Our language in action. Culture of oral speech Kostomarov our language in action pdf
Basic Facts:
Born January 3, 1930, Moscow. - Doctor of Philology, professor. - Corresponding member of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of the USSR from March 4, 1974, - Full member of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of the USSR from May 23, 1985, - Full member of the RAO from April 7, 1993. - Member of the Department of Education and Culture.
Works in the field: - Russian. linguistics, sociolinguistics, linguodidactics, linguistic methods, etc.
A number of works are devoted to linguistic and regional studies - the theory and practice of language teaching in connection with the study of the culture of its native people.
Researched the problems of speech culture ("Culture of Speech and Style". 1960).
Deals with issues of improving the content and methods of teaching Russian. language in national and foreign schools, training and advanced training grew. and zarub. Russian teachers language. - STATE PRIZE of the USSR (1979) for the comprehensive textbook “Russian Language for Everyone” (ed. 13 editions, 1970-1989), - PRIZE of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of the USSR named after. N.K. Krupskaya (1979) for the textbook “Language and Culture” (1983, jointly with E.M. Vereshchagin).
Vitaly Grigorievich Kostomarov: “Live without disturbing others” 
Vitaly Grigorievich Kostomarov - President of the State Institute of Russian Language named after. A.S. Pushkin. Academician of the Russian Academy of Education, honorary doctor of the Humboldt University of Berlin, Bratislava named after. Comenius, Shanghai and Heilongjiang Universities in China, Ulaanbaatar University, Millbury College (USA), Doctor of Philology, Professor, Honored Scientist of the Russian Federation. - Founder of the scientific school of methods of teaching Russian as a foreign language. - Laureate of the State Prize of the USSR, the Prize of the President of the Russian Federation in the field of education. - V.G. Kostomarov is one of the first scientists to be awarded the Pushkin Medal.
!! - By decision of the Council of Tula State University in 2004, he was elected an honorary doctor.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
YAKUTSK. On November 19, the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) celebrates Russian Language Day. The All-Russian scientific and practical conference “Current problems of functioning, teaching and studying the Russian language and literature in modern conditions”, which began on November 17, is dedicated to this day. A famous linguist, President of the International Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature (MAPRYAL) Vitaly Kostomarov, representatives of the Russian Language Institute came to Yakutsk to participate in the conference. A. S. Pushkin, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia, St. Petersburg and Vladivostok State Universities.
Vitaly Grigoryevich Kostomarov does not hold the opinion that the Russian language is dying and losing its power. On the contrary, it enriches itself by gaining international prestige. More than 450 million people in the world speak Russian. Recently, there has been interest in the language in eastern countries. Pushkin also said that the Russian language itself is communal and relatable. “Yes, it’s difficult for our language now, but all the husks will fall off, the American madness will pass and the Russian language will become even richer,” said V. Kostomarov. “We need to get used to the fact that the standardized Russian language can no longer serve modern society.” Professor at the Institute of Russian Language named after. A. S. Pushkin Yuri Prokhorov stated that it is not the language that is experiencing difficulties, but communicative behavior.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vitaly Grigorievich Kostomarov is a famous historian and author of textbooks. He wrote his book “The Life of Language” as an adventure. An adventure into which Moscow schoolgirl Nastya plunges. She falls into the hands of a magical talisman - an ancient hryvnia, which becomes her guide, commentator, and assistant. Through her eyes we see how the Russian language developed - written, literary and lively spoken, from modernity to antiquity.
Vitaly Kostomarov - President of the State Institute of Russian Languages named after A.S. Pushkin, Academician of the Russian Academy of Education, Doctor of Philology, Vice-President of MAPRYAL, laureate of the Presidential Prize of the Russian Federation in the field of education, is also the Author of the books: “Culture of Speech and Style” (1960), “ The Russian language on the newspaper page”, “The Russian language among other languages of the world” (1975), “The linguistic taste of the era” (1999), “Our language in action: essays on modern Russian stylistics” (2005) and many others. etc. (These are the most outstanding and used of his works).
“Our language in action: essays on modern Russian stylistics” (2005)”
Annotation:
The author proposes a new concept of stylistics, reflecting the functioning and state of the Russian language at the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st century. The interaction and interpenetration of “styles” leads to shifts in the relationship between the stylistics of language resources and the stylistics of their current use (the stylistics of texts). The key concept and object of study are groupings of texts, which are described not by a list of typical linguistic units, but by a vector indication of the rules of their selection and composition. Particular attention is paid to mass media texts, the new ratio of written and oral texts, bookishness and colloquialism, even vernacular in communication, as well as the characteristic use of modern texts to non-verbal means and methods of transmitting information. The book is written in accessible language and is intended not only for philologists - specialists and students, but also journalists, translators, editors, other word professionals and everyone who is interested in the modern Russian language and who is not indifferent to its fate.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
:Kostomarov V.G and Vereshchagin E.M:
Vitaly Kostomarov worked closely with Vereshchagin E.M., the result of their joint work is such benefits as:
Language and culture. – M.: Rus. lang., 1983.
Linguistic and cultural theory of the word. – M., 1980.
Language and culture: Linguistic and regional studies in teaching Russian as a foreign language. – M., 1990.
Quote from the manual by Vereshchagin and Kostomarov “Language and Culture. – M.: Rus. language, 1983"
“By clarifying the relationship between personality and culture, it is impossible to understand the genesis and formation of personality in isolation from the culture of a social community (a small social group and, ultimately, a nation). If you want to understand the inner world of a Russian or a German, a Pole or a Frenchman, you should study Russian or, respectively, German, Polish, French culture.”
Background knowledge, as the main object of linguistic and regional studies, is considered in their works by E.M. Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov. The names of these significant scientists are associated with the formation of domestic linguistic and regional studies as an independent science, which, from my point of view, to consider only a part of linguodidactics would not be entirely correct. Of course, it cannot be denied that all the achievements of linguistic and regional studies meet the goals and objectives of the methodology of teaching foreign languages and are currently widely used. However, we cannot underestimate the fact that, having laid the theoretical foundation of linguistic and regional studies, E.M. Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov touched upon such a wide range of problems that scientists from different fields of knowledge are currently working on: linguists, psychologists, psycholinguists , sociologists, sociolinguists.
only in writing, but also in speaking. The task usually boils down to “a vivid and imaginative retelling of fictional texts.” In teaching the Russian language to foreigners, it is customary to talk about “developing oral-conversational skills,” which boils down to teaching the oral form - speaking and listening, which, unlike the native language, do not precede reading and writing. The constructive and stylistic skill of conversation, without which foreigners are helpless or ridiculous in communicating with Russians, they most often master on their own and not always successfully. Unfortunately, only the best teachers overcome this nonsense by distinguishing between the concepts of orality and conversationality.
The distinction between these concepts, as well as the concepts of writing and bookishness, is surprisingly alien to many linguists. But back in the middle of the last century, N.Yu. Shvedova remarked emphatically: “Not everything that is written relates to written speech, just as not everything that is oral, spoken (and even embodied in conversation) refers to spoken speech” 1 .
It is appropriate to recall the famous remark of V.G. Belinsky that the seminarian speaks like grammar personified, but it is impossible to listen to him. The stylistics of texts has its own special patterns, which are generated by extra-linguistic factors generalized by the communication triangle - the nature of the content and topic, conditions, goals, etc., i.e. environment And sphere. The dependence of these patterns on language itself in the current era is obviously indirect and noticeably weakening. The use of language is specified by them in the form constructive style vectors, those. general orientations or attitudes.
If in texts special bookishness should be given preference specific information, accuracy of thought, and not the peculiarities of presentation (although, of course, its beauty will not interfere, but it requires effort, and may distract from the matter); if in texts of non-specialist bookishness everything is subject to author's image and artistic and visual aesthetics, then colloquial texts are determined communicationeat as such. The problem is solved very contextually - in the range from the desire for poetic sublimity to deliberate rudeness (“Arkady, don’t speak beautifully!”).
1 Shvedova N.Yu. Essays on the syntax of Russian colloquial speech. M., 1960. P. 8.
seventh essay
At first sight, mass communication texts, or textsmass media, mass media texts(we prefer the term mass media the abbreviation of the media, which has been more common in our country since Soviet times, since it is more consistent with the essence of the matter: what we have before us is mass communication, communication, and not unidirectional “mass information and propaganda”), in its main parameters it is similar to the texts of natural conversations - in terms of the boundlessness and unpredictability of the topic , by simulating a natural cultural setting, connection with sound, attracting non-linguistic means of expression, etc. In terms of content, only colloquialism is really as unrestricted as mass communication, in terms of subject matter and in the use of a wide variety of expressive means, including non-verbal .
Both of them are conditioned by momentary relevance, transient or permanent, say, relating to the results of the presidential election, the course of the war, a life-changing invention, or the weather forecast, the state of the foreign exchange market. In other words, in constructive and stylistic terms it is not sphere, A Wednesday relationships in it, its character, conditions. Clearly, their SWRs reflect the same imperative of continuous contact, if possible benevolent and personal, dictating not just an appeal to the “whole language”, but also the selection of the most “contact” means of expression from it. The stability of communication in the environment turns out to be a fundamental condition, which often forces one to neglect the information itself, dissect and deform it. However, it would be a grave mistake to equate mass media texts with colloquial texts; the similarity of their linguistic and extralinguistic features is very relative.
7 269
The author proposes a new concept of stylistics, reflecting the functioning and state of the Russian language at the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st century. The interaction and interpenetration of “styles” leads to shifts in the relationship between the stylistics of language resources and the stylistics of their current use (the stylistics of texts). The key concept and object of study are groupings of texts, which are described not by a list of typical linguistic units, but by a vector indication of the rules of their selection and composition.
Particular attention is paid to mass media texts, the new ratio of written and oral texts, bookishness and colloquialism, even vernacular in communication, as well as the characteristic use of modern texts to non-verbal means and methods of transmitting information.
The book is written in accessible language and is intended not only for philologists - specialists and students, but also journalists, translators, editors, other word professionals and everyone who is interested in the modern Russian language and who is not indifferent to its fate.
Download djvu: YaDisk 6.4 Mb - 300 dpi - 289 p., b/w text and illustrations, table of contents Download pdf: YaDisk 11 Mb - 300 dpi - 289 p., b/w text and illustrations, text layer, table of contents
O.A. Lapteva 5
INTRODUCTION 7
Reply to the side 1. Stylistics and rhetoric 7
About terms 12
Reply to side 2. About the term style 13
FIRST ESSAY. Communication scheme 15
Case Study 1: Scientific Monograph 19
Case Study 2: Artwork 23
Case Study 3: Everyday Conversations 25
Remark aside 3. About closed language styles 30
SECOND ESSAY. Text 33
Reply to side 4. About the term text 35
Case in point 4. Announcement, advertising, slogan 38
Reply to the side 5. About the term discourse 41
Remark aside 6. The problem of describing texts 49
Reply to the side 7. Language and speech 52
Reply to the side 8. Logoepistemes 56
THIRD ESSAY. Constructive style vectors. Bookishness 59
Replica to the side 9. Vector approach 66
Reply to the side 10. The role of SWR in the generation of texts 69
Retika aside 11. On the nature of SWR 71
Illustrative example 5. Book special texts 73
Reply to the side 12. On the classification of style groupings 88
Remark aside 13. About the “religious-preaching style” 91
Case Study 6: Limits of Individual SWRs 93
Reply to side 14. Spatial model of SWR 97
FOURTH ESSAY. Special and non-special book knowledge 100
Reply to the side 15. About “poetic license” 103
Reply to the side 16. About the term fiction 105
Illustrative example 7. Book non-specialist texts 110
Reply to the side 17. Limits of permissible liberties 118
Case Study 8: Journalism 120
Reply to the side 18. Traditional view of journalism 123
FIFTH ESSAY. Forms of materialization of text 127
Reply aside 19. Invention of writing 130
Reply aside 20. Natural and artificial 134
Reply to the side 21. Belated interest in oral form 137
Reply to the side 22. Forms of embodiment and stylistic basis of the text 140
Replica aside 23. Material basis of different shapes 143
Remark aside 24. On the ineradicability of habitual beliefs 152
SIXTH ESSAY. Colloquialism and its texts 153
Case in point 9. Everyday conversational texts 158
Case Study 10: Serious Conversational Texts 160
Reply to the side 25. Rules of conversation 168
Reply to the side 26. Aesthetic function of the text 173
Reply to the side 27. Educational understanding of conversationality 177
SEVENTH ESSAY. Texts in mass media 179
Reply to the side 28. Technical background of mass media texts 180
Reply to the side 29. From the history of studying the language of the newspaper 185
Reply to side 30. Different incarnations of a single SWR 191
Case Study 11: Verbal Alternations 198
Reply to the side 31. The dangers of mass media for language 200
Case Study 12: Text through the Eyes of TV Journalists 204
Case in point 13. Advertising texts. The power of context 209
Remark aside 32. On the prospects of screen culture 213
EIGHTH ESSAY. Stylistics of resources: the role of units 220
Illustrative example 14. General “revitalization”, “decrease in style” 230
Reply to the side 33. “Carnivalization” as a motive for the dynamics of language 234
NINTH ESSAY. Stylistics of resources: about varieties 240
Remark aside 34. On the transfer of “details of life” 244
Reply to the side 35. About the term literary 251
Bibliography 266
PREFACE
Before the reader is a new, largely final book by Vitaly Grigorievich Kostomarov. There is no need to introduce the author, a luminary of Russian stylistics: his works on the language of newspapers and other media are well known not only to narrow specialists. They are written in a lively and exciting way, combining linguistic research built on the material of today’s speech “alive as life” - and thoughts, observations, considerations and even the author’s impressions awakened by it.
New book by V.G. Kostomarov, creatively continuing and developing his previous works from a new perspective, possesses these same qualities in their vivid embodiment. It is undoubtedly important both for the linguist and for the general reader: both are witnesses to the current transformations in the Russian language, global changes in the relationships between the methods of linguistic expression presented in texts of different types. These changes are an inevitable consequence of the new omnipotence of the media and communications. The author shows how a new style - and stylistic - system is taking shape before our eyes in the Russian language.
The book is dedicated to modern stylistics. Its task is to see, understand and model the systemic-structural structure of the stylistics of our days and, most importantly, to find the leading principle of stylistic differentiation of the Russian literary language. The comprehensiveness of such a task requires a scrupulous analysis of the mass of modern uses of language, which can only be productive as a result of the author’s vision and understanding of these uses, their consideration through the prism of the author’s perception. Therefore, the book is both generalizing and personal, and even personal. The presentation is confined within an academic framework. In the lines of the book, the reader will feel a single impulse of the unique consonance of the author's pulsating syllable and thought - and the very subject of the study.
Stylistics: blue bird. They rush after her in the hope of catching her. But she is not given into her hands. Stylistics lives in time, and you can catch its breath only by synchronizing with it, feeling its rhythm, breathing in unison with it. Otherwise it is elusive. There is no alpha and omega in it, there are no established truths, it is changeable, mobile, fickle. Hence the multiplicity of solutions reflecting different aspects of its essence and essence.
Finding the leading principle of the stylistic organization of our language is an innovative task. It requires the researcher to feel the living thrill of each of the limitless, innumerable multitude of uses, individual and personal, like the person himself and his style. At first glance, this should hinder the search, but only at first. Indeed, the stylistics of language, in its elusiveness, differs sharply from the registering-descriptive sciences, the object of which can be ordered. But to find the leading - and unified in its universality - principle of stylistic organization means to understand the mechanism of the stylistic structure of the language in its action and historical variability.
In the science of language, there are problems that can be solved progressively, step by step, and there are “eternal” problems. The problems of stylistics largely come down to the need to solve eternal problems. V.G. Kostomarov proceeds to their universal consideration, based not on the directly given, not on the sets of linguistic means themselves, but on the reason for their groupings - a certain vector of their organization and development, which makes it possible for sets of means to become stable and acquire a systematic organization at different stages of the development of Russian literary language. A vector reflects its time; it is directed in a direction dictated by the nature of communication, its general and individual qualities, and the collective impulse of speakers and writers. The total ambiguity and multiplicity of these factors gives rise to a multiplicity of vector directions, i.e. they make up a certain number. Vectors incorporate traditional style-forming factors, they are based on previous achievements of stylistics and have universal resolution.
§ 1. Correct speech
By the way a person speaks, one can judge him: the degree of his intelligence, his psychological balance, and his general culture. “The less a person’s cultural experience, the poorer his language,” wrote D. S. Likhachev. In society, the rules of cultural (good) speech are passed on from generation to generation.
An important sign of good speech is correctness, i.e. compliance with the literary norm, as already mentioned above (see section I, chapter 3 “Language norm, its role in the formation and development of the literary language”).
§ 2. Appropriateness of speech
The normative aspect of cultural speech is one of the most important, but not the only one. One can cite a large number of texts with a wide variety of content, impeccable from the point of view of compliance with general literary norms, but not achieving the goal. These are, for example, technical instructions. Therefore, an important quality of good speech is its appropriateness.
Appropriateness of speech means:
- relevance to the topic;
- compliance with the conditions of speech and audience;
- selection of necessary speech means, i.e. those that most effectively serve the purposes of communication;
- correct tone of communication, tact in communication.
Already in ancient rhetoric, these features were considered the most important prerequisites for the success of a speaker. Aristotle wrote about this in
"Rhetoric". One of the conditions for effective speech is knowledge of the audience: level of education, age, gender, as well as knowledge of the conditions of speech, for example, the time and place of speech (see for more details Section II, Chapter 4 “Features of oral public speech. The speaker and his audience” ).
Thus, A.F. Koni wrote about the features of public speech: “The beginning must be in accordance with the audience, knowledge of it is necessary. For example, we need to talk about Lomonosov. In the introduction you can paint (briefly - definitely briefly, but powerfully!) a picture of the escape
a fisherman boy went to Moscow, and then many years passed. In St. Petersburg, in one of the ancient houses from the time of Peter the Great, in an office filled with physical instruments and littered with books, drawings and manuscripts, a man in a white wig and a court uniform stood at the table and explained new experiments on electricity to Catherine II. This man was the same boy who once ran away from his home on a dark night.
Here the attention is drawn to a simple beginning, as if not related to Lomonosov, and a sharp contrast between the two paintings...
But this beginning of the lecture would not be suitable for an intelligent audience, since from the very first words everyone would guess that we are talking about Lomonosov, and the originality of the beginning would turn into pitiful artificiality" [Koni A.F. Advice to lecturers // Judicial speeches of famous Russian lawyers. M., 1997, p. 12–13].
The appropriateness of speech means choosing the necessary linguistic means. First of all, it should be taken into account that there are two parallel systems in the language - the system of colloquial speech and the system of codified (standardized) literary language. Thus, we speak differently than we write, but we also speak differently in everyday life and in official settings. Conversational speech is constitutive, that is, it largely depends on the situation: time and place of action, participants in communication, speech etiquette accepted in a given environment. The appropriateness of the choice of language means is necessary both in official communication,
V written language and in everyday communication. V. G. Kostomarov notes that “a sense of proportionality and conformity” determines the style of our speech [Kostomarov V. G. Speech culture and style. M., 1960, p. 20–25]. An order from the director of an institution written in the style of a casual conversation would look inappropriate, but an official style in a home conversation would also be inappropriate.
You cannot write an order like this: The following text of an order is possible:
“Our women have a good time - “In commemoration of the International Women’s Day and in the public life of Women’s Day, they showed themselves well for great achievements. We discussed work and fruitful public relations and decided to give certificates.” activity to present certificates"
[Kostomarov V. G. Decree. worker, p. 27].
K.I. Chukovsky wrote that it is impossible to imagine a conversation over dinner about household chores in this style: “I quickly ensured the restoration of proper order in the living space”... [Chukovsky K.I. Alive as life. M., 1962, p. 112].
Such a quality as the appropriateness of speech is clearly manifested when choosing greeting formulas. For many nations, the choice of greeting depends on age, gender, occupation, degree of proximity of the people communicating, and even the time of day. In this case, facial expressions, gestures, and intonation play a big role.
In Russian, “Hello!” combined with forms on you, used in relation to unfamiliar people or to acquaintances in an official setting of communication.
Formula “Hello!” allowed in communication with close people.
Greetings are neutral “Good afternoon!”, “Good evening!”, “Good morning!”.
A group of stylistically elevated greetings used in an official setting is distinguished: “I greet you!”, “Allow me to greet you!”, “My respect!”. Such greetings are usually used by intellectuals of the older and middle generations.
Formula “Hello!” characteristic of relaxed communication between well-known people, usually communicating on a first-name basis.
Greeting "Great!" has the mark “colloquial” and is used mainly when addressing males.
In both official and informal speech, intonation and the correct tone in communication play an important role. It is appropriate here to quote A. F. Koni’s advice to lecturers: “You should speak loudly, clearly, distinctly (diction), non-monotonously, as expressively and simply as possible. There should be confidence, conviction, strength in the tone... There should not be a teacher’s tone, disgusting and unnecessary for adults, boring for young people” [Court speeches of famous Russian lawyers, p. 7].
§ 3. Brevity of speech
A necessary requirement for a good speech is its logic, consistency in the presentation of thoughts.
Brevity of speech is also a sign of a culture of speech. Brevity of speech does not mean shortness of time during which the speech is delivered. Brevity of speech means the absence of everything superfluous, unimportant, not related to the topic of the speech, conversation, conversation. “Brevity is the sister of talent,” wrote A.P. Chekhov.
As already mentioned in Sect. Chapter II 4 “Features of oral public speech. The speaker and his audience", a short public speech is more difficult to prepare than a long one, but the requirement of brevity of the speech is important
And for informal speech, since it facilitates mutual understanding between speakers and makes communication effective.
Brevity affects how the audience understands the speech. After all, the more words in a sentence, the more difficult it is to understand. If many sentences in a speech consist of 20 or more words, the speech is poorly understood by the audience. This kind of speech should be changed. Brevity
And simplicity of speech largely determines its success. Thus, it is known that the first US President Abraham Lincoln delivered his famous speech on the meaning of the Civil War and democratic values, consisting of only 10 sentences, most of the words of which have no more than five letters.
ABOUT Roosevelt is told that he always strived for brevity and simplicity in his speeches. One of his speechwriters wrote this sentence: “We will make every effort to create a more humane society.” Roosevelt corrected it to say: “We are going to create a country in which no one will be forgotten” [see. about this: Kushner M. The ability to speak in public for dummies / trans. from English M., 2006].
D. S. Likhachev wrote: “Try not to speak pretentiously. The language of a nation is itself a compressed, if you like, algebraic expression of the entire culture of the nation.”
§ 4. Accuracy of speech
An essential feature of good speech is its accuracy. Precision of speech is understood as the use of words in full accordance with their linguistic meaning, strict correspondence of words to the designated phenomena of reality. Inaccurate usage
is often due to the confusion of words that are close in their sphere of use, but still have different meanings, for example, it is a mistake to use instead of sell, take instead of buying, etc.
The Russian language has a variety of words with the same root, similar in formation, but different in meaning and use. Their confusion is observed even in official speech. Similar cognate formations are, for example, the verbs imagine and provide. Examples from newspapers and magazines confirm the presence of inaccurate use of these verbs. So, in the sentence “As soon as the opportunity arises, today I will graze cows on rye” the verb (needed: introduce myself) is used incorrectly, the same in the sentence “Manuscripts under the motto are provided (needed: presented”). To distinguish between these words, you need to know that the verb to provide means “to give the opportunity to use something,” and to present means “to convey, give, present something to someone.” The words heroism and heroism are often mistakenly used. The noun heroism is combined mainly with animate nouns. The word heroism means “the ability to perform a feat.” The word heroic is used with inanimate nouns and has the meaning “heroic content, the heroic side of something”: heroic revolution -
tions, heroism of communism, heroism of labor, struggle etc. Therefore, such use of the word would be erroneous heroics: “Fiery patriotism and high heroism (you need: high heroism ) Soviet people". Words heroism and heroism used synonymously, denoting courage, bravery: heroism (heroism) for-
shield guards of the city.
There is an erroneous use of the word factor instead of fact. You should learn the meanings of the words being compared: fact - something that really exists, a real event, phenomenon, chance, etc., factor - something that contributes to the development, existence of something, a driving force, an incentive. For example: economic fact- th development - presence, existence of economic development;
economic development factor - a phenomenon that promotes economic development and stimulates it.
The words successor and successor are often confused. When using these words, it should be remembered that successor is an animate noun; this is the one who received succession from someone
any rights, social status, obligations; a successor to someone's activities or traditions. Receiver is an inanimate noun - a device for receiving, collecting something. The following use of the word receiver is erroneous: This allows beginners to quickly find their place
V team, love him, become a worthy successor (you need: successor ) of his good traditions.
Let us give more examples of words that are often used in violation of lexical norms (i.e., not quite in their exact linguistic meaning).
Enrollee. 1. Anyone who enters a higher or secondary educational institution. 2. Outdated (mid-19th century). Student completing a course
V secondary educational institution.
Subscriber. 1. (early 20th century). The organization or person in whose name the telephone installation is registered. 2. (early 19th century). The person holding the subscription.
Holdings. 1. (1st half of the 20th century). Various assets (cash, checks, bills, transfers, letters of credit) through which payments are made. 2. Payment instruments of the bank held in its accounts in foreign banks in foreign currency.
Adept. An ardent supporter of any teaching, direction, idea.
Excise tax 1. Indirect tax, mainly on consumer goods. 2. The institution for collecting such tax.
Alibi. The proven absence of the accused at the scene of the crime at the time of its commission as evidence of innocence.
Altruism. Willingness to sacrifice one's own interests for the well-being of other people, selfless concern for their well-being.
Role. The type of roles usually performed by an actor according to his stage abilities.
Underground. (late 20th century). Not officially recognized art. A priori. Speculatively, without taking into account the facts, regardless of experience. Banal. Lacking originality, mediocre.
The Russian language has rich synonymy. Synonyms are words that are similar in meaning, but differ in shades of meaning or sphere of use, stylistically. Knowledge of the language allows you to choose the right word from a synonymous series and thereby achieve accuracy of expression, strict correspondence of speech to the conveyed meaning.
holding. For example, the words cinema and film are close in meaning. But the word cinema in modern Russian is used in the sense of “a theater in which films are shown,” i.e., a cinema, hence: going to the cinema; cinema - cinematography as an art form, hence: workers of Soviet cinema. They often say: “I haven’t seen this movie yet. I don't like this movie." In literary speech, the word cinema is not recommended to be used in the meaning of “film, picture.”
It is very important to use synonymous words stylistically correctly. Among the violations of stylistic norms, the most common cases are the inappropriate use of stylistically colored words in a neutral context. For example, it is unlikely that anyone will say in colloquial speech: “My wife and I ate.” After all, husband and wife are official book words, and their place is in official speech. The word of the spouse sounds solemnly on the lips of the queen in Pushkin’s work “Boris Godunov”:
Embark on life - not with childish blindness,
Not as a slave to the desires of your husband's lungs, Your weak-willed concubine - But as a worthy wife of you, Assistant to the Moscow Tsar.
The stylistic coloring of the words spouse, spouse continues to this day. They are common in newspaper reports and letters. In everyday life, in everyday speech, it is better to use the words husband, wife.
Russian writers called for a struggle for accuracy of speech. L.N. Tolstoy wrote: “If I were a king, I would make a law that a writer who uses a word whose meaning he cannot explain is deprived of the right to write and receives a hundred blows of the rod” [Russian writers about language. L., 1955, p. 288]. M. Gorky has the following phrase: “The struggle for purity, for semantic accuracy, for the sharpness of language is a struggle for an instrument of culture. The sharper this weapon, the more accurately it is aimed, the more victorious it is” [Gorky M. About literature.
M., 1953, p. 663].
The requirement for accuracy of speech increases when we mean official speech, i.e. business, scientific, journalistic. Accuracy as a quality of scientific, business, journalistic speech is associated with the accuracy of the use of terms.
Kostomarov Vladimir Grigorievich 2008V. G. Kostomarov Our language in action
I completely agree with the opinion of Yu. L. Vorotnikov that we are not moving towards a monocultural single world with a single language for a happy future. Contrary to the opinion of apologists for the globalization of culture, and not just civilization, ethnic groups will not abandon their native languages and English will not become the only world language. UNESCO has declared this year the Year of Multilingualism. The European Community is doing its best to raise the authority of all languages of its member countries; in the United States itself, 3 billion dollars have been allocated for training specialists in various
foreign languages. Including Russian, which is called “the most studied among those little taught” in educational institutions of the country; with a Russian-speaking diaspora, this makes it a very serious phenomenon.
Such facts impose a special responsibility on us. We must in every possible way strengthen and support the “Russian World” both outside and inside Russia. The spread of the Russian language is not only a cultural and linguistic problem, but also a problem of economic and political development.
ki, sports and tourism, the international authority of our country. We should take an example from countries that are aggressively promoting their languages and generously funding their promotion: Great Britain and the USA, France, Germany, Spain, and in recent years China. Branches of the British Council, the Alliance Française, the Goethe Institute, the Cervantes Institute, and the Confucius Society exist in almost all countries of the world. Continuing the line of the USSR, the top leadership of the Russian Federation is now also taking serious steps: the target program “Russian Language” and the activities of the Roszarubezhtsentr, St. Petersburg and Moscow Universities, RUDN, GosIRYa have been activated. Pushkin, other institutions, the Russian World Foundation was created. It is impossible not to draw attention to the activities of Professor K. K. Kolin, who published a policy article “Russian language and national security” back in the mid-1990s. And now this is absolutely clear to all of us, and it is clear to our president.
In my book “Our Language in Action” I tried to outline the range of linguistic problems associated with the functioning of the Russian language at home and abroad. Among them, the concept of text in the conditions of current linguistic existence attracts special attention. The words of de Quinge, a French historian-philosopher of the 19th century: “Texts, texts, nothing but texts” - with the development of internal and external contacts and the technical side of the design of texts, acquire special significance. I would like to stop here today.
In fact, our life is communication. And the text is the result of our communication. Even when we talk with friends or with family in the kitchen, we generate texts. Most of them disappear at the same moment, but there are also worthy, significant, and even imperishable texts. Yuri Leonidovich Vorotnikov quoted the Bible - a book that has been quoted, studied, and inspired for two thousand years. The greatest wealth of historical, scientific, cultural texts has been accumulated.
coms, preserving and transmitting to generations through time and space the experience and knowledge of mankind.
It is clear that due to the limitations of human memory, especially long-term memory, their storage cannot be carried out in natural sound form. For at least four thousand years, people have been using the greatest invention for this - writing, most peoples - writing of the alphabetic-phonetic type. It performs its functions without fear or reproach, although it very conditionally conveys the features of communication, forcing us to somehow compensate for the absence of sound, intonation, gestures, facial expressions and other “bearers of meaning.”
The present time has added amazing new technical capabilities for recording texts with the transmission of all the features of a real communicative act. We are still far from understanding that writing (so to speak, texts in “paper form”) has serious competitors, primarily television and computers with their “on-screen texts.” Of course, this cannot be ignored, but we are far from serious reflection. There are panicky fears that the screen will ruin the book, and, on the contrary, delight that the “boring book” will be replaced by sound, colorful, cheerful, even aggressive presentation of information.
Associated with types of communication that play different roles in life, ranging from personal, two people, and mass, many millions at once, texts are extremely dangerous to evaluate so straightforwardly. It is necessary, for example, to approach from the standpoint of their perception. Written, printed text, due to its conventionality, requires active work of the mind, comparison with one’s own life experience, critical work of the mind; On-screen text acts directly on the senses, creates the illusion of presence, and allows you to perceive information picturesquely, without tension, without learning to read. The book remains a more reliable way of learning, personal development, and the acquisition of serious knowledge. But one cannot underestimate
to enhance the ease of obtaining information provided by the screen, which is so attractive to children, and not only children. But does it follow from this that the book is becoming obsolete?
I am glad to hear the observation that Socrates objected to the recording of the Dialogues and advocated the benefits of memorizing wisdom texts in a natural-sounding form. He was not the only one who feared that written recording would lead to people losing the ability to remember altogether due to laziness. Such a danger, of course, exists, but the volume of wisdom is growing in such a way that it clearly exceeds the natural capabilities of man. Therefore, today there is still no need to despair that screen media will wean people from thinking independently and critically.
Now I would like to call for acceptance of the fact of the emergence of new forms of texts and call for their careful study. Just as writing has not replaced audible, spoken language, screen texts cannot replace written ones. They are not interchangeable and must cooperate, dividing their spheres of action, communicating with different types of communication. However, a deeper analysis does not allow for such a straightforward distribution of forms of text implementation by type of communication. Computer-screen texts, seemingly intended for mass communication, incredibly suddenly spread to personal communication in Internet chats. Mobile phones have provided an amazing opportunity to choose the form of text for conversational communication - naturally audio, written such as SMS, and, although not yet accessible to everyone, visual. It’s great that today you can choose different forms of presentation of weather forecasts, the latest news, and even the novel “War and Peace”: written in a book or on a screen, audio on a record or cassette, visual and audio in four film adaptations (I won’t say which one is better).
Of course, it is difficult to abandon the familiar and deified by a centuries-old tradition associated with enduring values. But technological progress is clearly
breaks into our linguistic and communicative life. Even if you don’t want to, you have to accept it and take it under control through study and evaluation. Technological progress in relation to on-screen texts is accelerating: quite recently it was believed that it would take longer to find a text on a computer than a book on a shelf; today they no longer say that written text is more convenient to edit and improve than on-screen text.
In conclusion, I would like to dwell on the questions posed in the invitation.
1. The place of the Russian language in world culture and politics. Enormous. It was during the last 700 years after Yaroslav, it is and will be. The guarantee is a great Russia.
2. There is no need to transform the Russian language into the language of world communication, but it is necessary to achieve its wide dissemination. It is recognized as one of the most important languages of world communication and, if over the last 15-20 years it has been thrown back a little, then our task is simply to return it to its worthy and rightful place.
3. The Russian language in the youth subculture does not indicate either the collapse of cultural norms or the birth of a new quality. The birth of a new quality is always associated with some kind of collapse of what was, but in language this happens slowly, according to its own hidden laws. Human intervention, especially legal intervention, does not work here. We will notice that the language has changed over three centuries only when, say, we compare “Petrovskie Gazette” and today’s newspaper. People in this interval, these two centuries, did not feel that the language was changing. Therefore, I think there is no need to interfere here. Language changes according to its innermost mechanisms, and not according to, say, legal laws, not according to norms. Today I tried to prove that the forms and structures of popular texts have changed, the actual language shifts are still felt as a kind of awkwardness, unnecessary foreign words, partial changes in the coloring and meaning of individual words, preferences for certain syntactic turns.
4. It is not the Russian language that needs to be saved, but ourselves. Language is rich and diverse, giving us what we need. If it is love, prosperity, work, then one thing; if it is robbery, poverty, idleness, then another. In the Russian dictionary, for example, there are more than forty assessments of a woman: beautiful, delightful, captivating, charming, enchanting, etc., but some journalists only know sexy.
5. The culture of politicians is a problem, and a terrifying one at that. It must be solved not linguistically, but pedagogically through the cultivation of taste, exactingness and self-criticism. As a politician thinks, so he speaks. We know of cases when a Duma deputy, unable to think or speak, could defend his position only with his fists.
6. Much is being done. The Law on the Russian Language was adopted. A series of books popularly presenting literary norms was published in St. Petersburg. New interesting dictionaries and grammars are being created. Much educational work is carried out by radio and television. Success, however, will depend on the desires of the people themselves.
7. We usually understand literacy as knowledge of the outdated Code of Spelling and Punctuation Rules of 1956. There are no words: any existing rules must be known and followed. But they also need to be updated, against what?
Our society (or just sensation-seeking but influential journalists?) for some reason sharply objects. But it is even more important, given, in particular, the role of public oral speech and the growing influence of electronic texts, to reveal this concept as the ability to speak intelligently, convincingly, beautifully, to the point and honestly. Since in a school called “Native Language” or “Russian Language” they study exclusively spelling, the rules of writing that are accepted today, which is boring, naturally, and some rudiments of analysis, logical analysis of language, which is also boring for neophilologists, then our children consider this subject the most boring subject in school. This needs to be radically changed. We need to teach the language, we need to teach how to use the language, and not force people to memorize the rules.
8. The cultural achievements of the Russian language and literature can be preserved, of course, by nationwide love for them, knowledge and respect. What is needed here is direct patriotic government will, supported by reasonable funding. If in Soviet times dictionaries and textbooks were difficult to obtain due to their shortage, now they are no easier to buy because of the price. One cannot help but mention the plight of many libraries, museums, theaters and clubs, as well as the decline in morals on many television channels.
From the chronicle of scientific life
On December 6-7, 2007, the All-Russian scientific conference “The image of Russian youth in the modern world: their self-awareness and sociocultural guidelines” was held at the Moscow University for the Humanities. The organizers of the conference also included the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Socio-Political Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The conference was held with the support of the Russian Humanitarian Research Foundation (project No. 07-06-03404g). The conference was attended by over 100 scientists, university teachers, graduate students and undergraduates from Moscow, Belgorod, Volgograd, Kazan, Magadan, Podolsk, Ryazan, Tver, Tula, Tyumen, Ulan-Ude, as well as representatives from Germany and Estonia.