Codification of the Russian literary language. The main means of codifying language factors (dictionaries, reference books, textbooks of the Russian language, etc.) Debunking Academician Marr and asserting the Russian language as the “world language of socialism”

TOPIC 1. LANGUAGE STANDARDS

Exercise 1. Formulate a definition of a literary language, name its features. Compare your definition with the existing ones:

1) “A normalized language serving the diverse cultural needs of the people, the language of fiction, journalistic works, periodicals, radio, theater, science, government agencies, schools, etc.” ( D.E. Rosenthal);

2) "It is a form of social (sociocultural) existence of the national language, accepted by its speakers as exemplary." ( IN AND. Maksimov);

3) “The modern Russian literary language, although it can be considered as a language from A. S. Pushkin to the present day, does not remain unchanged. It is constantly changing and, therefore, needs to be rationed.” ( E.N. Shiryaev);

4) "This codified subsystem; it is characterized by a more or less stable norm, uniform and obligatory for all speakers of the literary language, and this norm purposefully
cultivated" ( Belikov V.I., L.P. Krysin)

Based on these definitions of the norm, list its main features. Write them down. What other signs could you name?

Answer: The literary language is a normalized, generally accepted language system, which is characterized by a certain specificity: it has certain norms in grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation. It is subject to change and covers all spheres of human activity. Signs: 1: the presence of stable rules. 2: stability of the structure 3: multifunctionality (use in various fields of activity) 4: communicative expediency 5: availability of oral and written speech.

Exercise 2. Fill in the gaps in the table. Determine the relationship between language units:

Exercise 3. Name the basic units of the language, give them a definition. Determine which language level the speech errors in sentences belong to:

A. Phonetic. (sounds, stresses) B. Lexical. B. Morphological. (declension, numerals)

D. Syntactic

1. According to the stories of Pechorin, the noble society is filled with hypocrisy, anger, lies VVV. 2. With regard to the artistic means used by Pushkin to recreate the impression of the authenticity of the depicted reality. The story is a memoir. YYY 3. Anna Sergeevna was such a person who allowed her opinion to be expressed in front of him VVV.4. This is a free novel from all the limits and norms of the literary style. BBB 5. The timbre of our life far exceeds the timbre of the life of our ancestors. BBB 6. True artists of the word create grandiose epic canvases on the pages of their works. BBB 7. Looking at him, one gets an image of rudeness and negligence. 8. The president himself came to the opening of the German language center. AAA 9. Events are taking place in the village that have turned the whole worldview of the hero. VVV 10. Initially, he was not conceived as a single composition, but was created and published in parts. VVV

Answer: Basic units of language:

1) phoneme- the smallest unit of language and speech, which has a form, but not content; serves to identify or distinguish between words and morphemes.

2) morpheme- a non-independent unit of the language, a significant part of the word, which has both form and content.

3) word (lexeme)- the central independent unit of the language, which has a form, as well as the unity of lexical and grammatical meanings.

4) offer- the main syntactic unit of the language, which is a means of forming, expressing and communicating thoughts, as well as a means of conveying emotions and will.

Exercise 4. In accordance with the main levels of the language and the areas of use of language tools, enter the types of norms in the table:

Exercise 5. Determine which norms are violated in the sentences:

1. Onegin belongs to the category of people of a noble society. 2. He achieved such results by presenting the novel to us in the form of notes from Grinev's diary. 3. Pecherin indulges in passion with the savage Bella. 4. The author is trying to steer readers in a slightly different direction. 6. As MK has written more than once, the current pyramid of Russian power is geared towards Putin. 7. Guest worker Ira Filippova, who came from Ukraine to work on concert numbers in one of the many tents in St. Petersburg. 8. Apparently, at these speeds, matter will cease to be itself and disintegrate. 9. I was also surprised that the multi-colored threads with which the image was embroidered did not fade and did not lose their strength for more than five centuries. 10. In the language of actors, "numbered" meant the ability to sing, play, tell, improvise, imitate someone. 11. Since 2002, the People's Faculty has been working at the Novosibirsk State Technical University.

Exercise 6. Determine which subsystem of the language is represented in the texts and by what language means.

1) - And they will. Look, how Basco is there ... Suddenly, God will give them wealth. Evot how much! Evo! Pila says, pointing at the big house.

Perhaps. Toldy we will live together?

Otherwise, we’ll call Matryona.

A request would be necessary ...

Pila became sad. Now it seemed to him that he had no relatives at all, except for Sysoika, and the guys disappeared. It's a pity!

At the market he bought three loaves of bread and a liver. Sysoiko was carrying bread. I drank liver. They again approached the bishop's fence.

Let's go there, - said Sysoiko.

AND! Glee, where everyone goes.

And there are the burlaks.

They won't let us in, they'll put us in prison.

However, they entered the fence, went up to the porch and wanted to enter the church. They were driven away again ... They went to the barges.

Move! devils! .. - the pilot shouted at them.

The boat was already sailing. Pila, Sysoika and three other barge haulers were put on a shitik.

Are the guys here? Peel asked the pilot on the barge.

Wait for your guys!

And why did you leave them?

Yes, they stayed in the church, they didn’t find it ... What a disaster!

Paulie, staring there for the first time!

(Reshetnikov F.M. Between people)

2. The morning that day was sunny, brilliant, but cool - the relative proximity of the South Pole made itself felt. A fresh wind was blowing, and snow-white cirrus clouds were rushing across the sky, representing elegant fantastic patterns. Swaying smoothly, our clipper flew with full wind under the topsails in one reef, under the foresail and mainsail, running away from a passing wave.

Shutikov stood on the mainline, attached with a hemp belt, and learned to throw a lot, having recently replaced another sailor. Proshka was also close to him. He cleaned the gun and from time to time stopped, admiring Shutikov, how he, having gained many circles of the lot-line (the rope on which the lot is attached), deftly throws it back, like a lasso, and then, when the rope stretches out, again with quick deft movements selects her..

Suddenly, a desperate cry was heard from the quarterdeck:

Man overboard!

(Stanyukovich K.M. Man overboard)

3. What a warming up, - Aunt Dunya noticed, when I came home with lake water in two buckets, - “netniks” don’t like the big sun, except perhaps “jokes”, round dance girls with water. I already knew that “netchiks” are absent, absent, but the presence of “netchiks” constantly has to be reckoned with: they are all sorts of undead, evil spirits, complacently playful or insidious, harmful. (Akhmadulina B. Despair. Diary)

4. A drunken young man, apparently about seventeen years old, in patent leather boots, in a Hungarian coat with a tourniquet and a new cap on the back of his head, banging the bottom of his vodka glass on the table, convincingly proved something to a little shabby little man:

Listen, you...

And listen to what? what are you listening to? We worked together, and in half...

It is in half! .. You are a plug, I am on a screen, you are a shoveler, and I have a tank ... There are two red ones in the shoveler! ..

Baka walks for half a hundred, probably an anchor ...

Fail, for the fourth left ...

Fill in!

Pra-word! To breathe!

Where are they?

Lived! Here are the lacquered skates, here is the bonnet... Not a finag in your pocket!

Look, Oska, what a trick has crawled in!

The drunk young man looked at me, and I heard him whisper:

Are you lying?

All the Frogs seem to you... No! Just a shaky stunt.

(Gilyarovsky Vl. Moscow and Muscovites)

D/W: Prepare answers to the questions:

1. What is meant by language codification?

2. What norms are called codified?

3. What is the danger of establishing only rigid, unshakable norms?

4. Give examples of the historical variability of norms.

5. What is the main task of the culture of speech.

LANGUAGE NORM, a set of linguistic means and rules for their use, adopted in a given society in a given era. The norm is opposed to the system, understood as the possibilities of expressing meanings inherent in a particular language. Far from everything that the language system “can” is “permitted” by the language norm. For example, the system of the Russian language provides for the formation of forms of the 1st person singular from all verbs that can have personal forms; however, the norm “does not allow” the formation of the 1st person form from the verbs to win, convince (* I will win, * I will win, * I will convince, * I will convince) and “prescribes” to manage with descriptive turns: I will be able (I can) win (convince), I will win and etc.

The process of fixing the norm, i.e., the introduction of certain rules for the use of language means in dictionaries and reference books, is called codification. The language system has a level structure, depending on the level of the language, various types of norms and, accordingly, types of dictionaries are distinguished: the norms of pronunciation and stress are recorded in orthoepic and accentological dictionaries, the norms of word usage are in explanatory and phraseological dictionaries, dictionaries of synonyms, antonyms, paronyms, etc. ., morphological and syntactic norms - in special reference books and grammars.

8. Correlation between the concepts of "literary language" and "language of fiction".

(poetic language), a supranational type of language, many of the characteristic features of which, however, are revealed only within the framework of the work of writers of a certain nation and only when compared with the norms and features of the corresponding national language. The language of any nation manifests itself in two ways. Firstly, it is used when people communicate in everyday life - and in this case it turns out to be colloquial, "alive" (that is, relatively free from many literary norms). Secondly, it is used in all types of written texts, and this application imposes a number of restrictions on the language, in other words, normalizes it so that native speakers representing the population of different regions of the country, different social groups (including age and professional) could understand each other. Such a language turns out to be literary, it tends to become that ideal language that would be convenient for society as a whole to use. Elements of the literary language form the basis of national speech. They are also used in everyday life, but already in conjunction with elements of the spoken language, the use of which is contrary to general literary stylistic norms. So, literary vocabulary within the limits of everyday oral speech can be combined with dialectisms, jargon, slang. Consequently, the boundaries of the spoken language are much wider than the boundaries of the literary one.
In turn, the boundaries of the poetic language are even wider. The basis of the poetic language, as well as the spoken language, is made up of elements of the literary language. But the language of fiction does not always oblige writers to follow norms literary style of speech. For example, each author is free to compile his own poetic dictionary, including not only literary, but also colloquial, foreign, and other vocabulary. This language of fiction differs from the language of literature.
However, it is also different from the spoken language. First of all, in the poetic language, the authors exploit colloquial elements with an eye on literary speech norms. Every true writer's own speech is literary. But, being the creator of an epic work, the author can endow his character with colloquial speech not only in order to complement his artistic image, but also in order to create an artistic image of the language used by that part of society, of which this character is a typical representative.
In addition, the poetic (language of art literature) language provides the writer with a wider arsenal of speech means, the use of which is not prescribed by the rules of the national literary language. Thus, a science fiction writer may create languages ​​of non-existent nations, unearthly or magical beings, and so on. For example, J.R.R. Tolkien developed in his works the vocabulary and rules of word formation and grammatical connection of the languages ​​​​of the elves, dwarves and orcs inhabiting his worlds. Within the literary language, at each stage of its development, there are words that modern society recognizes as neologisms, but the author of works of art, describing the world of the future and "creating" objects not yet created by mankind, invents individual neologisms. Therefore, we can conclude that in fiction, along with the real one, the potential lexical stock of the national language is also used.
If the normalization, “correctness” of the literary language is its undoubted merit, then the manifestation of such features in the poetic language is a clear disadvantage. The language of fiction is focused on all sorts of deviations from known norms, since each writer seeks to develop an individual speech style. The loss of individual signs by the author's language is equal to the loss of artistry. Any deviation of the writer from the rules of the literary language forces readers to follow his speech more closely, forces them to read slowly. So, the early poems of V.V. Mayakovsky and B. L. Pasternak abound in bright metaphors, to some readers the style of each of the poets may seem dark, but it is the non-trivial word usage that determines the unusualness of the images they created. So, the language of fiction allows deviations from general literary norms, and they can manifest themselves at all levels of the language. In addition, the language of fiction as such is a supranational language: all rhythmic and intonation phenomena, in particular those related to the form of verse, belong to the poetic language (prosody in some monuments of world poetry is subject not to national language norms, but to non-national verse forms).

Both dialects and literary language have their own norms (see § 1). Language norms develop in society according to the internal laws inherent in the language system, as well as under the influence of external conditions of the life of society, which accelerate or slow down, or make certain adjustments to the development of the language.

These norms develop spontaneously in society, in the practice of social life. In the literary language - at a certain level of development of society - these norms can be consciously regulated, otherwise, codified, for example, in special normative dictionaries and grammars. This dialect norms differ significantly from the norms of the literary language. The codification of linguistic phenomena does not deny the possibility of variation. Existing options, if they are deemed appropriate, are evaluated from a stylistic point of view during codification: some of them are recognized as characteristic of high style, bookish or poetic language, others - colloquial speech, etc.

The codification of the written language is ahead of the codification of the spoken language. Within the limits of the written language, spelling is most easily amenable to codification, which can even be established by legislative means (as is known, the current spelling was introduced by the Soviet "government in 1918). The first experience of codifying a literary language dates back to the second half of the 30s. This is the famous "Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language" edited by D. N. Ushakov. Later, the codification of the Russian literary language was continued in the 17-volume and 4-volume dictionaries of the Russian literary language, in academic grammars of 1952-1954 and 1970. , as well as in other manuals.

The codification of the oral language encounters special and very significant difficulties, since it cannot be carried out, like orthography, by legislative means. Perhaps the greatest difficulty is the codification of the pronunciation side of the spoken language. It is even more difficult to ensure that these norms are inculcated in the wider society. The first attempt to codify this side of the oral language in Soviet linguistics was made in the reference dictionary "Russian literary pronunciation and stress" edited by R. I. Avanesov and S. I. Ozhegov (1959 and 1960; first, preliminary edition - 1955). .). Currently, a new, significantly expanded dictionary is being printed - “Orthoepic Dictionary of the Russian Language. Pronunciation, stress, grammatical forms, edited by R. I. Avanesov.

Naturally, the codification of norms can often lag behind those actually used in society to some extent. After all, the compilation and publication of dictionaries and grammars requires a lot of work and time. However, there is something positive in this lag. To some extent, codification slows down the inclusion of new phenomena in the norms of the literary language before they acquire a sufficiently “prestigious” character. This ensures the stability of the language, which, in turn, creates the best conditions for linguistic communication.

The norms of the literary language for each given epoch are an objective reality. But it is not always easy to find them and formulate them, since in diva language practice, as already noted, depending on dialectal, social, age, aesthetic factors, different forms of this phenomenon very often compete. Codification should take into account, first of all, the use of this variant and the tendencies of language development, that is, in what direction the language develops. It is very important to take into account the credibility of sources. However, this last factor should be treated with great caution, because writers and poets, both earlier and even more in our time, allow deviations from the literary norm. We will find dialectal elements in the prose writers of the 19th century, for example, in I. S. Tur-

geneva (Oryol), L. N. Tolstoy (Tula). So, for example, in M. Isakovsky we find elements of his native Smolensk dialect, in S. Yesenin - Ryazan. See M. Isakovsky: “An order was given: to him - to the west, / to her in the other direction ...”; “Tell me, Nastasya, how you sting under the stars, / How you didn’t sleep at night during the miserable times”; “I took a closer look, decided / Iv went to the collective farm. / She took flax, raised calves, / Raised a bird”; “Intoxicated mash is not cooked, relatives are not invited to the wedding”; “I just have to wait until he is born”; S. Yesenin: “Cockroaches, crickets / Baking! / Not the people, but the bustard / Knocked out! (the South Great Russian pronunciation is reflected in the literary bustard); “Enough to rot and whine” (in the context of literary whining). Despite the authority of these poets, the wide popularity of their works,. such irregularities in their language, by the way, inseparable from the unique style and charm of each of their poems, cannot be accepted as the norms of the literary language. In modern literature - both prose and poetry - we will find many irregularities that are unacceptable for the literary language.

In general, complete mastery of the norms of the literary language is only an ideal to which one should strive, but which is hardly achievable. Hardly anyone can claim that he fully owns them. A linguist-codifier is required not only to have versatile knowledge, broad observations of a large amount of material, taking into account trends in the development of a language, but also great sensitivity in assessing certain language options, a subtle sense of the language, and impeccable taste.

The concepts of normalization and codification are closely related to the issues of norms and their variance. Often the terms "normalization" and "codification" are used interchangeably. However, in recent studies, these terms and concepts are demarcated.

V.A. Itskovich proposes to consider normalization not a simple description of a norm, or its codification in the strict sense of the word, but only "active interference in the language process, for example, the introduction of certain terms and the rejection of others as undesirable for some reason." However, with this approach to normalization and codification, the distinction between these two phenomena is somewhat lost. We find a clearer solution to this issue in L.I. Skvortsova: “Opposing each other in terms of the degree of activity (or “consciousness”), the concepts of “codification” and “normalization” turn out to be in relation to subordination: the latter is part of the former. In practice, “normalization” ... is usually called “standardization” (in the broad sense of the word : the establishment of GOST, streamlining the terminological system, official renaming, etc.)".

According to L.K. Graudina, the term "normalization" refers to a set of problems involving the coverage of the following aspects: "1) the study of the problem of defining and establishing the norm of the literary language; 2) the study of linguistic practice for normative purposes in its relation to theory; 3) bringing into a system, further improvement and streamlining the rules of use in cases of discrepancy between theory and practice, when it becomes necessary to strengthen the norms of the literary language. The term "codification" L.K. Graudina considers it narrower and more specialized than the term "normalization" and uses it in those cases when it comes to the registration of rules in normative works.

The new textbook for universities "The Culture of Russian Speech" (edited by L.K. Graudina and E.N. Shiryaev) states the following: "Codified norms of the literary language are such norms that all native speakers of the literary language must follow. Any grammar of the modern of the Russian literary language, any of its dictionary is nothing but its codification.

The most optimal is the definition of normalization as a process of formation, approval of the norm, its description, ordering by linguists. Normalization is a historically lengthy selection of common, most commonly used units from linguistic variants. Normalizing activity finds its expression in the codification of a literary norm - its official recognition and description in the form of rules (prescriptions) in authoritative linguistic publications (dictionaries, reference books, grammars). Consequently, codification is a developed set of rules that brings standardized variants into a system, "legitimizes" them.

Thus, this or that phenomenon, before becoming a norm in the CDL, goes through a process of normalization, and in the case of a favorable outcome (wide distribution, public approval, etc.), it is fixed, codified in the rules, recorded in dictionaries with recommendatory notes.

The formation of the KLA norm is a multidimensional phenomenon, often contradictory. K.S. Gorbachevich remarks on this: "... the objective, dynamic and contradictory nature of the norms of the Russian literary language dictates the need for a conscious and cautious approach to assessing the controversial facts of modern speech ... Unfortunately, not all popular science books and mass textbooks on the culture of speech reveal scientifically a reasonable and sufficiently delicate solution to the complex problems of the literary norm.

There are facts of a subjective amateur assessment, and cases of a biased attitude towards neoplasms, and even manifestations of administration in matters of language. Indeed, language is one of those phenomena of social life about which many consider it possible to have their own dissenting opinion. Moreover, these personal opinions about right and wrong in the language are often expressed in the most categorical and temperamental form. However, independence and categorical judgments do not always mean their truth.

The phenomenon of normalization is closely related to the so-called anti-normalization - the denial of scientific normalization and codification of the language. At the heart of the views of convinced anti-normalizers is the worship of spontaneity in the development of language. The writer A. Yugov, for example, put forward the idea that "the Russian language rules by itself", it does not need norms, normative dictionaries. In the book "Thoughts on the Russian Word" he wrote: "Normative lexicography is a relic." And further: "I consider the following historical circumstance undeniable: the so-called literary norms of the Russian language, and now in force (or rather, villainous), they were established "from above", in imperial Russia. These are class norms.

It should be remembered that anti-normalization can undermine the established relatively stable system of norms of the Russian literary language, the system of functional styles.

Not only anti-normalizing, but also another (more well-known) phenomenon - purism (from Latin purus - pure), is closely connected with the development of the norms of the Russian literary language, their formation. rejection of any innovations and changes in the language or their direct prohibition. At the heart of the purist attitude to language lies the view of the norm as something unchanging. In a broad sense, purism is an unnecessarily strict, uncompromising attitude towards any borrowings, innovations, in general, to all subjectively understood cases of distortion, coarsening and damage to the language. Purists do not want to understand the historical development of the language, the policy of normalization: they idealize in the language the past, long established and tested.

G.O. Vinokur emphasized that purism only wants great-grandchildren to speak the same way as great-grandfathers used to say in the old and better years. V.P. Grigoriev in his article "Culture of Language and Language Policy" suggested that purists put up with the new in the language only if this new has no competitor in the old, already existing and meets their archaic tastes and habits, or if it equalizes , unifies the language system in accordance with their utopian idea of ​​the language ideal. In the book "Living like life" K.I. Chukovsky gives many examples of when prominent Russian writers, scientists, and public figures reacted negatively to the appearance in speech of certain words and expressions, which then became common, normative. For example, to Prince Vyazemsky the words mediocrity and talented seemed base, street. Many neologisms of the first third of the XIX century. were declared “non-Russian” and on this basis they were rejected: “In the Russian language there is no verb“ inspired ”,“ the Northern bee declared, objecting to the phrase“ Russia did not inspire him ”... at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries seemed to be “a typical and repulsive creation of the Odessa dialect.” Examples of such a rejection of the new by purists are numerous.

However, despite the rejection of any innovations and changes in the language, purism at the same time plays the role of a regulator that protects the language from the abuse of borrowings, excessive passion for innovations and contributes to stability, traditional norms, and ensuring the historical continuity of the language.

The choice of rational normative changes (solutions) cannot be based only on the intuition of a linguist or a simple native speaker and his common sense. Modern orthological studies are now especially in need of systematically developed forecasts.

The term "forecast" entered into scientific use relatively recently. There are 4 methods of linguistic forecasting:

1) the method of historical analogy (for example, a huge influx of borrowings in our time is often compared from a normative point of view with a similar process in the time of Peter I);

2) an expert forecasting method associated with the assessment of ongoing changes by professionals and expert linguists (for example, expert assessments of terminological standards and the extensive activities of linguists associated with the unification of terminology in the industrial and scientific fields);

3) a method associated with predicting the behavior of system units in a text (based on the study of the laws of text generation);

4) a method of prospective forecasting of the norm of the use of language units based on time series modeling.

The system approach of forecasting is especially clearly applied to the phenomena of grammatical variation. Moreover, in the system forecast model, such aspects as the combination of "erroneous" and "correct" in the use of language variants, objective and subjective factors affecting this use, the relative autonomy of individual grammatical categories and the ways of interaction of categories with the grammatical subsystem and the system in in general. In this case, both external and internal factors are important. And in prognostics they are called exogenous indicators (caused by external causes) and endogenous indicators (caused by internal causes).

Noah and educational literature. Such fixing norms is called codification. Therefore, the literary language is called not only normalized, but also codified. Codification of the language is based on a thorough study of the patterns and trends in the development of the language, real language material.

The purpose of codification is the evaluation, selection and consolidation of linguistic phenomena,

included in the standard. Evaluation is understood as a distinction between right and wrong phenomena, in the presence of two options, an indication of the more preferable one. But a natural question arises: who gives this assessment? Codification is carried out by linguists who specialize in this area, and the rest of the native speakers, as it were, give them authority to do so. At present, the most authoritative codifying publication, along with dictionaries, is Russian Grammar, edited by N.Yu. Shvedova (1982), which contains comprehensive information about phonetic, word-formation and grammatical norms. Only non-literary varieties of the language (territorial dialects, jargons, etc.) are not codified, although the corresponding dictionaries (they are called non-normative) that reflect dialect, colloquial and jargon vocabulary exist.

5.5. Dictionary types. Linguistic dictionaries

The level of general and speech culture of a person is largely determined by how this linguistic personality knows how to use dictionaries (for more details, see lecture No. 3). Hundreds of dictionaries of various volumes and targeted directions (large, small, short; academic, school, etc.) are published in our country. But according to the target setting, according to the selection of material and its submission, they are all divided into two groups: encyclopedic dictionaries and linguistic (language) dictionaries. The similarities and fundamental differences between these types of dictionaries are given in Table. 5.12.

Table 5.12

Comparative characteristics of encyclopedic and linguistic dictionaries

Varieties of dictionaries

ENCYCLOPEDIC	LINGUISTIC (LANGUAGE)

I. Similarity

1. Dictionary entry as main compositional semantic unit

2. The role of the title (headword) in the dictionary entry

3. Concise presentation of information in a dictionary entry

4. Alphabetical principle of the arrangement of dictionary entries

II. Differences

1. The object of description is a reality : object, arrange- 1. The object of description is a language unit: a word,

Varieties of dictionaries

ENCYCLOPEDIC	LINGUISTIC (LANGUAGE)

		2. The goal is to give comprehensive scientific ha- 2. The goal is to give a brief description of the lexical
		description of a concept or phenomenon			the meaning of a word, phraseological unit, etc.
		3. Includes only beings			3. Includes words of all parts of speech, including
		solid and compound names			tea service
		4. Contains proper names			4. Does not contain proper names
		5. Contains pictorial illustrative			5. Contains speech illustrative material:
		material (photographs, reproductions, maps)			quotes, sayings, etc.
		you, drawings, etc.)
				III. Examples
		ALTYN (from Tat. Altyn - gold), old Russian			ALTYN, -a, m. An old Russian small coin worthy
		small coin, as well as a unit of den. accounts. First-			instvom in three kopecks.
		initially equaled 6 Moscow or 3 Novgorod-			[Razlyulyaev (sings):] Here we have millet hryvnia, and barley
		skim money (see Money). The latter later			three altyns. A. Ostrovsky. Poverty is not a vice.
		received the name of a penny. From here, saving
		necking up to present name time. "five" for
		15 kop. In 1654, a copper coin was first issued with
		the inscription "altynnik", and in 1704 (until 1726) - silver
		Great Soviet Encyclopedia: in 30 volumes. Vol. 1, S. 463.
					Dictionary of the Russian language: in 4 volumes (MAS). T.1, S.33.
		In table. 5.13 gives a general description of the main types of linguistic dictionaries.
					Table 5.13
				Types of linguistic dictionaries
		Dictionary type			Purpose
		Explanatory		Gives an interpretation of the lexical meaning of the word; contains his grammar and
			other characteristics
		Orthoepic		Fixes the norms of pronunciation and stress
		Orthographic	Fixes the norms of writing words and individual forms of the word
		Grammatical		Contains information about the grammatical properties of words
			Contains information about the origin and internal form* of borrowed and
		Etymological
				original Russian words
		foreign words		Contains information about the origin and lexical meaning of borrowed
			Russian words
		Phraseological		Fixes stable expressions; contains information about their lexical meaning
			origin and origin
		Synonyms		Includes rows of words with the same or similar lexical meanings
		Antonimov		Includes pairs of words with opposite lexical meanings
		Homonyms	Includes pairs of words with the same spelling and/or pronunciation, but
				having different lexical meanings
		Paronimov		Includes pairs of words that are similar in sound but have different lexical
				values
		word-formation	Shows the division of words into morphemes, the word-formation structure of words
			and word-formation nests
		Word combinations	Contains combination characteristics of the most common words
		Abbreviations	Contains a decoding of complex abbreviated words, as well as graphic
			abbreviations used in writing

Note: * The internal form of the word is a sign underlying the name. For example, the noun animal, borrowed from the Old Slavonic language, is formed in it from the word belly (synonymous with Russian life).

What dictionaries do not contain information about the lexical meaning of the word?

Which of the linguistic dictionaries has a dictionary entry consisting of only one word? Why?

What are the similarities and differences between the dictionary of foreign words and the explanatory dictionary?

What are the similarities and differences between the dictionary of foreign words and the etymological dictionary?

The section of linguistics that studies the systematization and description of language units in dictionaries is called lexicography, and the compilers of dictionaries are called lexicographers. The dictionaries themselves are of great value not only for science, but for the whole society. But, despite the existing variety of linguistic dictionaries (see Table 5.13), in the minds of most native speakers, the word-term dictionary is still primarily associated with explanatory (lexical) dictionary. Explanatory dictionaries, the purpose of which is to explain the lexical meaning of words using the words of the same language, to show the conditions for their correct use, are the most commonly used.

It can be argued that everyone knows the so-called. Dictionary Dahl, the full name of which is "The Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language" (for more information about V.I. Dahl, see lecture 1, § 1.2.). The phrase Dahl Dictionary is a kind of precedent text, and even those who have never held it in their hands know about the existence of this dictionary. All his life V.I. Dahl worked on compiling a dictionary: from the age of nineteen, almost until his death. And, despite the fact that about 150 years have passed since the first edition, and its compiler did not set himself the goal of codifying lexical norms, the dictionary has not lost its relevance. Why?

Firstly, in this largest dictionary by V.I. Dahl (unlike his predecessors) strove to include all the Russian words known to him: both bookish, and colloquial, and dialectal and terminological. He characterized over 200,000 words, and the compiler chose some of them from already published dictionaries, and a significant part (about 80,000) was collected by him.

Secondly, the dictionary contains valuable material about the existing Russian trades and crafts, about folk beliefs, customs, and rituals. The uniqueness of the dictionary lies in the illustrative material used: phraseological units, proverbs, sayings, riddles (there are more than 30,000 of them in the dictionary), figuratively and at the same time clearly conveying the Russian linguistic mentality. (On the essence of the concept language mentality see lecture No. 4, § 4.2.).

And, finally, Dahl's Dictionary contains encyclopedic information in separate dictionary entries. For example, in the article a mushroom, along with a description of this concept

(plant more or less fleshy, no branches, no leaves, no color; consists of root or pistil with lobes and cap ), contains an exhaustive list of mushroom species, and even Latin terms corresponding to each Russian name are given. And in

The dictionary entry oven not only lists the types of ovens, but also describes in detail the structure of the Russian oven.

True, one should also note that feature of the Dahl Dictionary, which can somewhat complicate the search for the right word in it: it is not built according to the alphabetical principle, like other dictionaries, but according to the alphabetical-nesting principle (the reasons for this are named in lecture No. 1, § 1.2.). Let's say that in vain we will look for the word noun bath in the role of the head word: it is located in the dictionary entry with the head word to bathe (to wash, clean with water); within the same article, the words are characterized bathe, bathhouse, bath attendant and other cognate words.

Among modern explanatory dictionaries, the most famous and popular explanatory dictionary is the Dictionary of the Russian Language by S.I. Ozhegov, as well as created on its basis "" S.I. Ozhegova and N.Yu. Shvedova. Comparative characteristics of the most famous modern explanatory dictionaries are presented in table 5.14.

				Modern explanatory dictionaries						Table 5.14
							Quantity			Quantity
				Name
	(editor)
	Ushakov D.N.			Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language
	Ozhegov S.I.		Russian Dictionary
	Ozhegov S.I.,		Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language
Shvedova N.Yu.
	Editor		Russian Dictionary
	Evgenyeva A.P.
	Editor			Modern explanatory dictionary
	Kuznetsov S.A.			Russian language

As mentioned above, the compositional-semantic unit of any explanatory dictionary is dictionary entry. What elements does it consist of? It is not only the word itself and its lexical meaning. The sequence of structural and semantic elements of the article and a brief description of each of them are presented in Table. 5.15.

		The structure of the dictionary entry in the explanatory dictionary			Table 5.15
	Structural	Purpose of the element			obligatory
					element
	title (header-	The initial form of the word. Spelling pattern
	verbal word)	Place of stress in a word
	Orthoepic	Features of the pronunciation of individual sounds and sound
		readings in a word
	Grammar	Belonging to a certain part of speech
		Features of inflection
	Stylistic	An indication of the limited scope of use, styles
		stic or emotional coloring of the word
	The lexical	Interpretation of lexical (lexical) meanings (sign-
	values	words)

Structural	Purpose of the element	obligatory
		element
Illustrative	Confirmation of the use of the word in speech. clarification	Not*
material	the meaning of the word and its compatibility in the context
Phraseological	Set expressions whose component is
material	given word

Note: * Illustrative material is present in most dictionary entries. It is not used: a) when interpreting terminological vocabulary; b) when referring to a single-root word in a dictionary entry (see

tab. 5.16).

In addition, individual academic dictionaries, addressed primarily to specialists, may also contain the following elements: information about the origin of borrowed words; information about cognate words, as well as the name of the dictionary in which this word is recorded for the first time.

There are several ways to interpret the lexical meaning of a word, in Table. 5.16 shows the most used.

Table 5.16

Ways to explain the lexical meaning of words

Conceptual

Combined

Burlap - a rough and durable fabric (for bags, packaging, etc.) Earn - secretly slander someone; snitch doing nothing- idleness, idle pastime Completely - without a trace, completely

Dreamer - one who loves to dream, who is inclined to indulge in dreams Approving - containing approval; expressing approval. impudent - characterized by impudence; impudent

Quotations, sayings (phrases or short sentences compiled by the authors of the dictionary), as well as (as in the dictionary by V.I. Dahl) folklore material are used as illustrative material in the dictionary entry.

What dictionaries do you have at home? Which one do you most often refer to?

Using the orthoepic dictionary (dictionary of stresses, dictionary of difficulties of the Russian language), prove the existence of variational norms in the Russian language.

Which of the ways of interpreting the lexical meaning seems to you the most inconvenient for the user?

Try without the help of an explanatory dictionary to give an interpretation of the lexical meaning some thing, an object in your room. What kind of interpretation will you use? What difficulties will you experience? Then compare your interpretation with the one given in the explanatory dictionary.

Modern Russian literary language;

Language norm: Formation and functioning

literary language. Speech norms.

Sidorova M.Yu., 2002

Russian and other languages ​​of the world;

Lecture 10

The world in dictionaries and the world of dictionaries;

Lecture 12

Language game.

Sidorova M.Yu., 2005

Language norm, its role in the formation and functioning

ro-vaniya literary language.

Chernyak V.D.

Dictionaries and speech culture;

The history of the development of the norms of the Russian literary language

Norms of modern Russian speech.

Educational allowance-dictionary. Terminological and conceptual field "The normative aspect of culture

1. Borunova S.N. Orthoepic dictionary of the Russian language: Pronunciation, stress, grammatical forms / S.N. Borunova, A.L. Vorontsova, N.A. Eskova; ed. R.I. Avanesova.- M.: Rus.

2. Gorbachevich K.S. Dictionary of the difficulties of the modern Russian language / K.S. Gorbachevich.-St. Petersburg: Norint, 2003.

3. Graudina L.K. Grammatical correctness of Russian speech: a stylistic dictionary of variants / L.K. Graudina, V.A. Itskovich, L.P. Katlinskaya. - M .: Astrel Publishing House LLC: AST Publishing House LLC, 2004.

4. Dal V.I. Explanatory dictionary of the living Great Russian language: in 4 volumes / V.I.Dal. - St. Petersburg: OOO

"Diamant", OOO "Golden Age", 1999 (or any other edition).

5. Dyachenko G. Complete Church Slavonic Dictionary / G. Dyachenko - M .: Father's House, 2001.

6. Kolesnikov N.P. Dictionary of paronyms and antonyms of the Russian language / N.P. Kolesnikov.- Rostov / n / D: Phoenix, 1995.

7. The latest dictionary of foreign words and expressions. - M .: LLC "Publishing House AST", Mn .: Khar-

8. Novikov A.B. Dictionary of paraphrases of the Russian language (based on newspaper journalism) / A.B. Novikov. – M.: Rus. yaz., 2004.

9. Ozhegov S.I. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language / S.I. Ozhegov, N.Yu. Shvedova. – M.: Azbukovnik, 1999.

10. Dictionary of compatibility of words of the Russian language; ed. P.N. Denisova, V.V. Morkovkina. - M .:

Astrel Publishing House LLC: AST Publishing House LLC, 2002.

11. Thematic Dictionary of the Russian Language; ed. V.V. Morkovkina.– M.: Rus. yaz., 2000.

12. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language of the late twentieth century. language changes; under. ed. G.N. Sklyarevskaya. - St. Petersburg:"Folio-Press", 1998.

13. Phraseological dictionary of the Russian language; ed. A.I. Molotkova. - St. Petersburg: Option, 1994.

14. Chernykh P.Ya. Historical and etymological dictionary of the Russian language: in 2 volumes; P.Ya.Chernykh. – M.: Rus.