SOCIAL SCIENCES AND MODERNITY

CULTURE

L.P. KRYSIN

Is it possible to recognize an intellectual by speech?

They called you.

intelligent.

From a conversation between husband and wife

One of the most talented domestic linguists E. Polivanov back in the 20s. of the last century (in a completely "non-intelligent" time!) I wondered: what allows us to almost unmistakably single out intelligent voices among the voices we heard on the phone? After all, sometimes words cannot be properly understood, but we nevertheless make judgments about the intelligence of the voice with confidence. Polivanov himself did not give an answer to this question, indicating, however, the characteristic phonetic features of what we can call an "intelligent voice" [Polivanov, 1968, p. 232, 235]. In addition to phonetics, such features of speech are also important that relate to the modulation of the voice, that is, the totality of its characteristics in terms of pitch and timbre, as well as its intonational properties. In an intelligent, educated, cultured person, these characteristics and properties are richer and more diverse. This assumption is also confirmed experimentally: a telephone conversation recorded on a tape recorder was presented to the subjects with the task of determining who was speaking - a person from an intelligent environment or from a common people? So that the subject could not rely on the analysis of the content of the conversation, the recorded speech was deliberately made illegible. And yet, the subjects almost did not make mistakes in the qualification of voices, and in particular in the choice of an intelligent voice.

Are there any other signs of sounding speech by which we can identify an intellectual? To get an answer to this question, we must turn to a certain direction in modern linguistics, which is conditionally called speech portraiture. Specialists working in this direction are trying to create either individual speech portraits of native speakers, or speech portraits of entire social groups. For the sake of objectivity, it must be said that this line of research is young, and although its representatives have achieved certain successes, the main results, apparently, are yet to come. Let's see what guides and what scientists rely on when setting out to create a speech portrait of a person or group.

Krysin Leonid Petrovich - Doctor of Philology, Professor, Deputy Director of the Institute of the Russian Language. VV. Vinogradov.

The immediate impetus for the development of the concept of "speech portrait" was the idea of ​​a phonetic portrait, put forward in the mid-60s. 20th century outstanding domestic linguist M. Panov. He brilliantly embodied this idea in a number of phonetic portraits of politicians, writers, scientists, which he presented in the book "The History of Russian Literary Pronunciation of the 18th-20th Centuries." (M., 1990). The book is remarkable in that from it we can learn not only about the peculiarities of the speech of our contemporaries, but also about how people who lived in the “tapeless” era spoke, for example, Peter I, M. Lomonosov, A. Sumarokov ... Their Panov drew phonetic portraits by collecting and carefully studying their written speech - works, private letters, diaries, household papers, notes ...

Although the portraits created by Panov are individual (the manner of pronunciation of an individual, given person is described), their social and general cultural value is undeniable, since each of the portraits reflects the peculiarities of the speech of a certain social environment (of which the “portraited” is a representative). When choosing a “model” for creating a phonetic portrait, Panov justifies his choice precisely with social and sociocultural considerations: belonging to a particular generation, social stratum, following a certain cultural tradition in speech (theatrical, poetic, everyday), the presence of local speech features, etc. P.

The idea of ​​phonetic and, more broadly, speech portrait was picked up by other researchers. Works have appeared (and continue to appear) in which attempts are made to create verbal portraits of a businessman, a child from a certain social environment, a housewife, a scientist, a "new Russian"1... And a Russian intellectual.

But before turning to the speech features on which the speech portrait of an intellectual is built, it is necessary to resolve the question: what do we mean when we use the phrases "modern Russian intellectual", "modern Russian intelligentsia"? There are hardly at least two people whose interpretations of these phrases would coincide completely. Disagreements are possible and, as our observations show, they really exist - and in the understanding of the definition of "modern" (the end of the 20th century? its second half? the whole of this century? - in this article, under modernity, I will mean the second half of the 20th-beginning XXI century), and in the understanding of who can be called "Russian". Most likely, Russian is Russian by culture, by the system of education, and not only by place of birth and, of course, not only by blood, although the latest interpretation of the word "Russian" is becoming more and more relevant in modern journalism, being opposed to the term "Russian-speaking" . The understanding of the words "intellectual" and "intelligentsia" is especially difficult, contradictory and changeable both in time and from one social environment to another. Even if we disregard the purely qualitative understanding of these concepts2 and keep in mind the social characteristics of the intelligentsia and the intelligentsia, many questions relating to the status of this social stratum remain unclear.

It is necessary to make a significant reservation about the differences between the concepts of "intellectual" and "intelligentsia". Despite the common basis, these words are different in meaning. Sociologists define the intelligentsia as a layer of people with a certain level of education and culture and engaged in mental work. And an intellectual is not just, so to speak, one "quantum" of the intelligentsia, and not even necessarily a representative of this social stratum, but a person with a large inner

1 Some of these portraits can be found in books [Modern... 2003; Language... 1989; Language... 1990].

2 For example, A. Solzhenitsyn in "The Gulag Archipelago" gives the following definition: an intellectual is one whose interests and whose will to the spiritual side of life are persistent and constant, not compelled by external circumstances and exist even in spite of them. An intellectual is one whose thought is inimitable.

early culture. At the same time, higher education may not be available, so you can meet an intellectual in the university auditorium, and in the factory floor, and at the helm of a combine. In the future, we will mainly talk about the intelligentsia as a certain social stratum in the structure of modern Russian society.

But even with this concept, not everything is clear. For example, there is no doubt that the nature of education - whether it is humanitarian or technical - leaves an imprint on the human personality, on the system of its values. In this regard, the question arises: are the humanitarian and technical intelligentsia one cultural and social stratum or two different ones? The intelligentsia of the older, middle and younger generations is "one and the same", or we can talk about some qualitative differences between these generations, including significant ones from a linguistic point of view (the choice of different language means, differences in speech behavior tactics and etc.)? Is the intelligentsia of Moscow, St. Petersburg, Tula, Kostroma, Irkutsk one social stratum, or should we talk about local differences that have not only purely territorial, but also some qualitative grounds? We will confine ourselves to these questions, although it is obvious that they do not exhaust the ambiguities about the "social face" of the intelligentsia.

It goes without saying that before embarking on the creation of a verbal portrait of a representative of the intelligentsia, we need to decide what our object is: whose portrait are we going to "draw"? In connection with what has just been said, it seems reasonable to follow the principle of multiplicity, heterogeneity of the described object - the intelligentsia and the non-uniqueness of a typical representative of this social stratum. Bearing in mind its heterogeneity, it is reasonable to distinguish between the humanitarian and technical intelligentsia, its older, middle and younger generations (respectively, these are people aged 60 years and older; from 36 to 59 years old; up to 35 years old), territorially marked layers of the intelligentsia, located along the axis of the main opposition: the intelligentsia of the main cultural centers (Moscow and St. Petersburg, with the fixation of linguistic differences between Muscovites and St. speech of the intelligentsia).

It is possible, however, that some characteristic features of language and speech behavior are characteristic of the intelligentsia as a social stratum as a whole, in contrast to other social strata. Naturally, such traits - as touches to the speech portrait of a typical representative of the modern Russian intelligentsia - should be noted. I emphasize: we are talking about strokes, and not about a holistic portrait.

I will indicate the most characteristic features related to the choice of language units and their use in the speech of a representative of the intelligentsia (or any of the above-mentioned groups that make up this layer) and to his speech behavior.

Phonetic, that is, pronunciation, features are the most characteristic indicator of a person's speech: let us recall Professor Higgins, who determined the speaker's social affiliation precisely by these features. In addition, the pronunciation and intonation skills that a person masters from childhood are not realized by the speaker himself, they act automatically (in contrast to the choice of a word, which is often quite conscious and weighed): self-control of how you pronounce this or that sound, in a normal speech is difficult or even impossible. After all, if you begin to pay attention to the sound side of your words and thereby distract from their meaning, you will soon lose the thread of the conversation, and verbal communication will be disrupted. Therefore, the manner of pronunciation is quite objective

Like share 692 Views

What is intelligent speech? Lesson of preparation for the exam according to the letter of D.S. Likhachev. Author: teacher MKOU secondary school No. 14 Pyatigorsky settlement Ivakhnenko T.E. In which word is the letter denoting a stressed vowel correctly highlighted? 1.let's call Z.beautiful 2.cakes 4.catalog.

Download Presentation

What is intelligent speech? Lesson of preparation for the exam according to the letter of D.S. Likhachev.

E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

No related presentations.

Presentation Transcript

Lesson of preparation for the exam according to the letter of D.S. Likhachev.

Is the letter denoting a stressed vowel highlighted? 1. let's call Z. prettier 2. cakes 4. catalog

INTELLIGENT need to use the word INTELLIGENCE? According to D.S. Likhachev, an intellectual is a person who has mental decency, is free in his convictions, does not depend on economic, political conditions, and is not subject to ideological obligations. Approximately from the age of 17-18, the process of the formation of intelligence stops. An intellectual is a correct judgment, understanding, reflection, which, thanks to their common sense and initiative, help a person adapt to the circumstances of life. D.S. Likhachev calls the first typically Russian intellectuals freethinkers of the late 18th century, such as Radishchev and Novikov.

Speech errors. Happy is he who approaches in his life the ideal that has developed by youth. Children rarely listen and follow the advice of their elders. Thanks to sincerity, kindness, mutual understanding of parents, peace and harmony always reigned in the family. Everyone who was interested in the history of ancient Russian literature knows the works of D. S. Likhachev.

Formation of the word form: more than fifty rubles of ripe apricots a pair of socks to put on a coat

First syllable. beetroot took cement sorrel

Likhachev (1906-1999) The surest way to know a person - his mental development, his moral character, his character - is to listen to how he speaks. D.S. Likhachev

The pride of the Russian people, the pride of the intelligentsia. I don’t know who can take his place and who can have the right to speak like that about any problems of Russian culture with such knowledge and with such pain for her… People’s Artist of Russia Igor Dmitriev and how many people came to him with a request to help defend, save, preserve temples and museums, parks and schools, houses and names of people, streets, cities! Assistant to Dmitry Sergeevich for many years I.A. Lobakov

Granin in the book "The Secret Sign of St. Petersburg": "From all sides they turn to him, cry out" Stop the vandals! Demolish the monuments! Funds are needed! They cut down the parks! An avalanche of requests and appeals is ready to bury him. Like Sisyphus, he keeps pushing his stone. Sometimes I sympathize with the hopelessness of his efforts. Then he says to me: “Even in dead-end cases, when everything is deaf, when you are not heard, please, express your opinion. Do not remain silent, speak up. I force myself to speak so that at least one voice can be heard. -someone protests that not everyone has reconciled. Each person must declare his position. You cannot publicly, at least to friends, at least to family.

Formulate the problem of the original text. Comment on the issue. Reflect the position of the author of the original text. Express your attitude to the position of the author and the problem raised. Justify your answer.

Likhachev: There is light and darkness, there is nobility and meanness, there is purity and dirt: you have to grow up to the first, and is it worth descending to the second? Choose decent, not easy. (from "Letters about the good") There should not be blind to beauty, deaf to the word and real music, callous to goodness, forgetful of the past. And for this we need knowledge, we need intelligence, given by culture.

Everything that Russia has experienced in this century. Likhachev, with his love for his country, combined with tolerance and common sense, personified "Russian nationalism" in the best sense of the word. And I want to believe that his example and his ideas will flourish in Russia in the 21st century. Christopher Smith

How many people of the current generation think about what intelligence is? How does it express itself and does society need it at all? There were times when this word sounded like an insult, and it happened vice versa - this is how groups of people were called, trying to pull Russia out of the darkness of ignorance and stupidity.

Etymology of the word

"Intelligence" is a word that comes from Latin. Iintelligence- cognitive power, the ability of perception, which, in turn, comes from the Latin intellectus- understanding, thinking. Despite the Latin origin of the word, the concept of "intellectual" is considered to be primordially Russian and in the vast majority of cases is used only in the territory of the former USSR and among the Russian-speaking population.

The father of the term "intelligentsia" is considered to be the Russian liberalist writer Pyotr Bobrykin (1836-1921), who repeatedly used it in his critical articles, essays and novels. Initially, this was the name of people of mental labor: writers, artists and teachers, engineers and doctors. In those days, there were very few such professions and people were grouped according to common interests.

Who is an intelligent person?

"Cultural and not swearing," many will say. Some will add: "Smart". And then they will add something about education, erudition. But are all doctors of sciences and great minds of this world intellectuals?

There are enough people in the world with a huge store of knowledge who have read thousands of books, polyglots and true masters of their craft. Does this automatically make them involved in the intelligentsia, the social stratum?

The simplest definition of intelligence

One of the greatest minds of the Silver Age gave a very short but capacious definition of the concept of intelligence: "This is the highest culture of the human spirit, aimed at preserving the dignity of one's neighbor."

Such intelligence - that daily work is constant self-improvement, the result of a huge educational process on oneself, one's personality, which first of all cultivates in a person the ability to be attentive and empathetic towards another living being. An intellectual, even if he commits a dishonorable act under the will of circumstances, will suffer greatly from this and be tormented by remorse. He will rather harm himself, but will not be stained by base things.

Human values ​​inherent in an intellectual

According to the results of a social survey, the majority of people indicated the importance of education and good manners. But the great Faina Ranevskaya said: “It is better to be known as a good, but cursing obscenity than a well-bred bastard.” Therefore, higher education and knowledge of etiquette does not mean that you have before you an intellectual of the old school. More important are the following factors:

• Compassion for someone else's pain, no matter if it's human or animal.
• Patriotism, expressed in deeds, not shouts at rallies from the podium.
• Respect for other people's property: therefore, a true intellectual always pays his debts, but takes them extremely rarely, in the most critical cases.
• Politeness, pliability and gentleness of character are required - they are the first calling card of the intelligentsia. Tact is at the top of their relationship with people: he will never put another person in an uncomfortable position.
• The ability to forgive.
• Lack of rudeness towards anyone: even if the impudent one pushes the intellectual, he will be the first to apologize for the inconvenience caused. Just do not confuse this with cowardice: a coward is afraid, and an intellectual respects all people, whatever they may be.
• Lack of intrusiveness: out of respect for strangers, they are more often silent than frank with anyone.
• Sincerity and unwillingness to lie: again because of decency and love for other people, but more out of self-respect.
• An intellectual respects himself so much that he will not allow himself to be uneducated, unenlightened.
• Craving for beauty: a hole in the floor or a book thrown into the dirt excites their soul more than the absence of dinner.

From all this it becomes obvious that education and intelligence are not related concepts, although they are interacting. An intellectual is a rather complexly structured personality, which is why he is not loved by the lower strata of society: against the background of an esthete who feels the world subtly, they feel flawed and do not understand anything, this is where anger is manifested, leading to violence.

Modern intellectual

What is intelligence today? Is it even possible to be like that in the arena of total degradation and stupidity from the mass media, social networks and television shows?

All this is true, but universal human values ​​do not change from era to era: at any time, tolerance and respect for others, compassion and the ability to put oneself in the place of another are important. Honor, inner freedom and depth of soul, together with a sharp mind and a craving for beauty, have always been and will be of paramount importance for evolution. And today's intellectuals are not much different from their brothers in the spirit of the century before last, when a person really sounded proud. They are modest, honest with themselves and others, and necessarily kind from the heart, and not for the sake of PR. On the contrary, a spiritually developed person will never boast of his deeds, achievements and actions, but at the same time he will try to do everything possible to become at least a little better, knowing that by changing himself, he changes the whole world around him for the better.

Do modern society need intellectuals?

Education and intelligence are now as important an aspect as global warming or animal cruelty. The thirst for money and universal adoration has so captured society that the modest attempts of individuals to raise the level of human awareness resemble the painful attempts of a woman giving birth, who, despite all the pain, firmly believes in a successful outcome.

It is necessary to believe that intelligence is such a culture of the soul. This is not the amount of knowledge, but actions in accordance with moral principles. Perhaps then our world, mired in the mud of a distorted mind, will be saved. Humanity needs bright-hearted individuals, intellectuals of the spirit, who will promote the purity of relations without mercenary overtones, the importance of spiritual growth and the need for knowledge as an initial basis for subsequent development.

When does the formation of moral qualities take place?

In order to be, or rather, feel like an intellectual and not be burdened by this burden, you need to absorb the inclinations even with mother's milk, be brought up in an appropriate environment and environment, then highly moral behavior will be like a part of the being, like a hand or an eye.

It is for this reason that it is important not only to educate the child in the right direction, but also to set a good example by rational actions, correct actions, and not just words.

Lesson of preparation for the exam

Russian language in grade 11

"What is intelligent speech?"

(according to the letter of D.S. Likhachev)

Teachers MKOU secondary school No. 14, Pyatigorsky settlement

Predgorny municipal district

Stavropol Territory

Ivakhnenko Tatyana Evgenievna.

Subject: What is intelligent speech? (Based on a letter from D.S. Likhachev)

Goals:

• Preparation for the exam.
• Development of students' speech culture, the concept of intelligent speech.
• Development of the ability to work with a journalistic article.
• Education of speech culture, love for the native language.

During the classes

I. Preparation for the perception of the topic of the lesson.Preparation for the exam.

Let's do a series of test tasks for repeating the speech norms of the Russian language.(Presentation slide show)

1. In which word is the letter denoting the stressed vowel correctly highlighted?

1. call Z. prettier

2.cakes 4.catalogue

1. In which sentence should the word INTELLIGENT be used instead of the word INTELLIGENT?

1. According to D.S. Likhachev, an intellectual is a person who has mental decency, is free in his convictions, does not depend on economic, political conditions, and is not subject to ideological obligations.
2. Approximately from the age of 17-18, the process of the formation of intelligence stops.
3. An intellectual is a correct judgment, understanding, reflection, which, thanks to their common sense and initiative, help a person adapt to the circumstances of life.
4. D.S. Likhachev calls the first typically Russian intellectuals freethinkers of the late 18th century, such as Radishchev and Novikov.

1. Mark the sentences without speech errors.

1. Happy is he who approaches in his life the ideal that has developed by youth.
2. Children rarely listen and follow the advice of their elders.
3. Thanks to sincerity, kindness, mutual understanding of parents, peace and harmony always reigned in the family.
4. Everyone who was interested in the history of ancient Russian literature knows the works of D. S. Likhachev.

1. Give an example with an error in the formation of the word form:

1. more than fifty rubles
2. ripe apricots
3. couple of socks
4. put on a coat

1. Mark words with stress on the first syllable.

1. beet
2. accepted
3. cement
4. sorrel

So what did we repeat?

Why do you think we did it?

What do we have to work on today?

II. Work on the topic of the lesson. Introduction by the teacher.

Today the topic of our lesson is the culture of speech. The material for the lesson will be books, articles, statements of academician Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev (1906-1999), listening to whose speeches was the greatest pleasure for everyone who loves their native language. His speech can be considered the standard of modern colloquial Russian.

Let's remember what we know about this amazing person.

(Students recall information known about D.S. Likhachev earlier)

And here is what people who knew him well say about D.S. Likhachev.

Slides are shown

The source from which this great scientist drew the treasures of Russian literature is well known - this is ancient Russian literature. He spoke, of course, not in Old Russian, but in modern Russian, and he spoke without any pretense of oratorical eloquence. But his speech was always excellent, because it involuntarily revealed the height of his spiritual culture, and love for his native language, and incomparable knowledge and feeling of the Russian language, and deep respect and love for the listener or interlocutor.

In the articles: “On the language of oral and written, old and new”, and “How to speak”, Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev wrote about the Russian language as follows:

READING THE ARTICLE

Having read such high words of D.S. Likhachev about the Russian language, let us think about our speech, about our words. After all, it is undeniable that the word spoken by a person, voluntarily or involuntarily, serves as a means of self-expression. From the excess of what is stored in the heart speaks the mouth of man.

So: "Why do you say that?" "Why are we talking like that?" "Why do they say that?" Why? Why? Why?!

Let's remember how D.S. Likhachev thought: "The surest way to know a person is his mental development, his moral character, his character - listen to how he speaks."

If we notice a person's manner of behaving, his gait, his behavior and judge a person by them, sometimes, however, erroneously, then a person's language is a much more accurate indicator of his human qualities, his culture.The great Socrates asked: "Speak so that I can see you!"

D.S. Likhachev approaches a very important and burning topic - he talks about the purity of our spoken language:

“But it also happens that a person does not speak, but “spits words 44 . For every common concept, he has not ordinary words, but slang expressions. When such a person speaks with his spitting words, he reveals his cynical essence.

What does the word cynic mean?

In the “Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language” by S.I. Ozhegov and N.Yu. Shvedova (M., 1995), cynical is defined as ‘shameless’, and cynicism is defined as ‘disregard for the norms of public morality, morality, arrogance, shamelessness’.

Do any of us consciously want to be or look shameless?! Not without reason, in the Russian cultural tradition, shame has always coexisted with conscience: “No shame, no conscience!” - says the well-known popular censure of a person with cynical behavior. And a person crosses the border of good and evil most often through the word - through the wrong, inappropriate, unnatural use of words, through profanity, that is, through bad words! From this, such a transgression (or, more simply, a crime) of the norms of public morality is called foul language.

D.S. Likhachev’s intolerance to profanity is known. In an interview in 1976, he said: "If the shamelessness of everyday life passes into language, then the shamelessness of language creates an environment in which shamelessness is already a common thing."

III. Learning to write an essay on a journalistic article in the form of the exam.

So, our task is to write an essay-reasoning based on the text of D.S. Likhachev’s letter. Both in your notebooks and on my blackboard there is a memo with the criteria for such an essay.

What should we do first?

• Formulate the problem of the original text.
• Comment on the issue.
• Reflect the position of the author of the original text.
• Express your attitude to the position of the author and the problem raised.
• Justify your answer.

IV Summing up the lesson.

What have you been working on today?

What is, according to D.S. Likhachev, intelligent speech?

V. Homework.

Write an essay-reasoning "What is intelligent speech?" Express your opinion on the issue raised by D.S. Likhachev.

Among the types of Russian culture, the type of “intellectual” occupies a special place. There are constant disputes about this type in fiction and journalistic domestic literature. The attitude towards the intelligentsia and its representatives in Russia has always been emotionally marked - from the recognition of this large and very heterogeneous social group as the guardians of culture to the accusation of the intelligentsia for all the troubles that are happening to the country. It is generally accepted that an intellectual as a type is an ethno-specific concept - this concept is characteristic only of Russian culture. In linguistics, more precisely, in sociolinguistics and pragmalinguistics, a number of studies have been carried out on the study of the speech of representatives of various professional groups of the educated part of the population (teachers, doctors, lawyers, journalists, professors, actors, officers, etc.) (Bagdasaryan, 2005; Beilinson, 2001 ; Varnavskikh, 2004; Elina, 1997; Karatanova, 2003; Kormilitsyna, 1996; Koroteeva, 1999; Kochetkova, 1998; Parsamova, 2004; Sirotinina, 2003; Tarasova, 2003; Tupitsyna, 2000). A detailed speech portrait of a modern Russian intellectual was made by L.P. Krysin (2001). A detailed description of the attitude towards intellectuals and intelligence in Russia is given in the works of Yu.S. Stepanov (1997), N.L. Gogolitsyna (Gogolitsyna, 2002), G.N. Sklyarevskaya (2005), V.M. Savitsky (2007).

Linguistic and cultural modeling of this type is interesting for the following reasons:

1) the figurative and conceptual characteristics of intellectuals are often presented in a simplified and distorted form, and therefore a special linguocultural analysis will provide an opportunity to see the real picture of understanding this linguocultural type in one's own culture;

2) this type is characterized by clearly defined guidelines for behavior, which to a certain extent are guiding for society as a whole, while a systematic description of the value orientations of an intellectual in the collective linguistic consciousness has not yet been carried out;

3) this type has been ideologically marked for a long time, in the modern Russian consciousness in the new socio-political conditions, the self-perception of the intelligentsia and the attitude towards them from other groups of the population has undergone certain changes that have not yet been comprehended in a linguistic and cultural key.

The modeling of any linguocultural type is based on the recognition of the heterogeneity of a social group, which is the object of sociolinguistic and linguoculturological analysis, on the possibility of contradictory features and an ambivalent attitude towards them in society, on understanding the variability of both the basic and accompanying characteristics of this type while maintaining its self-identity (Krysin, 2001).

In this paper, the modeling of a linguocultural type is built according to the following plan: 1) a description of the conceptual content of the concept under consideration is given, the most important names of the concept are analyzed in their systemic relationships, including generic and opposite relations, the motivation of the features that make up the concept "intellectual" is revealed, 2) associative features are determined the considered type in the individual linguistic consciousness, established as a result of the analysis of short texts compiled by informants, contextual fragments and associative reactions of the speakers of modern Russian linguistic culture; 3) evaluative characteristics of this type are revealed in self-representation and in the representation of other social groups based on the analysis of value judgments in the form of aphorisms and text fragments.

It is known that the metalinguistic function of the language complicates the description of the language to a certain extent, there is a danger of mixing the subject and the research tool. Similarly, the study of the type to which the researcher himself belongs requires constant reflection aimed at obtaining objective information about reality. At the same time, it should be emphasized that when considering the problems of sociolinguistics, the researcher in one way or another takes a certain evaluative position, and in this respect has the right to clearly indicate this position. This thesis, clearly formulated by R. Vodak as a methodological basis for critical discourse analysis, is accepted as an axiom in this work (Vodak, 1997, p. 9).

Questions about the essence of the intelligentsia as a special group of people and intelligence as a personality trait are constantly worrying people who consider themselves intellectuals. The ideas developed in philosophy, sociology, cultural studies and journalism related to the concept of "Russian intellectual" can be summarized as follows.

A group or class of intellectuals inevitably arises as a result of the division of labor and performs the necessary functions in society to preserve traditions and develop new knowledge, these functions may come into conflict with each other, and then the carriers of knowledge become either dogmatists or idealists divorced from life (Markov, 2001; Smotritsky , 2001).

There are two main understandings of the concept of "intelligentsia": sociological (people of intellectual labor) and ethical (people with a heightened sense of responsibility for culture), the first understanding applies to various countries, the second is characteristic only of Russia, although there are publications whose authors dispute a purely Russian ethical understanding intelligence. Sociological studies show that the ethical understanding of the intelligentsia is gradually losing its significance in the minds of the bearers of modern Russian culture (Latova, 2005; Petrova, 2001; Polemics and discussions, 2004).

Having arisen as a result of the reforms of Peter I, the Russian intelligentsia took institutional shape as a social group in the 18-19 centuries and went through three stages in its development: a class of competent servants of state power, a class of critical opposition to state power (raznochinskaya intelligentsia) and a class of social subgroups imitating in the mass their loyalty to the state (the Soviet intelligentsia) (Gogolitsyna, 2002; Latova, 2005).

The Russian intelligentsia positions itself as one of the corners of the triangle "power" - "people" - "intelligentsia", opposing the authorities and criticizing its vices, on the one hand, and opposing the common people and feeling their responsibility for its development, on the other hand (Blok , 1918; Gogolitsyna, 2002; Latova, 2005).

Among the main advantages of the intelligentsia, representatives of various political parties include a heightened sense of justice. At the same time, the intelligentsia is accused of hypocrisy, secret and obvious subservience to power, careerism, separation from the people and (from the standpoint of radical nationalist critics) of a conscious course to harm the people, of pride and atheism resulting from it, of effeminacy and disgust, and also in the low level of professional qualifications and low creativity (Controversy and discussion, 2004).

The main accusations against the intelligentsia in journalism boil down to the fact that there are very few real intellectuals (critics consider themselves to be in this minority), that any compromise with the authorities is disastrous for the intelligentsia, erroneous for the authorities, and a dead end for the country as a whole, because someone then the other must assume the functions of criticizing the authorities. Sociological studies show that the question of the role of the intelligentsia in society is of concern only to the intelligentsia. Discussions about the fate of the Russian intelligentsia inevitably turn into the question of the ways of Russia's development (a dispute between Slavophiles and Westerners) (Petrova, 2001; Polemics and Discussions, 2004).

Let us characterize the conceptual component of the considered concept.

Intelligentsia (from the Latin intelligens - understanding, thinking, reasonable), the social stratum of people professionally engaged in mental, mostly complex creative work, development and dissemination of culture. The concept of intelligentsia is often given a moral meaning, considering it the embodiment of high morality and democracy. The term "intelligentsia" was introduced by the Russian writer P.D. Boborykin and moved from Russian to other languages. In the West, the term “intellectuals” is more common, and is also used as a synonym for an intellectual. The intelligentsia is heterogeneous in its composition. The prerequisite for the emergence of the intelligentsia was the division of labor into mental and physical. Having originated in ancient and medieval societies, it has received significant development in industrial and post-industrial societies (Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary. Electronic version).

The word "intellectual" is a Latin borrowing and goes back to the word intelligentia - "understanding" [the internal form of inter-lego - between + collect, select, distinguish with a glance, read]. The historical predecessor of the intellectual is the raznochinets. This concept is defined as follows: At the end of the 18th - 19th centuries. in Russia: a person engaged in mental work, who did not belong to the nobility, came from other classes (merchants, philistines, clergy or petty officials) (BTS). However, according to V.V. Kolesov, the speech of the intelligentsia is more in line with the characteristics of the middle class, the basis of which by the end of the 19th century in Russia was the petty bourgeois (the urban class, opposed to the mob), while the raznochintsy, with their desire to speak abstractly, were mainly priests (Kolesov, 1998, pp.28-32). Raznochinets, as a type defined by a minus characteristic (the internal form of the word indicates the vagueness of this concept from the positions of power, i.e., nobles), over time, realizes itself as a social type, defined positively, according to the main type of activity - mental labor. In the explanatory dictionary D.N. Ushakov (1935-1940, republished in 2001) gives a number of words that clarify the original idea of ​​this concept in several part-of-speech and evaluative directions:

Intelligent - 1. A person belonging to the intelligentsia. 2. The same as a person, whose social behavior is characterized by lack of will, hesitation, doubts (contempt.). This is the psychology of the Russian intellectual: in words he is a brave radical, in reality he is a vile official. Lenin.

Intelligent - Female. to the intellectual.

Intelligence - (bookish) abstract. noun to intelligent, cultured. He stood out for his intelligence.

Intelligent - 1. Educated, cultured, inherent in the intelligentsia. He turned out to be quite an intelligent person.. 2. App. to the intelligentsia (book) Intelligent professions.

Intelligent - characteristic of an intellectual (in 2 meanings). In my opinion, a negative attitude towards the intelligentsia is precisely a purely "intelligentsia" attitude. Maksim Gorky.

Intelligentsia - (contemptuously) The way of thinking, habits characteristic of the intelligentsia (in 2 meanings).

Intelligentsia - (new colloquialism, contempt.). 1. Intelligentsia, intelligent people. One intelligentsia gathered. 2. The same as the intelligentsia (but with great contempt). His views are pure intelligence.

Intelligentsia - 1. The social stratum of intellectual workers, educated people (book). Not a single ruling class could do without its own intelligentsia... The working class of the USSR also cannot do without its own industrial and technical intelligentsia. Stalin. 2. Collect. people of this layer. The meeting was attended only by the intelligentsia.

In the dictionary of V.I. Dahl (1880) we find the following definition: The intelligentsia is (in the meaning of collaborators) a reasonable, educated, mentally developed part of the inhabitants.

In the Big Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language, ch. ed. S.A. Kuznetsov (1998), almost the same words are given as in the dictionary edited by D.N. Ushakov, but their interpretation and dictionary illustrations are of a different nature:

An intellectual is one who belongs to the intelligentsia. Be a real intellectual. <Интеллигентишка. Пренебр. What does this intellectual understand! Intellectual. Razg. Hereditary intellectual. Intelligent. Intelligent delicacy. Intelligent. Think intelligently.

Intelligent. 1. Full only. to the Intelligent and the Intelligentsia. intelligent society. 2. Inherent, inherent in the intellectual, the intelligentsia. Intelligent speech. 3. Possessing a great internal culture. He is deeply intelligent. Intelligent. He looked quite intelligent.. Intelligence. He attracts with his intelligence.

Intelligent. See intellectual.

Intelligence. Iron. 1. Collect. Intelligent people, intelligentsia. The indecision of the intelligentsia. 2. Way of thinking, behavior characteristic of the intelligentsia. The manifestation of typical intelligence.

Intelligentsia. 1. A social group consisting of educated people with a great internal culture and professionally engaged in mental work. Tasks of the Russian intelligentsia. 2. Collect. People belonging to this social group are intellectuals. The club gathered all the rural intelligentsia.

In the explanatory dictionary of a new type (Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language, edited by D.V. Dmitriev, 2003), the concept under consideration is interpreted only positively:

Intelligent. 1. An intelligent person is a person who is well brought up, usually educated and has high spiritual qualities, as well as a group of such people. He is both outwardly and in behavior an extremely intelligent, gentle and very kind person. 2. Behavior, speech, etc. are called intelligent when they are characteristic of a well-mannered, cultured person. He had a very intelligent appearance..

In the dictionary of V.V. Chemist "The Big Dictionary of Russian Colloquial Speech", 2004, provides the following description of the concept of interest to us:

Intellectual. Mocking. neglected or contempt. (swearing) colloquial. About an indecisive, weak-willed, psychologically and physically weak person. In the philistine environment, it is traditional, especially in accordance with the class ideology of the Soviet era, about people of mental labor, especially humanitarian occupations, to whom a number of unforgivable shortcomings supposedly characteristic of them are attributed: weakness, indecision, lack of will, unreliability, etc. Eh, you, an intellectual, is it really necessary to talk to a woman, she loves power!; Hey. You intellectual in a hat, come here!; You've become an intellectual, you're afraid to get your hands dirty, right?

A lousy (rotten) intellectual (rotten intelligentsia). Rough contempt. bran. unfold Gain to "intellectual" (as an insult). In the old days, they would generally say about Yuryev: a lousy intellectual - thin, cautious, with big glasses, always impeccably dressed and combed, incredibly well-mannered.

Soft intellectual. Unapproved or contempt. bran. unfold About a weak-willed person showing excessive compliance. Eh, you soft-bodied intellectual, I would not keep silent if I were you!

Intelligentsia. Mocking. or contempt. bran. unfold Collected to "intellectual"; = intelligent. In the philistine environment, it is often believed that people of mental occupations shy away from physical labor, dirty work and despise the simple working person. Oh, you intellectual, look how to chop wood!

The above definitions make it possible to single out the following features in the meaning of the word "intellectual": 1) a person, 2) earning a living by work, 3) engaged in mental work, 4) professionally engaged in mental work, 5) usually educated, 6) possessing a great internal culture, 7) well-mannered, delicate, 8) indecisive, hesitant, subject to doubt.

In relation to the features that form the conceptual framework of the concept "intellectual", the following oppositions can be established: 1) a person, 2) not engaged in any work, an idle person, 3) engaged in physical labor, 4) engaged in mental work as a form of entertainment, 5) poorly educated , 6) having a low level of internal culture, 7) poorly educated, rude, 8) decisive.

The most important objective feature of a characterized person is the type of permanent occupation - mental work. The intellectual is opposed to those who are freed from the need to earn a living, and those who show their mental abilities for their own pleasure and entertainment. Let us pay attention to the fact that in Russian (and in English too) there is the word "intellectual", a person with high intelligence, but being an intellectual does not mean professionally engaging in mental work. In Russian, there is no word with a Slavic root for this concept. This can be explained by the high abstraction of this concept and the tradition of educated people to use the classical Greek-Latin heritage to designate such concepts.

The key feature in the composition of the conceptual characteristics of the concept under consideration - "mental labor" - is very vague and fuzzy. Strictly speaking, any work - "an expedient human activity aimed at creating material and spiritual values ​​(BTS) with the help of tools of production" - contains elements of both mental and physical stress. Speaking about mental and physical labor, we usually operate not with conceptual, but with figurative characteristics (a person in a suit with a fountain pen or some small professional device, as opposed to a person in overalls with a sledgehammer or crowbar). Economists, sociologists, and political scientists discuss these characteristics in detail, but from the standpoint of everyday knowledge, these differences are reduced to the typical working conditions and typical appearance of the workers concerned.

An external difference of this kind is called in English white collar job - blue collar job - "white collar (clerical worker, employee) - blue collar (production worker)". Professions "teacher", "doctor", "engineer", "journalist", "actor" traditionally belong to the professions of mental labor, and "locksmith", "carpenter", "cook", "lumberjack", "driver" are occupations falling (with reservations) under the definition of physical labor. In English, as you know, the word profession is applicable only to mental work that requires long-term formal (university) training. This sign - mental work - characterizes not so much a specific objective activity, but also a certain typical lifestyle, which lends itself not so much to a clear conceptual systematization as to the description and explanation of associative features. For example, with a high degree of probability, we can assume that a person engaged in mental work is more able to talk on abstract topics, draw formal conclusions, be interested in works of high art, etc., although examples can be given that testify to such characteristics of behavior in people traditionally referred to as representatives of physical labor. Along with the development of technology, the content of mental and physical labor is changing. Relatively reliable for understanding the specifics of mental labor remains a sign of education, the presence of higher education.

The sign of "high education" logically follows from the need to engage in mental work. But here we are faced with a very important qualifier - "usually". This means that 1) not every highly educated person can be considered intelligent and 2) intelligence can be combined with insufficient formal education. A logical contradiction arises, which explains the specifics of the concept under consideration.

The sign of "great internal culture" in a concentrated form expresses the ethical credo of an intelligent person, which consists in a respectful attitude towards other people, and not outwardly etiquette, but internally. Politeness, courtesy and gentleness in handling constitute the content of the quality of "delicacy". Usually these qualities in society deserve approval and it is not by chance that the content of the concept under consideration (in its dictionary-definitional component) highlights the sign of “well-bred”.

With these positive signs, the negative sign is sharply discordant: "indecisive, weak-willed, hesitant, doubting." To explain this sign, it is necessary to answer the question why the combination of the signs “professional mental work” and “indecision” arose. At first glance, this combination looks strange and illogical. We know that any positive quality in its extremes turns into negative personality traits. For example, courage - an insufficient manifestation of this quality is cowardice, excess - recklessness. If we consider the intellectual ability of a person from these positions, we come to similar conclusions: it is bad to be not smart enough; stupid, and it is bad to be too smart (from the point of view of other people), i.e. show others that they are dumber. The word "wise guy" in Russian characterizes just such people.

It would be logical to find in the language words denoting people who show professional failure. We find such words in those cases when it is assumed that a person should be well prepared for a certain activity that requires high qualifications, but does not cope with this activity. In addition to evaluative reduced vocabulary, there are units in the dictionary to refer to those people who pretend to understand complex issues, and those who are trying to fool people, and with dire consequences for them (it is interesting that both of these words are “amateur” and “charlatan "- of Italian origin, as the lover and drug dealer were designated). If a person is engaged in any activity out of love for art, and this does not harm anyone, then such an activity is not condemned in society (compare: an amateur astronomer and an *amateur surgeon). In computer slang, this semantic distribution is clearly visible: three positions are distinguished - 1) “user”, an expert on computers, 2) “teapot”, one who does not understand them, 3) “lamer”, one who pretends to understand but really doesn't understand anything about them. Lamer is dangerous when he undertakes to repair someone else's computer. There are no words in the language for a negative evaluation of those who work very well, better than others. This position is filled with an assessment of a different order: "When you do something well, you involuntarily begin to admire yourself, and then it can no longer be good." Such an assessment refers to the behavior of any person, regardless of his professional activities.

Let's try to approach the assessment of the sign of "indecision" from the other side. Why does this attribute cause a negative assessment? An indecisive person is not confident in himself, is discouraged, delays the way out of a difficult situation and, to a certain extent, slows down the overall progress of everyone towards a given goal. The most dangerous is indecision on the battlefield. In the conditions of struggle, uprising, revolution, when "procrastination is like death," indecision becomes a very dangerous quality. Note that in the dictionary V.I. Dahl mental work and indecision are not combined. This combination became relevant in the revolutionary struggle, when highly educated, cultured and idealistic people in Russia took part in the revolutionary process. The revolutionary struggle requires iron discipline and the adoption of tough, and sometimes cruel, decisions. In these circumstances, the intellectuals began to doubt the correctness of the decisions being made. These decisions were evaluated by intellectuals not from the standpoint of efficiency, but from the standpoint of morality. Accordingly, the leaders of the revolution branded their former supporters as weak-willed and soft-bodied pests to the common cause.

Historically, the highest class of Russia was the nobility. The business of the nobleman was military service to the king as an officer. From the positions of an officer, the highest valor of a person is the ability to accomplish a feat without hesitation. I would venture to suggest that a person who, by the nature of his activity, must often think, reason, weigh different options and, at the same time, is inclined to evaluate them from an ethical side, cannot arouse the sympathy of a noble officer. The delicacy of such a person is interpreted by the officer as weakness and effeminacy. High intelligence is rarely combined with internal loyalty. An intellectual critically assesses the actions of the authorities. The masters of the country at any historical stage of Russia's development had every reason to doubt the unconditional support from the intelligentsia.

Finally, from the standpoint of the common people, poorly educated and oppressed, the intellectual is a hired servant of the oppressor, helping this oppressor to exploit the people. Poorly educated people tend to consider mental work as an imitation of activity. The good manners of an intellectual are perceived as a way to distance themselves from the people. To this should be added the fact that many representatives of mental labor consider people engaged in physical labor to be not quite intellectually wealthy. Mental labor is rarely combined with physical strength, which always commands the respect of the people for functional reasons (it is needed for physical work and for clarifying personal relationships). Physically weak people attract the attention of those who want to improve their status in the eyes of witnesses and in their own eyes. The doctrinal declaration of the proletarians as the ruling class automatically leads to the lowering of the status of knowledge workers. Let us pay attention to the fact that it is in colloquial speech that the word "intellectual" acquires negative-evaluative characteristics. The subject of colloquial speech is the person who fundamentally questions the norms of official culture (in particular, such norms as respect for knowledge, education, good manners). These, in my opinion, are the reasons for the frequent contemptuous marks that accompany the interpretation of words that denote the concept of "intellectual".

So, the conceptual analysis of the concept under consideration leads us to the conclusion that this concept contains an explosive contradiction: on the one hand, an intellectual must be a model of a high internal culture, on the other hand, an intellectual is perceived as a representative of a special caste, disloyal to the authorities and alien other social groups. In order to check the validity of this thesis, let us turn to an experimental analysis of linguistic consciousness, in which the figurative-perceptual features of the analyzed concept are fixed.

One of the methods for identifying the associative features of a concept in individual consciousness is writing a short essay (topic) on a specific topic. To identify social stereotypes in the minds of modern speakers of Russian linguistic culture, the topics of such works were formulated in two versions: 1) “My ideas about a typical intellectual” and 2) “My contemporaries’ ideas about a typical intellectual”. Here are a few of these essays.

When I think of a typical intellectual, I imagine Academician D.S. Likhachev. I remember his appearances on television programs. He spoke about the traditions of Russian culture, about dangerous trends in the development of our society. He had a very clear manner of speaking. There was no desire to pose and teach. He had the ability to listen carefully to the interlocutor, reacted to questions with humor, behaved very naturally. I know that he had to spend several years in prison in the Solovki camp. This means that he had such convictions for which he was ready to go to great suffering.

If we talk about intelligence as a quality of a person, then we can single out the desire to constantly reflect on serious universal problems. Intelligence eliminates the pragmatic attitude to seek profit and the desire to have fun. An intellectual understands that someone nearby can feel bad. Typical shortcomings of intelligent people are constant introspection, increased criticality towards themselves and others. In modern life, the intellectual has a bad time, because many consider the high level of personal material well-being to be the main thing, and for the intellectual, questions of a spiritual order are in the first place.

An intellectual is a person of high culture who does not allow violence either against himself or against others. He avoids categorical judgments. A typical idea of ​​an intellectual is a polite man with glasses, who stands in line, gives way, lives in cramped conditions, does not know how to live, likes to talk about abstract topics. He will tactfully remain silent if someone nearby says absurdity, but will refuse to sign a document with which he internally disagrees. Many of us do not like intellectuals, they laugh at them.

Topics on the topic "Intellectual" provide descriptions of both the typical appearance of intellectuals and the typical behavior inherent in this social group of society. The dominant characteristics of this type in these works are the signs of "high culture", "the presence of firm moral principles", "modesty", "exemplary speech". It should be emphasized that the authors of the essays were students who identify themselves as representatives of the intelligentsia.

The Russian Associative Dictionary (2002) gives the following reactions of informants to the “intellectual” stimulus: a person (10); smart (7); glasses (4); lousy, diplomat, culture, mind, scientist (3); bespectacled, educated, bespectacled, pedant, student (2); library, future, former, polite, adult, military, smelly, well-mannered, prominent, highly moral, tie, urban, thinks, downtrodden, bore, engineer, intellect, interest, goat, contingent, handsome, who, cultured, Muscovite, wise, man, science, well-read, German, not left, unhappy, poor, tedious, well, well, shabby gentleman, he is a plump, privileged, pleasant person, professor, drinks champagne in the morning, Russian, old, cart, refinement, teacher, good, want to be, shitty, educated person, hat, elite, me (1) (PAC1). The same dictionary contains the following data (from reaction to stimulus): intellectual - polite, polite, genuine, hat (2); neat, noble, disgust, bourgeois, bourgeois, citizen, Don Juan, exercises, engineer, intellect, true, client, composer, bone, culture, concise, man, boss, communicate, jacket, writer, superficial, briefcase, passer-by, worker , developed, timid, secular, employee, solid, socialist, cane, scientist (1) (PAC2).

The above reactions show that in the minds of Russian students from 1988 to 1997 (this social group acted as informants), an intellectual is presented as an intelligent, educated, polite man in glasses, a jacket and a tie. Evaluative characteristics are divided into positive and negative (pleasant - unpleasant person), and each of these types is given in general or private evaluation options (in the first case, motivation is not explained, and in the second it is explained: for example, "lousy" and "tedious", for understanding the reasons for choosing one or another assessment are important (private assessment characteristics).

So, the figurative component of the concept under consideration is typified as a middle-aged man with glasses, his clothes are a formal suit with a tie, he is well-mannered, modest, tactful, emphatically polite, he reads literature (not only in his specialty, but certainly artistic), knows how to and likes to talk about abstract topics.

Let us turn to the contextual characteristics of the words denoting the concept of "Russian intellectual". Contextual analysis makes it possible to identify essential descriptions and refinements in the conceptualization of the analyzed type of people. The texts of fiction and journalistic works collected in the form of electronic libraries on CDs were taken as sources.

The external characteristics of an intellectual are reduced to the following recurring details:

Above average height, with a neat black beard, with delicate features of an intelligent face, on which slightly narrowed gray calm eyes stood out, he looked more like a scientist than a military man (I. Bolgarin, G. Seversky).

The man smiled kindly. Glasses with thin metal frames gave an unremarkable face a touch of intelligence. From under the unbuttoned coat one could see a formal suit with a tie (D. Koretsky).

Seeing pistols in the hands of two, Ph.D. Protsenko ... behaved as befits a bearded-bespectacled intellectual of the capital spill, faced with a menacingly threatening local color - he jumped up, knocking over a beer bottle, loudly, naturally yelled (A. Bushkov).

It is interesting to note that these details, when characterizing intellectuals - a neat beard, glasses, a tie - are given mostly in the texts of the detective genre. The hallmarks of intellectual behavior are as follows:

Vanya Lvov was known as an intellectual: he did not drink, did not smoke, and forced the sixes to get Dostoevsky and Chekhov (A. Kuchinsky) for him.

The owner of the office usually liked his own intelligent appearance, more suitable for a university professor than a responsible state person - and a well-honed softness of movements, and thin pursed lips, and large, albeit deep-set eyes ... (A. Solonik).

Shouting to an intelligent person is unnatural (I. Ratushinskaya).

These signs come down to the intelligentsia's lifestyle (first of all, it is a love of reading, and, moreover, to reading high-quality literature, and the absence of typical vices of poorly educated people, mainly drunkenness) and to a specific self-presentation - the ability to modulate the voice and make soft movements (these skills are acquired by educated people from childhood and testify to the developed habit of self-control). Noteworthy is the characteristic of the speech of intellectuals:

Yuri Vasilyevich was well versed in art, had a good, intelligent speech, was an excellent storyteller who could be listened to for hours (A. Konstantinov).

In a conversation with the gray-haired Rat, I involuntarily spoke the language of Friedrich von Tiefenbach - restrainedly and, as far as I can do it, intelligently, from time to time revealing the depth of my knowledge that can amaze any interlocutor. And since my knowledge was "with a gulkin's tail", I used only the manner of conversation of Friedrich (V. Kunin).

What words, Denis! You are an intelligent boy from a good family... (D. Koretsky).

Despite all his intelligence, Shura uses obscenities quite often and freely. Although he has an excellent vocabulary even without it (V. Kunin).

Somewhere in the area of ​​​​this bridge, the driver heard either a scream or a roar ... - said the captain, but he was interrupted by a soldier with a fine, intelligent face, jokingly picking up: - Either a man, or a bull, or a tour .. (V. Dotsenko).

Among the communicative features of an intellectual are well-developed speech, a large vocabulary, broad erudition, love for quotations and allusions (in the given example, a modified quote from a song by V. Vysotsky), a ban on the use of vulgarisms (although many modern intellectuals often violate this ban, it should be noted that the vulgar style of communication for an intellectual is precisely a style, a conscious choice of manner to behave, in a different situation a different style will be used, while for representatives of the social lower classes, swearing is a natural and only way of communicating, they do not swear, they talk like a mother).

As examples, typical professions and occupations of intellectuals are given:

Elderly, short, with a neatly trimmed beard, soft movements and intelligence of manners, he resembled either a doctor in a provincial hospital, or a school director who had retired for a well-deserved rest (V. Karyshev, A. Solonik).

With intelligent facial features and lush, thinned in front, but sticking out in both directions above the temples, he most of all resembled a composer, a famous violinist or conductor (D. Koretsky).