language norm. Types of language norms. Orthoepic. Variation of language norms. The concept of speech error
And accent rules. Lexical and phraseological norms
Plan
1. The concept of a language norm, its features.
2. Variants of norms.
3. Degrees of normativity of language units.
4. Types of norms.
5. Norms oral speech.
5.1. orthoepic norms.
5.2. Accent rules.
6. Norms of oral and written speech.
6.1. Lexical norms.
6.2. Phraseological norms.
The culture of speech, as mentioned earlier, is a multidimensional concept. It is based on the idea that exists in the human mind of the “speech ideal”, a model in accordance with which correct, literate speech should be built.
The norm is the dominant concept of the culture of speech. In the Big Explanatory Dictionary of the Modern Russian Language D.N. Ushakova word meaning norm defined as follows: "legalized establishment, ordinary mandatory order, condition". Thus, the norm reflects, first of all, customs, traditions, streamlines communication and is the result of a socio-historical selection of one option from several possible ones.
Language norms are the rules of use language tools in a certain period of development literary language(rules of pronunciation, word usage, use morphological forms different parts speech, syntactic constructions, etc.). This is a historically established uniform, exemplary, generally accepted use of elements of the language, recorded in grammars and normative dictionaries.
Language norms are characterized by a number of features:
1) relative stability;
2) general usage;
3) general obligatoriness;
4) compliance with the use, tradition and capabilities of the language system.
Norms reflect regular processes and phenomena occurring in the language, and are supported by language practice.
The sources of norms are the speech of educated people, the works of writers, as well as the most authoritative means mass media.
Norm functions:
1) ensures the correct understanding of each other by speakers of a given language;
2) hinders the penetration of dialect, colloquial, vernacular, slang elements into the literary language;
3) educates language taste.
Language norms are a historical phenomenon. They change over time, reflecting changes in the use of language tools. Sources for changing norms are:
Colloquial speech (cf., for example, colloquial variants such as calls- along with Lit. calls; cottage cheese- along with Lit. cottage cheese; [de]kan along with lit. [d'e]kan);
Vernacular (for example, in some dictionaries they are fixed as valid colloquial stress options contract, phenomenon, until recently, vernacular, non-normative options);
Dialects (for example, in the Russian literary language there are a number of words that are dialectal in origin: spider, snowstorm, taiga, life);
Professional jargons (cf. stress options actively penetrating into modern everyday speech whooping cough, syringes, accepted in the speech of health workers).
The change in norms is preceded by the appearance of their variants that exist in the language at a certain stage of its development and are actively used by native speakers. Language Options- these are two or more ways of pronunciation, stress, formation of grammatical form, etc. The emergence of variants is explained by the development of the language: some linguistic phenomena become obsolete, go out of use, others appear.
However, the options may be equal - normative, acceptable in literary speech ( bakery And bulo [shn] th; barge And barge; Mordvin And Mordvin ov ).
More often, only one of the options is recognized as normative, while others are assessed as unacceptable, incorrect, violating the literary norm ( drivers and wrong. chauffeurA; catholOg and wrong. catalog).
Unequal options. As a rule, variants of the norm are specialized in one way or another. Very often the options are stylistic specialization: neutral - high; literary - colloquial ( stylistic options ). Wed stylistically neutral pronunciation of the reduced vowel in words like s[a] no, n[a] floor, m[a] turf and the pronunciation of the sound [o] in the same words, characteristic of a high, specifically bookish style: s[o] no, p[o] floor, m[o] turf; neutral (soft) pronunciation of sounds [g], [k], [x] in words like shake up [g’i] wag, wave [x’i] wat, jump up [k’i] wat and the bookish, characteristic of the old Moscow noma, the firm pronunciation of these sounds: shudder [gy] walt, wave [hy] walt, jump [ky] walt. Wed also lit. contract, locksmith And and unfold contract, locksmith I.
Often options are specialized in terms of degree of their modernity(chronological options ). For example: modern creamy and outdated. plum [shn] th.
In addition, options may have differences in meaning ( semantic variants ): moves(move, move) and drives(set in motion, induce, force to act).
According to the ratio between the norm and the variant, three degrees of normativity of language units are distinguished.
Norm I degree. A strict, rigid norm that does not allow options. In such cases, variants in dictionaries are accompanied by prohibitive marks: choice s – not right. choice but; shi [n'e] l - not right. shi[ne]l; petition - not right. petition; pampered - not rivers. spoiled. In relation to linguistic facts that are outside the literary norm, it is more correct to speak not about variants, but about speech errors.
Norm II degree. The norm is neutral, allowing equal options. For example: a loop And a loop; swimming pool And ba[sse]in; stack And stack. In dictionaries, similar options are connected by the union And.
Norm III degree. A mobile norm that allows the use of colloquial, obsolete forms. Variants of the norm in such cases are accompanied by marks add.(permissible), add. obsolete(allowable deprecation). For example: August - add. August; budo[h]ik and additional mouth budo[shn]ik.
Variants of norms in the modern Russian literary language are presented very widely. In order to choose correct option, it is necessary to refer to special dictionaries: orthoepic, stress dictionaries, difficulty dictionaries, explanatory dictionaries etc.
Language norms are obligatory for both oral and written speech. The typology of norms covers all levels of the language system: pronunciation, stress, word formation, morphology, syntax, spelling, and punctuation are subject to norms.
In accordance with the main levels of the language system and the areas of use of language means, the following types of norms are distinguished.
Norm types
 |
||
| Norms of oral speech | Norms of written speech | Norms of oral and written speech |
| - accentological(norms of stress setting); - orthoepic(pronunciation norms) | - spelling(correct spelling); - punctuation(norms for punctuation marks) | - lexical(norms of word usage); - phraseological(norms for the use of phraseological units); - derivational(norms of word formation); - morphological(norms for the formation of word forms of various parts of speech); - syntactic(norms for constructing syntactic constructions) |
Oral speech is spoken speech. It uses a system phonetic means expressions, which include: speech sounds, word stress, phrasal stress, intonation.
Specific for oral speech are the norms of pronunciation (orthoepic) and the norms of stress (accentological).
The norms of oral speech are reflected in special dictionaries (see, for example: Orthoepic dictionary of the Russian language: pronunciation, stress, grammatical forms / edited by R.I. Avanesov. - M., 2001; Ageenko F.L., Zarva M.V. Dictionary of accents for radio and television workers. - M., 2000).
5.1. Orthoepic norms These are the norms of literary pronunciation.
Orthoepy (from the Greek. orphos - straight, correct and epic - speech) is a set of oral speech rules that ensure the unity of its sound design in accordance with the norms that have historically developed in the literary language.
stand out following groups orthoepic norms:
Vowel pronunciation: forest - in l[i]su; horn - r [a] ha;
Pronunciation of consonants: teeth - zu [p], o [t] take - o [d] give;
Pronunciation of individual combinations of consonants: in [zh’zh ’] and, [sh’sh’] astya; kone[shn]o;
Pronunciation of consonants in individual grammatical forms ah (in adjective forms: elastic [gy] th - elastic [g'y]; in verb forms: took [sa] - took [s'a], I remain [s] - I remain [s'];
Pronunciation of words of foreign origin: pu[re], [t’e]rror, b[o]a.
Let us dwell on individual, difficult, cases of pronunciation, when the speaker needs to choose the correct option from a number of existing ones.
The Russian literary language is characterized by the pronunciation of [g] explosive. The pronunciation of [γ] fricative is dialectal, non-normative. However, in a number of words, the norm requires the pronunciation of exactly the sound [γ], which, when stunned, turns into [x]: [ γ ]God, Bo[γ]a - Bo[x].
In Russian literary pronunciation, there used to be a fairly significant range of everyday words in which, in place of letter combinations CHN was pronounced SHN. Now, under the influence of spelling, there are quite a few such words left. Yes, the pronunciation SHN preserved as obligatory in words kone[shn] o, naro[shn] o and in patronymics: Ilini[shn]a, Savvi[shn]na, Nikiti[shn]a(cf. the spelling of these words: Ilyinichna, Savvichna, Nikitichna).
A number of words allow for variants of pronunciation CHN And SHN: decent And orderly [w] ny, bool [h] th And bulo [shn] th, milk [n] And young lady. In some words, the pronunciation SHN is perceived as obsolete: lavo [shn] ik, sin [shn] evy, apple [shn] y.
In scientific and technical terminology, as well as in words of a bookish nature, it is never pronounced SHN. Wed: flowing, cardiac (attack), milky (way), celibate.
consonant group Thu in words what to nothing pronounced like PCS: [pcs] about, [pcs] oby, none [pcs] about. In other cases, as Thu: not [th] about, after [th] and, after [th] a, [th] y, [read] ing.
For pronunciation foreign words The following tendencies are typical in the modern Russian literary language.
Foreign words are subject to phonetic patterns in the language, so most foreign words in pronunciation do not differ from Russian ones. However, some words retain the peculiarities of pronunciation. It concerns
1) unstressed pronunciation ABOUT;
2) pronunciation of the consonant before E.
1. In some groups of borrowed words that have limited use, an unstressed sound is (unstablely) preserved ABOUT. These include:
Foreign proper names: Voltaire, Zola, Jaurès, Chopin;
The literary norm is the rules for pronunciation, formation and use of language units in speech. Otherwise, the norm is defined as objectively established rules for the implementation of the language system. Norms are divided depending on the regulated tier of the language into the following types:
1) orthoepic (norms of pronunciation of words and their forms),
2) accentological (stress norms, special case orthoepic),
3) lexical (norms for the use of words, depending on their meaning),
4) phraseological (norms for the use of phraseological units),
5) word-formation (rules for creating new words according to models known to the language),
6) morphological (principles of formation and change of parts of speech),
7) syntactic (rules for combining word forms into phrases and sentences). The last two rules are often combined under common name - « grammatical norms", since the morphology and syntax intimately interconnected.
Depending on the regulated form of speech, the norms are divided into:
Those that are typical only for oral speech (these are orthoepic and accentological;
Characteristic only for written speech (spelling, punctuation);
Regulating both oral and written speech (all other types).
The literary norm is characterized by binding for all native speakers, use in all areas public life, relative stability, prevalence in all tiers of the language system.
The main function of the norm is security, its purpose is to preserve the richness of the literary language.
Variants of literary language norms
Language norms are a historical phenomenon. The change in literary norms is due to the constant development of the language. What was the norm in the twentieth century, and even two years ago, may become a deviation from it today. For example, in the 30-40s of the 20th century, the words graduate student And student to express the same concept: "A student doing a thesis." Word graduate student was a colloquial version of the word student. In the literary norm of the 50-60s. 20th century there was a distinction in the use of these words: the former colloquial graduate student now denotes a student, a student in the period of protection thesis, obtaining a diploma. Word student they began to name mainly the winners of competitions, prize-winners of reviews, competitions awarded with a diploma (for example, Diploma winner of the All-Union Piano Competition, Diploma Winner International Competition vocalists).
The sources of changes in the norms of the literary language are different: live, colloquial speech, local dialects, vernacular, professional jargons, other languages.
The change of norms is preceded by the appearance of their variants that really exist in the language at a certain stage of its development, are actively used by its speakers. Variants of norms are reflected in the dictionaries of the modern literary language.
The historical change in the norms of the literary language is a natural, objective phenomenon. It does not depend on the will and desire of individual native speakers. The development of society, the change in the social way of life, the emergence of new traditions, the functioning of literature lead to the constant renewal of the literary language and its norms.
The process of changing linguistic norms has become especially active in recent decades, therefore modern dictionaries fix many options, for example:
Pronunciation options: in the word " loser» pronounced sound combination [h], but pronunciation is allowed [shn];
Accent options: the word " cemetery" has an obsolete accent "cemetery";
Grammar variants: gerund "torment" has a conversational "tormenting". Rozental R.E., Telenkova M.A. Dictionary of the difficulties of the Russian language. M., 1984.
It is already clear from the examples that the variants, as a rule, differ stylistically (by the scope of use or color), in addition, one of the variants is more often marked as preferred, and the other as less used.
If the norm allows double pronunciation, spelling, use, then it is called dispositive. A norm that does not allow variations is called an imperative.
Variants (or doublets) are varieties of the same language unit that have the same meaning but differ in form. Some variants are not differentiated either semantically or stylistically: otherwise - otherwise; stack - stack; workshops - workshops; sazhen - sazhen. However, the vast majority of options undergo stylistic differentiation: called - called, accountants - accountants, condition - condition, wave - wave (the second options, compared to the first, have a colloquial or colloquial connotation).
How and why do options arise? What phenomena can be considered variant, and what are not? What is the fate of variant modes of expression? These and other questions are constantly in the field of view of scientists.
We know that language is constantly changing. It is obvious. Let's compare a text written about 150 years ago with a modern one to see the changes that have taken place in the language during this time:
But as soon as dusk fell to the ground,
The ax rattled on the elastic roots,
And pets of centuries fell without life!
Their clothes were torn off by little children,
Their bodies were then chopped up,
And they burned them slowly until morning with fire.
(M. Lermontov)
Zeus throwing thunders
And all the immortals around the father,
Their bright feasts and houses
We will see in the songs we are blind.
(N. Gnedich)
In the given contexts, phenomena are presented that diverge from modern standards on certain grounds: phonetic, lexical, morphological, etc. Constant, continuous language changes that occur in short periods of time are hardly noticeable. The stage of variation and the gradual replacement of competing modes of expression provides a less perceptible and less painful shift in the norm, in no small measure contributing to the existence famous paradox: the language changes, remaining itself.
L. V. Shcherba once wrote: “... in normative grammar, the language is often presented in a petrified form. This corresponds to a naive philistine idea: the language has changed before us and will change in the future, but now it is unchanged” 1 .
The functioning of the language involves language changes, the replacement of one norm by another. V. A. Itskovich presents the process of changing norms as follows. The new enters the language in spite of existing rules. It usually appears outside of literary use - in common speech, in professional speech, in colloquial everyday speech, etc. Then it gradually becomes fixed in the literary language 2 . Schematically, this can be represented as follows:
Scheme 1. Changing the norms of modern Russianliterary language
In the beginning, the phenomenon X1 is the norm, the phenomenon X2 is outside the KLA (used in colloquial speech, colloquially, in professional speech). At the second stage, there is a gradual convergence of these two phenomena, and is already beginning to be used in KLA, in its oral variety. The third stage is characterized by the fact that two phenomena are used on an equal footing, coexisting as variants of the norm. Then, at the fourth stage, there is a “shift” of the norm: the X2 variant gradually replaces the X1 variant, the latter is used only in the written speech of the KLA. And at the final stage, we observe a change in norms: the X2 phenomenon is the only form of the BLA, and X1 is already outside the norm. According to this scheme, there was, for example, a change in the endings of the nominative case plural the words of a lecturer have lecturers, a factor have factors, an overseer has overseers, a compass has compasses, a corporal has corporals, etc. In the 70s. 19th century Forms with the ending -а(-я) were normative, then gradually they were replaced by forms with the ending -ы(-и). It is interesting that for these and similar nouns the norm changed twice: the original ending -ы(-и) was replaced by -а(-я), and then again replaced this then new norm. This diagram shows the most common process of changing norms. But this is not always the case.
Several more trends stand out in the development of variance (see the works of L. K. Graudina, V. A. Itskovich and other researchers).
The first is a tendency towards stylistic differentiation of variants (differentiation in terms of stylistic coloring, marking). Such a stylistic stratification occurred, for example, in the 70-80s. 19th century with the majority of non-vociferous and full-voiced options (cooling - getting colder, gild - gild, middle - middle, etc.). Also in early XIX in. they (and others like them) were considered stylistically neutral. Later, these couples sharply dispersed, separated: non-vowel options began to be used in poetic speech and acquired the features of a sublime poetic vocabulary. We also see an increase in contrast in stylistic coloring in pronunciation options for back-lingual consonants. In the XVIII - early XIX century. the “solid” pronunciation of consonants was considered the norm, often this was also spelled out. In K. N. Batyushkov, for example, we observe the following rhyme:
In this hut wretched
Standing in front of the window
The table is dilapidated and tripod
With torn cloth.
But you, oh my poor
The cripple and the blind
Walking the road...
Throw my cloak wide
Arm yourself with a sword
And at midnight deep
Knock suddenly...
("My Penates")
A little later, P. A. Vyazemsky already used other forms for back-lingual consonants, which are widely used today:
The north is pale, the north is flat,
Steppe, native clouds -
Where was the sadness...
Now, where are those triplets?
Where is their smart escape?
Where's the uhar escape?
Where are you, lively bell,
Are you cart poetry?
(“In memory of the painter Orlovsky”)
Nowadays, the “hard” pronunciation of back-lingual consonants is observed only in stage speech (and even then inconsistently, more often among the actors of the Moscow Art Theater of the older generation): there is a steady tendency for spelling and pronunciation to converge. Thus, in the second half of the XX century. the ratio of forms with "hard" and "soft" pronunciation of back-lingual consonants is different compared to what it was in the 18th - early 19th centuries. 3
Along with such a stylistic differentiation of linguistic means, there is also an opposite trend - the neutralization of bookish and colloquial coloring. For example, in the 19th century units of measurement of physical quantities in the genitive plural had the usual ending -ov (amps, volts, watts). Then (obviously, under the influence of the law of economy) there was a shift in the norm: the form with zero inflection (ampere, watt, volt) was neutralized, in modern language in most technical units of measurement, it became dominant: ohm, watt, pendant, ampere, erg, hertz. This stage began, according to L.K. Graudina, in the 80s. 19th century and ended in the first decade of the 20th century, i.e., with the change of one generation of physicists by another. In the same units of measurement as grams, kilograms, in the genitive plural, Zero inflection is common in oral in a colloquial style, and in writing, due to strict editorial corrections, the forms for -ov are still considered normalized: grams, kilograms. Thus, the process of “shifts” in the ratio of options is not straightforward; it often proceeds unevenly and unevenly.
Variants are classified according to different features. By belonging to the linguistic types of units, options are distinguished:
1) pronunciation (bulo [h '] naya - bulo [sh] naya, female [n '] china -
woman [n] china, wait [wait] eat - do [w’] eat and so on.);
2) inflectional (tractors - tractors, in the shop - in the shop, hectare - hectares, etc.);
3) derivational (cutting - cutting, stitching - stitching, stuffing - stuffing, etc.);
4) syntactic: a) prepositional control (to ride a tram - to ride a tram, a height of 10 meters - a height of 10 meters, remarks on someone's address - remarks on someone's address); b) unpredictable control (wait for the plane - wait for the plane, they cannot read a book - they cannot read books, two main questions - two main questions, etc.);
5) lexical (movie - motion picture - film, international - international, export - export, import - import, etc.).
It should be noted that phonetic, derivational and grammatical variants are essentially semantic doublets, while lexical variants stand somewhat apart 4 . As L. K. Graudina notes, the classification of variants according to their belonging to linguistic types of units is hardly appropriate; it is interesting only from the point of view of the relative frequency of variants of some types compared to others. PM Zeitlin classifies variants according to the types of stylistic relationships between members of the pairs, highlighting, on the one hand, groups of pairs of variants in which one of the members is sharply stylistically colored (blato - swamp, breshchi - protect, helmet - helmet), and on the other hand, pairs in which the options are closest to each other in stylistic terms (short - short, incessant - incessant, etc.).
This approach to variants is recognized by most researchers as fruitful. For example, M.V. Panov believes that the classification of variants should be based on the types of stylistic opposition. It does not matter whether the syntaxes, lexemes, morphemes of the phoneme vary. The main ones are stylistic patterns that govern their functioning in speech.
In the process of language development, the number of variants, according to most researchers, is noticeably and continuously reduced. This is due to the increase in the general literacy of the population, the strengthening of the influence of the mass media and propaganda on the culture of speech, the normalization activities of linguists, the constant unification in the field of spelling and orthoepy, the strengthening of book styles of language - speech, etc.
Notes:
1. Shcherba L.V. Next problems of linguistics // Izbr. works on linguistics and phonetics. L.G. 1958. T. 1. S. 15.
2. For more details, see: Itskovich V.A. language norm. M., 1968.
3. These forms are now in a transitional phase between the fourth and fifth positions (see Diagram 1).
4. Lexical variants differ from derivational, inflectional and syntactic ones in that they do not constitute a paradigm of a number of words united by a common grammatical meaning. Their commonality is only functional and stylistic.
T.P. Pleshchenko, N.V. Fedotova, R.G. Chechet. Stylistics and culture of speech - Mn., 2001.
In modern linguistic science, the norm is seen as a dynamic rather than a static phenomenon, although normativity as the foundation of a literary language presupposes stability and stability.
The term "norm" in modern linguistic science is used in wide And narrow sense.
Concept definition
"In a broad sense, the norm means traditionally and spontaneously formed ways of speech that distinguish this language idiom from other language idioms. In this understanding, the norm is close to the concept of usage, i.e. generally accepted, established ways of using given language. <...>In a narrow sense, a norm is the result of a purposeful codification of a language. This understanding of the norm is inextricably linked with the concept literary language, which is otherwise called normalized, or codified".
Accordingly, it should be considered, on the one hand, the norm as a traditional phenomenon that has developed historically, and on the other hand, as a fact of codification, a set of regulations.
Concept definition
K. S. Gorbachevich emphasized: “Modern linguistics has freed itself from the dogmatic idea of the inviolability of the norms of literary speech. The norm reflects the progressive development of the language, although it should not be mechanically derived from linguistic evolution. The dynamic theory of the norm, based on the requirement of “flexible stability”, combines in itself and taking into account productive and independent of our will tendencies of language development, and careful attitude to the capital of inherited literary-traditional speech skills" .
Dynamic Approach to the norm was developed in the works of L. V. Shcherba, N. Yu. Shvedova, L. I. Skvortsov, F. P. Filin and other researchers. This approach to the norm combines the reproduction of "the realized possibilities of the system, elevated by social practice to the rank of a model", and "the constant generation of linguistic facts in the process of live communication, oriented at the same time both to the system and to the realized model" .
Obviously, the norm reflects both intra-linguistic language laws and extra-linguistic ones. On the one hand, the normativity of language levels is a reflection of the consistency of the language, the principles of linguistic analogy and economy, the patterns of field organization and gradualness. On the other hand, axiological and pragmatic factors also determine the stability of the norm in a particular period of development of society. Accordingly, a certain paradoxical nature of the language norm allows us to describe it in a complex of dialectical properties: stability and mobility, historical determinism and variability, unambiguity and ambiguity, interdependence of the language standard and context. Consequently, the choice is made both on the basis of linguistic tradition and on the basis of linguistic usage.
In this regard, the coexistence of linguistic options on all language levels, as a reflection of the dynamic properties of the language in the process of its evolution, is proof of the viability of the language system.
Concept definition
Variation (from lat. variants, genus. P. variantis- "changing"), or variability, is a multi-valued concept. First, it is the idea of different ways expressions of any linguistic entity as its modification, variety, or as a deviation from some norm (for example, discrepancies in different lists of the same monument)". Secondly, this term characterizes the way of existence and functioning of language units and the language system in general. Variation is a fundamental property of the language system and the functioning of all units of the language; it is characterized using the concepts of "variant", "invariant", "variation". In the first understanding of variance, only the concepts of "variant" and "variation" are used; modified, understood as a certain sample, standard or norm, and a variant as a modification of this norm or a deviation from it.In the second understanding, the term "invariant" and the opposition "variant-invariant" are introduced. options"understood different manifestations of the same essence, for example, a modification of the same unit, which remains itself in all changes.
In the same sense, L.P. Krysin uses the term variability. We consider it possible to consider the terms variability And variability as equivalent and equivalent.
By analogy with the typology of norms, orthoepic, lexical, grammatical (morphological and syntactic) variants are distinguished.
In Russian lexicography, the most striking fundamental source reflecting the typology of variant grammatical means, quantitative ratio variants within the type, stylistic differentiation of variants, containing a detailed explanation of the reasons for the variance, and, if necessary, a brief historical reference, a characteristic of current trends, is the dictionary "Grammatical Correctness of Russian Speech" .
The authors of the dictionary note that in a large group of double names various phenomena both components are usually declined: see -railway carriage (-buffet, -exhibition, -restaurant, -cistern, -refrigerator). "However, the names of the most commonly used in everyday life such as plan-map, plan-order, dining car, novel-newspaper, sofa bed with a strict literary norm requiring the declension of both components of the name, indeclinable variants at the junction of words have spread in colloquial speech: in the dining car, sale of sofa beds, filling out the plan-card"(S. 179).
Despite the fact that the literary norm is rigid and conservative, it allows the simultaneous functioning of variants of the same language unit. Options may differ stylistically, depend on the communicative conditions of speech, refer to the speech practice of certain social and professional groups; facts and free variation are possible.
The norm changes along with the development of the language. These changes, in turn (usually in the form options), are reflected in lexicographic sources by means of type labels add.(= "permissible"), unfold(= "colloquial"), simple.(= "colloquial"), heat?..(= "slang"), etc. The typology of marks in the modern Russian language is not regulated and therefore can be different.
The differentiation of litters used in " Orthoepic Dictionary Russian language" edited by R. I. Avanesov, first published in 1983. The authors of the dictionary, in relation to the norm, distinguish between linguistic facts described as add.(= "additional") - a less desirable version of the norm, which is within the correct range; add. obsolete(= "tolerably obsolete") – the variant being evaluated is gradually lost. Along with the above, prohibitive marks are also distinguished: not rivers.(= "not recommended") as reflecting phenomena corresponding to the general trends of language development ("often this label is used to evaluate variants that can be assumed to become normative in the not too distant future"); not right.(= "wrong") and grossly wrong.(= "grossly wrong").
See, for example: "reprimand, -a, pl.-y, -ov! wrong, pl. reprimand, -ov (S. 88)"; "put out, -vlyu, -vit, pov. expose And expose, incl. suffering, past exposed" (S. 95); "to sprinkle, - to pour, - to pour, - to pour and add.- sypit, - sypit, pov.-rash, incl. suffering, past sprinkled" (S. 428.); "start, -chnu, -chnet, past start, start, start, start, incl. suffering, past opened and additional obsolete started, started and add. obsolete start, start And started, started, started and additional obsolete started, started! not right, began" (S. 431-432).
The coexistence of options in a given period of time is unbalanced, which is due to statistical characteristic use. For example, as noted by the authors of the dictionary "Grammatical Correctness of Russian Speech", approximately until the 1950s. "declension of proper names ending in -but unstressed, both Russian and borrowed, practically without exception belonged to the first type of declension of the feminine morphological gender. However, since the middle of the 20th century, “proper names of this morphological type have fluctuated in declension between the first type of declension and the non-inflected variant (90.91 % – 9.09%)" . Compare: Pike - Pike, Shlomy – Shloma, Batekhi – Bateha, Clubs – cudgel etc.
There are several types of variation of language units within the norm;
- 1)free, for example, the variable coexistence of historically determined grammatical forms, reflecting the basic models of form formation, and modeling Similarly(for example, the shaping of verbs of non-productive groups by analogy with productive ones): ride - ride, wave – waving(Similarly read);
- 2) semantically due, for example, to the variation of forms genitive (cheese – cheese, cottage cheese – cottage cheese), prepositional case (in circle – in a circle, at home - at home), plural forms depending on the meaning of the word ( images – images, orders – orders) and etc.;
- 3) stylistically conditional, cf. alcoholic(neutral) - wino(simple) scandal(neutral) - brawl(colloquial), young woman(neutral) – Virgo(outdated), miser(neutral) – miser(simple);
- 4) professionally conditional, for example: excited(neutral) - excited(prof.), newborn(neutral) – newborn(prof.), convicted(neutral) – convicted(prof.), alcohol(neutral) - alcohol(prof.), spritz(neutral) – syringe(prof.);
- 5) socially conditioned, an example of which are the reflexes of the old Moscow pronunciation in modern sounding speech. In particular, as noted, the results of the research “convincingly showed that some of the old Moscow features that were previously recognized as archaic: the pronunciation of unstressed inflections of verbs II sp. 3 l. in a certain circle of words, the pronunciation of the sound [p "] before soft consonants (dental, front-lingual, labial, back-lingual) should be recognized as normatively acceptable in the modern language along with new pronunciation options"