About Russian speech in the 21st century. Abstract: Russian language of the beginning of the XXI century

RUSSIAN LANGUAGE OF THE EARLY XXI CENTURY

1. Russian language Soviet period and modern language situation.

The historical events of the 20th century could not help but influence the history of the Russian language. Of course, the language system has not changed in one century - social events do not affect the structure of the language. The speech practice of Russian speakers has changed, the number of those who speak Russian has increased, the composition of words in certain areas of the dictionary has changed, the stylistic properties of some words and turns of speech have changed. These changes in the practice of using the language, in speech styles, were caused by major social events during the formation and fall of the Soviet socio-political system.

The Soviet period in the history of Russia began with the events of October 1917 and ended with the events of August 1991.

Features of the Russian language of the Soviet era began to take shape before 1917 - in the period? world war and finally took shape in the 20s of the twentieth century.

Changes in the vocabulary and style of the Russian language associated with the decay and fall of the Soviet system began around 1987-88 and continue to the present.

It is interesting to note that the fall of the Soviet system was accompanied by such trends in the speech practice of society, which in many respects resemble the social and speech changes of the 1920s.

Both the 20s and the 90s of the twentieth century are characterized by:

politicization of the language;

pronounced evaluative attitude to words;

the transformation of many words into symbols of a person's belonging to a certain socio-political group;

loosening language norms in mass use and speeches of prominent public figures;

the growth of mutual misunderstanding between different social groups.

Features of the language of the Soviet era and trends caused by changes in society after 1991 have direct influence on the current state of Russian speech. Therefore, to understand the problems of speech culture modern society is possible only on the basis of an analysis of the features of the Russian language of the Soviet era.

These features arose in the speech of party leaders and activists, spread through

reports at meetings;

resolutions and orders;

communication with visitors

and became speech patterns for broad (in the early years of Soviet power - illiterate and semi-literate) sections of the population. From the official language, many words and phrases passed into colloquial everyday speech. In the opposite direction - from vernacular and jargon - words characteristic of the low style and features of the speech of illiterate people penetrated into the language of resolutions, reports, orders. This situation is typical for the 20s, then speech practice changed towards strengthening literary norms, increased educational level leaders and the entire population, however, the very norms of the Soviet official and journalistic styles came into conflict with the historical cultural traditions of the Russian language.

2. Grammatical features of Russian speech of the Soviet era

Typical grammatical flaws in speech were as follows:

loss of the verbality of the sentence, replacement of verbs by names (improvement, perfection, increase, in one of the speeches at the meeting - non-exit);

transformation independent words in formal service, including

verbs (made an attempt, fight, approach accounting),

nouns (task, question, business, work, line, strengthening, strengthening, deepening, construction),

adverbs (extremely, significantly);

a heap of identical cases (the possibility of a delaying effect of income taxation);

frequent use superlatives adjectives (greatest, fastest, most wonderful);

improper coordination and management;

wrong word order

formulaic expressions that cause unnecessary personification of abstract nouns.

Examples of template turnovers with abstract nouns the following proposals are subject:

The deepening of the crisis forces us to assess the prospects of the industry.

The aggravation of the need for steamships prompted Sovtorgflot to raise the question of the speedy transfer of ships to the center.

The merger of homogeneous organizations means limiting the number of procurers.

If these proposals highlight grammar basics, you get a pretty fantastic picture:

Deepening makes you evaluate ...

The aggravation prompted to arouse ...

Consolidation means...

This elimination of a person from the text, the creation of mythical subjects was sometimes explained by the specifics of the business style. In fact, the reason for such a construction of the statement was the desire to avoid personal responsibility, presenting any situation as the result of the action of elemental forces (deepening, aggravation, decline).

A striking example of how a word can completely lose its meaning is the following sentence: A lot of hard work has been put into the organization and development of the Faculty of Electrical Engineering. If work is put on the case, then the meaning of the word business is completely forgotten.

Already in the 1920s, philologists drew attention to the problems of using the Russian language in newspapers and everyday everyday speech. G. O. Vinokur wrote on this occasion: “Stamped phraseology closes our eyes to the true nature of things and their relations, ... it substitutes for us their nomenclature instead of real things - moreover, it is completely inaccurate, for petrified.” G.O. Vinokur made the following conclusion: "Since we use meaningless slogans and expressions, our thinking becomes meaningless, meaningless. You can think in images, you can think in terms, but is it possible to think in dictionary clichés?" (Vinokur G.O. Culture of language. Essays on linguistic technology. M.: 1925, pp. 84-86).

3. Lexical Features Russian speech of the Soviet era

The formation of a new social order accompanied by the following phenomena in the vocabulary:

distribution of nouns with a familiar-scornful suffix -k- (canteen, reading room, icon [Fine Department of the People's Commissariat of Education], economy [newspaper "Economic Life"], normalka [ normal school], inpatient [stationary school]);

the spread of words with a narrow, situational meaning that existed in the language very a short time(from a year to five years, sometimes two to three decades), outside the context of the social conditions of a certain period, such words are simply incomprehensible: anti-lower, dispossessed, enlightened, sovkovets, trustee, moderator;

dissemination of abbreviations (Chekvalap - Extraordinary Commission for the procurement of felt boots and bast shoes, hard clothing - clothes made in Tver, akavek - student of the AKV [Academy of Communist Education]);

distribution of borrowed words obscure to the people in newspapers and in the language of documents: plenum, ultimatum, ignore, regularly, personally, initiative (over time, some of these words have become generally understood, but the word must be understood at the time of use, and not ten years later);

loss of real meaning by words (moment, question, task, line);

the appearance of a negative emotional coloring at neutral words as a result of their situational use, which narrowed and distorted the meaning of these words (element, dissident, voyage, ascetic).

By the 60s and 70s of the twentieth century general level culture of speech in relation to the grammatical and lexical norms of the Russian language has grown significantly, the extremes of the 20s have been smoothed out. However, the tendency to distort the meaning of words, to introduce ideological elements of meaning into them, remained. It is also curious to note the fact that books on the culture of speech, officially published in the 1920s, were subsequently placed in the special storage department of the state library and became available after 1991.

4. Functional and stylistic features of the Russian speech of the Soviet era

The stylistic features of the official speech of the Soviet era are:

misuse of metaphors and symbols: struggle for academic achievement, battle for the harvest, vanguard of the working class, on the linguistic front, against bourgeois smuggling in linguistics, signaling [informing], purge, sweep, linkage, linkage, loading, fouling, slipping, hydra of counterrevolution, imperialist sharks, wind of change;

abuse of epithets of majesty: unprecedented, gigantic, unheard of, titanic, unique;

penetration of words from criminal jargon into newspaper and official speech: grow brown, cover, fake, gravity, trepach, punks (over time stylistic coloration these words have changed - the words fake, punks, trepach have become literary words of colloquial speech, the word by gravity - an official term in medical documents);

Colloquial speech was characterized by the inappropriate use of clericalism, sometimes distorting their conceptual meaning by shifting it to the objective meaning: a self-supporting jacket (an example from 1925), cooperative trousers (an example from 1989), a leather handbag, a monopoly ( drinking establishment, the conceptual meaning is associated with the state monopoly on the sale of alcoholic beverages introduced in the 1920s).

Regarding the abuse of emotionally colored vocabulary, prof. S.I. Kartsevsky wrote: "The pursuit of expressiveness and in general a subjective attitude to life lead to the fact that we constantly resort to metaphors and describe in every possible way, instead of defining" (Kartsevsky S.I. Language, war and revolution. Berlin : 1923, p. 11).

A typical feature of the style of official and colloquial speech was the use of euphemisms, words that hide the true meaning of the concept: insulator (prison), study (rough criticism), seagull, too much ( extraordinary commission), competent authorities (authorities state security), tower (execution).

S.I. Kartsevsky, A.M. Selishchev, and other philologists paid attention to the spread of cynical swearing and swearing in society.

After 1917, the attitude towards proper names changed. Instead of traditional Russian names in the 20s, parents gave their children such names, for example: Decree, Budyon, Terror, Vilen [Vladimir Ilyich Lenin], Vilor [Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - October Revolution]. Many cities and city streets were renamed in honor of the leaders of the revolution and Soviet leaders. The names of some cities have changed several times, for example, Rybinsk - Shcherbakov - Rybinsk - Andropov - Rybinsk.

Yu. Yasnopolsky wrote in 1923 in the Izvestia newspaper: "The Russian language suffered severely during the revolution. Nothing in our country has undergone such ruthless mutilation, such merciless distortion as the language."

Already at the end of the Soviet era, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, prof. Yu.N. Karaulov noted such tendencies in speech as:

the widespread use of abstract words with a pseudoscientific coloring, the semantics of which are so emasculated that they become interchangeable (question, process, situation, factor, problem, opinion, direction);

objectless use of transitive verbs (we will solve [the problem], we exchanged [opinions]);

violations in the verbal and nominal direction (prompted us, makes us, do not want to call, how good they are);

nominalization (replacing verbs with abstract names);

the use of inanimate nouns as a subject (inappropriate personification): creative work, national income, concern for a person, the image of a contemporary become characters in the text;

the tendency to smooth out the personal beginning in speech as much as possible, to increase the feeling of uncertainty, informational vagueness, which at the right time would allow a double interpretation of the content (Karaulov Yu.N. On the state of the Russian language of our time. M .: 1991, pp. 23-27 ).

All these tendencies have not only been preserved, but even intensified in the Russian speech of the 90s of the XX century and are typical of the modern language situation.

5. The inevitability of changes in the language in the new social conditions

After 1991, significant political and political changes took place in Russian society. economic changes, which influenced the conditions for the use of the Russian language in oral and written speech. These changes in the conditions for the use of the language were also reflected in certain sections of its lexical system. Lost relevance and went out of active use, many words that called the economic realities of the Soviet era, ideological vocabulary. The names of many institutions and positions were again renamed. Religious vocabulary returned to active use, and many economic and legal terms passed from a special sphere into common use.

The abolition of censorship led to the emergence of live spontaneous oral speech, democratization - to participation in public communication of persons with various education and the level of speech culture.

Such noticeable changes in speech have caused justified public concern about the state of the Russian language today. At the same time, they express different opinions. Some believe that the reforms in society have led to a sharp decrease in the level of speech culture, damage to the language. Others express the opinion that the development of a language is a spontaneous process that does not need regulation, since, in their opinion, the language itself will choose all the best and reject the superfluous, inappropriate. Unfortunately, assessments of the state of the language are most often politicized and overly emotional. In order to understand what is happening with the language, scientific methods for assessing the favorableness of language changes are needed, which have not yet been developed enough.

6. Scientific methods for assessing the favorableness of language changes

The scientific approach to assessing the ongoing changes is based on a number of well-established provisions of linguistics.

It should be noted right away that the language cannot but change over time, it cannot be conserved by any effort.

At the same time, society is not interested in the language changing too abruptly, as this creates a gap in the cultural tradition of the people.

Moreover, people are interested in language serving as an effective means of thinking and communicating, which means that it is desirable that changes in language serve this purpose, or at least not prevent it.

A scientific assessment of language change can only be made on the basis of a clear understanding of the functions of language and an accurate idea of what properties a language must have in order to best perform its functions.

We have already said that the main functions of language are to serve as a means of communication and the formation of thought. So the language must be such that it allows any complex thought make it clear to the interlocutor and the speaker himself. At the same time, it is important that the understanding is adequate, i.e. so that as a result of the utterance, exactly the thought that the speaker wanted to convey to him arose in the mind of the interlocutor.

To do this, the language needs the following properties:

lexical wealth, i.e. the availability of suitable words and combinations of words to express all the necessary concepts;

lexical precision, i.e. evidence of semantic differences between synonyms, paronyms, terms;

expressiveness, i.e. the ability of the word to create vivid image an object or concept (terms of foreign origin do not have this property);

clarity of grammatical constructions, i.e. the ability of word forms in a sentence to accurately indicate the relationship between concepts;

flexibility, i.e. the availability of means to describe various aspects the situation under discussion;

minimality of non-removable homonymy, i.e. the rarity of such situations when the word in the sentence remains ambiguous.

Modern Russian literary language fully possesses all the qualities listed above. Problems in communication arise due to the fact that not every speaker knows how to use the opportunities provided by the Russian language.

Therefore, to assess language change, the following questions need to be answered:

Does the change contribute to strengthening the positive properties of the language (expressiveness, richness, clarity, etc.)?

Does the change help the language perform its functions better?

A negative answer to these questions allows us to conclude that the change is undesirable.

In order to have reliable data on how language functions, regular sociolinguistic research is needed, during which it would be useful to clarify the following questions:

To what extent do individuals belonging to different social and demographic groups understand information messages from TV news?

To what extent do lawyers and non-lawyers understand the language of laws?

To what extent do industry professionals understand the new terminology?

How accurately are the terms used outside the professional environment?

How often do misunderstandings occur in ordinary everyday conversation?

The answers to these questions would make it possible to objectively evaluate the effectiveness of the use of the Russian language in modern speech communication.

7. The need to protect the Russian language

Since changes in speech can lead not only to positive, but also to negative changes in the language, it is worth considering how to protect the language from unwanted changes.

Of course, the development of a language cannot be controlled by administrative methods. Orders do not make a word more expressive, it is impossible to assign a different meaning to a word, it is impossible to force people to speak correctly if they do not know how to do it.

In protecting the language, the main role belongs not to administrative bodies, but to civil society and the individual.

The protection of the Russian language should be taken care of by political parties (unless, of course, their leaders themselves speak their native language sufficiently, otherwise it will turn out as always), public and scientific organizations, journalistic unions, and other associations of citizens.

Not much today public organizations who would pay attention to the issues of culture of speech. useful role organizations such as the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature, the Russian Guild of Expert Linguists, and the Glasnost Defense Foundation play in this matter.

The popular science magazine "Russian Speech", which promotes scientific knowledge about the Russian language, constantly publishes articles on the culture of speech, is of great benefit.

It is very important that the problems of the culture of speech are discussed with the participation of specialists in the Russian language. A subjective or ideological approach to the issues of the culture of speech can lead to an incorrect interpretation of linguistic phenomena, an erroneous assessment of the state of speech.

providing scientific, mass and school libraries new dictionaries of the Russian language and modern textbooks;

financing of scientific and popular scientific journals on the Russian language;

organization of popular science programs in the Russian language on radio and television;

advanced training of television and radio workers in the field of speech culture;

official edition of the new edition of the set of rules for spelling and punctuation.

8. The state of the speech culture of society at the present stage

After 1991, some positive trends have formed in the speech practice of society:

extension vocabulary language in the field of economic, political and legal vocabulary;

means language approximation mass media to the needs of reliable coverage of reality;

the convergence of the language of notes and correspondence with literary colloquial speech, the rejection of the clerical style in journalism;

de-ideologization of some layers of vocabulary;

the disuse of many newspaper stamps of the Soviet era;

return to some cities and streets of historical names.

Along with the positive modern speech negative trends have become widespread:

fixing grammatical errors as samples of sentence construction;

inaccurate use of vocabulary, distortion of the meanings of words;

stylistic speech disorders.

The grammatical flaws of modern speech are:

replacement personal forms verbal nouns with suffixes -ation, -enie, -anie (regionalization, farming, criminalization, sponsorship, lobbying, investment);

loss of a certain meaning by words (progress, panacea, momentum, stabilization, exclusive);

heaps of case forms (during the operation to detain an armed criminal, course correction will be carried out in the direction of tightening reforms, about the plan of events held in connection with the celebration ...);

replacement of case control by prepositional (the conference showed that ...);

replacement of the indirect case with a combination with how (sometimes this is as a concession, he is named as the best player);

wrong choice of case (based on some materials).

Lexical shortcomings of speech are:

distribution of words with a narrow (situational) meaning (state employee, contract worker, beneficiary, industry worker, security official);

the use of borrowings that are incomprehensible to many, sometimes even to the speaker himself (briefing, distributor, kidnapping);

the use of abbreviations (UIN, OBEP, OODUUM and PDN ATC, civil defense and emergency situations);

the ideologization of certain layers of vocabulary, the invention of new labels (group egoism [about people's demands to respect their rights when building territories, to pay salaries on time], consumer extremism [about the desire of citizens to receive quality services]).

The style of speech (in almost all functional styles) today is characterized by such negative features:

transformation of metaphors into new patterns (vertical of power, recovery of the economy), sometimes meaningless (biased barriers, Russia is sick today with people's health, Russia is the main person here, local authorities are struggling with a shortage of funds [I would like to add here: the shortage is still winning this unequal struggle]);

the use of words that hide the essence of phenomena (social insecurity [poverty], involvement of firms in charitable activities [illegal extortions from entrepreneurs]);

the penetration of jargon into journalistic and oral official speech;

abuse of emotionally colored vocabulary in official public speech

9. Causes of massive speech errors

The causes of negative phenomena in speech practice include:

people's trust in the printed word (the habit of considering everything printed and said on television as a model of the norm);

reduction of editorial exactingness to journalists regarding the observance of language norms;

decrease in the quality of proofreading work;

the gap between the complicated requirements of the new school curriculum in the Russian language and the real possibilities of today's Russian school;

a decrease in the interest of schoolchildren in classical literature;

problems in replenishing the fund of libraries;

the transformation of the "Rules of Spelling and Punctuation" of 1956 into a bibliographic rarity and the absence of their new edition;

disrespect for the humanities;

disrespect for addressees of speech;

disregard for mother tongue.

10. Ways to improve the speech culture of speakers

If we take into account the importance of taking care of the language, then it is quite possible to improve the state of affairs with the culture of speech. For this you need:

explain to persons whose speeches fall into the center of public attention the need for careful attitude to their native language;

explain to the heads of the media the need for high-quality editorial work on the style of published texts;

to organize an advisory service of the Russian language;

promote classical literature;

provide libraries with new dictionaries and textbooks on the Russian language and culture of speech;

prepare and publish a new edition of the official set of spelling and punctuation rules;

promote respect for the Russian language.

11. Methods for self-improvement of speech culture

As mentioned above, the main role in the preservation of the native language belongs to the person himself.

In order for the state of the language not to cause anxiety, each person must constantly think about what he says.

No commissions and federal programs will change anything if the people themselves do not begin to respect their native language, feel their responsibility for every word they say, and think about the meaning of their words.

Even the most comprehensive speech culture course cannot provide answers to all questions. The language is so rich that it cannot be described in one textbook. This means that it is necessary to constantly develop your speech culture, comprehend the depths of the Russian language.

To do this, you can use the following methods:

reading classical fiction(this is the most important and effective method);

careful study of the necessary sections in grammar reference books;

use of dictionaries;

seeking advice from philologists;

use of Internet resources.

There are several sites on the Internet that contain background information on the Russian language, dictionaries, articles on the problems of speech culture and other useful materials:

http://www.gramma.ru/

http://www.grammatika.ru/

http://www.gramota.ru/

http://www.ruslang.ru/

http://www.slovari.ru/

Bibliography

Baranov A.N., Karaulov Yu.N. Russian political metaphor (materials for the dictionary). - M.: 1991

Belchikov Yu.A. Stylistics and culture of speech. - M.: 2000.

Vvedenskaya L.A., Pavlova L.G., Kashaeva E.Yu. Russian language and culture of speech. Rostov-on-Don: 2000.

Karaulov Yu.N. On the state of the Russian language in modern times. - M.: 1991.

Karaulov Yu.N. Pushkin's Dictionary and the Evolution of Russian language ability. - M.: 1992.

Karaulov Yu.N. Russian language and linguistic personality. - M.: 1987.

Kostomarov V.G. Language taste of the era. - M.: 1994.

Russian language of the late twentieth century. - M.: 1996.

TOPIC 21. RUSSIAN LANGUAGE OF THE EARLY XXI CENTURY

21.4. Functional and stylistic features of Russian speech of the Soviet era
21.5. The inevitability of changes in language in new social conditions
21.6. Scientific Methods for Assessing the Favorability of Language Change

21.8. The state of speech culture of society at the present stage
21.9. Causes of mass speech errors
21.10. Ways to improve the speech culture of speakers
21.11. Methods for self-improvement of speech culture
21.1. Russian language of the Soviet period and the modern language situation

Historical events of the twentieth century. could not help but influence the history of the Russian language. Of course, the language system has not changed in one century - social events do not affect the structure of the language. The speech practice of Russian speakers has changed, the number of those who speak Russian has increased, the composition of words in certain areas of the dictionary has changed, the stylistic properties of some words and turns of speech have changed. These changes in the practice of using the language, in speech styles, were caused by major social events during the formation and fall of the Soviet socio-political system.
The Soviet period in the history of Russia began with the events of October 1917 and ended with the events of August 1991.
Features of the Russian language of the Soviet era began to take shape before 1917 - during the First World War and finally took shape in the 20s of the twentieth century.
Changes in the vocabulary and style of the Russian language associated with the decay and fall of the Soviet system began around 1987-1988. and continue to the present.
It is interesting to note that the fall of the Soviet system was accompanied by such trends in the speech practice of society, which in many respects resemble the social and speech changes of the 1920s.
Both 20s and 90s. 20th century are characterized by:
politicization of the language;
pronounced evaluative attitude to words;
the transformation of many words into symbols of a person's belonging to a certain socio-political group;
loosening of language norms in mass use and speech of prominent public figures;
the growth of mutual misunderstanding between different social groups.

The features of the language of the Soviet era and the trends caused by changes in society after 1991 have a direct impact on the current state of Russian speech. Therefore, it is possible to understand the problems of the speech culture of modern society only on the basis of an analysis of the features of the Russian language of the Soviet era.
These features arose in the speech of party leaders and activists, spread through:
newspapers;
reports at meetings;
resolutions and orders;
communication with visitors to institutions.
They became speech models for the broad (in the early years of Soviet power - illiterate and semi-literate) sections of the population. From the official language, many words and phrases passed into colloquial everyday speech. In the opposite direction - from vernacular and jargon - words characteristic of the low style and features of the speech of illiterate people penetrated into the language of resolutions, reports, orders. This situation is typical for the 1920s, then speech practice changed in the direction of strengthening literary norms, the educational level of leaders and the entire population increased, however, the very norms of the Soviet official business and journalistic styles came into conflict with the historical cultural traditions of the Russian language.
21.2. Grammatical features of Russian speech of the Soviet era

The grammatical features of the speech of the Soviet period consist in the disproportionate use of some of the possibilities of the grammatical system of the Russian language. They are characteristic of book and written speech, colloquial speech was free from abuses in grammar, although some clerical turns could penetrate into colloquial speech.
Typical grammatical flaws in speech were as follows:
loss of the verbality of the sentence, replacement of verbs by names (improvement, perfection, increase, in one of the speeches at the meeting - non-exit);
the transformation of independent words into formal service ones, including:
verbs (made an attempt, fight, approach accounting),
nouns (task, question, business, work, line, strengthening, strengthening, deepening, construction),
adverbs (extremely, significantly);
a heap of identical cases (the possibility of a delaying effect of income taxation);
frequent use of superlative adjectives (greatest, fastest, most wonderful);
improper coordination and management;
wrong word order
formulaic expressions that cause unnecessary personification of abstract nouns.

Examples of template phrases with abstract nouns as subjects are the following sentences:
The deepening of the crisis forces us to assess the prospects of the industry.
The aggravation of the need for steamships prompted Sovtorgflot to raise the question of the speedy transfer of ships to the center.
The merger of homogeneous organizations means limiting the number of procurers.
If we highlight the grammatical foundations in these sentences, we get a rather fantastic picture:
Deepening makes you evaluate ...
The aggravation prompted to arouse ...
Consolidation means...
This elimination of a person from the text, the creation of mythical subjects was sometimes explained by the specifics of the business style. In fact, the reason for such a construction of the statement was the desire to avoid personal responsibility, presenting any situation as the result of the action of elemental forces (deepening, aggravation, decline).
A striking example of how a word can completely lose its meaning is the following sentence: A lot of hard work has been put into the organization and development of the Faculty of Electrical Engineering. If work is put on the case, then the meaning of the word "case" is completely forgotten.
Already in the 20s. philologists drew attention to the problems of using the Russian language in newspapers and everyday everyday speech. G.O. Vinokur wrote on this occasion: "Stamped phraseology closes our eyes to the true nature of things and their relations, ... it substitutes for us their nomenclature instead of real things - moreover, it is completely inaccurate, for petrified." G.O. Vinokur made the following conclusion: "Since we use meaningless slogans and expressions, our thinking becomes meaningless, meaningless. You can think in images, you can think in terms, but is it possible to think in dictionary clichés?" (Vinokur G.O. Culture of language: Essays on linguistic technology. M., 1925, p. 84-86).
21.3. Lexical features of Russian speech of the Soviet era
The formation of a new social system was accompanied by the following phenomena in the vocabulary:
the spread of nouns with the familiar-scornful suffix -k- (canteen, reading room, icon [Fine Department of the People's Commissariat of Education], economy [the newspaper "Economic Life"], normalka [normal school], inpatient [stationary school]);
the spread of words with a narrow, situational meaning that existed in the language for a very short time (from a year to five years, sometimes two to three decades), outside the context of the social conditions of a certain period, such words are incomprehensible: anti-lower, deprived, enlightened, sovkovets, trust, regime ;
dissemination of abbreviations (Chekvalap - Extraordinary Commission for the procurement of felt boots and bast shoes, Tverodezhda - clothes made in Tver, akavek - student of the AKV [Academy of Communist Education]);
distribution of borrowed words obscure to the people in newspapers and in the language of documents: plenum, ultimatum, ignore, regularly, personally, initiative (over time, some of these words became generally understood, but the word must be understood at the time of use, and not after 10 years);
loss of real meaning by words (moment, question, task, line);
the appearance of a negative emotional coloring in neutral words as a result of such situational use of them, which narrowed and distorted the meaning of these words (element, dissident, voyage, labor).

Colloquial speech was characterized by inappropriate use of clericalisms, sometimes distorting their conceptual meaning by shifting it to the objective meaning: a self-supporting jacket (an example from 1925), cooperative trousers (an example from 1989), a leather handbag, a monopoly ( drinking establishment, the conceptual meaning is associated with the state monopoly on the sale of alcoholic beverages introduced in the 1920s).
Regarding the abuse of emotionally colored vocabulary, prof. S.I. Kartsevsky wrote: "The pursuit of expressiveness and, in general, a subjective attitude to life lead to the fact that we constantly resort to metaphors and describe in every possible way, instead of defining" (Kartsevsky S.I. Language, war and revolution. Berlin, 1923, p. . eleven).
A typical feature of the style of official and colloquial speech was the use of euphemisms - words that hide the true meaning of the concept: isolation ward (prison), study (rough criticism), seagull, overkill (extraordinary commission), competent authorities (state security agencies), tower (execution).
S.I. Kartsevsky, A.M. Selishchev, other philologists paid attention to the spread of cynical swearing and swearing in society.
After 1917, the attitude towards proper names changed. Instead of traditional Russian names in the 20s. parents gave their children such, for example, names: Decree, Buden, Terror, Vilen [Vladimir Ilyich Lenin], Vilor [Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - October Revolution]. Many cities and city streets were renamed in honor of the leaders of the revolution and Soviet leaders. The names of some cities have changed several times, for example, Rybinsk - Shcherbakov - Rybinsk - Andropov - Rybinsk.
Yu. Yasnopolsky wrote in 1923 in the Izvestiya newspaper: "The Russian language suffered severely during the revolution. Nothing in our country has undergone such ruthless mutilation, such merciless distortion as the language."
Already at the end of the Soviet era, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, prof. Yu.N. Karaulov noted such tendencies in speech as:
the widespread use of abstract words with a pseudoscientific coloring, the semantics of which are so emasculated that they become interchangeable (question, process, situation, factor, problem, opinion, direction);
objectless use of transitive verbs (we will solve [the problem], we exchanged [opinions]);
violations in the verbal and nominal direction (prompted us, makes us, do not want to call, how good they are);
nominalization (replacing verbs with abstract names);
the use of inanimate nouns as a subject (inappropriate personification): creative work, national income, concern for a person, the image of a contemporary become characters in the text;
the tendency to smooth out the personal beginning in speech as much as possible, to increase the feeling of uncertainty, informational vagueness, which at the right time would allow a double interpretation of the content (Karaulov Yu.N. On the state of the Russian language of our time. M., 1991, pp. 23-27 ).

All these tendencies not only survived, but even became more active in the Russian speech of the 1990s. 20th century and are typical of the modern language situation.
21.5. The inevitability of changes in language in new social conditions

After 1991, significant political and economic changes took place in Russian society, which influenced the conditions for the use of the Russian language in speech and writing. These changes in the conditions of use of the language were also reflected in certain parts of its lexical system. Lost relevance and went out of active use, many words that called the economic realities of the Soviet era, ideological vocabulary. The names of many institutions and positions were again renamed. Religious vocabulary returned to active use, and many economic and legal terms passed from a special sphere into common use.
The abolition of censorship led to the appearance of spontaneous oral speech on the air, democratization - to the participation in public communication of persons with different education and level of speech culture.
Such noticeable changes in speech have caused justified public concern about the state of the Russian language today. At the same time, different opinions are expressed. Some believe that the reforms in society have led to a sharp decrease in the level of speech culture, damage to the language. Others express the opinion that the development of a language is a spontaneous process that does not need regulation, since, in their opinion, the language itself will choose all the best and reject the superfluous, inappropriate. Unfortunately, assessments of the state of the language are most often politicized and overly emotional. In order to understand what is happening with the language, scientific methods for assessing the favorableness of language changes are needed, which have not yet been developed enough.
21.6. Scientific Methods for Assessing the Favorability of Language Change

The scientific approach to assessing the ongoing changes is based on a number of well-established provisions of linguistics.
It should be noted that the language cannot but change over time, it cannot be conserved by any effort.
At the same time, society is not interested in the language changing too abruptly, as this creates a gap in the cultural tradition of the people.
Moreover, people are interested in language serving as an effective means of thinking and communicating, which means that it is desirable that changes in language serve this purpose, or at least not interfere with it.
A scientific assessment of language change can only be made on the basis of a clear understanding of the functions of language and an accurate idea of what properties a language must have in order to best perform its functions.
We have already said that the main functions of language are to serve as a means of communication and the formation of thought. This means that the language must be such that it allows any complex thought to be made clear to the interlocutor and the speaker himself. At the same time, it is important that the understanding is adequate, i.e. so that as a result of the utterance, exactly the thought that the speaker wanted to convey to him arose in the mind of the interlocutor.
To do this, the language needs the following properties:
lexical wealth, i.e. the availability of suitable words and combinations of words to express all the necessary concepts;
lexical precision, i.e. evidence of semantic differences between synonyms, paronyms, terms;
expressiveness, i.e. the ability of a word to create a vivid image of an object or concept (terms of foreign origin do not have this property);
clarity of grammatical constructions, i.e. the ability of word forms in a sentence to accurately indicate the relationship between concepts;
flexibility, i.e. the availability of means to describe various aspects of the situation under discussion;
minimality of non-removable homonymy, i.e. the rarity of such situations when the word and in the sentence remains ambiguous.

The modern Russian literary language fully possesses all the qualities listed above. Problems in communication arise due to the fact that not every speaker knows how to use the opportunities provided by the Russian language.
Therefore, to assess language change, the following questions need to be answered:
Does the change contribute to strengthening the positive properties of the language (expressiveness, richness, clarity, etc.)?
Does the change help the language perform its functions better?
A negative answer to these questions allows us to conclude that the change is undesirable.
In order to have reliable data on how language functions, regular sociolinguistic research is needed, during which it would be useful to clarify the following questions:
To what extent do people from different social and demographic groups understand the messages from television news?
To what extent do lawyers and non-lawyers understand the language of laws?
To what extent do industry professionals understand the new terminology?
How accurately are the terms used outside the professional environment?
How often do misunderstandings occur in ordinary everyday conversation?
The answers to these questions would make it possible to objectively evaluate the effectiveness of the use of the Russian language in modern speech communication.
21.7. The need to protect the Russian language

Since changes in speech can lead not only to positive, but also to negative changes in the language, it is worth considering how to protect the language from unwanted changes.
Of course, the development of a language cannot be controlled by administrative methods. Orders do not make a word more expressive, it is impossible to assign a different meaning to a word, it is impossible to force people to speak correctly if they do not know how to do it.
In protecting the language, the main role belongs not to administrative bodies, but to civil society and the individual.
The protection of the Russian language should be taken care of by political parties (unless, of course, their leaders themselves speak their native language sufficiently, otherwise it will turn out as always), public and scientific organizations, journalistic unions, and other associations of citizens.
Today there are not so many public organizations that would pay attention to the issues of the culture of speech. A useful role in this matter is played by such organizations as the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature, the Russian Guild of Expert Linguists, and the Glasnost Defense Foundation.
The popular science magazine "Russian Speech", which promotes scientific knowledge about the Russian language, constantly publishes articles on the culture of speech, is of great benefit.
It is very important that the problems of the culture of speech are discussed with the participation of specialists in the Russian language. A subjective or ideological approach to the issues of the culture of speech can lead to an incorrect interpretation of linguistic phenomena, an erroneous assessment of the state of speech.

Ultimately, the fate of the Russian language depends on each person. The state cannot check every word spoken and stamp it "correctly". A person himself must take care to pass on the Russian language to the next generations in an undistorted form. On the other hand, society should help every citizen in every possible way to improve the knowledge of the Russian language. In this case, state support for the Russian language may also be useful.
The following measures can be recommended as such support:
provision of scientific, mass and school libraries with new dictionaries of the Russian language and modern textbooks;
financing of scientific and popular scientific journals on the Russian language;
organization of popular science programs in the Russian language on radio and television;
advanced training of television and radio workers in the field of speech culture;
official edition of the new edition of the set of rules for spelling and punctuation.
21.8. The state of speech culture of society at the present stage
After 1991, some positive trends formed in the speech practice of society:
expansion of the vocabulary of the language in the field of economic, political and legal vocabulary;
approximation of the language of the media to the needs of reliable coverage of reality;
the convergence of the language of notes and correspondence with literary colloquial speech, the rejection of the clerical style in journalism;
de-ideologization of some layers of vocabulary;
the disuse of many newspaper stamps of the Soviet era;
return to some cities and streets of historical names.

A positive impact on the development of the language has a change in the conditions of public communication: the abolition of censorship, the opportunity to express personal opinion, the opportunity for listeners to evaluate the oratorical talents of prominent politicians.
Along with the positive in modern speech, negative trends have become widespread:
fixing grammatical errors as samples of sentence construction;
inaccurate use of vocabulary, distortion of the meanings of words;
stylistic speech disorders.

The grammatical flaws of modern speech are:
replacement of personal forms of verbs with verbal nouns with suffixes -ation, -enie, -anie (regionalization, farming, criminalization, sponsoring, lobbying, investing);
loss of a certain meaning by words (advancement, panacea, momentum, stabilization, exclusive);
heaps of case forms (during the operation to detain an armed criminal, course correction will be carried out in the direction of tightening reforms, about the plan of measures taken in connection with the celebration ...);
replacement of case control by prepositional (the conference showed that ...);
replacing the indirect case with a combination with the word like (sometimes this is as a concession, he is named as the best player);
wrong choice of case (based on some materials).
Lexical shortcomings of speech are:
distribution of words with a narrow (situational) meaning (state employee, contract worker, beneficiary, industry worker, security official);
the use of borrowings that are incomprehensible to many, sometimes even to the speaker himself (briefing, distributor, kidnapping);
the use of abbreviations (UIN, OBEP, OODUUM and PDN ATC, civil defense and emergency situations);
the ideologization of certain layers of vocabulary, the invention of new labels (group egoism [about people's demands to respect their rights when building territories, to pay salaries on time], consumer extremism [about the desire of citizens to receive quality services]).
etc.................

When characterizing literary language XX century should distinguish between two chronological period: I - from October 1917 to April 1985 and II - from April 1985 to the present. What happens to the Russian literary language during these periods?

After the formation of the Soviet Union, its development and enrichment continued. The most obvious increase vocabulary literary language. The volume is growing especially fast scientific terminology, for example, related to cosmology, astronautics. A large number of words are created denoting new phenomena and concepts that reflect fundamental changes in the state, political, economic structure of the country, for example, Komsomolets, regional committee, virgin lands, collective farm, socialist competition, kindergarten and others. Fiction, journalistic, popular science literature has replenished the arsenal of expressive and visual means literary language. In morphology, syntax, the number of synonymous variants increases, differing from each other in shades of meaning or stylistic coloring.

There is a further unification of orthoepic, spelling, lexical, grammatical norms of the literary language. They are fixed by normative dictionaries.

Researchers Russian language since the 20s. XX century paid special attention literary language theory. As a result, they determined and characterized the system-structural division of the literary language. First, literary language has two types: book-written and oral-colloquial; secondly, each type is realized in speech. Book-and-Written Presented in special speech(written - scientific speech and written official business speech) and in artistic and visual speech (written journalistic speech and written artistic speech). The oral-conversational type is presented in public speech(in scientific speech and oral radio and television speech) and in colloquial speech(oral colloquial speech).

In the 20th century, the formation of the Russian letter language ended, which began to be a complex dark structural organization.

The second period - the period of perestroika and post-perestroika - attached particular importance to the processes that accompany the functioning of the language at all stages of its existence, made them more significant, more clearly expressed, brighter, more clearly presented. First of all, we should talk about a significant replenishment of the vocabulary of the Russian language with new words. (state structure, barter, foreign currency, Internet, cartridge, case, kiwi, adidas, hamburger etc.), about updating a large number words, finding; previously in the passive. In addition to new words, many the words, which seemed to be forever out of use gymnasium, lyceum, guild, governess, corporation, trust, department, communion, blessing, carnival and etc.

Speaking about the replenishment of the vocabulary of the literary language, it should be noted: a striking feature of our today's language development is considered a clogging of speech borrowing mi. The "foreignization" of the Russian language is a concern for linguists, literary critics, writers, many people; the Russian language is dear to those who are concerned about its future fate.

The Russian language throughout its history has been enriched not only by internal resources but also at the expense of other languages. But in some periods this influence, especially the borrowing of words, was excessive, and then there is an opinion that foreign words do not add anything new, since there are Russian words that are identical to them, that many Russian words cannot compete with fashionable borrowings and are forced out them.

The history of the Russian literary language shows: borrowing without measure clogs speech, makes it not understandable to everyone; reasonable borrowing enriches speech, gives it greater accuracy.

In connection with significant changes in the conditions for the functioning of the language, another problem is currently becoming relevant, the problem of language as a means of communication, language in its implementation, speech problem.

What features characterize the functioning of the literary language in late 20th century?

First, never been like this numerous and varied(by age, education, official position, political, religious, social views, party orientation) composition of mass communication participants.

Secondly, official censorship has almost disappeared, so people express their thoughts more freely, their speech becomes more open, confidential, relaxed.

Third, it begins to dominate spontaneous speech not prepared in advance.

Fourth, the diversity of communication situations leads to a change nature of communication. It is freed from rigid formality, it becomes more relaxed.

New conditions for the functioning of the language, the emergence of a large number of unprepared public performances lead not only to democratization of speech, but also to sharp the decline of her culture.

How is it shown? First, in violation of orthoepic (pronunciation), grammatical norms of the Russian language. Scientists, journalists, poets, ordinary citizens write about it. Especially a lot of criticism is caused by the speech of deputies, television and radio workers. Second, at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries democratization language has reached such proportions that it is more correct to call the process liberalization and more precisely - vulgarization.

On the pages of periodicals, in speech educated people flow jargon gushed, colloquial elements and others non-literary means: grandmas, thing, piece, stolnik, baldezh, pump out, launder, unfasten, scroll and many others. etc. The words became common even in official speech party, disassembly, mayhem the last word in the sense of "unlimited lawlessness" gained particular popularity.

For speakers, public speakers tolerance has changed, to say the least, completely absent. swearing, " swear language"," unprintable word "can be found today on the pages independent newspapers, free editions, in the texts of works of art. In shops, bookstores bazaars dictionaries are sold containing not only jargon, thieves, but also obscene words.

There are quite a few people who say that swearing and swearing are considered a characteristic, distinctive feature of the Russian people. If you turn to oral folk art, proverbs and sayings, it turns out that it is not entirely legitimate to assert that the Russian people consider swearing an integral part of their lives. Yes, people are trying to somehow justify her, to emphasize that abuse is a common thing: Scolding is not a reserve, and without it not for an hour; Swearing is not smoke– the eye will not go out; Hard words break no bones. It seems to even help in the work, you can’t do without it: Do not swear, you will not do the job; Without swearing, you can't unlock the lock in the cage.

But something else is more important: Argue, argue, but scolding is a sin; Do not scold: what comes out of a person, then he will be filthy; Swearing is not resin, but akin to soot: it doesn’t cling, it stains like that; With abuse people dry, and with praise they get fat; You won’t take it with your throat, you won’t beg with abuse.

This is not only a warning, this is already a condemnation, this is a ban.

The Russian literary language is our wealth, our heritage. He embodied cultural and historical traditions people. We are responsible for his condition, for his fate.

Fair and relevant (especially at the present time!) are the words of I.S. Turgenev: “In the days of doubt, in the days painful thoughts about the fate of my homeland - you are my only support and support, oh great, powerful, truthful and free Russian language! Without you, how not to fall into despair at the sight of everything that happens at home? But it is impossible to believe that such a language was not given to a great people!”

A round table was held in the Moscow House of Nationalities not so long ago "Russian language in the XXI century". A lot has been said here about the fact that the culture of speech is being lost everywhere, that the language is in a deep crisis. Needless to say, this is a very common opinion.

It is noteworthy that among the participants in the discussion, there was only one linguist - Professor of the Russian Language Department of Lomonosov Moscow State University Lyudmila Cherneiko. So she considers such statements to be exaggerated: “I don’t see anything deplorable in the state of the Russian language. I see only threats to him. But we do listen to each other. We speak very well. I listen to students. They speak great. Generally speaking, specialists have always been interested in language. If society shows such an interest in the Russian language, as it has shown now in the last, at least 5 years, this is evidence of an increase in national self-awareness. This inspires optimism.”

Surprisingly, only linguists tend to discuss linguistic problems in a more or less restrained register. Non-specialist debates tend to be heated. Busy: in this case, the arguments are often given the most slanderous. Moreover, it is not only disputes that cause a painful reaction. Many can catch themselves on the fact that, noticing in a speech official or, say, a TV journalist, just one, but a gross mistake, suddenly ready to jump with indignation or exclaim something like: “Oh, God, you can’t do that!”

No wonder there are set phrases mother tongue and native speech". The word “native” in the Russian national consciousness is closely related to very important deep concepts for everyone, for example, « native home» or « native person» . Attacking them causes anger. Damage to the native language too. Lyudmila Cherneiko notes that there is another reason why we are so embarrassed when we learn that we have pronounced or written a word incorrectly. (Compare with your reaction to an error, say, in arithmetic calculations - it will not be so emotional).

Lyudmila Cherneiko believes that speech is a social passport that tells a lot about a person: “Moreover, we will find out the place where a person was born, the place where he grew up. So, you need to get rid of some territorial features of your speech, if you do not want to give extra information to the listener. Further. The level of education. As we say, it depends on what kind of education we have, and especially in the humanities. Why now Bauman University introduced the subject "culture of speech"? Moreover, why is slang, such thieves' slang - this is an esoteric system, a closed system, why? Because a stranger is recognized by speeches. By speeches we find like-minded people, by speeches we find people who have approximately the same worldview as ours. It's all about words."

And these speeches last years they did not become more illiterate, rather, on the contrary. Why do many people have a strong feeling that the Russian language is degrading? The fact is that his existence has changed to a large extent. Previously, oral utterance in a number of cases was only an imitation of such, and, in fact, was writing speech. From all stands, starting with the factory meeting and ending with the platform of the CPSU congress, the reports were read from a piece of paper. The vast majority of TV and radio broadcasts were recorded, and so on and so forth. People of the middle and older generation remember with what eager interest the whole country listened to the speeches of Mikhail Gorbachev, who had just come to power, with ease (here rare case) forgiving him "n a start" instead of "start a t". The new leader was able to speak without looking at a pre-written text, and it seemed fresh and unusual.

Since then public oral speech has become predominant, and, of course, if a person does not speak according to what is written, he is more often mistaken. Which does not justify some extremes, emphasizes Lyudmila Cherneiko: “The television audience is colossal. In the absence of self-censorship, when the program for young people is “cool”, “high”, this is an endless “wow” - this way of communication is set as a model, as a standard, as something they want to imitate.

By the way, the English exclamation "wow" Lyudmila Cherneiko does not like it for the simple reason that it has a Russian counterpart. Therefore, she declares, a person who cares about the purity of speech will not use this word. Yes, it probably won’t take root: “If we don’t say “wow” to you, then we won’t say it. We will say Russian "Oh"", - says Lyudmila Cherneiko.

But in general, in the current abundance of borrowings (and this is considered by many to be one of the main threats to the language), the linguist does not see anything terrible: “The language is so arranged, especially the Russian language is open system, a language that has always absorbed other people's influence, reworked it creatively. When, quite recently, our graduate, who has been working in America for many years, spoke at the university, he said: “Let's throw out all foreign roots.” His mission is to cleanse the Russian language of all foreign roots. But I, as a linguist, have a completely natural question - and you, in general, suggest that a Russian person throw out the word "soup". Yes, he will be very surprised. But the word "soup" is borrowed. Therefore, when they offer me some completely utopian ideas- come on, we will clean the Russian language from foreign borrowings- I think it's funny. Because it is impossible. For example: "Only a vulgar face does not have a physiognomy." This is Turgenev. You are the word "physiognomy", borrowed, where are you going? By the way, it is a scientific fact that you will not find a single borrowed word rooted in the Russian language that would fully reflect the semantics of the recipient's language, that is, the language from which it was taken. This is not and cannot be. The language takes everything and builds it into its system, because it lacks some means. Among other things, these are such banal things - why was "laborer" lost as a name of a profession in Russian? Because you will never cleanse a Russian word from age-old connotations, from associations. Because in every word the associative meaning sticks out in a beam in all directions. Mandelstam wrote about this. A foreign word, especially in term creation, especially in term systems, is absolutely necessary, like air. Because it does not have any unnecessary connotations that are unnecessary for scientific thinking.

And here's something else. It is generally accepted that language is a self-organizing system that lives in its own way. internal laws. But not only, says another participant in the round table at the Moscow House of Nationalities - the head of the coordinating and analytical department of the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation Vyacheslav Smirnov. According to him, the political component also plays a significant role, at least when it comes to the area of distribution of the language: “Its use is narrowing - narrowing in the former republics of the former Soviet Union. Although not so long ago, the President of Kyrgyzstan spoke in favor of maintaining the status of the Russian language as an official one.”

The culture of Russian speech in the XXI century
Panel discussion

Lyudmila VERBITSKY

The president International Association teachers of the Russian language and literature, President of the Russian Academy of Education, Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Russkiy Mir Foundation

Lev Vladimirovich Shcherba wrote: in order to see how the language has changed, at least half a century must pass. And we are seeing that such changes occur much faster. And this is connected with the processes that take place not only in the Russian language, but also in other languages. These exolinguistic circumstances, situations external to the language, also very often influence the changes that we observe.

What is the culture of speech today, what is happening with our language? Can we accept these changes or should we resist them? After all, internal language factors are stronger than external ones. A similar problem that may affect the development language system, also occupied our predecessors, and we remember that the points of view on this were completely different.

I would like our discussion to be started by Sergey Oktyabrevich Malevinskiy, professor at the Kuban State University.

Sergei MALEVINSKY

Professor of the Department of General and Slavic-Russian Linguistics, Kuban State University

We have in Krasnodar Territory Until recently, the functions of the Minister of Culture were performed by my classmate, who, together with me, graduated from the Faculty of Philology of the Kuban University. She was a Komsomol activist, then went through the administrative part and grew up to the Minister of Culture of the Kuban. In the last years of her management of culture, she began to introduce into the consciousness of the masses that the official language of the entire Kuban and the regional administration should not be the Russian literary language, but the Kuban balachka. Imagine the official business language based on the Kuban dialect? Well, she was retired on time, and this idea with a balachka rested in Bose.

This is such a historical curiosity that my speech should not be completely sad.

And in the main part, I would like to speak not as a scientist, professor, theorist, but as a teacher-practitioner. As a person who has been teaching a course of practical stylistics and culture of speech for many, many years at various faculties of the Kuban State University. Being a historian of language by education, he approached this new business with full responsibility to the culture of speech. He began to study materials, dictionaries. I bring orthoepic dictionaries to classes with students, various kinds grammar guides. It often happens that a student looks for a word in the dictionary: how it is pronounced, where the stress is placed, how some of its forms are formed. And then he looks up at me and asks: “Is that what they say? Where did they get all this from? Yes, we have never heard of this!”.

At first I thought that all this comes from lack of education, from lack of culture, and then I began to understand: in spelling dictionaries and various kinds of reference books, there are such interpretations, such formulations, such recommendations that are godlessly outdated. That is, some dictionaries recommend that our students speak the way our fathers and grandfathers spoke. But the language does not stand still. The language is developing. The norms of the Russian literary language are developing, the normative speech representations of native speakers of the Russian language are changing. Unfortunately, in dictionaries, reference books, this is not always reflected.

And then the question arises: what guides the compilers of dictionaries, reference books, codifiers of the norms of the Russian literary language? Apparently, with your instinct? Although back in 1948, Elena Sergeevna Iskrina in one of her books formulated the principle of determining the normativity of language units. She said quite clearly: “the normativity of a speech unit is determined by the degree of its use in speech, provided that the source is sufficiently authoritative.” Frequency of use provided that the sources are sufficiently authoritative. Iskrina herself wrote that such authoritative sources in terms of studying literary norms are the works of classical writers and politicians.

But in parallel with this, a different approach was formulated within the framework of the Prague Linguistic Circle. Praguers wrote: yes, of course, the works of classical writers should be a source of study of the norms of the literary language - that's why they are classics. But what is a classic? This is what is in the past. And now? And the people of Prague said that along with the works of the classics, the speech and the normative-speech consciousness of the modern intelligentsia, modern educated strata of society: teachers, engineers, doctors, lawyers should be the same equal source for the study of literary norms. In general, all educated people.

And here's what's interesting: Soviet times published wonderful books, such as "Russian language according to the mass survey" edited by Leonid Petrovich Krysin. The work "Grammatical Correctness of Russian Speech (Experience of a Frequency-Stylistic Dictionary of Variants)" was published. The most serious works in which the normative speech representations and speech practice of the intelligentsia were studied.

Unfortunately, in recent times I don't see such work.

Lyudmila VERBITSKY

The mass circulation of the “Comprehensive Normative Dictionary of the Russian Language as the State Language of the Russian Federation” is coming out soon, which is both explanatory and grammatical. It is based on " National Corps Russian language" and frequency dictionaries. And your concern, of course, is understandable, because students have nothing to give into their hands today.

I would like to give the floor to Lyubov Pavlovna Klobukova. She is a professor at Moscow State University and played a huge role in what I think is a very important event. Fifteen years ago it was created Russian society teachers of the Russian language and literature, and Lyubov Pavlovna, who is very sensitive to the Russian language, participated in its formation. She has a lot of interesting ideas.

Lyubov KLOBUKOVA

Head of the Department of Russian Language for Foreign Students humanitarian faculties Moscow State University

I would like to touch upon the very dangerous process of discodification of the Russian language today.

To understand what is behind this term - "discodification", let's remember what codification is. Here are the words of Viktor Viktorovich Panov, who determined that codification is “the conscious concern of the whole society for the language.” He wrote: “The linguist, journalist, public figure, announcer, teacher, university teacher act as codifiers - those who preserve the dignity of the literary language.” It's amazing what words a person found! "Care"! Like a father talking about his child.

These words are as relevant today as ever. The point is that in turning points development of society, the results of codification are often called into question due to the destructive language practice of discodifiers.

Who is it? First, let's define that discodification is a destructive activity to destroy existing norms literary language. I want to emphasize - conscious destruction. There are many people who deliberately destroy the norms of the literary language, and I even combined them into several groups.

First of all, they are highly qualified specialists. You understand what the problem is: these are not some illiterate people who do not know how to speak. These are specialists in advertising goods of transnational companies. They deliberately, purposefully violate the norms of Russian speech in the advertising texts they create in order to achieve the necessary commercial effect.

The second group of ideological discodifiers is formed by intellectuals, connoisseurs of foreign languages, who organize their speech practice according to the principle "in any convenient case, instead of a Russian word, I use a foreign one."

The discodifier always knows what he's doing. He always consciously strives to outrageous at the lexical level. AT recent decades there is an unprecedented mass flow of borrowings from foreign languages - primarily from English. Here is the favorable background and the necessary condition for lexical discodification. I'm talking about borrowings that are introduced into Russian texts without translation, as if disguised as ordinary words, which supposedly should be well known to all Russian speakers. That is, we are talking about words such as "fake", "facebook", "like" and so on. These words are literally overflowing with texts from ordinary magazines that are sold in any kiosk. They are focused on Russian youth, on the so-called creative class, on educated people. But here is a question that is very important from the point of view of our discussion: which of these words can you safely do without?

The fact is that the appearance of some words in the modern Russian lexicon is due to the state of our lexical system. Pushkin wrote about such a state: “But “knickers”, “tailcoat”, “vest” - all these words are not in Russian. That is, the denotation has appeared, which means that words should appear. And if you look at the list of words I have listed from this point of view, it is quite obvious that words like “fake” will be superfluous. I consider the inclusion of this word in Russian speech a pure manifestation of the lexical discodification of our language, because for this neologism there are corresponding commonly used Russian words “fake”, “fake”. The use of such words in Russian speech practice simply implements the practice I mentioned of unmotivated, I want to emphasize, replacing Russian words with borrowings.

The goal is very clear. The speaker cuts off from his communicative circle "marginals" who do not know foreign languages; using words like "fake", he gives a signal to his addressee, in this case- fluent in English. He seems to pronounce the famous Kipling performative: "you and I are of the same blood." But such a stratification of society cannot be the goal of the literary language! On the contrary, we know that literary language is a powerful means of uniting a nation.

And now a few words about morphonomic discodification. It's even scarier. I want to draw your attention to the tendency of conscious, purposeful non-inclination of words that could and should, according to the norms of Russian grammar, be inclined.

We all remember the bright, aggressive advertising campaign - it is still ongoing - of the German electronics retail chain. "Fantastic prices", "Fantastic Markt", "The ice has broken - fantastic brands are swimming into their hands." That is, what is the grammatical assessment of this “fantastic situation”?

I am very upset by the unceremoniousness of introducing a foreign adjective into the Russian speech area in the presence of a Russian equivalent. We have the corresponding words: "fantastic", "fantastic". But here the morphological level of the language is already affected, and it is very sensitive. This is the backbone of the language, the collective system. We get a new adjective - analytical, which is not mastered by our language system.

And our task is to somehow monitor this. See: “I celebrate the New Year with friends and Coca-Cola”. Promotion from Nivea. “Acceptable prices in Ikea. And today, what is interesting, among the people, among normal people, this all continues to decline, but something completely different happens with marketing goals.

These examples are a clear and deliberate departure from grammatical norms, and that is why we must fight these attempts at discodification. Of course, the language must change, but for the normal development of the language it is necessary that these changes do not contradict the very nature of the language. The opinion of philologists should be taken into account when deciding on the language component of advertising texts that are distributed on the territory of Russia. By the way, it is very easy to change this without violating the interests of the company.

Lyudmila VERBITSKY

The great philosopher Vladimir Solovyov said that every person must necessarily master three styles of speech: high, in order to address only God, medium, in order to communicate with the interlocutor, and low, which, probably, everyone should know, but use only in internal monologue or a dialogue with yourself, so that no one hears.

Here is Valery Mikhailovich Mokienko, to whom I want to give the floor, just the dictionaries have prepared the very vocabulary that no one should hear, but it is used. How often, including television channels, we hear beeps that mask these words. And what is the situation in Russia if the President of the Russian Federation pays attention to this?

So, Valery Mikhailovich Mokienko, a specialist in a number of languages, and for a number of years he taught the Ukrainian language in Germany.

Valery MOKIENKO

Professor, Department of Slavic Philology, Faculty of Philology, St. Petersburg State University

What is the tragedy of the Russian professor? While he is engaged in morphology, no one talks about him and no one asks him about anything. But as soon as a Russian professor wants to explain to students the mysteries of Russian warfare, right there, overnight, one can become famous. While working in Berlin, I suddenly felt some completely natural interest in this vocabulary. One day a very nice German student Susanna came up to me and said:

- Valery Mikhailovich, I was in Moscow and my friends said words that I cannot find in the dictionary. And they asked me to read. I made a list, and every word that I read caused Homeric laughter.

When I saw these words written in calligraphic handwriting, my last hair stood on end. Suzanne's Russian friends planted such a Russian pig for her.

After that, I was asked to read a special course on this topic, then they asked me to make a dictionary. But I never dared to publish this dictionary in Russia. But after one TV show, I decided. On this program, the journalists wanted me to say some of these words. After that they asked me in Kaliningrad to publish a dictionary. I did not dare to publish it under my own name, but published it under the name of Professor McKiego, and I only wrote the preface. And I forgot. But then there was a need for this dictionary, and Tatyana Gennadievna Nikitina, a professor at Pskov University, and I nevertheless went on the lead of the publishers and called our dictionary “a dictionary of foul language”.

The dictionary went almost unnoticed, but then the State Duma issued a corresponding decree, and now we shudder when we encounter this problem. Despite official bans, there is no effect. When we watch TV shows, there is always beeping, which every Russian deciphers, but foreigners do not understand. It seems to me that this is hypocrisy. All European countries have dictionaries. For example, in German. All swear words are presented, but this does not force any of the Germans to swear at every step. It is a naive notion that a ban will lead to an exemption from scolding. Will not work. Our goal is to explain what it is. I told my granddaughter that the word "damn" has a different connotation than she thinks. She is already 23 years old, and I have never heard this word from her again. Explanation is much more effective than prohibitions.

I remember that more than twenty years ago, Alexander Dmitrievich Shmelev even predicted that the Russian language would become analytical, because words like “kakadu” appear all the time. I’m not talking about coffee, because we’ll immediately start quoting here State Duma. “Fantastic”, “das auto” and we do not decline in Russian quite justifiably. This is just the result of the codification of the norm, because inflexibility in the Russian language, “coat”, “kino”, “kimono” and so on, has already been codified. However, in all Slavic languages such words are inflected. In Ukrainian you can say “I buv u kine”, in Czech “bylsja u kine” is quite normal. But because the aristocrats in the Russian Academy spoke French, they could not afford to incline the French “coat”. And now this trend of prohibition gives us such an effect that we don’t incline even “fantastic”. This means that this is just the result of codification, as it seems to me, and not vice versa.

For some reason, purists attack Anglicisms, but at the same time, no one fights against the same Anglicisms, Germanisms, Gallicisms that come to us in the form of cripples. President Lincoln once said a phrase when he was elected, despite American law, once again to the presidency: "horses are not changed in midstream." One doesn't change horses in the stream. This phrase is known all over America, but it has been copied by everyone European languages. And now, when the Zenit coach has changed, we have capital letters in the newspaper it was written: "They changed the horse at the crossing." And not a single Russian objects to such borrowings, although they are more detrimental to the purity of any language, because they change the syntax.

Therefore, before you fight with borrowings, jargon, and - I'm not afraid of this word - matisms, you need to think, wait, look at the speakers. And then to recommend such a set of all this, which will be intelligent, dynamic and directed towards the future of the Russian language.

I think that the Russian language in its entire system, if it is used in all registers stylistically justified, will remain a real living language.

Lyudmila VERBITSKY

We are well aware of the power of the word. We know that one can kill with a word, one can save and lead regiments with a word. I would like to give the floor to Dan Davidson, Vice President of the International Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature, President of the American Councils for International Education. Dan ran an excellent program at St. Petersburg University for nine years. Its goal was a perfect Russian language, fluency for those Americans who have already done this and are studying with us. And suddenly we found out that this year the American government said: it will not finance this program. Otherwise, Russian speech will sound on the territory of the United States of America!

During these years of cooperation with us, Dan has done a lot to strengthen ties between our countries. There are wonderful Russian language textbooks prepared by Dan and his staff. Therefore, it seems to me that we will survive this temporary stage. I hope that Obama will then say: “I give money. Learn Russian language".

Dan Eugene DAVIDSON

Vice President of the International Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature, President of the American Councils for International Education

It would be necessary to translate our conversation a little bit towards products and the study of Russian as a foreign language. I would like to quote from an electronic diary, which, by the way, is kept by every student of the flagship program. They must reflect, think about own language which they produce. Here is what, for example, one student wrote in an electronic diary. “I am now very interested in expressing opinions in Russian in different registers, and in this regard I began to follow the programs on Youtube.” This is such a dubious source, but there, however, all the registers. “The fact is that I know all the words, but I don’t feel in what situations it’s right given word". Here is just an explanatory dictionary, a new generation of dictionaries, of course, will help.

The culture of speech is not translated, as well as speech behavior. There are obvious examples that I just came across today. English speakers feel the need to say hello very often. We know it. And this repeated repeated expression “hi, how are you” at each meeting, for example, with a Russian-speaking person, will definitely cause an answer like “we already greeted you”.

The current situation, unfortunately, is much more complicated than what we are talking about today. Thanks to the mobility of people, global technology and mobile networks, globalization has led to a radical change in the conditions of our learning, learning foreign languages and, ultimately, the use of foreign languages. This also led to the destabilization of those norms, standards, conditions that teachers used to rely on and which served as a guide for students when entering a big life outside the school walls. These changes call for a more reflective and historically grounded pedagogy.

Given the amount of interpersonal communication that is now taking place on the Internet, where, by the way, our students, our youth spend all their time, global technologies require us to reconsider the very concept of cultural authenticity. In the conditions of the Internet, not only the idea of speech genres, pragmatics, communicative norms and texts has changed. Appeared new type display text. Ease of perception won over grammar, literacy and accuracy. This is called a code change. The spoken code goes into other traffic and code, in English called code machines. That is, there is a deliberate mixing of different codes and formats.

Pedagogy, on the other hand, is used to teaching norms, and we now propose not to be limited only by the normative system, but also to use some kind of adaptive practice with its cultural and technological components, so that the norm is obvious, so that the ability to at least perceive what we live in remains. We need to be sensitive to heightened semantic complexity and the issues and relationships behind it.

Lyudmila VERBITSKY

Of course, of course, we understand that we have the Russian literary language and spontaneous speech. Spontaneous speech obeys completely different laws, but not a single phenomenon of spontaneous speech arises independently of language. Tallinn is a very special city for the residents of Leningrad-Petersburg. In the past, as Petersburgers go to Finland now, Leningraders often visited Tallinn. I am very pleased with the situation that is developing there. Even seven or ten years ago it was difficult to speak Russian with both young people and hotel workers. AT last time, relatively recently, I asked how we would communicate, in English or in Russian. All the hotel employees told me: “Of course, in Russian!”

Inga MANGUS

Director of the Tallinn Pushkin Institute, Chairman of the Estonian Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature

Russian speech abroad is in a somewhat different position than in its native country. In foreign territories, she is absolutely defenseless. If any advertising text on the foreign language is provided with a Russian translation with monstrous errors, then no one is responsible for this. And in this situation of impunity, the Russian language is subjected to mockery in foreign territories. Literally beaten, practically lynched. And the worst thing is that two sides take part in this execution. In other situations, sometimes opposing, and in this case, showing a sort of enviable solidarity. These are foreigners - out of ignorance, and Russians - often out of indifference.

As for Estonia, all this takes place against the backdrop of the most careful attitude towards their native language. The Estonian language, which is spoken by a tiny people, fights so hard for its purity and eradicates borrowings so much that other people's words do not stick. The case with "computer" was cited. There is no "computer" in Estonian. Even such words do not stick, like "business", "businessman". And the whole country is sincerely concerned about the health of the language. She worries about the future of her national expression tool. The Estonian President announces word-creation competitions. For example, in the last competition, the word that will replace the current “infrastructure” won. Moreover, six hundred people took part in the last competition. I figured in proportion to the population of Estonia and the population of Russia. About 100,000 Russian citizens would take part in the Russian word-creation competition announced by the President of Russia.

And sometimes it turns out that to save little tongue turns out to be easier than big tongue. The Russian language, it seems to me, is blurring faster due to huge amount users and plus their territorial disunity. AT small people, such as the Estonians, everyone has a sense of conscious responsibility for their language. If not me, then who? The Russian, it seems to me, thinks: "They will manage without me."

It is curious that the Russian diaspora abroad often acts as such small nationality, who is very often also proud of her tongue, and she worries about its purity. Small example. In the autumn, rhetoric courses were organized at the Tallinn Pushkin Institute, and a teacher was invited from St. Petersburg. What was his surprise when, explaining the motives for coming to the courses, the students said that they did not come for the ability to influence other people with their speech, but for a tool to improve and preserve the culture of their speech. They came to look for opportunities to resist the inevitable influence of the state language. “Stunned!” said a teacher from St. Petersburg. “I am a lecturer and teacher with thirty years of experience, but in Russia my listeners have never had such high motivation, devoid of pragmatic goals.” And as a result, the course of rhetoric, at the request of the listeners, gradually began to develop into a course on the culture of speech.

The Russian diaspora abroad lives, in my opinion, so to speak, in a situation of linguistic provinciality, far from the linguistic metropolis. And, characteristically, sometimes it only benefits the language. But another thing is that this imposes a great responsibility on native speakers and on professionals - native speakers of the language norm.

Lyudmila VERBITSKY

We have two Russian language councils: under the government and under the president. A very important project that is being developed today was considered at the government council. How can we find a university that, using new technologies, would enable many people living abroad in our country to improve their skills and learn the language?

Such a university is now the Pushkin Institute of the Russian Language.

Margarita RUSETSKAYA

And about. rector State Institute Russian language named after A. S. Pushkin

We discuss the relationship between two such phenomena as culture and language. Probably, we will never put an end to this issue. It cannot and cannot be posed, because as long as culture changes, as long as linguistic and non-linguistic changes occur, the object itself will change and the objects of two objects will change. And therefore, people who are related to this field of knowledge, to practice in this direction, will never be left without work.

But we remember that these are not only questions of the culture of speech, not only questions of mastering the norms of using oral, written language. This is also academic discipline, always difficult teaching - questions of didactics, questions of methodology. And therefore it is impossible not to take into account the changes that are taking place in education. Here, Lyudmila Alekseevna quite rightly said that the council under the government of the Russian Federation set the task of developing a platform, an electronic system for learning the Russian language in accordance with new, modern principles of education.

And such principles today, of course, are the principles open education built on an electronic basis. This education maximally includes requests to study at any time, where it is convenient and to the extent that the user needs.

The Russian Language Institute gathered a large team around the problem. These are 74 highly professional specialists representing both the practice and the theory of learning Russian as a foreign language. All Russian leading universities are included in this team, and now the development of a distance course for studying Russian as a foreign language is being completed. From November 20, level A1 will be available in electronic format.

We very much hope that this deep linguistic system will be successful. I want to invite you to cooperate, because we understand that this product is made primarily for you, to help you, to help everyone involved in organizing and promoting the Russian language abroad. This course is definitely up for grabs. We really hope that by registering and becoming users, individual or collective, you will be able to send your expert feedback, which will form the basis for further improvements to the system.

Until the middle of next year, this course will be brought up to the C1-C2 level, and I am very glad that the level of university philology is provided by the staff of St. Petersburg State University. This means that interactive multimedia resources, recorded and prepared by the best professors of St. Petersburg University, will be available to the whole world free of charge, openly, anywhere in the world.

The portal has a section of professional support for teachers. On September 1, the first distance course "Practice of Russian Speech" began to work. And surprisingly: without any special, purposeful, wide advertising, two and a half thousand students from all over the world signed up for this course. These are people who are interested in the issues of Russian speech, the teaching of Russian speech, the norms of Russian speech.

More and more of these courses will appear in the near future. Moreover, every university that has experience in implementing similar programs can become a co-author of our platform.

Lyudmila VERBITSKY

Sergey Malevinsky spoke, starting our discussion, how bad it is with dictionaries, how bad it is with modern textbooks. This is all true, but I would like to say that at St. Faculty of Philology a lot has been done. And not only in philology. Representatives of almost all faculties, including mathematicians, sociologists, and psychologists, took part in the preparation of any textbook, as well as a comprehensive standard dictionary.

In general, we teach students 160 languages at two faculties of St. Petersburg University. A few years ago, I met the king of the Zulu. When I said that we teach Zulu, he was simply shocked, because he had never heard that Zulu was taught anywhere. We are given the opportunity to develop excellent methods of teaching the Russian language. And I tell my foreign colleagues who complain that they do not know the language: come to St. Petersburg for two weeks. We have beautiful pulpit, wonderful teachers, who in two weeks can, at a minimum, of course, level, put the knowledge of the language so that you can answer all questions on the street.

This work has been led by Sergei Igorevich Bogdanov for many years. He is Vice-Rector for Oriental Studies, African Studies, Art and Philology of St. Petersburg State University. And also a member of the Council for the Culture of Speech under the Governor of St. Petersburg.

Sergey BOGDANOV

Vice-Rector of St Petersburg University, Deputy Chairman of the Board of the Russkiy Mir Foundation

The topic stated in our panel discussion is related to a very important and very complex issue. It's about defining national idea. How much has been said about this, but there is no result, at least preliminary, yet.

With regard to Russia, variants of the national idea may have an economic, political or confessional basis. In what direction can one move in terms of defining the national Russian idea? It seems to me that at present this idea is imperial in a good way. That is, ensuring the harmonious collective coexistence of a huge number of ethnic groups that inhabit the territory of the Russian Federation. It corresponds historical role Russia. It was a crossroads connecting the space between the civilizations of East and West. But ensuring this harmonious collective existence of different cultures, different peoples is a Russian historical mission, which is provided by the Russian language and Russian culture.

At the same time, it should be borne in mind that, probably, the most huge contribution Russian culture, Russia into European and world civilization - these are classical Russian-language texts, primarily texts of classical Russian literature. The spread of Russian language should ensure the widest possible implementation of Russian culture as an integral and relevant part of world culture.

What do we have now in practice? In practice, we have a situation that contradicts this thesis more and more.

The fact is that humanity, and Russia in particular, has recently received an incredible instrument of collective existence in its hands. These are the Internet and social networks. It seems to me that now we are not ready for global changes. mass communications at the turn of the century. Every member of society has the right to vote, to publicity. These voices sounded, and the consequences of this spontaneous, unprepared, but accessible to all polyphony turned out to be not only uncontrollable, but also largely unexpected. It can be stated that the intellectual, organizational, communicative level collective existence began to fall. And this is a reality that we must acknowledge. Before the right to public speech had people exceptionally prepared: a priest, a teacher, a writer who does this professionally. Now the situation is different: everyone has the right to speak in public, and due to the general unpreparedness and lack of editing in social networks the level of collective existence decreases. In such a state, native speakers can hardly ensure the triumph of the thesis that I spoke about at the beginning.

What to do, how to change this situation? Imagine that there can be only one change: to introduce a high-quality Russian-language text into wide public use, edited, by the way, in the interests of embodying the Russian national idea.

By the way, there is also a positive moment. The fact is that now on the Internet the Russian language is in second place in terms of prevalence. It is significantly behind English, but nevertheless in second place. Approximately six percent. This is more than any other, except English. Accordingly, there is a platform where you can carry high-quality edited Russian-language texts, both classic and new, relevant.

But it would be naive to assume that all Russian speakers who live in social networks will turn to these texts, see the world through them and learn to speak. That is unlikely. But here we have a chance. The phenomenon of the emergence of a new text, or, to put it very briefly, it is a kind of hypertext with multimedia components, corresponding to this moment medical, I would even say, the condition of our youth, it gives a chance. It is, in fact, a kind of technological technique. And if we now create classical Russian-language texts of our classical literature in a new format - and we already have some experience in this regard - then we will use the chance.

Elena KAZAKOVA

Director of the Institute pre-university education St. Petersburg State University

Language is not only a system of signs, but also a historically established form of the culture of the people. According to W. Humboldt, "language is not a dead clockwork, but a living creation, emanating from itself." The Russian language has evolved over many centuries. His vocabulary and grammatical structure were not formed immediately. The dictionary gradually included new lexical units, the emergence of which was dictated by the new needs of social development. Grammar gradually adapted to a more accurate and subtle transmission of thought following the development of national social and scientific thinking. The needs of cultural development became the engine of the development of the language, and the language reflected and preserved the history of the cultural life of the nation, including those stages that have already passed into the past. Thanks to this, the language is for the people a unique means of preserving national identity, the largest historical and cultural value.

Thus, the culture of speech is an important part of the national culture as a whole.

Develop and maintain culture impossible without the help of the Russian language. Loss of language threatens with loss of culture. The Russian language is the foundation of Russian identity in conditions multinational state. Ideal to strive for: harmony between national languages and the Russian language. The Russian language helps to preserve the unity of the country.

So we need to create powerful resource base for school education. In order for Russian language lessons to be among the most interesting, good educational and teaching aids that inspire teachers and captivate students.

Next is promotion new educational technologies contributing to the implementation of federal state educational standards. Since the one who is active develops, new educational technologies should help in creating conditions for the development of various activities of students. Learn activities in the process of the activity itself. Involve children in reading communities, literature clubs, literature games. Return to school the book of Lev Uspensky "Word about words". To educate not with an authoritarian didactic monologue, but in a dialogue, in the process of discussion in the lessons of the Russian language and complex literature moral problems relating to such values as friendship, love. Teach children to have a constructive dialogue. Just like that, with early childhood, we will instill the culture of Russian speech, and respect for Russian culture.

We have a program at the university called Russian as a state language. It is passed by teachers, doctors, including officials. But businessmen have gone too. A young businessman told me: "I want to be understood, so I came to you." The guy is only 24 years old. He asked: “Is there a good Russian language textbook? Why is it so boring to learn Russian? So colleagues suggest: let's create such an interesting textbook on the Russian language together. This is the only way to revive the interest of young people in the "great and mighty."

Portal for the student. Self-training

RELATED ARTICLES