The language is in a constant process of change. In connection with the historical change in phonemes, not only the form of the word changes, but the meaning and concept of the language. Such a change in language is a continuous development. The language change occurs first in the speech of some people, in particular the younger generation. The desire of the younger generation to adapt to the sensation of a new era is reflected and spread within the language as an object of social and cultural formation of the public masses. When the transformation of individual speech penetrates into general use, the change does not stop, but is strengthened by general language skills, although this penetration into a linguistic society is not so easy to accomplish. As with any cultural transformation, so in the case of a change in language, a conservative force in the person of the powerful center of society acts and hinders this penetration. It is clear that even during the life of one generation, a lot of changes take place in the language, but only some of them are fixed at the level of the entire nation-speaker of the language and remain in the language for a long time.

In different aspects of language, change occurs at different rates.

The most rapid changes are subject to lexical composition of the language... This can be seen both on the example of new words that have appeared in the Russian language over the past 10-15 years (all computer terminology, many new names of professions and types of activity, etc.), and on the example of a large number of borrowings from English in Korean, almost all of which date back to the post-1945 period. As a rule, the emergence of a new vocabulary is associated with the following phenomena: 1) borrowing a word from another language (with or without the displacement of a previously used word); 2) the emergence of new words to denote objects and phenomena that were previously absent in culture; 3) intra-lingual processes, in which a word or expression, originally invented and used by a small group of people, spreads to the language of the entire nation, 4) the change in the meaning of a word over time. Note that in recent years this process of vocabulary renewal has accelerated in all languages ​​due to the greater ease of information exchange between people than ever before in history. Naturally, the process of some words falling out of use is going on in parallel.

Let's look at all these 4 processes using the example of Korean and other languages:

1) borrowing. From the Chinese language, from the 4th century, and from the Japanese language from the end of the 19th century, hieroglyphic words have been borrowed. The share in modern Korean is 70%, in special terminology it is higher. Since the 20th century, there have been active borrowings from English.

2) the emergence of new words to denote new objects or phenomena. In Korean, they can be composed of both native Korean roots and hieroglyphic and even English, while the meaning of the word may be completely unrelated to the original meanings of the roots (원피스, 소개팅, 왕따, 고스톱, 화이트 데이),

3) the penetration of words from the lexicon of a small group of people into the masses: modern Korean slang 화이팅, 공주병, 호박, 당근, 깡통, 형광등, Russian "teapot", "brake", etc.

4) changing the meaning of words: Russian “comrade”, Italian “banca”, Korean originally hieroglyphic 생각 and 사랑, acquiring a new meaning 바가지, 동네북, changing the shade of the meaning of the word 아줌마 ...

Reverse processes also operate: expulsion and colloquial vulgarization of words. Dead language is also a product of this process. In modern language, words with the suffixes "- 뱅이": "가난뱅이 - poor man», «주정뱅이 - alcoholic»; «-치»: «장사치 - huckster», «거라치 – princeling"And others, are dismissive, but earlier they had the opposite meaning: a polite appeal to males

The suffix "- 뱅이" is derived from the word "방 (房)" in the nominative case. The suffix “- 치” was formed in the following order: first, the suffix “- 디” was softened - [디> 지], after which “- 지” was softened again - [지> 치] (4.15).

An example of the following words can be given: "디새 - roof tiles», «고마 – concubine», «구위 – department". These words were replaced by their hieroglyphs and disappeared, being variants of the dialect.

Thus, at first glance, the vocabulary looks like a rather unreliable guideline in determining the family ties of the language, but it also has a certain basic composition that is not subject to changes over the centuries and even millennia, and can be used in the study of the origin of the language and its family ties.

Slightly slower than vocabulary changes phonetic composition of the language: the appearance and disappearance of individual phonemes, the possibility or impossibility of their combination, various alternations. In this process, we are talking about centuries, and as a rule, the written language fixes these changes much later than they occur in oral speech. Examples of such changes include:

1) the disappearance of phonemes: in the Russian language in 1917, the use of the letters phita, izhitsa, a solid sign at the end of a word, yat was abolished (well, I did not find them in symbols !!!). That is, earlier these letters meant the sounds of speech, then the sounds gradually fell out of use, and only then the letters were withdrawn from use. A similar process took place in the Korean language, when, after the sounds в, ж, and some complex diphthongs and triphthongs, letters also disappeared from use, the last of which - (●) - fell out of use only in the 20th century.

2) the appearance of phonemes: at the present stage it is more difficult to trace it than in the language of previous periods, since the appeared phonemes, like the disappeared ones, are not immediately and not always fixed in the written language. In modern Russian, we can talk about the emergence of "e closed", for which there is no separate letter, but this sound is often used mainly in borrowed words, where "e" is written, and "e" is read - stress, progress, process, Internet, computer, sex, etc. We are also well aware that the phoneme "f" also came to the Russian language along with borrowed words. In Korean, you can trace the formation of diphthongoids 에, 애 and 얘 from full-fledged diphthongs "ai", "oi", "yai", the same can be said about 외 and 위.

3) combinations of phonemes: an example of this phenomenon in Russian is the impossibility in Old Russian of finding two consonants next to each other, which is quite possible in modern Russian: modern. The building is another building (from zida - "clay"), etc. This can also include, for example, the impossibility of combining sp or st at the beginning of a word in modern Spanish - there must be a vowel in front of them. In Korean in the Middle Ages and modern times, one can trace the process of transition from two or even three consonants at the beginning of a word / syllable to one consonant, and in modern Korean - a process officially recorded by the language only in the south of the peninsula: the transformation of ㄹ into ㄴ in Hanmun words at the beginning of a word, and a loss of ㄹ before soft vowels at the beginning of a word. That is, at the time of the division of Korea into north and south, the pronunciation norm "I" apparently took place, when writing the surname "리", in the south the spelling of such words was brought into line with the pronunciation, and in the north - vice versa.

4) alternation. Without going into the details of the Russian alternations of "k-ch", "g-z", "o-a" and "e-i" in the roots of the word (those who wish can try to think about what this is all about), let's go straight to the well-known you Korean, in which the alternation “ㅂ - 우” is a direct consequence of the presence of the sound “v” in the language, which fell out of use, turning into “p” before vowels ”and“ w ”before consonants. Also, the alternation “ㄷ - ㄹ” was the result of a historical process (that is, most of the hieroglyphic syllables ending in ㄹ at the time of their borrowing ended in ㄷ, this is clearly traced by a comparative analysis of the reading of hieroglyphs in various East Asian countries).

The phonetic features of a language can serve as an important material for the analysis of its origin. So, in the group of Altai languages, there are several important features (the impossibility of the position of certain phonemes at the beginning of a word, the euphony of vowels, and some others), which allowed linguists to carry out one or another classification within this language family.

Finally, the most stable and subject to the slowest changes is grammar and structure of the language... So, some Chinese grammatical forms came to the Korean language, the most famous of which is the suffix 적, as well as attributes and some other constructions, but they did not have a big impact on everyday speech, and even more so on the structure of the language.

Korean scholars also have their own interesting insight into the CAUSES of changes in the language. The reasons for language changes lie, first, within the nation responsible for the language; secondly, in changing the forms of letters and words. The first reason has three types: physiological, psychological, spiritual.

Among physiological factors special importance is attached to the state of the vocal apparatus. Each person's vocal apparatus has its own characteristics, but there are regional communities in the course of mastering the methods of articulation.

For example, in Seoul and Southern dialects, when pronouncing the phrase “나의 것” - “ my thing"You can see the obvious features of each:" 나으 것 "," 나 에 것 ". This phenomenon in the course of the action of the vocal apparatus is especially revealed in the case of the so-called change in conditionally connecting phonemes, which occurs due to adjacent sounds, for example, in such phenomena as assimilation, dissimilation, palatalization. There are also changes in unconditional self-generated phonemes that do not arise due to adjacent sounds.

Among psychological factors the most important is the instinct to simplify. This instinct, arising from the inclination to seek convenience, is expressed by assimilation, addition and contraction.

This tendency to search for simplicity of speech becomes one of the factors in the change in the so-called folk etymological form of speech. This can be seen in the example of words such as [낟알 → 나락]; phenomenon-transition "녀름" - (obsolete. "여름 - summer"):" 여름 "(obsolete." 열매 - fetus»), Respectively, [녀름> 여름: 여름> 열매] (4.14).

Another important factor is the process of drawing analogies, for example, [한길 - big road→행길(行- direction, line)]. In addition, concern for the beauty of intonation, the desire for a clear transmission of thought, the instinct to imitate certain vocabulary - all this entails changes in the language. All of the above psychological factors are closely related to each other.

Peculiarity spiritual factor consists in the fact that it surpasses the first two in various degrees. This influence is more reflected in the change in content than in the change in the phoneme or the form of speech. Changing content means changing the concepts of language. For example, the word "사랑" in the language of the medieval period had the meaning [思 ∙ 憶] - " think, remember", But gradually the meaning narrowed to the value [愛] -" love". Accordingly, it turns out that an action arises that expands the content of meaning in a unit of speech. For example, the word of the language of the medieval period "겨레 - relatives", Conveying the meaning of" members of the same genus ", began to mean" 민족 - nation"(4.15).

In addition, the cultural realities of other states constantly penetrate into the language, bringing with them new semantic meanings. Changes in the language of the ancient period go back deeply to changes in religion, culture, politics, economy, society. Even if we consider the Neolithic period, we will see that even then the Korean culture had various origins and connections with the cultures of neighboring regions and even remote lands of Siberia and Transbaikalia. In the first centuries of the new era, the population of the Korean peninsula was influenced by China. Some Korean communities acted as intermediaries in trade and cultural relations between the Chinese and the population of the Japanese islands. By the 4th century, Confucian ideas had become the state ideology of Kogure. Confucianism and Buddhism, along with a huge number of new concepts, appeared in Korea with the advent of the Chinese writing system.

Even if the content and forms of words in the language are constantly changing or disappear altogether, new word formations are still constantly appearing. Usually language changes can occur involuntarily in any territory, however, when creating new words, a planned force is at work. In the case of Korean, this is borne out by looking at new words like 매, 가름, 조각, 목. This spiritual influence, participating in the process of the formation of a new speech, either expands the territory of the language, accommodating an advanced culture, or changes it, and it is so huge that it cannot be expressed.

Very often, due to the specificity of the lexical structure of the Korean language, motivation appears in words. In fact, this motivation for the structure of the vocabulary of such languages ​​as English, French, is completely different. For example, if you compare the words 거짓말 (거짓 - falsity + 말 - word) - lie ( Lying), 눈물 (눈 – eyes + 물 - water) - tear ( tears), you can find out their structural peculiarity, that is, you can find out: how motivated is the structure of the Korean language in comparison with English; Has the language been constantly evolving in line with the analytic structure? But the essence of the question of this time is to what extent the inner power of language acts and whether there is a reason for these changes in humanity itself.

One of the significant driving forces behind changing phonemes can be found in relation to accent. The accent is divided into a strong or weak mechanical accent-accent, which emphasizes one word, syllable, sound, and a musical-modulation accent-level, which sets the pitch. However, the appearance of medium-length vowels among short vowels can create a connection with a medium-length musical-modulation accent; due to a change in the length of the sound, the phenomenon of transformation into either long vowels or short vowels can create a connection with a strong or weak mechanical accent.

From this point of view, it becomes necessary to think at least once about creating a connection with such an emphasis on the following phenomena as: the difference between short and long vowels of a modern language; the process of converting medium-length vowels from short vowels and vice versa; disappearance in the language of modern times of dots in the text of the language of the medieval period. Perhaps all of the above language changes occur in one collective in one person and are spread through imitation. As language changes proliferate, imitation becomes the most important internal driving force. But in the instinct of imitation, the process occurs spontaneously, without experiencing social restrictions.

Later, there is the deliberate intervention of people from the upper strata of society or political control of the state. Control and intervention play a decisive role in the process of the emergence of the cultural, spiritual language of the nation and, depending on the circumstances, indicate the achievement of the political development of society at a certain stage. In this case, the emerging trend rather determines the development within the language and usually seeks to protect it instead of introducing something new. The things that we see today (the rate of correct pronunciation or the rate of spelling) are interconnected with these processes.

Introduction

Russian language reform

I took a term paper in Russian for subject:"Consequences of changes in the norms of the Russian language."

All languages ​​are constantly developing, improving, changing, they have their past and present, in which the elements of the future state of the language arise. At the same time, the language invariably fulfills its most important purpose - it serves as a means of communication.

Language is the repository of human thought. It carries out the connection of times, generations ... The great Russian teacher K.D. Ushinsky: "Language is the most lively, the most abundant and strong connection, uniting the outdated, living and future generations of the people into one great, historical living whole ..."

The system of any language is gradually changing, despite the presence of norms supported by the school, the press, radio, television and other media, as well as traditions. Language is in perpetual motion, because many different factors act on speaking people - both external, as they say, extralinguistic, and internal, linguistic proper.

Language is characterized by a system of norms. Changes in these norms in the language occur constantly. This topic is especially relevant now after the entry into force of the order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation dated June 8, 2009 No. 195 "on the approval of the list of grammars, dictionaries and reference books containing the norms of the modern Russian literary language when it is used as the state language of the Russian Federation" ...

Purpose of work:to identify how changes in the norms of the Russian language occur, and what consequences they have

Tasks:

1)Identify the reasons for changes in the norms of the Russian language

2)Consider the reforms of the Russian language at the turn of the 20th century

3)Mark historical changes in word composition

)Observe the development of the vocabulary of the Russian language

)Refine spelling innovations of the 20th century

)Tell about the change in the norms of the Russian language from 01.09.09

)Find out the public opinion on changes in the norms

Hypothesis:If every decade amendments are made to the norms of the Russian language, then in 50 years we will have an "updated" Russian language.

1. Reasons for changing the norms of the Russian language

The event for the codification and approval of the changed rules of the Russian language is carried out in order to facilitate the study and (or) use of the language by its native speakers. Usually, language reforms (any) are carried out when the colloquial norms deviate too far from the spelling norms. On the other side ?,

Usually, the languages ​​of the so-called are subjected to language reforms. traditional spelling system, i.e. those in which the spelling system is built on the use of the traditional spelling of words, instead of the natural rule "I write as I hear" (according to the latter, phonetic spelling systems are formed, which are characteristic of new languages, the writing for which was formed not so long ago in comparison with traditional languages, history whose writing can be thousands of years old).

Tellingly, the Russian language has undergone reforms throughout history many times, while the reforms themselves have always fallen on the turning points in the life of the Russian people. Only in the twentieth century there were several cardinal changes, of which the most cardinal took place in a glorious revolutionary time (although it was prepared by the Slavists of the Russian Empire). The next hit in the mid-1950s. There was light controversy surrounding the supposedly imminent further changes in the 60s and 70s.

The most serious reform that abolished the so-called. "Pre-revolutionary spelling" was produced by the Bolsheviks after 1917. This state of affairs indicates that the language reform is not so much an attempt to facilitate learning and use, but something else that is not declared by the reformers. But if you think about it, it becomes clear that each reform of the Russian language was designed to break the link between times, to interrupt the consistent transfer of knowledge in the collective mind of the people, to break the chain of generations. That is why reforms are being carried out in critical years. The breakdown of social and political life must be carried out in all aspects, therefore it also affects such deep systems as linguistic archetypes. And it turns out that most of the population, which is already ? owns language norms at a sufficient level, it is necessary to retrain in a new way. The population is becoming totally illiterate. And if you remember, the Bolshevik reform was carried out under the slogan of combating illiteracy. Such is the dialectic.

The reform of the Russian language of the 20th century took place when the socio-political system was also broken. The "academicians" worked out new rules of Russian spelling, many of which caused bewilderment. Sometimes one got the impression that the Russian language was being customized specifically for illiterate immigrants of non-Russian nationality who could not learn Russian in the current established form. Fortunately, so far no total reform has taken place. For some reason, the Russian language council under the government of the Russian Federation postponed the reform.

2. Reform of the Russian language in 1917

.1 Reform history and implementation

The reform was discussed and prepared long before its practical implementation. For the first time it took the form of a "Preliminary Report" of the Spelling Subcommittee at the Imperial Academy of Sciences chaired by A.A. Shakhmatova (1904). In 1911, a special meeting at the Academy of Sciences generally approved the work of the preliminary commission and passed a resolution on this matter: elaborate in detail the main parts of the reform; the corresponding decree was published in 1912. Since that time, single editions appear, printed according to the new spelling. The reform was officially announced on May 11 (24), 1917 in the form of "Resolutions of the meeting on the simplification of Russian spelling", and on May 17 (30), on the basis of these materials, the Ministry of Public Education of the Provisional Government ordered the district trustees to immediately reform the Russian spelling; another circular was issued on June 22 (July 5). However, the reform then began only at school, which was confirmed by the decree of the Soviet People's Commissariat of Education on December 23, 1917 (January 5, 1918 in a new style). Only the decree of the Council of People's Commissars of October 10, 1918 (published in Izvestia on October 13) and the resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the National Economy "On the removal from circulation of common letters of the Russian language" (meaning letters with a general meaning : i = u,? = e,? = f), published the next day.

According to the decree, "all government publications, periodicals (newspapers and magazines) and non-periodicals (scientific works, collections, etc.), all documents and papers must be printed from October 15, 1918 according to the new spelling."

Thus, private publications could formally be printed according to the old (or generally whatever) spelling. The retraining of those previously trained in the old norm was not allowed according to the decree.

In practice, however, the state authorities soon established a monopoly on printed materials and very strictly monitored the execution of the decree. It was a frequent practice to remove not only the letters I, fita and yatya, but also Kommersant from the printing offices. Because of this, the writing of the apostrophe as a separating mark in place of b ( underoh hellyutant), which began to be perceived as part of the reform (although in fact, from the point of view of the letter of the decree of the Council of People's Commissars, such spellings were erroneous). Nevertheless, some scientific publications (related to the publication of old works and documents; editions, the recruitment of which began even before the revolution) came out according to the old spelling (except for the title page and, often, prefaces) until 1929. It is noteworthy that steam locomotives with the designations of the I,? Series were operated on Russian and later Soviet railways. and?.

.2 Positives and criticisms

The reform reduced the number of spelling rules that had no basis in pronunciation, for example, the difference in gender in the plural or the need to memorize a long list of words written with "yat" (moreover, there was controversy about the composition of this list among linguists, and various spelling guidelines in places contradicted each other ).

The reform led to some savings in writing and typing, eliminating the b at the end of words (according to L.V. Uspensky's estimates, the text in the new spelling becomes about 1/30 shorter).

The reform removed from the Russian alphabet a pair of completely homophonic graphemes (yat and E, fita and F, I and I), bringing the alphabet closer to the real phonological system of the Russian language.

Before implementation

While the reform was being discussed, various objections were expressed regarding it:

· no one has the right to forcibly change the systems? established op? ography ... only such changes are permissible, which occur immediately, under the influence of the living example of exemplary writers;

· | in reforms? there is no urgent need: the mastery of spelling is hampered not so much by the spelling itself as by bad teaching methods ...;

· reform is completely unfeasible ...:

o it is necessary that at the same time with the implementation of the reform of the school? were reprinted on a new sun? school textbooks ...

o then it is necessary to reprint all the classic authors, Karamzin, Ostrovsky, Turgenev, etc .;

o and tens and even hundreds of thousands of home libraries ... compiled not for the last day, pennies in the inheritance of d? tyam? In? D, Pushkin and Goncharov would have turned out to be the same as the current readers of the pre-Petrine press;

o it is necessary that all teaching staff, at once, with full readiness and with complete satisfaction, are right? d? la unanimously accepted the new spelling and adhered to it ...;

o need ... for bonnets, governesses, mothers, fathers and everything? the persons giving the initial training started to study the new spelling and, with readiness and satisfaction, taught him ...;

o it is finally necessary that the entire educated society accepts the reform of the oreography with full sympathy. Otherwise, the discord between the society and the school will finally discredit the authority of the last days, and the school ography will seem to the students themselves to distort the letter ...

Hence the conclusion was drawn: "All this makes us assume that the simplified simplification of the spelling of the whole person, with the exclusion of four letters from the alphabet, will not enter life in the near future." The wait, however, was only five years.

After implementation

Despite the fact that the reform was developed long before the revolution without any political goals by professional linguists (moreover, among its developers was a member of the far-right Union of the Russian People, Academician Alexei Ivanovich Sobolevsky, who proposed, in particular, to exclude the - yya / -іya), the first steps towards its practical implementation took place after the revolution, but it was actually adopted and implemented by the Bolsheviks. This determined a sharply critical attitude towards it on the part of the political opponents of Bolshevism (this attitude was aphoristically expressed by IA Bunin: “By the order of the Archangel Michael himself, I will never accept the Bolshevik spelling. to what is now written in this spelling "). It was not used in most of the publications printed in the white-controlled territories, and then in exile. Publications from the Russian diaspora for the most part switched to the new spelling only in the 1940s - 1950s, although some are still published in the old way.

The reform also met linguistic criticism: it was accused of insufficient elimination of the inconsistency of the old spelling (N.S. Trubetskoy):

In my opinion, the late Shakhmatov took a big sin on his soul that he consecrated the new spelling with his authority. Especially with apostrophes ("under eat "with" sexton ") it is difficult to agree, and in general, not many people do it better than before the reform: the main problem was that the Cyrillic alphabet does not have a letter for" o after a softened consonant ", and this problem remained in the new spelling unresolved.

As you can see, Trubetskoy was not entirely accurate, believing that the apostrophe, widely used in practice, was required by the reform (in fact, officially retaining a solid sign in this function).

Known criticism of the spelling reform of Ivan Aleksandrovich Ilyin, containing elements as linguistic (in particular, Ilyin reproached the new spelling for the increase in the number of homographs after the disappearance of differences like is /? st, mir / mir) and socio-political:

Why? these distortions? What is this mind-boggling decline for? Who needs this confusion in thought and in linguistic creativity ??

There can be only one answer: all this is needed by the enemies of national Russia. Im; it is im, and only im.

The symbolist poet Vyacheslav Ivanovich Ivanov criticized the reform from an aesthetic standpoint: “Our language is imprinted in splendid writings: they invent something new, seemingly simplified, but in reality it is more difficult - for less distinct, like an erased coin, spelling that violates the successively established proportionality and the completeness of its descriptive forms, reflecting its morphological structure as a faithful mirror. But the sense of form disgusts us: the variety of forms is contrary to the beginning of all the blotting out equality. But can a mindset that considers hatred as the only measure of effective power, and rupture as the first condition for creativity, can treasure continuity? "

3. Projects of reforms in 1930

3.1 Romanization project

“On the initiative of the Glavnauka NKP of the RSFSR, a subcommittee was organized in November 1929 as part of the spelling reform commission to develop the question of the romanization of the Russian alphabet. The subcommittee worked in the following composition: printing specialists - prof. M.I. Shchelkunov, V.V. Nikolaev, M.V. Gorshkov; Russian language teaching specialists - prof. D.M. Peshkovsky, prof. N.M. Karinsky, S.N. Abakumov, representatives of nationalities - V.I. Lytkin (Ugro-Finnologist), Yumankulov (All-Russian Central Committee NIDA); linguistic specialists - prof. L.I. Zhirkov, prof. N.F. Yakovlev, D.M. Sukhotin, inventor ing. Ezdakov, scientific secretary of the Glavnauka Kostenko. The chairman of the commission was appointed prof. N.F. Yakovlev, secretary V.I. Lytkin. The commission had its first meeting on November 29, 1929 "

"Secret

January 1930

Moscow city

In the Central Committee of the CPSU (b)

Comrade Stalin

According to the telephone conversation, I present you with a certificate from the Head. Chief Science Comrade Luppola on romanization.

A. Bubnov ".

“Information about the work of Glavnauka on the completion of the spelling reform and on the problems of romanization of the Russian alphabet.

On the initiative of the public (press, meetings of students, teachers, press workers, etc.), Glavnauka from the beginning of November 1929 began to develop further reform of spelling. In the process of the internal work of Glavnauka, it became clear that it was necessary not only to complete the reform (1917) of spelling and punctuation, but also to study the problem of romanizing the Russian alphabet. The printing industry was especially interested in this matter, whose representatives gave preliminary estimates of the possible savings. One transition from “and” to “i” (“and” with a dot) should save up to 4 mil. rubles per year, including up to 1 mil. rubles in foreign currency (non-ferrous metals). The dispute, organized by the "House of the Press", testified to the fact that the public associated with the printing industry is in favor of romanization. Letters received by Glavnauka say that this problem is of interest to wide circles. The opinions contained in the letters are mixed. In this situation, Glavnauka considered and considers it necessary to work out this problem by means of a commission. At the moment, the preliminary study has been completed, and all the material with the comments of both representatives of the public and scientific specialists will be considered at a closed meeting of the board of the People's Commissariat for Education.<…>.

I. Luppol "

"Resolution of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b)" On romanization "

Top secret

All-Union Communist Party (Bolshevik)

CENTRAL COMMITTEE

TT. Kurtz, Luppola.

About romanization.

Suggest to Glavnauka to stop working out the question of the romanization of the Russian alphabet.

Secretary of the Central Committee Stalin. "

“As a result of a heated discussion and elaboration of the project in sections, the meeting adopted the NIYAZ project with some amendments. This project is based on the principle of approximation of written speech to oral, or, more precisely, the approximation of spelling to a living literary language.

The practical part of this project boils down mainly to the following:

the letters e, and, y, b and the apostrophe are abolished.

Instead of e, e is written everywhere (floor, electricity). The pronunciation, of course, remains the same. Instead of and, i is introduced.

The project introduces a new letter j (iot), which is used, firstly, everywhere instead of d, secondly, in combination with a, o, y, instead of i, e, u (jabloko, jug), thirdly, in in the middle of words instead of ъ or ь signs in front of vowels (object, kaljyan), as well as in the word million (miljon) and, fourthly, in a combination of yi (chji, semji).

After w, w, h, q, I, yu, s (cucumber, revolution, tsigan) are never written.

The soft sign is abolished: 1) after hissing (mugs), 2) in the middle of countable words (fifty, seven hundred), 3) in an indefinite form of verbs ending in th (he will learn).

The prefixes from, cart, bottom, time, without, through are always written with the letter z. The endings of the adjectives oh, it are replaced by ovo, evo. The endings of masculine adjectives should be written oj, ei (redj, goodj). The endings of the adjectives ı, ıe are replaced by ıi, ii (goodi, sinii).

In complex names (All-Union Central Executive Committee), only the first word is written with a capital letter.

Free hyphenation (s-vet) is established.<…>

The draft reform of spelling, punctuation and transcription, adopted by the All-Union meeting, is submitted for approval by the board of the People's Commissariat for Education, and then the Council of People's Commissars. " ("Evening Moscow" 06/29/31: "Russian spelling reform project" as a result of the All-Union Spelling Meeting, which ended on June 26.)

"Top secret

No. P47 / def. 8-s

July 1931

T. Bubnov, Stetsky, Epstein, N.A. Milyutin, Krupskaya, Pokrovsky.

Extract from the protocol<…>"On the" reform "of the Russian alphabet".

In view of the continuing attempts to "reform" the Russian alphabet (see the notice of the results of the All-Union Conference of Spellographers in "Vechernaya Moskva" dated June 29), posing a threat of fruitless and empty waste of state forces and resources, the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) decides:

) Prohibit any "reform" and "discussion" about the "reform" of the Russian alphabet.

) To make the NKPros of the RSFSR Comrade Bubnov responsible for the implementation of this resolution.

Secretary of the Central Committee Stalin. "

The struggle continued until 1937. In 1932 they were replaced by the Latin alphabet, and in 1935 the Komi-Zyryan and Udmurt languages ​​were returned to the Russian basis.

In 1936, the secretariat of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) received a top-secret report No. OB-322, which, in particular, said: “The enemies of the Soviet government and the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) tried to use romanization in order to separate the workers of these republics and regions from the common family peoples of the USSR. Hiding behind talk about the "international character" of the Latin basis, they defended an orientation towards the bourgeois culture of the West. Europe, as opposed to a developing culture, national in form and socialist in content ... As a result of the active eradication of the Russian alphabet, the All-Union Central Center for Culture and Arts and the local committees of NA created 10 Latinized alphabets for peoples with Russian writing ... It is especially unfavorable in this respect among border peoples and nationalities, where "romanization" is simply an instrument of large and small imperialists. For example, in Soviet Moldova, for a number of years, the Romanization of terminology was openly carried out, and in Soviet Karelia (under the old leadership) - the most active financialization. And all this happened despite the resistance of the broad masses of the population. "

.2 Draft to simplify spelling rules

3.3 Draft dictionary correction (A.M. Peshkovsky, D.N. Ushakov)

“A.M. Peshkovsky intended to coordinate the spelling of words in the dictionary with a large spelling and grammatical reference book, which was being prepared under his own editorship for publication by the publishing house "Soviet Encyclopedia". But he did not complete the edition of the large reference book. (…) After the death of A.M. Peshkovsky's vocabulary and spelling work was completed by prof. D.N. Ushakov, whose spelling dictionary was published already in 1934 " (Belov A.I.A.M. Peshkovsky as a linguist and methodologist. - M., 1958. - S. 11-12).

The last 3 volumes of the dictionary were edited by S.I. Ozhegov. Perhaps this explains the different spellings of the word "barber": the old "barber" in the article "Almaviv", but the new "barber" in the article of the same name.

For the purpose of regulation, two spelling reference books were published in 1933 (in Moscow - AB Shapiro and MI Uarova, in Leningrad - edited by NN Filippov). Meanwhile, most of the controversial issues were resolved in them in complete disagreement, which inevitably gave rise to the discord legalized by these reference books.

4. Historical changes in the composition of the word

The morphemic composition of the word is not established and constant. Over the centuries, the composition of many words has changed in connection with the changing life of society. As the trunk and branches of a tree grow from a root, so related words arise from one root. In many words, the roots are hidden, as in the tree, we do not see them. And it is very important to know these ancient roots.

The science of etymology helps us in this (from the Greek "etymon" - truth and "logos" - doctrine). This is the science of the origin of the word .

Let's select the modern root in the word Sun... To do this, pick up the same root words: sun, sun, etc. So, the root is the sun- So a modern student will understand this word. But in ancient times the sun was denoted by the word SOL... As you can see, there have been changes in the history of the language.

The same thing happened with other words. For example, the word "people" comes from the ancient stem "clan", which meant a group of people of the same tribe. At the present time, the prefix has merged with the root. Area - from draenei "flat" - flat, wide was formed by adding the suffix - ad (see "Appendix No. 1")

In the process of the historical development of the language, some prefixes and suffixes have ceased to be used to form new words. Such prefixes and suffixes are called unproductive.

In Russian there are words with unproductive prefixes:

Pa-: stepson, stepdaughter, flood, etc.;

Great-: great-grandson, great-grandmother, etc.;

Su-: dusk, twilight, snowdrift, loam .;

There are words in Russian with unproductive suffixes:

yen: tusk, downpour;

knowledge: illness, fear, life, etc .;

pull, slobber.

Some prefixes and suffixes are so closely merged with the root of the word that they cannot always be separated from it, for example: memory, remember, take and others. When parsing such words morpheme, prefixes and suffixes are not separated from the root, but sometimes it is useful to highlight such morphemes to explain their spelling.

In the book "Pocket School" F, Krivin writes: "The root disappeared in the verb" take out ". All other parts of the word remained in place: both the prefix you-, and the suffix - well-, and even

known for its instability. And the root has disappeared.

It was the ancient root im-, which for centuries existed in the most diverse words of our language: to have, to remove, to raise and many others. It has also survived in the imperfect form of the verb - to take out. And disappeared somewhere when the perfect species was formed ... The prefix and the suffix got down to business together and successfully replaced the root of the word.

At first glance, you can't even tell that there is no root in the word "take out".

5. Changes in spelling in the 20th century

The first spelling reform (1917-1918) consisted in changing a number of Russian spelling rules, which was most noticeably manifested in the exclusion of several letters from the Russian alphabet.

October 1918 (published in Izvestia on October 13) the resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the National Economy "On the removal from circulation of common letters of the Russian language" (meaning letters with a common meaning: i = u,? = e,? = f).

In accordance with the reform:

· letters were excluded from the alphabet? (yat),? (fit), I ("and decimal"); instead of them should be used, respectively, E, F, I;

· the hard sign (b) at the end of words and parts of compound words was excluded, but remained as a dividing mark (ascent, adjutant);

· the rule of writing prefixes to s / s changed: now all of them (except for s- itself) ended in s before any voiceless consonant and in s before voiced consonants and before vowels (break, break, break? break, break, but break apart);

· in the genitive and accusative cases of adjectives, and participles the ending - ago, - Iago was replaced by - oo, - it (for example, new? new, better? best, early? early), in the nominative and accusative plurals of feminine and neuter genders - yya, -іya - on - s, - not (new (books, editions)? new);

· the word forms of the feminine plural he ?, one ?, one? xh, one? m, one were replaced by them, one, one, one, one;

· the word form of the genitive singular her (her) - on her (her).

In the last paragraphs, the reform, generally speaking, affected not only spelling, but also spelling and grammar, since the spellings he ?, one ?, her (reproducing Church Slavonic spelling) to some extent managed to enter Russian pronunciation, especially poetry (where participated in the rhyme: he? / wives? at Pushkin, mine / her at Tyutchev, etc.).

Did the reform say nothing about the fate of the rare and out of practical use even before 1917? (Izhitsa); in practice, after the reform, it also completely disappeared from the alphabet.

“In 1929, a new Spelling Commission was created; she had to complete the improvement of Russian spelling. But the project, which appeared in 1930, was not approved. Since 1934, another work unfolded in Moscow and Leningrad: not on reforming, but on streamlining spelling. It was supposed to lead to the creation of a single spelling set. The work of the commissions of the 1930s caused a number of valuable studies that determined the principle of constructing Russian spelling (A.M. Peshkovsky 1930; N.N.Durnovo 1930; S.P. Obnorsky 1939). Among the scholars there were both supporters of the strengthening of the traditional historical principle of spelling, and adherents of the phonetic one. For example, S.P. Obnorsky in many cases were reduced precisely to the introduction of etymological, historical spellings (see below). But the phonemic basis of Russian writing was especially fruitfully studied (N.F. Yakovlev 1928; R.I. Avanesov and V.N.Sidorov 1930; A.A. Reformatsky 1937). However, the work of the commissions did not produce any practical results in the 1930s. "

“A.M. Peshkovsky intended to coordinate the spelling of words in the dictionary with a large spelling and grammatical reference book, which was being prepared under his own editorship for publication by the publishing house "Soviet Encyclopedia". But he did not complete the edition of the large reference book. (…) After the death of A.M. Peshkovsky's vocabulary and spelling work was completed by prof. D.N. Ushakov, whose spelling dictionary was published already in 1934 " The last 3 volumes of the dictionary were edited by S.I. Ozhegov. Perhaps this explains the different spellings of the word "barber": the old "barber" in the article "almaviv", but the new "barber" in the article of the same name.

Released in 1930 in 15,000 copies, "The Glavnauki Project on New Spelling" (Moscow, 1930) and published in 1964, "Proposals for Improving Russian Spelling" were focused on simplifying Russian spelling. In the 2000 draft, as one of its authors and editors writes, "the task of improving the Russian writing was not set," "and yet minor changes turned out to be very desirable ... They are aimed at correcting regularly violated rules."

The solutions that were proposed in the projects of 1930 and 1960 were completely or partially the same. For example, the general provisions were:

· do not write ь after hissing consonants;

· leave only b as a dividing mark, respectively write: ate, entrance, exit, explain, announcement, rise, etc .;

· after hissing under stress, write about, without stress - e, i.e., for example: yellow, black - turn yellow, turn black; berezhot - gnaws; techot - will flow out; reflective - pronounced, baked - baked, etc.;

· component gender - always write with a hyphen, i.e. not only half a cucumber, half a liter, but also half an hour, half a year, half a meter and so on. (This proposal was repeated in the draft new Code of Practice 2000).

Both projects provided for a change in the use of s and and after c. But in the draft of 1930, not only after c, but also after w and w, it was proposed to write s: tsyrk, socialism, revolution; fat, write and under. The 1964 project envisaged after c always and: gigantic, chisel; fathers, streets, pale police and so on.

In both projects, it was proposed to cancel the spelling of double consonants in different positions. Especially radical in this respect was the draft of 1930, which left the "right" for double consonants only at the junction of the prefix and the root, as well as in the words buzz, quarrel, escaped, merged; among examples: wood, straw, agitated, Russian, Odessa, art, commission, communist, class, opposition, Ana, tones, Muler. The 1964 proposals provided for the abolition of double consonants only in words of foreign language origin with the proviso: "Double consonants are written only in words: bath, gamma, sum (the list of words is not yet final)."

Both drafts contained a clause on a change in the spelling of particles. In the draft of 1930, it was proposed to extend the hyphenated spelling to particles, whether, but in the draft of 1964 - to establish a separate spelling for something, - either, - something; some in pronouns (someone, someone, etc.).

As this far from complete list of proposals shows, in comparison with the 1917 decree, the projects of 1930 and 1964 were much more voluminous and not as "generally understandable" as in 1917.

In 1885, the book by J.K. The grotto "Russian spelling", compiled on behalf of the Second Department of the Imperial Academy of Sciences and published in volume 36, number 1, "Collection of the Department of Russian Language and Literature of the Imperial Academy of Sciences."

First of all, let us point out the general rule for combining vowels with consonants.

Of solid vowels, y is not written after guttural g kx and after sibilant z sh h sh; both consonants admit after themselves only and, i.e. only combinations are possible: ki hi ji shi chi, not gy ky khi, etc.

In the ancient language, on the contrary, in order for the gutturals to retain their sound, they were followed by s, for example. gybıl, Kyev, hytr, because before and they could not resist and passed into other sounds.

The same consonants, as well as c, do not tolerate the clothed vowels I, y. Therefore, only combinations are possible: ha ka ha zha sha cha cha cha cha gu ku hu zhu shu chu chu, and not gya kya ... gyu kyu, etc. , very often the inscriptions appeared: zhya shya chya schya qya zhu sheu and so on. After the guttural r k x and after the q, b is never written.

6. Vocabulary of the Russian language

The lexical composition is the most volatile. It is the vocabulary that is especially quickly distracted by everything new that appears in public life, science, technology, art, and everyday life. The vocabulary of the Russian language, like any other, is constantly replenished, enriched, updated. Words disappear, go out of use, others, on the contrary, appear, begin to be actively used by native speakers.

The lexical stock of a language can be enriched in different ways. For example, at certain periods of the development of the state, a significant amount of borrowed vocabulary appears in its language, which is observed, for example, in the present period in the Russian language.

Borrowing foreign words is one of the ways of developing a modern language. Language always responds quickly and flexibly to the needs of society. Borrowings are the result of contacts, relationships between peoples and states.

The main reason for borrowing a foreign language vocabulary is the absence of a corresponding concept in the cognitive base of the receptor language.

By the nature and volume of borrowings in the Russian language, it is possible to trace the paths of the historical development of the language, that is, the paths of international travel, connections and scientific development, and, as a result, the crossing of Russian vocabulary and phraseology with other languages. Observing the transition of words and phrases from any foreign language into Russian helps to understand the history of the Russian language, both literary and dialects.

6.1 Borrowings in the Old Russian language and under Peter I

Many foreign words borrowed by the Russian language in the distant past are so mastered by him that their origin is revealed only with the help of etymological analysis. These are, for example, some borrowings from the Turkic languages, the so-called Turkisms. Words from the Turkic languages ​​have penetrated into the Russian language since the time when Kievan Rus was adjacent to such Turkic tribes as the Bulgars, Polovtsians, Berendei, Pechenegs and others. Approximately VIII-XII centuries include such ancient Russian borrowings from the Turkic languages ​​as boyar, tent, hero, pearls, kumis, mob, cart, horde. It should be noted that historians of the Russian language often disagree about the origin of certain borrowings. So, in some linguistic dictionaries, the word horse is recognized as Türkism, while other experts attribute this word to native Russian.

For about ten centuries, the Church Slavonic language was the basis of religious and cultural communication between Orthodox Slavs, but it was very far from everyday life. The Church Slavonic language itself was close, but did not coincide either lexically or grammatically with the national Slavic languages. However, his influence on the Russian language was great, and as Christianity became an everyday phenomenon, an integral part of Russian reality, a huge stratum of Church Slavisms lost their conceptual foreignness (the names of the months - January, February, etc., heresy, idol, priest, etc.) other).

A noticeable trace was left by the Greekisms, which came to the Old Russian language mainly through the Old Church Slavonic in connection with the process of completing the Christianization of the Slavic states. Byzantium took an active role in this process. The formation of the Old Russian (East Slavic) language begins. The Greekisms of the period of the X-XVII centuries include the words from the field of religion: anathema, angel, bishop, demon, icon, monk, monastery, lamp, sexton; scientific terms: mathematics, philosophy, history, grammar; household terms: lime, sugar, bench, notebook, lantern; names of plants and animals: buffalo, beans, beets and others. Later borrowings relate mainly to the field of art and science: trochee, comedy, mantle, verse, logic, analogy, and others. Many Greek words that have received international status entered the Russian language through Western European languages.

By the 17th century, there were translations from Latin into Church Slavonic, including the Gennady Bible. Since then, the penetration of Latin words has begun into the Russian language. Many of these words continue to exist in our language to this day (Bible, doctor, medicine, lily, rose and others).

The stream of borrowed foreign language vocabulary characterizes the reign of Peter I. Peter's transformative activity became a prerequisite for the reform of the literary Russian language. The Church Slavonic language did not correspond to the realities of the new secular society. A huge influence on the language of that time was exerted by the penetration of a number of foreign words, mainly military and craft terms, the names of some household items, new concepts in science and technology, in naval affairs, in administration, in art, etc. Since Peter's times, such borrowed foreign words as algebra, optics, globe, apoplexy, varnish, compass, cruiser, port, corps, army, deserter, cavalry, office, act, rent, tariff and many others have existed in Russian.

Dutch words appeared in Russian mainly in the times of Peter the Great in connection with the development of navigation. These include ballast, buer, spirit level, shipyard, harbor, drift, maneuver, pilot, sailor, yacht, rudder, flag, navy, navigator, and so on.

At the same time, terms from the field of maritime affairs were also borrowed from the English language: barge, boat, brig, whaleboat, midshipman, schooner, boat and others.

It is known, however, that Peter himself had a negative attitude towards the dominance of foreign words and demanded from his contemporaries to write “as intelligibly as possible”, without abusing non-Russian words. For example, in his message to Ambassador Rudakovsky, Peter wrote:

“In your reports, you use many Polish and other foreign words and terms, behind which it is impossible to understand the matter itself: for the sake of this, for the sake of you, henceforth, your communications to us should be written in Russian, without using foreign words and terms.”

.2 Borrowing in the XVIII-XXI centuries

A great contribution to the study and ordering of foreign borrowings was made by M.V. Lomonosov, who in his work "Reader on the History of Russian Linguistics" presented his observations about Greek words in Russian in general, and in the field of the formation of scientific terms in particular.

“... While avoiding foreign language borrowings, Lomonosov at the same time sought to promote the rapprochement of Russian science with Western European, using, on the one hand, international scientific terminology, composed mainly of Greek-Latin roots, and on the other hand, forming new Russian terms or rethinking pre-existing words "

V.V. Vinogradov.

Lomonosov believed that the Russian language had lost its stability and linguistic norm due to the "clogging" of the living spoken language with borrowings from various languages. This prompted Lomonosov to create "Prefaces on the Use of Church Books", in which he manages to lay the foundations of the Russian language, corresponding to the time.

Active political and social ties with France in the 18th-19th centuries contributed to the penetration of a large number of borrowings from the French language into the Russian language. The French language became the official language of the court aristocratic circles, the language of the secular noble salons. Borrowings of this time - the names of household items, clothing, food: bureau, boudoir, stained glass, couch; boot, veil, wardrobe, vest, coat, broth, vinaigrette, jelly, marmalade; words from the field of art: actor, entrepreneur, poster, ballet, juggler, director; military terms: battalion, garrison, pistol; socio-political terms: bourgeois, declassed, demoralization, department and others.

Italian and Spanish borrowings are mainly associated with the field of art: aria, allegro, bravo, cello, short story, piano, recitative, tenor (Italian) or guitar, mantilla, castanets, serenade (Spanish), as well as with everyday concepts: currency , villa; vermicelli, pasta (ital.).

By the end of the 18th century. the process of Europeanization of the Russian language, carried out mainly through the French culture of the literary word, reached a high degree of development. The old book linguistic culture was supplanted by the new European one. The Russian literary language, without leaving its native soil, deliberately uses Church Slavism and Western European borrowings.

Leonid Petrovich Krysin in his work "On the Russian language of our days" analyzes the flow of foreign language vocabulary at the turn of the XX and XXI centuries. In his opinion, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the intensification of business, scientific, trade, cultural ties, the flourishing of foreign tourism, all this caused an intensification of communication with native speakers of foreign languages. Thus, first in the professional, and then in other areas, terms related to computer technology appeared (for example, computer, display, file, interface, printer, and others); economic and financial terms (for example, barter, broker, voucher, dealer and others); names of sports (windsurfing, skateboarding, arm wrestling, kickboxing); in less specialized areas of human activity (image, presentation, nomination, sponsor, video, show).

Many of these words have already been completely assimilated into the Russian language.

7. Changes in the norms of the Russian language 2009

On September 1, 2009, Order No. 195 of the Ministry of Education and Science came into force, which defines the list of dictionaries, grammars and reference books containing the norms of the modern Russian literary language. The status of official dictionaries-authorities was given to the "Spelling Dictionary of the Russian Language" by B. Bukchina, I. Sazonova and L. Cheltsova, "The Grammar Dictionary of the Russian Language" edited by A. Zaliznyak, "Dictionary of Russian Accentuations" by I. Reznichenko and "Big Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian language ”with a commentary by V. Telia.

From now on you can say:

Not only "contract", but also "contract"

Not only on Wednesdays, but also on Wednesdays

Not only "yogurt", but also "yogurt"

Not only "tvorog", but also "cottage cheese")

Not only "tandem", but also "tandem"

Not only "simultaneously", but also "simultaneously"

Not only "slogan", but also "slogan"

Not only "muscular", but also "muscular"

disdain "for some reason introduces a new norm -" disdain "

WRITING (WRITING - WRONG)

Disdain (instead of disdain)

Kvartal (kvartal - wrong)

Beets (beets - wrong)

Remedies (Remedies - wrong)

Fax to Imile (facsimile - wrong)

PROVIDING AND SUPPORTING (PROVIDING AND PROVIDING - WRONG)

You need to write:

Karate (karate is wrong)

"Internet" (always with a capital letter and in quotes)

Coffee (now neuter and masculine)

Tskhinvali (with "and" at the end)

Both "shopping" and "shopping"

The normative option is considered:

five-o-clock ("I didn't have a five-o-clock today" meaning "I didn't have an afternoon snack today")

email (mail)

chao (along with "bye")

As explained by Ivan Leonov from the Institute of the Russian Language. Pushkin, the change in the norm is due to the real state of affairs. Dictionaries, in his opinion, only record the common variants of pronunciation and spelling.

So why did the society so painfully perceive the innovations in the Russian language? One of the biggest problems with new dictionaries is inconsistency. A native speaker wants to know how to do it correctly, and dictionaries give different options. But variability within one system is one thing, and what is happening now is another. These options are needed only for linguists, they give them a job, but what to do for all other native speakers is not clear. Their interests are fundamentally different. This is especially acute when it comes to schoolchildren who have to take exams. What dictionaries should I use to study it? Which option should you choose? The situation is even more complicated by the fact that different universities are guided by different dictionaries. But in theory, these dictionaries should not apply to schoolchildren at all, because it is not the state language, which is spoken of in the law. However, the head of the educational program "Dictionaries of the XXI century" Konstantin Derevyanko believes that dictionaries should be included in schools, but so far it is not so simple. He also noticed that there are a lot of positive aspects in this whole situation: for example, “for the first time they started talking so much about the language and dictionaries”.

8. Were the norms of the Russian language new in 2009?

“Non-reform” awaits us. This is what the specialists working in the Spelling Commission of the Russian Academy of Sciences say. Scientists have been preparing it for almost ten years, discussing it, publishing dictionaries in which “non-reform” has already taken the form of a mandatory norm, and stubbornly deny that they are reforming anything. They assure that there is an adjustment, simplification, unification, revision of the current spelling laws, fixed in the "Rules of Russian Spelling and Punctuation" adopted in 1956.

“Anything but reform,” the members of the esteemed commission swear. And they can be understood. They are too afraid of associations with other - held (1918) and failed (1964) - reforms of the Russian language. Why are they afraid? Because any reform of the language is painfully experienced by society. Moreover, according to scientists in Germany and France, where the reforms that were started are now being strenuously slowed down, the reform of the language undermines the foundations of society.

In fact, is it easy: today you went to bed as a completely literate person, and you wake up ignorant. Everything you knew about spelling is outdated, and you do not have a new dictionary with “newly correct” words, and absolutely all the books in your house are full of mistakes, if you follow the new “Code of Russian Spelling Rules”.

"But when will it be, and will it be at all?" - the optimistic reader will ask. Alas, this is already there. A new dictionary (1999), published under the editorship of the Chairman of the Spelling Commission of the Russian Academy of Sciences V.V. Lopatin, confronts the reader with the fact: the new spelling has already become normative. However, this is so, the first step - just a little more than 150 words have changed their spelling. However, few people know about this, and this is also the merit of the commission.

Let us recall the not yet forgotten reform of 1964 with its<заецами>and eerie words like "mouse" and "socialism". According to Doctor of Philology, Chairman of the Spelling Commission of the Russian Academy of Sciences V.V. Lopatin, that reform did not take place only because it was “widely published in all details in a publicly available newspaper News "(From an interview with Lopatin" Nezavisimaya Gazeta ", 04/01/2000). The commission will not allow such a mistake anymore. Otherwise, she will not have the opportunity to publish millions of copies of new dictionaries, teaching aids, textbooks, she will not receive budget money for the implementation of this reform, and, finally, she simply will not leave a trace in the history of the development of Russian spelling.

Pavel Klubkov, Associate Professor of the Department of General Linguistics at the Faculty of Philology, St. “Dictionaries have changed and revised throughout their history. Changes are made to them every few years. Another thing is that journalists and publishers themselves rarely look into dictionaries. They looked there only when the Ministry of Education drew up a short list of recommended norms - and found something that was a big surprise for them. The word "marrying" is found in the spelling dictionary of the Institute of Linguistics of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR in 1956, edited by

A. Shapiro. In one of the latest editions of this dictionary, published in 1990, there are variants of "contract" and "contract". The word "coffee", masculine and neuter, appeared in dictionaries in the 1980s, during the Soviet era. The same applies to the variable stress in the word "contract". It was like this even in Avanesov's orthoepic dictionary. And in others too.

With some of the so-called new norms, there was a complete misunderstanding. For example, the word "yogurt" first penetrated into the Russian language with the stress on the last syllable; it was in this form that it was registered in all dictionaries since the 1930s. Moreover, in Ushakov's dictionary there are even two completely unusual variants - "yug-Urt" and "yag-Urt" - but the stress has never been variable. Then the product itself disappeared from sale, and we stopped talking about it. And again yoghurt appeared with a new accent - apparently, through the English language, with reaccentuation. Historically, this stress was French, but there was a conservation of the outgoing version: with such an emphasis (in the French manner), this word was used by L.N. Tolstoy. In short, new dictionaries tell us that the traditional stress in this word is on the last syllable, but since no one uses it now, you can “strike” the first syllable. And they were offended by this permission. People looked into dictionaries and said they had never heard of it. One way or another, all the words cited as innovations are not innovations. "

9. Expert opinion

This reform of the Russian language has caused a mixed reaction among philologists and linguists. So, some called it "tongue mocking." Others, as reported by Rusnord, expressed the opinion that “this is not a revolution in the language, but a process of its development. Acceptable norms have appeared, but no one has canceled the old ones, which are considered preferable. " In their opinion, it is impossible to stop changes in the Russian language, the norm will always change, but one should not get ahead of the norm.

Lyudmila Verbitskaya, President of St. Petersburg State University, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said: “There are cases when one option is standard, then a second appears, they live together for a while, and then one of them comes to the fore,” reports “ Russian newspaper". She also said that in the near future she would like to meet with Andrey Fursenko and ask him to hold an additional special meeting of the Russian language council to discuss the current situation.

Leonid Krysin, Deputy Director of the Russian Language Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the author of the dictionaries said: "Obviously, this list of four dictionaries is not enough." In his opinion, the very procedure for approving normative dictionaries is not entirely correct. “The publishing house submits an application, undergoes an examination, and dictionaries are approved or not. ... And the procedure is determined by the Ministry of Education. There is no prior notice, no clarification about this list, ”said Krysin.

Yulia Safonova, a representative of the portal Gramota.ru, expressed the opinion that the main problem lies in the disagreements between the recommended dictionaries themselves: “The recommendations of the spelling and spelling dictionaries do not coincide. Imagine, you wrote a dictation, guided by one dictionary, and the teacher gives you an assessment based on the norms of the dictionary of another. And this is just the clearest example, ”she said.

Rabit Batulla, Tatar writer and playwright, public figure, laureate of the State Prize named after I. Gabdulla Tukaya, People's Writer of the Republic of Tatarstan, has an extremely negative attitude to such norms. In his opinion, the Russian language is so completely clogged with foreign expressions. Foreign words are a real sabotage for any language - for Russian, for Tatar. And all this is laid on TV screens, pages of printed and electronic newspapers, radio. It often happens that people use a foreign word, although "in their pocket there is" the same meaning from the native language.

At one time, the French, Turks, Finns actively fought for the purity of their native language. For the use of a foreign word in a public place or in the press, if there was an analogue in the native language, fines were levied there. When Finland gained independence in 1917, they adopted the first law not on economics or politics, but on their native language, which was then littered with Swedish, Russian, and German expressions. At the state level, competitions were held there to invent new words according to the rules of the Finnish language, which were then immediately put into circulation through all channels. I have friends Tatars in Finland, so they say that the Finnish language is now the cleanest in the world. In Finnish, even the world-wide use of the word “telephone” has been replaced by a phrase that literally translates as “speak from afar”.

Of course, we need to work to cleanse the utterly dirty Russian language. And we need to start from school, university, media, parliament. Do you know that members of the Russian parliament use on average only about 300 words? If they issue such laws, then I am sure they did not read Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Pushkin.

Lilia Kovalenko, a teacher of Russian language and literature at gymnasium No. 7, took the changes in the Russian language hard and believes that such changes in the language are not needed.

So not all people speak literary speech, but here colloquial speech legitimately began to penetrate into the Russian language. A lot of confusion will also appear in connection with the exam. Dictionaries with changed words have not yet been released, but children need to learn, they need to prepare for the Unified State Exam. And how to do this when such changes have taken place in the language? It is not clear yet.

Lyaila Umarova, head of the Russian language teaching department at the TGSPU national school, has a negative attitude towards innovations. Now confusion will begin with the orthoepic norms in the language and in the exam. All test and measurement materials for the unified exam will need to be revised. Such changes will also affect the grammatical norm.

I don’t understand at all why the language of officials should be the standard for other people. If they are uncomfortable with pronouncing the word "agreement" correctly, then why should everyone speak the way officials like it? Why don't they get used to the correct primordial norms of the Russian language? All the teachers of the Russian language at TSPU were horrified by the adopted changes. On everything that I taught my students for 34 years, I now have to put an end to it. The hope remains that these norms will not take root in the language. For me, these changes will take effect when they are added to academic dictionaries.

The language needs to be changed, of course, but not so radically. Change must be approached wisely. For example, why not start by changing the spelling of adverbs? For example, you can write both "tomorrow" and "for tomorrow". Such changes will be more serious than the permutation of the stress in the word. We would erect a monument to the person who would be engaged in the unification of the spelling of adverbs.

Radik Farkhullin, editor-in-chief, host of the News of Tatarstan program:

I, as well as my colleagues in the editorial office, were not shocked by the order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, but the decision of federal officials nevertheless caused surprise. Yes, I understand, nobody and nothing stands still, everything is developing, including the Russian language. The proposed changes, in particular, have always been discussed by our editors before. We work with the language every day. Yes, the question of fluent stresses in the same word has always been relevant, this also applies to the coordination of cases and gender. We focus on the opinions of language scholars and teachers of the Russian language in higher education. They are strong enough in Kazan. Personally, I am calm about the decision of the officials of the Ministry of Education and Science. Of course, my hearing, and the hearing of our viewers, will cut all the proposed changes. And I'm not going to change anything in my speech, let alone a professional one. There are simply intelligent educated people whose base is classical Russian and there are those who speak the way they want to speak. Still, our society is multi-class.

It is difficult to say now whether the decision of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation will positively or negatively affect our society. Need time. And then, I suspect the decision of the Federal Ministry, whom it is trying to justify with such a decision - maybe illiterate officials? I think that a person who speaks correctly, beautifully, competently is treated with respect by the society. Such a person looks solid. And it will always be so.

Elena Shmeleva, a candidate of philological sciences, a researcher at the Institute of the Russian Language of the Russian Academy of Sciences, defended officials. "The dictionaries were not just invented from above, they are an answer to the demands of society, which always accuses the government of idleness," Shmeleva said. She also argues that "there can be no single norm, the norms have not been established even in spelling." Attacks on the so-called new words like "yoghurt" with an emphasis on "y" or the word "coffee", now used in the neuter gender, are not entirely justified. Even in the old Ushakov's dictionary there is the same neuter word “coffee”, and the word “yoghurt” originally appeared in our language with just such an accent, Shmeleva recalled. “Once this was the norm, it just changed, and now it is returning. And it returns to the dictionaries not on a par with the already established words and expressions, but with the marks "permissible" or "outdated." But no one looks at it, everyone has their own claims, ”said Shmeleva.

10. The future of the Russian language

In a quarter of a century, the Russian language will lose its status as a world language, since the number of its speakers will be approximately halved and the same number of people will speak it as at the beginning of the twentieth century. In 10 years, the Russian language will overtake French, Hindi, Arabic, and in another 15 years - Portuguese.

Such a bleak picture was painted by the rector of the Lomonosov Moscow State University, Viktor Sadovnichy. Speaking at the II Assembly of the World Forum "Intellectual Russia", the professor said that Russian now ranks fourth among the most common languages ​​in the world.

“Great and Mighty” overtakes English, which is spoken by about 500 million people and another 1 billion are fluent, Chinese (1.3 billion speakers) and Spanish (335 million native speakers and 25 million learners).

"According to forecasts, in 10 years the Russian language will overtake French, Hindi, Arabic, and in another 15 years - Portuguese, and Russian itself will lose its status as a world language." According to the professor, by 2025 the number of native speakers of the Russian language in the world will be halved and approximately the same number of people will speak it as at the beginning of the twentieth century.

According to the BBC, Russian is now the native language of 164 million people, of which 130 million live in Russia, 26 million in the former Soviet republics, and 7.5 million are emigrants. 114 million people speak Russian as a foreign or second language.

The main reason for the decline in the popularity of the Russian language was the collapse of the Soviet Union and, accordingly, the reduction in the teaching of the Russian language in schools of the former Soviet republics. For example, according to the Center for Demography and Human Ecology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, before the collapse of the USSR in 14 republics, except for the RSFSR, about 120 million people spoke Russian out of a population of 139 million. Now only 63 million inhabitants of the former republics speak fluent Russian. , another 40 million know the language at a basic level.

Since the collapse of the USSR, the number of Russian-language schools in the Baltic countries has decreased by more than 2 times - from 20 thousand in 1989 to 7.5 thousand in 2004. And in some countries there are no such schools at all. Nevertheless, according to a survey conducted in the EU, one fifth of the entire population of Latvia and Estonia considers Russian to be their native language, and Lithuanians call it the most important foreign language to learn.

The only former Soviet republic that has retained the status of the Russian language as the state language is Belarus. Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan declared Russian to be the language of official documents, but the majority of the population does not use Russian in daily communication.

In addition, in 1989, the compulsory study of the Russian language in schools was canceled in the countries of Eastern Europe.

Contributes to the negative trend and the reduction in the number of residents of Russia. According to the 2002 census, 145.2 million people lived in the Russian Federation - 1.8 million less than in 1989, when the previous census was conducted. Last year, according to Rosstat, Russia's population fell by another 680 thousand people.

All this forces experts to look for ways to solve the problem of the Russian language. “The Russian language,” said Viktor Sadovnichy, “needs special protection. This is the most important factor in the process of education and training of specialists, inseparable from the problem of forming a new public consciousness of young people as a generation without inferiority complexes and prejudices. " In his opinion, it is necessary to protect the Russian language from the influence of foreign languages ​​and not to accept changes in the norms of the native language, otherwise in 20 years the spelling rules will not be needed: as we hear, we write.

Nevertheless, despite the decline in the number of Russian speakers, interest in it is growing, especially in Europe. According to statistics, after the EU enlargement in 2004, Russian and Spanish are tied for the fourth place in terms of the number of people willing to study it as a foreign language. At the moment, this number is 6% of the total EU population.

The most popular language in the EU remains English - two-thirds of the population of the united Europe consider it absolutely necessary to study it. The number of people wishing to learn German is also growing, especially in the new EU countries.

But the popularity of French continues to fall, despite the active measures to popularize it. For example, France proposed to introduce French versions of computer terms, in particular, instead of "e-mail" it was suggested to write "courriel".

Perhaps the rector Sadovnichy slightly overestimated the role of the Russian language in the world. According to the American Summer Institute of Linguistics, almost 500 million people already speak Hindi, and some other studies give a slight advantage over Russian to Arabic.

According to Vladimir Zakharov, Deputy Director of the Russian Humanitarian Science Foundation, the rector of Moscow State University's assessment of the decline in the role of the Russian language in the world is fair. According to Zakharov, urgent measures are needed to protect the Russian language, such as the adoption of an appropriate state program.

“If 15 years ago, more than six spelling mistakes in entrance exams were made only by immigrants from other republics, now many graduates of Russian schools make mistakes, too,” Zakharov notes.

Conclusion

I completed a term paper on the topic: "Changes in the norms of the Russian language." My work turned out to be very interesting and informative. During the project, I identified the reasons for the changes in the norms of the Russian language, examined the reforms of the Russian language at the turn of the 20th century, noted the historical changes in the composition of the word, observed the development of the vocabulary of the Russian language, clarified the spelling innovations of the 20th century, and also talked about the change in the norms of the Russian language from 1 September 2009 and found out the public opinion on the changes in the norms.

Changes to the rules of the Russian language are carried out in order to facilitate the study and (or) use of the language by its native speakers. Usually, language reforms (any) are carried out when the colloquial norms deviate too far from the spelling norms. On the other side ?, no one defines the criteria for discrepancy, therefore, in the opinion of an outside observer, the reforms are carried out according to the principle “it is inconvenient for us to use, therefore we are reforming”.

The Russian language has undergone reforms throughout history many times, while the reforms themselves have always fallen on critical periods in the life of the Russian people. Only in the twentieth century there were several cardinal changes, of which the most cardinal took place in a glorious revolutionary time (although it was prepared by the Slavists of the Russian Empire). The next hit in the mid-1950s. There was light controversy surrounding the supposedly imminent further changes in the 60s and 70s.

As a result of these reforms, there was a transition from alphabet to alphabet, spelling rules were simplified, letters were excluded? (yat),? (fit), I ("and decimal"), the hard sign (b) at the end of words and parts of compound words, etc. was also excluded.

The vocabulary of the Russian language did not stand still either. Its composition was significantly replenished with neologisms, both in the twentieth century and in the 21st.

However, the reform of the Russian language does not end there. On September 1, new norms of the literary Russian language came into force. Now it is impossible to blame those who sign not an agreement, but an agreement and drink STRONG coffee or have breakfast with yogurt for illiteracy. From now on, speaking like this is the norm, enshrined in reference dictionaries:

) Bookchina B.Z., Sazonova I.K., Cheltsova L.K. Spelling dictionary of the Russian language. - M .: "AST-PRESS", 2008. - 1 288 p .;

) A.A. Zaliznyak Grammatical Dictionary of the Russian Language: Inflection. - M .: "AST-PRESS", 2008. - 794 p .;

) Reznichenko I.L. Dictionary of stresses of the Russian language. - M .: "AST-PRESS", 2008. - 943 p .;

) A large phraseological dictionary of the Russian language. Meaning. Use. Cultural commentary / Otv. ed. V.N. Telia. - M .: "AST-PRESS", 2008. - 782 p.

The innovations caused a flurry of newspaper publications and discussions on television and in the Internet communities. Assessing the current situation, optimists say that panic is premature, the current list is not final and that the department promises to supplement it with reference dictionaries. Pessimists are convinced that the four dictionaries are henceforth the last resort in the event of controversial issues of spelling and spelling: "The order of the Minister of Education gives reason to believe that these are official dictionaries, normative documents to the law on Russian as the state language of the Russian Federation." The corresponding dictionary entries in the Internet reference books should be changed in the near future.

And yet, as a consolation to those for whom exemplary speech will never be the subject of compromise, we can say that the new rules so far exist only in the form of recommendations. The path of a linguistic norm from optional (recommendatory) to imperative (the only possible) is long and sometimes takes more than one decade. Old language norms have been preserved in specialized dictionaries and reference books for radio and television workers and, therefore, continue to remain reference.

But the failure to accept the reform does not mean that it will not spread in the future. Because each reform was painful for society, but was implemented.

Thus, the hypothesis presented at the beginning was fully confirmed. Indeed, before the 1917 revolution, the norms of the Russian language are very different from those of 1956. By this time, completely different rules were formed: the alphabet was replaced by the alphabet, new spelling rules appeared, etc.

At the end of the work, I will summarize: the goal is to identify how changes in the norms of the Russian language occur and what consequences they have, was achieved, and the project's tasks were completed.

Bibliography

1. Babaytseva V.V., Chesnokova L.D. Russian language: Theory: Textbook. For 5-9 cl.

Barkhin K., Kostenko G. and Ustinova M. Russian language in the Soviet school. 1930 Spelling reform project

Groth J.K. Russian spelling. 11th ed., St. Petersburg, 1894

Kulman "Methodology of the Russian language", published by Y. Bashmakov 1912

V.V. Lopatin "Spelling Dictionary of the Russian Academy of Sciences"

Skoblikova E.S. "On the history of the development of Russian spelling"

Ushakov D.N. "Spelling Dictionary" 1934

Shapiro A. "Spelling Dictionary of the Institute of Linguistics of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR" 1956

Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron, 1890-1907

Www / gramota.ru

Tutoring

Need help exploring a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Send a request with the indication of the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

In the cultural center "Onezhsky" in the framework of the joint project of the site "Theory and Practice" and the Department of Culture of the city of Moscow "City Lecture Hall", a lecture was held by the editor-in-chief of the portal "Gramota.ru", candidate of philological sciences Vladimir Pakhomov. He told how the spelling changed in the history of the Russian language, why the use of the words "rings" with an accent in the first syllable and "coffee" in the neuter gender is not an indicator of illiteracy, and why it is pointless to prohibit foreign words. "Lenta.ru" publishes the main theses of his speech.

How we hear and what we write

In the minds of most people, two different concepts are very often confused: language and spelling (spelling). Therefore, the Russian language is often perceived simply as a set of rules, sometime invented by someone and randomly systematized in textbooks and reference books. Many sincerely believe that if a person has learned the rules, it means that he knows his native language.

In fact, the spelling rules are not the language itself, but its shell. They can be compared to the wrapper in which the chocolate candy is wrapped (in this case, it is like a tongue). And in school, it is the spelling rules that are mainly studied, not the language. Writing competently does not mean that you are fluent in Russian. Doctor of Philology Igor Miloslavsky rightly notes that "the level of knowledge of the native literary language is determined by a person's ability to accurately and fully understand everything that he reads or hears, as well as his ability to express absolutely clearly his own thoughts and feelings, depending on the conditions and recipient of communication." ... Let me emphasize: language and spelling are completely different things.

There is nothing specially invented in the spelling rules. Our spelling is slender and logical. 96 percent of the spellings of Russian words are based on a single principle - the main principle of Russian spelling. This is a morphological principle, the essence of which is that each morpheme (prefix, root, suffix, ending) is spelled the same, despite the fact that it can be pronounced differently in different words. For example, we say do [n] and do [b] s, but we write this root the same way: oak.

How sailors changed the Russian alphabet

In the history of the Russian language, there were only two reforms of graphics and spelling. The first was carried out by Peter I in 1708-1710. To a greater extent, it concerned graphics: the writing of uppercase (large) and lowercase (small) letters was legalized, unnecessary letters were removed from the Russian alphabet and the writing of the rest was simplified. The second took place in 1917-1918. This was already a reform of both graphics and spelling. In the course of it, the letters Ѣ (yat), Ѳ (fit), I ("And decimal"), a solid sign (b) at the end of words were removed. In addition, some spelling rules have been changed. For example, in the genitive and accusative cases of adjectives and participles, the endings -ago, -iago were replaced by -go, -his (for example, old - old), in the nominative and accusative plurals of the feminine and neuter genders -у, -ія - by - s, s (old - old).

By the way, the initiators of this reform were not the Bolsheviks at all. Changes in Russian spelling have been brewing for a long time, preparation began at the end of the 19th century. The spelling commission at the Imperial Academy of Sciences began work in 1904, and the first draft was presented in 1912. Some of the scientists' proposals were very radical: for example, at the end of words it was proposed to remove not only the hard sign (b), but also the soft one (b). If this proposal were accepted (later the linguists refused it), then we would now write not “night”, but “night”.

In May 1917, the reform project was approved by the Provisional Government. It was assumed that the transition to the new spelling will take place gradually, for some time both the old spelling and the new will be considered correct. But the Bolsheviks who seized power approached this issue in their characteristic manner. New rules were introduced immediately, and detachments of revolutionary sailors confiscated "canceled" letters from printing houses. This led to an incident: the solid character (b) was also taken away, despite the fact that its spelling as a separating character within words was retained. Therefore, typesetters had to use an apostrophe ('), so spellings like con'zd arose.

The adoption in 1956 of the still officially valid Russian spelling rules was not a spelling reform: there were not many changes in the text. For example, now it was necessary to write the words "shell", "barber", "scurvy", "mat" with the letter "and" instead of "s", "apparently", "still" through a hyphen instead of the previously adopted merged spelling , the spellings "damn", "go", "come" were approved - instead of "devil", "go", "come".

Hare and parachute

The next major reform of spelling in the Russian language was planned for 1964. Many linguists were aware of the incompleteness and some inconsistency of the 1956 rules, which were replete with a huge number of exceptions. The idea was not to simplify the Russian spelling, but to make it even slimmer, more systematic and more logical, to make it easier to learn at school. This was important both for teachers, who even in the 1960s often complained about the low literacy of schoolchildren and the lack of hours for studying the Russian language, and for the state. Why, for example, was it suggested to write "hare"? Look, we write "fighter" - "fighter", "fighter". The vowel also disappears in the controversial word: "hare", "hare", so why not write "hare" by analogy with "fighter"? In other words, it was not about simplification for the sake of simplification, but about the elimination of unjustified exceptions. Unfortunately, after the removal of Khrushchev, the new leaders of the country, who were "allergic" to the ideas of their predecessor, rolled back the already prepared reform.

The need to streamline the rules of Russian spelling was again discussed in the late 1990s. The country changed, the time changed, and many of the 1956 rules began to look not only outdated, but also downright ridiculous. For example, in the Soviet years, in accordance with ideological guidelines, the army of the USSR had to be called exclusively the Armed Forces. At the same time, when writing the names of the armies of the socialist countries, only the first word was written with a capital letter - the Armed Forces, and the armies of the capitalist states, NATO countries could only be called armed forces.

In addition, many new words have appeared, their first parts: media, internet, web, business. Therefore, the Spelling Commission of the Russian Academy of Sciences began work on a new edition of the spelling rules, with examples relevant to modern written speech. Linguists discussed changes in the spelling of individual words (many people remember the discussion about the words "parachute", "brochure", "jury", which were suggested to be written with "y", later the linguists abandoned this idea). Alas, the work of linguists was not fully conscientiously covered in the media, journalists talked about the allegedly impending "language reform", and so on. As a result, the society reacted extremely negatively to the work of the Spelling Commission, therefore the draft of a new edition of the Russian spelling rules prepared by it was not approved and the 1956 code remains generally binding to this day.

However, the work of the Spelling Commission was not in vain, its result was a complete academic reference book "Rules of Russian spelling and punctuation", published in 2006, as well as the academic "Russian spelling dictionary" edited by Doctor of Philology Vladimir Lopatin - the most complete spelling dictionary of the modern Russian language ... There are few changes compared to the 1956 rules. For example, the verbal adjective "read", which used to be an exception and was written with two letters "n", is now summed up under the general rule and is written with one "n", while the participle - with two (a few minutes and money counted by an accountant, Wed: fried potatoes and fried potatoes in a pan).

Is it ringing or ringing?

We talked about how often spelling changes. How often does the Russian language change? Constantly, because the Russian language is a living language, and only dead languages ​​do not change. Changes in the language are a normal process, which should not be feared and considered a degradation, destruction of the language.

The place of stress in words changes. Let's take the most famous example with the verb "call", anyway, no conversation about the language can do without it. Some native speakers defiantly portray excruciating suffering when they hear the stress rings (while they themselves make similar spelling mistakes without noticing it at all, for example, they say drills instead of normative drills), and journalists use their favorite stamp “litmus test of illiteracy” in relation to stress rings. Meanwhile, linguists are aware of the presence in the language of such a phenomenon as shifting the stress of verbs to -it in personal forms from the ending to the root (this process began at the end of the 18th century). Some verbs have already gone this way. For example, once they said: loads, warts, katITs, smokes, pays. Now we say: grUzit, varit, katit, kurit, pay.

Photo: Alexander Polyakov / RIA Novosti

Knowledge of this tendency gave the authors of the "Great Orthoepic Dictionary of the Russian Language", published in 2012, grounds to fix the option inclYuchit (previously prohibited) as acceptable (with a strict literary norm it will includeIt). There is no doubt that this option, which has already passed the way from forbidden to permissible, will continue to move towards the only possible and sooner or later will displace the old stress include

The same process happens with the verb "call." He, too, would have followed this path, but we - native speakers - will not let him in. The educated part of society has a sharply negative attitude to the option rings, and that is why it has not yet been included in the dictionaries as acceptable (although back in the 1970s, linguists wrote that the prohibition of stress rings is clearly artificial). Now, in 2015, it only calls normatively. But knowledge of the orthoepic law, which is mentioned above, gives grounds to assert that this will not always be so and the stress rings, most likely, sooner or later it will become the only correct one. Not because “linguists will follow the lead of illiterate people,” but because such are the laws of language.

In the process of language evolution, the lexical meanings of some words often change. Korney Chukovsky in his book "Alive as Life" gives an interesting example. The famous Russian lawyer A.F. Horses in the last years of his life (and he died already under Soviet rule in 1927) was very indignant when those around him used the word "necessarily" in a new meaning "certainly", although before the revolution it meant only "kindly", "obligingly."

Why are languages ​​being simplified?

The language changes at a grammatical level. It is known that in the Old Russian language there were six types of declension of nouns, and in modern Russian there are three. There were three numbers (singular, dual and plural), only two (singular and plural) remained.

And here it is worth mentioning another interesting pattern. We know that evolution is a path from simple to complex. But in the language, the opposite is true. The evolution of a language is a path from complex forms to simpler ones. The grammar of modern Russian is simpler than that of Old Russian; modern English is simpler than Old English; modern Greek is simpler than ancient Greek. Why it happens?

I have already said that in the Old Russian language there were three numbers: a single, dual (when it was only about two objects) and a plural, that is, in the minds of our ancestors, there could be one, two, or many objects. Now in Russian there is only singular or plural, that is, there can be one object or several. This is a higher level of abstraction. On the one hand, there are fewer grammatical forms and some simplification has taken place. On the other hand, the category of number with the emergence of the distinction "one - many" has become more harmonious, logical and clear. Therefore, these processes are not only not a sign of language degradation, but, on the contrary, testify to its improvement and development.

From masculine to neuter

Many people misunderstand the work of linguists. Some believe that they are inventing the rules of the Russian language and forcing society to live by them. For example, everyone says "to kill a spider with a slipper", and the linguist claims that it is impossible to say that, because the word "slipper" is feminine (it would be correct: "to kill a spider with a slipper"). Some believe that linguists are simplifying the norm for the sake of less educated people and include in their dictionaries illiterate variants like coffee in the neuter gender.

In fact, linguists do not come up with linguistic norms, they fix them. They observe the language and write down the conclusions in dictionaries and encyclopedias. Scientists should do this regardless of whether they like this or that option or not. But at the same time, they look to see if the variant meets the laws of the language. Depending on this, the option is marked as prohibited or allowed.

Why is the word "coffee" very often used in the neuter gender? Is it only from illiteracy? Not at all. The fact is that the masculine gender of the word "coffee" resists the very system of the language. This word is borrowed, inanimate, common noun, non-declining and ending in a vowel. In the overwhelming majority, such words in Russian belong to the neuter gender. "Coffee" got into the exception, because they were once in the language of the form "coffee", "coffee" - masculine, they bowed like "tea": drink tea, drink coffee. And now the masculine gender of the word "coffee" is a monument to long-dead forms, while the laws of a living language draw it into the neuter gender.

And these laws are very strong. Even the words that resist them still give up over time. For example, when the metro opened in Moscow in 1935, the media wrote: the metro is very convenient for passengers. The newspaper "Soviet Metro" was published, and Utesov sang: "But the metro flashed with oak handrails, at once he bewitched all the riders." The word "metro" was masculine (because "metro" was masculine), but gradually it "left" in the neuter gender. Consequently, the fact that "coffee" becomes a neuter word does not come from the illiteracy of people, but because such are the laws of language development.

Who gets in the way of foreign words?

Also, any conversation about the Russian language is not complete without a discussion of the borrowing of words. We often hear that the Russian language is clogged with foreign words and that we urgently need to get rid of borrowings, that if we do not take measures and stop the flow of borrowings, we will all soon speak a mixture of English and Nizhny Novgorod. And these myths are passed down from generation to generation.

Photo: Mary Evans Picture Library / Global Look

It is very easy to prove that the Russian language is inconceivable without borrowed words. It is enough to give examples of words that seem to us primordially Russian, but in fact are not. So, even in the Old Russian language from the Scandinavian languages ​​came the words "shark", "whip", "herring", "sneak", from the Turkic - "money", "pencil", "robe", from Greek - "letter", " bed "," sail "," notebook ". Even the word "bread" is very likely a borrowing: scholars assume that its source is the Gothic language.

In different eras, borrowings from one language usually predominated in the Russian language. When, during the time of Peter I, Russia was building a fleet in order to "cut a window to Europe", a lot of words related to maritime affairs came to us, with most of them from the Dutch language (shipyard, harbor, compass, cruiser, sailor), because the Dutch at that time were considered the best ship craftsmen and many of them worked in Russian shipyards. In the 18th-19th centuries, the Russian language was enriched with the names of dishes, clothes, jewelry, furnishings that came from the French language: soup, broth, champignon, cutlet, marmalade, vest, coat, wardrobe, bracelet, brooch. In recent decades, words in the Russian language come mainly from the English language and they are associated with modern technical devices and information technologies (computer, laptop, smartphone, online, website).

What has been said does not mean that the Russian language is so poor or greedy: it only accepts and does not give anything away. Not at all. Russian also shares its words with other languages, but exports often go not to the West, but to the East. If we compare the Russian language and the Kazakh language, for example, we will see that there are a lot of borrowings from the Russian language in the Kazakh language. In addition, the Russian language is a mediator for so many words coming from West to East and from East to West. The same role was played in the 17th-19th centuries by the Polish language, through which a lot of words came to Russian (thanks to the Poles we say “Paris”, not “Pari”, “revolution”, not “revolusion”).

If we prohibit foreign words, then we will simply stop the development of the language. And then there is a threat that we will start speaking in another language (for example, in the same English), because the Russian language in this case will not allow us to express thoughts in full and in detail. In other words, the ban on the use of foreign words leads not to the preservation, but to the destruction of the language.

Serving society as a means of communication, language is constantly undergoing changes, more and more accumulating its resources to adequately express the meaning of the changes taking place in society. For a living language, this process is natural and logical. However, the degree of intensity of this process can be different. And there is an objective reason for this: the society itself - the bearer and creator of the language - experiences different periods of its existence in different ways. During periods of sharp breakdown of established stereotypes, the processes of linguistic transformations also intensify. This was the case at the beginning of the 20th century, when the economic, political and social structure of Russian society changed dramatically. Under the influence of these changes, the psychological type of the representative of the new society also changes, albeit more slowly, which also acquires the character of an objective factor influencing the processes in the language.

The modern era has actualized many processes in the language, which in other conditions could be less noticeable, more smoothed. A social explosion does not make a revolution in the language as such, but actively influences the speech practice of a contemporary, revealing linguistic possibilities, bringing them to the surface. Under the influence of an external social factor, the internal resources of the language are set in motion, accumulated by intrasystemic relations, which were previously not in demand for various reasons, including, again, for socio-political reasons. So, for example, semantic and semantic-stylistic transformations were found in many lexical layers of the Russian language, in grammatical forms, etc. Rosenthal D.E., Golub I.B., Telenkova M.A. "Modern Russian language". - M .: Ayris-press, 2002., p. 38.

In general, linguistic changes are carried out with the interaction of external and internal causes. Moreover, the basis for changes is laid in the language itself, where internal laws operate, the reason for which, their driving force, lies in the systemic nature of the language. But a kind of stimulant (or, conversely, "extinguisher") of these changes is an external factor - processes in the life of society. Language and society, as a language user, are inextricably linked, but at the same time they have their own, separate laws of life support.

In my opinion, one of the reasons for the official recognition of language changes in our country is the continuing assimilation of migrants in the capital. Last year, the transition to the unified state exams was completed. It has been repeatedly said that the Unified State Exam will lead to an increase in the availability of education in the capital's universities for residents of other regions, and the forecasts were fully confirmed. This means that the line between the capital and the province will continue to blur, and the most educated people from the regions will study in the capital.

There is a legalization of a large number of nonresident ways of pronunciation, they actually acquire a higher status. Hence, "coffee" in the neuter genus, and "curd" with an emphasis on the last syllable, and the admissibility of the use "on Wednesdays." Active discussions were held about how to legitimize the "agreement", "chauffeur". If the "agreement" was legalized, then, perhaps, the "chauffeur" will also be legalized over time.

However, language changes are taking place not only in our country, but also in Europe. There is a controversy about what is happening with the German and English languages. Confusion in cases, violation of conjugations, incorrect formulation of prepositions - all these tendencies, characteristic of the Russian language, are observed, for example, in German. There is a whole bunch of reasons: both the impact of English, and "writing" through chats and blogs with a mixture of written and oral style, and the active inclusion of regional components, and talk shows with their easy spoken language. In addition, classical literature has greatly lost its authority not only in Russia.

• In this section, you will learn about the main trends in the development of Russian speech and the changes that affect the language system.
• You will learn to be critical of unjustified language innovations.
• You will master the criteria for an objective assessment of linguistic innovations, improve your skills in working with dictionaries of new words and meanings.

Arguing about the current state of the Russian language, we are primarily talking about the state of people who speak it, about the transformations that occur in the speech behavior (and therefore in the linguistic consciousness) of native speakers. The decline in public interest in the problems of speech culture in the last decade has led to a drop in the level of speech culture in society. This created the preconditions for infiltration of substandard options into widespread public speech practice. It makes us think that thieves' jargon most actively influences the literary language: chaos, reel, disassembly, order, godfather, grandmother, piece, lemon, common fund- these and other words no longer belong to the speech of only representatives of criminal circles. As Academician V. G. Kostomarov notes, "non-elite groups find themselves at the top, imposing their speech skills, in particular, jargon and swearing, on the entire society."

Another tendency that manifests itself in modern speech can be considered pan-European, or even global. It lies in a particularly wide the impact of American English into other languages ​​of the world.

Prominent lexicologist and lexicographer F.P. Filin in the late 1970s. wrote "about the aggression of the American version of the English language" and expressed the opinion that "over time, the pressure of Americanisms will weaken and borrowings from the English language will enter the normal course of development of equal international languages, each of which will contribute to the international language piggy bank." If the process of the influence of American English on the Russian language at that time could be compared with aggression, then the current situation is just right to compare with an invasion.

However, this phenomenon has objective reasons. Of course, there can be no equality in the degree of contribution to the "international language piggy bank". The role of the English language in the modern world is naturally determined by the degree of its prevalence in various countries, and, mainly, by the nature of the civilization to which the English language belongs. Linguistic expansion is a consequence of scientific, technical, cultural, political and even military expansion.

The degree of influence of the English language on modern languages, including Russian, is determined by the degree of influence of the modern English-speaking (primarily American) civilization on the rest of the world. You can, of course, pick up Russian matches for words printer, scanner, display, server ... But, perhaps, common sense allows us to be content with the fact that, in the jargon of programmers, these words are gradually acquiring a Russian look and at least change in case.

The problem outlined by F.P. Filin still exists and has become extremely acute in recent years. Along with the absolutely necessary, inevitable borrowings, a lot of unnecessary, incomprehensible words have appeared. It often seems that some people who have learned English simply did not bother to translate English into Russian so that it could be understood by others. Here is an advertisement for a man's lotion: "New Danim Afte Shaf". There is only one Russian word in this phrase, although it is assumed that the advertisement is in Russian. The situation is aggravated by the fact that not only individual words, but also whole phrases are used as borrowings: "In new razors, the lift and cut principle is supplemented with a reflex action system"; "Pampers baby dry".

You can, of course, see in this an element of fashion, a kind of verbal panache: Davidoff is the most exclusive cigarette in the world; sponsor(and more recently also co-sponsor, co-production, sponsor), dealers and distributors, service (!) service, teenager, inauguration ... It seems that such words, which are hardly mastered in the Russian language in graphic and sound terms, seem to some people much more attractive than their Russian counterparts.

V.G. Kostomarov noted that the enthusiasm for borrowing belongs not only to vocabulary, but, for example, syntax (cf. Pushkin Institute, Gorbachev Foid, Bekhterev Center, top model, press release, office manager), pronunciation (preservation of the peculiarities of English pronunciation in borrowed words), spelling and graphics (the influence of the spelling and graphic practice of American advertising is obvious: RosTV, UniRem, AvtoVAZbank, GLORIAbank, incoming and outgoing calls(advertisement for the Hot Jeans tariff).

There are uses that were completely impossible earlier in the literary language, coming from the jargon of "golden youth", where, on the one hand, colloquial vernacular elements and the corresponding imagery are unmotivated, and on the other - borrowings used only for the sake of panache, for example:

We decided to find out which apartments in the houses of the economy, middle and elite class are sold the most intensively and, therefore, have an added value to the money invested in them, and which ones are delayed in the price lists until the completion of construction.

Real estate market news. 2005. No. 16

Essentially a monster word middle class is a transliteration of an English expression middle class and in terms of meaning is no different from the corresponding Russian expression average class (economy and elite - the same). However, the authors increasingly do not bother themselves with transliteration:

Luc Besson is very principled in his works: dynamics and extreme sports have always been the main components of his work (it remains only to add love story).

Adrenalin. 2002. No. 12

Behind such "dashing" use of words, in addition to disrespect for the reader who does not know English, often hides low education, and elementary illiteracy. For example, a misunderstanding of the lexical meaning of borrowings leads to numerous speech errors (remember the cartoon "Looking for Consensus" in Chapter 1), verbosity, tautology (market marketing). Sometimes an initially tautological combination develops its meaning: service maintenance was born as a subconscious opposition of low-quality domestic service and wonderful foreign service, and now essentially stands for after-sales service. And if an English-speaking "specialist" does not know how to handle foreign language borrowings in general, errors of the following kind are inevitable: when transferring non-English language borrowings in Cyrillic, their sound is distorted - the French cognac Remi Martin turns into Remy Martin, the perfume Miroir is called Mirror, and the fashion designers Hubert Givenchy and Guy Laroche became Hubert Givenchy and Guy Laroche.

Mass media have a unique opportunity to influence the speech life of society. The mass character, accessibility, regularity, constancy and variety of television and radio broadcasts create favorable conditions for the widespread introduction of speech patterns into the minds of listeners. Despite the known regularity of certain violations of the norms of the literary language in the mass media (for example, scam instead of scam, incident, refusal of declination of quantitative numbers, etc.), one cannot talk about specific mistakes in the speech of workers of the mass media, since the speech of journalists reflects the speech practice of society as a whole. The negative effect is determined precisely by the massiveness and regularity of the reproduction of abnormal uses in newspapers, on television and radio.

Due to the relatively recent appearance and widespread distribution of advertising due to the insufficiently strict attitude of its authors to the observance of the norms of the literary language, a rather difficult situation is created in which sometimes a fleeting violation of the norm, which is insignificant for ordinary speech, or a more gross error, begin to repeat itself almost countless times during the day. The danger of such facts lies not only in the fact that deliberately erroneous use is being replicated - it is the repeated use that leads to the fact that even a solid knowledge of certain norms can be supplanted at the subconscious level by a repeated mistake many times, such as: "Our batteries work up to 10 times longer "(instead of ten times longer) or the name of the sunflower oil "Golden Seed", instead of the correct "Golden seed"In addition, grammatical and stylistic mistakes in advertising texts can damage the reputation of the advertised product or, even worse, the reputation of the company.

The approach to describing goods and products for catalogs is also problematic. What is obvious to the manufacturer and the seller is not always clear to the buyer. Descriptions in catalogs intended for the consumer often contain complex technical information and are silent about what seems obvious to a specialist, but an ordinary consumer is completely unknown. Such texts require a "translation" from a professional language into a language accessible to the most uninitiated client. Thus, the quality of the advertising language is important for both the consumer and the customer.

The decline in the prestige of high speech culture is accompanied by significant a decrease in the general level of knowledge of the norms of the literary language. What was previously considered necessary to hide, today is boldly demonstrated to the general public. This situation is not new, moreover, it is so typical for certain eras that one can refer to the opinion of two thousand years ago, belonging to the Roman philosopher Seneca: “Just as the splendor of feasts and clothing is a sign of a disease that has swept the state, so is the freedom of speech, if it occurs often, testifies to the fall of the souls from which the words emanate. And one should not be surprised if the spoilage of speech is favorably perceived not only by the dirtier listeners, but also by the well-dressed crowd: after all, only their togas differ, not their opinions. "

The examples considered are more related to the field use, speech practice of society and individuals. However, you can point to deeper processes, affecting the language system.

The most significant changes that occur in the style system of the literary language. In general terms, they can be characterized as a process of interaction and interpenetration of styles, which was already discussed above. The main direction of this process is set by the active influence of the colloquial style on the books, mainly on the journalistic, but to some extent also on the scientific style. Newspaper texts like this no longer surprise anyone:

The adventure, apparently, was to the pop girl's taste, and now, on the set of her new video ... she has deliberately hit the extreme and, without steaming understudies, initially conceived to do all the puzzling stunts herself ... And according to this vidon (of the singer. - Auth.) no one would have guessed that the pop starlet was not portraying some crazy tomboy, but getting used to the role of a glamorous actress from the 60s of the last century.

At the same time, there is no certainty that newspaper readers know exactly who she is. starlet and what actress can be called glamorous.

As V.G. Kostomarov notes, “the style of today's communication is characterized by the blurring of the boundaries between the communicative spheres, the leveling of types of speech, including the official one. cited links in the current flow of information, requiring constant replenishment of "background knowledge", without which it is difficult to understand it even after a break of several days. " Wed examples he cites: do not care, praetoria - construction, gaidaronomics, volcherisation, privatization, Chubaiser, Chumeiko, Yeltsinism, TelAvision.

The depth of these processes can be demonstrated by an example from an article devoted to the problems of modern diplomacy: "Europe, in response, is fascinated by the Russian passes, bastard from the absurdity of what is happening" (Izvestia. 1997, March 21). A high degree of ease and linguistic freedom is demonstrated by the publication, rightly considered respectable and liberal. The overall effect is enhanced by the fact that literally on the same page we read: "The Finnish capital is no stranger to summits, including the American-Russian (Soviet) ones ... Clinton showed miracles of diplomatic balancing act so as not to disavow Madeleine's sister [M. Albright, US Secretary - Auth.) and at the same time not to antagonize “brother Boris” [B. N. Yeltsin. - Auth.] ". An incredible for the previous era in the development of the Russian language, a combination of" incompatible ": jargon, familiar elements, familiar nomination and word formation. A similar process encompassed the entire stylistic system of the Russian language. The free use of the colloquial style in public text demonstrates the new possibilities of the language:

Contacts with the Chinese party of power - the CPC - were established by the secretary of the General Council of United Russia V. Bogomolov. As he confessed to the "AiF" correspondent, his Chinese comrades asked him about the experience of building "controlled democracy." The Russians, however, seemed close to the Chinese model of the vertical of power. Although the local governors are elected by the people, the candidacy is still approved by the center. Almost as it will be with us.

Arguments and Facts. 2004, no. 42 (1251)

Vocabulary changes, in general, fit into traditional schemes. In connection with the tendencies noted above, external borrowings (mainly Americanisms) are actively penetrating into the Russian language: image, spam, rating, clip, slogan, speaker, sponsor, creative, newsmaker. Internal borrowing is associated with the impact not of territorial dialects, as before, but mainly of social ones: order, chaos, buzz and others. It is no coincidence that in 1999 the book "Words We Met" was published with a notable subtitle "Dictionary of Common Jargon" (under the editorship of E. A. Zemskaya, R. I. Rozina and O. P. Ermakova).

Lexicological works indicate such a feature in the development of the Russian language as revitalizing previously obsolete words, changing their estimated color; lord, entrepreneur, faction, opposition, auction, corporation, including a large group of Old Slavicisms; patriarch, repentance, righteous, orthodoxy, providence, prophet and others Yu. N. Karaulov especially notes the activation of a large layer of half-forgotten Russian and Old Church Slavonic vocabulary associated with Orthodoxy (repentance, sincerity, generosity, mercy, meekness, pity, patience, humility).

Rethinking, shifts in the semantics of words, the expansion of the semantic volume of words, the creation of new meanings are directly related to the peculiarities of social life: apparatus, businessman, stagnation, perestroika, shuttle. The last two groups of vocabulary were first described in detail in the Dictionary of Perestroika (Maksimov V. I. [et al.] St. Petersburg, 1992), and then entered various dictionaries.

The main feature of almost all the processes occurring in the field of vocabulary is their swiftness, which can be observed in the example of a change in the composition of active and passive vocabulary, a rapid transition from one group to another, as happened with words glasnost, perestroika and others, first recorded back in the 19th century. and received a new life after almost 150 years.

Changes at other levels of the Russian language system are not defined with sufficient clarity and unambiguity. Specialists in the modern Russian language rather highlight individual strokes, tendencies of change. Yu. N. Karaulov, for example, speaks of the wide distribution of subjectless turns and passive formations, nominalized constructions, forms of an imperfect type. A. V. Bondarko notes the decreasing activity of the use of the temporal forms of the Russian verb (for example, the imperfect past tense when denoting repetitive and ordinary actions). V.G. Kostomarov points out that the use in the plural of words that were previously used only in the singular (such as cream, oil), the number of non-declining nouns is growing ( barista, franchisee). Word formation is characterized by an appeal to unproductive or obviously non-literary word-formation models: drugs, limit, coolness; porn, chernukha, gangbang. There was also a clear tendency towards the loss of the declination of cardinal numbers. It seems that for some native speakers of the Russian language, the whole paradigm boils down to two forms: the nominative case and some other indirect, more often genitive, forms of which replace the positions of all other cases. Indeed, the somewhat complex and archaic declension system of Russian numerals seems to be replaced by one or two forms by the "explicit order". The instrumental case suffers especially.

Nevertheless, all these observations relate to a greater extent to speech manifestations. In addition, the time period of observations is not so long that it was possible to draw a conclusion about certain changes in the system of the Russian language. Assessing the state of such language subsystems as morphological, syntactic, phonetic, one should speak more about trends than about specific, clearly marked changes. It can be seen from the examples given that the language system does not remain unchanged, motionless, however, different levels of the language are susceptible to changes to varying degrees. The most active shifts occur in the lexical composition, stylistic differentiation of the language. To a lesser extent, the morphological, syntactic systems are subject to changes. The phonetic system of the language is even more conservative - with the exception of intonation.