each other in certain ways in pronunciation, grammatical forms and vocabulary. For example: in the Northern Russian dialect they pronounce water(“will be doused”), they are coming (t solid), a vessel with a long handle for drawing water is called ladle; in the southern Russian dialect they pronounce yes(“akayat”), they go (t soft), and the same vessel for drawing water is called short

Between the Northern Russian and Southern Russian dialects there is a strip of Central Russian dialects, in which there are features of both dialects, for example: representatives of Central Russian dialects pronounce yes(“akayut” is a feature of the southern Russian dialect), they are coming (t solid - a feature of the Northern Russian dialect), a vessel with a long handle for drawing water is called ladle(a feature of the Northern Russian dialect).

Dialects are not of great importance in established national languages ​​(for example, in modern Russian): with their help, relatively small groups of the population, mainly older rural residents, communicate with each other. A much larger role is played in developed languages ​​by literary language: it serves as a means of communication for the overwhelming number of people who speak a given language, and is used for a wide variety of purposes. A literary language grows on the basis of some local dialect; for example, the Russian literary language grew on the basis of Central Russian dialects. The main role in the formation of the Russian literary language was played by Moscow with its government institutions, scientific and educational institutions and theaters. Writers, scientists and public figures. Currently, the Russian literary language is the main part of the national Russian language.

Word literary means “written”, “bookish”, but the name is not entirely accurate, since a literary language can be not only written (bookish), but also oral (spoken).

Literary language has served and serves all the diverse and rich life Russian nation. Therefore, the vocabulary of a literary language is many times richer than the vocabulary of any local dialect, and its grammar is more flexible and rich in forms.

A. M. Gorky emphasized this side of the literary language in the following words: “... starting with Pushkin, our classics selected the most accurate, bright, weighty words from the chaos of speech and created that “great, beautiful language” to serve further development whom Turgenev begged Leo Tolstoy.”

The most important feature of a literary language is its normativity. Pronunciation, choice of words, use of grammatical forms - all this is subject to known norms and rules in a literary language; for example, you cannot say “youth”, “author”, “officer”, “use”, “identify”, “perspective”, “confirm”, “on both sides”, “pay for travel”, etc.; necessary: youth, authors, officers, use, legitimize, perspective, state, on both sides, pay for travel(or pay for travel) etc. Norms in a literary language are considered to be historically established patterns of pronunciation, use of words and grammatical forms approved by the majority of speakers. Despite some fluctuations and inevitable variability (in connection with the development of the literary language and its interaction with dialects), the norms of the literary language are a necessary condition for its existence: without them, the literary language could not be preserved. Hence the need to strengthen the norms of literary speech, the importance of the struggle for the purity and correctness of the language. Compliance with the norms of literary speech ensures greater unity of the language, greater accuracy of expression and ease of understanding, in other words, communication in a given language is facilitated.

The concept of modern Russian literary language. Literary language, dialects and vernacular.

Literary language- a national written language, the language of official and business documents, school education, written communication, science, journalism, fiction, all manifestations of culture expressed in verbal form (written and sometimes oral), perceived by native speakers of this language as exemplary. Literary language is the language of literature in a broad sense. The Russian literary language functions both in oral form and in written form.

Signs of a literary language:

1) the presence of writing;

2) normalization is a fairly stable way of expression that expresses historically established patterns of development of the Russian literary language. Standardization is based on the language system and is enshrined in the best examples literary works. This method expressions are preferred by the educated part of society;

3) codification, i.e. fixed in scientific literature; this is expressed in availability grammar dictionaries and other books containing rules for using the language;

4) stylistic diversity, i.e. the variety of functional styles of the literary language;

5) relative stability;

6) prevalence;

7) common use;

8) universal obligatory;

9) compliance with the use, customs and capabilities of the language system.

The protection of the literary language and its norms is one of the main tasks of speech culture. Literary language unites people linguistically. The leading role in the creation of a literary language belongs to the most advanced part of society.

Each language, if sufficiently developed, has two main functional varieties: literary language and lively spoken language. Every person masters live spoken language from early childhood. The mastery of a literary language occurs throughout human development until old age.

Literary language must be generally understandable, that is, accessible to all members of society. Literary language must be developed to such an extent as to be able to serve the main areas of human activity. In speech, it is important to observe the grammatical, lexical, spelling and accentological norms of the language. Based on this, important task linguists is to consider everything new in a literary language from the point of view of compliance with the general laws of language development and the optimal conditions for its functioning.

The modern Russian literary language is multifunctional, i.e. it performs the functions of the everyday language of literate people, the language of science, journalism, public administration, the language of culture, literature, education, media mass media etc.

However, in certain situations the functions of the literary language may be limited (for example, it may function mainly in written speech, while territorial dialects are used in oral speech).

Literary language is used in various spheres of public and individual activities person. Literary language differs from the language of fiction, but at the same time it seems to be formed from it. The main feature of the language of fiction is that it performs a great aesthetic function.

The language of fiction is a special system of language, formed on the basis ethnic language and being its functional variety.

One of the most basic properties of the language of fiction is the preservation of the text and the provision of communication between generations. It is used exclusively in works of art.

Artistic speech is characterized by the use of all linguistic means. Linguistic means include not only words and expressions of the literary language, but also elements of vernacular, jargon, and territorial dialects.

The language of fiction is closely related to the system of images works of art, it widely uses epithets, metaphors, personification (animation of inanimate objects), etc. Many means of literary language acquire a special function: antonyms, synonyms are used to more colorfully describe the characters, their characters, habits, habits, etc.

The usual concept of a linguistic norm is not applicable to the language of fiction. In the language of fiction, everything that serves to accurately express the author’s thoughts is correct. This is the main difference between the language of fiction and literary language.

In the language of fiction there can be literary and non-literary speech, correct and incorrect words, phrases and sentences, etc.

Dialects perform functions different from the literary language. They have different scales of action. Territorial dialects are also called local dialects, since each dialect is limited by its place of distribution, i.e., in a certain territory of the country, linguistic forms unique to that territory are used. This is due to the fact that the language in a certain territorial space is stratified.

The peculiarity of the territorial dialect is that it is used only in everyday life, that is, when communicating between people in areas not related to business, official public communication.

And, besides the function of everyday communication, territorial dialects do not have any other functions, unlike the literary language, which has many various functions, one of which is communication in everyday life.

Any territorial dialect has its own special, characteristic features or, in other words, has its own norms. These characteristic features are expressed by sound structure, grammar, vocabulary, word formation, etc. However, these norms cannot be mandatory for everyone.

This is another feature of the territorial dialect, since the norms of the literary language are generally binding for all persons using the language. Therefore, the norms of the territorial dialect can only be called norms conditionally.

Territorial dialects are certain words, phrases that define the name of any objects, actions, phenomena, etc. It happens that the same word in different territorial dialects has different meaning or words or phrases found in a certain territorial dialect coincide in sound or even spelling with a word or phrase in a literary language, but their meaning in the territorial dialect is completely different.

Three main features can be identified that distinguish dialects from the standard language:

1) limited use of a territorial dialect in a certain territory;

2) the territorial dialect performs only one function - communication in everyday life;

3) lack of universal binding for all users of the language.

Vernacular is the use of certain words and phrases by one people or another; it is considered a national phenomenon. Vernacular language is used by persons who do not speak or have less knowledge of the norms of the literary language. Vernacular speech does not have such a feature as territorial limitation. Vernacular speech does not have strictly defined norms, i.e. in common speech a variety of forms of words and phrases can be used.

2. Speech culture: subject and objectives of the course. Related disciplines. The main components of speech culture.

Speech culture is such a set and such an organization of linguistic means that

a certain communication situation while observing modern language norms and

communication ethics make it possible to ensure the greatest effect in achieving

set communication tasks.

We will try to prove the necessity of each of the components of this

definitions. Total of them five, including three components of speech culture:

1) normative;

2) communicative;

3) ethical; and also:

4) selection and organization of linguistic means as a necessary condition for achieving

normativity, ethics and good communicative properties of speech;

5) effectiveness of communication as the ultimate goal of speech culture. Let's start with the latest

components.

Speech culture begins where language provides the opportunity to choose and

different organization of their funds to best achieve their goals

communication purposes. The selection and organization of linguistic means is carried out on

different levels of the language system for all components of speech culture. Question

about a norm arises when there are two or more contenders for it:

normative kilometer or non-normative kilometer, normative agreement or

less normative agreement, etc.

The ethical component, on the one hand, regulates in different situations

communication, the choice between, for example, such ritual ways of expressing

farewells, like Goodbye, All the best, Well, hello, etc., and, on the other hand

parties, prohibits swear words to express, for example, emotions. For

In order to achieve communicative perfection of a text, both choice and

organization of linguistic means both within the sentence and within

text. Sentences expressing one thought such as It will begin to rain

Fungi will grow and, under conditions of high humidity, you can expect active

mushroom growth are implemented in texts of different functional varieties.

It is quite clear that systemic phonetic, lexical and grammatical

descriptions of the literary language in general and modern Russian literary

language in particular is also recorded literary norm, but unlike

studies on speech culture, they also record those norms - and there are a large number of them

set - which are not associated with choice. It does not follow from this that

descriptions of the language system do not provide information about the variants that stand on the border

or beyond the boundaries of the literary language. It is necessary to clearly understand that

Speech culture as a scientific discipline is impossible without relying on normative

dictionaries and grammars. But, on the other hand, it does not follow from this that

Speech culture is not an independent discipline, but a “squeeze” from systemic

normative descriptions of language. Firstly, it is the culture of speech that is responsible

codification of the norm, and therefore the connection between normative system descriptions of language and

Speech culture in its normative component is two-sided. And secondly, and this

most importantly, not a single systematic description of a language aims to determine

ways to achieve maximum communication efficiency.

The effectiveness of communication is the “end product”, the creation of which

The theory of speech culture should facilitate its practical application. Under

By communicating effectively, we understand the optimal way to achieve

set communication goals. Communicative goals of close communication

are related in a way to the basic functions of language. Well known system

language features developed by P.O. Jacobson. The reference,

emotive, magical, factual, metalinguistic (assessment of linguistic

means), poetic functions. Already this simple list of functions

shows that the purpose of communication is a complex and multidimensional phenomenon.

The aesthetic function of language, realized in

the language of fiction. Language of fiction

it is inappropriate to make speech culture an object, since this is an area

art with its own specific laws, which differ sharply from

laws of implementation of other functions of language and which are therefore studied by special

linguistic discipline. The different purposes of communication can be considered as

some specification of the language functions. Such specification for understanding

culture of language proficiency is necessary because to achieve

For different purposes, language means and their implementation can be very different.

Thus, the goal of establishing contact between speakers presupposes, first

In total, the very fact of communication, and for achieving it is not very important, for example,

so necessary for scientific text quality like consistency

wording.

The communicative skill is primarily responsible for the effectiveness of communication.

component of speech culture, but this does not mean that normative and ethical

components are insignificant for the effectiveness of communication. Violation of normativity

may simply lead to misunderstanding if, for example, instead of a normative

well-known, some little-known dialect or

slang word, but more often in this case the effectiveness decreases in another way,

rather a pragmatic-psychological reason than a linguistic one:

non-normative use reveals the speaker’s lack of education and

encourages the listener to react accordingly to what is said.

suffered seriously precisely from the fact that these deputies discovered a weak

mastery of the norms of the modern Russian literary language. Similar

affects the effectiveness of communication and violation of ethical

communication norms: unethical address to the interlocutor, use of

so-called obscene language, etc. can completely interrupt communication

reason, which in everyday life is formulated like this: “I don’t want to be with this boor at all.”

speak".

It would be wrong to think that the foundations of cultural theory developed here

speeches are created from scratch. All three named components of speech culture

have been studied one way or another, but these studies, as already noted,

were carried out separately and for different purposes. Ethical component of culture

speech was studied in another area of ​​linguistics - in the description of language for purposes

his teaching as a non-native. And this is understandable, because ethics of communication,

ethical prohibitions in different languages ​​are different and cannot automatically

transfer from one language to another. In Russian, for example, much

Addressing “you” is more widespread than in Western European languages.

As for the communicative aspect of speech culture, in general Russians

traditional ideas on this matter were outside linguistics. This

the aspect of communication, as stated, was also considered in rhetoric. Fine

It is known that rhetoric is one of the achievements of ancient civilization. Antique

rhetoric was usually defined as a form of art with a strictly defined purpose

The art of persuasion. The main parts of ancient rhetoric were: finding

the subject, the arrangement of the material, its verbal expression.

If we remain on the understanding of rhetoric dating back to ancient culture as

oratory to persuade or the later understanding of rhetoric as

the art of not only oral, but also written speech with different purposes

orientation, then for the theory of speech culture, focused on the average

native speaker, such rhetoric cannot automatically enter as

a necessary component in speech culture as a scientific discipline. It would be

It is unrealistic to set the goal of teaching everyone the art of words, such art is

the lot of the few. But, on the other hand, there is no doubt that the achievements

Rhetorical studies are useful for the culture of speech. In particular, good

the theory of speech culture should not only provide a basis for standard

implementable paths to mastering language as an art. It should, however,

note another thing: often in lately rhetoric is understood as something

something that, in principle, everyone can own, and then in terminological terms

the concept of “rhetorical” or “communicative component of speech culture” is not enough

how they differ from each other. We prefer the term "communicative

component of speech culture" only because we do not want to "compromise"

ancient understanding of rhetoric as an art.

The task of creating a culture of speech as a special linguistic discipline

requires combining all three components of speech culture into a single, integral

theoretical concept. One of the motives for such a union has already been named: all

three components work to achieve one goal - effective communication.

There is another motive. Whatever component of speech culture is discussed,

the norm is always meant, i.e. selection and legitimation of one or more

options as normative. Therefore, it would undoubtedly be correct

call the components of speech culture not just ethical and communicative, but

components of ethical and communicative norms. And if we don't,

this is only because then the name “normative norm” would sound absurd.

Based on the above, speech culture can be defined as a discipline

studying a literary norm and codifying this norm, which in relation to

the normative component has almost always been done. It is normativity

forces us to treat the culture of speech as a single discipline, and not

a simple conglomerate of different disciplines.

It appears to be one of the most weak points research on

speech culture is the lack of a special methodology for such research,

which, by the way, prevents many from considering the culture of speech scientific

discipline. Perhaps the only study on culture can be named

speech, in which, based on strict statistical methods, it is determined

frequency of options different levels language system. In other cases

one of the options is codified as the only or preferable one, or

based on the investigator’s instincts and judgment, or based on the opinion

Thus, if the culture of speech wants to exist as a special

linguistic discipline, a single complete consistent

the theory of this discipline with its rather strict methodology. Let's consider

a little more detail in terms of creating such a theory of the components of speech culture.

The concept of norm. Variation of the norm. Types of norms. Dynamic nature of the norm. Reasons influencing changes in norms.

Norm- these are existing in given time in a given linguistic community, linguistic units and patterns of their use are obligatory for all members of the collective, and these obligatory units can be the only possible ones, or act as variants coexisting within the literary language.
Changes in norms are preceded by the appearance of their variants, which actually exist in the language at a certain stage of development and are actively used by its speakers. Variants of norms are reflected in dictionaries of the modern Russian language.
Three degrees of normativity:
1) Strict, tough, does not allow options
2) Neutral, allows equivalent options
3) More flexible, allows forms of colloquial and obsolete language
Variants (doublets) are varieties of the same linguistic unit that have the same meaning and are found at different language levels. They can be equal, i.e. interchangeable in all situations, regardless of speech style, and unequal - semantic and normative - chronological.
Dynamics and historical variability of the norm.
The norm is one of the conditions for stability, unity and national identity. language. It is wrong to think that the norm is fixed; it develops and changes over time, and the degree of mobility of the norm is not the same at different language levels.
The norm is a developing phenomenon, not always predictable.
In the Old Russian language there were 3 numbers (table, 2 tables, tables). Since the 18th century, the form of the dual number has been destroyed, but it has been preserved:
1)Im. P. pl. Ch. Nouns denoting paired objects (horns, sleeves, eyes, shores, etc.)
2) R.p. units h. + numerals (2,3,4) ending -a displaces -s: train-trains (in the 19th century - trains; tractor- 1940 tractors-1963 a=s)
The sources of changes in the norms of the literary language are:
Live spoken language
Local dialects
Vernacular
Professional jargons
Other languages

Main reasons speech errors:
1. Misunderstanding the meaning of the word
2. Lexical compatibility
3. Use of synonyms
4. Use of homonyms
5. Consumption polysemantic words
6. Verbosity
7. Lexical incompleteness of the statement
8. New words
9. Outdated words
10. Words of foreign origin
11. Dialectisms
12. Colloquial and colloquial words
13. Professional jargon
14. Phraseologisms

4. Orthoepic and accentological norms of the modern Russian language.

Stress norms, or accentological norms, are violated especially often. This is explained, firstly, by the fact that the variability of norms leads to the inevitable (albeit temporary) coexistence of old and new variants, and this gives rise to hesitation in choosing one of them, and secondly, by the difficulty of mastering stress, which in the Russian language is heterogeneous and mobile: passport, arrest, protocol, etc. When forming the grammatical forms of a word, it often moves from one syllable to another: river - rivers, head - heads, etc.

1. Strengthening the grammatical function of stress

At the same time, the very direction in the historical movement of accents can even be the opposite: to the initial syllable (butt - butt, ploughshare - ploughshare) - to the final syllable (lip - lip, ski track - ski track). However, in both cases, the change in emphasis was useful and justified. As a result, a clearer opposition of grammatical forms arose. Wed: genitive singular lips, ploughshare - nominative plural lips, ploughshare.

2. An important feature of the development of stress is the assignment of outdated or incoming variants to stable combinations or phraseological units. Usually they say: hit the forehead, but drag across the forehead; take sin per capita, but per capita. The dependence of stress on constructively determined semantic differences is clearly manifested when using short forms of some adjectives: his exploits are great, but his boots (to whom?) are too big; These people are not thin, but plump, but they are full of (what?) new ideas.

3. It is known that for some words the choice of stress depends on the lexical meaning (glacier - “cellar with ice”, glacier - “accumulation of ice in the mountains”; armor - “cover with armor”, armor - “secure something”, etc.) p.).

As a result of comparative observations, a historically multidirectional movement of stress was discovered:

regressive- moving from the last syllable to the beginning or closer to the beginning of the word, progressive- moving the stress from the first syllable to the end or closer to the end of the word.

Research indicates that regressive accentological development now prevails in the following groups of accent variants: a) in two- and three-syllable masculine names: cooper > cooper, otsvet > otsvet, etc.; b) for three-, four-, five-syllable verb forms in the past tense: postlala > postlala, tore > tore, born > was born, resold > resold, etc.; c) for the present-future tense forms of verbs: will include > will include, will modify > will modify, etc.

Progressive accentological development predominates in the following groups of accent variants:

a) for derivatives of three- and four-syllable adjectives: tiger > tiger, great-grandfather's > great-grandfather's, factory > factory, etc.;

b) for two- and three-syllable forms of the infinitive: to fish > to fish, to rein in > to rein in, to rust > to rust, etc.;

c) for some two-syllable prefixed verbs in past tense forms: sipped > sipped, poured > poured, etc.;

d) in case forms of one- and two-syllable nouns and short forms plural adjectives: stem > stem, milk mushroom > milk mushroom, hill > hill, close > close, true > true, etc.

Naturally, to establish the norm of stress, it is not enough to know only the direction of accentological movements. Trends in stress movement are a necessary but only approximate guide. The concept of the norm of verbal stress is individual and consists of a sum of features, an important place among which belongs to the sphere of use of a particular word, public assessment and understanding of this stress against the background of historical and literary tradition.

Pronunciation of vowel sounds

The main feature of Russian literary pronunciation in the area of ​​vowels is their different sound in stressed and unstressed syllables with the same spelling. In unstressed syllables, vowels are reduced. There are two types of reduction - quantitative (when the length and strength of the sound decreases) and qualitative (when the sound itself changes in an unstressed position). Vowels in the 1st pre-stressed syllable undergo less reduction, and more in all other syllables. The vowels [a], [o], [e] are subject to both quantitative and qualitative reduction in unstressed syllables; The vowels [i], [ы], [у] do not change their quality in unstressed syllables, but partially lose their duration.

1. Vowels in the 1st pre-stressed syllable:

a) after hard consonants in place of o and a, a weakened sound [a] is pronounced: in [a] yes, n[a] ga, M[a]skva, s[a]dy, z[a]bor; after the hard hissing zh and sh, in place of a and o, a weakened sound [a] is also pronounced: zh[a]ra, zh[a]ngler, sh[a]gi, sh[a]fer.

Note 1. After hard hissing w, w and after c, before soft consonants, a sound like [s] with an overtone [e] is pronounced, conventionally designated [ee]: zh[ye]let, to sozh[ye]leniyu, zh[ye]ket, in in the plural forms of the word horse: losh[ye]day, losh[ye]dyam, etc.. in the forms of indirect cases of numerals in -twenty: twenty[ye]ti, thirty[ye]ti, etc.; in rare cases, the sound [ые] is pronounced in place a in the position before hard consonants: rzh[ye]noy. w[ye]smin.

Note 2. Unstressed [o] is pronounced in conjunctions but and what, and is also allowed in some foreign words, for example: b[o]á, b[o]mond. rococo. F[o]res.

Note 3. Preservation of o in unstressed syllables is a feature of regional pronunciation, therefore the pronunciation is M[o]skva, p[o]kupka, p[o]edem, v[o]zit. the station is not up to standard;

b) after the hard hissing w, sh and c, in place of e, a reduced sound like [s] with an overtone [e] is pronounced, conventionally designated [ые]: zh[ye]na, w[ye]ptat, ts[ye]luy;

c) after soft consonants in place of the letters i and e, as well as after soft hissing ch and shch in place of a, a weakened sound [i] with an overtone [e] is pronounced, conventionally designated [ie]: m[ie]snoy, R[ie ]zan, m[ie]sti, ch[ie]sy, sh[ie]dit, as well as in the plural forms of the word area: area[ie]dey, area[ie]dyam, etc.;

d) in place of i and e at the beginning of the word, the sound [i] is pronounced with the overtone [e], denoted [ie] in combination with the preceding [th]: [yie]zda, [yie]antar, [yie]ytso.

Note. Preservation of [a] in an unstressed syllable after soft consonants is a feature of regional pronunciation, therefore the pronunciation of [v’a]zat, bina, ch[a]sý, [ya]ytsó, [ya]vitsya does not correspond to the norm.

2. Vowels in other unstressed syllables:

a) at the absolute beginning of a word, in place of the letters a and o, a weakened sound [a] is always pronounced: [a] watermelon: [a] knó, [a] car, [a] deflection;

b) after hard consonants in unstressed syllables, except for the 1st pre-stressed syllable, in place of a and o a reduced sound is pronounced, average in sound between [a] and [ы], short in duration, conventionally designated [ъ]: g[ъ] lova, k[b]randash, apple[b]k[b];

c) after soft consonants in unstressed syllables, except for the 1st pre-stressed syllable, in place of a/ya and e, a reduced one is pronounced, average in sound between [i] and [e], short in duration, designated conventionally [b]: [p' b]tachok, [l'j]sorub, you[n'j]su, h[b]lovek.

3. The vowel and at the beginning of the root after a prefix or preposition ending in hard consonants is pronounced as [s]: from the institute - i[zy]institute, with Igor - [sy]gor; maintaining [and] in this position and softening the consonant before it is a regional feature of pronunciation and does not correspond to the norm.

4. Stressed vowel sounds in place of e and e. Difficulties arise in the pronunciation of a number of words due to the inability to distinguish between the letters e and e in printed text, because to designate them only the letter e is used (except educational literature for younger schoolchildren and foreign students). This situation leads to a distortion of not only the graphic, but also the phonetic appearance of the word, and causes frequent pronunciation errors. Therefore, it is recommended to remember two sets of words:

A) with the letter e, in the place of which it sounds [e]: scam, spineless, bluff, being, icy conditions, firebrand, grenadier, stout, life, foreign, procession (but godfather), fishing line, non-existence, perplexed, unappreciated, guardianship, sedentary (settled life), successor, legal successor, surveillance, modern, yoke, barley, etc.;

b) with the letter е, in its place it sounds [o]: hopeless, veder, engraver, bile (permissible bile), bilious (permissible bile), mockery, traveling salesman, priest (but priest), maneuvers, mercenary, convicted, brought in , translated, brought, sturgeon, fable, laid down, brought, brought, obscene, scrupulous, belt, smart, tesha, fur (coarse-haired), lye, etc.

In some pairs of words, different meanings are accompanied by different sounds of the stressed vowel [o] or [e]: expired (term) - expired (in blood), catechumen (screams like a catechumen) - catechumen (decree), perfect (singing) - perfect (opening) .

Consonants before "e"

In foreign language non-Russified words, the consonants before e are not softened, as in native Russian ones. This applies primarily to dental consonants (except l) - t, d, s, z, n, r.

Hard [t] is pronounced in such words

atheism, atelier, stand, aesthetics

The hard [t] is also preserved in the foreign language prefix inter-:

in[te]rview

as well as in a number of geographical names and other proper names:

Ams[te]rdam, Dan[te]

The sound [d] is not softened in the words code, model, modern, etc., as well as in such geographical names and last names like

Delhi, Rhodesia Descartes, Mendelssohn

The sounds [z] and [s] are pronounced firmly only in a few words:

[s]entence, mor[ze]

Also hard [z] and [s] are found in first and last names, such as

Joseph, Seneca

The sound [n] also remains solid in first and last names

Re[ne], [ne]lson)

Most words are pronounced with a hard [n], but there are cases when the [n] before e is softened:

neolithic, neologism

But in most words of foreign origin, the consonants before e are softened in accordance with the norms of Russian literary pronunciation, therefore pronunciation such as

pro[fe]ssor, ag[re]ssor, [re]t, etc.

Phraseological tracing papers.

Phraseological tracing paper is a stable combination of words,

which arose in the Russian language as a result of the literal translation of a foreign language

phraseology.

For example: struggle for life (English struggle for life), smash completely (German.

aufs Haupt schlagen), paper does not turn red (lat. epistola non erubescit), with

bird's eye view (French a vol d'oiseau), from the bottom of my heart (French de tout mon

Variants of noun suffixes

1. In the pairs sparrows - sparrows, pebble - pebble, the first variants (with the suffixes -yshek, -eshek) are used in a neutral style, and the second (with the suffix -ushki) have a folk and colloquial connotation.

In a pair of edges - edges, the first word has a colloquial connotation, and the second is dialectal.

2. In the pairs loznyak - loznik, birch forest - birch forest, the second options (with the suffix -nik) are dialectal.

Variants of case forms of nouns.

In addition to the main ending, which the vast majority of nouns of a given declension have, there may be variant endings, which are possessed by relatively small categories of words (along with the main ones). Most often, forms with variant endings differ from the main ones stylistically, less often - semantically, and sometimes these differences are combined.

1st declension

Genitive case of masculine nouns. Along with the main ending -a/-zsome ranks nouns masculine in certain conditions have a variant ending -у/-у.

Variant forms with endings -у/-у may have:

1) real nouns when denoting measure, quantity: “piece” cheese", "cup kefir", "cup tea", "few pepper", "many snow";

2) real and abstract nouns when denoting an object to which the action applies partially (genitive disjunctive): “add sugar", "pour soup", "let loose cold",
"catch up fear";Wed Also: " I'm on my way,“Kisa,” said Ostap” (I. and P.); "Give me Narzan", – asked Berlioz" (M. Bulg.);

3) abstract nouns when denoting the degree of quantity of a feature: “little in order", "so many noise", "many shine"; cf. also: "Everyone about the glasses only lied to me, but no use there is not a hair in them" (Wing);

4) nouns with the meaning of undivided plurality when denoting quantity, in negative constructions: “many to the people", "so many loss", "no income";

5 ) abstract and concrete nouns with prepositions without, for, to, from, from, with(with) in combinations of an adverbial character: “I lined the shelf with rows of books. I read, read, but that’s all no use" (P.); "Once upon a time in the cold, winter, I from the forest came out" (N. Nekr.).

Variant forms on -у/-у
assigned (as “mandatory”) to a number of phraseological units:
give up, there’s no mention of it, don’t let it go, don’t let it go, with the world by thread, without clan without tribe, our regiment has arrived, face to face etc. In others: phraseological units along with forms on -у/-у Basic forms are also possible: don't show it(kind), mosquito on the nose(nose)
won’t undermine, I’ll hang up(lights out)No etc.

Forms on -у/-у
are used mainly in lively colloquial speech and in the genres of fiction that reflect it, being one of the features of the conversational style. A typical example: “Yes... I also saw a ram. Weight one hundred thirty kilograms. Faces - in!" (V.Sol.). Compare and " I'm on my way, Kitty...". In general, these forms are gradually declining. Their use is mandatory in two cases: 1) as part of a number of phraseological units (see above); 2) and nouns with diminutive suffixes (mainly in -OK (-yok ):cheesecake, coffee, tea, honey, Also kefir man(in combinations of a quantitative nature).

Prepositional masculine nouns. Basic ending 1st declension -e
has most nouns: in the din, in(O)city, in makeup, in(O)jazz, in an alley, in a stadium, on a chair;about the fountain, in the refrigerator, about the hero, in May, in the barn etc.

Each national language includes a standard language and territorial dialects. Literary, or "standard", is called a language everyday communication, official business documents, school education, writing, science, culture, fiction. His distinguishing feature – normalization, i.e. the presence of rules, compliance with which is mandatory for all members of society. They are enshrined in grammars, reference books and dictionaries of the modern Russian language. Dialect (Greek διάλεκτος - “adverb” from the Greek διαλέγομαι - “to speak, express”) is a type of language that is used as a means of communication between people connected by the same territory. Dialects also have their own language laws. However, they are not clearly understood by the speakers of dialects - rural residents, much less have a written embodiment in the form of rules. Russian dialects are characterized only by oral form existence, in contrast to a literary language, which has both oral and written forms.
Speak, or dialect, is one of the main concepts of dialectology. A dialect is the smallest territorial variety of a language. It is spoken by residents of one or more villages. The scope of the dialect is narrower than the scope of the literary language, which is a means of communication for everyone who speaks Russian.
Literary language and dialects constantly interact and influence each other. The influence of the literary language on dialects is, of course, stronger than that of dialects on the literary language. His influence spreads through schooling, television, radio. Gradually, dialects are destroyed and lose their characteristic features. Many words denoting rituals, customs, concepts, and household items of a traditional village have gone and are leaving along with the people of the older generation. That is why it is so important to record the living language of the village as completely and in detail as possible.
In our country, for a long time, a disdainful attitude towards local dialects as a phenomenon that needs to be combated prevailed. But it wasn't always like this. On mid-19th V. in Russia there is a peak of public interest in folk speech. At this time, “The Experience of the Regional Great Russian Dictionary” (1852) was published, where dialect words were specially collected for the first time, and “ Dictionary living Great Russian language" by Vladimir Ivanovich Dahl in 4 volumes (1863–1866), also including large number dialect words. Amateurs actively helped collect materials for these dictionaries Russian literature 2. Magazines and provincial bulletins of that time published various kinds of ethnographic sketches, dialect descriptions, and dictionaries of local sayings from issue to issue.
The opposite attitude towards dialects was observed in the 30s. of our century. In the era of the breakdown of the village - the period of collectivization - the destruction of old methods of farming was proclaimed, family life, the culture of the peasantry, i.e. all manifestations of the material and spiritual life of the village. A negative attitude towards dialects has spread in society. For the peasants themselves, the village turned into a place from which they had to flee in order to save themselves, to forget everything connected with it, including the language. An entire generation of rural residents, having deliberately abandoned their language, at the same time failed to perceive a new language system for them - the literary language - and master it. All this led to the decline of language culture in society.
Respectful and careful attitude dialects are common to many peoples. For us, the experience of Western European countries is interesting and instructive: Austria, Germany, Switzerland, France. For example, in schools in a number of French provinces, an elective in the native dialect has been introduced, a mark for which is included in the certificate. In Germany and Switzerland, literary-dialectal bilingualism and constant communication in the dialect in the family are generally accepted. In Russia at the beginning of the 19th century. educated people, coming from the village to the capital, spoke the literary language, and at home, on their estates, communicating with neighbors and peasants, they often used the local dialect.
Nowadays, people who speak a dialect have an ambiguous attitude towards their language. In their minds, the native dialect is assessed in two ways: 1) through comparison with other, neighboring dialects and 2) through comparison with the literary language. The emerging opposition between “one’s own” (one’s own dialect) and “alien” has different meanings. In the first case, when “foreign” is a different dialect, it is often perceived as something bad, ridiculous, something that can be laughed at, and “ours” – as correct, pure (Peculiarities of pronunciation are often fixed in nicknames. Thus, you can hear: “Yes, we call them shchimyaki, they are on sch They say; here, for example, tickling(Now)").

In the second case, “one’s own” is assessed as bad, “gray”, incorrect, and “alien” - literary language - as good. This attitude towards the literary language is completely justified and understandable: thereby its cultural value is realized.

The science that studies territorial varieties of language - local talk, or dialects, is called dialectology(from the Greek dialektos “talk, adverb” and logos “word, teaching”).