Saving language resources. And the means that are required to ensure the needs of thinking and mutual understanding in communication are the economy of linguistic means. Means of language economy at the lexical level

LAWS OF LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT Valgina N. S. Active processes in the Russian language. M.: Logos, 2001. Ch. 3

External factors of language changes 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) change in the circle of native speakers, the spread of education, territorial movements of the masses, the creation of a new statehood, the development of science, technology, international contacts, etc., active factor actions of the media (print, radio, television), 8) the factor of socio-psychological restructuring of the individual in the conditions of the new statehood and, accordingly, the degree of adaptation to new conditions.

Internal laws of language development 1. THE LAW OF SYSTEM (a global law, which is at the same time a property and quality of language); 2. THE LAW OF TRADITION, which usually restrains new processes; 3. LAW OF ANALOGY (stimulant for undermining traditionality); 4. THE LAW OF ECONOMY (the law of “least effort”), especially actively focused on accelerating the pace of social life; 5. LAWS OF ANTINOMY (laws of contradictions) - “initiators” of the struggle of opposites inherent in the language system itself: 1) antinomy of speaker and listener; 2) the antinomy of usage and the capabilities of the language system; 3) antinomy of code and text; 4) antinomy due to the asymmetry of the linguistic sign; 5) the antinomy of two functions of language - informational and expressive, 6) the antinomy of two forms of language - written and oral.

The law of consistency manifests itself at different language levels, both within each level and in their interaction with each other. Most clearly: 1) morphological, 2) lexical, 3) syntactic

Systematic law 1. The reduction in the number of cases in the Russian language (6 out of 9) leads to an increase in analytical features in the syntactic structure of the language: the function of the case form began to be determined by the position of the word in the sentence and its relationship with other forms. 2. A change in the semantics of a word can affect its syntactic connections and its form. 3. And, conversely, a new syntactic compatibility can lead to a change in the meaning of the word (its expansion or narrowing). 4. Consistency as a property of language and a separate sign in it, discovered by F. de Saussure, is also manifested in the relationship between the sign (signifier) and the signified. For example: in modern language the combination Doctor came normatively, despite the formal grammatical inconsistency. The form of the subject changes, focusing on specific content (the doctor is a woman). In this example, the influence of an external social factor is added to the semantic-syntactic transformation: the profession of a doctor in modern conditions is as widespread among women as among men, and the doctor-doctor correlation is carried out at a different linguistic level - stylistic.

The law of linguistic tradition is explained by the objective desire of the language for stability, “protection” of what has already been achieved and acquired. But the potency of language objectively undermines this stability, forming a natural breakthrough in the weak link of the system, which turns out to be quite natural. The law of tradition is good when it acts as a restraining principle, counteracting random, unmotivated use or preventing the too extended action of other laws, in particular the law of speech analogy (such as the dialect path in creativity by analogy with life). When confronted with the law of analogy, it creates, in a sense, a conflict situation, the resolution of which in particular cases may turn out to be unpredictable: either tradition or analogy will win.

Law of linguistic tradition For example: * Among traditional spellings there are spellings that are highly conventional: 1) the ending of adjectives -ого with the letter g in place of the phoneme (green); 2) writing adverbs with ь (jump, backhand) and verb forms (writing, reading), 3) traditional spellings of feminine nouns such as night, rye, mouse, although in this case the law of morphological analogy is also included in the action when ь appears in as a graphic equalizer for the paradigms of noun declension (cf.: night - at night, like spruce - spruce, door - door) (Ivanova V.F. Modern Russian orthography: Textbook. M., 1991).

Law of linguistic analogy The essence of analogy lies in leveling out the forms and bringing them closer to more common patterns: 1) pronunciation (when, instead of a historically expected sound, another appears in a word form, by analogy with other forms (analogy is especially active in non-standardized colloquial and dialect speech (for example, replacement alternations: you take care of it - you take care of it instead of you take care of it, according to the example, you carry it - you carry it, etc.).

Law of linguistic analogy 2) Alignment of the norms of stress placement (stress system) of some verbal forms where book tradition and living usage collide (for example, the gender form of the past tense of a verb; cf.: call - zva′l, zva′lo, called, but: called, etc.). Naturally, the violation of tradition specifically affected the feminine form (zva′la, rava′la, spa′la, etc.), which is not yet allowed in the literary language, but is common in everyday use). Fluctuations in stress in the terminological vocabulary, where the tradition (origin) and practice of using Latinisms and Greekisms in Russian contexts also often collide (the transfer of stress to the final stem is noted even in terms that staunchly retain the original stress, for example mastopathy (cf. homeopa) tia, allopathy, myopathy, antipathy, metriopathy, etc.) Often the difference in stress is explained by the different origin of words - Latin or Greek: dislalia, discussion (from the Latin discussio - consideration) .

Law of linguistic analogy 3) alignment of grammatical norms (in particular in verb control) (analogy can cause the transition of verbs from one class to another, for example, by analogy with the forms of verbs like read - read, throw - throw, the forms gargle (instead of rinse) appeared) , waving (instead of waving), meowing (instead of meowing), etc.)

Law of Speech Economy The desire for economy of linguistic expression is found at different levels of the language system: 1) in vocabulary and word formation (various abbreviations, especially if the abbreviations take on the permanent form of names - nouns capable of obeying the rules of grammar (university, study at a university, loss of patronymic in personal proper names in official documents and the media - a tribute to Western tradition), 2) in morphology (for example: replacement of forms of the following type: Georgian from Georgian, Lezgin from Lezgin, Ossetian from Ossetian (however Bashkir - ?), zero ending in R. pad Plural in a number of classes of words: five Georgians instead of Georgians; one hundred grams instead of grams; half a kilo of orange, tomato, tangerine instead of hundred oranges, tomatoes, tangerines, etc. 3) in syntax (phrases base for the formation of words (electric train electric train, grade book - record book, buckwheat - buckwheat)

LAWS OF ANTINOMY (laws of contradictions) The development of language is stimulated by the inconsistency of ongoing processes. Contradictions are inherent in language itself as a phenomenon. Without them, any changes are unthinkable. It is in the struggle of opposites that the self-development of language is manifested. Antinomies: 1) antinomy of speaker and listener; 2) the antinomy of usage and the capabilities of the language system; 3) antinomy of code and text; 4) antinomy due to the asymmetry of the linguistic sign; 5) the antinomy of two functions of language - informational and expressive, 6) the antinomy of two forms of language - written and oral.

1. The antinomy of the speaker and the listener is created as a result of the difference in the interests of the interlocutors coming into contact (or the reader and the author): the speaker is interested in simplifying and shortening the utterance, and the listener is interested in simplifying and facilitating the perception and understanding of the utterance. This creates a conflict situation, which is resolved by finding forms of expression that satisfy both sides. The conflict between the speaker and the listener is resolved either in favor of the speaker or in favor of the listener. This manifests itself not only at the level of general attitudes, but also at the level of the linguistic forms themselves - in the preference for some and the denial or limitation of others.

1. Antinomy of speaker and listener For example: In the Russian language of the beginning and middle of the 20th century. Many abbreviations appeared (sound, alphabetic, and partly syllabic). This was very convenient for the compilers of texts (saving speech effort) (*Zamkomporde - Deputy Commissioner for Maritime Affairs). After 1917, 1920s-1930s (content closed, unclear, encrypted names of institutions) Today, more divided names appear (cf.: Society for the Protection of Animals, Department for Combating Organized Crime, Society of Easel Artists). These names have a stronger impact on the listener (reader) because they contain open content. But new acronyms also arise, which are not always successful (*ROC - Russian Orthodox Church (a familiar relation to the Orthodox Church)).

2. Antinomy of code and text This is a contradiction between a set of linguistic units (code - the sum of phonemes, morphemes, words, syntactic units) and their use in coherent speech (text). Increasing code - > reducing text. Reducing the code -> increasing the text (the missing code characters will have to be conveyed descriptively, using the remaining characters). For example: the names of our relatives. In the Russian language, there were kinship terms to name various kinship relationships in the family: brother-in-law - husband’s brother; brother-in-law - wife's brother; sister-in-law - husband's sister; sister-in-law - wife's sister, daughter-in-law - son's wife; father-in-law - husband's father; mother-in-law - father-in-law's wife, husband's mother; son-in-law - husband of a daughter, sister, sister-in-law; father-in-law - wife's father; mother-in-law - wife's mother; nephew - the son of a brother, sister; niece - daughter of a brother or sister. Some of these words (brother-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, daughter-in-law, father-in-law, mother-in-law) were gradually forced out of everyday life. In their place, descriptive substitutions began to be used to denote concepts (wife's brother, husband's brother, husband's sister, etc.). The number of words in the active dictionary has decreased, and the text has increased as a result.

3. The antinomy of usage and the possibilities of language (= system and norm) consists in the fact that the possibilities of language (system) are much wider than the use of linguistic signs accepted in a literary language. The traditional norm acts in the direction of restriction and prohibition, while the system is capable of satisfying large demands for communication. For example: the norm fixes the insufficiency of some grammatical forms (the absence of a form of 1 l. unit of the simple everyday tense of the verb to win (*win, *will run); lack of opposition by aspect in a number of verbs that qualify as two-aspect, etc. .: marry, marry, execute, etc., foreign language verbs with suffixes –irova, isirova (telegraph, hospitalize)).

4. Antinomy caused by the asymmetry of a linguistic sign It manifests itself in the fact that the signified (meaning) and the signifier (sign) (means of expressing meaning) are always in a state of conflict: 1. Meaning - > to the acquisition of new signs. 2. Sign - > to expand the range of its meanings, acquire new meanings 1. Meaning - > to acquire new signs. The word ink “black liquid” with a fairly transparent meaning (niello, black - ink) once had one meaning. But over time, substances of different colors appear to perform the same function as ink. A conflict has arisen: there is one signifier (ink), but there are several signifieds - liquids of different colors ->

Src="https://present5.com/presentation/3/57897897_133001832.pdf-img/57897897_133001832.pdf-19.jpg" alt="4. Antinomy caused by the asymmetry of a linguistic sign For example: A. Meaning - > to purchase"> 4. Антиномия, вызванная асимметричностью языкового знака Например: А. Значение - > к приобретению новых знаков. Слово чернила «жидкость черного цвета» с достаточно прозрачным значением (чернь, черный - чернила) когда то имело одно означаемое. Но со временем появляются вещества иного цвета для выполнения той же функции, что и чернила. Возникший конфликт: означающее одно (чернила), а означаемых несколько - жидкости разного цвета - > к появлению абсурдных с (.) здравого смысла сочетаний красные чернила, синие чернила, зеленые чернила. Абсурдность снимается появлением словосочетания черные чернила. То есть слово чернила расширило свое значение - «жидкость, используемая для письма» . Так возникло равновесие - означаемое и означающее «пришли к согласию» .!}

Src="https://present5.com/presentation/3/57897897_133001832.pdf-img/57897897_133001832.pdf-20.jpg" alt="4. Antinomy caused by the asymmetry of the linguistic sign 2. Sign -> to expanding the circle of their"> 4. Антиномия, вызванная асимметричностью языкового знака 2. Знак - > к расширению круга своих значений, приобретению новых значений В словах котенок, щенок, теленок и др. , если они употребляются в значениях «детеныш кошки» , «детеныш собаки» , «детеныш коровы» , нет дифференциации по признаку пола и потому одно означающее относится к двум означаемым. При необходимости точного указания на пол возникают соотношения корреляции - теленок и телка, кошка и кот и др. В таком случае, скажем, наименование теленок означает только детеныша мужского пола. Слово депутат означает лицо по должности независимо от пола (один знак - два означаемых).!}

5. The antinomy of the two functions of language comes down to the opposition of the purely informational function and the expressive function of language. A. Information function - > to uniformity, standardization of language units. The speech standard is fixed in official spheres of communication - in business correspondence, legal literature, government acts. B. Expressive - > to novelty, originality of expression. Expression, novelty of expression is more characteristic of oratorical, journalistic, and artistic speech. A kind of compromise (or more often a conflict) is found in the media, especially in the newspaper, where expression and standard are constructive features of journalism. (Kostomarov V. G. Russian language on a newspaper page. - M., 1971.)

6. Antinomy of oral and written forms of language Oral speech perceives elements of bookishness, written speech widely uses the principles of colloquialism. The very relationship between bookishness (the basis is written speech) and colloquialism (the basis is oral speech) begins to collapse. In spoken speech, lexical and grammatical features of bookish speech and written symbolism appear (for example: person with a capital letter, kindness in quotation marks, quality with a plus (minus) sign, etc.; We leave behind-the-scenes agreements outside the brackets (MK, 1993, March 23) ; Only medical workers serving 20 clients of the sobering-up center, I counted 13 plus a psychologist, plus four consultants (Pravda, 1990, February 25)).

Internal laws of language development - manifest themselves within the language system, their actions are based on their own linguistic material, they act as if independently of the influence of society.

General Internal laws began to be called laws and principles that apply to all known languages and all tiers of the linguistic structure. General internal laws recognized such features of languages as the presence of successive historical forms of language, the discrepancy between external and internal linguistic forms and, in connection with this, the difference in patterns and rates of change in individual tiers of the structure of the language. In recent years, the problem of general laws of language has been supplanted by the problem of universals.

Private Internal laws began to be called such formulas and principles that are applicable only to certain languages or groups of languages and individual tiers of the linguistic structure. Thus, the phonetic law in Slavic languages is the first and second palatalization of back-languages.

Why the action of internal laws is a decisive factor in language development (decisive, but not the only one) lies in the fact that language is a systemic formation. Language is not just a set, a sum of linguistic signs (morphemes, words, phrases, etc.), but also the relationships between them, so a failure in one link of signs can set in motion not only nearby links, but also the entire chain in whole (or a certain part of it).

Law of linguistic tradition The understandability of the law is explained by the objective desire of language for stability, the “security” of what has already been achieved, acquired, but the potency of language just as objectively acts in the direction of shaking this stability, and a breakthrough in the weak link of the system turns out to be quite natural. But here forces come into play that are not directly related to the language itself, but can impose a kind of taboo on innovation. Such prohibitive measures come from linguists and special institutions with the appropriate legal status. There is, as it were, an artificial delay in the obvious process, the preservation of tradition contrary to the objective state of affairs.

Action law of linguistic analogy manifests itself in the internal overcoming of linguistic anomalies, which is carried out as a result of the assimilation of one form of linguistic expression to another. In general terms, this is a powerful factor in linguistic evolution, since the result is some unification of forms, but, on the other hand, it can deprive the language of specific semantic and grammatical nuances. In such cases, the restraining principle of tradition can play a positive role.

The essence of likening forms (analogy) lies in the alignment of forms, which is observed in pronunciation, in the accentual design of words (in stress), and partly in grammar (for example, in verb control). Colloquial language is especially susceptible to the action of the law of analogy, while literary language is more based on tradition, which is understandable, since the latter is more conservative in nature.

law of speech economy(or saving speech effort). The desire for economy of linguistic expression is found at different levels of the language system - in vocabulary, word formation, morphology, syntax.

The development of language, like development in any other area of life and activity, cannot but be stimulated by the inconsistency of ongoing processes. Controversies (or antinomies) are characteristic of language itself as a phenomenon, without them any changes are unthinkable. It is in the struggle of opposites that the self-development of language is manifested. There are usually five or six main antinomies:

Antinomy of speaker and listener is created as a result of differences in the interests of the interlocutors coming into contact (or the reader and the author): the speaker is interested in simplifying and shortening the utterance, and the listener is interested in simplifying and facilitating the perception and understanding of the utterance. A clash of interests creates a conflict situation that must be resolved by searching for forms of expression that satisfy both sides.

The beginning of a systematic study of the problem of language economy was noted in the 80s XIX century and is associated with the names of such scientists as I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay, P. Passy, G. Sweet, O. Espersen. However, the beginnings of the doctrine of linguistic economy can be found already in the works of ancient linguist philosophers. Thus, Aristotle wrote that if he wants to speak concisely, the speaker should strive to use a name instead of a concept (Ancient theories of language and style, 1936, pp. 180 - 181) meanwhile, from a wide variety of linguists we often read that “language acts economically." The “word” “economical” and the phrase “principles of economy”, “law of economy” are found every now and then on the pages of linguistic publications around the world.

At the initial stage, the study of linguistic economy took place in the field of phonology, limiting itself to the study of only phonetic changes; this circumstance was determined by the progress of the development of the science of linguistics itself, a characteristic feature of which during this period was an increased interest in the study of the phonological layer of the language.

In particular, P. Passy tried to find the reason for some phonetic changes in the language in the fact of the action of linguistic economy, manifested in the economy of pronunciation efforts (the so-called “search for the least effort”), leading to changes in vowels and consonants in the phonological system of the French language. P. Passy concludes that “language constantly strives to free itself from the superfluous,” which, in his opinion, is the principle of economy. Many words have indeed become shorter. Already in the prehistory of the French language, the process of reduction of atonic vowels following stress took place (Latin tabula > French-table; Latin prehendere > French prendre, etc.)

The study of language as a systemic-structural formation, the identification of various levels in the language structure, the introduction of such oppositions as language and speech, synchrony - diachrony, paradigmatics - syntagmatics, which began in the 20th century, are reflected in the doctrine of linguistic economy.

A tendency towards linguistic economy began to be detected in the field of morphology, as well as syntax. At the same time, “economical” phenomena in morphology also found their expression in syntax, which was determined by the specifics of the relationship between these two levels.

As noted above, the idea that the linguistic structure should be determined by “economical distribution” between its parts became quite widespread already in the 17th - 18th centuries. L. Bloomfield pays special attention to the manifestation of economy in the syntax of the English language. He points out that the use of substitute words makes speech very economical, and at the same time, lively and flexible.

The English philosopher and sociologist Herbert Spencer believed that language, in the process of development according to the “natural laws of evolution,” moves from complex to simple. Long words become short, “multiple sentences” become monosyllabic sentences. N: we tellen was transformed into we tell (the ending is lost). Having traced the history of the development of English words, we see that at each stage of their development, as a result of the reduction of endings in the middle period and the loss of final consonants in unstressed syllables in the 15th century. long words turn into short ones, polysyllabic words turn into monosyllabic ones, for example:

Old English period Average XIV century XV century Translation

Drincan -> drinken -> drinke-> drink drink

vyrcan -> werken -> werke-> werk work andsdvarian -> anweren -> answere-> answer answer

smocian -> smoken -> smoke smoke

lufian -> loven -> love be in love

Word production without adding word-forming suffixes turned out to be one of the most productive methods of replenishing the vocabulary in the new period.

Crowd< др. a. crudan

Drive< др. a. drifian

Praise< ср. a. preisen

Paint < ср.a. peinten

Talk < ср.a. talken < др. a. tealcan

In theoretical terms, the problems of linguistic economy are most fully covered in the works of A. Martinet. A. Martinet considers the principles of linguistic economy as a determining factor in the development and change of the language system as a whole.

In connection with the dichatomy synchrony - diachrony, the issue of linguistic economy is considered in the works of S. Bally. Studying the history of the French language allows Bally to come to the conclusion that economy plays a very significant role in its development. Sh. Bally sees the manifestation of economy primarily as a tendency towards compression. He notes that the early period of the development of the French language is characterized by the compression of individual words, “elements merge within words”, as the latter turn into simple indecomposable units, for example:

Gaaigner > gaigner, gagnier

Saoul > soul

Age > age

Reonde > ronde

Minutum > menut > menu

Pensare > pasare >peser

The problems of linguistic economy, and, in particular, its manifestation in speech, were dealt with by domestic linguists (Peshkovsky, Polivanov, etc.). So, for example, A.M. Peshkovsky places the main emphasis on the economy that takes place in dialogical speech. According to the teachings of A.M. Peshkovsky, the essence of linguistic economy in dialogical speech is as follows: in the process of communication, interlocutors almost never speak to each other in extended phrases. Based on the situation, they can omit not only individual words, but also entire sentences, nevertheless understanding each other perfectly.

A.M. Peshkovsky comes to the conclusion that speech activity is regulated by some law, which helps to save the speech efforts of speakers.

A number of issues related to the problem of linguistic economy are considered in the works of Soviet scientists. V.V. Borisov believes that the actions of the “law of economy” are to increase the efficiency of the communicative function of language.

When interpreting the problem of “economy of language,” some researchers argued that the development of language as a whole is characterized, as mentioned above, by a tendency to simplify language forms. American linguist L. Bloomfield also wrote: “Even now it is clear that changes in language are directed towards shortening words and streamlining their construction:

sound units make words shorter, and changes by analogy replace irregular formations with regular ones.” “Linguistic behavior” is regulated by the principle of least effort or the principle of economy.

In the introduction to one of the English scientific, popular books, we came across the following example:

“In the complicated story of man one has to be precise about the animals and the ideas talked about and so it is absolutely necessary to use their right names and terms. I have tried to explain each one as I name to it.

Unfortunately these as names are rarely one syllable" 1 1 “When describing the complex history of human development, it is necessary to be precise and use the correct names and terms. Every time I had to do this, I tried to give the exact name. Unfortunately, these names and terms, with rare exceptions, are polysyllabic" (N. Howells. Mankind in the making., London 1967.P.15)

The last sentence of this sample is remarkable from the point of view of explaining the reasons for the strong tendency, and in English, to shorten words of various kinds. In the English vocabulary, as is known, short, monosyllabic and disyllabic ones occupy a larger place, and longer ones are perceived as something foreign.

The tendency of the English language towards monosyllabism is also noted by other authors, for example, S. Bally: “... the English language, striving for monosyllabism, turns ...zoological garden V zoo.... popular concerts in pops...”

This is apparently one of the most important reasons for the wide spread and constantly growing number of various abbreviations in modern English.

It is very important that numerous abbreviations do not remain on the periphery of the vocabulary, but become the property of the entire linguistic community, reflect important social concepts, and are used to denote the subject of reality in everyday life, in politics, science, economics, etc.

In different languages, the answer will consist of one word, unexpected for us - “laziness” (E.D. Polivanov 1891-1938). See Art. Popova about syllabic reduction in “Yalta 99” P. 133.

Those. the desire to save labor energy, but within limits, as long as the economy does not lead to the futility of our work.

Simplification of writing - to what extent?

What about oral speech (this is also a work activity)?

Syllable reduction. In the old military life: "Hello, Your Excellency" Wed Thank you! Zsss! Minzhurenko: so to speak - tskt; grit(speaks). In less common words this is not so noticeable. The word “wears out” over the course of the speech practice of one person or one generation. The younger ones assimilate it in a distorted form. The histories of different languages are filled with facts of “contraction of phrases” into one word:

Lat. Augustus "August"  fr. Out u

lat. Ille non alphabet passum  fr. il n, a pas

loss of sounds: [sleep, feeling]

“Difficult” sounds in articulation are replaced by easier ones: “spirantization of affricates”: ch  sh, ts  s.
“Laziness” manifests itself not only in the physiology of speech, but also in the form saving mental activity:

a) economy of thought processes > metaphors, metonymy.

b) saving energy in the process of learning the native language.

Loss of “irregular” verbs in Old French, in English - transition to regular ones; simplification of the sound appearance of a foreign word: kakava, radiva, kolidor, laboratory.

Baudouin: “It cannot happen in any language that new irregular verbs suddenly rain down from the sky.”

Having indicated the main factor - saving labor effort - we name only the starting point...

And the path of language changes can be very “winding” and requires taking into account various conditions, physiological and other data.
It would be too hasty to consider the doctrine of linguistic evolution as a complete linguistic discipline (1931). A lot of things here are in the hypothetical stage...

In any case, it is now impossible to present to general linguistics (and the theory of the evolution of language in particular) the reproach that was often expressed by skeptics of the last century: “With you, everything can turn into everything: from to to with, and from to to, etc. But it was back in the last century that Baudouin replied: “No, not at all, for example, if [to] [s], then [s] [to] never directly passes..."

- Well, what about the forms of duras and fool? - continued the skeptic.

Baudouin could only ask the skeptic which of these forms he chose to name.

Prerequisites for language changes

(General linguistics Minsk, 1983. Edited by Suprun)

The ability of the language system to self-regulate (if you reduce the number of case inflections, the role of word order increases - beige dress, metallic color)
Semantic (“personal meaning”) and formal variation in speech (history reduced - disappeared in a weak position).

Dynamics of coexistence of options: A - Av - AB - aB - B
Linguistic antinomies

Linguistic antinomies- internal factors of changes in language.

Linguistic evolution is carried out in accordance with the law of unity and struggle of opposites. Antinomies are a manifestation of this law.

At each stage, the antinomies are resolved in favor of first one or the other of the opposing principles - new contradictions (final resolution is impossible).

A) Asymmetry of signifier and signified  development of polysemy and homonymy, development of synonymy.

b) Antinomies of the norm (usus) and the capabilities of the system.

Participles from rub, protect, be able?

The norm is selective, and the language strives to realize all the possibilities inherent in the system. This is an ever-living conflict.

If the norm is strong and the linguistic needs are ripe, the dam breaks through in another place. How to replace the gerund from rub and so on.?

Panov- about the norm: “It takes an orthoepic mountain so that the swamp has nothing to equal”

Two-aspect verbs - the process of imperfectification:

use, attack.

Eliminating asymmetry between form and content: -and I in them plural - bargaining A - in favor of the system or the norm?

In different areas of the language - at different speeds
Children's speech more fully implements the system: smeared, lit, horseman, kittens, reading.

Baudouin: “the child looks into the future, predicting... the future state of the language, and only subsequently moves back, more and more adapting to the language of those around him.”

From the essays of applicants: dragging after N. Goncharova, mass emigration abroad, skillfully incited discord, what sensuality of the surrounding world! ruler, the dark life of hardened nobles, Catherine's age.

V) Antinomy of code and text: the more complex the code, the shorter the text.

New words complicate the code, but shorten the text? (kitsch, PR, diving), neologisms, for example. But sometimes it is more profitable to simplify the code (brother-in-law, brother-in-law). Functional styles - complication of code.

Conflict between speaker and listener.

Speaker's interests: reduction

Interests of the listener: dismembered forms.

After VOSR there are abbreviations.

Well, dovam, - I said goodbye - How do you understand this? - I’m pleased with you, this is instead of “thank you.” - Thank you - God bless - religious. (N. Ognev)

Current: Deputy Director for Personnel // Plenipotentiary Representative in the Siberian Federal District OPONOS, WWII, TNP, KM, KRS, FIG...

d) Antinomy of the standard(regularity) and individuality (expressive function of language). Your kitchen squeezes my thighs. He doesn't need a nurse, but a bed.
Panov: regularity and expressiveness. Terminology - metaphorization (especially in jargon and professional language)

See dental jargon

What features of conversational phonetics, vocabulary, morphology, syntax can be demonstrated using examples from the text? How can deviations from the spelling norm be explained?

Corporate party on Friday. Tea, noise, conversations. Their Majesty Boss
came to mere mortals to honor them with his bright gaze.Obviously , every
at the same time trying to show off and lick him better. Boss tells
some bearded andstupid anek . Everyone laughs loudly. Comes in here
The admin is already unobtrusively interested in the reason for the laughter.
“Oh, they told such a joke,” one of the ass-lickers rolls up,
especially hating the admin, and retells it.
Admin , like a person experienced in the topic of aneks, stands with a stone face and
gives:
- And what degenerate told you this?
Dead silence. Someone choked on tea. Lickingactually and wanted the admin
it's a shame to substitute , but clearly did not expect such a question. And then he did
a fatal mistake - he decided to defend the honor of the Boss. Like, how dare you
our beloved and generous one to say this.

Admin:
- Is this this one? - and the greyhound points his finger at the Boss. - Well... with him!

After these words, he walks past the statues of employees, takes from one
computer mouse and walks away proudly. The party ended quickly. And not just one week
after that, the ass-licker exposed his soft spot to a bad mood
Boss, and in the end wasdisgustingly fired en. And the admin... and the admin, bitch, was fired
1 day before this Friday party and came to pick up my belongings and
a beautiful mouse, once given to a girl accountant who
rejected.
Phrases that twenty years ago could have easily gotten you into trouble.
madhouse:

I'll be in the forest, but you call me...

- My hand is already frozen to talk to you...
- I accidentally erased “War and Peace”...
- Damn, I can’t log into my email...
- I sent you a letter ten minutes ago, did you receive it?
- Send me a photo for soap...
- I forgot my phone at home...
- I can’t talk to you, you disappear all the time...
- Put money on the pipe for me...
- I’ll buy myself more brains tomorrow...
- Let's give him a home theater...
- Yes, there are only two hundred gigs...
- I went through the Second World War for the Germans...
- Just do the math on your phone...
- Rename the folder...
- Give me twenty-five rubles for the metro...
- I'm rocking the elf...
- Give me a charger...
- Ivan is not at home, he is in the army. You call him.

Lecture 10

Methodology and methods of modern linguistics

One of the linguist's tasks is to look at it very closely

distance and with the help of deep reflections on how linguistic entities are formed, which in the formed

and the languages familiar to us took the form of words.

Gustave Guillaume (lecture, 1944)
Many phenomena that are the subject of linguistics are not given to us in direct observation (phonemes, morphemes, parts of speech, sentence structures), and many observed phenomena require one or another interpretation (For example, determine what part of speech a word is even in a sentence The quality is excellent, the prices are very good!). Therefore, one of the most important problems in the science of language is the problem of methods for studying language. Research involves putting forward a hypothesis about some object of interest to a scientist, collecting data, analyzing and scientific description. Each of these stages represents a specific research problem.

In domestic linguistics in the 40-50s. a contrast was formed between three key concepts of scientific research: methodology - method - technique. Wherein methodology was understood as a set of techniques of observation and experiment (“extraction” of material). Method- as a way of theoretical development of data obtained through observation and experiment (description of material). Methodology- as the application of the principles of worldview to the process of cognition by a scientist of objects of interest to him (Yu.S. Stepanov).

For example, for linguistics the object is language. It can be viewed from different positions: 1) “As we live, so we speak” (being determines consciousness) 2) “As we speak, so we live” (consciousness determines being).

For Russian science (including linguistics), the general method is dialectical materialism. What does dialectical materialism mean in relation to language? Language is an objective reality; it is knowable, although not given in direct observation; language changes, primarily as a result of changes occurring in society.

There are general scientific methods, common to many sciences, and special scientific ones, used in individual sciences. General scientific ones include empirical methods, based on the collection of material and its subsequent interpretation, and deductive, the starting point of which is a hypothesis and an understanding of general patterns that may be confirmed in the material (or may not).

What are the specifics of deductive methods? Every theory includes an element of hypothesis and abstraction. This is the movement of scientific thought from the general to the specific: when a researcher puts forward a hypothesis and tries to confirm or refute it with facts (True, there is an opinion that “facts are like a wax nose: wherever you turn, that’s where they look”).

The famous Russian linguist V.A. Zvegintsev reflected on the relationship between the two general scientific methods: “The desire to grab hold of a tangible fact and hold on to it with a bulldog grip sometimes crosses the boundaries of vulgar materialism and turns into a kind of cave materialism.” This comes from the dominance of neogrammatical naive positivism, nurtured over many years. This approach makes it possible to declare any theory based not on observed facts, but on a metaphorical hypothesis [Zvegintsev p. 6].

But there is also another extreme. When dealing with natural language and striving to understand its nature, some scientists strive with all their might to stay at the abstract-logical heights and elevate this to the general principle of the scientific study of language. They proceed from the premise that the formal models they construct do not reflect all the features and properties of natural language, but recreate its logical backbone (“ideal language”, free from the shortcomings of “natural language”). [Zvegintsev, p. 7]

Each of the methods sets itself specific tasks, but has the same goal - to obtain knowledge, and knowledge has the same value no matter how it is acquired.

The reliability of the research results obtained is verified through verification. Verification is a test of theories, including through the use of other methods. Scientific statements are often formulated in the form of hypotheses (often with reference to unobservable units), but are tested by reality, by specific facts. If the facts do not fit into the theory, it is developed, reformulated, and even denied (see, for example, the communication postulates of P. Grice, which were later repeatedly clarified).

Additionally

American linguistics

In American linguistics in the middleXXcenturies, there was a three-part division of linguistic science, from which one can also derive an idea of the method. Thus, “prelinguistics, or prelinguistics”, “microlinguistics or linguistics in the proper sense of the word” and “metalinguistics” were distinguished.

Prelinguistics studied the “building material” - speech sounds at the acoustic and articulatory level (not at the functional level).

Microlinguistics - analysis of the language system and structure (theoretical development of previously identified material).

Metalinguistics compared the results obtained at the previous stage, i.e. various theoretical systematizations of linguistic material.

American metalinguistics of that time (40-50s) showed 2 trends: 1) “linguistics of divine truth”, 2) “linguistics of magic”.

Language has some autonomous structure, the linguist must discover it. It is important to collect a sufficient number of facts and think through the procedure for a theoretical description. It was assumed that based on the same facts, the same description should always be obtained.
“The linguistics of magic” received its name from opponents of this approach. In it, language is understood as an autonomous structure. But you won't recognize it instantly. The linguist establishes schemes or models to define phenomena that seem to him to be interrelated, and then, through observation, determines how closely the schemes correspond to the facts. Descriptions (i.e. models) can be improved as research progresses (this approach is characteristic of structuralism).

Comparison of the views of domestic and American linguistic schools of the 40-50s. shows many similarities, but there are also differences.

General - three-part structure of the method:

the question of ways to collect new material and introduce it into scientific circulation (“methodology” or “prelinguistics”).
a question about ways to systematize and explain material (“method” or “microlinguistics”) (for example, is it permissible to study word stressXIXV. based on poetic texts?)
the question of the relationship between systemic material and the philosophical problem of cognition (“methodology” or “metalinguistics”)

Differences: for domestic linguistics of the 40-50s. There was insufficient attention to the methods of identifying and introducing new material into science. The procedures for establishing linguistic facts and linguistic units were not specifically discussed and were not explicitly formulated (with the exception of the series of dictionaries “New Words and Meanings” in the 70s). There was a characteristic lack of attention to colloquial speech, to vernacular language, to the functioning of linguistic units. In the field of codification, the consequence of this is purism. In American linguistics, on the contrary, this problem is one of the developed ones. All descriptive linguistics was engaged in the development of the problem: how to translate directly spoken speech into a body of scientific data about language. Only in the 70s. we have a special study on methods of the initial (zero) cycle - the work of A.E. Kibrik “Methodology of field research” (towards the formulation of the problem). For example, when using printed texts, how do you separate the author from the editor? In the last quarterXXcentury, a whole direction has been formed - corpus linguistics, which puts the issues of collecting and systematizing material at the center of attention. (see about this in [A.N. Baranov Introduction to Applied Linguistics. M., 2001. pp. 81-89.])
The Americans did not fundamentally consider the problem of methodology. And the statements emphasized the independence of linguistics from philosophy. M. Druz in the book “Basic Directions of Structuralism” wrote: “We do not answer questions “why” regarding the structure of language, we try to accurately describe, we do not try to explain.” Wed. : “The linguistic method is a procedure of discovery, and not a method of presentation, and certainly not a method of explanation” (D. Olmstead).

So, when comparing different linguistic schools (American and domestic), the three-part structure of the method system and whether it includes the discovery procedure, on the one hand, and the connection with philosophy, on the other hand, turns out to be significant.

In modern linguistics, the views of the Russian school are presented in the studies of B.A. Serebrennikov (“General linguistics”, vol. 3).

In recent years, concepts have emerged that occupy an intermediate position. For example, in generative grammars the main question is about the method of presentation, and the question about the method of “discovering” or collecting material is removed.
Depending on the properties of the object being studied, modern linguistics uses various research methods, which are implemented in the form of specific techniques and procedures for collecting and describing material (particular methods, or techniques).

It is necessary to distinguish between methods of data collection and methods of analyzing material.

Methods of collecting material: observation and experiment.

Observation As a general scientific method, it assumes a relatively passive role of the scientist-observer. Example - so-called field research, recording the speech of linguistically interesting persons. An observer can only record facts without participating in communication, or be a participant in a communicative situation ( participant observation- for example, when studying family communication).

An experiment in linguistics (as in other sciences) involves the deliberate creation of conditions when the phenomena of interest to a scientist are presented in a “concentrated form.” Therefore, it is necessary to figure out how this can be achieved. L.V. Shcherba substantiated the linguist’s “right” to experiment (“On the threefold aspect of linguistic phenomena and on experiment in linguistics”, 1931). For example, in dialectology, studies of colloquial, professional speech, this can be a survey (questionnaire or free conversation), in phonetics - instrumental methods, in psycholinguistics - associative experiments, in syntax and semasiology - a transformational method that is used to study hidden linguistic meanings and properties (see more about this below).

The main features of a linguistic experiment: the creation of artificial conditions for native speakers (this is not natural living speech); the possibility of repeating the experiment (for example, studying the features of pronunciation using a voice recorder).

Both observation and experiment are inductive methods: they allow one to establish patterns using induction, i.e. deducing a general rule from observations of a limited number of facts that obey the general rule.

The main linguistic methods of mastering (analysis) of facts are: descriptive, comparative and normative-stylistic .

Descriptive- method of synchronous analysis of one language. The material is considered outside of its evaluation from the point of view of the norm.

Normative-stylistic – establishment of current standards based on the descriptive method and development of recommendations of a normative and stylistic nature based on certain criteria.

Comparative historical method - the first scientific method in linguistics (formed in the first half of the 19th century). Its goal is to explain the origin of genetically related languages from a common source. The reconstruction of certain ancestral forms is a deductive study based on certain scientific premises.
Particular methods of the descriptive approach to language

Techniques (particular methods) for the descriptive study of phenomena: distributional analysis, differential analysis, transformation method, etc.

Distribution analysis method (DA)

The goal is to give a classification of linguistic units of one level or another according to their syntagmatic properties (according to their distribution in the flow of speech). To do this, you need to find out in what contexts a given linguistic unit appears, in what environment it may be in the process of functioning.

Wed. Black...horse. Black Raven. Or - an unexpected collision in one context: Yeltsin's friend and ally (about the Deputy Prime Minister).

The totality (sum) of all possible environments of a linguistic unit constitutes its distribution (distribution). Thus, the basis for classification is the similarities and differences in the distributional environments of certain units. Principles of distributional analysis - from American descriptive linguistics (Treyger, Harris, B. Block). They tried to exhaustively describe the language using this method (in particular, the meaning of a word - through a set of contexts).

There are two main types of distribution: additional and contrasting, as well as free variation.

Additional distribution - when the relationship is either//or ( brown//brown), i.e. in a certain environment only element A (and no other) can be found. Cf. ы and и.
Contrasting distribution - elements appear in identical environments, but at the same time differentiate meanings: [ n] os/[n’] es, wallss /wallsOuch . Wed. now/now; swim-swim. Contrastive distribution helps to identify implicit differences - for example, in the semantics of units.
Free variation: when elements appear in identical environments, but do not differentiate meanings: -ой/-оу, pronunciation God[g plosive // h fricative], linguistics // linguistics.

The technique of distributional analysis is simple and requires only an accurate account of the observed facts (if we have them). The problem is data collection. The easiest way is in phonology or phonetics, since the number of elements is small.

For example, in what ways is the phonetic system described? Different!

Various classifications are possible: articulatory, acoustic. So, from the point of view of acoustics, there are 2 classes - voiced and voiceless consonants. For example, h, d, c- voiced, and s, t- deaf . Let us observe the properties of these same consonant sounds from the point of view of their compatibility.

	With	T	h	d	V
With	+ ss ora	+ st Ouch	-	-	+ sv Ouch
T	+ o ts fall	+ o tt yay	-	-	+ TV Ouch
h	-	-	+ be zz pathetic	+ building you are	+ sound er
d	-	-	+by dz dark	+by dd eat	+ dv er
V	-	-	+ vz yat	+ vd eat	+ bb return

Serving society as a means of communication, language is constantly undergoing changes, increasingly accumulating its resources to adequately express the meaning of the changes taking place in society. For a living language this process is natural and natural. However, the intensity of this process may vary. And there is an objective reason for this: society itself - the bearer and creator of the language - experiences different periods of its existence differently. During periods of sharp disruption 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 a representative of a new society also changes, albeit more slowly, which also acquires the character of an objective factor influencing processes in language.

The modern era has updated many processes in language, which in other conditions might have been less noticeable and more smoothed out. A social explosion does not make a revolution in 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 come into motion, developed by intrasystem relations, which were previously not in demand for various reasons, including, again, socio-political reasons. For example, semantic and semantic-stylistic transformations were discovered in many lexical layers of the Russian language, in grammatical forms, etc.

In general, language changes occur through the interaction of external and internal causes. Moreover, the basis for changes is laid in the language itself, where internal patterns operate, the reason for which, their driving force, lies in the systematic nature of the language. But a kind of stimulator (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.

Thus, the life of a language, its history, is organically connected with the history of society, but is not completely subordinate to it due to its own systemic organization. Thus, in the language movement, processes of self-development collide with processes stimulated from the outside.

What are the internal laws of language development?

Usually internal laws include law of consistency(global law, which is at the same time a property, quality of language); the law of tradition, which usually restrains innovative processes; the law of analogy (a stimulator for undermining traditionality); the law of economy (or the law of “least effort”), especially actively focused on accelerating the pace of social life; laws of contradictions(antinomies), which are essentially the “initiators” of the struggle of opposites inherent in the language system itself. Being inherent in the object (language) itself, antinomies seem to be preparing an explosion from within.

The external factors involved in the accumulation of elements of a new quality by a language can include the following: a change in the circle of native speakers, the spread of education, territorial movements of the masses, the creation of a new statehood, the development of science, technology, international contacts, etc. This also includes the factor of the active action of the media (print, radio, television), as well as the factor of socio-psychological restructuring of the individual in the conditions of the new statehood and, accordingly, the degree of adaptation to new conditions.

When considering the processes of self-regulation in language that occur as a result of internal laws, and taking into account the impact of external factors on these processes, it is necessary to observe a certain measure of the interaction of these factors: exaggerating the action and significance of one (self-development) can lead to a separation of the language from the society that gave birth to it; exaggeration of the role of the social factor (sometimes while completely forgetting the first) leads to vulgar sociologism.

The answer to the question of why the action of internal laws is a decisive (decisive, but not the only) factor in language development lies in the fact that language is a systemic formation. Language is not just a set, a sum of linguistic signs (morphemes, words, phrases, etc.), but also the relationships between them, so a failure in one link of signs can set in motion not only nearby links, but also the entire chain in whole (or a certain part of it).

Law of consistency is found at different language levels (morphological, lexical, syntactic) and manifests itself both within each level and in their interaction with each other. For example, a reduction in the number of cases in the Russian language (six out of nine) led to an increase in analytical features in the syntactic structure of the language - the function of the case form began to be determined by the position of the word in a sentence and its relationship with other forms. A change in the semantics of a word can affect its syntactic connections and even its form. And, conversely, a new syntactic compatibility can lead to a change in the meaning of the word (its expansion or narrowing). Often these processes are interdependent processes. For example, in modern use, the term “ecology”, due to expanded syntactic connections, has significantly expanded its semantics: ecology (from the Greek óikos - house, dwelling, residence and...logy) is the science of the relationships of plant and animal organisms and the communities they form between yourself and with the environment (BES. T. 2. M., 1991). From the middle of the 20th century. In connection with the increased human impact on nature, ecology has acquired importance as the scientific basis for rational environmental management and the protection of living organisms. At the end of the 20th century. the ecology section is being formed - human ecology(social ecology); aspects appear accordingly city ecology, environmental ethics etc. In general, we can already talk about the greening of modern science. Environmental problems have given rise to socio-political movements (for example, the Greens, etc.). From the point of view of language, there was an expansion of the semantic field, as a result of which another meaning (more abstract) appeared - “requiring protection.” The latter is visible in new syntactic contexts: ecological culture, industrial ecology, greening of production, ecology of life, words, ecology of spirit; ecological situation, environmental disaster and so on. In the last two cases, a new shade of meaning appears - “danger, trouble.” Thus, a word with a special meaning becomes widely used, in which semantic transformations occur by expanding syntactic compatibility.

Systemic relationships are also revealed in a number of other cases, in particular, when choosing predicate forms for subject nouns denoting positions, titles, professions, etc. For modern consciousness, say, the combination Doctor came sounds quite normal, although there is an obvious formal and grammatical discrepancy here. The form changes, focusing on specific content (the doctor is a woman). By the way, in this case, along with semantic-syntactic transformations, one can also note the influence of the social factor: the profession of a doctor in modern conditions is as widespread among women as among men, and the doctor-doctor correlation is carried out at a different linguistic level - stylistic.

Systematicity as a property of language and an individual sign in it, discovered by F. de Saussure, also exhibits deeper relationships, in particular the relationship between the sign (signifier) and the signified, which turned out to be not indifferent.

On the one hand, it appears as something lying on the surface, completely understandable and obvious. On the other hand, its action reveals a complex interweaving of external and internal stimuli that delay transformations in language. The understandability of the law is explained by the objective desire of language for stability, the “security” of what has already been achieved, acquired, but the potency of language just as objectively acts in the direction of shaking this stability, and a breakthrough in the weak link of the system turns out to be quite natural. But here forces come into play that are not directly related to the language itself, but can impose a kind of taboo on innovation. Such prohibitive measures come from linguists and special institutions with the appropriate legal status; in dictionaries, manuals, reference books, official regulations, perceived as a social establishment, there are indications of the legitimacy or incompetence of the use of certain linguistic signs. There is, as it were, an artificial delay in the obvious process, the preservation of tradition contrary to the objective state of affairs. Take, for example, a textbook example with the widespread use of the verb to call in the forms з Oh no, they're calling instead of ringing and t, calling t. The rules preserve tradition, cf.: g and rit - fry, cook - cook, cook - cook, in the latter case (in and Rish) tradition has been overcome (formerly: Raven is not but they don’t cook.- I. Krylov; The stove pot is more valuable to you: you cook your food in it.- A. Pushkin), but in the verb to call the tradition is stubbornly preserved, not by language, but by codifiers, “establishers” of the literary norm. Such preservation of tradition is justified by other, similar cases, for example, the preservation of traditional stress in verb forms including and t - turn on t, turn t, hand t - hand t, hand t(cf.: incorrect, unconventional use of forms incl. yu cheat, lie cheat hosts of the television programs “Itogi” and “Time”, although such an error has a certain basis - this is a general tendency to shift the stress of verbs to the root part: var and t - cook, cook, cook, cook; beckon - beckon, beckon, beckon, beckon). So tradition can act selectively and not always motivated. Another example: they haven’t spoken for a long time two pairs of felt boots (felt boots), boots (boots), boots (bot), stockings (stockings). But the shape of the socks is stubbornly preserved (and the shape of the socks is traditionally classified as vernacular). The tradition is especially protected by the rules of writing words. Compare, for example, numerous exceptions in the spelling of adverbs, adjectives, etc. The main criterion here is tradition. Why, for example, is it written separately with pantalyku, although the rule states that adverbs formed from nouns that have disappeared from use are written together with prepositions (prefixes)? The answer is incomprehensible - according to tradition, but tradition is a safe conduct for something long gone. Of course, the global destruction of tradition can seriously harm a language, depriving it of such necessary qualities as continuity, stability, and solidity in the end. But partial periodic adjustments of assessments and recommendations are necessary.

The law of tradition is good when it acts as a restraining principle, counteracting random, unmotivated use or, finally, preventing the too extended action of other laws, in particular the law of speech analogy (such as the dialect path in creative work by analogy with life) . Among the traditional spellings there are spellings that are highly conventional (for example, the ending of adjectives -ого with the letter g in place of the phoneme<в>; writing adverbs with -ь ( jump up, backhand) and verb forms (write, read). This also includes traditional spellings of feminine nouns such as night, rye, mouse, although in this case the law of morphological analogy is also included in the action, when -ь acts as a graphic equalizer of noun declension paradigms, cf.: night - at night, like spruce - spruce, door - door.

The law of tradition often collides with the law of analogy, creating in a sense a conflict situation, the resolution of which in particular cases may turn out to be unpredictable: either tradition or analogy will win.

At the phonetic level, the law of analogy manifests itself, for example, in the case when, instead of a historically expected sound, another appears in a word form, by analogy with other forms. For example, the development of the sound o after a soft consonant before a hard consonant is in place (yat): star - stars (from zvezda - zvezdy) by analogy with the forms spring - spring.

An analogy can cause the transition of verbs from one class to another, for example, by analogy with forms of verbs like read - read, throw - quit forms appeared: I gargle (instead of rinsing), waving (instead of waving), meowing (instead of meowing), etc. The analogy is especially active in irregular colloquial and dialect speech (for example, replacing alternations: shore - take care instead of taking care according to the example, you are carrying - you are carrying, etc.). This is how the forms are aligned, pulling them towards more common patterns.

In particular, some verb forms are subject to alignment of the stress system, where book tradition and living usage collide. For example, the feminine form of the past tense of the verb turns out to be quite stable; compare: call - called, called, called, but: called A; tear - tore, tore, tore, but: tore A; sleep - slept, slept, slept, but: slept A; come to life - oh lived, oh lived, oh lived, but: came to life A. Naturally, the violation of tradition affected specifically the feminine form (sound a la, tear la, spa la etc.), which is not yet allowed in the literary language, but is widespread in everyday use.

A lot of fluctuations in stress are observed in terminological vocabulary, where tradition (as a rule, these are Latin and Greek terms in origin) and practice of use in Russian contexts also often collide. Analogy in this class of words turned out to be extremely productive, and discrepancies were extremely rare. For example, most terms place the emphasis on the final part of the stem, such as: arrhythm and I, ischemia, hypertension, schizophrenia, idiot, bestiality, endoscopy, dystrophy, diplopy, allergies, therapy, electrotherapy, endoscopy, asymmetry and others. But they firmly maintain the emphasis within the stem of the word on -graphy and -tion: photogr aphy, fluorography, lithography, cinematography, monography; pagination, inlay, indexing. In the grammatical dictionary, among 1000 words in -tion, only one word with shifted stress was found - pharmac and me (pharmaceuticals). However, in other cases, there are different forms of words depending on their word-formation composition, for example: heteron oh mia(Greek nómos - law), heteroph he and I(Greek phōnē - sound), heterog and Mia(Greek gámos - marriage), but: heterostyle and I(Greek stýlos - pillar), heterophyll and I(Greek ph yllon- leaf), in the last two cases one can see a violation of tradition and, accordingly, a similarity in pronunciation. By the way, in some terms modern dictionaries record double stress, for example with the same component -phonia - diaphonia. The Latin term industria BES gives in two variants (industria u stri i), and the dictionary marks the form of industries and I as outdated and recognizes the form of ind. as corresponding to the modern norm in striae; double stress is also recorded in the words apopl e xi i and epil e psi i, as in the mentioned word diaph he and I, although a similar diachron model and I retains a single accent. Disagreements in the recommendations are also found regarding the word kulin and Riya. Most dictionaries consider the literary form kulin and Riya, but in the edition of the dictionary by S.I. Ozhegov and N.Yu. Shvedova (1992) both options are already recognized as literary - kulin and ri I. Terms with the component -mania staunchly retain the emphasis -mania (English ania, melomania, gallomania, bibliomania, megalomania, etheromania, gigantomania and etc.). Dictionary A.A. Zaliznyaka gives 22 such words. However, in professional speech, sometimes, under the influence of linguistic analogy, the stress shifts to the end of the word, for example, medical workers more often pronounce drug and I than people's commissar and.

The transfer of stress to the final stem is noted even in terms that staunchly retain the original stress, for example mastopat and I(cf. most of these terms: homeop a tia, allopathy, myopathy, antipathy, metriopathy and etc.). Often the difference in stress is explained by the different origin of words - Latin or Greek: dislal and I(from dis... and Greek lalia - speech), dyspeps and I(from dis... and gr. pepsis - digestion), dysplasia and I(from dis... and gr. plasis - education); disp e Russia(from Latin dispersio - scattering), disk in Russia(from Latin discussio - consideration).

Thus, in the terminological models of words, contradictory trends are observed: on the one hand, the preservation of traditional forms of words based on the etymology of word formation, and on the other hand, the desire for unification and likening of forms.

The alignment of forms under the influence of the law of analogy can also be observed in grammar, for example, in the change in verbal and nominal control: for example, the control of the verb is affected by dates. p. (what, instead of what) arose by analogy with other verbs (to be amazed at what, to be surprised at what). Often such changes are assessed as erroneous and unacceptable in the literary language (for example, under the influence of the combination faith in victory, the erroneous combination arose confidence in victory instead of confidence in victory).

The action is especially active in modern Russian language law of speech economy(or saving speech effort). The desire for economy of linguistic expression is found at different levels of the language system - in vocabulary, word formation, morphology, syntax. The effect of this law explains, for example, the replacement of forms of the following type: Georgian from Georgian, Lezgin from Lezgin, Ossetian from Ossetian (however, Bashkir - ?); The same is evidenced by the zero ending in the genitive plural of a number of classes of words: five Georgians instead of Georgians; one hundred grams instead one hundred grams; half a kilo of orange, tomato, tangerine instead of oranges, tomatoes, tangerines and so on.

Syntax has a particularly large reserve in this regard: phrases can serve as the basis for the formation of words, and complex sentences can be reduced to simple ones, etc. For example: electric train (electric train), record book (grade book), buckwheat (buckwheat) and so on. Wed. also parallel use of constructions like: My brother said that my father would come. - My brother told me about my father’s arrival. The economy of linguistic forms is evidenced by various abbreviations, especially if the abbreviation formations acquire the permanent form of names - nouns that can obey the rules of grammar ( university, study at university).

The development of language, like development in any other area of life and activity, cannot but be stimulated by the inconsistency of ongoing processes. Contradictions (or antinomies) are inherent in language itself as a phenomenon; without them, any changes are unthinkable. It is in the struggle of opposites that the self-development of language is manifested.

There are usually five or six main antinomies: the antinomy of speaker and listener; antinomy of usage and capabilities of the language system; antinomy of code and text; antinomy due to the asymmetry of the linguistic sign; the antinomy of two functions of language - informational and expressive, the antinomy of two forms of language - written and oral.

A clash of interests creates a conflict situation that must be resolved by searching for forms of expression that satisfy both sides.

In different eras of society, this conflict is resolved in different ways. For example, in a society where public forms of communication play a leading role (debates, rallies, oratorical appeals, persuasive speeches), the focus on the listener is more noticeable. Ancient rhetoric was largely constructed taking into account precisely this attitude. They provide clear rules for constructing a persuasive speech. It is not without reason that the techniques of rhetoric and the organization of public speech are actively instilled in the modern socio-political situation in Russia, when the principle of openness and open expression of one’s opinion is elevated to the leading criterion for the activities of parliamentarians, journalists, correspondents, etc. Currently, manuals and guides are appearing on the problems of oratory speech , problems of dialogue, problems of speech culture, the concept of which includes not only such quality as literary literacy, but especially expressiveness, persuasiveness, and logic.

In other eras, there may be a clear dominance of written language and its influence on the process of communication. The orientation towards the written text (the predominance of the interests of the writer, the speaker), the text of the order prevailed in Soviet society, and it was to this that the activities of the media were subordinated. Thus, despite the intralinguistic essence of this antinomy, it is thoroughly imbued with social content.

Thus, the conflict between the speaker and the listener is resolved either in favor of the speaker or in favor of the listener. This can manifest itself not only at the level of general attitudes, as noted above, but also at the level of the linguistic forms themselves - in the preference of some and the denial or limitation of others. For example, in the Russian language of the beginning and middle of the 20th century. Many abbreviations appeared (sound, alphabetic, and partly syllabic). This was extremely convenient for those who compiled the texts (saving speech effort), however, nowadays more and more divided names are appearing (cf.: Society for the Protection of Animals, Department for Combating Organized Crime, Society of Easel Artists), which do not deny the use of abbreviations, but, competing with them, have a clear advantage of influencing power, since they contain open content. The following example is very clear in this regard: the Literary Gazette dated June 5, 1991 published a letter from Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Rus', which sharply condemned the practice of using the abbreviation ROC (Russian Orthodox Church) in our press. “Neither the spirit of the Russian person, nor the rules of church piety allow such a substitution,” writes the patriarch. Indeed, such familiarity in relation to the Church turns into a serious spiritual loss. The name of the Russian Orthodox Church turns into an empty icon that does not touch the spiritual strings of a person. Alexy II ends his reasoning this way: “I hope that strained abbreviations like the Russian Orthodox Church or the once-existent “V. Great" and even "I. Christ" will not be found in church speech."

Antinomy of code and text- this is a contradiction between a set of linguistic units (code - the sum of phonemes, morphemes, words, syntactic units) and their use in coherent speech (text). There is such a connection here: if you increase the code (increase the number of linguistic signs), then the text that is built from these signs will be reduced; and vice versa, if you shorten the code, the text will certainly increase, since the missing code characters will have to be conveyed descriptively, using the remaining characters. A textbook example of such a relationship is the names of our relatives. In the Russian language, special kinship terms existed to name various kinship relationships within the family: brother-in-law - husband’s brother; brother-in-law - wife's brother; sister-in-law - husband's sister; sister-in-law - wife's sister, daughter-in-law - son's wife; father-in-law - husband's father; mother-in-law - father-in-law's wife, husband's mother; son-in-law - husband of a daughter, sister, sister-in-law; father-in-law - wife's father; mother-in-law - wife's mother; nephew - the son of a brother, sister; niece - daughter of a brother or sister. Some of these words ( brother-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, daughter-in-law, father-in-law, mother-in-law) were gradually forced out of speech, the words fell out, but the concepts remained. Consequently, descriptive substitutions ( wife's brother, husband's brother, husband's sister etc.). The number of words in the active dictionary has decreased, and the text has increased as a result. Another example of the relationship between code and text is the relationship between a term and its definition (definition). The definition gives a detailed interpretation of the term. Consequently, the more often terms are used in the text without their description, the shorter the text will be. True, in this case, a reduction in the text when lengthening the code is observed under the condition that the number of naming objects does not change. If a new sign appears to designate a new object, then the structure of the text does not change. An increase in the code due to borrowing occurs in cases where a foreign word can only be translated by a phrase, for example: cruise - a sea voyage, surprise - an unexpected gift, broker (broker) - an intermediary in making a transaction (usually in stock exchange transactions), lounge - a device in a circus, insuring performers for performing dangerous stunts, camping - a camp for auto tourists.

Antinomy of usage and language capabilities(in another way - systems and norms) is that the capabilities of the language (system) are much wider than the use of linguistic signs accepted in a literary language; the traditional norm acts in the direction of restriction and prohibition, while the system is capable of satisfying large demands for communication. For example, the norm fixes the insufficiency of some grammatical forms (the absence of a 1st person singular form in the verb to win, the absence of opposition by aspect in a number of verbs that qualify as two-aspect, etc.). Usage compensates for such absences by taking advantage of the capabilities of the language itself, often using analogies for this. For example, in the verb attack, the meanings of the perfective or imperfective form are not distinguished out of context, then, contrary to the norm, a pair is created attack - attack similar to verbs organize - organize(the form of organizing has already penetrated into the literary language). Forms are created using the same pattern. use, mobilize and others, which are only at the stage of vernacular. Thus the norm resists the possibilities of language. More examples: the system gives two types of endings for nouns in the nominative plural - houses/houses, engineers/engineers, toms/toms, workshops/workshops. The norm differentiates forms, taking into account style and stylistic criteria: literary-neutral ( professors, teachers, engineers, poplars, cakes) and professional ( cake, casing, power, anchor, editor, proofreader), vernacular (squares, mother), bookish ( teachers, professors).

Antinomy caused by the asymmetry of the linguistic sign, is manifested in the fact that the signified and the signifier are always in a state of conflict: the signified (meaning) strives to acquire new, more precise means of expression (new signs for designation), and the signifier (sign) strives to expand the range of its meanings, to acquire new meanings. A striking example of the asymmetry of a linguistic sign and its overcoming is the history of the word ink with a fairly transparent meaning ( niello, black - ink). Initially, there was no conflict - one signified and one signifier (ink is a black substance). However, over time, substances of a different color appear to perform the same function as ink, so a conflict arose: there is one signifier (ink), and there are several signifieds - liquids of different colors. As a result, combinations that were absurd from the point of view of common sense arose red ink, blue ink, green ink. The absurdity is removed by the next step in mastering the word ink, the appearance of the phrase black ink; Thus, the word ink lost its black meaning and began to be used in the meaning of “liquid used for writing.” This is how a balance arose - the signified and the signifier “came to agreement.”

Examples of asymmetry of linguistic signs are words kitten, puppy, calf etc., if they are used in the meanings “baby cat”, “baby dog”, “baby cow”, in which there is no differentiation based on gender and therefore one signifier refers to two signifieds. If it is necessary to accurately indicate the sex, corresponding correlations arise - calf and heifer, cat and cat, etc. In this case, say, the name calf means only a male cub. Another example: the word deputy means a person in office, regardless of gender (one sign - two signified). The same is true in other cases, for example, when the designations of a person, a creature and an object collide: broiler (chicken room and chicken), classifier (device and the one who classifies), animator (device and animation specialist), conductor (machine part and transport worker), etc. The language seeks to overcome such inconvenience of forms, in particular, through secondary suffixation: baking powder (subject) - baking powder(person), puncher (object) - puncher (person). Simultaneously with this differentiation of designations (person and object), a specialization of suffixes also occurs: the person suffix -tel (cf. teacher) becomes a designation of the object, and the meaning of the person is conveyed by the suffix -schik.

The possible asymmetry of a linguistic sign in our time leads to an expansion of the meanings of many words and their generalization; these are, for example, designations of various positions, titles, professions that are equally suitable for men and women ( lawyer, pilot, doctor, professor, assistant, director, lecturer and etc.). Even if correlating forms of the feminine gender are possible with such words, they either have a reduced stylistic coloring ( lecturer, doctor, lawyer), or acquire a different meaning (professor - wife of a professor). Neutral correlated pairs are rarer: teacher - teacher, chairman - chairman).

The antinomy of the two functions of language comes down to the opposition of a purely informational function and an expressive one. Both act in different directions: the information function leads to uniformity and standardization of linguistic units, the expressive function encourages novelty and originality of expression. The speech standard is fixed in official spheres of communication - in business correspondence, legal literature, government acts. Expression, novelty of expression is more characteristic of oratorical, journalistic, and artistic speech. A kind of compromise (or more often a conflict) is found in the media, especially in the newspaper, where expression and standard, according to V.G. Kostomarov, are a constructive feature.

We can name another area of manifestation of contradictions - this is antinomy of oral and written language. Currently, due to the growing role of spontaneous communication and the weakening of the framework of official public communication (in the past - prepared in writing), due to the weakening of censorship and self-censorship, the very functioning of the Russian language has changed.

In the past, rather isolated forms of language implementation - oral and written - begin in some cases to come closer, intensifying their natural interaction. Oral speech perceives elements of bookishness, written speech widely uses the principles of colloquialism. The very relationship between bookishness (the basis is written speech) and colloquialism (the basis is oral speech) begins to collapse. In spoken speech, not only lexico-grammatical features of bookish speech appear, but also purely written symbolism, for example: person with a capital letter, kindness in quotes, quality with a plus (minus) sign and etc.

Moreover, from oral speech, these “book borrowings” again pass into written speech in a colloquial form. Here are some examples: We leave behind-the-scenes agreements outside the brackets(MK, 1993, March 23); Only medical workers serving 20 clients of the sobering-up center, I counted 13 plus a psychologist, plus four consultants(Pravda, 1990, February 25); One of the side effects of this so-called fetal therapy is a general rejuvenation of the body, a change in biological age.(Evening Moscow, 1994, March 23); These charming blond girls in jackets and skirts as blue as his suit, with snow-white blouses, in these beautiful bright orange thickly inflated vests and dash belts, suddenly became inaccessible to him, like the Kingdom of Heaven(F. Neznansky. Private investigation).

So the boundaries of speech forms become blurred, and, according to V.G. Kostomarov, a special type of speech appears - book-oral speech.

This situation predetermines the increased interpenetration of bookishness and colloquiality (oral and written), which sets in motion the adjacent planes, giving birth to a new linguistic quality on the basis of new clashes and contradictions. “The dependence of the functioning of linguistic means on the form of speech decreases, but their attachment to the topic, sphere, and situation of communication increases.”

All these antinomies that were discussed are internal stimuli for the development of language. But thanks to the influence of social factors, their action in different eras of the life of a language may turn out to be more or less intense and open. In modern language, many of these antinomies have become especially active. In particular, the most striking phenomena characteristic of the functioning of the Russian language of our time are M.V. Panov considers the strengthening of the personal principle, stylistic dynamism and stylistic contrast, and dialogical communication. Thus, socio- and psycholinguistic factors influence the characteristics of the language of the modern era.

Saving language resources. And the means that are required to ensure the needs of thinking and mutual understanding in communication are the economy of linguistic means. Means of language economy at the lexical level

Continuous random variable, distribution function and probability density

A fairy tale about a wonderful telephone, a magical palace, a terrible good fellow, and a wonderful miracle Introduction to the fairy tale on the telephone

Arkady's meeting with his father (analysis of the second chapter of the novel I

Online test for the Unified State Examination in the Russian language I will pass the Unified State Examination in the Russian language

(1)Archimedes’s enormous service to all humanity is

Saving language resources. And the means that are required to ensure the needs of thinking and mutual understanding in communication are the economy of linguistic means. Means of language economy at the lexical level

Similar articles