If the author does not strive to achieve a certain stylistic goal, the violation of lexical compatibility becomes a speech error. This reflects a characteristic feature of the dialectical nature of the language: in one case, the phenomenon, which is a deviation from the linguistic norm, turns out to be an effective means of creating speech expression, in the other, it is evidence of the author’s negligence, inattentive attitude to the word. Involuntary violation of lexical compatibility is a very common speech error.

“Although our favorite skaters lost in this competition, the audience gives them a standing cheer,” says the sportscaster (but: win, lose). “Maybe insomnia has come to you, and you are lying without closing your blue eyes,” the poet writes (but: you can close your eyes, not your eyes). In the essay, the journalist remarks: “ The hollow made a cozy impression"(You can make a pleasant impression, but not a cozy one). Some words are often used in speech in the wrong combinations (meeting convened, conversation read, increase attention, give importance, increase horizons, etc.).

Violation of lexical compatibility can be caused by contamination of outwardly similar phrases. For example, they say: meet modern needs, mixing combinations to meet requirements and meet needs; He was charged with material damage in favor of the victims (material damage can be compensated; money can be recovered); The artistic level of the expositions of the folk museums has been improved (the level can increase, increase; the quality can be improved). More examples of word combinations contamination: take measures (take measures - take steps); deserved fame (acquired fame - deserved respect); unflagging help (constant help - unflagging attention); does not matter (does not matter - does not matter). The confusion of phrases was the reason for the joke:

Tastes could not be discussed:

Some respect apricots in brine,

Others like jam with mustard.

But all this is irrelevant

And besides, it doesn't matter.

(E. Svistunov)

When using words that have extremely limited possibilities of lexical connections, a violation of lexical compatibility often becomes the cause of the comic sound of speech. For example: Serious problems hit young entrepreneurs by surprise; Leaders paid serious attention to the shortcomings achieved; They worked like the most notorious specialists; People came to us dejected by the experience. Comic in such cases arises because words that have limited lexical compatibility suggest variants of phrases with often directly opposite meanings (cf .: successes achieved, notorious scammers, dejected by grief).

Consider examples of stylistic editing of sentences in which lexical compatibility is violated:

2. The museum exhibits relics presented by delegations. - Gifts presented by delegations are exhibited in the museum.

3. The main strength of Siberia is in its abundant mineral resource base. - The strength of Siberia lies in its richest mineral resource base.

As you can see, stylistic editing basically comes down to replacing words, the use of which led to a violation of lexical compatibility.

Golub I.B. Stylistics of the Russian language - M., 1997

Topic 3.4. Lexical errors and their correction

Lexical word compatibility- this is the ability of a word to combine with other words of the context without violating the semantic and grammatical patterns of word combinations. Lexical compatibility is determined by the language of the possibility of combining words within a phrase or connecting a subject with a predicate. Phraseological units of a language can be considered an extreme case of the dependence of words on such a possibility.

Deliberate violation of the semantic or grammatical patterns of word combinations underlies some stylistic figures and tropes.

Unintentional, accidental violation of lexical compatibility leads to a speech error. A common case of violation of lexical compatibility is a construction in which parts of synonymous phrases are erroneously combined: play a role (play a role and make a difference), take action (take action and take action).

Lexical redundancy- this is the common name for two stylistic phenomena: pleonasm and tautology, associated with the presence in a sentence of two words instead of one.

Lexical redundancy is used as a stylistic device of amplification: see with your own eyes, hear with your ears.

Pleonasm- this is lexical redundancy arising from the duplication of the lexical meaning of one word by another, whole or any part of it: interior(the interior already matters internal), idle.

There are two types of pleonasms. Pleonasm is obligatory, or structurally conditioned, which is not a stylistic error and is widely represented in the language: come down the mountain(duplication of preposition and prefix), never read.

Pleonasm- a stylistic error in which superfluous, redundant words are combined into a phrase or sentence. PLEONASM(Greek - excess).

1. A means of lexical expressiveness based on the use in a sentence or text of words that are close in meaning, creating semantic redundancy.

Pleonasm is found in folklore: once upon a time, sadness-longing, path-path, sea-okiya. Also, this tool is widely used in fiction, usually with the aim of concretizing the details of the narrative or enhancing emotions, assessments: Indeed, extremely strange! - said the official, - the place perfectly smooth like a freshly baked pancake. Yes, unbelievably smooth! (N. Gogol, "The Nose"); The old fear gripped him again. everything from head to toe (F. Dostoevsky, "Crime and Punishment"); - I didn't see you the whole week I didn't hear you so long. I passionately want, I thirsty your voice. Speak up.(A. Chekhov, "Ionych").

2. A kind of lexical error associated with a violation of the norms of lexical compatibility, when words that are unnecessary from a semantic point of view are used in a phrase or sentence. For example, in a sentence They ensured the rhythmic and uninterrupted operation of the enterprise. definitions express similar meanings; here one of them is sufficient. Author's inscription on the cover of the book I dedicate to my dad - Sergey Mikhailovich pleonastic; enough Dedicated to my dad...

Typical examples of non-normative pleonasm are phrases in which the meaning of one word repeats the meaning of another: more important (more redundant because more important means "more important") first premiere(enough premiere- "the first performance of a play, film or performance of a musical work"), atmospheric air(enough air- "a mixture of gases that forms the Earth's atmosphere"), eventually(right in the end or enough eventually), go back(verb return indicates movement backwards, in the opposite direction), import from abroad(enough import- "to import from abroad").

Some pleonastic phrases have become entrenched in the language and are not considered erroneous, for example: go down, go up, time period, exhibit(Latin exponatus means "exposed"), people's democracy (democracy translated from the Greek language "power of the people").

In fiction and journalism, non-normative lexical redundancy can act as a means of speech characterization of characters: - Here you are laughing and bare your teeth, - said Vasya, - but I really, Marya Vasilievna, warmly welcome you love and I love (M. Zoshchenko, "Love").

Tautology- this is lexical redundancy, in which within the phrase or combination of the subject and the predicate in the sentence, single-root words are repeated: soon the fairy tale is told, but not soon the deed is done.

The tautology is humorously demonstrated in the Baby Monitor program in the following poem:

I prefer autumn the most

When everything bears fruit,

And they mow hay in a hayfield,

And butter is on the table.

Often tautological repetitions are not a stylistic mistake, but the only possible characteristic of an object (salt salt, life to live). Tautological combinations of words are found in folk poetic works, in proverbs and sayings: friendship is friendship, and service is service.

Unintentional tautology testifies to the inability to use the synonymous richness of the language, that is, it is a stylistic mistake.

Lexical repetitions Stylistically inappropriate repetition of the same words: I study at a technical school. After graduating from college, I will work in the gas field.

Lexical insufficiency- a stylistic error, consisting in the omission of the necessary component of the phrase: This question worries me to the depths (soul). Lexical deficiency is sometimes associated with a linguistic phenomenon called constriction: he drinks (alcoholic drinks), his brother serves (in the army). But with lexical insufficiency, such semantic contraction does not occur, and the fulfillment of the missing component of the phrase remains necessary.

Tautology, pleonasm, inappropriate repetitions of words make the text dissonant and make it difficult to perceive. The reasons for such errors are common: poverty of speech, inability to use synonyms, ignorance of the lexical meaning of words, as well as underdevelopment of “speech hearing”: the speaker does not notice that he inappropriately uses words that are close in meaning or have the same root.

The use of phraseological units in speech obeys historically established rules fixed by tradition. From the point of view of stylistic phraseological units of the language are heterogeneous. Some of them have a colloquial or colloquial emotional and expressive coloring and therefore are not used in purely bookish styles (official business and scientific). Other shades of bookishness, refer to high vocabulary, are often part of poeticisms.

As a language game, there is a deliberate destruction of phraseological turnover, the replacement of one of the components in order to give a different, often ironic meaning: The one who shoots first laughs best.

Unintentional destruction of phraseological turnover is a stylistic mistake.

TAUTOLOGY(Greek - the same and - the word) - a kind of pleonasm; the use of single-root words in a sentence or text.

Tautology is found in proverbs and sayings: friendship friendship , a service by service; life to live– not a field to go; free will ; in phraseological turns: walk shaking, crowded, eat by eater .

Expressively colored tautological combinations are characteristic of folklore: Soon fairy tale affects, but not soon the deed is done; sit down sit, bitter grief .

The intentional use of single-root words serves as a means of lexical expressiveness in fiction and journalism: “ Gorky with fur mine laugh "(N. Gogol); " How mind is smart, how business is efficient, // How terrible fear, how darkness is dark!// How life is alive! How death is fatal! // How youth young youth! "(Z. Ezrohi)," Law there is law " (from the newspaper).

The tautology is lexical error if the use of cognate words is not justified by stylistic purposes and is random: put together, dance a dance, treat sports in a sporty way, confirm the statement. Usually, an unintentional tautology is said like this: butter oil.

Please watch the video and try to answer the question: what unites these fragments?

Yes, indeed, we are again faced with a fairly common speech error - a violation of the lexical compatibility of words.

take action. What is wrong with this phrase? Why can't you say that? After all, we understood the essence of the information encrypted in it. It turns out that this is not enough to be considered a speech phenomenon that does not go beyond the boundaries of the language norm. We should not cross a pedestrian crossing during a red traffic light just because there is not a single car in sight. The language also has its own clearly defined norms, which are not inferior in their severity to the rules of the road.

Word undertake matches with words steps, attempts. And the word measures requires a verb next to it to accept.

Take steps, take action - only in such cases the combination of two words does not contradict the norms of the Russian language. Otherwise, we are dealing with a speech error.

Lexical compatibility is the ability of a word to be used together with another word in a speech segment. Let's take a closer look at this linguistic phenomenon together, and at the end, as usual, you will have an attentiveness test.

At first glance, it may seem that the consolidation of one or another norm of lexical compatibility occurs spontaneously and has no logical explanation. This is especially true for synonymous words, as in our example. In fact, this single example confirms a very interesting and important idea that language is living matter.

The word lives for itself in an abstract linguistic field, and then we insert it into the context, and amazing metamorphoses occur with it: it comes to life and begins to show its character and individual behavioral traits, like any living creature.

We have grouped videos with errors on similar topics for a reason. The complex relationships between people and animals described in news texts are quite consonant with the problems of lexical compatibility of some words in the language stream.

Well, some words don’t want to stand side by side in a phrase or sentence, and we can’t do anything with them - the language took into account their wishes and fixed it as the norm.

Do you want an explanation? It is one thing: this is the linguistic tradition.

Amazing, right? So we are all forced to try to take into account these "whims" so as not to be considered ignoramuses.

Here are examples of the most common errors:

to matter, to pay attention to, to pay attention to
doesn't matter doesn't matter
acquire skills acquire skills
broaden your horizons broaden your horizons
raise a toast make a toast, raise a glass for ...
give support give support
win a victory win a victory
listen carefully listen carefully
be in the spotlight be in the spotlight
rapidly creeping up/down rapidly rising/falling
cheap prices low prices
pay the fine pay the fine
improving the image increasing prestige, forming a positive image
increase output increase output
improve the level of well-being increase the level of well-being
economic growth growth of economic indicators
show care show care
improved level of service improved quality of service
be defeated be defeated
gain respect earn respect
deep spring late spring
to impress to impress

How do we learn about the ability of a word to combine? In science it's called valence(from lat. valentia - strength, ability). The word "brown", for example, can only be combined with the noun "eyes", and "bosom" can only be a friend.

For example, we say: a herd of cows, a herd of horses, a flock of sheep, a pack of wolves, a caravan of camels. These are low value words. Why can you say "deep autumn", but "deep spring" Is this already a mistake? The reasons are rooted in the distant past.

All information about valency, in addition to the lexical meaning, is inherent in each word from the very beginning. In fact, every word in the language has its own programmed individual code of lexical compatibility. Some words have a high ability to combine, while others have a minimal one.

Native speakers read this information intuitively. Age and the level of speech culture are moving us further and further away from lexical errors. This has been developed over the years, which is why media workers should closely monitor their speech, since they are responsible for the formation and consolidation of speech norms among their listeners and viewers.

In school essays, you can sometimes find such “pearls”:

• Katerina, having married Tikhon, became an unhappy girl.
• The Battle of Borodino revealed the best that was in Prince Andrei.
• Tears silently flowed from Sonya's eyes.
• Already trampled in one place: he could not take off.
• Tolstoy's favorite heroes are far from perfect, they fall into their own crises...

By the way, violation of lexical compatibility is a scourge not only for children. This linguistic subtlety is literally a curse for those who study foreign languages. Can you imagine how much time should pass for a foreigner to learn that the fare can be paid, but the fine cannot? The fine can be paid.

Here we are faced with paronyms. It makes sense to talk about them in detail in the next article.

If you want to visually see how foreign students literally drown in lexical errors when writing essays and presentations in Russian, we advise you to read the works of the already truly legendary Vietnamese student Lee Won Yang.

Violation of lexical compatibility is often explained by the association (contamination) similar phrases. Here are the most common couples:

• meet requirements - meet needs
• conversation held - lecture read
• to compensate for the damage - to recover money, a fine
• take action take steps
• raise the level - improve the quality
• gain fame - earn respect
• play a role - matter

Are there cases when semantic or lexical compatibility is justified? Of course. Any exception to the rule in the hands of a true master of the word turns into a real pearl. Rate it yourself.

Polykhaev's creative thought was not limited, of course, exclusively to the administrative side of the matter. As a man of broad views, he could not get around the issues of current politics. And he ordered a wonderful universal stamp, on the text of which he worked for several days. It was wonderful rubber thought, which Polykhaev could adapt to any occasion of life. In addition to the fact that it made it possible to immediately respond to events, it also freed from the need to think painfully every time. The stamp was built so conveniently that it was enough just to fill the gap left in it to get a topical resolution.

And in the novel "12 Chairs" Ilya Ilf and Evgeny Petrov use an expression that is marvelous in its figurativeness "girl's hutch":

Circulation operations for that day were completed. Spectators settled on the coastal slopes and, beyond all expectations, noisily expressed their approval of the pharmacy-Negro ensemble. Galkin, Palkin, Malkin, Chalkin and Zalkind looked proudly, as if to say: “You see! And you argued that the broad masses will not get it. Art, it always comes!” Then, on an impromptu stage, the Columbusians played a light vaudeville with singing and dancing, the content of which boiled down to how Vavila won fifty thousand rubles and what came of it. The artists, having thrown off the fetters of Nixestrian constructivism, played cheerfully, danced energetically and sang with sweet voices. The coast was quite satisfied. The second number was a balalaika virtuoso. The beach was covered with smiles.
“Mistress, lady,” the virtuoso worked out, “madam-lady.”
The balalaika is in motion. She flew behind the artist, and from behind was heard: “If the master is with a chain, then the gentleman is without a watch!” She took off into the air and in her short flight produced many of the most difficult variations.
It was the turn of Georgette of Tiraspol. She brought with her herd of girls in sundresses. The concert ended with Russian dances.

The lexical compatibility of words plays a particularly important role in artistic speech. Both in prose and poetry. Studying the drafts of the manuscripts, one can see this clearly. In 1961, Mosnauchfilm filmed an amazing documentary called Pushkin's Manuscripts. It clearly demonstrates how the poet, when creating the poem "The Bronze Horseman", selected every word.

This black-and-white film without any complex animation and special effects allows you to literally follow the hand of Alexander Sergeevich. It is with such a rigorous analysis that it becomes obvious how important the lexical compatibility of words is in the context of artistic creativity.

Great masters of the artistic word are able to expand the usual boundaries of compatibility, but this work is truly jewelry, otherwise there is a big risk of slipping into a banal speech error. You have to be a real professional for such experiments to generate vivid metaphors, unexpected images and express the necessary expression.

At the end of the conversation, according to tradition, we will check ourselves with the help of a test for attentiveness and speech literacy. Watch the video and try to find the errors:

If the number of correct answers is rapidly creeping up, then we will continue to increase our horizons and speak in detail about speech errors.

Introduction

There are many such words in the Russian language that seem to be “attracted” to each other. For example, they say: “herd of cows”, “herd of horses”, “flock of sheep”. Therefore, an unsuccessful combination of words makes laugh: "A flock of ducks and hares appeared in the distance." In this case, the words are connected incorrectly, i.e. lexical compatibility is broken.

Lexical compatibility is the ability of words to connect with each other. Indeed, in speech, words are used not one at a time, not in isolation, but in phrases. At the same time, some words are freely combined with others if they fit them in meaning, while others have limited lexical compatibility. So, very similar definitions - long, long, long, long - are attracted to nouns in different ways: you can say a long (long) period, but not a long (long) period.

The limitations of lexical compatibility for certain words are often explained by their use in special meanings. For example, the word round in its main meaning - “one that resembles the shape of a circle, ring, ball” - freely connects with the words of the corresponding subject-thematic group: round table, round box; round window. But, speaking in the meaning of “whole, whole, without interruption” (about time), the word round is combined only with nouns year, day, and in the meaning of “full, perfect” - with such as an excellent student, an ignoramus.

In other cases, the reason for limiting lexical compatibility is the assignment of a word to set expressions. For example, the velvet season is "the autumn months (September, October) in the south." This expression has a stable character and it is impossible to replace the word “season” with any other, even the closest in meaning, for example, “velvet autumn”.

Violation of lexical compatibility is often explained by the association of similar phrases. For example, they write: "meet modern requirements", mixing combinations of "meet the requirements" and "meet the needs"; “the conversation was read” (“a lecture was given” and “a conversation was held”); "improve the level" ("improve the quality" and "raise the level").

lexical compatibility error

1. Violation of lexical compatibility

Semantic errors

Violation of lexical compatibility is caused by semantic errors of two types - logical and linguistic.

Logical errors are associated with not distinguishing between concepts that are close in any respect. Often people do not distinguish between areas of activity, cause and effect, part and whole, related phenomena.

Thus, in the sentence “Residents of a seaside town witnessed a large theatrical performance”, an error is found in the phrase “witnesses of the performance”. The word "witness" means "eyewitness" - this is the name of a person who finds himself at the scene of an incident. This word is associated with the sphere of judicial and legal activity. In the field of theatrical and concert activity, which is referred to in the proposal, the word "spectator" is used. This error is associated with a lack of distinction between areas of activity.

The erroneous combination “prices have risen in price” is associated with a lack of distinction between the related concepts of “prices” and “goods”: goods rise in price, and prices rise. Examples of similar errors in the sentences can be given: “The timely start-up of the plant causes concern”; “52 trees have been planted in the park”; "As a result of the plague, people left the city." All these errors are not explained by the distinction between related phenomena: the fear is not that the combine will be started up, but that it will not be started up at the scheduled time; lay not trees, but a park; people leave the city not as a result, but because of the plague. Possible corrections in these cases: “There is concern that the plant will not be launched at the scheduled time”; “52 trees planted in the park”; "As a result of the plague, the city was deserted."

Linguistic errors are associated with not distinguishing denoting words that are in any semantic relationship. These are mostly synonyms and paronyms.

Not distinguishing between synonyms, words that are close or coinciding in meaning, leads to errors in use. For example, the words "role" and "function" in the sense of "work, circle of activity" are synonymous, but genetically they are associated with different designations: the role - with the sphere of theater and cinema, and the function - with logic. Hence the established lexical compatibility: the role is played (played), and the function is performed (performed). The words “brave” and “brave” are synonyms, but “brave” is associated with the external manifestation of the called quality, and “brave” is associated with both external and internal, so a thought, decision, idea can only be bold, but not brave.

Not distinguishing between paronyms, i.e. words that partially coincide in sound also lead to errors in use; most paronyms are single-root words that differ in suffixes or prefixes and, as a result, shades of meaning, as well as stylistic coloring. For example, a misdemeanor (offense) is an act (action committed by someone); guilty (who committed a crime) - guilty (guilty of something, violating the rules of morality, politeness, etc.); to pay (for something) - to pay (for something).

Paronyms can be associated with different variants of a common root. For example, short (small in size, the opposite of long) - short (stated briefly, in a few words). Therefore, they say a short text, but a brief retelling of the text.

Borrowed words may also appear in paronymic relations: parity (equality) - priority (primacy, advantage), dequalification (loss of qualification) - disqualification (deprivation of qualification), etc. To distinguish between paronyms of foreign origin, it is necessary to refer to dictionaries of foreign words.

The following are frequency pairs of paronyms:

Fulfill - fulfill have the general meaning "to carry out, put into practice", for example, to fulfill (fulfill) an order, but the second verb has a book character;

Long - long coincide in the meaning of “ongoing, long”, for example, a long (long) conversation, a long (long) pause, but “long” indicates the length in time, and “long” emphasizes the procedural meaning of the noun; “long” is usually combined with the names of periods of time (long night, long winter), and “long” with the names of actions and states calculated for a long time (long flight, long treatment);

Agreement - agreement differ in that "agreement" means a written or oral agreement, a condition of mutual obligations (friendship and cooperation agreement), and "agreement" - an agreement reached through negotiations (an agreement to include an issue on the agenda);

Truth (truth, actual state of affairs) - truth (correspondence to truth). For example, the desire for truth is the truth of the assumptions put forward;

Ordinary - ordinary differ in that the first word emphasizes unremarkable, unremarkable, and the second - typical. For example, an ordinary person is an ordinary day.

To identify the specifics of words related by paronymic relations, it is necessary to correctly represent the morphological composition of the word and the method of its formation. For example, in pairs to learn - to master, to complicate - to complicate, to make heavier - to make heavier words with the prefix o- have the meaning of a higher degree of manifestation of the action. In pairs hygienic - hygienic, logical - logical, practical - practical, economic - economical, differing in suffixes -ichesk- / -n-, the second adjective denotes a feature that can manifest itself to a greater or lesser extent (qualitative adjective). This implies compatibility: hygienic norm - hygienic fabric, logical laws - a logical conclusion, practical application - practical clothing, economic policy - an economical device.

Stylistic mistakes

Stylistic errors are a violation of the requirements of the unity of the functional style, the unjustified use of emotionally colored, stylistically marked means. Stylistic errors are associated with ignoring the restrictions that its stylistic coloring imposes on the use of a word.

The most common stylistic mistakes include:

1. The use of clericalism - words and phrases characteristic of the official business style. For example, "As the revenue side of my budget increased, I decided to buy a new car for permanent use" - "I began to receive a lot of money, so I decided to buy a new car."

2. The use of words (expressions) of inappropriate stylistic coloring. So, in a literary context, the use of jargon, vernacular, abusive vocabulary is inappropriate; in a business text, colloquial and expressively colored words should be avoided. For example, "The trustee of charitable institutions fawns over the auditor" - "The trustee of charitable institutions fawns over the auditor."

3. Mixture of styles - unjustified use in one text of words, syntactic constructions characteristic of different styles of the Russian language. For example, a mixture of scientific and colloquial styles.

4. Mixing vocabulary from different historical eras. For example, “On the heroes of chain mail, trousers, mittens” - “On the heroes of chain mail, armor, mittens.”

5. Incorrect sentence construction. For example, "Despite his youth, he is a good person." There are several ways to correct these errors. First, change the word order in the sentence: "There are many works that tell about the author's childhood in world literature" - "In world literature there are many works that tell about the author's childhood."

6. Secondly, redo the sentence: “From other sporting events, let's talk about the barbell” - “From other sporting events, barbell competitions should be highlighted.”

"Brevity is the sister of talent," A.P. Chekhov argued. This must be remembered by everyone who wants to improve their style. Read the sentence: Students of the schools where they are studying came to the assembly dedicated to the beginning of the new academic year in order to sit down at their desks again, to continue their education within the walls of their native educational institution". This example, of course, deliberately overloaded with single-root words, convincingly shows the absurdity verbosity, or speech redundancy. We often fall into this sin if we do not watch our speech. The carelessness or helplessness of the writer usually leads to verbosity, and brevity and clarity of wording is achieved as a result of hard work with the word. An economical, accurate expression of thought is the most important requirement of style, which, unfortunately, we do not fulfill so often. Let's not go far for examples, let's turn to the style of student essays. Among the stylistic shortcomings in them, one constantly has to point out verbosity: " The forces of the "dark kingdom" united together against the nature that challenged them"; "Inhabitants the city of Kalinov live monotonous, dismal life ". This use of cognate words gives rise to a tautology (from the Greek. tauto - the same thing, logos - a word). A classic example of a tautology is "butter oil." But other examples of tautologies that are not invented, but taken from life itself: " you can ask a question?"; "like this example"; "this phenomenon is..."; "regularity follows naturally"; "multiply many times"; "resume again". In one of the writings we read: " Katerina anticipates her death in advance ... She cannot return back to the Kabanovs' house and prefers the death of everyday life to a joyless and dreary life in which all the noble impulses of her exalted soul are uselessly lost". We have identified phrases in which unnecessary qualifying words. This form of verbosity is called pleonasm (from the Greek pleonasmos - excess). Pleonasms arise when using unnecessary definitions ( the main essence, valuable treasures, dark darkness, everyday routine, feel in advance), extra circumstances ( come back, fell down), as well as as a result of unjustified stringing of synonyms ( finish, complete, complete a task). Why explain things that are already clear: " He spoke gesturing with his hands(what else?)"; " The model, which the guys so diligently glued, Vadim trampled with his feet(but can you stomp your hands?) ". Eliminate the highlighted words, and the meaning will not suffer at all. M. Gorky, reading the works of novice writers, drew attention to verbosity. For example, he did not like the passage: " They worked silently, without words. In the course of two hours of digging trenches, the soldiers working nearby did not exchange a single word.". In the margins, M. Gorky remarked: " What is the point of writing "silently, without words" when it is clear that if a person is silent, he does not speak". In another case against the words " the Red Army soldier raved about his own family"M. Gorky pointed out:" You should not double "your, dear". Similar corrections in the manuscripts of young authors were made by A.P. Chekhov. So, he emphasized the "embarrassing expression" passion for graphomania and explained: Not good, because the word graphomania already contains the concept - passion". Pleonastic can be considered such, for example, combinations: in the month of May, for example, plans for the future, unused reserves, standing idle, forward movement. Speech redundancy generates and connection of a foreign word with Russian, duplicating its meaning (memorabilia, unusual phenomenon, driving leitmotif, biography of life, own autobiography, in the end, miserable little things, leading leader, retaliatory counterattack, folklore, demobilize from the army). In such cases, one speaks of a hidden tautology, since the Russian word repeats the meaning of the borrowed one. For example, souvenir- a French word meaning "a keepsake", "a thing associated with memories", and it is also added memorable; biography- Greek word meaning "life story" autobiography- "a biography of a person, compiled by himself", therefore clarifying words are inappropriate for them.