How did the Russian language develop? Formation of the Russian language. The formation of the modern Russian literary language The history of the emergence of the Russian literary language

29.11.2020

BRIEF COURSE OF LECTURES

ON THE DISCIPLINE "HISTORY OF THE RUSSIAN LITERARY LANGUAGE"

Lecture #1

Historical characteristics of the language. History of the Russian literary language as a science. main categories.

1. The subject of the history of the Russian literary language. Course subject- history of development mother tongue, the processes of its development, their essence. Appeal to ancient written monuments as object of study course.

The history of the Russian literary language is the science of the essence, origin and stages of development of the Russian national language, its use in different speech registers, the change of these registers, their evolution. Traditions of studying the history of the Russian literary language: the history of the Russian literary language as historical stylistics (in the works of V.V. Vinogradov, G.O. Vinokur and their followers A.I. Gorshkov, E.G. Kovalevskaya), as historical orthology (the founder of the direction is A.I. Sobolevsky, followers - N.I. Tolstoy, M.L. Remnev), as historical sociolinguistics (B.A. Uspensky, V.M. Zhivov).

The concept of literary language. Literary language as a phenomenon of book culture. Historical and cultural background and conditions for the formation of the literary language. The concept of literary and written language, literary language and language fiction. Literary and colloquial language. Stylistic heterogeneity of the literary language, changes in its nature in the process historical development.

The concept of a language norm. Book norm as the basis of the literary language, linguistic norm as a historical category. Language system and norm. Different kinds norms. The specificity of the book norm. Its connection with learning and conscious assimilation, with the literary and linguistic tradition. Connection of the history of the literary language with the history of culture.

2. Language situationas a factor in the development of the literary language. Typology of cultural and linguistic situations: monolingualism, bilingualism (foreign language), diglossia. Dhigher education- coexistence in society of two languages that are equal in their functions. Diglossia- a stable language situation, characterized by a stable functional balance of coexisting languages that are in additional distribution. Signs that distinguish diglossia from bilingualism: the inadmissibility of using the book language as a means of conversational communication, the lack of codification of the spoken language and parallel texts with the same content. Changing the language situation in the history of the development of the Russian literary language. Evidence of existence in Ancient Rus' diglossia (B.A. Uspensky, V.M. Zhivov). Arguments against diglossia (V.V. Kolesov, A.A. Alekseev).

3. The main stages in the development of the Russian literary language . Different points of view on the issue periodization of the course of the history of the Russian literary language: B.A. Uspensky, A.M. Kamchatnov and the periodization accepted by most linguists.

I period. The literary language of Ancient Rus' (XI-XIV centuries) is the initial stage of the literary and linguistic history of the Eastern Slavs. II period. The development of the Russian literary language on the basis of ancient Russian literary and linguistic traditions in the context of the consolidation of the Russian people (XIV-XVII centuries). III period. Formation of the Russian literary language of a new type (XVIII - early XIX centuries). Experiences in the normalization of the Russian literary language and the construction of its stylistic system. IV period. The development of the modern Russian literary language (since the beginning of the 19th century) as a single and universal normalized system serving all spheres of cultural activity. Designing a normalized system oral speech as a reflection of the process of displacement of dialects and vernacular from the sphere of oral communication.

Lecture #2

Literary language of Ancient Rus' (XI-XIV centuries): origin of the Russian literary language.

1. First South Slavic influence (X- XIcenturies).

After the baptism of Rus' (988), the Bulgarian version of the Old Slavonic language was adopted - the South Slavic language, and writing in this language is spreading. The assimilation of the South Slavic book tradition was due not so much to an orientation towards Bulgaria, but to the mediating role of the South Slavs as conductors of Greek cultural influence: the orientation was Greek, the writing was Bulgarian. Thus, Christinization introduces Rus' into the orbit of the Byzantine world, and the Church Slavonic language acts as a means of Byzantization of Russian culture. All of the above allows us to speak about first South Slavic influence and connects with it the initial phase of the formation of the literary language of the Eastern Slavs. In fact, the first South Slavic influence was the baptism of Rus' according to the eastern model and the borrowing of the ancient Bulgarian script. The Old Church Slavonic language early began to be exposed to the influence of ethnic languages and broke up into different editions (revisions), in particular, the Russian recension of the Church Slavonic language is being formed. On the other hand, the presence of ancient Russian monuments in Rus' testifies to the existence of writing in two languages. An important question of this period is the following: to determine which of them is the literary language of Ancient Rus'.

2. History of scientific controversy about .

History of scientific controversy about the origin of the Russian literary language associated with the tradition of opposing the theory of the Old Slavonic origin of the Russian literary language A.A. Shakhmatov and the theory of the original East Slavic basis of the Russian literary language by S.P. Obnorsky.

Hypothesis A.A. Shakhmatova was widely used. In the work "Essay on the modern Russian language" A.A. Shakhmatov wrote: “By its origin, the Russian literary language is the Church Slavonic (Old Bulgarian by origin) language transferred to Russian soil, which for centuries has been approaching the folk language and gradually losing and losing its foreign appearance.” In his opinion, “the ancient Bulgarian language in Rus' was perceived as a foreign language for no more than a century, after which they got used to it as their own”, which allows us to speak about "Russification" of the South Slavic foundation. To prove this thesis, A.A. Shakhmatov cites 12 signs of the foreign language basis of the modern Russian language: 1) disagreement; 2) combination ra, la at the beginning of a word; 3) combination railway vm. and; 4) affricate sch vm. h; 5) no transition [e] > [o]; 6) initial Yu vm. at; 7) solid s vm. soft ( useful, unassuming); 8) vocalization oh e in place of the reduced ones; 9) vowel clearing s, and in place of tense reduced; 10) grammatical forms with Church Slavonic inflections (m. R.: -ago, -yago; and. R.: - her); 11) Church Slavonic word formation; 12) Church Slavonic vocabulary.

In the 50s. 20th century S.P. Obnorsky put forward the theory of the East Slavic basis of the Russian literary language, suggesting that the modern Russian language in its genetic basis is not borrowed, but Russian. In his works, we are talking about the Old Russian literary language, which, since the time of the second South Slavic influence, began to undergo Church Slavonicization, more precisely, "slander" of the Russian language. The shortcomings of the theory: it is not clear what the specific gravity of the Church Slavonic superstratum is; orientation to a genre-limited range of sources of oral folk tradition, which served as the basis for the formation of a supra-dialect form - Koine. As a result, the Church Slavonic language "froze", being used only in the cult sphere, and the Old Russian language evolved.

After the publication of works by S.P. Obnorsky (1934), a scientific discussion began, a critical attitude to his theory was noted (A. M. Selishchev, V. V. Vinogradov), new concepts appeared. The concept of diglossia (B.A. Uspensky, A.V. Isachenko), according to which the literary language was Church Slavonic, and folk colloquial speech existed in parallel, not being a literary form. The concept of bilingualism (F.P. Filin, following M.V. Lomonosov) is the coexistence of Church Slavonic and Old Russian languages, each with its own varieties. Hypothesis V.V. Vinogradov - the idea of the unity of the literary language on a nationwide basis. Two types of Old Russian literary language: book-Slavonic and folk-literary (according to V.V. Vinogradov).

Lecture #3

Literary language of Ancient Rus' (XI-XIV centuries): characteristics of written monuments.

1. Types of written monuments Kievan Rus.

Traditionally, it is customary to talk about two types of written monuments of Kievan Rus: Christian and secular. Monuments of Christian literature were created in the Church Slavonic language. Translation of Christian literature includes the Gospel, Psalter, Prologues, Patericons. Genres of original Christian literature are "Journeys", "Lives", "Words", "Teachings". Translation secular literature- these are works translated from Latin, Greek (“History of the Jewish War” by I. Flavius, “Devgeny's act”). Original secular literature- folk literary monuments created in the Old Russian language (chronicles, chronicles; "The Tale of Bygone Years", "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", "Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh").

The variety of written monuments of Kievan Rus also determines the typology of linguistic traditions and their varieties, which are characterized by the ratio of different linguistic elements within one ancient text.

Varieties of language traditions based on Church Slavonic: standard, complicated, formulaic, simplified, hybrid Church Slavonic. The standard Church Slavonic language is the language of the Gospel, life. The complicated Church Slavonic language is a presentation reinforced rhetorically, poetically, exotic, expressive, archaic lexemes. The formulaic (“clichéd”) Church Slavonic language is a direct quotation or paraphrasing of canonical (biblical) texts (kryst kissing, signing kryst in a way, etc.). The simplified Church Slavonic language is characterized by the inclusion of elements of the vernacular language. The hybrid Church Slavonic language is a striped pattern, the replacement of the language means of the Church Slavonic language with elements of the vernacular language.

Varieties of language traditions based on Old Russian: standard, dialectal, complicated, business (formula), Slavicized Old Russian language. The standard Old Russian language is a linguistic tradition that demonstrates the general tendencies of the Old Russian language. The dialectal Old Russian language reflects certain dialectal features. The complicated Old Russian language is a presentation reinforced rhetorically, poetically, contains symbolic and figurative usage, a reflection of folklore traditions. The business (formula) Old Russian language is based on the use of clichés, standard expressions of Old Russian documents (go to the company, knock your head down, take your face, etc.). The Slavicized Old Russian language is a linguistic tradition where only some forms are non-systemically Slavicized.

2. The status of business writing in Ancient Rus'

In Ancient Rus', business writing has an ancient tradition, which is confirmed by Oleg's 3 agreements with the Greeks, found in the "Tale of Bygone Years". The ambiguous status of business writing in the history of the Russian literary language (isolation or a stylistically defined variety) is motivated by the critical socially oriented situation of its emergence. G.O. Vinokur gives arguments that testify to the isolation of the business language: functioning only in the field of business documentation, the content of business documents is limited by the nature of use, the semantically limited composition of the vocabulary. A.I. Gorshkov, A.M. Kamchatnov believes that there are no sufficient grounds to isolate the business language from the system of varieties of the Old Russian language, since “it (the business language) is a socially important, stylistically processed and ordered variety of the use of the Old Russian language, and at subsequent stages of development it gradually strengthened its ties with the “properly literary” language and its influence on it. A.M. Kamchatnov: “... XI-XIV centuries. characteristic opposition of three styles of the literary language - sacred, Slavic-Russian and business.

The linguistic specificity of business documents was determined by the peculiarities of its content, as evidenced, for example, by the statement of Afanasy Matveyevich Selishchev: “When they talked about theft, about a fight, about a torn beard, about a bloody face, the corresponding speech was also used - the speech of everyday life ... Not only style, but also the accuracy of the content of business speech, documentary accuracy required the use of appropriate words - Russian words of a certain meaning. " Indeed, it was about objects, phenomena and concepts that are specifically Russian. Therefore, business monuments are based on the Old Russian language, connection with the terminological system of oral law, and the absence of sacredness. Thus, we can note the following features of the business legal writing of Ancient Russia (“Russian Truth”, donative and contractual letters): genre-functional marking (use for practical purposes), semantically limited composition of the content structure (use of legal vocabulary: vira, vidok, posluh, tatba, golovnichestvo, istsevo, etc.), monotony of syntactic constructions (conditional clauses, imperative - infinitive constructions, stringing simple sentences), the presence of linguistic formulas and the absence of figurative and expressive means.

3. Linguistic specificity of works of everyday writing: birch bark letters (private correspondence) and graffiti (everyday, dedicatory, religious inscriptions).
Lecture #4

Cultural and linguistic situation of Muscovite Rus at the end of the 14th - the middle of the 15th centuries.

1. Ways of development of colloquial and literary language during the formation of the Moscow state.

From the second half of the 14th century, the Moscow principality began to develop rapidly, annexing neighboring ones. Moscow is the spiritual and political center of Russia: "Moscow is the third Rome." The dialect of Moscow becomes colorful, including borrowings from the languages of neighboring peoples. One of the transitive dialects is formed - Moscow Koine, which became the basis of the language of the Great Russian people. This language differed from the Old Russian language, for example, in its vocabulary (due to a change in ideology, realities). In addition to the extralinguistic prerequisites that led to the restructuring of relations between the bookish and non-bookish language, intralinguistic reasons were also identified that characterize the spoken language of the Moscow State by the 14th century. Among them are the change in the phonological system after the process of the fall of the reduced ones; loss of grammatical categories (vocative form, dual number); unification of types of declension in plural. hours; use of the perfect without a copula; the spread of new alliances. In this situation, the spoken and literary language began to differ from each other: previously neutral (general) forms become specifically bookish, i.e. new correlations of Church Slavonic and living Russian are formed. So, the forms of ruch, nozh, help, God, bake, moogl, me, cha, etc. are now opposed to forms of colloquial speech. Accordingly, the distance between Church Slavonic and Russian as a bookish and non-bookish language is increasing.

2. Second South Slavic influence.

One of the controversial issues in the history of Russian writing remains the question of the role of the so-called to. XIV century. - early 16th century - the second wave of influence on the Russian book culture from the side of the South Slavic written culture (Bulgaria and partly Serbia) after the period of the Christianization of Rus' (X-XI centuries). It was a reform of the principles of translation from the Greek language, the literary language and spelling, carried out in the 14th century. Bulgarian Patriarch Evfimiy Tarnovskiy, which spread very quickly. The implementation of the reform in Russian writing is associated with the name of Metropolitan Cyprian - a Serb or, according to other sources, a Bulgarian by birth, who emigrated to Rus' in the general flow of South Slavic emigration. Hence another name for the process - Kipranovsky on the right.

The second South Slavic influence as a cardinal event in the history of the Russian literary language was first noticed in the 19th century by A.I. Sobolevsky. Sobolevsky's discovery was widely recognized. B.A. Uspensky: “This phenomenon is based on purificatory and restoration tendencies: its immediate stimulus was the desire of Russian scribes to purify the Church Slavonic language from those colloquial elements that had penetrated into it as a result of its gradual Russification (i.e., adaptation to local conditions).” First of all, A.I. Sobolevsky drew attention to changes in the external design of manuscripts, pointed out innovations in graphics, changes in the spelling of these written monuments compared to previous periods. Based on this material, he concluded that Russian writing in the period of the end of the XIV century - early. 16th century was heavily influenced by the south Slavic writing, hence the term "second South Slavic influence". In fact, all the indicated changes brought the Old Russian manuscripts closer to the Bulgarian and Serbian written monuments of the same era. Indeed, the model for Russian manuscripts is the corrected church books of Bulgaria and Serbia, where by the end of the 14th century. the editing of religious books ended, and many prominent church figures (Metropolitan Cyprian, Grigory Tsamblak, Pakhomiy Logofet) arrived in Moscow. In connection with the political and economic growth of Moscow, the authority of the Moscow church, church literature, and hence the role of the Church Slavonic language, is also growing. Therefore, the activity of editing church books in Moscow during this period turned out to be appropriate. The correction and rewriting of books was primarily due to the translation of the Russian Church from the Studium charter, which prevailed in Byzantium until the end of the 11th century. and from there came to Rus', to the Jerusalem rule, which was established in the 14th century throughout the Orthodox world. Conservatism and reverence for antiquity, natural for the church, prompted scribes, on the one hand, to preserve the written tradition of ancient texts, deliberately archaizing the bookish language, and on the other hand, Slavic languages it was in the XIV century that they changed so significantly in the system of vocalism, consonantism, accentology, and in lexical and grammatical terms that the use of many signs in ancient texts became incomprehensible. These are letters such as @, \, #, >, i, s, ^, h. A true understanding of their use could be achieved on the basis of the creation of a scientific history of the Slavic languages, but the church scribes of the XIV century were still far from even setting such a task. And now artificial rules for writing these letters are being developed, the use of which has become unclear. Among Russian scribes, these artificial rules meet with dull but stubborn resistance. Therefore, the purpose of the editing undertaken by the scribes is to bring the church books into the original, most accurate, corresponding to the Greek originals form.

Consequences second South Slavic influence:

1) restoration in the graphics of Greek letters (j, k, ^, i), large yus, which disappeared from practice; the appearance of ideographic signs and symbols (D.S. Likhachev notes the “geometric ornament of the text”);

2) elimination of iotation, i.e. the absence of spellings with j in the postvocalic position before a and #, now iotation is conveyed not by the letter ", but by the letters a and #: svo# (////// svoa), dobraa, deacon (writing neioted letters is a Greek sample);

3) the spelling of ers obeys distributive rules: at the end of the word there is always ь, in the middle ъ. This artificial rule was due to the coincidence of the etymological reflexes *ъ, *ь in one phoneme, which made these letters homophonic and interchangeable.

4) the distribution in the spelling of the letters i and i: i is written before vowels, which is also associated with the Greek model (this rule was adopted by civil orthography and was preserved until the reform of 1917-1918);

5) reflection of the reflexes and processes of the Book Slavonic language (palatalizations, the first full accord);

6) an increase in the number of titles, superscripts and punctuation marks.

7) the emergence and spread of a rhetorically decorated manner of writing - word weaving style- as a way of constructing a text that originates in church works, then transferred to secular ones. For the first time in Rus' weaving style scribe of the XIV century - early. 15th century Epiphanius the Wise introduced in the Life of Stephen of Perm.

Word weaving style arose “from the idea of hesychasm about the unknowability and unnameability of God, i.e. the name of God can only be approached by trying different ways of naming” (L.V. Zubova). Hesychasm is an ethical and ascetic doctrine of the path to the unity of man with God, the ascent of the human spirit to the deity, the “divinity of the verb”, the need for close attention to the sound and semantics of the word, which serves to name the essence of the subject, but often not able to express the “soul of the subject”, to convey the main thing. Hesychasts refused the word: contemplation gives direct communication with God, therefore hesychasts were also called “silent ones”. The word is "divine verb".

The term "weaving of words" does not quite adequately convey the essence of the style. The phrase "weave words" was known even before Epiphanius in the sense of "to produce new words"; in the translations of the Byzantine hymn we meet: "the word weaving the word sweetness." Thus, neither the term "weaving of words", nor the ornate rhetorical style for the XIV - XV centuries. are not new. New is the motive for the return to floridity. The hesychast identification of the word and the essence of the phenomenon caused in verbal creativity, it would seem, the opposite result - pleonasm, which for this era was justified, since the unity of a high idea with a base one was embodied in the designation of the concreteness of a “thing”. And the hagiographic genre accumulated various vocabulary general meaning, the general meaning turned out to be important, and not the meanings of individual words, which became the basis for the development of polysemy and synonymy. Moreover, the focus is on abstractness, emotionality, symbolism, figurativeness of linguistic means of expression and constructions.

An important consequence second South Slavic influence became the emergence of correlative pairs of correlative Slavisms and Russisms. Direct lexical borrowings from Russian into Church Slavonic have become impossible. A kind of bilingual Russian-Church Slavonic dictionary is being created (I say - I say, advertising - I said, today - today, truth - truth). Thus, second South Slavic influence predetermined the transition to bilingualism.

In general, it should be noted that the Cyprianian right, which took place against the backdrop of a national upsurge (the century between 1380 and 1480 is the time between the Battle of Kulikovo and the complete elimination of Rus''s dependence on the Golden Horde), still did not cause such a split in the church and society, which was later caused by the Nikonian right of the 17th century, which took place against the background of the serfdom of the peasantry. Meanwhile, after all, both on the right are two stages of the same process of the formation of the modern Church Slavonic language with its artificial spelling and other features of inept archaization, carried out in an environment of complete absence of the history of the Slavic languages as a science.

Lecture #5

The language situation of the second half of the XV-XVI centuries.

1. Archaization of the language of journalism second half of the 15th-16th centuries.

In the second half of the 15th century, the process of state building was influenced by the worldview of two spiritual and religious movements: mystical Orthodoxy and theological rationalism. The ideas of mystical Orthodoxy were defended by the “Volga elders” led by Nil Sorsky, as they opposed church and monastic land ownership, condemned the decoration of monasteries, declared asceticism, detachment from worldly affairs, including politics, continued to develop the ideas of hesychasm. In their messages, the “Volga elders” preferred religious and moral issues, expressed a critical attitude towards the Holy Scriptures, therefore, for their manner of writing, strict observance of the norms of the Church Slavonic language and the absence of rhetorical excesses were relevant. Maxim Grek and Andrey Kurbsky followed the style of presentation of the “trans-Volga elders”. Iosif Volotsky (Ivan Sanin, 1439-1515) is the ideologist of another ecclesiastical and political trend of the late 15th - first half of the 16th centuries, called "Josephism", is the author of vivid works of a journalistic nature. The views of its supporters are directly opposite: they defend the inviolability of church dogmas and political influence churches, protect church and monastic land ownership, support the concept of absolute monarchy, the aestheticization of the rite. The "Josephites" paid a lot of attention to the description of specific events, details of Russian life, therefore, both the book-Slavonic lush rhetoric and colloquial everyday language elements were reflected in their works. Ivan the Terrible wrote in the style of "Josephites".

2. Stylistic varieties of secular literature and business writing in Muscovite Rus'.

The specifics of the secular literature of Muscovite Rus'- Strengthening the socio-political significance. Therefore, those works that had pronounced political tendencies and were aimed at glorifying and exalting the young Muscovite state are made out by means of the Church Slavonic language (“The Legend of the Mamaev Battle”, “The Tale of the Capture of Constantinople”). This literature gradually began to become on a par with ecclesiastical-religious literature, and at the same time the authority of the folk-literary language was rising. In addition, the folk-literary type of language could differ not in structural elements, but in rhetorical technique: the presence / absence of rhetorical embellishment (A. Nikitin’s “Journey Beyond Three Seas” is a work of a folk-literary type of language without rhetorical means of expression).

In general, the following can be considered specific features of secular literature during this period: semantic conditioning in the choice of language tradition; alternation of contexts, characteristic of the Church Slavonic and Old Russian languages, within the framework of one work; deliberate mixing of linguistic elements of different traditions depending on the context; strengthening the authority of the folk literary language.

Function expansion business language of Muscovite Rus'. Variety of genres: from charters (private letters) to government acts, reflecting the standard command business language. Rapprochement of the business language with the literary language (article lists). The invasion of the folk-colloquial element in the sphere of business writing (letters, "pompous" speeches, "questioning" speeches). Availability of standard language formulas - initial and final forms (refusal and vacation books, petitions). Mastering foreign vocabulary and expanding the topics and structure of the business language (“Vesti-Kuranty”, article lists).
Lecture #6

Cultural and linguistic situation of Southwestern Rus' (mid-16th century). The influence of the book tradition of Southwestern Rus' on the Moscow book tradition.

1. Characteristics of the cultural and linguistic situation of Southwestern Rus'.

By the middle of the XVI century. in South-Western Rus', a situation of bilingualism has developed, when two literary languages coexist: the Church Slavonic language of the south-western Russian edition and "prosta Mova". At the heart of the "simple language" is the official clerical language of Southwestern Rus', officially recognized in the Polish-Lithuanian state as the language of legal proceedings. This language gradually lost the functions of a business language and became a literary language. In contrast to the Book Slavonic language of Muscovite Rus, it reveals in its composition an undoubted colloquial substratum, which is artificially "bookish" due to Slavicization (Ukrainian version of "simple language") and Polonization (Belarusian "simple language"). By the second half of the XVI century. the prestige of the “simple language” is growing: it is being codified (dictionaries by L. Zizania and P. Berynda); create scientific, journalistic works; translate into plain language bible books. The Church Slavonic language at this time takes the status of the language of the learned class: the fundamental grammars of Lawrence Zizania and Meletius Smotrytsky appear; orientation towards Latin in grammar (constructions and forms) and vocabulary (borrowings-Latinisms) as a result of the influence of Western European Catholic culture; the presence of polonisms and ukrainisms through the secular business and social everyday language of educated people. This is how the southwestern version of the Church Slavonic language was formed. Thus, the southwestern edition of the Book Slavonic language and the “simple (Russian) language” are literary and linguistic mediators of Western European influence.

2. Literation of "Russian baroque" IN mid-seventeenth V. Ukraine reunites with Russia and turns from a cultural center into a periphery. Local scribes moved to Moscow: Simeon Polotsky, Sylvester Medvedev, Karion Istomin, later Feofan Prokopovich. Their creative legacy literation of "Russian baroque", represented by solemn, epistolary, oratorical prose, verses and dramaturgy. The language of this literature is book-Slavonic, but different both from the Church Slavonic language of the Russian version and from the Church Slavonic language of the South-West Russian edition. It is distinguished from the “old” Church Slavonic by the presence of Latinisms, Polonisms, Ukrainianisms, names of ancient heroes and gods. It differs from the Church Slavonic language of the southwestern Russian edition in a smaller number of polonisms and provincialisms.
Lecture No. 7

Cultural and linguistic situation of the first half of XVII century. Formation of the East Slavic grammatical tradition.

The process of standardization of the literary language is associated with the development of book printing. In 1553, the Printing Yard was established in Kitai-Gorod. In the second half of the XVI century. The first printed books appear in Moscow. Typography contributed

development of uniform spelling;
strengthening the unifying role of the literary language in relation to the territorial dialects;
spreading the literary language throughout the state and among all social groups of literate people.

These reasons necessitated the codification of the Slavic grammatical system of the 16th-17th centuries, which is expressed in the appearance of primers and grammars. For example, the first printed book - "Primer" by Ivan Fedorov (Lvov, 1574) - is a truly scientific work on Slavic grammar.

Grammar existed before the beginning of printing: in the XI - XIV centuries. specific lexico-grammatical compositions appeared (a pre-national stage in the development of the grammatical tradition), in the 16th-17th centuries. - translated grammars (pre-national stage of development of the grammatical tradition). So, in the 20s. 16th century Dmitry Gerasimov translated the Latin grammar of Donatus (4th century BC).

Grammar works published during this period in Western Rus' are also oriented towards Greek grammars. In 1596, the grammar book “Adelfotis” (adelfotis from Greek “brotherhood”) was published, published by students of the Lviv fraternal school, which became the first manual for the comparative study of Slavic and Greek grammar. It is no coincidence that the full grammar was called “Grammar of the Good-Verbal Hellenic-Slavonic Language”, contained grammatical categories similar to Greek samples (long and short vowels, semi-vowel and voiceless consonants).

Grammar "Adelfotis" became the basis for another grammatical work. It was Lavrentiy Zizaniy's Grammar of the Slovene Perfect Art of the Eight Parts of the Word, published in Vilna in 1591, which expounded the traditional for antiquity "the doctrine of the eight parts of the word." Some parts of Zizania's grammar are presented in such a way that the text in Church Slavonic is accompanied by a translation into "simple language". This feature of grammar reflects the school practice of Southwestern Rus'. There is a contrast between the forms of the Church Slavonic language and the "simple language" in different levels: spelling (kolikw - kolkw, four - chotyri), lexical (prevailing - vhdane, famous - singing) and grammatical (hedgehogs - zhebysmy wrote). Correlates to Church Slavonic words of Greek origin in the “simple language” are compound words tracing them, which in their structure can be regarded as Slavic words (etymology - true words). Therefore, the opposition of the forms of the Church Slavonic language and the “simple language” in some cases is the opposition of bookish and colloquial, in others - the opposition of Greek and Slavic. Thus, Lavrenty Zizaniy clearly artificially seeks to contrast the spelling appearance of words that coincide in the Church Slavonic language and “simple language”. Specific features of grammar: distinguished proper and common nouns (unlike "Adelfotis"), 5 voices, 4 moods (indicative, vocative, prayerful, indefinite). Grammar application - "Lexis, that is, the sayings are briefly collected and interpreted from the Slovenian language into simple Russian dialect" (1061 words).

At the beginning of the XVII century. appears the most complete and thorough work on Church Slavonic grammar. This is the "Grammar of the Slovenian correct syntagma", published in the city of Evie in 1619 by Meletiy Smotrytsky. The grammar contained the following sections: "Spelling", "Etymology", "Syntax", "Prosody". Grammar terminology has been introduced: words are syllables, speech is a word, a word is a sentence, etymology is morphology, word parts are parts of speech. There were 8 “word parts” in Smotrytsky’s grammar. “The parts of a word are eight: Name. Mhvalue. Verb. Participle. Addicts. Predlog. Soyuz. Interjection". In this case, the adjective is part of the name. The term "communion" is introduced by M. Smotrytsky for the first time. Thus, the ancient (Greco-Roman) division of the dictionary into parts of speech passed into the Slavic-Russian grammar of Smotrytsky. Specific grammatical categories are noted: 7 genders (general, masculine, feminine, neuter, everyone, bewildered, general); 4 voices (real, passive, middle, suspensive); 4 past tenses (transitory, past, past, nonlimiting); introduces the concept of transitive and intransitive verbs, as well as personal, impersonal, obstinate (irregular), insufficient verbs. At the same time, M. Smotrytsky translates individual grammatical constructions into “simple language”, thereby codifying it in a certain way.

In 1648, a revised edition of the Grammar by Melety Smotrytsky was printed at the Printing House in Moscow. When reissuing the form where, abym etc., since they were alien to the colloquial speech of Moscow spravochnikov, were perceived as bookish and preserved in the text. Therefore, the forms of the "simple language" that are intended to explain the Church Slavonic forms of Meletius Smotrytsky's "Grammar" were transferred to the rank of normative Church Slavonic forms. The revision also affected many grammatical rules, in particular the declension paradigm, bringing them closer to the traditions of colloquial Great Russian speech. The changes also concerned the accent system, which in the previous edition reflected the norms of Western Russian pronunciation.

On the whole, Meletius Smotrytsky's Grammar is a fundamental set of grammatical rules of the Church Slavonic language and a normative model for liturgical books. It was this treatise that became the basis for the grammatical normalization of the official version of the Church Slavonic language until the time of M.V. Lomonosov, who himself studied this grammar.

Along with the indicated grammars in the 16th century. Church Slavonic-"Russian" dictionaries appear in Western Rus'. To appreciate the significance of this phenomenon, it is enough to note that in Russian conditions such dictionaries would be published only in the second half of the 18th century.

In addition to the “Lexis” of L. Zizania indicated above, one should mention the “Lexicon of Slovene Russian and names of translation” by Pamva Berynda (1 edition - Kyiv, 1627). There are almost 7,000 words in the dictionary, and this number seemed incredible. At the same time, “Russian speech” (“prosta mova”) is contrasted with “Volyn” (Ukrainian) and “Lithuanian” (Belarusian): tssl. phten - ox. pven - lit. rooster. "Lexicon" by P. Berynda is wider in its vocabulary. Attached to the dictionary is an index of proper names contained in the church "Saints", which presents the interpretation of the names of Greek, Jewish, Latin origin.
Lecture No. 8

New traditions in the development of the literary language in the second half of the 17th century. Expansion of the functions of the Church Slavonic language.

1. Nikonovskaya on the right(serXVIIV.).

The change in the Church Slavonic language under the influence of the southwestern ideology is the result of the need to normalize the language, which is expressed in the middle of the 17th century. in carrying out a new book right under the leadership of Patriarch Nikon. Linguistic attitudes of the referees - editing books according to Greek samples. So, the spellings were brought into Greek correspondence: aggel, Jesus. Nikon's edition regulated changes in the accentology of names: Avvakum (vm. Avvakum); Michael (vm. Michael); in case management: forever and ever (vm. forever and ever); in Christ (mind about Christ); in the use of old word forms: mine, yours (vm. mi, ti); However, the opponents of the reform - a truly Orthodox audience - the spelling of Jesus was perceived as anti-Christian. In their opinion, changing the form of a word, the nomination of something entails a distortion of the very essence of the Christian concept; God is the author of the text, and the text cannot be changed; the expression must be correct, i.e. Christian. Therefore, a different attitude to the linguistic form of the word became the reason for the split of the church under Patriarch Nikon between the opponents of the reform (“Old Believers”) and its supporters (“New Believers”).

The correlation of the Church Slavonic language of South-Western Rus' and the Church Slavonic language of Moscow Rus' determines the direct influence of the first on the second, which happens in the process of the Nikon and post-Nikon book right: the formal features of the Church Slavonic language of the South-West Russian edition are transferred to the Church Slavonic language of the Great Russian edition, as a result, it is noted education unified all-Russian edition of the Book Slavonic language.

2. Activation in use Church Slavonic.

17th century - the time when the Russian literary language begins to take shape. This process is characterized

the emergence of the "learned" Church Slavonic language under the influence of the literacy of Southwestern Rus';
democratization of literature and literary language, the emergence of new genres, which is associated with the socio-economic shifts of the era. Southwestern Rus'

The new all-Russian Church Slavonic language, despite the fact that in South-Western Rus', to a large extent, the Church Slavonic language was supplanted by the “simple language”, continues to function actively in Great Russian conditions. From the second half of the XVII century. the activation in the use of the Church Slavonic language is due to the following facts: the Church Slavonic language is the language of the learned class (scientific disputes are held in it); ongoing active learning Church Slavonic (using grammar); the functioning of the Church Slavonic language in other areas (secular and legal) is increasing; both clergy and secular write letters in Church Slavonic.

In the development of the literary language during this period in Moscow, new trends are observed: 1) rapprochement with the spoken language of the people; 2) modeling of the Slovenian language, which led to its isolation and the emergence of new phenomena - quasi-Slavicisms. Simply put, new democratic tendencies are emerging in the system of the Church Slavonic language. Their vivid expression is the works of preaching and polemical literature of the Old Believers (deacon Fyodor, Epiphanius, Archpriest Avvakum, etc.). “Vyakanye” (“colloquialism”, opposed to Church Slavonic eloquence) is the main style of the works of Archpriest Avvakum. Avvakum deliberately creates a stylistic dissonance that combines the reduced colloquial and Church Slavonic. The main stylistic feature of his texts is the neutralization of Slavicisms, within which vernacular expressions are built into church-biblical formulas; Church Slavonicisms in the neighborhood with colloquial expressions are assimilated ( full of nets came the God of fish...), i.e. quasi-Slavicisms appear.

Similar trends are also seen in literary genres, little connected with the book-Slavic language - in secular stories of the 17th-18th centuries. (“The Tale of Frol Skobeev”, “The Tale of Shemyakin Court”, “The Tale of Grief-Misfortune”, etc.), with the appearance of which begins fformation of democratic (posad, trade and handicraft) literature. The main characteristics of the works of this literature are the style-forming nature of colloquial everyday and emotionally expressive vocabulary, the absence of unified norms of the grammatical system, the influence of oral folk art (techniques and formulas of the epic style, proverbs and sayings, a kind of rhymed prose).

Another manifestation of Book Slavonic modeling is its parodic use. The examples of the first half of the 17th century testify to the parodic use of the Book Slavonic language. (letter from a handwritten collection of the 1st third of the 17th century). In the second half of the XVII century. the number of parodies in the Book Slavonic language is increasing, which is associated with the decline in the authority of the church, church literature, and the Church Slavonic language. These are satirical works, where Church Slavonicisms are often used to achieve a comic effect, where the use of outdated formulas was played up (“The Legend of the Peasant's Son”, “Service to the Tavern”, “The Tale of Yersh Yershovich”, etc.).

The possibility of parodic use of the Book Slavonic language is evidence of the beginning destruction of diglossia. In addition, the coexistence of parallel texts in Church Slavonic and Russian (for example, in the Code of 1649) is a clear sign of bilingualism and a violation of the diglossia principle. From Ser. 17th century in Russia - the situation of bilingualism. A further trend is the displacement of the Church Slavonic language by the Russian language to the periphery.

Lecture No. 9

Prerequisites for the formation of a new type of literary language (I quarter of the 18th century): the cultural and linguistic policy of Peter I.

1. The purpose of Peter's reforms.

The initial period of the formation of a new literary book language is associated with the Petrine era, which covers the last decade of the 17th century. – I quarter of the 18th century. The secularization of Russian culture is a radical achievement of the Petrine era. The main manifestations of this process can be considered the creation of new educational institutions, the establishment of the Academy of Sciences, the publication of the first Russian newspaper Vedomosti (1703), the introduction of the General Regulations (1720), the Table of Ranks (1722), an increase in the number of printed books and Russian-foreign dictionaries. Language construction is an integral fact of Peter's reforms. V.M. Zhivov: “The opposition of two languages was conceived as an antagonism between two cultures: the old book language (traditional) is barbaric, clerical (church), ignorant in the ideas of Peter the Great reformers, and the new book language was to become European, secular and enlightened.”

2. Graphics reform as the first stage of Peter's transformations in the field of language.

The creation of a Russian civil typeface (1708 - 1710) was the initiative of Peter I himself. The activity to create a new alphabet was carried out by Peter I together with the employees of the Moscow printing house (Musin-Pushkin, F. Polikarpov), starting from 1708, when the sovereign issued a decree “to print a book of geometry into Russian with new alphabets, which was sent from a military campaign and other civil books to print with the same new alphabets. beeches." On January 29, 1710, Peter approved a new alphabet - a civil printed font, on the cover of which it was indicated: "Images of ancient and new letters of Slavonic printed and handwritten." On the back of the cover, Peter wrote: “These letters should be printed in historical and manufactory books, and which are blackened, do not use them in the books described above.” By May 1710, in the "newly invented" alphabet - citizen - 15 editions were printed, among them the first: "Geometry of the Slavic Earth"; "Methods of a compass and a ruler"; "Compliments, or samples of how to write letters to different persons," etc. An example of the standard use of civil type and the spelling practice of newly printed books is the typesetting manuscript “An Honest Mirror of Youth”, or “Indications for everyday behavior, collected from authors of the early 18th century.”

Parameters of Peter's reformation of the Cyrillic alphabet:

change in the alphabetic composition: initially, Peter orders to exclude 9 (according to V.M. Zhivov) / 11 (according to A.M. Kamchatnov) Cyrillic letters: and (like); w (omega); z (ground); q (uk); f(fert); i (Izhitsa); k(xi); j (psi); ^ (ligature "from"); @ (us big); # (us small). But in the finally approved alphabet of 1710, the following were left: and (like); z (ground); q (uk); f(fert); k (xi).
regulation of letters e, e, i(the letter e is entered; instead of >, "- i; instead of ~ - e);
editing the forms of the letters themselves (legalized rounded lettering as opposed to square Cyrillic);
introduction of new designations of numbers (instead of letters, Arabic numbers);
elimination of titles and superscripts.

Peter I himself edited the books, requiring translators to write scientific treatises in plain language, the language of the Ambassadorial order, i.e. secular.

The newly introduced civil type and the church half-charter began to be functionally opposed: just as church books could not be printed by a citizen, so civil books could not be printed by a church semi-charter. The division of the alphabet into ecclesiastical and civil is evidence of bilingualism (the coexistence of two living bookish languages) and dual culture (the opposition of secular and spiritual in printed books).

3. The second aspect of the linguistic transformations of Peter I - language reform.

In 1697, Peter I in Europe discovered "what they write, how they say." Therefore, the main principle of language construction in this period was the formation of a new literary language on a folk basis. The main goal is the transition from a hybrid Church Slavonic language to a “simple” one Russian language. The way to create a new literary language is a combination of Europeanized vocabulary and Russified morphology.

The main trends in the language construction of the Petrine era:

Enrichment of the vocabulary of the native language with Europeanized vocabulary.
Creation of Russified morphology.
The displacement of the command language of Muscovite Rus'.

A striking difference in the literary language of this period is the increase in the number of borrowings, which reached its climax. "Europeanization" of the vocabulary of the language tied

with the advent of powerful translation activities, which also solved the problem of the state's personnel policy. The appearance of translation literature meant that not only foreign vocabulary got into the Russian language, but also the new content required the development of new forms of the native language, as indicated by the sovereign’s prescription: “... in order to translate more clearly, and it is not necessary to keep speech from speech in translation, ... write into your own language as it is more intelligible ... ".
with the process of reorganization of the administrative system, the reorganization of naval affairs, the development of trade, factory enterprises, as a result of which the formation of a new terminological system of different thematic groups begins.

The borrowing process is driven by two functions:

1) pragmatic: lexical borrowings are mostly motivated by the borrowing of new things and concepts that speakers had to master in order to be codified;

2) semiotic: the use of borrowings indicated the assimilation of a new system of values and the rejection of traditional ideas.

At the same time, the latter function manifested itself in those cases when borrowings were accompanied in the text by a gloss (Greek "language, speech"), i.e. interpretation of an incomprehensible word through the equivalent of a given language familiar to the reader (for example, in the "General Regulations or Charter" (1720)).

In general, the process of borrowing during this period is characterized by

1) both redundancy (presence of glossing) and insufficiency (translators were not always able to designate new concepts and objects, choosing words from Russian usage);

2) successful tracing ( productus"work", Sonnestand"solstice", etc.);

3) temporary displacement from the active use of Russian words ( Victoria instead of victory, battle instead of battle, surname instead of family, fortification instead of fortress and etc.);

4) the transition to the passive vocabulary of the disappeared realities ( senate, footman, camisole, caftan and etc.).

Thus, the widespread use of borrowings did not solve the main linguistic task of Peter. stable trait language policy of this time - complaints about the incomprehensibility of legal documents (a number of borrowings first appear in legislative acts). So, in the "Military Regulations" (1716), in addition to those borrowings that are glossed, there are a number of similar lexical elements that the reader had to understand on his own ( patent, officer, article, execution). For the language situation of the Petrine era, not only bilingualism as a sign of local significance is relevant, but also multilingualism associated with the appearance of foreign vocabulary.

Another striking sign of the language construction of this time is lack of uniform morphological norms: unsystematic use of Russian, colloquial and Church Slavonic elements (letters and papers of Peter I, stories of the beginning of the 18th century). On the one hand, in morphological features of the created language reflected the influence of the former book-Slavic tradition. On April 19, 1724, Peter I wrote a decree to Senod on compiling short teachings, where he ordered “just write so that the villager knows, or two: the villager is simple, but in the city it is prettier for the sweetness of those who listen ...”. One gets the impression that the marked Church Slavonic elements are perceived as a rhetorical embellishment, or as a socio-cultural task in the activities of poets and writers, and not as general cultural significance. Therefore, Church Slavonic is no longer a universal language. On the other hand, the creation of Russified morphology is an attempt to edit the texts in accordance with the new language policy. Morphological editing includes the replacement of the aorist and imperfect forms with l-forms without a copula, infinitive forms with -t, forms 2 l. units h. on –sh, forms of the dual number on forms plural, coexistence in addresses of forms of the vocative and nominative case. Syntactic editing was expressed in the replacement of the constructions "particle yes + form of the present tense" with synthetic forms imperative mood, single negation by double, constructions with nouns in gender. n. on agreed phrases.

Stylistic disorder of the literary language as a genetic heterogeneity of linguistic means of expression in its composition. The mixed nature of speech is a sign of the formation of a cultural dialect.

Two varieties literary speech: Slavic-Russian language and civil mediocre dialect. The Slavic Russian language is “secularized” Church Slavonic: a combination of Church Slavonic grammar and a small amount of vernacular, borrowings (sermons by Feofan Prokopovich, Stefan Yavorsky, translated scientific works, preface to the “Trilingual Lexicon” by Fyodor Polikarpov). Creation of civil mediation as an accessible and understandable written literary language of a new type - the main linguistic setting of Peter I. The complex composition of this literary language: colloquial Russian, colloquial, Church Slavonic elements, European borrowings, artificial formations, neologisms, tracing papers, individual author's lexemes (translations of technical books, translated novels, dramas, intimate poetry, letters, newspapers).

The role of the "order" language in the development of the literary language: previously opposed to Church Slavonic, now it is moving to the periphery. Under the new conditions, the literariness of texts ceases to be associated with the signs of bookishness and is determined by extralinguistic parameters. As a result, the possibility of the existence of non-literary texts in the literary language is created. The new language acquires the attribute of polyfunctionality: the inclusion in the language culture of those areas that were outside the limits of its functioning (spiritual literature, legislation, office work).

Thus, the cultural policy of Peter I led to a radical change in the language situation:

The "mandatory" language of Muscovite Rus': out of use and in competition with the traditional bookish language.
Church Slavonic loses its polyfunctionality: only the language of worship.
a written literary language of a new type is being formed - a civil mediocre dialect.
the new literary language is distinguished by stylistic disorder, a mixture of old and new, one's own and others', bookish and colloquial.

The deeper we go into history, the less indisputable facts and reliable information we have, especially if we are interested in non-material problems, for example: linguistic consciousness, mentality, attitude towards linguistic phenomena and the status of linguistic units. You can ask eyewitnesses about the events of the recent past, find written evidence, maybe even photo and video materials. And what to do if none of this exists: native speakers have long been dead, material evidence of their speech is fragmentary or absent at all, much has been lost or has undergone later editing?

It is impossible to hear how the ancient Vyatichi spoke, and therefore, to understand how much the written language of the Slavs differed from the oral tradition. There is no evidence of how Novgorodians perceived the speech of the people of Kiev or the language of Metropolitan Hilarion's sermons, which means that the question of the dialect division of the Old Russian language remains without an unambiguous answer. It is impossible to determine the actual degree of closeness of the languages of the Slavs at the end of the 1st millennium AD, and therefore, to accurately answer the question of whether the artificial Old Slavonic language created on South Slavic soil was equally perceived by the Bulgarians and the Russians.

Of course, the painstaking work of language historians bears fruit: the study and comparison of texts from different genres, styles, eras and territories; data of comparative linguistics and dialectology, indirect evidence of archeology, history, ethnography allow us to recreate a picture of the distant past. However, one must understand that the analogy with the picture here is much deeper than it seems at first glance: reliable data obtained in the process of studying the ancient states of the language are only separate fragments of a single canvas, between which there are white spots (the older the period, the more) missing data. Thus, a complete picture is created, completed by the researcher on the basis of indirect data, fragments surrounding the white spot, known principles and the most probable possibilities. This means that errors and different interpretations of the same facts and events are possible.

At the same time, even in distant history there are indisputable facts, one of which is the Baptism of Rus'. The nature of this process, the role of certain actors, the dating of specific events remains the subject of scientific and pseudo-scientific discussions, however, it is known without any doubt that at the end of the 1st millennium AD. the state of the Eastern Slavs, referred to in modern historiography as Kievan Rus, adopts Byzantine Christianity as the state religion and officially switches to Cyrillic writing. Whatever views the researcher holds, whatever data he uses, it is impossible to bypass these two facts. Everything else about this period, even the sequence of these events and the causal relationships between them, is constantly becoming a subject of dispute. Chronicle vaults adhere to the version: Christianity brought culture to Rus' and gave writing, at the same time retaining references to agreements concluded and signed in two languages between Byzantium and still pagan Rusichs. There are also references to the presence in Rus' of pre-Christian writing, for example, among Arab travelers.

But at the moment, something else is important for us: at the end of the 1st millennium AD. the language situation of Ancient Rus' is undergoing significant changes caused by a change in the state religion. Whatever the situation before that, the new religion brought with it a special linguistic layer, canonically fixed in writing - the Old Slavonic language, which (in the form of the Russian national version - the edition - the Church Slavonic language) from that moment became an integral element of Russian culture and Russian linguistic mentality. In the history of the Russian language, this phenomenon has been called "the first South Slavic influence."

The scheme of the formation of the Russian language

We will return to this scheme. In the meantime, we need to understand what elements the new linguistic situation in Ancient Rus' began to take shape after the adoption of Christianity, and what in this new situation can be identified with the concept of "literary language".

Firstly, there was an oral Old Russian language, represented by very different, capable of eventually reaching the level of closely related languages, and almost no different dialects (Slavic languages by this time had not yet completely overcome the stage of dialects of a single Proto-Slavic language). In any case, it had a certain history and was developed enough to serve all spheres of the life of the Old Russian state, i.e. had sufficient linguistic means not only to be used in everyday communication, but also to serve the diplomatic, legal, commercial, religious and cultural (oral folk art) spheres.

Secondly, the Old Slavonic written language appeared, introduced by Christianity to serve religious needs and gradually spread to the sphere of culture and literature.

Third, there had to be a state-business written language for conducting diplomatic, legal and trade correspondence and documentation, as well as servicing domestic needs.

It is here that the question of the closeness of the Slavic languages to each other and the perception of Church Slavonic by the speakers of the Old Russian language turns out to be extremely relevant. If the Slavic languages were still very close to each other, then it is likely that, while learning to write according to Church Slavonic patterns, the Russians perceived the differences between languages as the difference between oral and written speech (we say “karova” - we write “cow”). Consequently, at the initial stage, the entire sphere of written speech was given to the Church Slavonic language, and only with the passage of time, in conditions of increasing divergence, Old Russian elements began to penetrate into it, primarily into non-spiritual texts, moreover, in the status of colloquial ones. Which ultimately led to the marking of the Old Russian elements as simple, “low”, and the surviving Old Slavonic ones as “high” (for example, turn - rotate, milk - Milky Way, freak - holy fool).

If the differences were already significant, noticeable to speakers, then the language that came with Christianity became associated with religion, philosophy, education (since education was carried out by copying the texts of Holy Scripture). The solution of everyday, legal, and other material issues, as in the pre-Christian period, continued to be carried out with the help of the Old Russian language, both in oral and written spheres. Which would lead to the same consequences, but with different initial data.

An unequivocal answer here is practically impossible, since at the moment there is simply not enough initial data: very few texts have come down to us from the early period of Kievan Rus, most of them are religious monuments. The rest was preserved in later lists, where the differences between Church Slavonic and Old Russian can be both original and appeared later. Now let's return to the question of the literary language. It is clear that in order to use this term in the conditions of the Old Russian language space, it is necessary to correct the meaning of the term in relation to the situation of the absence of both the very idea of the language norm and the means of state and public control of the state of the language (dictionaries, reference books, grammars, laws, etc.).

So, what is the literary language in modern world? There are many definitions of this term, but in fact it is a stable version of the language that meets the needs of the state and society and ensures the continuity of the transmission of information and the preservation of the national worldview. It cuts off everything that is actually or declaratively unacceptable for society and the state at this stage: it supports linguistic censorship, stylistic differentiation; ensures the preservation of the richness of the language (even unclaimed by the language situation of the era, for example: lovely, young lady, many-sided) and the prevention of the language that has not passed the test of time (new formations, borrowings, etc.).

What ensures the stability of the language variant? Due to the existence of fixed language norms, which are marked as an ideal version of a given language and are passed on to the next generations, which ensures the continuity of linguistic consciousness, preventing linguistic changes.

Obviously, with any use of the same term, in this case it is “literary language”, the essence and main functions of the phenomenon described by the term must remain unchanged, otherwise the principle of unambiguity of the terminological unit is violated. What is changing? After all, it is no less obvious that the literary language of the XXI century. and the literary language of Kievan Rus differ significantly from each other.

The main changes occur in the ways of maintaining the stability of the language variant and the principles of interaction between the subjects of the linguistic process. In modern Russian, the means of maintaining stability are:

language dictionaries (explanatory, orthographic, orthoepic, phraseological, grammatical, etc.), grammars and grammar reference books, Russian language textbooks for schools and universities, programs for teaching the Russian language at school, Russian language and culture of speech at a university, laws and legislative acts on state language- means of fixing the norm and informing about the norm of society;
teaching the Russian language and Russian literature in secondary schools, publishing works of Russian classics and classical folklore for children, proofreading and editing work in publishing houses; compulsory exams in the Russian language for school graduates, emigrants and migrants, a mandatory course of the Russian language and the culture of speech at a university, state programs to support the Russian language: for example, the “Year of the Russian Language”, programs to support the status of the Russian language in the world, targeted festive events (their funding and wide coverage): Day of Slavic Literature and Culture, Day of the Russian Language - means of forming norm bearers and maintaining the status of the norm in society.

The system of relations between the subjects of the literary language process

We return to the past. It is clear that there was no complex and multi-level system for maintaining the stability of the language in Kievan Rus, as well as the very concept of “norm” in the absence of a scientific description of the language, a full-fledged language education and a system of language censorship that would allow to identify and correct errors and prevent their further spread. Actually, there was no concept of "error" in its modern sense.

However, there was already (and there is enough indirect evidence of this) the rulers of Rus' realized the possibilities of a single literary language in strengthening the state and forming the nation. Strange as it may sound, Christianity, as described in The Tale of Bygone Years, most likely, indeed, was chosen from several options. Chosen as a national idea. Obviously, the development of the East Slavic state at some point faced the need to strengthen statehood and unite the tribes into a single people. This explains why the process of converting to another religion, which usually occurs either for deep personal reasons or for political reasons, is presented in the annals as a free, conscious choice from all the options available at that time. A strong unifying idea was needed, not contradicting the key, fundamental for the worldview ideas of the tribes from which the nation was formed. After the choice was made, to use modern terminology, a broad campaign was launched to implement the national idea, which included:

bright mass actions (for example, the famous baptism of Kyivans in the Dnieper);
historical justification (chronicles);
publicistic support (for example, Metropolitan Hilarion's "Sermon on Law and Grace", where not only the differences between the Old and New Testaments are analyzed and the principles of the Christian worldview are explained, but a parallel is drawn between the correct dispensation inner world a person that gives Christianity, and the correct arrangement of the state, which is ensured by a peaceful Christian consciousness and autocracy, protecting from internal strife and allowing the state to become strong and stable);
means of disseminating and maintaining the national idea: translation activities (actively started already under Yaroslav the Wise), the creation of their own book tradition, schooling3;
the formation of an intelligentsia - an educated social stratum - a carrier and, more importantly, a repeater of the national idea (Vladimir purposefully teaches children to know, forms the priesthood; Yaroslav gathers scribes and translators, seeks permission from Byzantium to form a national higher clergy, etc.).

The successful implementation of the “state program” required a socially significant language (linguistic variant), common for the whole people, with a high status and a developed written tradition. In the modern understanding of the main linguistic terms, these are signs of the literary language, and in the linguistic situation of Ancient Rus' in the 11th century. - Church Slavonic

Functions and features of the literary and Church Slavonic language

Thus, it turns out that the literary language of Ancient Rus' after Baptism becomes national version Old Church Slavonic - Church Slavonic. However, the development of the Old Russian language does not stand still, and, despite the adaptation of the Church Slavonic language to the needs of the East Slavic tradition in the process of forming a national recension, the gap between Old Russian and Church Slavonic begins to grow. The situation is worsened by several factors.

1. The already mentioned evolution of the living Old Russian language against the background of the stability of the literary Church Slavonic, which weakly and inconsistently reflects even processes common to all Slavs (for example, the fall of the reduced ones: weak reduced ones continue, albeit not everywhere, to be fixed in the monuments of both the 12th and 13th centuries).

2. Using a sample as a norm that maintains stability (that is, learning to write goes by repeatedly copying the model form, it also acts as the only measure of the correctness of the text: if I don’t know how to write it, I have to look at the sample or remember it). Let's consider this factor in more detail.

We have already said that for the normal existence of the literary language, special means are needed to protect it from the influence of the national language. They ensure the preservation of a stable and unchanged state of the literary language to the maximum possible period time. Such means are called the norms of the literary language and are recorded in dictionaries, grammars, collections of rules, textbooks. This allows the literary language to ignore living processes as long as it does not begin to contradict the national linguistic consciousness. In the pre-scientific period, when there is no description of language units, tradition, a model, becomes a means of using a model to maintain the stability of the literary language: instead of the principle “I write this way because it is right”, the principle “I write this way because I see (or remember) how to write it” operates. This is quite reasonable and convenient when the main activity of the bearer of the book tradition becomes the rewriting of books (that is, replicating texts by manual copying). The main task of the scribe in this case is precisely to strictly observe the presented pattern. This approach determines many features of the Old Russian cultural tradition:

a small number of texts in culture;
anonymity;
canonicity;
a small number of genres;
stability of turns and verbal constructions;
traditional figurative and expressive means.

If modern literature does not accept worn out metaphors, unoriginal comparisons, hackneyed phrases and strives for maximum uniqueness of the text, then ancient Russian literature and, by the way, oral folk art, on the contrary, tried to use proven, recognized linguistic means; to express a certain type of thought, they tried to use the traditional method of registration accepted by society. Hence the absolutely conscious anonymity: “I, by God’s command, put information into tradition” - this is the canon of life, this is the life of a saint - “I just put the events that were in the traditional form in which they should be stored.” And if a modern author writes in order to be seen or heard, then the Old Russian wrote because he had to convey this information. Therefore, the number of original books turned out to be small.

However, over time, the situation began to change, and the sample, as the custodian of the stability of the literary language, showed a significant drawback: it was neither universal nor mobile. The higher the originality of the text, the more difficult it was for the scribe to rely on memory, which means that he had to write not “as it is written in the sample”, but “as I think it should be written”. The application of this principle brought into the text elements of a living language that conflicted with tradition and provoked doubts in the scribe: “I see (or I remember) different spellings of the same word, which means there is a mistake somewhere, but where”? Either statistics helped (“I saw this option more often”), or living language (“how do I say it”?). Sometimes, however, hyper-correction worked: “I say this, but I usually write not the way I speak, so I’ll write it the way they don’t say it.” Thus, the sample as a means of maintaining stability under the influence of several factors began to gradually lose its effectiveness.

3. The existence of writing not only in Church Slavonic, but also in Old Russian (legal, business, diplomatic writing).

4. The limited scope of the use of the Church Slavonic language (it was perceived as the language of faith, religion, Holy Scripture, therefore, native speakers had the feeling that it was wrong to use it for something less high, more mundane).

All these factors, under the influence of a catastrophic weakening of the centralized state power, the weakening of educational activities led to the fact that the literary language entered a phase of a protracted crisis, culminating in the formation of Muscovite Rus'.

The history of the Russian literary language is a branch of Russian studies that studies the emergence, formation, historical transformations of the structure of the literary language, the correlative relationships of its constituent system components - styles, both linguistic and functional speech and individual author's, etc., the development of written and bookish and oral and colloquial forms of the literary language. The theoretical basis of the discipline is a complex and versatile (historical-cultural, historical-literary, historical-poetic and historical-linguistic) approach to the study of the structure of lit. language, its norms at different stages of historical development. The concept of the history of the Russian literary language as scientific discipline was developed by V. V. Vinogradov and adopted by modern Russian linguistics. She replaced the approach that previously existed in science, which was a commentary on Rus. lit. language 18-19 centuries. with a collection of heterogeneous phonetic-morphological and word-forming facts against the background of understanding the language as a tool of Russian. culture (works by E. F. Budde).

In Russian Philology of the 19th century there were four historical and linguistic concepts of the emergence and development of the ancient Russian literary language. 1. The Church Slavonic language and the Old Russian folk literary language are styles of the same “Slavonic”, or old Russian literary language (A.S. Shishkov, P.A. Katenin, etc.). 2. The Church Slavonic (or Old Slavonic) language (the language of church books) and the Old Russian language of business and secular writing are different, albeit closely related, languages that were in close interaction and confusion until the end. 18 - beg. 19th centuries (A. Kh. Vostokov, partly K. F. Kalaidovich, M. T. Kachenovsky and others).

3. The Old Russian literary language is based on the Church Slavonic language (M. A. Maksimovich, K. S. Aksakov, partly N. I. Nadezhdin, and others). According to Maksimovich, “Church Slavonic not only gave rise to the written language of Russian... but, more than all other languages, played a part in the further formation of our national language” (“History of Ancient Russian Literature”, 1839). 4. The basis of other Russian. lit. language - a living East Slavic folk speech, close in its main structural features to the Old Slavic language. By adopting Christianity, the people “have already found all the books necessary for worship and for teaching in the faith, in a dialect that differed very little from its popular dialect”; “Not only in authentic works of Russian. scribes, but also in translations, the older they are, the more we see nationalities in the expression of thoughts and images ”(I. I. Sreznevsky,“ Thoughts on the history of the Russian language and other Slavic dialects ”, 1887). The separation of the bookish and folk language, caused by changes in the colloquial, dialectal speech of the Eastern Slavs, dates back to the 13th-14th centuries. This led to the fact that the development of the Old Russian literary language was determined by the ratio of two speech elements - the written common Slavic (Old Slavonic, Old Slavonic) and the oral and written national Old Russian. The following periods are distinguished in the development of the Russian literary language: the literary language of Ancient Rus' (from the 10th to the end of the 14th - beginning of the 15th centuries); the literary language of Muscovite Rus' (from the late 14th - early 15th centuries to the 2nd half of the 17th century); literary language of the initial era of the formation of Russian. nations (from the middle of the 17th century to the 1880s and 1890s); the literary language of the era of the formation of the Russian nation and the formation of its national norms (from the end of the 18th century); Russian literary language modern era. The spread and development of writing and literature in Rus' begins after the adoption of Christianity (988), i.e. with con. 10th c. The oldest of the written monuments are translations from the Greek language (Gospel, Apostle, Psalter ...) Ancient Russian authors created during this period original works in the genres of preaching literature (“Words” and “Teachings” of Metropolitan Hilarion, Kirill of Turov, Luka Zhidyata, Kliment Smolyatich), pilgrimage literature (“The Progress of Father Superior Daniel”), etc. the Yang type of language lay the Old Slavic language. Ancient Russian literature during this period of its history also cultivated narrative, historical and folk art genres, the emergence of which is associated with the development of the folk cultural or folk processed type of the Old Russian literary language. These are The Tale of Bygone Years (12th century) - an ancient Russian chronicle, the epic work The Tale of Igor's Campaign (end of the 12th century), The Teaching of Vladimir Monomakh (12th century) - an example of the "secular, hagiographic" genre, "The Prayer of Daniel the Sharpener" (12th century), "The Tale of the Destruction of the Russian Land" (late 13th - early 14th centuries .). A special group of vocabulary of the Old Russian language is made up of Old Slavic words that have the same root as the corresponding Russian ones, differing in sound appearance: breg (cf. shore), vlas (cf. hair), gates (cf. gate), chapter (cf. head), tree (cf. tree), srachica (cf. purely lexical alleles, such as marriage and marriage; vyya and neck; muddy and go; speak, speak and say, speak; cheek and cheek; eyes and eyes; percy and chest; mouth and lips; forehead and forehead, etc. The presence of such lexical pairs enriched the literary language functionally, semantically and stylistically. The Old Russian literary language inherited from the Old Slavonic language the means of artistic representation: epithets, comparisons, metaphors, antitheses, gradations, etc. By the middle of the 12th century. Kievan Rus falls into decay, a period of feudal fragmentation begins, which contributed to the dialectal fragmentation of the Old Russian language. From about the 14th century on the East Slavic territory, closely related East Slavic languages \u200b\u200bare formed: Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian. The Russian language of the era of the Muscovite state (14-17 centuries) had complex history. The main dialect zones took shape - the Northern Great Russian dialect (approximately north of the line Pskov - Tver - Moscow, south Nizhny Novgorod) and the South Veliko-Korusian dialect (up to the borders with the Ukrainian zone in the south and the Belarusian zone in the west). From the end of the 14th century in Moscow, glories and church books are being edited to bring them into their original form, corresponding to the Greek originals. This editing was carried out under the leadership of Metropolitan Cyprian and was supposed to bring Russian writing closer to South Slavic. In the 15th century Rus. Orthodox Church leaves the care of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, the patriarchate is established in it in 1589). The rise of Muscovite Rus' begins, the authority of the grand-ducal power and sinks, the church is growing, the idea of Moscow’s continuity in relation to Byzantium, which has found its expression in the ideological formula “Moscow is the third Rome, and there can be no fourth”, is becoming widespread, which receives theological, state-legal and historical-cultural comprehension. In the book-Slavic type of the literary language, archaized spellings based on the South Slavic spelling norm are spreading, a special rhetorical manner of expression arises, flowery, lush, saturated with metaphors, called the “convolution of words” (“weaving of words”).

From the 17th century the language of Russian science and the national literary language are being formed. The tendency towards internal unity, towards rapprochement of lit. spoken language. In the 2nd floor. 16th century in the Muscovite state, book printing began, which was of great importance for the fate of the Russian. lit. language, literature, culture and education. The handwritten culture was replaced by a written culture. In 1708, the civil alphabet was introduced, in which secular literature was printed. The Church Slavonic alphabet (Cyrillic) is used only for confessional purposes. In the literary language of the end of the 17th-1st floor. 18th century book-Slavic, often even archaic, lexical and grammatical elements, words and turns of speech of a folk-colloquial and “order” (“business”) character, and Western European borrowings are closely intertwined and interact.

Russian language dialects of the Russian language Portal: Russian language

History of the Russian literary language- formation and transformation of the Russian language used in literary works. The oldest surviving literary monuments date back to the 11th century. In the 18th-19th centuries, this process took place against the background of the opposition of the Russian language, which was spoken by the people, to French, the language of the nobility. The classics of Russian literature actively explored the possibilities of the Russian language and were innovators of many language forms. They emphasized the richness of the Russian language and often pointed out its advantages over foreign languages. On the basis of such comparisons, disputes have repeatedly arisen, for example, disputes between Westerners and Slavophiles. IN Soviet times it was emphasized that the Russian language is the language of the builders of communism, and during the era of Stalin's rule, a campaign was carried out to combat cosmopolitanism in literature. The transformation of the Russian literary language continues at the present time.

Folklore

Oral folk art (folklore) in the form of fairy tales, epics, proverbs and sayings is rooted in distant history. They were passed from mouth to mouth, their content was polished in such a way that the most stable combinations remained, and linguistic forms were updated as the language developed. Oral creativity continued to exist even after the advent of writing. In modern times, peasant folklore was supplemented by worker and city folklore, as well as army and thieves (prison-camp) folklore. At present, oral folk art is most expressed in anecdotes. Oral folk art also influences the written literary language.

The development of the literary language in ancient Rus'

The introduction and spread of writing in Rus', which led to the creation of the Russian literary language, is usually associated with Cyril and Methodius.

So, in ancient Novgorod and other cities in the XI-XV centuries, birch bark letters were in use. Most of the surviving birch bark letters are private letters of a business nature, as well as business documents: wills, receipts, bills of sale, court records. There are also church texts and literary and folklore works (conspiracies, school jokes, riddles, housekeeping instructions), educational records (alphabets, warehouses, school exercises, children's drawings and scribbles).

Church Slavonic writing, introduced by Cyril and Methodius in 862, was based on Old Church Slavonic, which in turn originated from South Slavic dialects. The literary activity of Cyril and Methodius consisted in translating the books of the Holy Scriptures of the New and Old Testaments. The disciples of Cyril and Methodius translated a large number of religious books into Church Slavonic from Greek. Some researchers believe that Cyril and Methodius did not introduce the Cyrillic alphabet, but the Glagolitic one; and the Cyrillic alphabet was developed by their students.

Church Slavonic was a bookish language, not a spoken language, the language of church culture, which spread among many Slavic peoples. Church Slavonic literature spread among the Western Slavs (Moravia), the Southern Slavs (Bulgaria), in Wallachia, parts of Croatia and the Czech Republic, and, with the adoption of Christianity, in Rus'. Since the Church Slavonic language differed from spoken Russian, church texts were subject to change during correspondence, Russified. The scribes corrected the Church Slavonic words, bringing them closer to the Russian ones. At the same time, they introduced the features of local dialects.

To systematize Church Slavonic texts and introduce uniform language norms in the Commonwealth, the first grammars were written - the grammar of Lavrenty Zizania (1596) and the grammar of Melety Smotrytsky (1619). The process of formation of the Church Slavonic language was basically completed at the end of the 17th century, when Patriarch Nikon corrected and systematized the liturgical books. Liturgical books of Russian Orthodoxy have become the norm for all Orthodox peoples .

As Church Slavonic religious texts spread in Rus', literary works gradually began to appear that used the writing system of Cyril and Methodius. The first such works date back to the end of the 11th century. These are The Tale of Bygone Years" (1068), "The Tale of Boris and Gleb", "The Life of Theodosius of Pechorsky", "Word of Law and Grace" (1051), "Instructions of Vladimir Monomakh" (1096) and "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" (1185-1188). These works are written in a language that is a mixture of Church Slavonic with Old Russian.

Reforms of the Russian literary language of the 18th century

“The beauty, splendor, strength and richness of the Russian language is quite clear from books written in past centuries, when our ancestors did not know any rules for compositions, but they hardly thought that they exist or could be,” Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov argued

The most important reforms of the Russian literary language and system of versification in the 18th century were made by Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov. In the city, he wrote a "Letter on the Rules of Russian Poetry", in which he formulated the principles of a new versification in Russian. In a polemic with Trediakovsky, he argued that instead of cultivating poems written according to schemes borrowed from other languages, it is necessary to use the possibilities of the Russian language. Lomonosov believed that it was possible to write poetry with many types of feet - disyllabic (iambic and trochee) and trisyllabic (dactyl, anapaest and amphibrach), but considered it wrong to replace the feet with pyrrhic and spondei. Such innovation by Lomonosov sparked a discussion in which Trediakovsky and Sumarokov actively participated. Three transcriptions of the 143rd Psalm, made by these authors, were published in the city, and readers were asked to express which of the texts they consider the best.

However, Pushkin's statement is known, in which Lomonosov's literary activity is not approved: “His odes ... are tiring and inflated. His influence on literature was harmful and still reverberates in it. Grandiloquence, sophistication, disgust at simplicity and accuracy, the absence of any nationality and originality - these are the traces left by Lomonosov. Belinsky called this view "surprisingly correct, but one-sided." According to Belinsky, “In the time of Lomonosov, we did not need folk poetry; then the great question - to be or not to be - was for us not nationality, but Europeanism ... Lomonosov was Peter the Great of our literature.

In addition to his contribution to the poetic language, Lomonosov was also the author of scientific Russian grammar. In this book, he described the riches and possibilities of the Russian language. Lomonosov's grammar was published 14 times and formed the basis of the Russian grammar course of Barsov (1771), who was a student of Lomonosov. In this book, Lomonosov, in particular, wrote: “Charles the fifth, the Roman emperor, used to say that it was decent to speak Spanish with God, French with friends, German with enemies, Italian with the female sex. But if he were skilled in the Russian language, then, of course, he would add to that that it was decent for them to speak with all of them, for he would find in it the splendor of Spanish, the liveliness of French, the strength of German, the tenderness of Italian, moreover, the richness and brevity of the Greek and Latin language, strong in images. It is interesting that Derzhavin later spoke similarly: “The Slavic-Russian language, according to the testimony of foreign estheticians themselves, is not inferior either in courage to Latin or in smoothness to Greek, surpassing all European ones: Italian, French and Spanish, much more so German.”

Modern Russian literary language

The creator of the modern literary language is Alexander Pushkin, whose works are considered the pinnacle of Russian literature. This thesis remains dominant, despite the significant changes that have taken place in the language over the almost two hundred years that have passed since the creation of his major works, and the obvious stylistic differences between the language of Pushkin and modern writers.

Meanwhile, the poet himself points to the paramount role of N. M. Karamzin in the formation of the Russian literary language, according to A. S. Pushkin, this glorious historian and writer "liberated the language from an alien yoke and returned its freedom, turning it to the living sources of the folk word."

"Great, mighty..."

Turgenev belongs to, perhaps, one of the most famous definitions of the Russian language as "great and mighty."

In days of doubt, in days of painful reflections on the fate of my homeland, you alone are my support and support, O great, powerful, truthful and free Russian language! Without you - how not to fall into despair at the sight of everything that happens at home? But one cannot believe that such a language was not given to a great people!(I. S. Turgenev)

Charles V, the Roman emperor, used to say that it was decent to speak with God in Gishpan, French with friends, German with enemies, Italian with women. But if he were skilled in the Russian language, then of course he would add to that that it was decent for them to speak with all of them. For I would find in it: great ... ... German, the strength of the German, the tenderness of the Italian, in addition to the richness and brevity of the Greek and Latin languages \u200b\u200bstrong in the image.

Notes

Russian language

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .

Chekhov
Tashfin ibn Ali

See what the "History of the Russian literary language" is in other dictionaries:

Dictionary of modern Russian literary language- "The Dictionary of the Modern Russian Literary Language" (SSRLA; Big Academic Dictionary, BAS) is an academic normative explanatory historical dictionary of the Russian literary language in 17 volumes, published from 1948 to 1965. Reflects ... ... Wikipedia

History of the literary Russian language- The history of the Russian literary language, the formation and transformation of the Russian language used in literary works. The oldest surviving literary monuments date back to the 11th century. In *** centuries, Rus' spread ... ... Wikipedia

The literary Russian language began to take shape many centuries ago. Until now, there are disputes in science about its basis, about the role of the Church Slavonic language in its origin. The Russian language belongs to the Indo-European family. Its origins date back to the time of the existence and collapse of the common European (proto-Slavic) language. From this common Slavic unity (VI-VII centuries), several groups stand out: eastern, western and southern. It is in the East Slavic group that the Russian language will later stand out (XV century).

In the Kievan state, a mixed language was used, which was called Church Slavonic. All liturgical literature, being written off from Old Slavonic Byzantine and Bulgarian sources, reflected the norms of the Old Slavonic language. However, words and elements of the Old Russian language penetrated into this literature. In parallel to this style of language, secular and business literature also existed. If the “Psalter”, “Gospel” and so on serve as examples of the Church Slavonic language, then “The Tale of Igor's Campaign”, “The Tale of Bygone Years”, “Russian Truth” are considered an example of the secular and business language of Ancient Rus'.

This literature (secular and business) reflects the linguistic norms of the living spoken language of the Slavs, their oral folk art. Based on the fact that in Ancient Rus' there was such a complex dual language system, it is difficult for scientists to explain the origin of the modern literary Russian language. Their opinions differ, but the most common is the theory of the academician V. V. Vinogradova . According to this theory, two varieties of the literary language functioned in Ancient Rus':

1) book-Slavonic literary language, based on Old Church Slavonic and used mainly in church literature;

2) folk-literary language, based on the living Old Russian language and used in secular literature.

According to V.V. Vinogradov, these are two types of language, and not two special languages, that is, there was no bilingualism in Kievan Rus. These two types of language interacted with each other for a long time. Gradually they became closer, and on their basis in the XVIII century. a unified literary Russian language was formed.

The beginning of the stage of development of the Russian literary language is considered to be the time of the work of the great Russian poet Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, who is sometimes called the creator of the modern Russian literary language.

A. S. Pushkin streamlined artistic means Russian literary language, significantly enriched it. Based on various manifestations of the folk language, he managed to create in his works a language that was perceived by society as a literary one.

Pushkin's work is indeed a definite milestone in the history of the literary Russian language. We still read his works easily and with pleasure, while the works of his predecessors and even many contemporaries - with some difficulty. one feels that they have already written obsolete language. Of course, a lot of time has passed since the time of A. S. Pushkin and a lot has changed, including the Russian language: something has gone out of it, a lot of new words have appeared. Although great poet did not leave us grammars, he was the author of not only artistic, but also historical, journalistic works, clearly delineated the author's speech and characters, that is, he practically laid the foundations for the modern functional-style classification of the literary Russian language.

The further development of the literary language continued in the work of the great Russian writers, publicists, in the diverse activities of the Russian people. Late XIX V. up to the present time - the second period of development of the modern literary Russian language. This period is characterized by well-established linguistic norms, but these norms are being improved over time.

	Portal "Russian language "
	at Wikiquote
	in Wikisource
	History of the Russian literary language at Wikimedia Commons

samarapedsovet.ru