When characterizing literary language XX century, two chronological periods should be distinguished: I - from October 1917 to April 1985 and II - from April 1985 to the present. What happens to the Russian literary language during these periods?
After education Soviet Union its development and enrichment continues. The vocabulary of the literary language is most clearly increasing .. A large number of words are created denoting new phenomena and concepts that reflect fundamental changes in the state, political, economic structure of the country, for example, Komsomol member, regional committee, virgin lands, collective farm, socialist competition, kindergarten, etc. Fiction, journalistic, popular science literature has replenished the arsenal of expressive and visual means of the literary language. In morphology, syntax, the number of synonymous variants increases, differing from each other in shades of meaning or stylistic coloring.
Researchers of the Russian language since the 20s. XX century Special attention devoted to the theory of literary language. As a result, they determined and characterized the system-structural division of the literary language. Firstly, the literary language has two types: book-written and oral-colloquial; secondly, each type is realized in speech. Book-written is presented in special speech (written - scientific speech and written official business speech) and in artistic and visual speech (written journalistic speech and written artistic speech). The oral-colloquial type is presented in public speech (scientific speech and oral radio and television speech) and in colloquial speech (oral colloquial everyday speech).
In the 20th century, the formation of the Russian letter language ended, which began to be a complex dark structural organization.
The second period - the period of perestroika and post-perestroika - gave special meaning to those processes that accompany the functioning of the language at all stages of its existence, made them more significant, more clearly expressed, more vividly presented. First of all, we should talk about a significant replenishment of the vocabulary of the Russian language with new words (state structure, barter, Internet, cartridge, case, kiwi, hamburger, etc.), about updating a large number words, finding; previously in the passive. In addition to new words, many words that seemed to have gone out of use forever have been brought back to life: corporation, trust, department, communion, blessing, carnival, etc.
Speaking about the replenishment of the vocabulary of the literary language, it should be noted: a striking feature of our current language development is the clogging of speech; borrowing "Foreignization" of the Russian language causes concern for linguists, literary critics, writers who are concerned about its future fate.
Throughout its history, the Russian language has been enriched not only at the expense of internal resources, but also at the expense of other languages. But in some periods this influence, especially the borrowing of words, was excessive, and then there is an opinion that foreign words do not add anything new, since there are Russian words that are identical to them, that many Russian words cannot compete with fashionable borrowings and are forced out them. The history of the Russian literary language shows: borrowing without measure clogs speech, makes it not understandable to everyone; reasonable borrowing enriches speech, gives it greater accuracy. In connection with significant changes in the conditions for the functioning of the language, another problem is currently becoming relevant, the problem of language as a means of communication, language in its implementation, the problem of speech.
What features characterize the functioning of the literary language at the end of the 20th century?
First, the composition of participants in mass communication has never been so numerous and diverse (by age, education, official position, political, religious, social views, party orientation).
Secondly, official censorship has almost disappeared, so people express their thoughts more freely, their speech becomes more open, confidential, and relaxed.
Thirdly, speech begins to dominate spontaneous, spontaneous, not prepared in advance.
Fourth, the diversity of communication situations leads to a change in the nature of communication. It is freed from rigid formality, it becomes more relaxed.
New conditions for the functioning of the language, the emergence of a large number of unprepared public speaking lead not only to the democratization of speech, but also to a sharp decline in its culture. How is it shown?
Firstly, in violation of the orthoepic (pronunciation), grammatical norms of the Russian language. Scientists, journalists, poets, ordinary citizens write about it. Especially a lot of criticism is caused by the speech of deputies, television and radio workers.
Secondly, at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, the democratization of the language reached such proportions that it would be more correct to call the process liberalization, or, more precisely, vulgarization.
On the pages of the periodical press, in the speech of educated people, jargon, colloquial elements and other non-literary means poured in: grandmas, piece, piece, stolnik, baldness, pump out, launder, unfasten, scroll and many more. etc. Common, even in official speech, became the words tusovka, disassembly, lawlessness, the last word in the meaning of "unlimited lawlessness" has gained particular popularity.
For speakers, public speakers, the measure of admissibility has changed, if not completely absent. Cursing, "obscene language", "unprintable word" today can be found on the pages of independent newspapers, free publications, in the texts of works of art. Dictionaries are sold in shops and book markets, containing not only jargon, thieves, but also obscene words.
There are quite a few people who say that swearing and swearing are considered a characteristic, distinctive feature of the Russian people. If we turn to oral folk art, proverbs and sayings, it turns out that it is not entirely legitimate to say that the Russian people consider swearing an integral part of their lives. Yes, people are trying to somehow justify it, to emphasize that scolding is a common thing: Scolding is not a reserve, and without it not for an hour; Swearing is not smoke - the eye will not eat out; Hard words break no bones. It seems to even help in the work, you can’t do without it: You won’t swear, you won’t do the job; Without swearing, you can't unlock the lock in the cage.
But something else is more important: Arguing, arguing, but scolding is a sin; Do not scold: what comes out of a person, then he will be filthy; Swearing is not resin, but akin to soot: it doesn’t cling, it stains like that; With abuse people dry, and with praise they get fat; You won’t take it with your throat, you won’t beg with abuse.
This is not only a warning, this is already a condemnation, this is a ban.
The Russian literary language is our wealth, our heritage. He embodied the cultural and historical traditions of the people. We are responsible for his condition, for his fate.
Fair and relevant (especially at the present time!) are the words of I.S. Turgenev: “In the days of doubt, in the days of painful reflections on the fate of my homeland - you are my only support and support, O great, powerful, truthful and free Russian language! Without you - how not to fall into despair at the sight of everything that happens at home? But it is impossible to believe that such a language was not given to a great people!”
The article is devoted to the analysis of the modern language situation. The main factors influencing the development of the modern literary language are determined, among which the central place belongs to the language of the media. The prospects and nature of the development of the modern Russian literary language are characterized.
Keywords: language situation, mass media language, mass culture, postmodernism, literary language, national language
In works devoted to the state of the modern Russian literary language, in reports and speeches by Russian linguists, the intonation is alarming. The Russian language is being invaded by foreign borrowings (primarily Americanisms). A stream of jargon, vernacular, even obscene vocabulary has poured into literary speech. Under the influence of these negative factors, our speech loses the quality of literature, needs urgent measures of salvation. The topic of discussion in the program of V. Tretyakov “What is to be done?” is typical. (Culture channel, February 21, 2010): “The Russian language is still great, but no longer powerful?”
Is the diagnosis correct and are fears about the state and fate of native speech justified?
Of course, the observations are correct, but it seems premature and unjustified to draw pessimistic conclusions from the observed processes. It is important to proceed from the peculiarities of the modern language situation and take into account the trends arising from it.
Let us turn from this point of view to foreign borrowings. Indeed, their number, as it seems to a superficial glance, exceeds the critical mass. But how to determine this mass, an acceptable measure of borrowing, after which satiety sets in, the abuse of foreign vocabulary? For example, according to French linguists, French more than 20,000 foreign words are poured in every year, which causes public concern, concerned that the French language may eventually turn into “French”.
As for the Russian language, two reference dictionaries “New Words and Meanings” were published based on the materials of the press and literature of the 60s. (M., 1971) and the 70s. (M., 1984). They also recorded English-language borrowings, which were more or less widespread. However, their number was not counted, and borrowings not recommended for use were not given, which seems to be especially important. After all, borrowings turn out to be ballast only when they do not denote new realities, do not express new meanings or their shades, do not differ stylistically from Russian equivalents (if any).
Therefore, the point is not even in the number of borrowings, but in their quality. When looking at the problem not in a normative, but in a functional sense, foreign borrowings will appear in a different light - as one of the leading trends in the development of the modern Russian literary language. At the same time, a feature of its current state is a sharp increase in the number of borrowings. With the development of science, economics, in connection with the course towards modernization, the Russian language is literally “doomed” to borrowings. Terms and concepts of computer science, economics, politics, etc. are poured into the Russian lexicon in a wide stream as the named industries form and develop on domestic soil (cf.: leasing, merchandising, nanotechnologies, innovations, innovation city, website, portal, web designer, user, hacker, marketing, etc.). They enter the language along with the development of the relevant branches of science and technology, which is promptly reflected in new dictionaries. New trends in popular culture, postmodernism are also accompanied by vocabulary replenishment (tribute, single, sequel, prequel, suspense, etc.).
The Russian lexicon is expanding quite significantly. This process is actively ongoing. And it would be wrong to complain about this, or even more so to try to look for Russian equivalents of new words. A powerful productive process of enrichment of the Russian dictionary is taking place before our eyes.
Foreign borrowings not only significantly expand the vocabulary, increasing the possibilities of nomination, expanding the national linguistic picture of the world. They also have a significant impact on the internal language development - on the enrichment of the semantics of many Russian words. So, under the influence of foreign words (semantic tracing), words such as a nail (season), challenge (to humanity), successful (man), etc. acquired new shades of meaning. Thus, borrowing foreign words is a very productive and progressive process. The activation of this process is one of the features of the modern language situation. Borrowings contribute to the expansion of verbal resources, the development of semantics, the intellectualization of the language (the number of concepts increases), the laconicism of speech (Russian equivalents, if possible, are, as a rule, longer than foreign neologisms).
Jargon and vernacular also have a generally positive effect on the literary language. They bring expression, evaluativeness into it, liberate official speech, saving it from excessive pathos, solemnity, bookishness. It is far from accidental that many jargons have entered the literary language (for example, partying, lawlessness, scumbags), while others are on the way to entering it (collision, roof, racketeering, arrow, throw). In any case, this source of enrichment of the literary language remains open. Of course, here there is a danger of oversaturation, so the linguistic taste of the writer (speaker), the assessment of specific texts, is very important. In the process of development of the literary language, the selection of the most relevant lexical units that meet social needs takes place.
If we evaluate the effect of all the named sources of replenishment of the dictionary (foreign vocabulary, jargon, vernacular), then the main and unifying function of them is that they contribute to the democratization of the literary language. L.V. wrote about this deeply and accurately. Shcherba:
“Before the revolution, technical words were almost not included in the literary language at all.<...>and did not even get into the pages of the daily press. This is an old European tradition of literary languages<...>. This was quite understandable: the literary language in the first place was then the language of the salon, the language of high society, which stood very far from any kind of production.<...>. In the future, there is a process of gradual democratization of the literary language, served by the literary language of significant sections of business people. In this regard, in each new edition of the Dictionary of the French Academy, a new and new number of production terms appears. The same process, but not in such a clear form, took place with us. The revolution dramatically changed the state of things - and in the sense that real people from production themselves constituted that “society”, the function of which is the literary language, and the ideology of society changed. Non-working elements have lost weight in society. And the issues of production and its organization became the focus of attention” [Shcherba, 1957, p. 137-138].
Democratization continues in modern era. This is the main path of development of the literary language from its classical state (XX century) to the modern one. This is the path from its literaturocentric quality, when the literary language was the flesh and blood of the language of fiction, to its modern state, when its main features are determined by the language of the media (more details below). And for the first time in the entire history of its existence, the literary language becomes the property of not the elite, not an insignificant part of its speakers, but the property of the people, the masses. This is one of the main features of the modern language situation, which determines the direction of development of the literary language.
The nature of culture (cf. noble, raznochinskaya, peasant, proletarian) is determined by its bearers. The homogeneous language environment determines the conservative nature of the development of the language, the weak role of borrowings from various sources. Changing the composition of native speakers leads to dramatic shifts in the standard language. New groups, layers of native speakers introduce their language skills, favorite means into literary speech, which affects the qualities of the entire literary language. A period of stability gives way to a period of more or less dramatic changes.
The period we are experiencing (the end of the 20th - the beginning of the 21st century) is characterized by a serious change in the composition of native speakers. So, with the spread of the Internet, the rapid development of mass communication, the base of the literary language is expanding dramatically. Native speakers get the word and begin to actively express themselves, not constrained by the norms of the former speech culture, and often opposing themselves to culture. These are, as a rule, carriers of urban vernacular, slang. There is a further democratization of the literary language, stimulated by social changes (“perestroika”, political and economic reforms, the formation of a middle class).
Factors that have a strong influence on the development of the literary language, on the process of its democratization, also include such phenomena as mass culture, postmodernism (modernism), and the language of the media.
In linguistic reality, everything is interconnected: poetry, prose, art, media, science, folk culture, mass culture, the Internet. But far from all these factors are equivalent, and their mutual influence does not always proceed clearly, openly. It is often done implicitly. The principle operates, and the implementation accepts it various forms in different areas. It is necessary to distinguish between the direct external and open influence of extralinguistic factors and their internal influence.
A feature of the modern cultural situation is a radical change in the very system of culture. “Mass culture is becoming its main, dominant element. Elite (the former cultural dominant) and folk culture are pushed to the periphery, appearing secondary in the new system of culture” [Romanenko, 2009, p. 265].
Mass culture is one of the factors of strong influence on the literary language. Powerful criticism that falls on mass culture is conducted from the standpoint of the educational role of art and literature, while mass culture is opposed to the elite, mass classical literature. But in linguistic terms - from the point of view of the development of the literary language, the formation of the norm - the very fact of the existence of mass culture (primarily literature) is important. And no matter how subjectively we treat this phenomenon, such is the linguistic reality. Mass culture has an impact on the literary language already by virtue of its mass character. Classical literature and modern literature close to it in terms of prevalence are much inferior to mass literature, and therefore the impact of serious literature on the literary language is much weaker.
Mass culture changes and complicates the linguistic reality. And the analysis of the modern language situation is impossible without taking into account mass culture (literature). The prevailing negative assessment of mass culture simplifies and eliminates its role in the public consciousness and in the development of the literary language. The time has come for a deeper and more realistic analysis of mass culture (literature). Unfortunately, there are no works investigating the influence of mass culture on the literary language. It is not uncommon for those who write about popular literature to be carried away by examples of stylistic errors. However, the issue is not limited to errors. There is, if not competition, then interaction between mass literature and literature that inherits the traditions of the classics. And this interaction requires deep reflection.
It can be assumed that mass literature, designed for significant layers of native speakers, contributes to the development and introduction into the literary language of a wide range of colloquial means, urban vernacular. Of course, negative trends are also noticeable in popular literature (decrease in linguistic taste, frequent glamour, etc.). However, it is not always true to evaluate mass literature by the standards classical literature. Mass literature has other tasks, a different aesthetic ideal. And the characteristics of the modern language situation, state of the art literary language will be incomplete without taking into account the language of popular literature.
“Mass literature (mass art in general) acts as one of the forces that unite society. Through mass culture, its symbols and signs, the individual has the opportunity to adequately, as it seems to him, evaluate himself and correctly identify himself. It does this by reinforcing the figurative system of national identity, the corpus of national traditions, through the constant transmission of existing stereotypes and the introduction of new ones, intelligible for an unprepared “consumer”. In many ways, it is thanks to mass literature that society develops one system ideas, images and ideas” [Kupina et al., 2010, p. 57].
The impact of mass culture on the literary language is not least connected with the general postmodern situation in culture. Having arisen as a phenomenon of art (postmodernism covers the second half of the twentieth century and is relevant for early XXI c.), postmodernism has penetrated all spheres human activity and became a sign of the era [Kaminskaya, 2008, p. 94)]. S.I. Smetanina, who considers the media text in the system of culture, sees the specifics of Russian postmodernism “in experiencing the monstrous impasse of Soviet civilization”, and the features of the new journalistic text “in mixing documentary and artistic discourse”, “including it in a conditional context that is much more interesting than the actual information” [Mediatext , 2002, p. 79]. The text, therefore, does not so much tell about reality as it creates it. And the authors of not only literary texts, but also texts of mass communication turn to the postmodernist style of writing.
Characteristic signs of such a manner are the spread of the technique of “quoting writing”, the game element, intertextuality, the combination of the voices of the author, character and narrator. “The dominance of the author of the text of mass communication over the “alien word” and even over the “cultural background of the era” allows linguists to imagine the period we are considering as the “era of cultural interpretation of the finished word”, in which there are entire interpretative models of the most important national and cultural stereotypes” [Annenkova, 2006, With. 69-78].
So, the modern language situation is very complicated. The literary language is influenced by such heterogeneous factors as social changes (“perestroika”, reforms), mass culture, postmodernism, the Internet, etc. As a result, means of various, often opposite stylistic coloring. This leads, as many researchers rightly write, to the democratization of the literary language. But the question arises: how are such heterogeneous stylistic streams united in the literary language? And here we come to the main, central feature of the modern language situation.
Under the conditions of functional-style stratification, each functional style manifests a literary language. In each of them, with greater or lesser relief, certain features of the literary language are found. However, the linguistic consciousness of society needs a visual model of the literary language, which implements unity in diversity on the basis of any one style, acting as a kind of ideal representative of the literary language. Multi-style to one degree or another weakens the idea of the unity of the literary language, therefore, in each of the periods of development, society needs a style that would model, represent the literary language in its integrity and unity. This situation is especially acutely felt in our days, when heterogeneous stylistic streams that have poured into the literary language literally “blur” literary speech.
If in the 19th, partly in the 20th century, the concept of literary language was associated primarily with the language of fiction, then in our time the language of the media claims this role, which is associated both with its polythematic nature and with the changed conditions for its functioning. Television, radio, newspapers, magazines, movies have penetrated into all “pores” of human life. In terms of the strength of its influence on society, on the formation of linguistic tastes, linguistic behavior, and literary norms, the language of the media cannot be compared with the language of fiction, or with any other style. It is no accident that back in the 50s of the twentieth century. Academician N.I. Konrad called the language of the media the general, average language of the nation [Konrad, 1959, p. 12].
“Media language today,” writes Yu.N. Karaulov, - gained a dominant position among all functional varieties, absorbing, absorbing, assimilating the resources of all functional styles. In other words, the language of the media today is, whether we like it or not, a generalized model, an aggregate image national language, the collective user of which is all Russians” [Karaulov, 2001, p. 12].
The language of the media, by its very nature and functions, is intended to be a model of the national language. Journalism does not consciously seek to become such a model. Journalists did not and should not have such a goal. Journalism becomes a model of the national language spontaneously. Like the national language, journalism covers all spheres of life. And in this regard, it is commensurable, comparable to the national language. The language of the media reflects, analyzes, evaluates all spheres and phenomena of life, but from a special angle. The journalist “deals with mass consciousness (for him it is both a product and material) and, according to the same logic, he must probably transform this mass consciousness from its previous state into some new one. And in this way justify the necessity of one's profession” [Muratov, 2009, p. 207].
No other kind of national language has such a power of mass influence and such an important role in society as the language of the media. Therefore, by its very nature, functions and qualities, the language of the media acts as a factor that unites all layers, groups of native speakers.
For the linguistic consciousness of society, it is the language of the media that embodies ideas about the national language. intelligentsia, urban, rural population, carriers of dialects and jargons - the speech of all these groups proceeds to a certain extent in isolation. And only in the language of the media, all these stylistic streams are combined, forming a new functional and stylistic unity, representing the national language - the language of the media.
Being polythematic, spreading to all spheres of life, the language of the media, unlike any other kind of language, is able to include almost all linguistic means. However, this process is not a simple transfer from one language sphere to another. The language of the media masters, processes, and literalizes the means of various functional areas, changing their stylistic quality, giving them a uniform average coloring within the language of the media. This is what happens with foreign borrowings, which, due to repeated repetition in the media, lose to a large extent the coloring of bookishness, special speech, which contributes to their adaptation, development and significantly expands the lexicon, the scope of book-neutral means.
Jargon and vernacular undergo a similar process. Widely using them, the language of the media neutralizes their non-literary status, but emphasizes their appraisal, enhancing the pragmatic potential of the word, enriching its semantic structure.
Thus, the language of the media becomes “a source for the development and testing of new language tools, both informative and expressive (flash drive, online trading, ecotour, google, digitize, protest voting). Introducing them into a journalistic dialogue and reinforcing them with repeated repetition, the language of the media “patches holes” in the Russian language picture of the world” [Trofimova, Kuznetsova, 2010, p. 188].
Absorbing various stylistic streams, averaging and unifying them, the language of the media acts as a kind of laboratory in which new linguistic means are mastered, as the main language creator, shaping and fixing literary norms, as a means of maintaining the unity of the literary language. The role of the mass media language in modern language processes is exceptionally large and multifaceted. This main feature modern language situation. The development of the language takes place in the depths of functional styles and other areas of the national language. But the results of these processes are finally fixed in the language of the media.
If earlier the processes of language development were determined by the ratio “national language - literary language” (the latter was actually equated with the language of fiction), then in our time these processes are powerfully invaded by the language of the media and language development is determined by the triad “national language - language of the media - literary language". The language of the media is a kind of bridge between the national and literary language. Before becoming the property of the literary language, the means of the national language are processed in the language of the media. Ultimately, the language of the media becomes the main factor in the development of both the national and the literary language.
There was a time when the language of the newspaper was classified as a “lower literary formation” (A.M. Peshkovsky), and artistic speech occupied the top of the stylistic pyramid. But those times are gone. In the modern era, the language of the media has come to the forefront of language development. And it remains for us to study the incalculable consequences of the new linguistic situation. In our time, the source of literary norms lies in the media. It is here that new words, usages, turns of phrase, etc. are tested and approved. The role of fiction and authoritative writers in these processes tends to zero. And no matter how subjectively we may relate to such a situation, such is the linguistic reality, a sign of the times. Being literary at its core, the language of the media pushes, expands the boundaries of literature, mastering dialects, jargons, and vernacular.
Of course, it would be an oversimplification to reduce all development processes to the functioning of the media language. Literary language is a multidimensional formation. The complexity of the modern language situation lies in the action of many factors, such as functional styles, areas of the national language, genres. They continue to act, influencing the literary language, making it multi-register, polyphonic. However, all these processes are combined, acquire a common vector due to the language of the media, which implements unity in diversity.
“The language of the media is not one of the varieties of the national language, but is an independent full-fledged model of the national language. To describe and study the language of the media means to analyze and evaluate the degree of use of resources and satisfaction of the basic needs of this phenomenon, to assess the degree of objectivity and completeness of the picture of the world reproduced in it, the nature and degree of compliance with the national ideals of those possible worlds that are constructed in the language of the media” [Karaulov , 2007, p. 138].
Each of the spheres of the national language develops and functions relatively independently, which determines the linguistic (stylistic) status of these spheres. But only in the language of the media all these areas appear interconnected, transformed, manifesting the national language as its model.
This, in particular, explains the high prestige of the mass media language, which performs the function of a reference language in public practice, influencing politics, literature, and culture in general. The prominent role of the language of the media is increasingly beginning to be realized by researchers. “Today, the media are the main tool political influence V modern society. They are capable of being an effective means of influencing the social climate.” "Now almost all Slavic languages as a “reference speech” the language of the mass media, journalism is approved” [Nemishchenko, 2004, p. 107].
Acquiring aesthetic qualities, aesthetic originality, the language of the media begins to influence the language of fiction, even the language of lyric poetry. One of the striking examples is the work of Blaise Cendrars, which Soviet literary criticism attributed to the direction of poetic realism.
“Approximately around 1910, several lyric poets, primarily in France, as if undertaking to compete not only with the objectivity of painting, but with a newspaper, announcement, poster, advertisement, poster, strive to include maximum visual information in poetry. They are ready to present it in a catchy, undivided, direct way, without generalizing typification. As if to give it just the way life breaks into their work. Often - in the form of chains or clusters of facts, events, experiences and their metaphorical reflections” [Balashov, 1971, p. 191]. Entire newspaper genres are often borrowed. The use of the reporting form in literature has become a stable tradition.
Thus, the language of the media becomes a powerful aesthetic factor and changes the overall linguistic picture of culture.
So, the modern language situation is complex, multidimensional and multifactorial. All spheres and varieties included in the national and literary language retain their significance and continue to operate. However, this does not lead to the emergence of many independent "languages". And the main unifying factor is the language of the media. The unifying function of the language of the media reflects the situation that exists in modern society, in which the middle class is being formed, the role of which, according to sociologists, will increase. If in the previous era the literary language was associated primarily with the elite, then present stage literary language is the average speech of the whole society, especially its middle class.
The leading role of the media language in the development of the literary language does not mean a complete cessation of other factors (mass culture, classical and modern serious literature, the Internet, etc.). All these factors continue to operate, but act indirectly, indirectly. In this case, the language of the media acts as an intermediary, a filter. So, fiction (not mass) literature, if it continues to influence the literary language, then mainly through the language of the media. Before becoming the property of the literary language, diverse means of various stylistic affiliations must pass through the language of the media. The language of the media becomes a standard, a kind of legislator of literature.
What are the consequences and prospects of the described modern language situation?
If we try to generalize the effect of the factors mentioned above and outline the trends in the development of the literary language, then we can say that modern literary speech is moving towards neutralization, averaging, intellectualization (cf. the massive influx of foreign borrowings, the entry and partial neutralization of jargon and vernacular). And this is primarily due to the unusually increased role of the language of the media. At the present stage, the media form not only public opinion, but also in many respects the literary language. The democratization of the literary language, noted by many researchers, is nothing more than the assimilation by the literary language of areas that previously did not have such an important meaning and were outside the literary language.
In the “cauldron” of the language of mass communication, these means are processed, assimilated and begin to be used on a par with traditionally neutral and bookish ones. At the same time, the vector of development is shifting from bookiness to neutrality. If we use the old Lomonosov terms, then we can say that the “middle” style comes to the fore. "High" is losing its positions, "low" is approaching the middle, providing the means for the "medium" style. The aesthetic ideal of literary speech as a whole is difficult to formulate - it changes in relation to certain varieties of literary language, genres, etc. However, for all spheres of literary speech, there is a tendency to reduce or eliminate pathos, to adequately convey information using minimal linguistic means.
The modern period of development of the literary language is characterized by the influence of many factors. The field of action of the literary language is expanding, capturing almost the entire national language. The development of the literary language takes place under the sign and under the decisive influence of the language of the mass media. This is the main feature of the modern language situation. And no matter how one treats it - for example, to regret the sharp decline in the role of classical and modern serious (not mass) literature in the formation of literary norms, such is the objective reality. And it does not give grounds for subjective conclusions about the deterioration of the literary language, even about its death.
We are going through new period in the development of the literary language. And what is often regarded as a corruption, in fact, these are new qualities of the literary language, due to new social conditions and a new language situation. Boris Strugatsky answered very well to those who are preparing for a memorial service in their native language: “Anything can happen to the Russian language: perestroika, transformation, transformation - but not extinction. It is too big, powerful, flexible, dynamic and unpredictable to take and suddenly disappear. Unless - together with us.
Bibliography
Annenkova I.V. The language of modern media in the context of Russian culture // Russian speech. 2006.
Balashov N.I. Cendrars and poetic realism of the twentieth century. // Blaise Cendrars. Around the world and deep into the world. M., 1971.
Kaminskaya T.L. Addressee in mass communication. Veliky Novgorod, 2008.
Karaulov Yu.N. Media language as a model of a national language // Media language as an object of interdisciplinary research. Abstracts of the international scientific conference. M., 2001.
Karaulov Yu.N. Russian language and linguistic personality. M., 2007.
Konrad N.I. About “linguistic existence” // Japanese Linguistic Collection. M., 1959.
Kupina N.A., Litovskaya M.A., Nikolina N.A. Mass Literature Today. M., 2010.
Media text in the system of culture: dynamic processes in the language and style of journalism at the end of the 20th century. St. Petersburg, 2002.
Muratov S. Television in search of television. Chronicle of author's observations. M., 2009.
Neshimenko G.P. Language and culture in the history of the ethnos // Language. Ethnos. Culture. M., 1994.
Romanenko A.P. Soviet and post-Soviet mass verbal culture: common and different // Soviet past and present culture. T. 2. Ekaterinburg, 2009.
Trofimova O.V., Kuznetsova N.V. publicistic text: linguistic analysis: Proc. allowance. M., 2010.
Shcherba L.V. Literary language and ways of its development (in relation to the Russian language) // Shcherba L.V. Selected works on the Russian language. M., 1957.
Received May 14, 2010
Wed a similar neologism is Denglish (Deutch + English).
Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language XX! century. Current vocabulary / Ed. G.N. Sklyarevskaya. M., 2008; Krysin L.P. Explanatory dictionary of foreign words. 3rd ed. M., 2001.
Of course, this process may have costs. Not all new words will receive citizenship rights. The borrowing of some words is dictated by fashion (cf. the widespread use of the word trends instead of trends, approaches: “new trends in teaching literature.” Often, foreign words are used for the sake of a falsely understood prestige, although Russian words could well be dispensed with. The Russian language, like any other , needs to be protected for its purity.As an example, we can cite the “Official Dictionary of Neologisms” periodically reprinted in France, containing more than 2,500 foreign words that are not recommended for use. Unfortunately, we do not have such lexicographic publications.
Here characteristic example: “...High art educates, but mass culture corrupts and gradually removes the problem of humanism in principle?.. Criminal jargon gives rise to a criminal lifestyle, and that, in turn, inevitably - a criminal way of acting” (Izvestia. 04/01/2010).
Vartanova E.L. Terrorism is not a sensation // Media Trends. 2010. No. 4.
A strong impetus to democratization was also the repulsion from the odious language of the stagnant period, sinning with bookishness, burdened with clichés, and extremely ideological (see the works of N.A. Kupina).
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Similar Documents
Study of the features of the Russian language in the historical period of Russia from October 1917 to August 1991. Changing the stylistic properties of some words of the Russian language; distinctive features Soviet speech practice. Terms: concept, classification.
test, added 09/12/2012
Development of the Russian literary language. Varieties and branches of the national language. The function of the literary language. Folk colloquial speech. Oral and written form. Territorial and social dialects. Jargon and slang.
report, added 11/21/2006
The process of formation of the national literary language. The role of A.S. Pushkin in the formation of the Russian literary language, the influence of poetry on its development. The emergence of a "new style", an inexhaustible wealth of idioms and Russianisms in the works of A.S. Pushkin.
presentation, added 09/26/2014
Consideration of the features of the lexicographic description of the meaning of words in " explanatory dictionary modern Russian language". The nature of the language change of the century is the use of both traditional and previously peripheral models of word formation.
abstract, added 03/20/2011
Word-building system of the Russian language of the XX century. Modern word production (end of the twentieth century). The vocabulary of the Russian literary language. Intensive formation of new words. Changes in the semantic structure of words.
abstract, added 11/18/2006
Varieties of the literary language in Ancient Rus'. The origin of the Russian literary language. Literary language: its main features and functions. The concept of the norm of the literary language as the rules of pronunciation, formation and use of language units in speech.
abstract, added 08/06/2014
Characteristics of the Russian language - the largest of the world's languages, its features, the existence of many borrowings, the basis of many mixed languages. Classics of Russian literature about the possibilities of the Russian language. Reforms of the Russian literary language.
control work, added 10/15/2009
The nature of the language situation at the beginning of the 20th century. due to economic, scientific, technical, socio-cultural factors, which are based on revolutionary and historical changes in Russia, the formation of a new state. A revolution in the social order, a hard breaking of traditions and foundations, had a radical impact on the language, which embodies the consciousness and spirituality of the people.
Period late XIX- the first quarter of the XX century. for literature and art, humanistic thought became the Silver Age. And this time of great trials for all of Russia is captured in the works of literature.
Burning years!
Is there madness in you, is there any hope?
From the days of war, from the days of freedom -
There is a bloody glow in the faces.
There is silence - then the rumble of the alarm Forced to block the mouth.
In hearts that were once enthusiastic.
There is a fatal void.
(A. Blok. “Born in deaf years ...”)
They told us
years of labor
under the red flag and days of malnutrition.
The revolutions of 1905-1907 and 1917, the fall of the Russian Empire, the change in the nature of power and the type of state, the Civil War are the main events of the first quarter of the 20th century. This time is also captured by linguistic means: petrel, bolshevik, sailor, red flag, tachanka, white And red in their opposites. Even proper names were symbols of the era: Nicholas II, Rasputin, Leo Tolstoy, Maxim Gorky, Aurora, Winter, Marx, Engels, Lenin, Kerensky, Chapaev, Budyonny, Makhno, Trotsky and etc.
In Cursed Days, I. Bunin bitterly noted the change in life, culture, consciousness and spirituality due to the linguistic changes of the revolutionary time: “The truck - what a terrible symbol it has remained for us, how much this truck is in our most difficult and terrible memories! From its very first day, the revolution was associated with this roaring and stinking animal, crowded first with hysterics and obscene soldiers from deserters, and then with selected convicts. All the rudeness of modern culture and its social pathos is embodied in the truck.
For V. Mayakovsky, the symbols of the bygone past seemed more terrible: “... the remnants of words such as “prostitution”, “tuberculosis”, “blockade” will emerge from Leta” (“Out loud”).
The theme of the revolution, concluded V. Rozanov, is "how to correct sin with sin." The life of Russia before and after the turning point becomes central to the literature and art of this period.
End of the 19th century in Russia was associated with the active development of its economy and culture. In the XX century. Russia entered as an agrarian country with a strong and beginning to renew itself based on the introduction of the first agricultural machines. agriculture. Factories, railways were built, electricity was included in the life of cities. In terms of industrial development, the country was ahead of the United States. By 1913 Russian empire became one of the world's great powers.
The turn of two centuries and the first decades of the XX century. - a period of intensive development of Russian modernism. Proponents of this direction advocated the creation of a culture that helps the spiritual improvement of man. During these years, the glory of Russian ballet and Russian opera began, exhibitions of works by Russian artists (V. Kandinsky, K. Malevich), projects of Russian architects were perceived as events of international significance. In 1907, the founder of Russian cinema A. Khanzhonkov opened his own business. Such significant for culture were published Silver Age magazines such as "World of Art", "Apollo", "Capital and Estate", "Old Years".
In search of spiritual renewal, improvement of the Russian mentality, prominent Russian writers and philosophers turned to religious and moral quests (L. Tolstoy, A. Bely, V. Ivanov, I. Shmelev; V. V. Rozanov, P. A. Florensky, N. A. Berdyaev, S. N. Bulgakov). Original (neo-Christian) theories were formed in an intense search for a spiritual ideal and in bright dreams about the unity of mankind, living in a world blinded by disunity and enmity, with the Divine Essence. Food for the formation of communist beliefs was provided by the ideas of V. I. Lenin, his associates, as well as rivals and opponents in the political struggle. The advanced scientific ideas of V. I. Vernadsky, A. L. Chizhevsky, K. E. Tsiolkovsky and others excited and awakened creative thought. number of intellectual, styles in the literary language.
The work of I. Bunin, A. Blok, K. Balmont gave brilliant examples of a refined style in prose and poetry, which contributed to further development artistic style of the literary language [The fields turned blue melancholy, far, far on the horizon, the sun goes beyond the earth as a huge cloudy crimson ball. And there is something old Russian in this sad picture, in this blue distance with a muddy crimson shield(I. Bunin. "The gold mine")].
However, “the framework of classical prose of the XIX century. turned out to be cramped for subsequent literature. Different tendencies merged in it: realism, impressionism, symbolization of ordinary phenomena, mythologization of images, romanticization of heroes and situations. This synthetic type of artistic thinking was reflected in the texts of works by a system of metaphors with an abstract meaning and indefinitely symbolic meaning, evoked by associations that enriched the vocabulary and semantics of the Russian literary language. Wed:
description of the landscape in realistic prose: For half an hour hailstorms dragged on and the sky winked, and only when the loaf of bread lay down did it pour soft and gentle, insultingly unnecessary rain.(S. Sergeev-Tsensky. "Sadness of the fields"); The sky, the trees, the sand are turning green - although they are not green: someone mighty and nameless, whose name you cannot guess, flooded everything around with his immense power; it squeezes thoughts out of the brain, it floods everything with its reciprocal, transparent greenery; and the sky and the waters are obedient to him(B. Zaitsev. "Quiet Dawns");
pictures of reality in the prose of the acmeist writer: The sunset that evening over the green shoals of Jeddah was wide and bright yellow with a scarlet patch of sun in the middle. Then he became ashen-ashed, then greenish, as if the sea is reflected in the sky(N. Gumilyov. "African hunting");
satirical depiction of reality: On the third day, Sharikov came home for dinner and said to his wife: “Honey! I know, that you are a saint, and I am a scoundrel. But you need to understand the human soul!”(Taffy. "Brochette").
They competed with each other, argued, actively defending their positions in an effort to create new stylistic trends, to express their view of reality in a unique and vivid way, to assess it, symbolists and acmeists, futurists and ego-futurists, imagists and representatives of other trends associated in general with the Art Nouveau style. .
The influence of new (in comparison with the styles of the second half of the 19th century) styles was reflected in the development of the entire stylistic system of the Russian literary language, but above all, the artistic style. “An active rapprochement of Russian culture with Western culture has begun. The symbolists were the pioneers here. D. Merezhkovsky in 1907, comprehending the evolution and role of “decadentism” in Russia, called the decadents “the first Europeans”, free from the “slavery” of the Westernizers and Slavophiles, who had the merit of creating a cultural environment in Russia.
Creative activity, including word creation, poets and prose writers of the Silver Age (A. Blok, A. Bely, N. Gumilyov, S. Gorodetsky, I. Severyanin, M. Voloshin, O. Mandelstam, A. Akhmatova, V. Mayakovsky, S. Yesenin, N. Klyuev, M. Tsvetaeva, N. Aseeva, G. Ivanov) influenced the development of the Russian literary language of the 20th century.
In poetry and prose, the subjective principle is enhanced, the authors are not so much concerned about real life with its human types (the hero almost disappeared from literature - the bearer of the views of the writer himself), how much life, according to M. Voloshin, "rumbles inside us." Writers are interested in reality, woven from memories, forebodings, dreams, reality, consonant either with public moods, or with deeply intimate experiences. Wed:
Will I give myself up to random intuition,
I consciously correct the verse, I will still remain a telegraph thread,
Stretched through the ages from my days!
Iya look, opening with effort the eyelids of Dreams, tired, like a weak eye,
To the future! - as once the Aztecs Looked into the world, anticipating us in it.
(V. Bryusov. "Thread")
L there is my marble double,
Defeated under the old maple,
He gave his face to the lake waters,
Listens to the rustle of green.
The bright rains have His dried wound...
Cold, white, wait
I, too, will become a marble.
(A. Akhmatova. "In Tsarskoye Selo")
Created a kind of fictional poetic worlds, the “paint” for the image of which becomes an abstract, borrowed, occasional, “estranged” (V. Shklovsky’s term), a word filled with additional meanings:
Lunar tears of lungs clinging to flax somnambulists.
Affectionate lilyness of those who are in love with captivity Sticky green leaves. In the waves flying flounders,
Flat, sloping body. And in the distance - Madeleine.
(I. Severyanin. "Moon glare")
This artistic space (and the means of its creation) was not always accepted by contemporaries, it was critically evaluated by writers. “I'm talking about the amazing, some kind of fatal isolation of all modern young poetry from life. Our young poets live in a fantasy world that they have created for themselves, and as if they know nothing about what is happening around us, what our eyes meet daily, what we have to talk and think about every day, ”wrote in 1912. Bryusov. M. Gorky spoke about the same in the article “The Destruction of the Personality” (1908): “It is difficult to suspect a modern writer of being interested in the fate of the country. Even the “senior heroes”, when asked about this, probably will not deny that for them the homeland is a matter, in best case, secondary, that social problems do not excite their creativity in the same strength as the riddles of individual existence, that the main thing for them is art, free, objective art, which is higher than the fate of the motherland, politics, parties and outside the interests of the day, year, era.
Wed other positions:
Today's poetry is the poetry of struggle. Every word should be, like in an army of soldiers, from healthy meat, red meat!
(V. Mayakovsky. “And meat for us”)
Yes. This is what inspiration dictates:
My free dream
Everything clings to where there is humiliation,
Where is dirt, and darkness, and poverty.
(A. Blok. "Yes. This is how inspiration dictates...")
Aesthetic parallels were “laid” in the texts, intertextual connections were established, designed for a philosophizing reader, lines of ideological and artistic interaction with the literature of previous eras were built, an attraction to the classics was demonstrated, including at the level of units of the expression plane, including proper names. For example: War and Peace continues. Wet wings of glory beat against the glass: both ambition and the same thirst for honor! The night sun in rain-blinded Finland, the conspiratorial sun of the new Austerlitz! Dying, Borte raved about Finland ... Here we played towns and, lying on the Finnish meadows, he liked to look at the simple skies with the coldly surprised eyes of Prince Andrei(O. Mandelstam. "The Noise of Time") - here there is a parallel with the epic novel by L. Tolstoy "War and Peace" (the image of the sky of Austerlitz, the theme of the death of Prince Andrei, the motive of ambition debunked by the writer), which is represented by lexical and phraseological units, where proper names are especially significant, by parallel and chain connection of sentences-statements.
Another example: in the “Song of Judith” by K. Balmont, the plot of the biblical myth about Judith and Holofernes is reproduced, in a word titanium connection with Greek and Roman mythology is established:
But the Almighty Lord, by the hand of a woman, Deposed all the enemies of the Jewish country.
Holofernes the giant did not fall from youths,
Titan did not fight with his hand,
But Judith ruined him with the beauty of her face.
The writers realized the desire for transformations not only as an artistic pattern, but even as a sign of the times.
The phenomenon of the Silver Age "consisted in the discovery of processes born by the era human consciousness and inner being, in the development of special forms of verbal art. The innovation inherent in the work of all true artists was extremely bold and natural. It stemmed from the development of historical, cultural and literary traditions (primarily domestic ones) to express the tragic dissonances of the time and ways to overcome them” 1 .
The literary and artistic environment, the participation of the intelligentsia in cultural and political events changed the linguistic portrait of immigrants from the provinces, for whom participation in the "avant-garde" life of Moscow and St. social environment, to which they belonged by birth (petty officials, petty bourgeois, peasants).
The development of the sciences, and in particular philosophy, contributed to the further intellectualization of the literary language, which began in the last decades of the 19th century. Numerous poetic schools and directions that appeared during this period, declaring their rules for the selection, creation and use of language means, demonstrated the enormous potential of the Russian language system.
At the same time, different strata of the Russian population did not have an equal relationship to the literary language, because, according to the 1897 census, the literate population in Russia was only about 30 percent. But the main thing is Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. was torn apart by numerous social contradictions (strikes and strikes of workers in the cities, peasant riots, terrorist acts). All this affected the evolution of thinking, including artistic. So, M. Gorky, creatively comprehending modern life, captured many of its contradictions, "he understood well that the educated elite of Russia (including the one that made the revolution) had lost understanding of deep Russia" .
The new worldview was not only reflected, but also shaped by the poetry of the first decades of the 20th century. Poets actively used various expressive language means, including borrowings (barbarisms), as well as colloquial, stylistically reduced lexemes and phraseological units:
- Look, bastard, started a hurdy-gurdy,
What are you, Petka, a woman, or what?
- - That's right, the soul inside out Thought to turn it out? Please!
- (A Block. “Twelve”)
First World War(1914-1918) led to the collapse of the country's economy. Russia entered a revolutionary situation, the outcome of which was fundamental changes in the life of the state, in the social structure of society, the painful years of overcoming the consequences of civil war(1918-1922) and devastation, the creation of a new type of state. All these factors determined the nature of the language situation in the first quarter of the 20th century.
At the beginning of the XX century. the social base of the Russian literary language remained small. It expanded markedly during its first quarter (and then changed almost every two decades, from generation to generation of Russian speakers). In public life, the role of the proletariat, replenished by people from different strata, is increasing. With this class, strengthening its position, inheriting the best and acquiring the culture created for it, there is a significant change social base literary language. During the years of the revolution and the Civil War, the dominant speaker of the Russian literary language changed. The Russian nobility, which kept cultural traditions, influenced tastes and regulated language norms, as well as the bourgeoisie, which played a major role in the development of the Russian economy, were destroyed. The intelligentsia and enlightened clergy suffered.
The number of speakers of the norms of the literary language, based on exemplary, classical texts of Russian literature of the 19th century, has decreased. In the first post-revolutionary years, the norms of the literary language were owned by intellectuals, as well as socio-political figures and professional revolutionaries, brought up on the best literary traditions of the late 19th century. Gradually, this layer decreased, as the nature of the social elite of the new state changed.
V. Bryusov in his article “Proletarian Poetry” (1920) asked vital questions: “What is meant by the new proletarian culture: a modification of the old culture of capitalist Europe or something completely special? Did this new culture, at least in its foundations, come about as a direct result of the great upheaval we have experienced together with the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat in Soviet Russia, or is this culture only an aspiration to be realized in a more or less distant future? Who are the bearers and builders of this culture? - exclusively individuals who came out of the ranks of the class that was proletarian under the old regime, or all the leaders, at least sincere leaders, of our new society, striving to become classless?
The literary language functioned in the conditions of the coexistence of two variants of the norm - the old Moscow, national, priority, and St. Petersburg, book and literary. The Petersburg norm was largely oriented towards the aesthetic tastes of the Silver Age intelligentsia (programs of individual literary trends included special language requirements)" works).
At the beginning of the XX century. the sources and pace of replenishment of the Russian literary language are changing. If in the 19th century these were mainly territorial and social dialects that “introduced” their elements into the common Russian vernacular, then during the years of wars and revolutions, due to the intensive migration of the population, the influence of the language of the “democratic masses of the city” increased. Although the “grassroots urban language” used by different segments of the population was a dull struggle in the name of literacy on the part of different strata of society throughout the second half of the 19th century. and the first decade of the 20th century", these non-literary linguistic layers "entered the arena literary life after the revolution and acquired great importance in the organization of the literary language of the revolutionary epoch".
The active process of mastering the dialect vocabulary was caused by objective reasons, first of all, the absence in the literary language of nominations for designating phenomena and objects that, for some reason, have become widespread. If the Russian literary language of the second half of the XIX century. was opposed to these forms of a national language, then for a new generation of writers who came to literature and journalism from the trenches and held only a rifle and a plow in their hands, a dialect or colloquial colloquial word turned out to be a natural and sometimes the only form of expressing an idea. For example:
Love and evil hatred Intertwined in my chest:
Love - for the poor people And hatred - for the lords,
To kings, priests, landlords And all sorts of "ranks."
Because I reveal the whole truth to the poor,
I used to be pulled up by the nobles At the first bitch.
(D. Poor. “True-womb, or How to distinguish genuine leaflets at the fronts ...”)
An important factor in the development of the literary language was the change in the ratio between active and passive vocabulary. Archaization of the “old” vocabulary and phraseology is observed (moving from the active to the passive stock of such words and phrases as file, clerk, executor, kindly inform etc.) and updating the new, including borrowed, related to the areas of administrative-state, legal, socio-political, economic, religious, cultural (for example: budyonnovets, party, RSDLP, world revolution, comrade, SNK).
In the 20s of the XX century. the processes of direct interaction of various levels of the literary language with vernacular and dialects intensified. When mastering new lexical layers, there is an energetic convergence with live colloquial speech. Talking about the explosive growth of vocabulary,
S. I. Ozhegov noted that “whole series of new words arose, formed according to the norms of Russian word formation. A new grammatical class of words has appeared - compound words. Regarding this period, they talked about the "coarseness of the language", "linguistic turmoil", even about the "linguistic devastation" and the "death" of the literary language. Much of the language of the first quarter of the 20th century, which arose in connection with the reorganization of the state, unprecedented transformations in the sphere of social life, subsequently did not remain in active use.
At the beginning of the XX century. continued active development individual styles writers as a source of enrichment of the literary language, its stylistic system. In the poetry of I. Severyanin, A. Blok, Vel. Khlebnikov, B. Pasternak, S. Yesenin, V. Mayakovsky, M. Voloshin, K. Balmont, occasionalisms are widely used in the prose of A. Bely and other authors, which indicates the existence of general trends in poetic creativity.
For example, when creating your own individual author's neoplasms ( hymniv, ring, reflected, elezhny etc.) Igor Severyanin combines innovative and traditional: he uses words that name images, symbols of traditional semantic fields of poetry - “moon”, “spring”, “poetry”, etc. as generating bases ( lull, lunify, officialize, Apollonian), foreign words, roots and affixes (lunel, frörter, Beaitopde’ovy), forms words from stems that are not characteristic of the usual way of word formation (for example, an adverb from a noun: languidly, rockforno) etc.
Due to occasional words created by poets ( desirability, expectancy etc.) the synonymic rows are expanding, and this contributes to the enrichment of the system of expressive and visual means of the literary language [These wrinkles... walked on the forehead with a shaking, chorusAndhodor.There was something in you, My friend, Godunov-Sko-Tatar(O. Mandelstam. "Journey to Armenia")].
The original interaction in the text of words, including neologisms created by writers, with common vocabulary expands the expressive possibilities of the literary language, changes the features of compatibility [look kings; to the electric stove album(I. Severyanin); rough guest, raisin eyes; manuscript stumps(O. Mandelstam); In the purple avenue the snow was alive: they moved quietlylime cassocksAndmaple tablecloths; from apple treeshere and therefurtively fellplump shreds(S. Sergeev-Tssnsky)].
The concentration (essentiality) of the meanings of the text is a characteristic stylistic feature of the language of fiction at the beginning of the 20th century. [Time in the museum turned according to hourglass. A brick sifting ran up, a glass was emptied, and there from the upper cabinet into the lower jar the same trickle of golden simum(O. Mandelstam. "Journey to Armenia")]. A glut of occasionalisms in a small text space is a sign of its ornamentality:
With what inexplicable tenderness, with what cordiality Your face is illumined and glazed,
An invisible face, identified in all blackness with Eternity,
Your, - but whose?
(I. Severyanin. "To hell with hell")
The concentration of the meanings of the text is achieved with the help of complex adjectives used as epithets, which act in a figurative and concretizing function, designed to draw attention to the meanings that are important for understanding the author's artistic image. They also reflect subjective creative personality, conveying a positive or negative assessment of the subject of speech, and thereby expand the range of evaluative vocabulary.
For example, in the texts of I. Bunin there are a lot of compound words, in the structure of which one of the components enhances the meaning of the other, being in a connecting (i.e. equal) or comparative-adversative relationship with it (harmoniously refined sound of the voice; primordial-immaculate evening", animal-primitive lips; miserable goose eyes", tired-brisk old woman). In the poems of I. Severyanin, in the formation of complex adjectives, both the associative links of words, their evaluative potential, the proximity of the sound image, and their semantic opposite are used. (a ball-sick soul; a vaguely dark smell of pine; fiery-icy nights; who is poisonous and tenderly rude). The creation of such words demonstrated the ability of the Russian language to reflect the most complex shades of meaning in a concise, but semantically capacious unit [ The Bosphorus winds, the hills close ahead - Seems, that you swim on the mirror-opal lakes(I. Bunin. "The Shadow of the Bird")].
The requirements of a general literary norm and communicative and aesthetic expediency were attacked by the so-called special language (language in the poetic function) of poetry and prose. It was "developed" as a way of the author's self-expression, organization of a unique language space, its extreme individualization. Such, for example, is the “language of the gods”, “zaum”, “crazy language” Vel. Khlebnikov:
maerch maarch bzup bzoy bzip.
bzograul.
Rolls of the month
margin! user merch.
These features reflected a tendency towards excessive aestheticization, “verbal luxury” (definition by V.V. Vinogradov), subjective orientation of the language of fiction, which resulted in the separation of “created” literary texts from the social substratum of the post-revolutionary period - native speakers of the national language.
In the first decades of the XX century. Literary language is actively used not only in literary texts, but also in newspaper publications, oral oratorical speech, and in ideological (later mainly party) literature. The increased importance of journalism as a means of agitation, and then political struggle, could not but be reflected in the interaction of styles of the literary language.
The texts of journalistic style come to the fore, their role in maintaining the norms of the literary language increases. This was facilitated by the fact that newspaper and magazine publications are focused on the mass reader, and in terms of the expression "adapted" to influence the "new" native speaker of the Russian language who came from the bottom. In 1929
V. Mayakovsky defined this situation as follows: “The difference between a newspaperman and a writer is not a target difference, but only a difference in verbal processing [highlighted by us. - Avtti]. The mechanical incorporation into the newspaper of a writer with old literary skills... that's not enough anymore... There were many conflicting attitudes towards poetry. We put forward the only correct and new thing, this is “poetry is the path to socialism”. Now this path goes between newspaper fields.<...>The newspaper not only does not dispose the writer to hack work, but, on the contrary, eradicates his slovenliness and accustoms him to responsibility ... "1
In the development of journalistic style Active participation were accepted by the ideologists of the new world, who formed the public consciousness. In the linguistic works of the Soviet period, the Bolshevik style of speech was characterized as the successor to the journalistic prose of V. G. Belinsky and N. G. Chernyshevsky, the successor to the traditions of Kolokol, Sovremennik, Otechestvennye Zapiski. This certainly applies to the works of V. I. Lenin, G. V. Plekhanov, A. V. Lunacharsky.
The workers' press (illegal and legal newspapers and magazines) was not only a means of propagating the ideas of Marxism, but also carried ideological information, introduced new concepts (the concepts of culture, economics, etc.), taught and educated.
The concepts reflected the Bolshevik understanding of socio-economic relations. As the names of concepts, units of book vocabulary and phraseology were used (philosophical: doctrinairism, eclecticism; economic: capital wage labor relations of production, socialization of land, private property, socio-political: agrarian program, class struggle, bourgeoisie, proletariat, revolutionary liberation movement and etc.), as well as rethought and terminological units of the national language (class, labor, work, market, commodity economy, class contradiction).
The famous linguist E. D. Polivanov in the 30s of the XX century. argued that “a dictionary can best reflect social and cultural shifts (accompanied by the introduction of a number of new concepts into the circle of collective thinking, for which new words are needed)”, that “it is in the field of the dictionary that we have the most indisputable results of the impact of the revolution on the language” 1 . The terminological meaning of many words was refined and consolidated in the language of party literature, primarily in the journalistic language of V. I. Lenin.
Evgeny Dmitrievich Polivanov (1891-1938)
The journalistic style contributed to the expansion of the semantic structure of the Russian literary language and the formation of various terminological systems.
At the same time, aphoristic expressions, phraseological units ( less is better, yes better; mind, honor and conscience of our era), metaphorical transfers as a characteristic way of expanding the semantics of a word, creating shades of meaning, including evaluative and characterizing (attack, assault, exploitation), expressive folk colloquial, obsolete words ( companion, devastation, deviation), actual neologisms ( non-partisanship, de-peasantry), tracing paper (primarily from German - for translating the works of K. Marx and F. Engels: Rus. order of the dayGerman Tagesordnung; Russian mode of production Prodctionsweise etc.), logical syntax, etc.
Revolutionary journalism was characterized by great polemical intensity, which was required by the tasks of changing living conditions, transforming the fundamental Russian mentality, overthrowing religious and other social and personal values that were not consistent with Marxism. Life has proven the viability of the communicative-pragmatic strategy of party journalism (relevance of information, clarity of terminology, intelligibility and figurative presentation of material) and the language policy of publications addressed to the mass reader (following the national language norm), the effectiveness of the specific selection of lexico-phraseological and grammatical means, etc. All this, of course, contributed to the development of the Russian literary language, which affected the language situation in the first quarter of the 20th century. The most demanded, relevant was precisely this form of existence of the literary language - the journalistic style embodied in the texts of mass publications.
Although the composition of journalistic style tools was actively expanding, many authors did not have the linguistic competence necessary to create expressive, persuasive texts. They unjustifiably used slang elements, clericalism, speech stamps, etc. I. A. Bunin very caustically described the language of the newspapers of that time in “Cursed Days”: “Bolshevik jargon is completely unbearable. And what was the language of our leftists in general? “With cynicism reaching grace... Now a brunette, tomorrow a blond... Reading in the hearts... He will interrogate with prejudice... Either - or: there is no third way... Draw proper conclusions... Who knows one should... Boil in one's own juice... Sleight of hand... New time fellows...” And this use with some supposedly poisonous irony (it is not known on what and on whom) of high style? After all, even with Korolenko (especially in letters) this is at every turn. Certainly not a horse, but Rosinante, instead of “I sat down to write” - “I saddled my Pegasus”, the gendarmes - “uniforms of heavenly color” ”. A critical look at newspaper and magazine texts prompted the struggle for the purity and correctness of the speech of publicists.
Scientists were very interested in changes in the Russian literary language at a turning point in the history of the state. The first descriptions of the "language of the revolution" (i.e., the period 1917-1920) were presented in the works of S. O. Kartsevsky "Language, war and revolution" (1923) and A. M. Selishchev "The language of the revolutionary era" (1928 ). Linguistic science, analyzing the observed phenomena, advocated the preservation of traditions, for continuity in relation to the norms of the literary language in connection with their social significance.
A feature of the linguistic situation of that time was the priority of the written form of the functioning of the language as a literary, normalized one. Such an extra-linguistic reason, as the struggle of the leadership of the new state for raising the level of culture and education of workers and peasants, required the spread of literacy, the inculcation of writing skills, that is, the possession of standardized written speech (see the Decree of the Council of People's Commissars of December 26, 1919 "On the Elimination of Illiteracy population of the RSFSR). This led to the development of the normalization direction. scientific activity, which manifested itself in the implementation of the reform of graphics and spelling prepared long ago by domestic linguists (A. A. Shakhmatov and others). The reform provided for a reduction in the number of letters (first of all, the elimination of the final t "and the letter i in all cases), and this simplified writing and facilitated learning to read and write, which was important in the prevailing historical conditions. There was no talk of any radical “breaking” or “reform” of the language.
According to Polivanov, “a whole series of revolutionary (and precisely revolutionary, not evolutionary) processes in the most various areas our way of life and our spiritual culture, up to such a special corner as the technique of our writing: graphics and spelling, which also experienced their revolution in the “new orthography of 1917.” And since these processes became possible only in the presence of October revolution and in their content reflect its political slogans (as, for example, the “new spelling of 1917” carries out the slogan of the democratization of writing, and consequently of book culture in general), one can even say otherwise, namely: these processes are not just consequences, but components parts of the October Revolution, flesh from flesh and blood from its blood, and thus even “the new orthography of 1917 and ... this is also a piece of revolution in the narrow technical field of spiritual culture - in graphics” See: Ozhegov S. I. Main features of the development of the Russian literary language in the Soviet era. S. 23; Shklyarevsky G. I. History of the Russian literary language ( Soviet period). Kharkov, 1973. S. 4.