Active vocabulary. Active and passive vocabulary of the Russian literary language
The vocabulary of the Russian language, like a mirror, reflects the entire historical development of society. The processes of human production activity, the economic, social, political, cultural development of life - everything is reflected in vocabulary, which is constantly changing and improving. In fact, with the development of science, technology, industry, agriculture, culture, with the emergence and development of new social and international relations, new concepts arise, and therefore words for naming these concepts. On the contrary, with the disappearance of any phenomenon of reality or object from life, the words that name them go out of use or change their meaning. After the October Revolution they left
Section 1. Accuracy of word usage 147
from the use of the word strike, auction, mercy, charity, governor, province, zemstvo, governess, prefecture, worship, gymnasium, philanthropist, merchant, nobleman. Now, with the return of these phenomena to life, these words have again entered our speech.
Depending on how actively words are used in speech, the entire vocabulary of the Russian language is divided into two large groups: active vocabulary (or active vocabulary) and passive vocabulary (passive vocabulary). Active vocabulary consists of everyday words (commonly used words), the meaning of which is clear to all people who speak Russian. As a rule, they refer to the concepts of modern life. These may be old, but not obsolete words: man, water, work, bread, house and etc.; terms: lawyer, court, industry, science, atom etc.
The passive vocabulary includes vocabulary that is very rarely used in everyday communication. It is, as it were, stored in memory until a convenient, necessary occasion. These are either outdated words or new ones that have not yet received widespread use.
Outdated vocabulary
So, outdated words. If they name objects of old life, culture, old socio-political and economic relations that have disappeared from life, for example: boyar, chain mail, smerd, armyak, serf, then before us historicisms. Some words that arose in the Soviet era and named phenomena in the first or later years of Soviet power also became historicisms: NEPman, food detachment, food tax, surplus appropriation system, People's Commissar, Stakhanovite, Economic Council, Komsomol etc. In the post-perestroika period, the word becomes historicized kopek.
In addition, outdated words can denote currently existing phenomena and objects, for example: cheeks(cheeks), peeit(poet), airplane(airplane), this(this), hood(robe), youth(teenager), etc., i.e. these are outdated names of modern things and phenomena. And these words are called archaisms. In the process of language development, they were replaced by synonyms: cavalry - cavalry, bed - bed, provinces - periphery, province - region, orphanage - orphanage etc. The last three words seem to be returning to our speech again.
The use of obsolete words in each text must be justified. Historicisms are usually used in special,
148 Part I. Functioning of linguistic units in a lawyer’s speech
scientific and historical literature, which denotes phenomena of past years. Archaisms, as a rule, perform stylistic functions, giving speech a touch of solemnity, pathos or irony. Thus, F. N. Plevako, in his famous speech on the case of an old woman who stole a 30-kopeck teapot, deliberately uses an archaic form twelve languages, which not only gives the speech solemnity, but also colors it with an ironic shade. The same function in Ya. S. Kiselev’s defensive speech is performed by the archaic form of the name of the imaginary victim - Natalia Feodorovna and outdated - stolen . In colloquial speech, outdated words most often give an ironic tint and create humor.
In the written speech of a lawyer, which is a type of official business style, outdated words are inappropriate. However, they can be recorded in the interrogation protocol in the responses of the interrogated. The use of outdated words without taking into account their expressive connotation leads to stylistic errors: The accused Shishkin, who committed the beating of household members, is in the arrest house. Inappropriately used outdated words can give the text a purely clerical flavor: A certificate of rent is attached to this application. Their frequent repetition leads to tautology.
There are a large number of archaisms and historicisms in the Criminal Code of 1903 1: exactions, police, excise, gambling house, nobles, merchants, zemstvo service, hard labor, class meetings, demands, alms, fortress, workhouse, usury, code, administration, health, permission, blasphemy, crime, shops, this, these, which, these, natives, midwife, adultery, exchange, therefore, foreign tribes, subjects, trustworthy, prisoner, deanery, arrest, province, district, rank, unrest, extortion, imprisonment, worker, obscenity, legalization. We also find archaic forms here: wandering, drinking, allowed, hypnotism, establish, contagious illnesses, family rights. The Criminal Code of the RSFSR retains from outdated words act , as the most accurately naming a criminal act or omission, commit has a specific legal connotation. Outdated words such (Article 129) concealment (Article 185) emphasize the official language of the law.
In Art. 232 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, which names remnants of local customs, instead of the term relatives used it justifiably
Section 1. Accuracy of word usage 149
obsolete colloquial synonym relatives, denoting members of a clan.
In explanatory dictionaries, obsolete words are given with the mark outdated
§ 2. New words
In addition to outdated vocabulary, passive vocabulary includes neologisms(from Greek neos - new + logos - word) - words that have recently appeared in the language. Neologisms appear along with a new phenomenon, object or thing, and their novelty is felt by speakers. Great achievements in scientific, cultural and industrial development in the post-October period gave rise to a large number of new words, for example: collective farm, metro, escalator, Komsomolets... Some new words communicate new achievements and discoveries. Thus, several decades ago, the root was productive for the formation of new words space-: after the word astronaut words appeared with cosmic speed cosmophysicist, spaceship, cosmodrome, space navigation, cosmovision, geocosmos etc. Many new words appeared from the root body -: television equipment, television tower, teletype, teleconference and etc.
Nowadays, new words are constantly being born. In almost every newspaper, in every magazine you can find a word that has just appeared. Most of the new words name phenomena of political, economic, social life, and therefore they quickly become part of the active vocabulary: perestroika, agricultural industry, state acceptance, arrangement, exchange, impact, privatization, involved, informals, denationalization, electorate etc. These can be names of fashionable things and phenomena: mixed fabrics, sneakers, Varenka, disco, impregnation, video salon, negative phenomena that have appeared in life: distortions, homeless people, scourge, morbidity... Colloquial words began to be actively used in print promise, liked, help: Today there is a pronounced increase in delinquency among minors, and this again promises a surge in the total number of crimes in 2-3 years 2.
New words can be formed as a result of changes in the semantics of existing words in the language. Yes, a polysemantic word official means 1) an employee of a government agency... 2) a person formally related to his duties -
150 Part P. Functioning of linguistic units in a lawyer’s speech
there. During the Soviet period it was used in the 2nd meaning, in the 1st meaning it was historicism. Nowadays, it again denotes an employee of a government agency. Word shuttle has three meanings: 1. Cheln. 2. Part of a loom in the form of an oblong oval box or block with wound yarn for laying weft threads. 3. The part of a double-thread sewing machine that feeds the bobbin thread. Nowadays, this word has a new meaning: it refers to people traveling abroad for the purpose of buying and reselling goods. The transfer of the meaning of the word occurred on the basis of the similarity of actions: to move “back and forth.” The words have a new meaning lump, substitute; run over, thimble, get, poured, cool, screw up b and etc.
New words are acquired by the language in different ways. From passive vocabulary they move into active vocabulary and become commonly used if the concepts they denote are firmly established in life. Some of the words do not take root in the language, some remain individually authored. Discordant neologisms such as rsagozh (from react), blackmail(instead of blackmail), kindergartenism, denationalization etc. Neologisms are formed incorrectly heavily polluted, oil-contaminated, negotiable, although the “authors” used them as terms. Words like these give the speech a comical tone: As a result of prolonged rains, large potholes formed on the roads. Or: Despite the fact that the warehouse was special, material assets were at a high price 3. Individual neologisms become obsolete in the language along with the passing away of the phenomena or objects they denote. This is what happened with words nonsense, informals, state acceptance. Perhaps the word is becoming historicist perestroika. Interesting history of the word turtleneck . It entered our language in the 60s, calling a women's sweater fashionable in those years; after a few years it fell out of use as turtlenecks were no longer worn. And now again, along with the fashion for the thing, this word has returned to the active vocabulary. While this manual is being published, the word may again become outdated.
In general, new words are an inexhaustible source of replenishing the vocabulary of the Russian language.
Self-test questions
1. Why is the vocabulary of the Russian language divided into active and passive? 2. What vocabulary is included in the active vocabulary
Section 1. Accuracy of word usage 151
composition, which one - in passive vocabulary? 3. How do historicisms and archaisms differ? What are their functions in speech? 4. What are neologisms? When do they enter the active vocabulary?
Sample plan for a practical lesson
Theoretical part
1. Uncommon vocabulary. Definition of the concept.
2. Areas of use and functions of historicisms and archaisms.
3. Neologisms, new words.
4. Errors caused by the use of passive vocabulary.
Practical part
Exercise 1. In examples taken from the Criminal Code of 1903 (see p. 148), note historicisms and archaisms; justify the legality of their use in the text of the law. Choose modern synonyms for archaisms.
Task 2. Read 15 articles each from the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, the Criminal Procedure Code of the RSFSR, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and the Civil Procedure Code of the RSFSR, draw a conclusion about the presence of passive words in them.
Exercise 3. Answer in which procedural acts and why outdated vocabulary and neologisms may be used. Give examples.
Task 4. Read several defensive speeches by Ya.S. Kiseleva, mark outdated words in them. Explain the reasons for using them.
Task 5. Tell us how you perceive the use in print and on the radio of such words as disassembly, soviet, party, collapse, lumps, cheating, chernukha, bucks . What are their meaning , stylistic coloring, sphere of use?
Exercise 6. Correct errors caused by inappropriate use of outdated vocabulary and neologisms.
The police department, which received a statement from the victims, filed a lawsuit against the cloakroom attendants. The indicated actions of the suspect allow us to leave the preventive measure the same. Surplus equipment that is owned by management should be transferred to the inter-factory fund. The confiscated vase, as being of no value, was destroyed by breaking. The accused departed in an unknown direction, where he remained until his arrest.
152 Part P. Functioning of linguistic units in a lawyer’s speech
Task 7. Get acquainted with the works: 1) New words and meanings: Dictionary-reference book. materials of the press and literature of the 70s / E. A. Levashov, T. N. Popovtseva et al. M., 1984. 2) New words and dictionaries of new words: [Sb. Art.] / Rep. ed. 3. N. Kotelova. L., 1983. 3) Russian language. Encyclopedia / Ch. ed. F. P. Filin. M., 1979 (see dictionary entries: neologism, passive vocabulary, obsolete words). Express your opinion on the importance of such dictionaries for a lawyer.
Target lectures - to deepen the concept of passive vocabulary, to characterize outdated words and neologisms.
1. Active and passive stock of the Russian language.
2. Outdated words (archaisms and historicisms). Types of archaisms and historicisms.
3. New words. Types of neologisms.
4. Use of passive vocabulary in fiction.
1. Active and passive stock of the Russian language
The vocabulary of a language is not something frozen and unchanging. Over the centuries, the sound system has changed, and changes have occurred in grammar and vocabulary. Changes in vocabulary are especially noticeable in the era of various public and social transformations, during a period of rapid changes in the life of society.
The changes are dual in nature - on the one hand, the vocabulary is enriched with new words, on the other, it is freed from elements that are unnecessary at this stage. Therefore, there are two layers in the language - active and passive vocabulary. The term “active and passive stock” was introduced into lexicographic practice by L.V. Shcherba, but there is no unity in the understanding of the vocabulary of passive vocabulary. For example, in the works of M.V. Arapova, A.A. Reformatsky, L.I. Barannikova and others, passive vocabulary includes not only outdated words, but also dialectisms, terms, names of rare realities and phenomena.
Active vocabulary includes those words that are relevant for the modern stage, words that meet the requirements of modernity and do not have signs of antiquity or novelty.
The passive composition consists of words that have fallen out of use due to their obsolescence, irrelevance, and new words that have not yet lost the sign of unusualness and novelty.
2. Outdated words. Types of archaisms and historicisms
Words that have left or are leaving the active stock due to their rare use are called obsolete words. The process of obsolescence is complex and lengthy, so obsolete words are distinguished by the degree of obsolescence.
The first group includes words that are unknown or incomprehensible to most native speakers. Several categories of words can be included here:
– words that have disappeared from the language and are not found even in derivative stems: grid “warrior”, stry “uncle”, netiy - “nephew”, loki - “puddle”, vyya - “neck”;
– words that are not used independently, but are found as part of derivative words (sometimes having survived the process of simplification): lepota “beauty” - ridiculous, memoriya - “memory” - memorial, vitija - “orator” - florid, mnitya - “think” - suspicious;
- words that in modern language are preserved only as part of phraseological figures of speech: all - “village, village” - in cities and villages; zenitsa - “pupil” - store like the apple of an eye; more - “more” - more than aspirations.
The second group includes obsolete words known to speakers of modern language, for example: verst, arshin, tithe, pound, fathom, horse-drawn horse, bursa, cold, glass, finger, barber, eye, etc. Many of them were recently used in the active dictionary .
Obsolete words differ not only in the degree of archaization, but also in the reasons that led them to the category of obsolete. From this point of view, obsolete vocabulary can be divided into historicisms and archaisms.
Historicisms are words that name disappeared objects and phenomena of reality. With the development of society, new socio-political relations arise, the economy and military affairs become different, the way of life and culture of the people change. With the disappearance of certain objects and phenomena, the need for the words that denoted them disappears.
Historicisms can be divided into a number of semantic groups:
1) names of socio-political phenomena, names of members of the royal family, representatives of classes, etc.: young lady, serf, smerd, purchase; tsar, queen, prince, princess, boyar, nobleman, prince, count, steward, master, merchant, cadet, cadet, kulak, landowners, etc.;
2) names of administrative institutions, educational and other institutions: order, stock exchange, gymnasium, pro-gymnasium, tavern, monopolka, breech, charitable institution, etc.;
3) names of positions and persons by type of their occupation: virnik, mytnik, assessor, caretaker, trustee, mayor, policeman, high school student, student, manufacturer, factory owner, beekeeper, barge hauler, etc.;
4) names of military ranks: centurion, hetman, archer, musketeer, dragoon, reitar, volunteer, warrior, lieutenant, bell, halberdier, broadswordman, cuirassier, etc.;
5) names of types of weapons, military armor and their parts: hammer, flail, mace, mortar, arquebus, berdysh, samopal, halberd, broadsword, arquebus, chain mail, armor, cuirass, etc.;
6) names of vehicles: stagecoach, dormez, horse-drawn horse, landau, cabriolet, carriage, charabanc, etc.;
7) names of old measures of length, area, weight, monetary units: arshin, fathom, verst, ten na; pound, batman, zolotnik, lot, hryvnia, altyn, forty, gold, penny, polushka, etc.;
8) names of vanished household items, household items, types of clothing, food, drinks, etc.: luchina, svetets, endova, prosak, kanitel, barms, salop, epancha, kazakin, armyak, camisole, boots, sbiten.
In addition to the historicisms discussed above, which can be called lexical, there is also a relatively small group of historicisms in the passive dictionary, for which the previous meaning or one of the meanings is outdated. For example, the lexeme clerk lost the meaning of “an official in charge of the affairs of some institution (order) - in ancient Rus'; the lexeme order has an outdated meaning: “an institution in charge of a separate branch of management in the Moscow state of the 16th – 17th centuries, cf.: Ambassadorial order. Such words in linguistic literature are called semantic historicisms.
A special place among historicisms is occupied by words that appeared in the Soviet era to denote transitory phenomena, for example: NEP, NEPman, NEPMANSH, Torgsin, food tax, surplus appropriation, food detachment, etc. Having emerged as neologisms, they did not last long in the active dictionary, turning into historicisms.
Archaisms (Greek archaios - “ancient”) are outdated names for modern things and concepts. They went into passive stock because new names for the same concepts appeared in the language. Archaisms have synonyms in the active dictionary. This is how they differ from historicisms.
In modern Russian there are several types of archaisms. Depending on whether the word as a whole is outdated or only its meaning, archaisms are divided into lexical and semantic.
Lexical archaisms, in turn, are divided into proper lexical, lexical-word-formative and lexical-phonetic.
1. Proper lexical archaisms are words that are squeezed out of the active stock by words with a different root: memoria - “memory”, odrina - “bedroom”, sail “sail”., shoulder pad - “comrade-in-arms”, lanits - “cheeks”, mouth – “lips”, womb – “breast;
2. Lexico-word-formative archaisms are words that have been replaced in active use by single-root words with other formative morphemes (more often by suffixes, less often by prefixes); shepherd - “shepherd”, friendship - “friendship”, phantasm - “fantasy”, fisherman - “fisherman”;
Z. Lexico-phonetic archaisms are words that in the active dictionary are synonymous with lexemes with a slightly different sound: mirror - “mirror”, prospekt - “prospect”, goshpital - “hospital”, gishpansky - “Spanish”. A variety of lexical-phonetic archaisms are accentological archaisms in which the place of emphasis has changed: symbol, epigraph, ghost, helpless, music, etc.
4. Grammatical archaisms (morphological and syntactic) words with outdated grammatical forms of film - film, black piano - black piano, white swan - white swan, rings - rings, elder, master, prince (vocal form good fellow, honest father, sometimes mother I missed them.
5. Unlike all others, semantic archaisms are words preserved in the active vocabulary whose meaning (or one of the meanings) is outdated: shame - “spectacle”, station - “institution”, partisan - “supporter, person belonging to what -parties"; the statement is “news”, the operator is “surgeon”, the splash is “applause”.
3. New words. Types of neologisms
Along with the obsolescence of words, new words appear in the language - neologisms (Greek neos - “new”, logos - “word”). A distinction is made between linguistic, or national, and individual-stylistic, or author's, neologisms.
Linguistic neologisms are new formations that arise in the popular language:
a) as the names of new concepts (cosmodrome, aquanaut, lunodrome, mendelevium, mixer, melan, punched tape, resuscitation, docking, etc.),
b) as new names instead of outdated ones (zeppelin - airship, aviator - pilot, pulmonologist - phthisiatrician, slang - jargon),
c) as words with new semantics while maintaining or losing old meanings (marsporter - “the main jet engine of a rocket or aircraft”, archer - “an athlete engaged in archery”, memory “an electronic machine device for recording, storing and issuing information” and etc.).
Linguistic neologisms can be divided into lexical and semantic. Lexical neologisms are new names for new or pre-existing concepts, semantic ones are new meanings of existing words.
Currently, there is an active process of expanding the vocabulary in the following groups: in the economic sphere, in the field of science, its practical application, in medicine, in the field of sports, culture, in the field of computer technology: brand manager, soft maker, marketer, distributor , hirudotherapist, parapsychologist, website holder, web design, couturier, top model, curler, diver, sales, prime time, multiplex, etc.
Most new words are borrowed words.
National neologisms are contrasted with author's, or individual-stylistic, neologisms. They not only denote concepts, but are also a figurative, expressive means that more specifically characterizes an object and more fully and accurately expresses a thought. They are created according to word-formation models existing in the language. Unlike linguistic neologisms, they retain novelty and originality for many years: ogoncharovan, kuchelbeckerno, half-scoundrel, half-ignorant (in A. Pushkin), pompadour, biliberdonets, bedbug (in M. Saltykov-Shchedrin), smart-thin, trembling-leaved ( in N. Gogol), grows dark, turns golden (in A. Blok), waxes poetic, pociceronistic, sourness (in A. Chekhov), dragonfly, poetic, illiterate, celebrate, Monte-dwarf (in V. Mayakovsky).
4. The role of obsolete words in modern Russian language
Historicisms differ from archaisms in their purpose. They are the only names for certain concepts, and therefore perform a mainly nominative function in the language. Historicisms have no parallels in the modern Russian language, and therefore they are turned to when the need arises to name some objects or phenomena that have come out of everyday life. In modern language, historicisms have limited use, for example, in scientific works on history.
Archaisms, being synonyms in relation to commonly used words, differ from them in additional shades. Therefore, they are used as a bright stylistic means to create the color of the era, to stylize speech, to socially characterize characters through speech means.
Archaisms can be used not only in the speech of the characters, but also in the language of the author.
Archaisms are also used to create an elevated, solemn style (and very often Old Slavonicisms are used for this purpose). In this function, archaisms appear in the language of fiction, and in journalism, and in oratory, and in judicial speech.
Literature
1. Emelyanova O.N. About the “passive vocabulary of the language” and “outdated vocabulary” // Russian speech. – 2004. – No. 1.
2. Modern Russian language: Theory. Analysis of linguistic units: In 2 hours / Ed. E.I. Dibrova. – M., 2001. – Part 1.
3. Fomina M.I. Modern Russian language. Lexicology. – M., 2001.
4. Shansky N.M. Lexicology of the modern Russian language. – M., 1972.
Control questions
1. What groups of words are included in passive vocabulary? On what basis?
2. What are the reasons for the obsolescence of words in the Russian language?
3. What is the reason for the identification of types of archaisms?
4. What are the functions of obsolete words of artistic speech?
Active and passive vocabulary are distinguished due to the different usage of words.
Active vocabulary (active vocabulary) consists of words that a speaker of a given language not only understands, but also uses and actively uses. Depending on the level of linguistic development of speakers, their active vocabulary averages from 300-400 words to 1500-2000 words. The active composition of the vocabulary includes the most frequent words that are used every day in communication, the meanings of which are known to all speakers: earth, white, go, many, five, on.
Active words also include socio-political vocabulary (social, progress, competition, economics, etc.), as well as words that belong to special vocabulary and terminology, but denote relevant concepts and are therefore known to many non-specialists: atom, gene, genocide, prevention, cost-effective, virtual, atom, anesthesia, verb, ecology.
The passive vocabulary (passive vocabulary) includes words that are rarely used by the speaker in ordinary speech communication. The meanings are not always clear to speakers.
Passive words form three groups:
1) archaisms;
2) historicisms;
3) neologisms.
1 Archaisms (from Greek archaios ‘ancient’) - obsolete words or expressions, displaced from active use by synonymous units: neck - neck , right hand - right hand, in vain- in vain, in vain, since ancient times- from time immemorial, actor- actor, this- this, that is to say- that is .
The following types of archaisms are distinguished:
1) actually lexical - these are words that are completely outdated, as an integral sound complex: lichba ‘account’, otrokovitsa ‘teenage girl’, influenza ‘flu’;
2) semantic - these are words with an outdated meaning: belly (in the meaning of 'life'), shame (in the meaning of 'spectacle'), existent (in the meaning of 'existing'), outrageous (in the meaning of 'calling for indignation, for rebellion') ;
3) phonetic - a word that retained the same meaning, but had a different sound design in the past: historia (history), glad (hunger), vrata (gate), mirror (mirror), piit (poet), osmoy (eighth), fire ' fire';
4) accented - words that in the past had an emphasis different from the modern one: symbol, music, ghost, shudder, against;
5) morphological - words with an outdated morphemic structure: ferocity - ferocity, nervous - nervous, collapse - collapse, disaster - disaster, answer - answer.
Archaisms are used in speech:
a) to recreate the historical flavor of the era (usually in historical novels, stories);
b) to give speech a touch of solemnity, pathetic emotion (in poetry, in an oratory, in a journalistic speech);
c) to create a comic effect, irony, satire, parody (usually in feuilletons, pamphlets);
d) for the speech characteristics of a character (for example, a person of clergy).
Historicisms are obsolete words that have fallen out of use due to the disappearance of the realities that they denoted: boyar, clerk, guardsman, baskak, constable, crossbow, shishak, caftan, okolotochny, solicitor. Words denoting the realities of the Soviet era also became historicisms: kombe-dy, nepman, revkom, socialist competition, Komsomol, five-year plan, district committee.
For polysemantic words, one of the meanings can become historic. For example, the commonly used word people has an outdated meaning of ‘servants, workers in a manor house’. The word PIONEER, meaning ‘member of a children’s organization in the USSR’, can also be considered obsolete.
Historicisms are used as a nominative means in scientific-historical literature, where they serve as names of the realities of past eras, and as a pictorial means in works of fiction, where they contribute to the reconstruction of a particular historical era.
Sometimes words that have become historicisms return to active use. This happens due to the return (reactualization) of the phenomenon itself denoted by this word. Such, for example, are the words gymnasium, lyceum, governor, Duma, etc.
3 Neologisms (from Greek neos 'new' + logos 'word') name words that have recently appeared in the language and are still unknown to a wide range of native speakers: mortgage, mundial, glamor, inauguration, creative, extreme, etc. After a word comes into widespread use, it ceases be a neologism. The emergence of new words is a natural process reflecting the development of science, technology, culture, and social relations.
There are lexical and semantic neologisms. Lexical neologisms are new words, the appearance of which is associated with the formation of new concepts in the life of society. These include words such as autobahn 'type of highway', jacuzzi 'large heated bathtub with hydromassage', label 'product label', remake 'remake of a previously filmed film', bluetooth 'a type of wireless communications for data transmission', as well as sponsor, hit, show, etc.
Semantic neo-logisms are words that belong to the active dictionary, but have acquired new, previously unknown meanings. For example, the word anchor in the 70s. received a new meaning ‘a special platform for fixing an astronaut, located on the orbital station next to the hatch’; the word CHELNOK in the 80s. acquired the meaning of “a small merchant who imports goods from abroad (or exports them abroad) with their subsequent sale in local markets.”
A special type of words of this kind are individually authored neologisms, which are created by poets, writers, and publicists with special stylistic purposes.
Their distinctive feature is that they, as a rule, do not become active vocabulary, remaining occasionalisms - single or rarely used new formations: Küchelbecker (A. Pushkin), green-haired (N. Gogol), Moscow soul (V. Belinsky) , passenger , become masculine (A. Chekhov), machinery (V. Yakhontov), frown (E. Isaev), six-story building (N. Tikhonov), vermutorno (V. Vysotsky). overblown (A. Blok), multi-powder, mandolin, hammer-handed (V. Mayakovsky).
Only individual author's formations over time become words in the active dictionary: industry (N. Karamzin), bungler (M. Saltykov-Shchedrin), pro-sate (V. Mayakovsky), mediocrity (I. Severyanin), etc.
The creation of new words is a creative process that reflects a person’s desire for novelty and completeness in the perception of reality. Native speakers create new words that reflect the nuances of existence and its assessment: for example, psychoteca, soulful, soulful dance, joyfulness, specialness, self-righteousness, etc. (from the collection of neologisms by M. Epstein).
However, the results of word searches should not always be considered successful. For example, the new formations found in the following statements are unlikely to enrich the national lexicon.
The question has been formed and guaranteed.
The store urgently needs a vegetable shop to sell vegetables.
There are also real masterpieces of toy making.
Material assets were stolen, although the warehouse was special.
Issues of the semantic system of language, the semantic structure of linguistic units, the relationship of various types of meaning, the development of methods for their research and a number of other complex issues of semasiology attract the attention of linguists of various schools and directions. The meaning of a word is one of the most complex and at the same time the most important not only linguistic, but also logical, psychological and philosophical categories, since it is directly related to the basic question of the relationship between thinking and language, concept and word, and it reflects the diversity of the inner world of man and surrounding reality. Modern linguistics, developing in many directions, has already accumulated significant experience in the study of lexical meaning. Lexical units carry different types of both extralinguistic and linguistic information itself, which underlies the identification of different types of meaning. Currently, in linguistics, much attention is paid to the problems of linguistic nomination, to which, in terms of their linguistic functions, the object of our study - obsolete words - belongs.
Language as a system is in constant motion, and the most mobile level of language is vocabulary: it first of all reacts to all changes in society, replenished with new words. At the same time, the names of objects and phenomena that are no longer used in the life of peoples fall out of use. In the functioning of the vocabulary of any language, including Russian, a dialectical contradiction is revealed: on the one hand, there is a desire for stability, stability, on the other, for constant change and development. Therefore, at each stage of existence in the language system, it is possible to distinguish active and passive vocabulary.
The active vocabulary includes all the vocabulary that is familiar, used every day in one or another area of communication, while the passive vocabulary includes outdated vocabulary and words that appear in speech and are included in the language system, tending to be consolidated in it. From obsolete words that form the peripheral part of the language system during the period of its functioning under study, one should distinguish those words that existed in the history of the language, but are unknown to ordinary speakers of the language of the analyzed era and cannot be understood without referring to specialized literature. Thus, in relation to the modern Russian language, the words arshin, konka, polites should be characterized as passive words, and the words skora - “skin”, loki - “puddle”, swagger - “puffiness, swagger”, etc. - as not included in the system of modern Russian language.
The concept of active and passive language stock was introduced into lexicographic theory and practice by L. V. Shcherba. Shcherba referred to passive vocabulary as words that have become less common and the range of use of which has narrowed. However, the passive vocabulary of a language “should not be confused with the passive vocabulary of a particular native speaker, depending on his profession, education, daily work, etc.”
There is no unity among scientists in understanding the essence of the term passive vocabulary. Broad understanding: the passive vocabulary includes words that are rarely used or are not used by all native speakers. These are the names of rare things; outdated words; words that have not yet become common property; words that exist either only in book or only in colloquial speech; words known only to a narrow circle of specialists in any field of knowledge. Narrow understanding: the passive vocabulary includes words that are understood by the majority of native speakers, but are rarely used, almost not used in everyday communication - part of the obsolete and part of the new vocabulary that is just entering the language system.
Obsolete and new words represent two fundamentally different groups in the vocabulary of the passive vocabulary.
Archaization process
The archaization of one of the meanings of a word is a very interesting phenomenon. The result of this process is the emergence of semantic, or semantic, archaisms, that is, words used in an unusual, outdated meaning for us. The process of archaization of part of the vocabulary of a language, as a rule, occurs gradually, therefore, among the obsolete words there are those that have a very significant “experience” (for example, child, vorog, reche, scarlet, therefore, this); others are removed from the vocabulary of the modern Russian language, since they belong to the Old Russian period of its development. Some words become obsolete in a very short period of time, having appeared in the language and disappeared in the modern period; Wed : shkrab - in the 20s replaced the word teacher, rabkrin - Workers' and Peasants' Inspectorate; NKVD officer - NKVD employee. Such nominations do not always have corresponding marks in explanatory dictionaries, since the process of archaization of a particular word may be perceived as not yet completed. The reasons for the archaization of vocabulary are different: they can be extra-linguistic in nature, if the refusal to use the word is associated with social transformations in the life of society, but they can also be determined by linguistic laws. For example, the adverbs oshyu, odesnu (left, right) disappeared from the active dictionary because the producing nouns shuytsa - “left hand” and desnitsa - “right hand” became archaic. In such cases, the systemic relationships of lexical units played a decisive role. Thus, the word shuytsa fell out of use, and the semantic connection of words united by this historical root also disintegrated (for example, the word shulga did not survive in the language in the meaning of “left-handed” and remained only as a surname, going back to a nickname). Antonymous pairs (shuytsa - right hand, oshyu - right hand), synonymous connections (oshyu, left) have been destroyed. However, the word right hand, despite the archaization of words associated with it through systemic relations, remained in the language for some time. In Pushkin's era, for example, it was used in the “high syllable” of poetic speech. One of the reasons was also a change in the productivity of service morphemes, for example: the loss of the word-formative variant dorogotnya and the appearance of the variant dorogotnya due to the fact that by the end of the 17th century. the suffix -rel- began to be added to the stems of verbs (cf.: running around, knocking, chattering), while the suffix -izn- began to be intensively used in denominative word formation (cheapness, novelty, whiteness). There are known cases of the revival of obsolete words, their return to the active vocabulary. Thus, in modern Russian, such nouns as soldier, officer, ensign, minister and a number of others are actively used, which after October became archaic, giving way to new ones: Red Army soldier, chief division, people's commissar, etc. In the 20s, from the passive vocabulary, the word leader was extracted, which even in the Pushkin era was perceived as outdated and was listed in the dictionaries of that time with the corresponding stylistic marking. Now it is being archaized again. Relatively recently, the Old Church Slavonic word parasite has lost its archaic connotation.
However, the return of some obsolete words to the active vocabulary is possible only in special cases and is always due to extralinguistic factors. If the archaization of a word is dictated by linguistic laws and is reflected in the systemic connections of vocabulary, then its revival is excluded.
Thus, we can conclude that the vocabulary of the Russian language is in constant development: it is regularly updated with new words, forming the composition of active and passive vocabulary. Active words usually include words used daily, in oral and written speech. Passive vocabulary consists of words that are used rarely and not by all native speakers. These may include outdated words, jargon or professionalism. Obsolete words arise as a result of the process of archaization. The reasons for this process may be extra-linguistic in nature or may be dictated by linguistic laws. Words also tend to return to the active vocabulary from the passive one, however, if the formation of an obsolete word was determined by linguistic factors, then it will never be revived.
HISTORISM AND ARCHAISMS IN O. MANDELSHTAM'S POETIC TEXTS
2. 1. Stylistic functions of obsolete words
2. 1. 1. Stylistic functions of historicisms
Among obsolete words, a special group consists of historicisms - the names of disappeared or irrelevant objects, phenomena, concepts, for example, oprichnik, chain mail, gendarme, policeman, hussar, tutor, institute, etc. The appearance of historicisms, as a rule, is caused by extra-linguistic reasons: social transformations in society, the development of production, the renewal of weapons, household items, etc.
Historicisms, unlike other obsolete words, do not have synonyms in the modern Russian language. This is explained by the fact that the very realities for which these words served as names are outdated. Thus, when describing distant times, recreating the flavor of bygone eras, historicisms perform the function of special vocabulary: they act as a kind of terms that do not have competing equivalents.
Historicisms can be classified into several semantic groups:
The first lexical-semantic group consists of words denoting positions and titles. This group includes words denoting a high social position of persons: tsar, boyar, prince. The next lexical-semantic group consists of words denoting military vocabulary. This includes words such as berdysh, chain mail, spear. The third lexical-semantic group consists of words denoting clothing. This group includes words such as caftan, bast shoes, terlik, feryaz. The fourth lexical-semantic group consists of words denoting buildings and their parts. These are words such as cell, bedchamber, cookhouse. The fifth lexical-semantic group consists of words denoting everyday concepts: tub, vzvar, cart.
Words that differ in the time of their appearance in the language become historicisms: they can be associated with very distant eras (tiun, voivode, oprichnina), and with recent events (tax in food, gubkom, district).
The meaning of historicisms as stylistically colored words acquires its special significance in works of fiction, since it is they that allow the author to find his own, unique style of presentation and, most importantly, to bring the reader as close as possible to the era discussed in the work. After all, it is words that allow us to most fully imagine the events, customs and customs of the past. This is due to the fact that language is a constantly changing organism that reacts very quickly to various not only cultural, but also political and social changes in society. Thus, the words boyar, tsar, etc. ceased to be used due to the disappearance of the concepts. The words of this group are called historicisms. Obsolete words include not only words that have long gone out of use, but also those that arose and became obsolete relatively recently. Native and borrowed words can be obsolete.
Obsolete words in modern literary language can perform various stylistic functions. In particular, historicisms are used in works of art about the historical past of our country to recreate the flavor of the era and depict antiquity.
2. 1. 2. Archaisms, their stylistic functions
Archaisms include the names of currently existing objects and phenomena, for some reason supplanted by other words belonging to the active vocabulary; for example: every day - always, comedian - actor, necessary - necessary, percy - chest, verb - to speak, to know - to know. Their main difference from historicisms is the presence of synonyms in modern language, devoid of a hint of archaism.
Words can be archaized only partially, for example, in their suffixal design (vysost - height), in their sound (ocm - eighth, goshpital - hospital), in their individual meanings (nature - nature, fairly - excellent, disorder - disorder). This gives grounds to distinguish several groups within archaisms:
1. Lexical archaisms - words that are outdated in all their meanings: lzya (possible), barber (hairdresser), zelo (very), therefore, know, is coming. They can also be divided into several subgroups, for example: a) A group of words denoting parts of the human face and body (mouth, eyes, face); b) Lexico-semantic group of words denoting a person according to some characteristic (child, husband, thief); c) Group of traditional poetisms. This group is represented by a number of very common, traditional and characteristic words for the poetic lexicon, such as bliss, delight, bush, curtains.
d) A group of words denoting the physical or emotional state of a person. It can combine such lexemes as vigil, hunger, hope and the word kruchina, recorded in dictionaries as folk poetic.
e) A group of words related to the theme of death (deceased, buried).
f) A group of words symbolically denoting a region, a land given by fate (vale, monastery); g) Words denoting speech (verb, verb, name), serving to create an atmosphere of sublimity and solemnity; h) A group of words related to the perception of phenomena in the surrounding world (look, listen, know, taste); i) A group of words denoting any action (perform, do, bestow, anoint).
2. Lexico-word-formation archaisms - words in which individual word-formation elements are outdated: fisherman, flirt, vskolki (since), necessary, handicrafts (craft), transgress.
3. Lexico-phonetic archaisms are words whose phonetic design is outdated and has undergone some changes in the process of the historical development of the language. The leading place here is occupied by incomplete words, which are representatives of genetic Slavicisms (solodky, vorog, young, breg, night, Sveisky (Swedish), Aglitsky (English), Iroism, atheism).
4. Lexico-semantic archaisms - words that have lost their individual meanings: guest - merchant, shame - spectacle, vulgar - popular, dream - thought.
5. Grammatical archaisms are outdated grammatical forms of nominal parts of speech. They can also be divided into several groups: a) A very large group consists of grammatical archaisms-nouns.
b) A sign of morphological archaization of adjectives is inflection: even. The -ago inflection of a full adjective is an indicator of the genitive singular.
c) A very small group of morphological archaisms is represented by pronouns (for example, personal az, interrogative colic, attributive).
Archaisms in modern literary language can perform various stylistic functions.
1. Archaisms, and especially Old Slavonicisms, which have replenished the passive composition of the vocabulary, give speech a sublime, solemn sound.
Old Church Slavonic vocabulary was used in this function even in ancient Russian literature. In the poetry of classicism, acting as the main component of the odic vocabulary, Old Slavonicisms determined the solemn style of “high poetry.” In poetic speech of the 19th century. With the archaizing Old Church Slavonic vocabulary, the outdated vocabulary of other sources, and above all Old Russianisms, was stylistically equalized. The tradition of writers turning to outdated high vocabulary in works of civil and patriotic themes is maintained in the Russian literary language in our time.
2. Archaisms are used in works of art about the historical past of our country to recreate the flavor of the era.
3. Obsolete words can be a means of speech characterization of characters, for example, clergy, monarchs.
4. Archaisms, and especially Old Slavonicisms, are used to recreate the ancient oriental flavor, which is explained by the closeness of Old Slavonic speech culture to biblical imagery.
5. Highly outdated vocabulary can be subject to ironic rethinking and act as a means of humor and satire. The comical sound of outdated words is noted in everyday stories and satire of the 17th century. , and later - in epigrams, jokes, parodies written by participants in linguistic polemics of the early 19th century. (members of the Arzamas society), who opposed the archaization of the Russian literary language.
In modern humorous and satirical poetry, outdated words are also often used as a means of creating an ironic coloring of speech.
When analyzing the stylistic functions of obsolete words in artistic speech, one cannot help but take into account the fact that their use in some cases may not be related to a specific stylistic task, but is determined by the characteristics of the author’s style and the individual preferences of the writer. In the poetic speech of Pushkin’s time, the appeal to incomplete words and other Old Slavonic expressions that have consonant Russian equivalents was often due to versification: in accordance with the requirement of rhythm and rhyme, the poet gave preference to one or another option (as “poetic license”): “I will sigh, and my languid voice, like a harp’s voice, will die quietly in the air” by Batyushkov; “Onegin, my good friend, was born on the banks of the Neva. ", "Go to the banks of the Neva, newborn creation. "at Pushkin. By the end of the 19th century. poetic liberties were eliminated and the amount of outdated vocabulary in the poetic language sharply decreased. However, also Blok, and Yesenin, and Mayakovsky, and Bryusov, and other poets of the early 20th century. they paid tribute to outdated words traditionally assigned to poetic speech (though Mayakovsky had already turned to archaisms primarily as a means of irony and satire). Echoes of this tradition are still found today; for example, in Yevtushenko’s works: Winter is a respectable regional city, but not a village at all.
In addition, it is important to emphasize that when analyzing the stylistic functions of obsolete words in a particular work of art, one should take into account the time of its writing and know the general linguistic norms that were in force in that era. After all, for a writer who lived a hundred or two hundred years ago, many words could have been completely modern, commonly used units that had not yet become a passive part of the vocabulary.
The need to turn to an outdated dictionary also arises for authors of scientific and historical works. To describe the past of Russia, its realities that have gone into oblivion, historicisms are used, which in such cases act in their own nominative function. Yes, academician D. S. Likhachev in his works “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”, “The Culture of Rus' in the Time of Andrei Rublev and Epiphanius the Wise” uses many words unknown to a modern speaker of the language, mainly historicisms, explaining their meaning.
Sometimes the opinion is expressed that outdated words are also used in official business speech. Indeed, in legal documents there are sometimes words that in other conditions we have the right to attribute to archaisms: deed, punishment, retribution, deed. In business papers they write: herewith attached, this year, the undersigned, the above-named. Such words should be considered special. They are set in an official business style and do not carry any expressive or stylistic meaning in the context. However, the use of outdated words that do not have a strict terminological meaning can cause unjustified archaization of business language.
2. 2. Features of the use of outdated vocabulary in the poetry of O. Mandelstam
The very fact that many modern authors turn to archaic, high vocabulary suggests that they recognize this vocabulary as one of the means of stylistic expressiveness. Thus, the lexical layer under consideration is not alien to the language of poetry of the 20th century.
When analyzing outdated vocabulary in O. Mandelstam’s poetic texts, one should pay attention to the fact that historicisms are quite rare in them. We noted 36 word usages.
The appearance of this special group of obsolete words, as a rule, is caused by extra-linguistic reasons: social transformations in society, the development of production, the renewal of weapons, household items, etc.
Historicisms, unlike other obsolete words, do not have synonyms in the modern Russian language. This is explained by the fact that the very realities for which these words served as names are outdated. Thus, when describing distant times, recreating the flavor of bygone eras, historicisms perform the function of special vocabulary: they act as a kind of terms that do not have competing equivalents. Words that differ in the time of their appearance in the language become historicisms: they can be associated with very distant eras, and with recent events. In O. Mandelstam's poems, this layer of outdated words is used primarily for historical stylization, to reflect the flavor of the era in which the action takes place.
Of the 36 historicisms, we found only 3 adjectives (morocco, lordly and Persian).
All historicisms found in poetic texts can be divided into several semantic groups, which mean:
1. Positions and titles (prince, duke, khan, nobleman, king, lordly);
1) The whistle of a steam locomotive. The prince is coming.
There is a retinue in the glass pavilion!
And, dragging the saber angrily,
The officer comes out, arrogant, -
I have no doubt - this is the prince.
2) The lamb on the mountain, the monk on the donkey,
To the duke's soldiers, slightly foolish
From wine drinking, plague and garlic,
And in a net of blue flies to a sleeping child.
2. Military vocabulary (chain mail, sword, front, armor, armored cars, rapier, mace);
1) On the square with armored cars
I see a man: he
He scares the wolves with burning brands:
Freedom, equality, law!
2) The shine of the steel of a samurai sword
And all the primordial darkness
They will merge into one nugget,
When more damned than stones
Captivating evil chin
At my little Mary's.
1) Ever flying to the silver trumpets of Asia -
Armenia Armenia!
The sun generously gives away Persian money -
Armenia, Armenia!
2) Ah, Erivan, Erivan! Or a bird painted you,
Or did the lion color like a child from a colored pencil case?
Ah, Erivan, Erivan! Not a city - a hard nut,
I love Babylons of your large-mouthed crooked streets.
4. Clothes (jackets, cap);
1) The skull develops from life
All over the forehead - from temple to temple -
He teases himself with the cleanliness of his seams,
It is clear with an understanding dome,
Foams with thoughts, dreams about himself, -
Cup of cups and fatherland to fatherland,
A star-stitched cap,
The Bonnet of Happiness is Shakespeare's father.
2) Alas, the candle melted
Hardened young men,
That they walked half-shouldered
In green camisoles,
What overpowered the shame
And the plague
And to all kinds of gentlemen
They served us right away.
5. Buildings and their parts (cell, acropolis);
1) In the northern capital a dusty poplar languishes,
The transparent dial got entangled in the foliage,
And in the dark greenery a frigate or an acropolis
Shines from afar - brother to water and sky.
6. Everyday concepts (morocco, ten-kopeck coin, Moskvoshway era):
1) It's time for you to know, I am also a contemporary,
I am a man of the Moscow seamstress era, -
Look how my jacket is puffing up on me,
How can I walk and talk!
2) When you think about how you are connected to the world,
You don’t believe yourself: nonsense!
Midnight key to someone else's apartment,
Yes, a silver ten-kopeck piece in my pocket,
Yes, celluloid films are a thief.
Table 2. 1
Semantic groups Historicisms Quantity
Positions and titles Prince, duke, khan, nobleman, king, lordly 6
Military vocabulary chain mail, sword, front, armor, armored car, rapier, mace, slings, 11
chariots, squads, rook
Name of peoples, countries barbarians, Khazars, Saracens, Persians, Byzantium, Erivan, Janissaries, 9
Scythian, Bedouin
Clothes camisole, cap 2
Cell buildings, acropolis 2
Everyday concepts: morocco, ten-kopeck piece, Moskvoshvey era, veche, spindle 5
Unlike historicisms, archaisms are much more common in Mandelstam’s works. We noted 174 uses. The most common nouns, adjectives and verbs found in texts.
Table 2. 2
Partial characteristics of archaisms in the poems of O. Mandelstam
Parts of speech Examples Percentages
Nouns godina, shelom, tympanum, bonds, apses, exedra, 64%
archangel, seraphim, under the canopy, boundaries, cart, coffee, snare, penates, downing, trees, tithes, spinning wheel, halls, vigils, mob, in radiance, heights, sleds, veks, curtains, flails, canoes, on purple, plebeians , Chaldeans, fiends, lots, barn, influx, quiver, purple, skiffs, tubs, lares, abysses, oblivion, robe, arrogance, lancers, forerunners, disgrace, tabernacles, skald, lightning, Levite, ether, child, shacks, spring , scaffold, hope, palace, barns, bosom, potholes, lists, senets, troublemakers, barber, sorcerer, stench, firmament, dishes, host, food, delight, milkiness, seven-branch, variations, birdhouse, sherbet, devil, hail, men , gulbischa, song, people, lies, holy fool, sleepyhead, judge, fingers, right hand, rumor, forehead, mouth, eyes, cheek, zegzica, head, cage, zephyr, palaces, goad, temple, petition
Adjectives of ethereal, mortal, tawdry, Lord's, 11%
foreign, lush, octagonal, azure, milky, spring, non-silent, Lenten, mortal, blessed, obscene, fragrant, not having, blessed, sweet-voiced, Italian, silvery, prophetic, midnight
Participles stolen, tasted, absent-minded, underpainted, 7%
future, weary, overwhelmed
Verbs and gerunds Collide, cajole, drag around, be ashamed, 12%
floats, devours, descends, reigns, embraces, enters, rests, twists, collides, kuralesit, said, rumor, behold, used to say, having seen, unconscious, judged, orbiting, ascend, reigns, treat, rdeya, prevails
Pronouns se, siya, sei, sii 2%
Adverb a hundred times, today, pleasantly, truly, in vain, 4%
Among the obsolete nouns there are both concrete (riza, skald, lightning, levite, krinitsa, block) and abstract (oblivion, hope, delight, lie).
Archaic verbs more often denote a person’s internal experience (flaunt, drag, be ashamed).
There are even fewer adjectives in poetic texts, mostly relative adjectives (morocco, foreign, bayunny, octagonal, milky), qualitative ones are less common (coarse, mortal). There are isolated cases of the use of pronouns and adverbs.
The predominance of archaisms-nouns and archaisms-verbs in O. Mandelstam's poems is apparently due to the fact that in the language there are quantitatively more nouns and verbs than other parts of speech. In Mandelstam's poems, the total number of nouns with the meaning of action, state, quality and abstract concept keeps balance with the number of object nouns. Of even greater importance is the fact that Mandelstam’s noun is one of the main carriers of imagery.
Mandelstam's early poems are dominated by adjective epithets, primarily qualitative ones. They are followed by participles - carriers of action, substitutes for the predicate verb.
Based on the existing classification of archaisms, we have identified the following groups:
1. The first group consists of proper lexical archaisms: lar, abyss, oblivion, robe, arrogance, lancers, forerunners, disgrace, tabernacle, skald, mortal, lightning, Levitom, child, shacks, well, scaffold, hope, palace, rigi, bosom, ruts, forehead, right hand, fingers, compares, lists, senets, petition, troublemaker, tawdry, barber, founded, right hand, fingers, said, rumor, rumor, sorcerer, stench, foreign, firmament, viand, cajole, host, lush, food, lists, delight, sledge, eyes, lips, cheeks, zegzice, palaces, we see, behold, apse, exedra, archangel, seraphim, under the canopy, coming, boundaries, orbiting, hour, shell, tympanums, in vain, goad , arb, treat, tenetah, obuyan, penatov, sbitnya, mob, sled, vekshi, rdeya, flails, canoe, on purple, plebeians, Chaldeans, fiends, influx, quiver, purple, skiffs, sbiten, prevails, on a tub, prophetic , weeks; For example:
1) But clinking the spoon, it’s touching to look at
So that in a cramped gazebo, among dusty acacias,
Accept favorably from the bakery graces
Fragile food in an intricate cup
2) And after how pathetic Sumarokov
He babbled his memorized role,
Like the royal staff in the tabernacle of the prophets,
Solemn pain blossomed among us.
3) And in the inflamed interval,
Where we see nothing -
You pointed in the throne room
Celebration of white glory!
2. The second group includes lexical-phonetic archaisms, words whose phonetic design is outdated and has undergone changes: milkiness, seven-branch, lotions, variations, midnight, judge, azure, in radiance, skvoreshnik, vigil, Lord, octagonal, milky, vernal . The leading place is occupied here by non-vocal combinations, which give poeticization of speech and high expression: hail, before, dragging, head, sweet-voiced, tree, silver; For example:
1) Where is dear Troy? Where is the royal house, where is the maiden house?
It will be destroyed, Priam's tall tower.
And the arrows fall like dry wooden rain,
And other arrows grow on the ground, like hazel trees.
2) I wandered into the toy thicket
And he opened the azure grotto.
Am I real?
Will death really come?
3) When the grass disappears from the mosaics
And the church is echoing and empty,
I'm in the dark, like a crafty serpent,
I am dragging myself to the foot of the Cross.
3. The third group consists of grammatical archaisms: whispers, behold, this, this, these; Lenten, beloved, undecorated, blessed, mortal, blessed; For example:
1) And the fragile shell of the wall,
Like a house of an uninhabited heart,
Fill you with whispers of foam,
Fog, wind and rain
2) I love the priest’s leisurely step,
Wide extension of the shroud
And in the old net the darkness of Gennesaret
Lenten weeks.
3) We are pleased with the dominance of the four elements,
But the fifth was created by a free man.
Doesn't space deny superiority?
This chastely built ark?
4. The fourth group includes lexical-semantic archaisms: men, judged, for example:
1) Like a crane wedge into foreign borders -
On the heads of kings there is divine foam -
Where are you sailing? Whenever Elena
What is Troy alone for you, Achaean men?
2) Hagia Sophia – stay here
The Lord judged nations and kings!
After all, your dome, according to an eyewitness,
As if on a chain, suspended to heaven.
5. The fifth group consists of lexical and word-formative archaisms: silent, be ashamed, turn, hundredfold, of old, gulbischa, song, descends, stolen, entrails, emlet, enters, curly, stones, girdles, golden-haired, people, lies, fool, today, reigns, kindly, ascend, temple, obscene, fragrant, coffee, those who do not have, to their heart's content, Italian, tithes, halls, heights, curtains,
1) And the temple has a small body,
A hundred times more animated
The giant that is whole rock
Helplessly pinned to the ground!
2) Stay foam, Aphrodite,
And return the word to music,
And be ashamed of your heart,
Merged from the fundamental principle of life!
3) And I sing the wine of times -
Source of Italian speech -
And in the cradle of the ancestral Aryans
Slavic and Germanic flax!
Among the archaisms we found, we can distinguish the following lexico-thematic groups:
1) A group of words denoting parts of the human face and body: eyes, mouth, cheeks.
2) A lexical-semantic group of words denoting a person according to some characteristic: lancers, forerunners, skald, Levite, child, troublemaker, barber, sorcerer.
3) A group of traditional poetisms: neg, twist, rumor, delight, ethereal.
4) A group of words denoting the physical or emotional state of a person: oblivion, hope, is based, mortal.
5) Words denoting objects: birdhouse, stones, sledges, chests, potholes.
6) Words related to church vocabulary: robe, tabernacle, palace, firmament, seven-branched candlestick, Lord's, Lenten, week, will enter, holy fool, today, forerunner.
7) Abstract vocabulary: oblivion, arrogance, disgrace, abyss, hope, milkiness, lies.
8) Words denoting a dwelling (room) or part of it: shacks, senets.
Speaking about the stylistic functions that archaisms perform in the poetry of Osip Mandelstam, it should be noted that they play an important role in the formation of his special poetic style.
1. Function of poeticizing speech:
No, not the moon, but a light dial
Shines on me, and what is my fault,
What faint stars do I feel the milkiness?
2) Europe bitterly listens to the mighty splash,
The fat sea boils all around,
It can be seen that the oily sheen of the waters frightens her.
And I would like to slide off the rough cliffs.
2. High expression creation function:
1) You walked through a cloud of fog,
Delicate blush on the cheeks
2) The sound is cautious and dull
The fruit that fell from the tree
Among the incessant chant
Deep forest silence.
3. Historical stylization function:
Offended, they go to the hills,
Like plebeians dissatisfied with Rome,
Old sheep women are black Chaldeans,
Spawn of the night in the hoods of darkness.
4. Function of folklore stylization:
It's night outside. Master's lie:
After me there might be a flood.
What then? The wheeze of the townspeople
And the hustle to the wardrobe.
Thus, in poetic texts O. Mandelstam most often uses lexical, word-formation and phonetic archaisms, because they are more recognizable in the modern Russian language than grammatical archaisms, i.e. outdated forms of various parts of speech. In particular, most archaisms are expressed by nouns, verbs and adjectives.
We can conclude that the peculiarity of the use of archaisms (their thematic groups) by O. Mandelstam is that, unlike other poets, he does not primarily use words denoting parts of the human face and body, although such also occur, but, above all, , are outdated words denoting church concepts, as well as archaisms denoting a person based on some characteristic. This is due to the theme of the poet’s poems: quite often in his work there are poems on a church theme and poetic works related to philosophical lyrics, which depict people with different spiritual quests and ways of life. His favorite lexical sources are ancient mythology, the Bible, architectural and musical professional dictionaries. A large number of specifically literary, bookish words help create a solemn atmosphere, however, the poet does not fall into a literary template and dead bookishness. In the early works of O. Mandelstam, there are many more cases of the use of outdated words than in the poetic works of the last years of the author’s life. This change in style may be associated with historical and political changes in Russia: before the revolution of 1917, O. Mandelstam used more historicisms than after it.
Thus, the entire vocabulary of the Russian language is divided into active and passive. Active vocabulary includes all the vocabulary that is familiar and used every day in one or another area of communication. Passive - these are words that have become less common and the range of use of which has narrowed, that is, obsolete or obsolete words. The process of archaization is the emergence of semantic, or semantic, archaisms.
There are two groups of obsolete words: historicisms and archaisms. Historicisms are the names of disappeared or irrelevant objects, phenomena, concepts.
Having analyzed the poetic texts of O. Mandelstam, we noted 36 uses of historicisms. The dominant part of speech is the noun, but adjectives are also found. The historicisms found in the texts can be divided into several semantic groups of words that mean:
1. Positions and titles (princes, duke, khan, nobleman, king, lordly);
2. Military vocabulary (chain mail, sword, front, armor, armored car, rapier);
3. Names of peoples; countries that have now collapsed (Barbarian, Khazars, Saracens, Persians, Byzantium, Erivan);
4. Clothes (camisole, cap);
5. Buildings and their parts (cells);
6. Everyday concepts (morocco, ten-kopeck coin, Moskvoshway era).
The main stylistic function of the use of historicisms in Mandelstam’s works is to recreate the flavor of the depicted era.
Archaisms are found much more often in Mandelstam’s works. We noted 174 word usages. Most often in Mandelstam's poetic texts nouns and adjectives are found. We classified archaisms into several semantic groups: proper lexical archaisms (rizoyu, palace, bosom), lexical-phonetic archaisms (semyvesveshnik, milkiness, skvoreshnik; inconsistency grade, vlachas); grammatical archaisms (whispers, kuralesit; pronouns behold, this; inflections of Lenten, mortal); lexical-semantic archaisms (men); lexical and word-formative archaisms (shame on you, hundredfold, lie);
In the poems of O. Mandelstam, we also identified the following lexico-thematic groups of archaisms, which denote parts of the human face and body (eyes, mouth, cheeks), a person according to some characteristic (skald, child, barber, sorcerer), physical or emotional state person (oblivion, hope, mortal), objects (skvoreshnik, sherbet, lara), housing or part of it (shacks, senets), as well as words related to traditional poetism (neg, kruchinsya, delight, ethereal), church vocabulary (seven-veshchnik , Lenten, week, today) and abstract vocabulary (abyss, hope, milkiness, lie).
We noted that in the poetic works of O. Mandelstam there are more proper lexical, lexical-phonetic and lexical-word-formative archaisms. Frequent cases of the use of words related to church vocabulary or denoting a person on any basis are associated with the themes of the author’s poetic works. Church or philosophical themes dominate in O. Mandelstam’s work, which reveals the psychologism of the human soul. Also, the use of words belonging to these thematic groups is associated with the vocabulary in the author’s poetic texts, which he draws from ancient mythology, the Bible, musical and architectural dictionaries, which creates high expression in his works.
Archaisms are organically included in the fabric of Osip Mandelstam’s works. Archaisms participate in the formation of her unique poetic style and are used to poeticize speech, create a solemn atmosphere, and serve as a method of historical and folklore stylization.
1.3 Active and passive vocabulary of the Russian literary language
Vocabulary composition is the most mobile language level. Changing and improving vocabulary is directly related to human production activity, to the economic, social, and political life of the people. The vocabulary reflects all processes of the historical development of society. With the advent of new objects and phenomena, new concepts arise, and with them, words for naming these concepts. With the death of certain phenomena, the words that name them go out of use or change their sound appearance and meaning. Taking all this into account, the vocabulary of the national language can be divided into two large groups: active dictionary and passive dictionary.
The active vocabulary includes those everyday words whose meaning is clear to speakers of a given language. The words of this group are devoid of any shades of obsolescence.
The passive vocabulary includes those that are either outdated or, conversely, due to their novelty, have not yet become widely known and are also not used every day. Thus, passive words are divided, in turn, into obsolete and new (neologisms). Those words that have fallen out of active use are considered obsolete. For example, words that have ceased to be used due to the disappearance of the concepts that they denoted are clearly outdated: boyar, clerk, veche, streltsy, oprichnik, vowel (member of the city duma), mayor, etc. The words of this group are called historicisms, they are more or less known and understood by native speakers, but not actively used by them. In modern language, they are addressed only when it is necessary to name objects or phenomena that have fallen out of use, for example, in special scientific-historical literature, as well as in the language of works of art in order to recreate a particular historical era.
If the concept of an object, phenomenon, action, quality, etc. is preserved, and the names assigned to it are replaced in the process of language development by new ones, more acceptable for one reason or another for the new generation of native speakers, then the old names also become category of passive vocabulary, into the group of so-called archaisms (Greek archaios - ancient). For example: ponezhe - therefore, vezhdy - eyelids, guest - merchant, merchant (mostly foreign), guest - trade, etc. Some of the words of this type are practically beyond the boundaries of even the passively existing lexical reserves of the modern literary language. For example: thief - thief, robber; stry - paternal uncle, stryinya - paternal uncle's wife; uy - maternal uncle; stirrup - down; sling - roof and vault of heaven; vezha - tent, tent, tower; fat - fat, lard and many others.
Some of the archaisms are preserved in modern language as part of phraseological units: to get into a mess, where a mess is a spinning rope machine; you can’t see where zga (stga) is a road, path; hit with the forehead, where the forehead is the forehead; go crazy with fat, where fat is wealth; protect it like the apple of your eye, where the apple is the pupil, etc.
The process of transition of words from the group of active use to the passive group is long. It is caused by both extra-linguistic reasons, for example social changes, and linguistic ones, of which a very significant role is played by the systemic connections of obsolete words: the more extensive, varied and durable they are, the slower the word passes into the passive layers of the dictionary.
Obsolete words include not only those words that have long gone out of use, but also those that arose and became obsolete quite recently, for example: educational program (liquidation of illiteracy), surplus appropriation, tax in kind, committee of the poor, etc. Obsolete words can also be primordial words (for example , shelom, khorobry, oboloko, etc.) and borrowed ones, for example, Old Slavonicisms (vezhdy - eyelids, alkati - starve, fast, robe - clothes, dlan - palm, etc.).
Depending on whether the word becomes completely obsolete, whether its individual elements are used, or whether the phonetic design of the word changes, several are distinguished; types of archaisms: proper lexical, lexical-semantic, lexical-phonetic and lexical-word-formative.
Actually, lexical ones appear when the whole word becomes obsolete and passes into passive archaic layers, for example: kdmon - horse, mock - perhaps, glebeti - drown, knit, zane - since, because, etc.
Lexical-semantic words include some polysemantic words that have one or more meanings that are outdated. For example, the word “guest” has an obsolete meaning of “foreign trader, merchant,” while the rest have been preserved, although somewhat rethought (2): guest-1) a person who came to visit someone; 2) a stranger (in modern language - an outsider invited or admitted to any meeting or meeting). Such archaisms also include one of the meanings of the words: shame - spectacle; humanity - humanity, humanity; to lie - to tell (see A.S. Pushkin: A friend of humanity sadly notices the destructive shame of ignorance everywhere), etc.
Lexical-phonetic archaisms include words in which, in the process of the historical development of the language, their sound form has changed (while maintaining the content): prospekt - prospect, aglitsky - English, sveysky - Swedish, state - state, voksal - station, piit - poet and many others. Lexico-word-formative archaisms are those that have been preserved in the modern language in the form of separate elements, cf.: burr and usnie - skin, radio broadcasting and broadcast - speak, p. The gum and the right hand are the right hand, to arouse and sparkle is anxiety, it is impossible to lie - freedom (hence the benefit, benefit) and many others.
The stylistic functions of obsolete vocabulary (historicisms and archaisms) are very diverse. Both are used to reproduce the flavor of the era, to recreate some historical events. For this purpose, they were widely used by A.S. Pushkin in “Boris Godunov”, A.N. Tolstoy in “Peter I”, A. Chapygin in the novel “Stepan Razin”, V. Kostylev in “Ivan the Terrible”, L. Nikulin in the novel “Loyal Sons of Russia” and many others.
Both types of obsolete words, especially archaisms, are often introduced into the text by writers, poets, and publicists to impart special solemnity, sublimity, and pathos to the speech.
Outdated vocabulary can sometimes be used as a means of humor, irony, and satire. In this case, archaizing elephants are often used in an environment that is semantically alien to them.
New words, or neologisms (Greek ne-os - new logos - concept), are, first of all, words that appear in the language to designate new concepts, for example: cybernetics, lavsan, letilan (antimicrobial fiber), interferon (medicine ), okeonaut, eveemovets (from EVM - electronic computer), lepovets (from power transmission line - power line), etc. Especially many neologisms arise in the field of scientific and technical terminology. Neologisms also arose during Pushkin’s time, but at the moment they are not relevant for us. Such words form a group of proper lexical neologisms.
The emergence of new names for those concepts that already had a name in the language is also one of the ways in which neologisms appear. In this case, there is a loss of some words due to the activation of others, synonymous with the first, then the transition of the repressed words into passive layers of vocabulary, i.e. their archaization. This is the path that the words difference took at one time (instead of difference and difference; cf. A.S. Pushkin in Eugene Onegin: At first, mutually different, They were boring to each other..., and also: I am always glad to notice the difference between Onegin and me), disaster (instead of disaster), steamship (instead of a pyroscaffe, steamboat and steam ship), a steam locomotive (instead of a steamboat, cf. in the poem by the 19th century poet Kukolnik: A steamboat is rushing quickly in an open field), a helicopter (instead of a helicopter and a gyroplane ) and etc.
Neologisms are also words newly formed according to certain normative models from words that have existed for a long time. For example: activist - activist, activist, activist, activism, activation; atom - nuclear-powered ship, nuclear scientist, atomic specialist; moon - lunar, lunar, lunar rover; rocket - rocket launcher, rocket carrier, launch vehicle, rocket launch site; space - cosmodrome, cosmonaut, space helmet, space vision and many other simple and complex words that make up a group of so-called lexical and word-forming neologisms.
Neologisms also include words and phrases previously known in the Russian language that have developed a new meaning, cf., for example: pioneer - discoverer and pioneer - member of a children's communist organization; brigadier - a military rank in the tsarist army and brigadier - leader of a team of people at an enterprise, plant 1; noble - famous and noble - belonging to the top of the privileged class (noble milkmaid, noble nobleman); dynasty - a number of successively reigning monarchs from the same family and dynasty - representatives of different generations from the same family, having the same profession (working dynasty 2, mining dynasty), etc. Words that arose as a result of rethinking previously known language of nominations, some researchers call lexical-semantic neologisms.
Semantic updating of words is one of the most active processes that replenish the lexical system of the modern Russian language. Around a word that begins to live anew, completely new lexemes are grouped, new synonyms and new oppositions arise.
A neologism that has arisen together with a new object, thing, or concept is not immediately included in the active composition of the dictionary. After a new word becomes commonly used and accessible to the public, it ceases to be a neologism.
Such a path has been followed, for example, by the words Soviet, collectivization, link, tractor driver, Komsomol member, Leninist, pioneer, Michurinets, metro builder, virgin land worker, satellite, cosmonaut and many others.
Due to the continuous historical development of the vocabulary of the language, many words, back in the 19th century. perceived as neologisms (freedom, equality, citizen, public, humanity, realism, fiction, freedom, reality, spontaneity, idea and the like 1), in the modern Russian language are the property of an active vocabulary stock.
Consequently, the specific linguistic repertoire that characterizes and reveals this concept is changeable and depends on the historical process of development of society and language.
In addition to neologisms, which are the property of the national language, new words are distinguished, formed by one or another writer with a specific stylistic purpose. Neologisms of this group are called occasional (or individual-stylistic) and some of them subsequently enriched the vocabulary of the general literary language. Others remain among occasional formations; they perform a figurative and expressive role only in a certain context.
If you can get the necessary information about outdated vocabulary (historicisms and archaisms) in explanatory dictionaries, as well as in special historical dictionaries of the Russian language, then until recently there was no special dictionary of new words, although interest in neologisms arose a very long time ago. Thus, in the times of Peter the Great, the “New Vocabulary Lexicon” was compiled, which was essentially a short dictionary of foreign words.
In addition to the recently published explanatory dictionaries (Ozhegov's dictionary, BAS, MAC), in 1971 the dictionary sector of the Institute of the Russian Language of the Academy of Sciences published a dictionary-reference book on materials from the press and literature of the 60s, “New Words and Meanings” (ed. N. .3. Kotelova and Yu.S. Sorokin). This is the first attempt to publish such a dictionary. In the future, it is planned to publish such reference books once every 6-8 years.
The dictionary, as the compilers and publishers note, is not normative. It explains and illustrates that part of the new words and meanings (about 3500) that have become more or less widespread (this should not be confused with the concept of an active vocabulary).
Thus, the meanings of words form a system within one word (polysemy), within the vocabulary as a whole (synonymy, antonymy), within the entire language system (connections of vocabulary with other levels of language). The specificity of the lexical level of language is the orientation of vocabulary to reality (sociality), the permeability of the system formed by words, its mobility, and the associated impossibility of accurately calculating lexical units.
Chapter 2. Vocabulary of the Russian literary language in the works of A.S. Pushkin
In Pushkin's language, the entire previous culture of Russian literary expression not only reached its highest peak, but also found a decisive transformation.
Pushkin's language, reflecting directly or indirectly the entire history of the Russian literary language, starting from the 17th century. until the end of the 30s of the 19th century, at the same time he determined in many directions the path of subsequent development of Russian literary speech and continues to serve as a living source and an unsurpassed example of artistic expression for the modern reader.
In the 20-30s of the XIX century. Further enrichment of the lexical composition of the Russian literary language continues. The approval in the literary language of words that were, to one degree or another, known to the previous period is completed. At the same time, words that only at the beginning of the 19th century are quickly assimilated into the literary language. began to enter literary circulation.
Before Pushkin, the problem of literary language was a problem of vocabulary selection. This is exactly how this question was posed by supporters of the so-called old and new syllables - the Shishkovists and Karamzinists. A syllable was a stylistic type of speech, characterized by a special selection and combination of various layers of vocabulary in different genres. It is interesting to note that both opposing sides proceeded from the same thesis - the need to develop the original principles of Russian vocabulary and their use in Russian speech. But A.S. Shishkov and his followers believed that the original Russian principles were embedded in archaic (including Old Church Slavonic) vocabulary. It was proposed to replace borrowed words with archaic ones. In contrast to this, N.M. Karamzin and his school believed that the original Russian principles were embedded in the generally accepted neutral vocabulary, and these principles should be developed in the direction of convergence with the vocabulary of Western European languages. It is something popular that brings the Russian language closer to other languages. Karamzinists rejected common speech and considered it necessary to preserve the generally accepted borrowed vocabulary that had become established in the Russian language. They widely used tracing.
It has become a generally accepted opinion that in the works of A.S. In Pushkin, these two elements - book-archaic and salon speech - merged into one. This is true. But there is a third element in the language of the great poet - folk speech, which first made itself felt in his poem "Ruslan and Lyudmila." It is precisely starting from Pushkin that the trend towards democratization of the Russian literary language acquires a universal and sustainable character. The origin of this trend can be traced in the works of G.R. Derzhavina, D.I. Fonvizina, A.S. Griboyedov and especially I.A. Krylov, but it acquires a general literary character in the works of A.S. Pushkin. The special quality of Pushkin’s democratization of literary speech was manifested in the fact that the poet considered it possible to include in literary speech only those elements of folk speech that had been processed by folklore. It is no coincidence that Pushkin called on young writers to read folk tales. “The study of ancient songs, fairy tales, etc.,” the poet wrote, “is necessary for perfect knowledge of the properties of the Russian language. Later, starting with N.V. Gogol, dialect and colloquial words began to penetrate into literary speech directly from oral speech, bypassing their folklore processing.
For Pushkin there is no problem of literary and non-literary vocabulary. Any vocabulary - archaic and borrowed, dialectal, slang, colloquial and even abusive (obscene) - acts as literary if its use in speech is subject to the principle of “proportionality” and “conformity”, that is, it corresponds to the general properties of literacy, type of communication, genre , nationality, realism of the image, motivation, content and individualization of images, first of all, the correspondence of the internal and external world of the literary hero. Thus, for Pushkin there is no literary and non-literary vocabulary, but there is literary and non-literary speech. Speech that satisfies the requirement of proportionality and conformity can be called literary; speech that does not satisfy this requirement is non-literary. If even now such a formulation of the question can confuse the orthodox augur of science, then all the more so it was unusual for that time with its zealots and lovers of “true Russian literature.” Nevertheless, the most insightful contemporaries and civil descendants of Pushkin accepted the poet’s new view of the literary nature of the Russian word. So, S.P. Shevyrev wrote: “Pushkin did not disdain a single Russian word and was often able, having taken the most common word from the lips of the mob, to correct it in his verse so that it lost its rudeness.”
In the 18th century in Russia there were many poets who dared to collide layers of heterogeneous vocabulary in their works. The tendency towards multi-style design was most clearly manifested in the works of G.R. Derzhavina. However, as many critics (including V.G. Belinsky) noted, the combination of the heterogeneous elements of this patriarch of Russian literature, the poetic idol of the late 18th - early 19th centuries, gave the impression of something awkward and sometimes even chaotic. And this is with the high poetic technique that G.R. achieved. Derzhavin. To rise to Pushkin's proportionality and conformity, one thing was missing here - a special understanding of artistic reality, which later received the name of realism.
The standard definition of realism as the depiction of typical reality in typical images of reality itself is hardly capable of explaining the specifics of Pushkin’s artistic exploration of life. It can equally well be attributed to G.R. Derzhavin, and to N.M. Karamzin, and to V.A. Zhukovsky. But the artistic method of A.S. Pushkin is distinguished by the multidimensionality and dynamism of the image with brevity and accuracy of description. “Precision and brevity,” wrote A.S. Pushkin, “these are the first advantages of prose. It requires thoughts and thoughts - without them, brilliant expressions serve nothing.”
Before Pushkin, Russian literature suffered from verbosity and poverty of thought; in Pushkin we see brevity with rich content. Brevity in itself does not create rich artistic thinking. It was necessary to construct the minimized speech in such a unique way that it would evoke a rich artistic presupposition (implied content; imagination, called subtext). A special artistic effect was achieved by A.S. Pushkin due to the interrelation of new methods of aesthetic thinking, a special arrangement of literary structures and unique methods of using language.
Analyzing the difference between the writer’s romantic and realistic perception of the world, Yu.M. Lotman came to the conclusion that the romantic hero is the bearer of one “mask” - the image of a “strange man”, which he wears throughout the entire narrative. A realistic hero constantly changes his literary masks - his worldview, manners, behavior, habits
Moreover, Pushkin views his heroes from different angles, from the positions of different participants in the artistic and communicative process, although they themselves continue to wear the old mask they put on themselves. The literary hero does not seem to notice that the author or his artistic environment has long put a different mask on him and continues to think that he is wearing an old mask that he tried on for himself. Thus, the behavior of Eugene Onegin at Tatiana’s name day is depicted in the following images: a turkey (“he sulked and indignantly vowed to enrage Lensky”), a cat (“Onegin was again driven by boredom, near Olga he plunged into thought..., followed by Olenka yawning... ") and a rooster (the image of a half-rooster and half-cat in Tatyana's dream). A realistic hero is dynamic in contrast to a static romantic hero. The second feature of Pushkin’s artistic thinking is the correlation in the description of the external behavior and inner world of the hero, his consciousness and subconscious (it is no coincidence that dreams play a significant role in the work of A.S. Pushkin). A.S. Pushkin carefully traces the attitude of the depicted heroes to folk culture, history, place and time of description. A special place in the aesthetic worldview of A.S. Pushkin is interested in such universal principles as dignity, honor and justice. All this created a special artistic and ideological motivation, which A.S. Pushkin followed in his work and in life and which he bequeathed to Russian literature.
A.S. Pushkin was the creator of the realistic artistic method in Russian literature. The consequence of the application of this method was the individualization of artistic types and structures in his own work. “The main principle of Pushkin’s work since the late 20s has become the principle of correspondence of the speech style to the depicted world, historical reality, depicted environment, and depicted character.” The poet took into account the uniqueness of the genre, type of communication (poetry, prose, monologue, dialogue), content, and situation being described. The end result was the individualization of the image. At one time F.E. Korsh wrote: “The common people seemed to Pushkin not to be an indifferent mass, but the old hussar thinks and speaks differently from him than the tramp Varlaam posing as a monk, a monk is not like a peasant, a peasant is different from a Cossack, a Cossack from a servant, for example, Savelich; Moreover, a sober man does not look like a drunk man (in the joke: “Matchmaker Ivan, how can we drink.”) In “Rusalka” itself, the miller and his daughter are different people in their views and even in their language.”
The originality of aesthetic perception and artistic individualization were expressed by various methods of linguistic designation. Among them, the leading place was occupied by the contrast of styles, which in Pushkin did not give the impression of inappropriateness, since oppositional elements were associated with different aspects of the content. For example: “The conversations fell silent for a moment, the lips chewed.” mouth - high style. chew - low. Mouths are the mouths of the nobility, representatives of high society. This is an external, social characteristic. Chewing means eating. But this literally applies not to people, but to horses. This is an internal, psychological characteristic of the characters. Another example: “... and crossing himself, the crowd buzzes as they sit down at the table.” People are baptized (external characteristic). Bugs are buzzing (an internal characteristic of these people).
The following linguistic device is occasional semantic polysemy:
"They came together: water and stone,
Poetry and prose, ice and fire
Not so different from each other"
Water and stone, poetry and prose, ice and fire - in this context, these words act as occasional antonyms.
"But soon the guests gradually
They raise general alarm.
Nobody listens, they shout
They laugh, argue and squeak."
The chicks are squeaking. Against this background, the expression “raise the general alarm” (high style) compares the behavior of noble guests with the sudden noise of birds. Here the expression of high style serves as an occasional, indirect synonym for the low style word - zagaldeli.
The uniqueness of fiction, in contrast to written monuments of other genres, lies in the fact that it presents its content in several senses. Realistic literature forms different meanings quite consciously, creating contrasts between the denotative objective and symbolic content of a work of art. Pushkin created the entire main symbolic artistic fund of modern Russian literature. It was precisely from Pushkin that the thunderstorm became a symbol of freedom, the sea - a symbol of a free, attractive element, a star - a symbol of a cherished guiding thread, a person’s life goal. In the poem "Winter Morning" the symbol is the word shore. It means "the last refuge of man." Pushkin's achievement is the use of semantic and sound correlation to create additional content. Similar content corresponds to a monotonous sound design; Pushkin’s different content corresponds to sound contrasts (rhymes, rhythm, sound combinations). The sound similarity of the expressions “adorable friend” - “dear friend” - “dear shore for me” creates an additional symbolic meaning of the poem “Winter Morning”, transforming it from a denotative description of the beauties of the Russian winter into a love confession. The language design techniques listed here are just individual examples. They do not exhaust the entire variety of stylistic techniques used by Pushkin, which create semantic ambiguity and linguistic ambiguity of his creations.
In Pushkin's time, one of the main problems of the formation of a national literary language continued to remain relevant - determining the place and role of vocabulary of different genetic-stylistic layers in it. The work of the most famous writers of the era was of great importance in solving this problem. In the 20s and 30s, the language of fiction was the main area in which the norms of the Russian literary language were determined and created. However, as in the previous period, the volume, or “repertoire,” of words included in literary circulation varied greatly depending on the social affiliation of a particular author, his views on literary language, and individual preferences.
An extremely important role in determining the boundaries of the use of genetically different vocabulary in the literary language belonged to Pushkin. His artistic practice was formed mainly by the volume and composition of vocabulary that came from various sources and the principles of its use, which, due to the significance of the poet’s work itself and his authority among his contemporaries and followers, were perceived by subsequent generations as normative.
The essence of Pushkin’s language reform was to overcome the disunity of lexical elements of different genetic-stylistic strata, and to combine them freely and organically. The writer “changed the traditional attitude (author’s word) to words and forms.” Pushkin did not recognize the Lomonosov system of three styles, on which the Shishkovists relied in their concept, and in this he joined forces with the Karamzinists, who sought to establish a single norm of literary language. But he recognized Lomonosov’s principle of “constructive unification of heterogeneous verbal series” as alive and relevant for his time. Adhering to the views of the Karamzinists on a single general literary norm, Pushkin, however, was much freer and broader in his understanding of the boundaries and volume of lexical material included in the literary language. He put forward other principles and criteria for the selection and use of words from different genetic layers. A direct polemic with the Karamzinists was Pushkin’s statement that he would not sacrifice “the sincerity and accuracy of expression of provincial stiffness and fear of appearing common, a Slavophile, and the like.” He also made his own adjustments to the concept of “taste”, which Karamzinists so widely used: “true taste does not consist in the unconscious rejection of such and such a word, such and such a phrase, but in a sense of proportionality and conformity.”
Pushkin recognizes the right of the vocabulary of each genetic-stylistic layer to be one of the constituent parts of the Russian literary language. Seeing colloquial vocabulary as one of the living sources of enrichment of the literary language, the writer considered Slavicisms, which made up a significant part of book words, as a necessary element of literary speech. The written language, he wrote, “is enlivened every minute by expressions born in conversation, but it should not renounce what it has acquired over the centuries: to write only in spoken language means not to know the language.” Based on the unification of folk Russian and book-Slavic lexical elements, he strives to create a “commonly understood language.” Pushkin also comes to “a deeply individual solution to the problem of the synthesis of Russian national and Western European elements in literary language.”
The literary language continues to be replenished with new formations created on Russian soil. Words of abstract meaning dominate among them. A special need for such words was caused by the development of science and production, the formation of philosophical and aesthetic teachings, as well as the fact that critical and journalistic prose was beginning to take shape, which required the improvement of bookish abstract language. In parallel, there was a process of formation of new specific words, in particular, designations for faces. The productivity of new formations with colloquial suffixes increases somewhat (for example, -ka in the circle of nouns, -nitchat - in the circle of verbs). The disunity of words of different genetic-stylistic layers is overcome, and words that combine morphemes of different origins function freely as completely “normative” ones.
Along with the enrichment of new formations, the Russian literary language continued to acquire new lexemes. The borrowing of foreign language vocabulary is somewhat streamlined and acquires more defined boundaries. The Russian literary language began to absorb from other languages mainly words that penetrate to us along with the borrowing of reality and subject matter. However, due to the tendency towards the development of the language of politics, science, philosophy, words denoting abstract concepts are also borrowed, in particular, the names of various directions, systems, worldviews, etc.
The borrowing of such words, as well as the appearance of Russian new formations of abstract meaning, indicates that the main line in the development of the lexical composition of the Russian literary language was its enrichment with abstract words.
At the same time, the period of formation of national norms of the Russian literary language is characterized by the intensification in various spheres of the literary use of elements of living national speech. Among them, concrete words predominate.
In the first decades of the 19th century. there is an increasing influx of colloquial, “simple” words into the literary language. It was during this period that many of those words of living colloquial speech that began to penetrate literature in the 18th century finally entered the literary language. The addition of colloquial words that do not have expression, which are strengthened in the literary language as ordinary nominative units, is preserved, but somewhat weakened in comparison with the previous period. Due to the need of the language to update expressive means, expressively colored colloquial words that enter the language without being neutralized, but retaining their expressive qualities, easily find a place in the literary language. It is significant that there is some updating in the composition of expressive-evaluative words included in literary use. “The living sources of the folk language, to which Pushkin and subsequent generations of Russian writers turned, were often untouched even in the 18th century.” The most easily acquired literary language was colloquial, “simple” words that did not have corresponding one-word equivalents. These words, continuing to be used in those genres and contexts in which it was allowed by the previous literary tradition, penetrated into the neutral author’s speech in such genres as poem, novel, story, lyric and “high” poetry, scientific and historical prose, journalism. Their widespread inclusion in literary circulation shows that new norms of word usage were emerging.
To a much lesser extent, dialectal (nominative and expressively colored), as well as professional and slang elements joined the lexical fund of the literary language. The word usage of writers of this era (and above all Pushkin) contributes to the completion of the process of literary canonization of a number of those dialect words that penetrated into Russian literature in previous eras. One might think that their emergence beyond the narrow local environment contributed to their inclusion in the speech habit of educated people.
One of the main directions in the development of the Russian literary language is the widespread process of democratization. The most important result of this process was the formation of a colloquial variety of the literary language.
Variant forms continue to coexist within the literary vocabulary. However, an essential feature of the literary language of Pushkin’s period is the desire to eliminate identical, doublet designations. The 20-30s are the era that “put an end to this multiplicity of names.” This is due to a noticeable strengthening of the previously emerging tendency towards semantic and stylistic delimitation of variant means.
Along with the enrichment of the vocabulary fund with new words, the opposite process is taking place - the liberation of the literary language from book-Slavic archaism and from “low” lexical units.
The active implementation of these processes allows the first third of the 19th century. enter the history of the Russian literary language as an era of streamlining of linguistic means.
In the 20-30s of the XIX century. The semantic enrichment of the vocabulary of the Russian literary language continues. The predominant part of changes in semantics is associated with the figurative, metaphorical and figurative use of words of different genetic and stylistic layers. The main feature of these transformations is the expansion of the semantic scope of words that previously had a very narrow, specific meaning. A fairly wide range of subject-specific, “simple” vocabulary is included in semantic spheres that are unusual for it, which allows it, in words. S. Sorokin, rise to the “upper floors” of the literary language (see get dirty, goof up). On the other hand, some words that have developed figurative meanings move from book speech to colloquial speech, receiving emotional overtones (see rant, expose).
Writers, especially Pushkin, had a noticeable influence on the development of the Russian literary language during this period. Pushkin's historical merit lies in the fact that with his creativity he contributed to increasing the volume of the vocabulary of the literary language, expanding its boundaries, primarily through colloquial vocabulary.
Pushkin recognizes the right of each layer to be one of the constituent parts of the literary language. However, in attracting genetically different vocabulary, he acted deliberately and carefully. Thus, he does not abuse foreign language borrowings, moderately introduces colloquial elements into literature, correcting their use with “stylistic assessments of a cultured and educated person from a “good society.”
In Pushkin’s work there is a deepening tendency towards organic fusion and combination of elements of different styles in the context. Pushkin “affirms the diversity of styles within the framework of a single national norm of literary expression.” Its formation, as noted by A.I. Gorshkov, is associated, first of all, with the new organization of the literary text, which ran along many lines, of which the most important are:
1) approval of word usage based on the principle of the most accurate designation of phenomena of reality, rejection of formal verbal tricks, rhetorical periphrases, pointless metaphors, etc., “syntactic condensation of speech”,
2) free unification of linguistic units previously separated by different styles and areas of use.”
The free interaction of heterogeneous speech elements could be realized due to the fact that throughout the 18th century. processes of interrelations and mutual influences between Russian vocabulary, Slavicisms and borrowings were actively occurring.
Pushkin resolves one of the main problems of the era - the problem of the relationship between book and colloquial in the literary language. Striving, like N. Karamzin, to create a single general literary norm, Pushkin, unlike his predecessor, “resolutely rebels against the complete merger of book and spoken language into one neutral system of expression.”
The writer affirms in the literary language (mainly in its book variety) that layer of book Slavic words that had already been assimilated in the previous period. At the same time, he determines the fate of a noticeable part of Slavicisms, which continued to cause controversy in Pushkin’s period: the writer uses them only for certain stylistic purposes. The limitation of the spheres of application of many Slavicisms to artistic (mainly poetic) texts indicates their withdrawal from the active fund of the literary language - while at the same time affirming and preserving the positions of a general literary word for the corresponding words of Russian origin.
The above indicates that in the Pushkin era there was a redistribution of the lexical composition of the language. And the vocabulary of A.S. Pushkina stood out for its originality and originality.
Pushkin style vocabulary worldview
Chapter 3. The originality of the vocabulary of the original and the Belarusian translation of the story by A.S. Pushkin "Dubrovsky"
The connections of Russian writers with Belarus are varied. Creativity of A.S. Pushkin, one way or another, is connected with the history and culture of our people. It is connected not only by travel, accommodation, correspondence, and sometimes friendly relations with local residents, but, perhaps, even more interesting and important - by stories, books, literary characters, the prototypes of which were Belarusians. One of such works is the story “Dubrovsky”.
The plot of “Dubrovsky” is based on what was reported to Pushkin by his friend P.V. Nashchokin described an episode from the life of a Belarusian poor nobleman named Ostrovsky (as the novel was originally called), who had a lawsuit with a neighbor for land, was forced out of the estate and, left with only peasants, began to rob first clerks, and then others. Nashchokin saw this Ostrovsky in prison. (“Stories of Pushkin, recorded from the words of his friends by P.I. Bartenev in 1851-1860”, M. 1925, p. 27.)
In 1832, Pushkin began to write his work, in which the question of the relationship between the peasantry and the nobility was raised with great urgency.
The novel apparently takes place in the 10s. XIX century “Dubrovsky” is remarkable, first of all, for its broad picture of landowner provincial life and morals. “The ancient life of the Russian nobility in the person of Troekurov is depicted with terrifying fidelity,” Belinsky points out (vol. VII, p. 577). Historically, Troyekurov is a typical product of the feudal-serfdom reality of Catherine's time. His career began after the coup of 1762, which brought Catherine II to power. Contrasting the noble and rich Troekurov with the poor but proud old man Dubrovsky, Pushkin reveals in the novel the fate of that group of well-born but impoverished nobility to which he himself belonged by birth.
The new generation of provincial landed aristocracy is represented by the image of the “European” Vereisky.
The novel depicts in satirical colors the “ink tribe” of corrupt officials-hook-makers, who are hated by the serfs no less than the Troekurovs. Without these police officers and assessors, without the image of the Kistenevsky priest, cowardly and indifferent to the needs of the people, the picture of the landowner province of the early 19th century. would be incomplete.
Pushnin's novel achieves particular poignancy in its depiction of the moods of the serfs. Pushkin does not idealize the peasantry. He shows that feudal morals corrupted some servants who became slaves. But Pushkin also shows serfs who were hostile against the landowners and their henchmen. This is the figure of the blacksmith Arkhip, who deals with the court of his own free will and against the wishes of Dubrovsky. To the request of the complaining Yegorovna to take pity on the clerks dying in the fire, he firmly replies: “How wrong,” and after the reprisal he declares: “Now everything is fine.”
Pushkin brings together the rebel nobleman, the ruined and lonely Dubrovsky, with the rebellious peasants. The romantic image of a Protestant rebel against slavery and despotism acquires specific social content in Pushkin. The hero of the novel is a renegade among the landowners. However, the poet does not make Dubrovsky a like-minded peasant; he emphasizes the personal motives of his rebellion. When Dubrovsky finds out that Masha is married to Vereisky, he leaves his comrades, telling them: “You are all swindlers.” He remains alien to the serf masses.
According to genre characteristics, “Dubrovsky” is a historical and everyday novel. But the image of Dubrovsky was depicted by Pushkin to a certain extent in the traditions of the adventure novel of the 18th century. This could not but hinder the development of the anti-serfdom, social peasant theme in the novel.
The theme of peasant uprisings, only touched upon in Dubrovsky, naturally turned Pushkin’s thought to Pugachev’s uprising. The poet plans to write “The History of Pugachev.” At the same time, while still working on Dubrovsky, Pushkin conceived the idea of a work of art about the Pugachev uprising.
The history of the formation of the lexical and phraseological systems of the Belarusian and Russian languages has a close connection with the history of the formation of the Belarusian and Russian peoples. At one time Ya.F. Karsky made the following conclusion about the dependence of language development on changes in the life of its speakers: “Already at the first stage of the existence of one or another tribe, the known physical conditions of the country it occupied were somehow reflected in the development of its character, which in turn leaves a certain imprint on language itself. This connection between language and nature, the country, continues inextricably throughout the existence of a people. Nature gives a certain imprint to folk creativity, forcing it to invent the necessary forms to reflect its beauty, its wealth or poverty. Then the external influence of one people on another ( whether it is related or distant), its way of life, worldview and language are also in close connection with the nature of the country." The above lines fully characterize the features of the formation and development of the Belarusian and Russian languages, both in general and in individual systems, and primarily vocabulary and phraseology.
Let's try the example of a comparative analysis of the vocabulary of the original and the Belarusian translation, the work of A.S. Pushkin “Dubrovsky”, to show what is the difference and similarity of the vocabulary of these two languages. The translation of the work “Dubrovsky” into Belarusian was done by K. Cherny.
It is well known that a nation is preceded by a nationality. Therefore, Belarusians and Russians, as nations, were formed directly with the Belarusian and Russian nationalities, which in turn formed into the East Slavic nationality. The common East Slavic nationality emerged as a result of the collapse of the primitive communal system in the East Slavic tribes, during the period of the establishment of their class society and the creation of the early feudal state - Kievan Rus.
Feudal fragmentation led to the fact that in the first half of the 13th century. Kievan Rus collapsed, and its eastern lands were captured by the Tatar-Mongols for almost three centuries, and the western lands became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which in the 15th century. falls under the influence of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Thus, the formation of the Belarusian and Russian nationalities and their languages from the end of the 13th to the end of the 18th century, when the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was subsequently divided in 1772, 1793 and 1795. Belarusians and their lands went to the Russian Empire, which happened in an original way. But the formation of Belarusians and Russians as nations took place with direct mutual influence and interaction. All this, of course, influenced the formation of Belarusian and Russian vocabulary and phraseology.
It is indisputable that all changes in society, firstly, found their imprint in the vocabulary of one or another people, a socially or territorially limited group of people. In general, the vocabulary of any living language is in continuous movement and development. However, the main vocabulary fund as a lexical base, or the most stable layer of vocabulary of one or another language, has at its core the original vocabulary fund of the prehistoric, pre-class era and changes very slowly and unnoticeably. In every language, the vocabulary develops mainly due to words that remain outside the main fund.
In modern East Slavic languages, the core of the vocabulary of the Belarusian and Russian languages is created by the so-called native Russian and native Belarusian words (firstly, these are words from the Old Church Slavonic and Common East Slavic lexical fund). The origin of these words is explained by the origin and development of the East Slavic languages themselves. This includes words-names associated with the designation of the person himself, parts of his body and organism, family relationships, natural phenomena, flora, buildings and their parts, wild and domestic animals, etc. This vocabulary includes numerous names for various actions and processes : beat, brother, run, istsi, breathe, pisats, slats, estsi - be, take, run, walk, breathe, write, send, eat; qualities and signs: white, deaf, simple, bold, broad, noisy, clear - white, deaf, simple, bold, wide, noisy, clear. Not only common Slavic, but also Indo-European are some pronouns, numerals, prepositions, conjunctions: you, yon, I, you, two, five, hundred, na, pad, for, i, a, u, etc. All these words are found and in the Russian original and in the Belarusian translation of the work.
The given and similar words are the most ancient in all Slavic languages, and some of them are also found in almost all Indo-European languages: (comparison: Bel. matsi, Russian mother, Old Russian and Old Slavic mati, and etc.) Therefore, such vocabulary is naturally and rightfully called Indo-European.
Comparativists are always trying to identify the full number of words that have remained in one or another Slavic language (or in all) since the common Slavic linguistic unity. In the middle of the 19th century. F.S. Shymkevich in his work “Cornesword of the Russian language, compared with all the main Slavic dialects and with twenty-four foreign ones” (St. Petersburg, 1842), counted 1378 words with the Proto-Slavic language (“indigenous”), and a hundred years later T. Ler-Splavinsky counted there are more than 17004 such words. M.M. Shanski notes: “The words that come from the common Slavic language (numerous from which they already exist today with other meanings) in our vocabulary are no more than two thousand. However, to this day, such words appear in our speech as the most common, frequent and popular in everyday relationships and make up at least 1/4 of all words. It is these words that are the core of our modern vocabulary, the most important and integral part of it." It seems that in the “Etymological Dictionary of Slavic Languages: Proto-Slavic Lexical Fund” (M., 1974-1984) the number of such words will increase, because it widely uses data from not only all Slavic languages, but also their dialects.
In addition to the Indo-European and Common Slavic vocabulary, in the vocabulary of the Belarusian and Russian languages, East Slavic words stand out as original words, which means that the vocabulary is an acquisition only of fraternal peoples during their compatible life. Linguists include here primarily such words as: white. sam"ya, nephew, vayavoda, pasol, ganets, service, servant, volastsya, plow, tribute, dzesyatsina, sorak, dzevyanosta...; Russian family, nephew, voivode, ambassador, messenger, service, servant, volost, plow , tribute, desiatanna, forty, ninety... In recent decades, the traditional vocabulary common to the Russian and Belarusian languages is also being revised, and it includes words like: vopytnasts, adjustment, etc., joker, wag, lark, buzz , chill, finch, privilege, sniff, completely, jackdaw, here, snowfall, talker, bullfinch, bubble, icy, after, etc., dwaranin, villager, earthling, zemski, zemets, righteous, righteous, righteous, etc.
The original vocabulary of the East Slavic languages also includes all the so-called lexical and semantic non-alagisms - words created directly by Belarusians and Russians since the 14th century. to this day, with the help of their word-formation resources and semantic changes in already known words (both their own and borrowed ones). So, since ancient times, the following words have been considered strictly Belarusian: abavyazak (Russian debt), darosly (Russian adult), zvychay (Russian custom), letasa (Russian last summer, last year), tsikavitsa (Russian nntinterested); truly Russian - kraukha (white akraets), local (white tuteishy), weigh (white important), juicy (white), suddenly (white raptam); and etc.
In the above examples it is clear that the differences between East Slavic languages in their own lexemes relate mainly to the morphemic and word-forming levels. There are much fewer of them in lexical and semantic ones. In general, at the semantic level, discrepancies (differences) between the Belarusian and Russian languages most often occur during the period of formation of these languages as national ones. The Russian language has preserved the common Slavic (Old Church Slavonic) word litse (modern Russian face) with the meanings the front part of a person’s head, “appearance”, grammatical category of verb and pronoun, and the modern Belarusian language has retained only the cognate word ablіccha (Russian appearance), which conveys others indicated meanings using the lexemes tvar and asoba. The word person and person used by F. Skaryna with the meanings “person, person” and “creature” remained the property of only the Old Belarusian language. But with the word “mountain”, which is of Indo-European origin, in the modern Belarusian language not only new meanings have developed: “room, the space between the ceiling and the roof of a house”, “top, height”, “vyalikaya kolkast’ chago nebudz”, but also new words : garyshcha (Russian attic), garoy (the pads were raised on a spoon with garoy).
In the course of a comparative analysis of Pushkin’s work “Dubrovsky,” we came to the conclusion that modern Belarusian and Russian languages use ancient vocabulary differently, even widely used in the common Slavic language. The main vocabulary of the related East Slavic languages differs little, although for a considerable time the Belarusian and Russian languages developed independently. The text in any of these languages has much in common than it is specific and is generally understandable. Let's give an example: “...Ten minutes later he drove into the master's courtyard. He looked around him with indescribable excitement. For twelve years he did not see his homeland. The birches that had just been planted near the fence during his time had grown and now became tall, branchy trees. The yard, once decorated with three regular flower beds, between which ran a wide road, carefully swept, turned into an unmown meadow, in which a tangled horse was grazing. The dogs began to bark, but, recognizing Anton, they fell silent and waved their shaggy tails. The servants poured out of the people's faces and surrounded the young master with noisy expressions of joy...” “... Just ten days ago the nobleman left for the master's yard. He looks like he is not praised. Twelve bastards did not see their radzima. The bushes, which had only been planted in the past, grew and became tall trees. The yard, the village, was furnished with three proper flower beds, among which there was a wide road, a folded sheet, and the meadows where the horse grazed were laid out. The dogs, it seemed, began to kick, but, as Anton knew, they froze and waved their flamboyant boasts. Dwarf people poured out of human images and the young gentleman arrived with noisy joy….”
Half of the material is lexical correspondences, of which a quarter consists of formal and semantic ones. Second quarter, approximate, lexical matches with differences in form and semantics or both. We compared excerpts from the text of Pushkin’s work, their Belarusian and Russian vocabulary (13 verbs and 13 nouns are compared in all Slavic literary languages), which show that the same vocabulary makes up at least half of each text). For example: “...At about seven o’clock in the evening, some guests wanted to leave, but the owner, amused by the punch, ordered the gates to be locked and announced that he would not let anyone out of the yard until the next morning. Soon the music began to thunder, the doors to the hall opened, and the ball began. The owner and his entourage sat in the corner, drinking glass after glass and admiring the gaiety of the youth. The old ladies were playing cards...” and “... This past evening, some of the statesmen were eager to go, ale gaspadar, relieved by punches, wishing to close the gates and abbyascii, so that the wound would never leave the door. The hut was filled with music, the doors in the hall went wild, and the ball began. Gaspadar and his family sat down and ate, drinking glass after glass and admiring the joyful youth. Grannies were playing cards...” Thus, the vocabulary of the Russian and Belarusian languages is extremely close. But even in such close and related languages as Belarusian and Russian, there are significant lexical differences.
Book Slavic vocabulary occupied a large place in Pushkin’s work. In his works, the composition of Slavicisms expanded significantly, compared to the Karamzinists. Pushkin recognized book Slavic vocabulary as “a living structural element of the Russian literary language.” However, unlike the “Shishkovists,” he saw in this vocabulary not the basis of the Russian literary language, but only one of its components (along with other genetic-stylistic layers). Pushkin's view of the place of book Slavic vocabulary in the general composition of the literary language, its volume and, most importantly, its function did not coincide with the views of the Shishkovists. This is clearly evident from his following statement: “How long ago did we begin to write in a language that is commonly understood? Are we convinced that the Slavic language is not the Russian language, and that we cannot mix them willfully, that if many words, many phrases can happily be borrowed from church books into our literature, then it does not follow from this that we can write : Let him kiss me with a kiss, instead of kissing me. Of course, Lomonosov didn’t think so either; he preferred studying the Slavic language as a necessary means to a thorough knowledge of the Russian language.”
Considering Pushkin’s views on the role and place of book Slavic vocabulary in the Russian literary language, his statements about this vocabulary, the principles of its selection and use in the poet’s work, it should be borne in mind that for Pushkin, as for his contemporaries and predecessors, Karamzinists, the concept of Slavicism had not a genetic, but a purely stylistic meaning. In other words, we were talking only about that part of the book Slavonic vocabulary, which by this time still retained the stylistic connotation of highness and, in the perception of contemporaries, had not lost its connection with the church language. Those Slavicisms that by that time had been stylistically and semantically assimilated and constituted a significant lexical fund of the literary language were excluded from the linguistic disputes of the period under consideration. For example: “...Her gaze quickly ran over them and again showed the same insensibility. The young people got into the carriage together and went to Arbatovo; Kirill Petrovich has already gone there to meet the young people there...”
Thus, having made a comparative analysis of Pushkin’s texts “Dubrovsky” in the Belarusian and Russian languages, having determined the composition of stylistically significant Slavicisms and their artistic functions, we see that Pushkin limited the scope of their functioning as specific means of artistic expression mainly within the boundaries of poetic speech. This was an important step towards the gradual movement of a significant part of book Slavic vocabulary to the periphery of the literary language, leaving the living and relevant elements of the Russian literary language.
In Pushkin’s time, “a new generation of people begins to feel the charm of their native language and the power to form it.” Both Russian and Belarusian written sources (chronicles, works of fiction, translations, chronicles, etc.), under the influence of the living spoken language, penetrate the original names of basic necessities, as well as phenomena of objective reality, created on the basis of common Slavic words with with the help of various advances in semantics, i.e. rethought. The most significant lexical differences between the Belarusian language and Russian appeared during the period of formation and establishment of both languages as national languages (XVIII - early XX centuries).
In particular, there are many specific words and phrases in the Belarusian literary language, which in the new period was formed exclusively on a colloquial basis, therefore the vocabulary and phraseology of the modern Belarusian language has distinctive national features not only in terms of its form (phonemic and morphemic composition), but also content (meaning - direct, figurative, narrowed, expanded, new, updated, etc.). All this can be confirmed by analysis of lexemes and phrasemes found in I.I.’s dictionaries. Nosovich and V.I. Dahl, in Russian-Belarusian and Belarusian-Russian dictionaries, in explanatory dictionaries of modern Russian and Belarusian languages.
In the course of analyzing Pushkin’s work “Dubrovsky,” we see that he widely uses folk colloquial vocabulary in his work. For example: “...At that moment, a tall old man, pale and thin, in a robe and cap, entered the hall, moving his legs with force.
Hello, Volodka! - he said in a weak voice, and Vladimir passionately hugged his father. The joy produced too strong a shock in the patient, he weakened, his legs gave way under him, and he would have fallen if his son had not supported him.
“Why did you get out of bed,” Yegorovna told him, “you can’t stand on your feet, but you’ll give birth to the same place as people…” He sees in her a source of national renewal of the literary language. His attitude towards it was formulated by him in theoretical articles. Considering that the spoken language of the common people is worthy of deep research, Pushkin calls for “listening to the Moscow malts. They speak an amazingly clear and correct language.” For Pushkin, the process of democratization of the literary language is a sign of “mature literature”: “In mature literature, the time comes when minds, bored with monotonous works of art, a limited circle of conventional, chosen language, turn to fresh folk inventions and strange vernacular.” Defending the artist’s right to freedom in using different linguistic means in his works, Pushkin repeatedly proves that the most poetic thoughts can be literary expressed in folk speech, “the language of an honest commoner.”
When comparing the vocabulary of the original and the Belarusian translation of Pushkin’s story “Dubrovsky,” one immediately notices the various specific features of the Belarusian and Russian languages in the field of phonetics and graphics (ў, dz, dzh, added vowels and consonants, yakan, softness [h], etc. ), morphology and spelling (second and third softening of back-lingual [g], [k], [x] and spelling -tstsa, -chy as farmants of infinitives in the Belarusian language, -tsya, -ch in Russian, etc.), various morphological word formation and different morphemic composition with the same root morphemes (for example: st.-white intercessor and st.-rus. intercessor, etc.). Let us note that many linguist researchers attribute words with the above and similar differences to the Belarusian or Russian vocabulary proper, however, in this type of lexemes there will be not lexical, but phonetic, graphic, spelling, morphological and word-formation differences. For example: “...There were fewer cavaliers, as elsewhere, where some uhlan brigade is not stationed, than ladies; all the men who were fit for duty were recruited. The teacher was different from everyone, he danced more than anyone else, all the young ladies chose him and found it very clever to waltz with him. Several times he circled with Marya Kirilovna, and the young ladies mockingly noticed them. Finally, around midnight, the tired owner stopped dancing, ordered dinner to be served, and went to bed himself...”, “The cavalier, as well as here, without the quarter of some kind of Uhlan brigade, was less than the ladies, all the men, created for that, were recruited. The instructor between us is abrasive, he dances more successfully, all the young ladies took away the yago and knew, so the nobleman waltzed with them. Several times she circled around Marya Kirilovna, and the young ladies hummed mockingly behind them. At the end of the night, we are tired of dancing in bed, I made a wish to go to bed, and I will go to sleep...” It's a different matter with words with different roots or their relics. In general, M.M. Shansky is inclined to believe that Russian words proper are those words that arose on Russian soil in the 14th century. to this day with the help of common Slavic and East Slavic roots, but actually Russian afixes. These are, first of all, words like mason, dead meat, leaflet, etc. The same can be said about Belarusian words proper, including in their group various types of lexemes-tracing letters, compare: avechka and sheep, song and rooster, etc. d.
The independent development of the Belarusian and Russian languages over the course of five centuries led to the emergence of significant differences even in those lexical-semantic groups that had stabilized during the common Slavic period. A striking example is the modern Belarusian names of some parts of the human body in comparison with their modern Russian counterparts: tvar - face, skroni - whiskey, vochy - eyes, etc. Other layers of everyday vocabulary in both languages are even more modified.
Despite the originality of the Belarusian and Russian languages, throughout the history of their development there has been interlinguistic contact, which naturally affected primarily the lexical-semantic system. Written monuments reflected this phenomenon in both Old Belarusian and Old Russian languages.
In the story “Dubrovsky,” Pushkin carefully selects vocabulary from the spoken language and uses it in such a way that it serves as a means of realistic reproduction of reality or as a means of social characterization of the character. This use of lexical means of the national language is determined by the creative method of the writer and his worldview. At the same time, it reflects the beginning of a leading trend in the development of literature and the literary language of the era as a whole.
The range of colloquial words that Pushkin involves in his work is quite wide. However, the wide availability of colloquial lexical elements in fiction is not a new phenomenon. And yet, it is no coincidence that Pushkin was called “a complete reformer of language” (Belinsky), although it is known that Pushkin “did not create any “new” language, he did not invent new words, forms, etc., and in general was not involved in word creation at all ". " An innovative attitude to language lies in changing the conditions for the functioning of linguistic material in a work of art. The principles of selecting “simple” vocabulary in Pushkin’s language do not remain unchanged, they evolve.
Penetrating into Pushkin’s fiction, this vocabulary finds application in stories not only when describing peasants, but also in the speech of storytellers created by Pushkin. Such vocabulary is often used in a neutral author’s narrative. For example: Masha was dumbfounded, mortal pallor covered her face. (“Dubrovsky”). Or: “...she shuddered and froze, but still hesitated, still waited; the priest, without waiting for her answer, uttered irrevocable words. The ritual was smoked. She felt the cold kiss of her disliked husband, she heard the cheerful congratulations of those present and still could believe that her life was forever shackled, that Dubrovsky did not fly to free her...”
So, colloquial lexical units, while maintaining their expression, are widely involved in Pushkin’s artistic narrative. Their functioning as colloquial, but completely literary, normative elements is recognized in modern scientific literature as the essence of the transformation of the literary language in this era. The use of the named category of words in a neutral author’s speech clearly indicates that new norms of word usage are emerging, that the boundaries of the literary norm itself are expanding. These norms were adopted by the most advanced cultural figures of Pushkin's time.
However, from the point of view of the traditional understanding of literary canons, Pushkin’s language could and did seem unacceptable to a certain part of journalists, since it did not fit into the previously established idea of the literary norm: “Pushkin’s vocabulary amazed his contemporaries with its complete diversity and novelty, creating the impression of sharp dissonance against the background of poetic traditions" .
The national Russian poet, Pushkin, is not confined in his work to the framework of Russian culture. His creations reflect the cultures of the West and the East: modern, ancient, ancient and medieval. Words from various languages, even the most exotic (Malay Anchar), are found in the poet’s language, and the first place among them belongs to Gallicisms. Pushkin uses words of French origin in Russian writing, French words and expressions in their French design, as well as literally translated expressions and words from French. Some of the letters were written by Pushkin in French. Brought up in the spirit of the times in French culture, the writer studied English, knew Italian, read the Koran in the original, and studied Hebrew. He worked on Latin, Greek, Ukrainian, Polish, Tatar, Old Bulgarian, and German. For example: “...There were fewer cavaliers, as elsewhere, where some uhlan brigade is not stationed, than ladies, all the men who were fit for duty were recruited...”.
Pushkin pays tribute to the cultures of other languages. It is no coincidence that he characterizes his native language as “a language... flexible and powerful in its turns and means..., reciprocal and communal in its relations to foreign languages.”
Over the considerable history of their development, Russians and Belarusians have accumulated quite a significant amount of verbal wealth borrowed from other peoples. So, during the analysis of the story “Dubrovsky,” we determined that borrowed words in the Belarusian and Russian languages differ from the actual Belarusian and actual Russian lexemes in some of their morphemes, sound combinations and even sounds (letters). For example, in the Old Russian language, almost all words with the sound [f], combinations [gk], [g"e], [k"e], [x"e] were borrowed; in modern Russian, words with the sounds [j], [dz | also borrowed, etc.; in the modern Belarusian language, words with initial stress [о], [у] and without added consonants will always be foreign languages, the same phenomenon with words with combinations іа(ія), іо(іе ), йо(ыё), etc. In general, numerous combinations of sounds (letters) and morphemes in modern Russian and Belarusian languages indicate borrowings from one or another language, for example, the combination la, le, ra (ro) - from Old Church Slavonic: rus. mind, cloud, helmet, etc., white rozum, clouds, helmet (sholam), etc.; elements –dl-(-tl-) and shp- - from Polish and German: pavіdla, tongue, hairpin, etc.; prefixes a-(an-), ant-(anti-), archi- -- from Greek: immoral, anti-government, archbishop, etc.; suffixes -us, -um - from Latin: sail, Sirius, quorum, cansilium, presidium and etc .
When comparing the borrowed vocabulary of the Belarusian and Russian languages, it immediately becomes clear that both languages have an unequal number of foreign words. Recognizing the role of foreign language sources in enriching the vocabulary of a literary language, Pushkin emphasized that this influence is not always necessary. He believed that it could not be too strong if its own culture was sufficiently developed.
In Pushkin's work, the central problem of the era is solved - the synthesis of all viable linguistic elements that came into the Russian literary language from different genetic sources. The freedom to combine these elements, speech synthetism, as shown by the results of a number of modern studies, is the essence of Pushkin’s language reform. It is under the pen of Pushkin that an organic fusion of elements of heterogeneous sources takes place: Church Slavonicisms, Russian words (including colloquial and dialectal ones), borrowings; Pushkin is characterized by “free combination and interpenetration of linguistic units, previously separated and opposed in historical-genetic, expressive-stylistic and social-characterological terms.”
The most important point of Pushkin’s synthesis was that “the act of crossing the book and everyday principles” was completed. Pushkin is characterized by a free combination of Slavicisms in one context with colloquial and everyday words, sometimes sharply different from each other in their stylistic coloring. The combination of such words contradicted the concept of stylistic norm among Karamzinists, violated the principle - “perfect sameness or uniformity in words and their flow, without any jumps or irregularities.”
“Dubrovsky” is of particular interest in this regard. The novelty of Pushkin’s approach to synthesizing two speech elements in a text lay here, as researchers admit, in the fact that, by combining bookish and colloquial elements, the writer does not destroy the stylistic monolithicity of the whole. This is, for example, the combination of different stylistic lexical units, the combination of book Slavic words with words denoting objects and phenomena of everyday life, sometimes peasant life.
And in conclusion, I would like to say that in Pushkin, in Gogol’s words, “it’s as if the lexicon contained all the wealth, strength and flexibility of our language. He is more than anyone, he has further expanded his boundaries and shown his entire space more than anyone else.” Thus, Pushkin determined the main direction of development of the vocabulary of the Russian literary language."
Conclusion
1. The Russian national language was formed over several centuries: in the middle of the 18th century. Its morphological system developed by the beginning of the 19th century. - syntactic system, in the first half of the 19th century. the modern correlation of various lexical layers in the literary language and the language of fiction is established.
2. At the beginning of the 19th century. two types of literary language are formed, characteristic of each national language: bookish and colloquial, and, as before, interacting with non-literary colloquial speech, but not coinciding with it in volume.
3. The leading place in the literary language system is occupied by the language of fiction; a large number of extra-literary means are involved in the texts of fiction, which makes it possible from the middle of the 19th century. (30-40s) contrast three systems of language - literary language, lively colloquial speech and the language of fiction, where literary and extra-literary linguistic means are used.
4. In the process of bringing the literary language closer to living folk speech, in the formation of norms of literary speech, in the formation of specific linguistic features of fiction, A.S. played an important role. Pushkin.
5. The process of democratization of the Russian literary language was most fully reflected in the works of A.S. Pushkin, in particular in the story “Dubrovsky”, since in his work there was a harmonious fusion of all viable elements of the Russian literary language with elements of living folk speech, such as words, word forms, syntactic structures, stable phrases selected by the writer from folk speech.
6. In the first half of the 19th century. (30-40s) the process of formation of the Russian literary national language ends; The norms of the modern Russian literary language were most fully presented for the first time in the works of Pushkin, which is why many researchers call Pushkin the founder of the modern Russian literary language, and his vocabulary as original.
List of used literature
2. Ababurko M.V. “Paraunal grammar Belarusian and Russian mou” - Mn. “Higher School” 1992. – p. 21-36
3. Budagov R.A. Writers about language and the language of writers. M., 1984. – p. 203
4. Birzhakova E.E., Voinova L.A., Kutina L.L. Essays on the historical lexicology of the Russian language of the 18th century. - L., 1972.-p. 18-19
5. Vinogradov V.V. Essays on the history of the Russian literary language of the 17th-19th centuries. M., Uchpedgiz, 1938, chapters five and six.
6. Vinogradov V.V. Pushkin's language. M., “Asa”, 1953. - p. 63
7. Vinogradov V.V. Pushkin's style. M., Goslitizdat, 1941.-p.71
8. Goffman V.A. The language of Pushkin.- In the collection: Style and language of A.S. Pushkina, M., 1987.-p. 14
9. Grigorieva A.D. Poetic phraseology of the late XVIII - early XIX centuries - In the book: Education of the booty stylistics of the Russian language in the Pushkin era. M., “Science”, 1964.-p.80
10. Gorshkov A.I. The language of pre-Pushkin prose. – M., 1982.-p. 72
11. Zemskaya E.A., Kitaigorodskaya M.V., Rozanova N.N. Russian colloquial speech. Phonetics, Morphology. Lexicology. Gesture. M., 1983 – p. 53
12. Ilinetskaya I.S. From observations of Pushkin's vocabulary. - “Proceedings of the Russian Language Institute”, vol. II. M., 1950.-p.51
13. Kovalevskaya E.G. History of the Russian literary language. M. “Enlightenment” 1989. – p. 311
14. Kalinin A.V. Vocabulary of the Russian language. - M., 1978.-p. 170
15. Knyazkova G.P. Vocabulary of a folk colloquial source in a travestied poem of the 18th century. // Language of Russian writers of the 18th century. - L., 1981. – p. 29
16. Vocabulary of the Russian literary language. /F.P. Filin.-M. “Science”, 1981. – p. 132-177
17. Lykov A.G. Modern Russian lexicology (Russian occasional word). M., “Science”, 1976. – p. 81
18. Linnik T.G. Problems of language borrowing. Language situations and interactions of languages. - Kyiv, 1989. - p. 49
19. Orlov A.S. The language of Russian writers. M.-L., publishing house of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1978, p. 62-122.
20. General linguistics./Ed. A.E. Supruna. - Mn. “Higher School” 1983. – p. 391
21. Petrova M.A. Russian language. Vocabulary. Phonetics. Word formation. M., “Science”, 1983.-p. 82
22. Russian language. A manual for preparatory departments of universities. /M.G. Bulakhov, N.P. Pipchenko, L.A. Shuvchenko. - Mn. Ed. BSU, 1982 – p. 7-28
23. Sorokin Yu.S. The significance of Pushkin in the development of the Russian literary language. - History of Russian literature, vol. VI. M.-L., publishing house of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1973.-p.89
24. Tynyanov Yu. Pushkin. - In the book: Yu. Tynyanov. Archaists and innovators. M., "Surf". 1998.-s. 72
25. Ulukhanov I.S. Units of the word-formation system of the Russian language and their lexical implementation. M., 199 – p.105