When the Russian literary language is formed. Modern and Russian literary language. The Status of Business Writing in Ancient Russia
History of the Russian literary language- formation and transformation of the Russian language used in literary works. The oldest surviving literary monuments date back to the 11th century. In the XVIII- 19th century x this process took place against the background of the opposition of the Russian language, which was spoken by the people, to French - the language of the nobility. The classics of Russian literature actively explored the possibilities of the Russian language and were innovators of many language forms. They emphasized the richness of the Russian language and often pointed out its advantages over foreign languages. On the basis of such comparisons, disputes have repeatedly arisen, for example, disputes between Westerners and Slavophiles. AT Soviet times it was emphasized that the Russian language is the language of the builders of communism, and during the era of Stalin's rule, a campaign was carried out to combat cosmopolitanism in literature. Russian conversion literary language continues at the present time.
Folklore
Oral folk art (folklore) in the form of fairy tales, epics, proverbs and sayings is rooted in distant history. They were passed from mouth to mouth, their content was polished in such a way that the most stable combinations remained, and linguistic forms were updated as the language developed. Oral creativity continued to exist even after the advent of writing. In modern times, peasant folklore was supplemented by worker and city folklore, as well as army and thieves (prison-camp) folklore. At present, oral folk art is most expressed in anecdotes. Oral folk art also influences the written literary language.
The development of the literary language in ancient Russia
The introduction and spread of writing in Russia, which led to the creation of the Russian literary language, is usually associated with Cyril and Methodius.
So, in ancient Novgorod and other cities in the XI-XV centuries, birch bark letters were in use. Most of the surviving birch bark letters are private letters of a business nature, as well as business documents: wills, receipts, bills of sale, court records. There are also church texts and literary and folklore works (conspiracies, school jokes, riddles, instructions on household chores), educational records (alphabets, warehouses, school exercises, children's drawings and scribbles).
Church Slavonic writing, introduced by Cyril and Methodius in 862, was based on the Old Church Slavonic language, which in turn came from South Slavic dialects. The literary activity of Cyril and Methodius consisted in translating the books of the Holy Scriptures of the New and Old Testaments. The disciples of Cyril and Methodius translated a large number of religious books into Church Slavonic from Greek. Some researchers believe that Cyril and Methodius did not introduce the Cyrillic alphabet, but the Glagolitic one; and the Cyrillic alphabet was developed by their students.
Church Slavonic was a bookish language, not a spoken language, the language of church culture, which spread among many Slavic peoples. Church Slavonic literature spread among the Western Slavs (Moravia), the Southern Slavs (Bulgaria), in Wallachia, parts of Croatia and the Czech Republic, and, with the adoption of Christianity, in Russia. Since the Church Slavonic language differed from spoken Russian, church texts were subjected to changes during correspondence, Russified. The scribes corrected the Church Slavonic words, bringing them closer to the Russian ones. At the same time, they introduced the features of local dialects.
To systematize Church Slavonic texts and introduce uniform language norms in the Commonwealth, the first grammars were written - the grammar of Lawrence Zizaniy (1596) and the grammar of Meletiy Smotrytsky (1619). The process of formation of the Church Slavonic language was basically completed at the end of the 17th century, when Patriarch Nikon corrected and systematized the liturgical books. Liturgical books of Russian Orthodoxy have become the norm for all Orthodox peoples .
As Church Slavonic religious texts spread in Russia, literary works gradually began to appear that used the writing system of Cyril and Methodius. The first such works date back to the end of the 11th century. These are The Tale of Bygone Years" (1068), " The Tale of Boris and Gleb", " The Life of Theodosius of Pechorsky", " The Word of Law and Grace" (1051), " Teaching of Vladimir Monomakh" (1096) and " The Tale of Igor's Campaign" (1185-1188). These works are written in a language that is a mixture of Church Slavonic with Old Russian.
Links
Reforms of the Russian literary language of the 18th century
“The beauty, magnificence, strength and richness of the Russian language is quite clear from books written in past centuries, when our ancestors did not know any rules for compositions yet, but they hardly thought that they exist or can be” - Mikhail Vasilievich Lomonosov claimed
The most important reforms of the Russian literary language and system of versification in the 18th century were made by Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov. In the city, he wrote a "Letter on the Rules of Russian Poetry", in which he formulated the principles of a new versification in Russian. In a polemic with Trediakovsky, he argued that instead of cultivating poems written according to schemes borrowed from other languages, it is necessary to use the possibilities of the Russian language. Lomonosov believed that it was possible to write poetry with many types of feet - disyllabic (iambic and trochaic) and trisyllabic (dactyl, anapaest and amphibrach), but considered it wrong to replace the feet with pyrrhic and spondei. Such innovation by Lomonosov sparked a discussion in which Trediakovsky and Sumarokov actively participated. Three transcriptions of the 143rd psalm by these authors were published in the city, and readers were asked to express which of the texts they consider the best.
However, Pushkin's statement is known, in which literary activity Lomonosov is not approved: “His odes ... are tiring and inflated. His influence on literature was harmful and still reverberates in it. Grandiloquence, sophistication, disgust at simplicity and accuracy, the absence of any nationality and originality - these are the traces left by Lomonosov. Belinsky called this view "surprisingly correct, but one-sided." According to Belinsky, “In the time of Lomonosov, we did not need folk poetry; then the great question - to be or not to be - was for us not nationality, but Europeanism ... Lomonosov was Peter the Great of our literature.
In addition to his contribution to the poetic language, Lomonosov was also the author of scientific Russian grammar. In this book, he described the riches and possibilities of the Russian language. Lomonosov's grammar was published 14 times and formed the basis of the Russian grammar course of Barsov (1771), who was a student of Lomonosov. In this book, Lomonosov, in particular, wrote: “Charles the fifth, the Roman emperor, used to say that it was decent to speak Spanish with God, French with friends, German with enemies, Italian with the female sex. But if he were skilled in the Russian language, then, of course, he would add to that that it is decent for them to speak with all of them, for he would find in it the splendor of Spanish, the liveliness of French, the strength of German, the tenderness of Italian, moreover, richness and strength in images brevity of Greek and Latin." It is interesting that Derzhavin later spoke similarly: “The Slavic-Russian language, according to the testimony of foreign estheticians themselves, is not inferior either in courage to Latin or in smoothness to Greek, surpassing all European ones: Italian, French and Spanish, much more so German.”
Modern Russian literary language
The creator of the modern literary language is Alexander Pushkin, whose works are considered the pinnacle of Russian literature. This thesis remains dominant, despite the significant changes that have taken place in the language over the almost two hundred years that have passed since the creation of his major works, and the obvious stylistic differences between the language of Pushkin and modern writers.
Meanwhile, the poet himself points to the paramount role of N. M. Karamzin in the formation of the Russian literary language, according to A. S. Pushkin, this glorious historian and writer “liberated the language from an alien yoke and returned its freedom, turning it to the living sources of the folk the words".
"Great, mighty..."
Turgenev belongs to, perhaps, one of the most famous definitions of the Russian language as "great and mighty."
In days of doubt, in days of painful reflections on the fate of my homeland, you alone are my support and support, O great, powerful, truthful and free Russian language! Without you - how not to fall into despair at the sight of everything that happens at home? But one cannot believe that such a language was not given to a great people!(I. S. Turgenev)
Charles V, the Roman emperor, used to say that it was decent to speak with God in Gishpan, French with friends, German with enemies, Italian with women. But if he were skilled in the Russian language, then of course he would add to that that it was decent for them to speak with all of them. For I would find in it: great ... ... German, the strength of the German, the tenderness of the Italian, in addition to the richness and brevity of the Greek and Latin languages \u200b\u200bstrong in the image.
see also
| Portal "Russian language " | |
| at Wikiquote | |
| in Wikisource | |
| History of the Russian literary language at Wikimedia Commons |
Notes
| Russian language | ||
|---|---|---|
 |
||
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .
- Chekhov
- Tashfin ibn Ali
See what the "History of the Russian literary language" is in other dictionaries:
Dictionary of modern Russian literary language- "The Dictionary of the Modern Russian Literary Language" (SSRLA; Big Academic Dictionary, BAS) is an academic normative explanatory historical dictionary of the Russian literary language in 17 volumes, published from 1948 to 1965. Reflects ... ... Wikipedia
History of the literary Russian language- The history of the Russian literary language, the formation and transformation of the Russian language used in literary works. The oldest surviving literary monuments date back to the 11th century. In *** centuries, Russia spread ... ... Wikipedia
1. IRLYA as an independent scientific discipline - the science of the essence, origin and stages of development of the Russian literary language - was formed in the first half of the 20th century. The largest philologists took part in its creation: L.A. Bulakhovsky, V.V. Vinogradov, G.O. Vinokur, B.A. Larin, S.P. Obnorsky, F.P. Filin, L.V. Shcherba, L.P. Yakubinsky. The object of study of the history of the Russian literary language is the Russian literary language.
Periodization of the history of the Russian literary language The literary language is one of the forms of national culture, therefore, the study of the formation of the literary language is impossible without taking into account changes in the socio-economic life of Russia, out of connection with the history of science, art, literature, history public thought in our country.
The very concept of "literary language" is historically changeable. The Russian literary language has gone through a difficult path of development from its inception and formation to the present day. The change in the literary language over the centuries has occurred gradually, through the transition quantitative changes in quality. In this regard, in the process of development of the Russian literary language, various periods are distinguished based on the changes taking place within the language. At the same time, the science of the literary language is based on research on language and society, on the development of various social phenomena, and on the influence of socio-historical and cultural-social factors on the development of the language. The doctrine of the internal laws of language development does not contradict the doctrine of the development of language in connection with the history of the people, since language is a social phenomenon, although it develops according to its own internal laws. The question of periodization was addressed by researchers with early XIX century (N.M. Karamzin, A.X. Vostokov, I.P. Timkovsky, M.A. Maksimovich, I.I. Sreznevsky).
A.A. Chess in the "Essay on the main points in the development of the Russian literary language until the 19th century" and a number of other works, he considers three periods in the history of the book literary language: XI-XIV centuries - ancient, XIV-XVII centuries - transition and XVII-XIX centuries - new(the completion of the process of Russification of the Church Slavonic language, the convergence of the bookish literary language and the "dialect of the city of Moscow").
Nowadays, there is no single periodization of the history of the Russian literary language accepted by all linguists, but all researchers in constructing periodization take into account the socio-historical and cultural-social conditions for the development of the language. At the heart of the periodization of the history of the Russian literary language L.P. Yakubinsky, V.V. Vinogradova, G.O. Vinokura, B.A. Larina, D.I. Gorshkova, Yu.S. Sorokin and other linguists are observing the norms of the Russian literary language, its relation to the old literary and linguistic tradition, to the national language and dialects, taking into account the social functions and areas of application of the Russian literary language.
In this regard, most linguists distinguish four periods in the history of the Russian literary language:
1. literary language of the Old Russian people, or literary language of the Kievan state (XI-XIII centuries),
2. literary language of the Great Russian people, or literary language of the Moscow State (XIV-XVII centuries),
3. literary language of the period of formation of the Russian nation(XVII - first quarter of the XIX century),
4. modern Russian literary language.(KOVALEVSKAYA)
V.V. Vinogradov on the basis of the fundamental differences between the literary languages in the pre-national and national eras, he considered it necessary to distinguish two periods 6
1. - XI-XVII centuries: Russian literary language of pre-national eras;
2. - XVII - the first quarter of the XIX century: formation of the Russian literary national language), which is reflected in most modern teaching aids on the history of the Russian literary language with the preservation of the periodization proposed above, within each of the two main periods.
The question of the origin of the Russian literary language is usually associated with the appearance of writing in Russia, since the literary language presupposes the presence of writing. After the baptism of Russia, for the first time, handwritten South Slavic books appeared in our country, then handwritten monuments created on the model of South Slavic books (the oldest of such surviving monuments is Ostromir Gospel 1056-1057). Some researchers (L.P. Yakubinsky, S.P. Obnorsky, B.A. Larin, P.Ya. Chernykh, A.S. Lvov, etc.) expressed the assumption that there is a written language Eastern Slavs before the official baptism of Russia, referring to the statements of Arab writers, historians, reports of travelers from Western European countries.
Researchers who believe that writing existed among the Slavs before the activities of the first teachers Cyril and Methodius refer to the 15th-century list of the Life of Constantine the Philosopher, which reports that Cyril was in Korsun (Chersonesos) in the middle of the 9th century and found there a gospel and a psalter written in Russian: "acquire tou evaggele and ψaltyr Russian writings are written." A number of linguists (A. Vaian, T.A. Ivanova, V.R. Kinarsky, N.I. Tolstoy) convincingly prove that we are talking about Syriac writings: in the metathesis text, the letters r and s are “written in Sour letters”. It can be assumed that at the dawn of their lives, the Slavs, like other peoples, used sign letter. As a result of archaeological excavations on the territory of our country, many objects with incomprehensible signs on them were found. Perhaps these were the features and cuts that are reported in the treatise “On Writings” by the Chernoriz Khrabr, dedicated to the emergence of writing among the Slavs: “First of all, I didn’t have books, but with lines and cuts I read and gadaahu ...”. Perhaps in Russia there was no single beginning of the letter. Literate people could use both the Greek alphabet and the Latin letters (the baptized, Roman and Greek letters need Slovene speech without dispensation - “On the Letters” of the Chernorite Khrabr).
Most philologists of the 18th-20th centuries declared and declare the basis of the Russian literary language Church Slavonic who came to Russia along with the adoption of Christianity. Some researchers unconditionally developed and develop the theory of the Church Slavonic basis of the Russian literary language (A.I. Sobolevsky, A.A. Shakhmatov, B.M. Lyapunov, L.V. Shcherba, N.I. Tolstoy and others). So, A.I. Sobolevsky wrote: “As you know, from the Slavic languages, the Church Slavonic language was the first to receive literary use”, “after Cyril and Methodius, it became the literary language, first of the Bulgarians, then of the Serbs and Russians”48. The most complete reflection and completion of the hypothesis about the Church Slavonic basis of the Russian literary language was received in the works A.A. Shakhmatova, who emphasized the extraordinary complexity of the formation of the Russian literary language: "Hardly any other language in the world can be compared with Russian in the complex historical process that it has gone through." The scientist resolutely elevates the modern Russian literary language to Church Slavonic: “By its origin, the Russian literary language is the Church Slavonic (Old Bulgarian in origin) language transferred to Russian soil, which for centuries has come close to the living folk language and gradually lost its foreign appearance” .BUT. Shakhmatov believed that the ancient Bulgarian language not only became the written literary language of the Kievan state, but had a great influence on the oral speech of the “educated layers of Kyiv” already in the 10th century, therefore, the modern Russian literary language contains many words and word forms of ancient Bulgarian book speech.
However, many researchers of the 18th – 20th centuries (M.V. Lomonosov, A.Kh. Vostokov, F.I. Buslaev, M.A. Maksimovich, I.I. Sreznevsky) drew attention to the complex interaction of Church Slavonic book and spoken East Slavic elements in the composition of ancient Russian monuments. For example, M.V. Lomonosov in a review of Schlozer's work, he emphasized the difference between the language of the annals, "Treaties of the Russians with the Greeks", "Russian Truth" and other "historical books" from the language of church literature53. F.I. Buslaev in Historical Grammar, he clearly contrasted Russian colloquial and bookish Church Slavonic elements in “ancient monuments”: the predominant language is Church Slavonic; in secular writings, for example, in chronicles, in legal acts, in ancient Russian poems, proverbs, etc. the Russian language prevails, colloquial"54 In the works of the linguist the second half of XIX century M.A. Maksimovich: “With the spread of worship in this language (Church Slavonic), it also became a church and book language among us, and through that, more than anyone else, it had an influence on the Russian language - not only written, which developed from it, but also on vernacular. Therefore, in the history of Russian literature it has almost the same value like our own"
G.O. Distiller in historical essay"Russian Language" (1943) also connects the emergence of writing among the Eastern Slavs with the spread of Christianity, which is typical for the entire medieval world, emphasizing the closeness of the living East Slavic speech and the Church Slavonic language, which has become the common "scientific and literary language" of the Slavs.
As noted V.V. Vinogradov in a report at the IV International Congress of Slavists, in linguistics of the 19th-20th centuries, “the the problem of ancient Russian literary bilingualism or linguistic dualism, in need of a detailed concrete historical study"
S.P. Obnorsky believed that the Russian literary language developed independently of the Old Church Slavonic language of the Russian edition, which served the needs of the church and all religious literature, on the basis of live East Slavic speech. Examining the texts of Russkaya Pravda, The Tale of Igor’s Campaign, the works of Vladimir Monomakh, The Prayer of Daniil the Zatochnik, the scientist came to the conclusion that their language is the common Russian literary language of the older period, all elements of the Church Slavonic language, presented in the monuments, added there by scribes at a later date. The work of S.P. Obnorsky played an important role in establishing the specifics of the language of ancient Russian secular monuments, but his theory of the origin of the Russian literary language cannot be considered substantiated.
B.A. Larin said on this occasion: "If you do not oppose the two languages in Ancient Russia – Old Russian and Church Slavonic, then everything is simple. But if we distinguish between these two foundations, then we either have to admit that we are dealing with a mixed character of language in a number of the most important and valuable monuments, or to do violence to obvious facts, which was admitted by some researchers. I affirm that it is the Russian language of complex composition that is characteristic of the monuments of the 12th-13th centuries”
B.A. Uspensky in a report at the IX International Congress of Slavists in Kyiv in 1983, he uses the term " diglossia" to designate a certain kind of bilingualism, a special diglossic situation in Russia. By diglossia, he understands "such a linguistic situation when two different languages are perceived (in a language community) and function as one language." At the same time, from his point of view, “it is common for a member of a language community to perceive coexisting language systems as one language, while for an external observer (including a linguist researcher) it is common in this situation to see two different languages.” Diglossia is characterized by: 1) the inadmissibility of using the bookish language as a means of conversational communication; 2) lack of codification of the spoken language; 3) the absence of parallel texts with the same content. Thus, for B.A. Uspensky, diglossia is a way of coexistence of “two language systems within one language community, when the functions of these two systems are in an additional distribution, corresponding to the functions of one language in a normal (non-diglossic situation)”
In the works of B.A. Uspensky, as well as in the works of his opponents (A.A. Alekseev, A.I. Gorshkov, V.V. Kolesov, etc.)69, the reader will find a lot of important and interesting material for making his own judgment about the language situation in Russia in the X-XIII centuries. But it is impossible to finally resolve the question of the nature of the literary language in this period, since we do not have the original secular monuments, there is no complete description of the language of all Slavic manuscripts and their lists of the 15th-17th centuries, no one can accurately reproduce the features of living East Slavic speech.
In the Kievan state functioned three groups of such monuments:
- church,
- secular business,
- secular non-business monuments.
All Slavic languages (Polish, Czech, Slovak, Serbo-Croatian, Slovenian, Macedonian, Bulgarian, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Russian) come from a common root - a single Proto-Slavic language that probably existed until the 10th-11th centuries.
In the XIV-XV centuries. as a result of the collapse of the Kievan state, on the basis of a single language of the Old Russian people, three independent language: Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian, which, with the formation of nations, took shape in national languages.
The first texts written in Cyrillic appeared among the Eastern Slavs in the 10th century. By the first half of the X century. refers to the inscription on the korchaga (vessel) from Gnezdovo (near Smolensk). This is probably an inscription indicating the name of the owner. From the second half of the X century. also preserved a number of inscriptions indicating the belonging of objects.
After the baptism of Russia in 988, book writing arose. The Chronicle reports on "many scribes" who worked under Yaroslav the Wise.
1. Mostly corresponded liturgical books. The originals for the East Slavic handwritten books were mainly South Slavic manuscripts dating back to the works of the students of the creators of the Slavic script Cyril and Methodius. In the process of correspondence, the original language was adapted to the East Slavic language and the Old Russian book language was formed - the Russian version (variant) of the Church Slavonic language.
The oldest surviving written church monuments include the Ostromir Gospel of 1056-1057. and the Archangel Gospel of 1092
The original compositions of Russian authors were moralizing and life writings. Since the bookish language was mastered without grammars, dictionaries and rhetorical aids, compliance with language norms depended on the author's well-read and his ability to reproduce those forms and constructions that he knew from exemplary texts.
A special class of ancient written monuments are annals. Chronicler, outlining historical events, included them in the context of Christian history, and this united the annals with other monuments of book culture of spiritual content. Therefore, the annals were written in the bookish language and were guided by the same corpus of exemplary texts, however, due to the specifics of the material presented (concrete events, local realities), the language of the annals was supplemented with non-bookish elements.
Separately from the book tradition, a non-book written tradition developed in Russia: administrative and judicial texts, official and private office work, household records. These documents differed from book texts in both syntactic constructions and morphology. At the center of this written tradition were legal codes, beginning with Russkaya Pravda, the oldest copy of which dates back to 1282.
Legal acts of an official and private nature adjoin this tradition: interstate and interprincely agreements, donations, contributions, wills, bills of sale, etc. The oldest text of this kind is the charter of the Grand Duke Mstislav to the Yuryev Monastery (c. 1130).
Graffiti occupies a special position. For the most part, these are prayer texts written on the walls of churches, although there are graffiti and other (factual, chronographic, act) content.
Main conclusions
1. The question of the origins of the Old Russian literary language has not yet been resolved. In the history of Russian linguistics, two polar points of view on this subject were expressed: about the Church Slavonic basis Old Russian literary language and about the living East Slavic basis Old Russian literary language.
2. Most modern linguists accept the theory of bilingualism in Russia (with various variants), according to which in the Kievan era there were two literary languages (Church Slavonic and Old Russian), or two types of literary language (Book Slavonic and a literary processed type of folk language - terms V.V. Vinogradova), used in various spheres of culture and performing various functions.
3. Among linguists of various countries there is diglossia theory(bilingual Obnorsky), according to which a single Old Slavonic literary language functioned in the Slavic countries, in contact with the local living folk speech (folk-spoken substratum).
4. There are three types of ancient Russian monuments: business(letters, "Russian Truth"), which most fully reflected the features of the living East Slavic speech of the X-XVII centuries; church writing- monuments of the Church Slavonic language (Old Church Slavonic language of the "Russian edition", or the Book Slavonic type of literary language) and secular writing.
5. Secular monuments not preserved in the original, their number is small, but it was in these monuments that the complex composition of the Old Russian literary language (or the literary processed type of the folk language) was reflected, which is a complex unity of elements of common Slavic, Old Slavonic and East Slavic.
6. The choice of these linguistic elements was determined by the genre of the work, the theme of the work or its fragment, the stability of one or another variant in the writing of the Kyiv period, the literary tradition, the author's erudition, the scribe's education, and other reasons.
7. In ancient Russian written monuments, various local dialect features that did not violate the unity of the literary language. After the collapse of the Kievan state and Tatar-Mongol invasion the connection between the regions is broken, the number of dialect elements in the Novgorod, Pskov, Ryazan, Smolensk and other monuments increases.
8. Happening rearrangement of dialects: North-Eastern Russia is separated from South-Western, prerequisites are created for the formation of three new linguistic unities: southern (the language of the Ukrainian people), western (the language of the Belarusian people), northeast (the language of the Great Russian people).
- Struggle and interaction of different literary and linguistic trends in the post-Pushkin era (1830-1850s). The development of the Russian literary language within the framework of a stable norm. Codification of this norm (works of N. I. Grech). General Process democratization of the literary language (spread of the literary language in different social groups due to the spread of education and an increase in reader demand). The dynamics of styles and the periodic activation of Church Slavonic language means in this process. Struggle between noble and raznochinny parties in the linguistic controversy of this period. The instability of literary styles in the language of various non-elitist groups in Russian society; saturation of the literary language with elements of urban vernacular and professionalism. Development of scientific-philosophical and journalistic speech, enrichment of the vocabulary of the Russian literary language. Nadezhdin's linguistic positions and the influence of the seminary language on the language of raznochin literature. The value of V. G. Belinsky in the history of Russian journalism and journalistic style.
- The process of formation of the system of styles of the Russian literary language (second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries). Differentiation of functional styles. Growth of influence of newspaper-journalistic and scientific prose. Activation of Slavicisms in the Formation of Scientific Terminology: Scientific Style as a Conductor of Church Slavonic Influence on the Literary Language. Judicial eloquence and its significance in the formation of the stylistic system of the literary language. Strengthening and dissemination of artificial literary methods of presentation in the Russian literary language of the second half of the 19th century. Distribution of foreign words and borrowed terms in the literary language of the second half of the 19th century; composition and functions of borrowings. Ethnographic element in the Russian literary process of the second half of the 19th century. and the involvement of dialectisms and vernacular in the repertoire of literary stylistic means. Partial changes in the grammatical system and pronunciation norm. The growth of literacy among different segments of the population and the strengthening of the role of the literary standard.
- Russian literary language under the communist regime. Revolutionary language. Language struggle in the context of the cultural revolution. Spelling reform 1917-1918 and its cultural and historical significance. Foreign language elements, neologisms, development of word-formation models with affixes -izm, -ist, -abable-, archi-. Functions of Slavicisms; clericalisms and archaisms. Compound words as signs of cultural orientation, features of their formation. The fight against illiteracy, the change of local elites and the elimination of the literary norm. Aestheticization of the language of the revolutionary era in the literature of the avant-garde. Language experiments by A. Platonov and M. Zoshchenko.
The decline of the role of the language standard with the reduction of state monopoly in cultural policy (since the late 1950s). Perception of the literary standard as a means of state control over creativity and attempts to update the literary language ("village literature", modernism in the 1960s-1980s, language experiments
A. I. Solzhenitsyn). Erosion of the literary norm and the resulting instability of the modern Russian literary language.
The state of the Russian literary language is currently an acute problem for the state, for the whole society. This is explained by the fact that the entire historical experience of the people is concentrated and represented in the language: the state of the language indicates the state of society, its culture, its mentality. Disorder and - vacillation in society, the decline of morality, the loss of characteristic national features - all this affects the language, leads to its decline.
The preservation of the language, concern for its further development and enrichment is a guarantee of the preservation and development of Russian culture. Therefore, every citizen Russian Federation no matter who he works for, no matter what position he holds, he is responsible for the state of the language of his country, his people.
Of greatest interest for understanding the formation and development of the literary language is the 18th century, when progressive-minded circles of society tried to raise the authority of the Russian language, to prove its viability as the language of science and art.
A special role in the formation of the literary language during this period was played by M.V. Lomonosov. Possessing talent, vast knowledge, passionately desiring to change the attitude towards the Russian language not only of foreigners, but also of Russians, he creates the first in Russian "Russian Grammar", in which for the first time he presents the scientific system of the Russian language, draws up a set of grammatical rules, shows how to take advantage of its rich potential.
During this period, the concentration of national language elements is planned due to the selection of the most common features of the South Russian and North Russian dialects. At the same time, the democratization of the language also begins: its lexical composition, grammatical structure, in a significant amount, includes elements of the lively oral speech of the urban merchants, service people, lower clergy, and literate peasants.
Along with democratization, the language begins to gradually free itself from the influence of the Church Slavonic language.
In the 17th century, the Russian language was updated and enriched with Western European languages: Polish, French, Dutch, German, Italian. This was especially evident in the formation of the scientific language, its terminology: philosophical, economic, legal, scientific and technical.
At the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th centuries, representatives of the democratically minded Russian intelligentsia, expressing their attitude to the reform of the literary language and its styles, emphasized that the question of the literary language should not be resolved without determining the role of living folk speech in the structure of the national language. In this regard, the work of the great writers of the first half of the 19th century, Griboyedov and Krylov, is indicative, they proved what inexhaustible possibilities live folk speech has, how original, original, rich the language of folklore is.
The creator of the modern Russian literary language is rightfully considered A.S. Pushkin. His contemporaries wrote about the reformatory nature of the poet's work. So, N.V. Gogol rightly asserted: “It, as if in a lexicon, contains all the richness, strength and flexibility of our language. He is more than all, he further than all pushed the boundaries for him and more showed all his space.
The 19th century is the "silver age" of Russian literature and the Russian language. At this time, there is an unprecedented flowering of Russian literature. The work of Gogol, Lermontov, Goncharov, Dostoevsky, L. Tolstoy, Saltykov-Shchedrin, Ostrovsky, Chekhov and others is gaining universal appreciation. Russian journalism reaches extraordinary heights: articles by Belinsky, Pisarev, Dobrolyubov, Chernyshevsky. Achievements of Russian scientists Dokuchaev, Mendeleev, Pirogov, Lobachevsky, Mozhaisky, Kovalevsky, Klyuchevsky and others are receiving worldwide recognition.
The development of literature, journalism, science contributes to the further development and enrichment of the Russian language. The vocabulary is replenished with new socio-political, philosophical, economic, technical terminology: worldview, integrity, self-determination, proletariat, humanity, education, reality, and many others. etc. Phraseology is enriched: center of gravity, bring to one denominator, negative value, reach apogee, etc.
Scientific and journalistic literature increases the stock of international terminology: agitation, intelligentsia, intellectual, conservative, maximum, etc.
The rapid development of science, the steady growth of magazine and newspaper production contributed to the formation of functional styles of the literary language - scientific and journalistic.
One of the most important features literary language as the highest form of the national language is its normativity. Throughout the 19th century, the process of processing the national language was going on in order to create unified grammatical, lexical, spelling, orthoepic norms. These norms are theoretically substantiated in the works of Vostokov, Buslaev, Fortunatov, Shakhmatov; are described and approved in the grammars of Vostokov, Grech, Kalaidovich, Grot, etc.
The richness and diversity of the vocabulary of the Russian language is reflected in dictionaries (historical, etymological, synonymous, foreign words) that appear in the 19th century.
Well-known philologists of that time publish articles in which they determine the principles of the lexicographic description of words, the principles of vocabulary selection, taking into account the goals and objectives of the dictionary. Thus, questions of lexicography are being developed for the first time.
The largest event was the publication in 1863-1866. the four-volume "Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language" by V.I. Dahl. The dictionary was highly appreciated by contemporaries. Its author in 1863 received the Lomonosov Prize of the Russian Imperial Academy of Sciences and the title of honorary academician.
So, by the beginning of the 20th century, the Russian literary language was formed, its norms were defined, the morphological and syntactic structures were described, dictionaries were compiled and published, fixing and legitimizing its spelling, lexical, morphological features.
When characterizing the literary language of the 20th century, two chronological periods should be distinguished: I - from October 1917 to April 1985 and II - from April 1985 to the present. What happens to the Russian literary language during these periods?
After education Soviet Union its development and enrichment continues. The most obvious increase vocabulary literary language. The volume of scientific terminology, for example, related to cosmology and astronautics, is growing especially intensively. In large numbers, words are created denoting new phenomena and concepts that reflect fundamental changes in the state, political, economic structure of the country, for example, Komsomol member, regional committee, virgin lands, collective farm, socialist competition, kindergarten, etc. Artistic, journalistic, popular science literature replenished the arsenal of expressive and visual means of the literary language. In morphology, syntax, the number of synonymous variants increases, differing from each other in shades of meaning or stylistic coloring.
Researchers of the Russian language since the 20s. XX century paid special attention to the theory of literary language. As a result, they determined and characterized the system-structural division of the literary language. Firstly, the literary language has two types: book-written and oral-colloquial; secondly, each type is realized in speech. Book-written is presented in special speech (written - scientific speech and written official business speech) and in artistic and visual speech (written journalistic speech and written artistic speech). The oral-colloquial type is presented in public speech (scientific speech and oral radio and television speech) and in colloquial speech (oral colloquial and everyday speech).
In the 20th century, the formation of the Russian letter language ended, which began to be a complex dark structural organization.
The second period - the period of perestroika and post-perestroika - attached particular importance to the processes that accompany the functioning of the language at all stages of its existence, made them more significant, more clearly expressed, brighter, more clearly presented. First of all, we should talk about a significant replenishment of the vocabulary of the Russian language with new words (government structure, barter, foreign currency, Internet, cartridge, case, kiwi, adidas, hamburger, etc.), about updating a large number of words found; previously in the passive. In addition to new words, many words have been brought back to life that seemed to have gone out of use forever - gymnasium, lyceum, guild, governess, corporation, trust, department, communion, blessing, carnival, etc.
Speaking about the replenishment of the vocabulary of the literary language, it should be noted: a striking feature of our current language development is the clogging of speech with borrowings. The "foreignization" of the Russian language is a concern for linguists, literary critics, writers, many people; the Russian language is dear to those who are concerned about its future fate.
Throughout its history, the Russian language has been enriched not only at the expense of internal resources, but also at the expense of other languages. But in some periods this influence, especially the borrowing of words, was excessive, and then there is an opinion that foreign words do not add anything new, since there are Russian words that are identical to them, that many Russian words cannot compete with fashionable borrowings and are forced out them.
The history of the Russian literary language shows: borrowing without measure clogs speech, makes it not understandable to everyone; reasonable borrowing enriches speech, gives it greater accuracy.
In connection with significant changes in the conditions for the functioning of the language, another problem is currently becoming relevant, the problem of language as a means of communication, language in its implementation, the problem of speech.
What features characterize the functioning of the literary language at the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st century?
Firstly, it has never been so numerous and diverse (by age, education, official position, political, religious, public opinion, according to party orientation) composition of mass communication participants.
Secondly, official censorship has almost disappeared, so people express their thoughts more freely, their speech becomes more open, confidential, and relaxed.
Thirdly, speech begins to dominate spontaneous, spontaneous, not prepared in advance.
Fourth, the diversity of communication situations leads to a change in the nature of communication. It is freed from rigid formality, it becomes more relaxed.
New conditions for the functioning of the language, the emergence of a large number of unprepared public speaking lead not only to the democratization of speech, but also to a sharp decline in its culture.
How is it shown? Firstly, in violation of the orthoepic (pronunciation), grammatical norms of the Russian language. Scientists, journalists, poets, ordinary citizens write about it. Especially a lot of criticism is caused by the speech of deputies, television and radio workers. Secondly, at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, the democratization of the language reached such proportions that it would be more correct to call the process liberalization, or, more precisely, vulgarization.
On the pages of periodicals, in speech educated people jargon, colloquial elements and other non-literary means poured in a stream: grandmas, piece, piece, stolnik, baldezh, pump out, launder, unfasten, scroll and many more. etc. Common even in official speech became the words: party, disassembly, lawlessness and much more.
There are quite a few people who declare that swearing and swearing are considered a characteristic, distinguishing feature of the Russian people. If we turn to oral folk art, proverbs and sayings, it turns out that it is not entirely legitimate to say that the Russian people consider swearing an integral part of their lives. Yes, people are trying to somehow justify it, to emphasize that scolding is a common thing: Scolding is not a reserve, and without it not for an hour; Swearing is not smoke - the eye will not eat out; Hard words break no bones. It seems to even help in the work, you can’t do without it: You won’t swear, you won’t do the job; Without swearing, you can't unlock the lock in the cage.
But something else is more important: Arguing, arguing, but scolding is a sin; Do not scold: what comes out of a person, then he will be filthy; Swearing is not resin, but akin to soot: it doesn’t cling, it stains like that; With abuse people dry, and with praise they get fat; You won’t take it with your throat, you won’t beg with abuse.
This is not only a warning, this is already a condemnation, this is a ban.
The Russian literary language is our wealth, our heritage. He embodied the cultural and historical traditions of the people. We are responsible for his condition, for his fate.
Fair and relevant (especially at the present time!) are the words of I.S. Turgenev: “In the days of doubt, in the days of painful reflections on the fate of my homeland - you are my only support and support, O great, powerful, truthful and free Russian language! Without you - how not to fall into despair at the sight of everything that happens at home? But it is impossible to believe that such a language was not given to a great people!”
BRIEF COURSE OF LECTURESON THE DISCIPLINE "HISTORY OF THE RUSSIAN LITERARY LANGUAGE"
Lecture #1
Historical characteristics of the language. History of the Russian literary language as a science. main categories.1. The subject of the history of the Russian literary language. Course subject- the history of the development of the native language, the processes of its development, their essence. Appeal to ancient written monuments as object of study course.
The history of the Russian literary language is the science of the essence, origin and stages of development of the Russian national language, its use in different speech registers, the change of these registers, their evolution. Traditions of studying the history of the Russian literary language: the history of the Russian literary language as a historical style (in the works of V.V. Vinogradov, G.O. Vinokur and their followers A.I. Gorshkov, E.G. Kovalevskaya), as a historical orthology (the founder of the direction is A.I. Sobolevsky, followers - N.I. Tolstoy, M.L. Remneva), as historical sociolinguistics (B.A. Uspensky, V.M. Zhivov).
The concept of literary language. Literary language as a phenomenon of book culture. Historical and cultural background and conditions for the formation of the literary language. The concept of literary and written language, literary language and language fiction. Literary and colloquial language. Stylistic heterogeneity of the literary language, changes in its nature in the process of historical development.
The concept of a language norm. Book norm as the basis of the literary language, linguistic norm as a historical category. Language system and norm. different types of norms. The specificity of the book norm. Its connection with learning and conscious assimilation, with the literary and linguistic tradition. Connection of the history of the literary language with the history of culture.
2. Language situationas a factor in the development of the literary language. Typology of cultural and linguistic situations: monolingualism, bilingualism (foreign language), diglossia. Dhigher education- coexistence in society of two languages that are equal in their functions. Diglossia- a stable language situation, characterized by a stable functional balance of coexisting languages that are in additional distribution. Signs that distinguish diglossia from bilingualism: the inadmissibility of using the book language as a means of conversational communication, the lack of codification of the spoken language and parallel texts with the same content. Changing the language situation in the history of the development of the Russian literary language. Evidence of the existence of diglossia in Ancient Russia (B.A. Uspensky, V.M. Zhivov). Arguments against diglossia (V.V. Kolesov, A.A. Alekseev).
3. The main stages in the development of the Russian literary language . Different points of view on the issue periodization of the course of the history of the Russian literary language: B.A. Uspensky, A.M. Kamchatnov and the periodization accepted by most linguists.
I period. The literary language of Ancient Russia (XI-XIV centuries) is the initial stage of the literary and linguistic history of the Eastern Slavs. II period. The development of the Russian literary language on the basis of ancient Russian literary and linguistic traditions in the context of the consolidation of the Russian people (XIV-XVII centuries). III period. Formation of the Russian literary language of a new type (XVIII - early XIX centuries). Experiences in the normalization of the Russian literary language and the construction of its stylistic system. IV period. The development of the modern Russian literary language (since the beginning of the 19th century) as a single and universal normalized system serving all areas cultural activities. Formation of the system of normalized oral speech as a reflection of the process of displacement of dialects and vernacular from the sphere of oral communication.
Lecture #2
Literary language of Ancient Russia (XI-XIV centuries): origin of the Russian literary language.
1. First South Slavic influence (X- XIcenturies).After the baptism of Russia (988), the Bulgarian version of the Old Slavonic language, the South Slavic language, was adopted and writing in this language spread. The assimilation of the South Slavic book tradition was due not so much to the orientation towards Bulgaria, but to the mediating role of the South Slavs as conductors of Greek cultural influence: the orientation was Greek, the writing was Bulgarian. Thus, Christinization introduces Russia into the orbit of the Byzantine world, and the Church Slavonic language acts as a means of Byzantization of Russian culture. All of the above allows us to speak about first South Slavic influence and connects with it the initial phase of the formation of the literary language of the Eastern Slavs. In fact, the first South Slavic influence was the baptism of Russia according to the eastern model and the borrowing of the ancient Bulgarian script. The Old Church Slavonic language early began to be exposed to the influence of ethnic languages and fell into different editions (revisions), in particular, the Russian recension of the Church Slavonic language is being formed. On the other hand, the presence of ancient Russian monuments in Russia testifies to the existence of writing in two languages. An important question of this period is the following: to determine which of them is the literary language of Ancient Russia.
2. History of scientific controversy about .
History of scientific controversy about the origin of the Russian literary language associated with the tradition of opposing the theory of the Old Slavonic origin of the Russian literary language A.A. Shakhmatov and the theory of the original East Slavic basis of the Russian literary language by S.P. Obnorsky.
Hypothesis A.A. Shakhmatova was widely used. In the work "Essay on the modern Russian language" A.A. Shakhmatov wrote: “By its origin, the Russian literary language is the Church Slavonic (Old Bulgarian by origin) language transferred to Russian soil, which for centuries has been approaching the folk language and gradually losing and losing its foreign appearance.” In his opinion, “the ancient Bulgarian language in Russia was perceived as a foreign language for no more than a century, after which they got used to it as their own”, which allows us to speak about "Russification" of the South Slavic foundation. To prove this thesis, A.A. Shakhmatov cites 12 signs of the foreign language basis of the modern Russian language: 1) disagreement; 2) combination ra, la at the beginning of a word; 3) combination railway vm. well; 4) affricate sch vm. h; 5) no transition [e] > [o]; 6) initial Yu vm. at; 7) solid s vm. soft ( useful, unassuming); 8) vocalization oh e in place of the reduced ones; 9) vowel clearing s, and in place of tense reduced; 10) grammatical forms with Church Slavonic inflections (m. R.: -ago, -yago; well. R.: - her); 11) Church Slavonic word formation; 12) Church Slavonic vocabulary.
In the 50s. 20th century S.P. Obnorsky put forward the theory of the East Slavic basis of the Russian literary language, assuming that the modern Russian language in its genetic basis is not borrowed, but Russian. In his works, we are talking about the Old Russian literary language, which since the time of the second South Slavic influence began to undergo Church Slavonicization, more precisely, "slander" of the Russian language. The shortcomings of the theory: it is not clear what the specific gravity of the Church Slavonic superstratum is; orientation to a genre-limited range of sources of oral folk tradition, which served as the basis for the formation of a supra-dialect form - Koine. As a result, the Church Slavonic language "froze", being used only in the cult sphere, and the Old Russian language evolved.
After the publication of works by S.P. Obnorsky (1934), a scientific discussion began, a critical attitude to his theory was noted (A. M. Selishchev, V. V. Vinogradov), new concepts appeared. The concept of diglossia (B.A. Uspensky, A.V. Isachenko), according to which the literary language was the Church Slavonic language, and folk colloquial speech existed in parallel, not being a literary form. The concept of bilingualism (F.P. Filin, following M.V. Lomonosov) is the coexistence of Church Slavonic and Old Russian languages, each with its own variety. Hypothesis V.V. Vinogradov - the idea of the unity of the literary language on a nationwide basis. Two types of Old Russian literary language: book-Slavonic and folk-literary (according to V.V. Vinogradov).
Lecture #3
Literary language of Ancient Russia (XI-XIV centuries): characteristics of written monuments.
1. Types of written monuments Kievan Rus.Traditionally, it is customary to talk about two types of written monuments of Kievan Rus: Christian and secular. Monuments of Christian literature were created in the Church Slavonic language. Translation of Christian literature includes the Gospel, Psalter, Prologues, Patericons. Genres of original Christian literature are "Journeys", "Lives", "Words", "Teachings". Translation secular literature are works translated from Latin, Greek(“History of the Jewish War” by I. Flavius, “Degenius Act”). Original secular literature- folk literary monuments created in the Old Russian language (chronicles, chronicles; "The Tale of Bygone Years", "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", "Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh").
The variety of written monuments of Kievan Rus also determines the typology of linguistic traditions and their varieties, which are characterized by the ratio of different linguistic elements within one ancient text.
Varieties of language traditions based on Church Slavonic: standard, complicated, formulaic, simplified, hybrid Church Slavonic. The standard Church Slavonic language is the language of the Gospel, life. The complicated Church Slavonic language is a presentation reinforced rhetorically, poetically, exotic, expressive, archaic lexemes. The formulaic (“clichéd”) Church Slavonic language is a direct quotation or paraphrasing of canonical (biblical) texts (kryst kissing, signing kryst in a way, etc.). The simplified Church Slavonic language is characterized by the inclusion of elements of the vernacular language. The hybrid Church Slavonic language is a striped pattern, the replacement of the language means of the Church Slavonic language with elements of the vernacular language.
Varieties of language traditions based on Old Russian: standard, dialectal, complicated, business (formula), Slavicized Old Russian language. The standard Old Russian language is a linguistic tradition that demonstrates the general tendencies of the Old Russian language. The dialectal Old Russian language reflects certain dialectal features. The complicated Old Russian language is a presentation reinforced rhetorically, poetically, contains symbolic and figurative usage, a reflection of folklore traditions. The business (formula) Old Russian language is based on the use of clichés, standard expressions of Old Russian documents (go to the company, knock your head down, take your face, etc.). The Slavicized Old Russian language is a linguistic tradition where only some forms are non-systemically Slavicized.
2. The status of business writing in Ancient Russia
In Ancient Russia, business writing has an ancient tradition, which is confirmed by Oleg's 3 agreements with the Greeks, found in the "Tale of Bygone Years". The ambiguous status of business writing in the history of the Russian literary language (isolation or stylistically defined variety) is motivated by the critical socially oriented situation of its emergence. G.O. Vinokur gives arguments testifying to the isolation business language: functioning only in the field of business records management, the content of business documents is limited by the nature of use, semantically limited vocabulary. A.I. Gorshkov, A.M. Kamchatnov believe that there are no sufficient grounds to isolate the business language from the system of varieties of the Old Russian language, since “it (the business language) is a socially important, stylistically processed and ordered variety of the use of the Old Russian language, and at subsequent stages of development it gradually strengthened its ties with the “actually literary "language and its influence on it." A.M. Kamchatnov: “... XI-XIV centuries. characteristic opposition of three styles of the literary language - sacred, Slavic-Russian and business.
The linguistic specificity of business documents was determined by the peculiarities of its content, as evidenced, for example, by the statement of Afanasy Matveyevich Selishchev: “When they talked about theft, about a fight, about a torn beard, about a bloody face, the corresponding speech was also used - the speech of everyday life ... Not only style, but also the accuracy of the content of business speech, documentary accuracy required the use of appropriate words - Russian words of a certain meaning. Indeed, it was about objects, phenomena and concepts that are specifically Russian. Therefore, business monuments are based on the Old Russian language, connection with the terminological system of oral law, and the absence of sacredness. Thus, the following features of the business legal writing of Ancient Russia (“Russian Truth”, donative and contractual letters) can be noted: genre-functional marking (use for practical purposes), semantically limited composition of the content structure (use of legal vocabulary: vira, vidok, obedience, tatba, golovnichestvo, claimant, etc.), monotony syntactic constructions(conditional clauses, imperative-infinitive constructions, stringing simple sentences), the presence of language formulas and the absence of figurative and expressive means.
3. Linguistic specificity of works of everyday writing: birch bark letters (private correspondence) and graffiti (everyday, dedicatory, religious inscriptions).
Lecture #4
Cultural and linguistic situation of Muscovite Rus at the end of the 14th - the middle of the 15th centuries.
1. Ways of development of colloquial and literary language during the formation of the Moscow state.
From the second half of the 14th century, the Moscow principality began to develop rapidly, annexing neighboring ones. Moscow is the spiritual and political center of Russia: "Moscow is the third Rome." The dialect of Moscow becomes colorful, including borrowings from the languages of neighboring peoples. One of the transitive dialects is formed - Moscow Koine, which became the basis of the language of the Great Russian people. This language differed from the Old Russian language, for example, in its vocabulary (due to a change in ideology, realities). In addition to the extralinguistic prerequisites that led to the restructuring of relations between the bookish and non-bookish language, intralinguistic reasons were also identified that characterize the spoken language of the Moscow state by the 14th century. Among them are the change in the phonological system after the process of the fall of the reduced ones; loss of grammatical categories (vocative form, dual number); unification of types of declension in plural. hours; use of the perfect without a copula; the spread of new alliances. In this situation, the spoken and literary language began to differ from each other: previously neutral (general) forms become specifically bookish, i.e. new correlations of Church Slavonic and living Russian are formed. So, the forms of ruch, nozh, help, God, bake, moogl, me, cha, etc. are now opposed to forms of colloquial speech. Accordingly, the distance between Church Slavonic and Russian as a bookish and non-bookish language is increasing.
2. Second South Slavic influence.
One of the controversial issues in the history of Russian writing remains the question of the role of the so-called to. XIV century. - early 16th century - the second wave of influence on the Russian book culture from the side of the South Slavic written culture (Bulgaria and partly Serbia) after the period of the Christianization of Russia (X-XI centuries). It was a reform of the principles of translation from the Greek language, the literary language and spelling, carried out in the 14th century. Bulgarian Patriarch Evfimiy Tarnovskiy, which spread very quickly. The implementation of the reform in Russian writing is associated with the name of Metropolitan Cyprian - a Serb or, according to other sources, a Bulgarian by birth, who emigrated to Russia in the general flow of South Slavic emigration. Hence another name for the process - Kipranovsky on the right.
The second South Slavic influence as a cardinal event in the history of the Russian literary language was first noticed in the 19th century by A.I. Sobolevsky. Sobolevsky's discovery was widely recognized. B.A. Uspensky: “This phenomenon is based on purificatory and restoration tendencies: its immediate stimulus was the desire of Russian scribes to purify the Church Slavonic language from those colloquial elements that had penetrated into it as a result of its gradual Russification (i.e., adaptation to local conditions).” First of all, A.I. Sobolevsky drew attention to changes in the external design of manuscripts, pointed out innovations in graphics, changes in the spelling of these written monuments compared to previous periods. Based on this material, he concluded that Russian writing in the period of the end of the XIV century - early. 16th century fell under the strong influence of South Slavic writing, hence the term "second South Slavic influence". In fact, all the indicated changes brought the Old Russian manuscripts closer to the Bulgarian and Serbian written monuments of the same era. Indeed, the model for Russian manuscripts is the corrected church books of Bulgaria and Serbia, where by the end of the 14th century. the editing of religious books ended, and many prominent church figures (Metropolitan Cyprian, Grigory Tsamblak, Pakhomiy Logofet) arrived in Moscow. In connection with the political and economic growth of Moscow, the authority of the Moscow church, church literature, and hence the role of the Church Slavonic language, is also growing. Therefore, the activity of editing church books in Moscow during this period turned out to be appropriate. The correction and rewriting of books was primarily due to the translation of the Russian Church from the Studium charter, which prevailed in Byzantium until the end of the 11th century. and from there came to Russia, to the Jerusalem rule, which was established in the 14th century throughout the Orthodox world. Conservatism and reverence for antiquity, natural for the church, prompted scribes, on the one hand, to preserve the written tradition of ancient texts, deliberately archaizing the bookish language, and on the other hand, it was in the 14th century that the Slavic languages changed so significantly in the system of vocalism, consonantism, accentology, and in lexico-grammatical terms, that the use of many signs in ancient texts became incomprehensible. These are letters such as @, \, #, >, i, s, ^, h. A true understanding of their use could be achieved on the basis of the creation scientific history Slavic languages, but the church scribes of the XIV century were still far from even setting such a task. And now artificial rules for writing these letters are being developed, the use of which has become unclear. Among Russian scribes, these artificial rules meet with dull but stubborn resistance. Therefore, the purpose of the editing undertaken by the scribes is to bring the church books into the original, most accurate, corresponding to the Greek originals form.
Consequences second South Slavic influence:
1) restoration in the graphics of Greek letters (j, k, ^, i), large yus, which disappeared from practice; the appearance of ideographic signs and symbols (D.S. Likhachev notes the “geometric ornament of the text”);
2) elimination of iotation, i.e. the absence of spellings with j in the postvocalic position before a and #, now iotation is conveyed not by the letter ", but by the letters a and #: svo#(//////svoa), dobraa, deacon (writing neiotized letters is a Greek sample);
3) the spelling of ers obeys distributive rules: at the end of the word there is always ь, in the middle ъ. This artificial rule was due to the coincidence of the etymological reflexes *ъ, *ь in one phoneme, which made these letters homophonic and interchangeable.
4) the distribution in the spelling of the letters i and i: i is written before vowels, which is also associated with the Greek model (this rule was adopted by civil orthography and was preserved until the reform of 1917-1918);
5) reflection of the reflexes and processes of the Book Slavonic language (palatalizations, the first full accord);
6) an increase in the number of titles, superscripts and punctuation marks.
7) the emergence and spread of a rhetorically decorated manner of writing - word weaving style- as a way of constructing a text that originates in church works, then transferred to secular ones. For the first time in Russia weaving style scribe of the XIV century - early. 15th century Epiphanius the Wise introduced in the Life of Stephen of Perm.
Word weaving style arose “from the idea of hesychasm about the unknowability and unnameability of God, i.e. the name of God can only be approached by trying different ways naming” (L.V. Zubova). Hesychasm is an ethical and ascetic doctrine of the path to the unity of man with God, the ascent of the human spirit to the deity, the "divinity of the verb", the need for close attention to the sound and semantics of the word, which serves to name the essence of the subject, but often not able to express the "soul of the subject" , convey the main thing. Hesychasts refused the word: contemplation gives direct communication with God, therefore hesychasts were also called “silent ones”. The word is "divine verb".
The term "weaving of words" does not quite adequately convey the essence of the style. The phrase "weave words" was known even before Epiphanius in the sense of "to produce new words"; in the translations of the Byzantine hymn we meet: "the word weaving the word sweetness." Thus, neither the term "weaving of words", nor the ornate rhetorical style for the XIV - XV centuries. are not new. New is the motive for the return to floridity. The hesychast identification of the word and the essence of the phenomenon caused in verbal creativity, it would seem, the opposite result - pleonasm, which for this era was justified, since the unity of a high idea with a base one was embodied in the designation of the concreteness of a “thing”. And the hagiographic genre accumulated various vocabulary general meaning, the general meaning turned out to be important, not the meanings individual words, which became the basis for the development of polysemy and synonymy. Moreover, the focus is on abstractness, emotionality, symbolism, figurativeness of linguistic means of expression and constructions.
An important consequence second South Slavic influence became the emergence of correlative pairs of correlative Slavisms and Russisms. Direct lexical borrowings from Russian into Church Slavonic have become impossible. A kind of bilingual Russian-Church Slavonic dictionary is being created (I say - I say, advertising - I said, today - today, truth - truth). Thus, second South Slavic influence predetermined the transition to bilingualism.
On the whole, it should be noted that the Cyprianian right, which took place against the backdrop of a national upsurge (the century between 1380 and 1480 is the time between the Battle of Kulikovo and the complete elimination of Russia's dependence on the Golden Horde), still did not cause such a split in the church and society, which was later caused by the Nikonian right of the 17th century, which took place against the background of the serfdom of the peasantry. Meanwhile, after all, both of them on the right are two stages of the same process of the formation of the modern Church Slavonic language with its artificial spelling and other features of inept archaization, carried out in an atmosphere of complete absence of the history of the Slavic languages as a science.
Lecture #5
The language situation of the second half of the XV-XVI centuries.
1. Archaization of the language of journalism second half of the 15th-16th centuries.
In the second half of the 15th century, the process of state building was influenced by the worldview of two spiritual and religious movements: mystical Orthodoxy and theological rationalism. The ideas of mystical Orthodoxy were defended by the “Volga elders” headed by Nil Sorsky, since they opposed church and monastic land ownership, condemned the decoration of monasteries, declared asceticism, detachment from worldly affairs, including politics, continued to develop the ideas of hesychasm. In their messages, the “Zavolzhsky elders” preferred religious and moral issues, expressed a critical attitude towards the Holy Scriptures, therefore, for their manner of writing, strict observance of the norms of the Church Slavonic language and the absence of rhetorical excesses were relevant. Maxim Grek and Andrey Kurbsky followed the style of presentation of the “trans-Volga elders”. Iosif Volotsky (Ivan Sanin, 1439-1515), the ideologist of another ecclesiastical and political movement of the late 15th - first half of the 16th centuries, called "Josephism", is the author of vivid works of a journalistic nature. The views of its supporters are directly opposite: they defend the inviolability of church dogmas and the political influence of the church, defend church and monastic land ownership, support the concept of absolute monarchy, the aestheticization of the rite. The "Josephites" paid a lot of attention to the description of specific events, details of Russian life, so their works reflected both book-Slavonic lush rhetoric and colloquial everyday language elements. Ivan the Terrible wrote in the style of "Josephites".
2. Stylistic varieties of secular literature and business writing in Muscovite Russia.
The specifics of the secular literature of Muscovite Russia- Strengthening the socio-political significance. Therefore, those works that had pronounced political tendencies and were aimed at glorifying and exalting the young Muscovite state are made out by means of the Church Slavonic language (“The Legend of the Mamaev Battle”, “The Tale of the Capture of Constantinople”). This literature gradually began to become on a par with ecclesiastical-religious literature, and at the same time the authority of the folk-literary language was rising. In addition, the folk-literary type of language could differ not in structural elements, but in rhetorical technique: the presence / absence of rhetorical embellishment (A. Nikitin’s “Journey Beyond Three Seas” is a work of a folk-literary type of language without rhetorical means of expression).
In general, the following can be considered specific features of secular literature during this period: semantic conditioning in the choice of language tradition; alternation of contexts, characteristic of the Church Slavonic and Old Russian languages, within the framework of one work; deliberate mixing of linguistic elements of different traditions depending on the context; strengthening the authority of the folk literary language.
Function expansion business language of Muscovite Russia. Variety of genres: from charters (private letters) to government acts, reflecting the standard command business language. Rapprochement of the business language with the literary language (article lists). The invasion of the folk-colloquial element in the sphere of business writing (letters, "pompous" speeches, "questioning" speeches). Availability of standard language formulas - initial and final forms (refusal and vacation books, petitions). Mastering foreign vocabulary and expanding the topics and structure of the business language (“Vesti-Kuranty”, article lists).
Lecture #6
Cultural and linguistic situation of Southwestern Russia (mid-16th century). The influence of the book tradition of Southwestern Russia on the Moscow book tradition.
1. Characteristics of the cultural and linguistic situation of Southwestern Russia.
To mid-sixteenth in. in South-Western Russia, a situation of bilingualism has developed, when two literary languages coexist: the Church Slavonic language of the south-western Russian edition and "prosta Mova". At the heart of the "simple language" is the official clerical language of Southwestern Russia, officially recognized in the Polish-Lithuanian state as the language of legal proceedings. This language gradually lost the functions of a business language and became a literary language. In contrast to the Book Slavonic language of Muscovite Rus, it reveals in its composition an undoubted colloquial substratum, which is artificially “bookish” due to Slavicization (Ukrainian version of “simple language”) and Polonization (Belarusian “simple language”). By the second half of the XVI century. the prestige of the “simple language” is growing: it is being codified (dictionaries by L. Zizania and P. Berynda); create scientific, journalistic works; translate Bible books into plain language. The Church Slavonic language at this time takes the status of the language of the learned class: the fundamental grammars of Lawrence Zizania and Meletius Smotrytsky appear; orientation towards Latin in grammar (constructions and forms) and vocabulary (borrowings-Latinisms) as a result of the influence of Western European Catholic culture; the presence of polonisms and ukrainisms through the secular business and social everyday language of educated people. This is how the southwestern version of the Church Slavonic language was formed. Thus, the southwestern edition of the Book Slavonic language and the “simple (Russian) language” are literary and linguistic mediators of Western European influence.
2. Literation of "Russian baroque"
In the middle of the XVII century. Ukraine reunites with Russia and turns from a cultural center into a periphery. Local scribes moved to Moscow: Simeon Polotsky, Sylvester Medvedev, Karion Istomin, later Feofan Prokopovich. Their creative legacy literation of "Russian baroque", represented by solemn, epistolary, oratorical prose, verses and dramaturgy. The language of this literature is Book Slavonic, but different both from the Church Slavonic language of the Russian version and from the Church Slavonic language of the southwestern Russian edition. It is distinguished from the “old” Church Slavonic by the presence of Latinisms, Polonisms, Ukrainianisms, names of ancient heroes and gods. It differs from the Church Slavonic language of the southwestern Russian edition in a smaller number of polonisms and provincialisms.
Lecture No. 7
Cultural and linguistic situation in the first half of the 17th century. Formation of the East Slavic grammatical tradition.
The process of standardization of the literary language is associated with the development of book printing. In 1553, the Printing Yard was established in Kitai-Gorod. In the second half of the XVI century. The first printed books appear in Moscow. Typography contributed
development of uniform spelling;
strengthening the unifying role of the literary language in relation to the territorial dialects;
spreading the literary language throughout the state and among all social groups of literate people.
Grammar existed before the beginning of printing: in the XI - XIV centuries. specific lexico-grammatical compositions appeared (a pre-national stage in the development of the grammatical tradition), in the 16th-17th centuries. - translated grammars (pre-national stage of development of the grammatical tradition). So, in the 20s. 16th century Dmitry Gerasimov translated the Latin grammar of Donatus (4th century BC).
Grammar works published during this period in Western Russia are also oriented towards Greek grammars. In 1596, the grammar Adelfotis (adelfotis from Greek ‘brotherhood’) was published by students of the Lviv fraternal school, which became the first manual for the comparative study of Slavic and Greek grammar. It is no coincidence that the full grammar was called “Grammar of the Good-Verbal Hellenic-Slavonic Language”, contained grammatical categories similar to Greek samples (long and short vowels, semi-vowel and voiceless consonants).
Grammar "Adelfotis" became the basis for another grammatical work. It was Lavrentiy Zizaniy's Grammar of the Slovene Perfect Art of the Eight Parts of the Word, published in Vilna in 1591, which expounded the traditional for antiquity "the doctrine of the eight parts of the word." Some parts of Zizania's grammar are presented in such a way that the text in Church Slavonic is accompanied by a translation into "simple language". This feature of grammar reflects the school practice of Southwestern Russia. There is a contrast between the forms of the Church Slavonic language and the “simple language” at different levels: spelling (kolikw - kolkw, four - chotyri), lexical (prevailing - vhdane, known - singing) and grammatical (hedgehog - zhebysmy wrote). Correlates to Church Slavonic words of Greek origin in the “simple language” are compound words tracing them, which in their structure can be regarded as Slavic words (etymology - true words). Therefore, the opposition of the forms of the Church Slavonic language and the “simple language” in some cases is the opposition of bookish and colloquial, in others - the opposition of Greek and Slavic. Thus, Lavrenty Zizaniy clearly artificially seeks to contrast the spelling appearance of words that coincide in the Church Slavonic language and “simple language”. Specific features of grammar: distinguished proper and common nouns (unlike "Adelfotis"), 5 pledges, 4 moods (indicative, vocative, prayerful, indefinite). Grammar application - "Lexis, that is, the sayings are briefly collected and interpreted from the Slovenian language into simple Russian dialect" (1061 words).
At the beginning of the XVII century. appears the most complete and thorough work on Church Slavonic grammar. This is the "Grammar of the Slovenian correct syntagma", published in the city of Evie in 1619 by Meletiy Smotrytsky. The grammar contained the following sections: "Spelling", "Etymology", "Syntax", "Prosody". Grammar terminology has been introduced: words are syllables, speech is a word, a word is a sentence, etymology is morphology, word parts are parts of speech. There were 8 “word parts” in Smotrytsky’s grammar. “The parts of a word are eight: Name. Mhvalue. Verb. Participle. Addicts. Predlog. Soyuz. Interjection". In this case, the adjective is part of the name. The term "communion" is introduced by M. Smotrytsky for the first time. Thus, the ancient (Greco-Roman) division of the dictionary into parts of speech passed into the Slavic-Russian grammar of Smotrytsky. Specific grammatical categories are noted: 7 genders (general, masculine, feminine, neuter, everyone, bewildered, general); 4 voices (real, passive, middle, suspensive); 4 past tenses (transitory, past, past, nonlimiting); introduces the concept of transitive and intransitive verbs, as well as personal, impersonal, obstinate (irregular), insufficient verbs. At the same time, M. Smotrytsky translates individual grammatical constructions into “simple language”, thereby codifying it in a certain way.
In 1648, a revised edition of the Grammar by Melety Smotrytsky was printed at the Printing House in Moscow. When reissuing the form where, abym etc., since they were alien to the colloquial speech of Moscow spravochnikov, were perceived as bookish and preserved in the text. Therefore, the forms of the "simple language" that are intended to explain the Church Slavonic forms of Meletius Smotrytsky's "Grammar" were transferred to the rank of normative Church Slavonic forms. The revision also affected many grammatical rules, in particular the declension paradigm, bringing them closer to the traditions of colloquial Great Russian speech. The changes also concerned the accent system, which in the previous edition reflected the norms of Western Russian pronunciation.
On the whole, Meletius Smotrytsky's Grammar is a fundamental set of grammatical rules of the Church Slavonic language and a normative model for liturgical books. It was this treatise that became the basis for the grammatical normalization of the official version of the Church Slavonic language until the time of M.V. Lomonosov, who himself studied this grammar.
Along with the indicated grammars in the 16th century. Church Slavonic-"Russian" dictionaries appear in Western Russia. To appreciate the significance of this phenomenon, it is enough to note that in Russian conditions such dictionaries would be published only in the second half of the 18th century.
In addition to the “Lexis” of L. Zizania indicated above, one should mention the “Lexicon of Slovene Russian and names of translation” by Pamva Berynda (1 edition - Kyiv, 1627). There are almost 7,000 words in the dictionary, and this number seemed incredible. At the same time, “Russian speech” (“prosta mova”) is contrasted with “Volyn” (Ukrainian) and “Lithuanian” (Belarusian): tssl. phten - ox. pven - lit. rooster. "Lexicon" by P. Berynda is wider in its vocabulary. Attached to the dictionary is an index of proper names contained in the church "Saints", which presents the interpretation of the names of Greek, Jewish, Latin origin.
Lecture No. 8
New traditions in the development of the literary language in the second half of the 17th century. Expansion of the functions of the Church Slavonic language.
1. Nikonovskaya on the right(serXVIIin.).
The change in the Church Slavonic language under the influence of the southwestern ideology is the result of the need to normalize the language, which is expressed in the middle of the 17th century. in carrying out a new book right under the leadership of Patriarch Nikon. Linguistic attitudes of the referees - editing books according to Greek samples. So, the spellings were brought into Greek correspondence: aggel, Jesus. Nikon's edition regulated changes in the accentology of names: Avvakum (vm. Avvakum); Michael (vm. Michael); in case management: forever and ever (vm. forever and ever); in Christ (mind about Christ); in the use of old word forms: mine, yours (vm. mi, ti); However, the opponents of the reform - a truly Orthodox audience - the spelling of Jesus was perceived as anti-Christian. In their opinion, changing the form of a word, the nomination of something entails a distortion of the very essence of the Christian concept; God is the author of the text, and the text cannot be changed; the expression must be correct, i.e. Christian. Therefore, a different attitude towards the linguistic form of the word became the reason for the split of the church under Patriarch Nikon between the opponents of the reform (“Old Believers”) and its supporters (“New Believers”).
The correlation of the Church Slavonic language of South-Western Russia and the Church Slavonic language of Moscow Russia determines the direct influence of the first on the second, which happens in the process of the Nikon and post-Nikon book right: the formal features of the Church Slavonic language of the South-West Russian edition are transferred to the Church Slavonic language of the Great Russian edition, as a result, it is noted education unified all-Russian edition of the Book Slavonic language.
2. Activation in use Church Slavonic.
17th century - the time when the Russian literary language begins to take shape. This process is characterized
the emergence of the "learned" Church Slavonic language under the influence of the literacy of Southwestern Russia;
democratization of literature and literary language, the emergence of new genres, which is associated with the socio-economic shifts of the era. Southwestern Russia
In the development of the literary language during this period in Moscow, new trends are observed: 1) rapprochement with the spoken language of the people; 2) modeling of the Slovenian language, which led to its isolation and the emergence of new phenomena - quasi-Slavicisms. Simply put, new democratic trends are emerging in the system of the Church Slavonic language. Their vivid expression is the works of the preaching and polemical literature of the Old Believers (deacon Fyodor, Epiphanius, Archpriest Avvakum, etc.). “Vyakanye” (“colloquial speech”, opposed to Church Slavonic eloquence) is the main style of the works of Archpriest Avvakum. Avvakum deliberately creates a stylistic dissonance that combines the reduced colloquial and Church Slavonic. The main stylistic feature of his texts is the neutralization of Slavicisms, within which vernacular expressions are built into church-biblical formulas; Church Slavonicisms in the neighborhood with colloquial expressions are assimilated ( full of nets came the God of fish...), i.e. quasi-Slavicisms appear.
Similar tendencies are also manifested in literary genres that have little connection with the Slavonic language, in the secular stories of the 17th-18th centuries. (“The Tale of Frol Skobeev”, “The Tale of Shemyakin Court”, “The Tale of Woe-Misfortune”, etc.), with the appearance of which begins fformation of democratic (townsman, trade and handicraft) literature. The main characteristics of the works of this literature are the style-forming nature of colloquial everyday and emotionally expressive vocabulary, the absence of unified norms of the grammatical system, the influence of oral folk art (techniques and formulas of the epic style, proverbs and sayings, a kind of rhymed prose).
Another manifestation of Book Slavonic modeling is its parodic use. The examples of the first half of the 17th century testify to the parodic use of the Book Slavonic language. (letter from a handwritten collection of the 1st third of the 17th century). In the second half of the XVII century. the number of parodies in the Book Slavonic language is increasing, which is associated with the decline in the authority of the church, church literature, and the Church Slavonic language. These are satirical works, where Church Slavonicisms are often used to achieve a comic effect, where the use of outdated formulas was played up (“The Legend of the Peasant's Son”, “Service to the Tavern”, “The Tale of Ersh Yershovich”, etc.).
The possibility of parodic use of the Book Slavonic language is evidence of the beginning destruction of diglossia. In addition, the coexistence of parallel texts in Church Slavonic and Russian (for example, in the Code of 1649) is a clear sign of bilingualism and a violation of the diglossia principle. From Ser. 17th century in Russia - the situation of bilingualism. A further trend is the pushing away of the Church Slavonic language by the Russian language to the periphery.
Lecture No. 9
Prerequisites for the formation of a new type of literary language (I quarter of the 18th century): the cultural and linguistic policy of Peter I.1. The purpose of Peter's reforms.
The initial period of the formation of a new literary book language is associated with the Petrine era, which covers the last decade of the 17th century. – I quarter of the 18th century. The secularization of Russian culture is a radical achievement of the Petrine era. The main manifestations of this process can be considered the creation of new educational institutions, the establishment of the Academy of Sciences, the publication of the first Russian newspaper Vedomosti (1703), the introduction of the General Regulations (1720), the Table of Ranks (1722), an increase in the number of printed books and Russian-foreign dictionaries. Language construction is an integral fact of Peter's reforms. V.M. Zhivov: “The opposition of two languages was conceived as an antagonism of two cultures: the old bookish language (traditional) is barbaric, clerical (church), ignorant in the ideas of Peter the Great reformers, and the new bookish language was to become European, secular and enlightened.”
2. Graphics reform as the first stage of Peter's transformations in the field of language.
The creation of the Russian civil typeface (1708 - 1710) was the initiative of Peter I himself. The activity to create a new alphabet was carried out by Peter I together with the employees of the Moscow printing house (Musin-Pushkin, F. Polikarpov), starting from 1708, when the decree was issued Sovereign "with new alphabets to print a book of geometry into Russian, which was sent from a military campaign and other civil books to print in the same new alphabets." On January 29, 1710, Peter approved a new alphabet - a civil printed font, on the cover of which it was indicated: “Images of ancient and new letters of Slavonic printed and handwritten". On the back of the cover, Peter wrote: “These letters should be printed in historical and manufactory books, and which are blackened, do not use them in the books described above.” By May 1710, in the "newly invented" alphabet - citizen - 15 editions were printed, among them the first: "Geometry of the Slavonic Earth"; "Methods of a compass and a ruler"; "Compliments, or samples of how to write letters to different persons," etc. An example of the standard use of civil type and the spelling practice of newly printed books is the typesetting manuscript “An Honest Mirror of Youth”, or “Indications for everyday behavior, collected from the authors early XVIII century."
Parameters of Peter's reformation of the Cyrillic alphabet:
change in the alphabetic composition: initially, Peter orders to exclude 9 (according to V.M. Zhivov) / 11 (according to A.M. Kamchatnov) Cyrillic letters: and (like); w (omega); z (ground); q (uk); f(fert); i (Izhitsa); k(xi); j (psi); ^ (ligature "from"); @ (us big); # (us small). But in the finally approved alphabet of 1710, the following were left: and (like); z (ground); q (uk); f(fert); k (xi).
regulation of letters e, e, i(the letter e is entered; instead of >, "- i; instead of ~ - e);
editing the forms of the letters themselves (legalized rounded lettering as opposed to square Cyrillic);
introduction of new designations of numbers (instead of letters, Arabic numbers);
elimination of titles and superscripts.
The newly introduced civil type and the church half-charter began to be functionally opposed: just as church books could not be printed by a citizen, so civil books could not be printed by a church semi-charter. The division of the alphabet into ecclesiastical and civil is evidence of bilingualism (the coexistence of two living bookish languages) and dual culture (the opposition of secular and spiritual in printed books).
3. The second aspect of the linguistic transformations of Peter I - language reform.
In 1697, Peter I in Europe discovered "what they write, how they say." Therefore, the main principle of language construction in this period was the formation of a new literary language on a folk basis. The main goal is the transition from the hybrid Church Slavonic language to the "simple" Russian language. The way to create a new literary language is a combination of Europeanized vocabulary and Russified morphology.
The main trends in the language construction of the Petrine era:
Enrichment of the vocabulary of the native language with Europeanized vocabulary.
Creation of Russified morphology.
The displacement of the command language of Muscovite Russia.
with the advent of powerful translation activities, which also solved the problem of the state's personnel policy. The appearance of translation literature meant that not only foreign vocabulary got into the Russian language, but also the new content required the development of new forms of the native language, as indicated by the order of the sovereign: “... in order to translate more clearly, it is not necessary to keep speech from speech in translation, ... write in your own language as clearly as possible ... ".
with the process of reorganization of the administrative system, the reorganization of naval affairs, the development of trade, factory enterprises, as a result of which the formation of a new terminological system of different thematic groups begins.
1) pragmatic: lexical borrowings are mostly motivated by the borrowing of new things and concepts that speakers had to master in order to be codified;
2) semiotic: the use of borrowings testified to the assimilation of a new value system and the rejection of traditional ideas.
At the same time, the latter function manifested itself in those cases when borrowings were accompanied in the text by a gloss (Greek "language, speech"), i.e. interpretation of an incomprehensible word through the equivalent of a given language familiar to the reader (for example, in the "General Regulations or Charter" (1720)).
In general, the process of borrowing during this period is characterized by
1) both redundancy (presence of glossing) and insufficiency (translators were not always able to designate new concepts and objects, choosing words from Russian usage);
2) successful tracing ( productus"work", Sonnestand"solstice", etc.);
3) temporary displacement from the active use of Russian words ( Victoria instead of victory, battle instead of battle, surname instead of family, fortification instead of fortress and etc.);
4) the transition to the passive vocabulary of the disappeared realities ( senate, footman, camisole, caftan and etc.).
Thus, the widespread use of borrowings did not solve the main linguistic task Peter. A stable feature of the language policy of that time was complaints about the incomprehensibility of legal documents (a number of borrowings first appear in legislative acts). So, in " military regulations"(1716) in addition to those borrowings that are glossed, there are a number of similar lexical elements that the reader had to understand on his own ( patent, officer, article, execution). For the language situation of the Petrine era, not only bilingualism as a sign of local significance is relevant, but also multilingualism associated with the appearance of foreign vocabulary.
Another striking sign of the language construction of this time is lack of uniform morphological norms: unsystematic use of Russian, colloquial and Church Slavonic elements (letters and papers of Peter I, stories of the beginning of the 18th century). On the one hand, the influence of the former Book Slavonic tradition was reflected in the morphological features of the language being created. On April 19, 1724, Peter I wrote a decree to Senod on compiling short teachings, where he ordered “just write so that the villager knows, or two: the villager is simple, but in the city it is prettier for the sweetness of those who listen ...”. One gets the impression that the marked Church Slavonic elements are perceived as a rhetorical embellishment, or as a socio-cultural task in the activities of poets and writers, and not as general cultural significance. Therefore, Church Slavonic is no longer a universal language. On the other hand, the creation of Russified morphology is an attempt to edit the texts in accordance with the new language policy. Morphological editing includes the replacement of the aorist and imperfect forms with l-forms without a copula, infinitive forms with -t, forms 2 l. units h. on –sh, forms of the dual number on forms plural, coexistence in addresses of forms of the vocative and nominative case. Syntactic editing was expressed in the replacement of constructions "particle yes + form of the present tense" with synthetic forms of the imperative mood, single negative double, constructions with nouns in gender. n. on agreed phrases.
Stylistic disorder of the literary language as a genetic heterogeneity of linguistic means of expression in its composition. The mixed nature of speech is a sign of the formation of a cultural dialect.
Two varieties of literary speech: the Slavic Russian language and the civil mediocre dialect. The Slavic Russian language is “secularized” Church Slavonic: a combination of Church Slavonic grammar and a small amount of vernacular, borrowings (sermons by Feofan Prokopovich, Stefan Yavorsky, translated scientific works, preface to the “Trilingual Lexicon” by Fyodor Polikarpov). Creation of civil mediation as an accessible and understandable written literary language of a new type - the main linguistic setting of Peter I. Complex composition of this literary language: colloquial Russian, colloquial, Church Slavonic elements, European borrowings, artificial formations, neologisms, tracing papers, individual author's lexemes (translations of technical books, translated novels, dramas, intimate poetry, letters, newspapers).
The role of the "order" language in the development of the literary language: previously opposed to Church Slavonic, now it is moving to the periphery. Under the new conditions, the literariness of texts ceases to be associated with the signs of bookishness and is determined by extralinguistic parameters. As a result, the possibility of the existence of non-literary texts in the literary language is created. New language acquires the attribute of polyfunctionality: the inclusion in the linguistic culture of those areas that were outside the limits of its functioning (spiritual literature, legislation, office work).
Thus, the cultural policy of Peter I led to a radical change in the language situation:
The "mandatory" language of Muscovite Russia: out of use and in competition with the traditional bookish language.
Church Slavonic loses its polyfunctionality: only the language of worship.
a written literary language of a new type is being formed - a civil mediocre dialect.
the new literary language is distinguished by stylistic disorder, a mixture of old and new, one's own and others', bookish and colloquial.
