-- [ Page 1 ] --

M.I. Fomina

Modern

Lexicology

Fourth edition, revised

admitted

Ministry

education

Russian Federation

as a textbook

for university students

educational institutions

"High School" 2003

BBK 81.2 Rus

Reviewer: Department of Modern Russian Language

Kuban State University (Head of the Department, Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor T.Kh. Kade) Fomina M.I.

F76 Modern Russian language. Lexicology: Textbook / M.I. Fomin. - 4th ed., Rev. - M.: Higher. school, 2003.- 415 p.

ISBN 5-06-003794-0 The textbook consists of two parts. The 1st contains the basic theoretical information about the lexico-semantic system of the Russian language, and the 2nd considers the phraseological system of the Russian language. The textbook provides norms for the use of lexical and phraseological units.

The fourth edition (3rd - 1990) includes the necessary corrections and clarifications.

UDC 808. LBC 81.2 Rus ISBN 5-06-003794-0 © FSUE Vysshaya Shkola Publishing House, The original layout of this publication is the property of the Vysshaya Shkola Publishing House, and its reproduction (reproduction) in any way without the consent of the publishing house is prohibited.

FOREWORD The textbook reflects one of the main sections of the course "Modern Russian" - "Lexicology and lexicography". This material is the basis for the training of specialist philologists, whose entire activity in the future will be connected with the word.

The textbook consists of two sections: "Vocabulary" and "Phraseology".

The Lexicon consists of three parts. In the first one, a semasiological characteristic of the modern lexical system is given: the lexical meaning and its types are defined, ways of developing different meanings are presented, systemic connections are traced within one word and between words. In the second, the main stages of the historical formation of the lexico-semantic system of the Russian language are considered:

the place of the Russian language among other Slavic languages ​​is determined, the concept of native Russian vocabulary is revealed, the place and role of borrowings are described, an idea is given of the presence of Russian words in other languages ​​of the world. The third traces the systemic connections of words united by the specifics of their functioning in speech, i.e., the scope of use, stylistic affiliation and expressive-stylistic characteristics, activity or passivity of use.

"Phraseology" includes two parts. The first one gives a semasiological characteristic of the modern phraseological system: the concept of phraseological unit, phraseological meaning in comparison with lexical meaning is defined;

the connection of a phraseological unit with a word and a free phrase is shown;

the types of systemic connections of phraseological units are described, their structural, semantic-grammatical, genetic and stylistic characteristics are given.

Theoretical information about the lexico-phraseological system is supplemented by the functional and stylistic characteristics of the studied units and data on the norms of their use. The main ways of development of modern vocabulary and phraseology are considered.

In addition to theoretical sections, the textbook includes exercises that will help develop the skills of a creative approach to the language, develop linguistic flair and improve speech culture. A significant part of them is devoted to comparing different editions of the same text, which will allow students to penetrate deeper into the creative laboratory of writers, journalists, and translators.

There are exercises that involve a comparative analysis of modern newspaper and magazine texts, as a result of which students are asked to choose (or offer their own) a stylistically justified given option and convincingly motivate the choice. There are many theoretical exercises. Their implementation will acquaint students with the opinions of different researchers on the issues under study and will help to reasonably adhere to one or another point of view.

The 4th edition (3rd - 1990) includes the necessary corrections and additions.

The textbook includes information about the main linguistic dictionaries of the Russian language and gives their general characteristics. The book is accompanied by subject and name indexes.

INTRODUCTION § 1. The concept of lexicology and phraseology The word is the main unit of a special section of the science of language - lexicology (gr. lexicos - verbal, dictionary: lexis - word + logos - teaching). In lexicology, the word is studied not only by itself, but also in a certain connection with other words that form a system of lexical units. Phraseology closely adjoins lexicology (Greek phrasis - gen. item from phraseos - expression + logos), which considers lexically indivisible, non-free combinations of words in all the variety of their systemic connections. Thus, lexicology and phraseology are the doctrine of the vocabulary of the Russian language.

The main tasks of lexicology and phraseology: 1) semasiological characteristics of words and phrases (i.e., revealing the internal organization of meaning types and analyzing various kinds of systemic relationships);

2) definition of lexical and phraseological units, as well as their distinguishing features;

3) description of phraseological units in comparison with a word and a free phrase;

4) analysis of the patterns of relationships between words and phrases with other words, etc.

§ 2. Functions of lexicology and phraseology.

The role of related sciences In modern linguistics, the terms "lexicology"

and "phraseology" are ambiguous.

Firstly, they distinguish between general lexicology, which studies the vocabulary of different languages, and private lexicology , which deals with the problems of a particular language. The same can be said about phraseology. Secondly, the very definition of lexicology can be broad and narrow. In a broad sense, lexicology includes the doctrine of both words and stable (phraseological) combinations of words. (This was reflected in the works of V. V. Vinogradov, K. A. Levkovskaya, N. M. Shansky, D. N. Shmelev and others.) In a narrow sense, lexicology deals only with words. , and general lexicology (and phraseology) can study the lexical (and phraseological) system in its modern state.In this case, it is called descriptive, synchronous s y n - together + chronos - time).But it is necessary to study the vocabulary in historical terms, then it is called historical on and with about y (gr. dia - through, through + chronos).

The lexical and phraseological systems of the Russian language or their individual elements can be compared with similar facts in other languages ​​(related and unrelated). Comparative lexicology and comparative phraseology do this. To identify and characterize systemic connections at the lexical and phraseological levels, on the one hand, a crossed type of analysis can be used, i.e., the convergence of the synchronic plan with the diachronic one, on the other hand, data from various comparisons.

With a more complete and in-depth description of vocabulary and phraseology, information from other sections of linguistics is involved, for example, semasiology (gr. sema sia - designation + logos) - the science of the meaning of vocabulary units;

onomasiology (gr. opita - name + -K / ogos) - the science of the principles and patterns of naming phenomena and objects;

etymology (gr.

etymon - truth + logos) - the science of the origin of words and phrases;

lexicography (gr. lexikon - dictionary graph about - I write), phraseography (gr. phrase o s + grapho) - the science of compiling dictionaries, both lexico-phraseological and phraseological proper.

The role of dictionaries in the study of vocabulary and phraseology is especially significant.

§ 3. The concept of national and literary vocabulary and phraseology The concept of the national vocabulary is closely related to the general concept of the national Russian language as a means of communication for the Russian nation, that is, a historically established stable community of people united by the unity of territory, economy and language .

The national Russian language includes the entire set of linguistic means of the Russian people, including dialectal and socio-professional ones. Consequently, the national vocabulary and phraseology, being part of the national Russian language, covers almost all of its vocabulary layers: common units;

means of limited use (dialect, socio-professional and jargon-argotic);

words and phrases, according to style, stylistic properties, which are generally accepted, normalized and go beyond these norms (coarse colloquial, swearing, vulgar), etc.

Literary vocabulary and phraseology form the basis of the modern Russian literary language as the highest form of the national language. Literary vocabulary and phraseology differ from the nationwide clear standardization. The norms are legalized in writing (i.e., codified) and fixed by the corresponding rules and dictionaries of the modern literary language (see § 6).

The normalization of literary vocabulary and phraseology lies primarily in their greater or lesser regulation. Recall that the standardization of the literary language as a whole is a broader concept: in addition to proper lexical ones, it also includes orthoepic, orthographic, word-forming, inflectional, morphological and syntactic norms. For national vocabulary and phraseology, such norms are not the main distinguishing feature.

It should be noted that in the process of the historical development of Russian vocabulary (during the formation of the national language), in connection with the change and expansion of social functions, both its content and its boundaries changed in accordance with the general laws of the formation and development of the literary language as a whole. For example, if in relation to the period of the late XVIII - early XIX century. we can only talk about the activation of the process of forming the general norms of the literary language, and above all its vocabulary, then in relation to the Pushkin era we are talking about a clearer and deeper formation of general literary norms. “... It was in the artistic language of Pushkin that the Russian national language found that embodied norm, which was the goal of all the complex events that took place in it from the end of the 17th century,” wrote G. O. Vinokur in the historical essay “Russian Language”.

The concepts of "literary language", "vocabulary and phraseology of the literary language" and others have undergone changes over the decades, which reflected and confirmed the historical regularity of the evolution that took place in the common Russian language in general and in its processed, normalized form - the literary language in particular.

The presence of a norm, however, allows several ways of expressing it, i.e., variance (or variability). For example, the options are equally correct: apricot and apricot, spasm and spasm, and many others.

The variance of literary norms is manifested so widely that in recent years special attention has been paid to its study (see the works of K. S. Gorbachevich, R. P. Rogozhnikova and others).

The chronological boundaries of the concept of "modern Russian literary language" (and, consequently, of the concepts of "literary vocabulary" and "literary phraseology") also turn out to be changeable. So, until recent years, many researchers called "modern"

in the broad sense of the word, the language from Pushkin to the present day. V. V. Vinogradov considers the time from the 90s of the XIX century to the conditional boundary. right up to the 70s of our century, that is, from Gorky to the present day.

F. P. Filin identifies two main historically and chronologically limited stages in the development of the modern Russian literary language: 1) from Pushkin to 1917 and 2) after 1917 to the present day, which does not exclude, in his opinion, “ private subdivisions within each stage”.

An analysis of the changes that took place in the language of the Soviet period allows some researchers to further narrow the chronological scope of this concept.

It seems to us appropriate, when defining the boundaries of the concept of "modern language", to rely on the experience of compiling explanatory normative dictionaries of the literary language, where national literary sources are used mainly from the end of the 19th century. to the present day, i.e., to accept the conditional chronological framework outlined by V. V. Vinogradov. However, such temporal limitation does not prevent us from actively using the vocabulary and materials of the language of Pushkin's period for analysis. But the main attention should be paid to the characteristics of vocabulary in the last few decades of its development.

So, the concepts of national and literary vocabulary and phraseology are not identical. The first is much wider, more voluminous than the second. The vocabulary of the national language is almost limitless in composition, as it includes professional terminological vocabulary, its oral dialect varieties, oral jargon formations, vernacular, etc.

The lexical and phraseological composition of the literary language is much narrower. So, in the seventeen-volume Dictionary of the Modern Russian Literary Language

(see § 6) explained more than 120 thousand words. This, of course, is not limited to lexical literary stocks.

It is not easy to take them into account accurately: they are constantly replenished with scientific, technical, professional terminology, as well as words from non-codified oral varieties of speech, i.e. words of limited use. One thing is indisputable: on the whole, the dictionary of the literary language is much smaller than the dictionary of the national one.

2 See: Belchikov Yu. A. Lexical stylistics. M., 1977. S. 14-15;

Gorbachevich K.S. Changing the norms of the Russian literary language.

L., 1971. S. 36-40;

his own. Word variance and language norm.

L., 1978. S. 41-43.

VOCABULARY SEMASIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MODERN LEXICAL SYSTEM § 4. The word as a lexical unit In the Russian language, and above all in its richest vocabulary, the processes and results of human cognitive activity are embodied, the development of the culture of the people, their art is reflected. Being the main means of the lexical system, words both by themselves and in combination with each other transmit labor skills, concepts, cultural and historical values ​​accumulated from generation to generation. And this serves as one of the most important conditions for the existence of a person in society, allows you to constantly improve production as the basis of society, develop science and culture, the education system, etc.

By its linguistic nature, the word is a complex, multidimensional, diverse unit of language. Already at the first attempt to analytically comprehend the word, the dichotomism inherent in it becomes obvious (gr.

dicha - two parts + tome - section) - an easily distinguishable primordial two-sided essence: on the one hand, - material sound design, on the other - a meaning that is equally understood by native speakers, socially assigned to the word (i.e., reflection by linguistic designation, naming one or another object, phenomenon, quality, etc. of extralinguistic reality).

However, to define a word only as a linguistic element, consisting of a series of sounds denoting a particular concept, is to isolate it from the language system as a whole. Taking into account the complexity and diversity of the structure of a word, modern researchers use the so-called multi-aspect type of analysis when characterizing it, i.e., they point to the sum of a variety of linguistic features: phonetic structure and the presence of one stress (or non-two-stress);

the lexico-semantic significance of the word and its ability to express the concept in significant words (cf. the lack of direct correlation with the concept in functional words);

its separateness and impenetrability (i.e., the impossibility of additional insertions into the word without changing its meaning);

idiomatic (otherwise - unpredictability, unmotivated naming or its incomplete motivation);

reference to certain parts of speech In the lexicology of the Russian language, a short definition proposed by D.N.

The distinctive features of the word listed above and one of its definitions give only a general idea of ​​it. The structural and semantic essence of the word, its functional role will be understood more fully and deeply in the process of consistent study of the lexico-semantic system of the Russian language.

§ 5. The concept of the modern lexical-semantic system The vocabulary of the national Russian language is practically incalculable. Only in the card index of the dictionary of the Russian language are registered more than five million words in their main meaning. And this number does not include tens and hundreds of thousands of special terminological words and meanings that are limited in use 3.

Despite the virtually inexhaustible supply of words, their multifaceted nature, the diverse nature of the connections, the vocabulary of the Russian language is a certain system that does not go beyond the general language system, but, on the contrary, actively participates in its logical development. As already noted, the word is a unit with diverse characteristic features and diverse languages. 1954. Vol. 4;

Shansky NM Lexicology of the modern Russian language. M., 1972;

Shmelev D.N. Problems of semantic analysis of vocabulary (on the basis of the Russian language). M., 1973.

2 Shmelev D. N. Problems of semantic analysis of vocabulary (based on the Russian language). S. 55.

3 See: Kotelova N. 3. The meaning of the word and its compatibility (towards formalization in linguistics). L., 1975. S. 37.

ties, i.e. it correlates with different levels of the language:

phonetic, or phonemic, since it is framed with the help of sounds (or rather, the shortest meaningful units - phonemes);

word-formative, since root, unmotivated (or non-derivative) bases serve as the basis for creating new words, from which, in turn, lexical units are again formed;

morphological, because according to their categorial-semantic features, words form certain systemic groups, for example, words with an objective meaning are part of nouns, words with the meaning of an action or state - into the composition of verbs, etc.;

syntactic, since words realize their semantic possibilities when combined with other words, i.e. in phrases, sentences and more complex syntactic constructions.

With some levels, the connection of the word is clearly expressed, consistently bilateral (for example, with word formation), with others - the dichotomism of relations is not so constant and clear (for example, with morphology).

So, being associated with different levels of language, the word holds together, cements the general linguistic system.

However, it is also the basis of an independent lexico-semantic system as an internal organized unity, the elements of which, constantly interacting with each other, are at the same time naturally connected by certain more or less stable relationships.

The concept of systematic vocabulary includes two interdependent characteristic features of this level:

firstly, the lexical system as a set of vocabulary units (words and phrases that are nominative means), and secondly, the lexical system as a form of organization of these units and ways of their interaction. The vocabulary of the language is consistently described in various linguistic dictionaries. They reveal the systemic properties of the word, but often within the relatively limited semantic limits of one unit.

However, as M. M. Pokrovsky noted back in 1895 in his work “Semasiological research in the field of ancient languages”, “words and their meanings do not live a separate life from each other, but are connected (in our soul), regardless of our consciousness, into different groups, and the basis for the grouping is the similarity or direct opposition in the main meaning.

Groups into which words are combined according to semantic features can be distinguished on a different basis.

So, non-linguistic characteristics can serve as the basis for association. An example is the division of vocabulary into thematic classes, i.e. such sets of words that are connected by a single topic and the similarity of the concepts denoted (cf .:

words that name specific household items, and words that are the names of abstract concepts, etc.). Note that some researchers point to the predetermination of systemic semantic connections of words by extralinguistic factors (connection of the objects themselves, phenomena, concepts of the objective world) as a leading sign of systemicity (see the works of V. I. Koduhov, S. D. Katsnelson and others). .).

The basis can be based on the proper linguistic properties of words. For example, the traditional distribution of words by parts of speech is based on the similarity of lexico-semantic and formal grammatical features.

The combination of words is also carried out in terms of stylistic and stylistic features. In particular, this is the basis for the selection of groups of words that naming an object, or denotata (lat. denotare - to designate), informs it of an additional assessment, i.e.

have an additional emotionally expressive coloring, or connotation (lat. sit / sop - together + notare - mark). On this sign, for example, the combination of words with a touch of solemnity or with a playful, familiarly reduced coloring, etc., is based.

However, in any case, the most important criterion for combining words is the presence (or absence) of both similar and distinctive features in their semantic structure. For example, in order to substantiate the pattern of connection into one object 4 Pokrovsky MM Selected Works on Linguistics. M., 1959. S. 82.

thematic group of words such as sofa, armchair, bench, chair, stool, ottoman, it is necessary to identify a common semantic feature for them, which was the basis for the association. Such a sign will be the correlation of each of the given words with a general concept that has a lexical name - "furniture". But these words are not called any furniture, but "a kind of furniture designed for sitting or lying down."

This distinguishing feature allows you to isolate words from the general thematic group "furniture in general"

into a relatively small subgroup "furniture for sitting or lying", forming a certain lexical and semantic paradigm (column

paradeigma - an example, a sample), i.e. a set of elements of the language system.

Relationships of words in such groups (and then in subgroups, classes, subclasses, etc.) are called paradigmatic and mathematical. They are the main, most important and essential indicator of the systematization of the lexical level. (Note that the identification of distinctive, or differential, semantic features of all the listed words can be continued. This will allow us to determine the similarity and difference in their meanings, see § 7 and following.) As a very significant semantic feature that allows you to highlight lexical paradigms , "modern researchers (A. A. Ufimtseva, D. N. Shmelev and others) point to the so-called opposition of meanings in various semantic groups of words. For example, the selection of the above subgroup of words denoting "furniture for sitting or lying ”, became possible when they were compared (and opposed) with a subgroup of words denoting furniture designed “not for sitting or lying down”, but, for example, “for storing something” (wardrobe, slide, sideboard, bedside table, etc.). This paradigmatic grouping, in turn, can be opposed by the presence or absence of relative and essential features to another lexical paradigm, which will include the following ova, denoting “a piece of furniture in the form of a wide horizontal board on one or more legs, on which something is placed or placed”, i.e. table, stand (in one of the meanings), stalls (colloquial, in one of the meanings) and etc.

The same word can be included in different paradigmatic groupings, which confirms the presence of systemic connections in the language. For example, the word march is a member of a synonymic group with the general meaning "to go, move";

by opposite meaning - is included in the group of words with the main meaning "to stand, not to move";

according to the similarity of origin - into the group of borrowings from the related Old Slavonic language;

according to the primary functional stylistics of the essence, it is a bookish word, solemnly sublime (however, it can also be used with a touch of playfully ironic);

according to lexico-grammatical features, it is a member of the largest group of verb words with the main meaning of “action”, is included in the subgroup of verbs denoting “movement”, etc.

Consequently, paradigmatic relations in the vocabulary are multifaceted, semantically diverse.

The result of the comparison of words or their opposition according to various semantic features is the formation of "rows of subordinate or intersecting lexico-semantic paradigms" or a number of words united "by the strength of their connection" between themselves 6.

Being primarily a property of the language, lexico-semantic paradigms are quite stable in their essence and do not depend much on functioning in speech, on specific contextual use.

(Note that the identification of certain regular connections between the semantics of a word and the surrounding context also serves as proof of the systemic nature of vocabulary.) One of the manifestations of the systemic connections of lexical units is the regularity of their combination with each other, i.e. English relations (gr. syntagma - something connected). They are also conditioned by the language system as a whole, but compared to semantic paradigms, they are more dependent on the context. Syntagmatic connections are revealed in the process of realizing the meanings of words precisely in certain lexical combinations.

Lexical compatibility is the connection of meanings based on their subject-logical 5 Shmelev D. I. Problems of semantic analysis of vocabulary (based on the Russian language) . S. 113.

See: Yu. S. Sorokin. The development of the vocabulary of the Russian literary language: 30-90s of the XIX century. M.;

L., 1965. S. 10-13.

meaning, syntax and co-occurrence - for the regularity of the combination of words in speech.

Lexical compatibility often influences the development of new word meanings;

first, only within certain phrases, and then - the semantic structure of the word as a whole, which entails changes in lexical groups (paradigms). For example, quite recently the word geography had one meaning - "a complex of sciences that study the surface of the earth with its natural conditions, the distribution of population and economic resources on it." It was used in relatively limited semantic combinations: physical geography, the study of geography, the geography of plants, the development of geography (as a science), a geography lesson, books on geography, etc. The word description of the earth was identical in meaning.

In the 60s, first purely contextual syntagmas with this word appeared, for example, the geography of business trips of special correspondents, the geography of discoveries, etc. Then the compatibility of the word expanded somewhat. Combinations such as the geography of the competition, the geography of sports victories, the geography of new enterprises, and others (sometimes not entirely successful, for example, the geography of a cake) have become constant. The word developed a new meaning: “the boundaries of the placement, distribution of something”, which was fixed in lexical syntagmatics, and then led to changes in paradigmatic relations, for example, when a new series of words were formed that were close in meaning: geography - border, place, region , region (distribution), etc. Consequently, the nature of the lexical combinability of words affects their location in the lexical paradigm and its specificity in general.

Systemic relations in the lexicon are also manifested in the case when words are connected by word-production relations, i.e., depending on the meaning, their combination into different word-formation series is motivated. For example, the motivating (producing) basis of the wind gave several word-building nests, lexically combined by associative links:

Sailing (obsolete) (engine) "- windy (glass) windy, wind (reg.) windmill - - windy (day) - windy, calm, leeward, etc.

(pox) windmill, "windy (man) (simple) chickenpox Such relationships are called derivation and (lat. derivatio - retraction, retraction), they are based on the possibility of associative convergences and associations words among themselves - derivational, semantic, etymological, etc.

Note. This type of connection is not limited to the proper word-formation relationship of words. In a broad sense, derivational relations also cover various kinds of expressive semantic transformations of words, brought together by a common sound (for example, vaudeville - surprise in folk colloquial rethinking), individual occasionalisms (compare sunshine and moonlight, milkiness in S. Yesenin), etc. Derivational relations in the lexical system deepen, expand and supplement the first two types of connections - paradigmatic and syntagmatic. Therefore, they are also called e p and d and g m a t and h e with k and m and (gr. epi - over, over).

Thus, the interaction of different meanings of one word and its relationship with other words is extremely diverse. In general, they form a complex lexical system, the multi-tiered nature of which can be considered in the following sequence: 1) within one word - the disclosure of its meaning (or meanings), the connection of different meanings with each other (polysemy) and the breaking of this connection (homonymy, paronymy );

2) within the vocabulary - a description of different types of semantic connection of words and features of their onomasiological features (synonymy, antonymy, as well as by similarity of origin, sphere of use, functional and stylistic affiliation, expressive stylistic role, etc.), i.e., revealing their paradigmatic, syntagmatic, and derivational relations;

3) within the general language system - establishing the dependence of the semantic structure of a word on formal grammatical features, phonetic changes and other proper linguistic factors;

the influence of paralinguistic factors that accompany verbal communication: facial expressions, gestures, intonation, etc. (Gr. para - near, near, with Ts | Linguistics) and extralinguistic (i.e., super-, supra- or extra-linguistic properties). The essence of the general language system (as well as its individual levels) is revealed and cognized in the process of language functioning, which in turn affects the nature of general language changes, determining the development paths of the language system 1.

7 For a different interpretation, see: Kuznetsova E.V. Lexicology of the Russian language. M., 1989.

§ 6. Explanatory dictionaries as a characteristic of the systemic connections of words The lexico-semantic system in the form of a list of words is described with varying degrees of completeness and accuracy in the explanatory linguistic dictionaries of the modern national language and dictionaries of the literary language 8. The role of linguistic dictionaries in the study of the lexical system is huge. In them, it is presented most clearly: the words are arranged in alphabetical order, the general semantic structure of the word is revealed, the main types (or rather, models, formulas) of its connections with other words are listed, a fairly complete list of characteristic features is given. words at other levels of the general language system (phonetic orthoepic, word-formation, morphological, syntactic), the main stylistic properties are indicated, and illustrative material is provided. In this sense, explanatory dictionaries are a kind of extensive textbook on lexicology, but without theoretical justifications and generalizations.

Explanatory dictionaries of the Russian language in their modern form did not appear immediately. The first Russian handwritten dictionary-list (end of the 13th century) explained only some incomprehensible words that were found in the monuments of ancient Russian writing. In 1596, as an appendix to the grammar of Lavrenty Zizan and I, the first printed dictionary of the Russian language was published, which contained 1061 words. It had the title "Leksis, that is, the sayings are briefly collected and interpreted from the Slovenian language into a simple Russian dialect." Such an “interpretation” was predominantly Church Slavonic, as well as a few foreign words.

In the dictionary of 1627 "Lexicon of Slavonic Russian, Names Interpretation", compiled by the Ukrainian philologist Pamva Berynda, there are already 6982 words. According to 8 In this textbook there is no additional division of linguistic dictionaries into proper semasiological ones, interpreting the meaning according to the principle from word to concept (for example, proper explanatory dictionaries that reveal the polysemy of words, dictionaries of homonyms, paronyms), and onomasiological ones, in which the meaning is revealed is written in the reverse order - from the concept to the word (for example, dictionaries of synonyms, antonyms, various kinds of thematic, etc.). Encyclopedic dictionaries are also not considered, where not the words themselves are described, but the realities, objects and scientific concepts denoted by certain words.

2 - 2921 compared with previous dictionaries, the explanations of words in it are given more precisely, many sources are used, including live colloquial speech.

In the Petrine era and subsequent decades, interest in dictionaries increased. Dictionaries of foreign words, bilingual and trilingual dictionaries, dictionaries of the Church Slavonic language, etc. appear. All of them prepared the basis for further lexicographic work and made it possible to start creating the first extensive standard dictionary of the Russian language, which was published in 6 volumes in 1789-1794 gg. It was called the "Dictionary of the Russian Academy" and included 43,257 words, the bulk of which, as in the dictionaries of the previous period, is represented by Church Slavonic vocabulary. The words of the living colloquial language are not numerous. In addition to the interpretation of the meaning of words, the dictionary contains stylistic marks, which contributed to the consolidation of certain word usage norms. So, there are constant marks of vernacular and vernacular, indicating the sphere of distribution. The words are arranged in alphabetical nesting order, i.e., dictionary entries are built taking into account the alphabet of root words, and all derivative words (both prefix and suffix) are given inside the entry.

For example, after revealing two meanings of the word year, a nest of words with the same root is given, occupying 12 columns, i.e. 6 pages. The nest includes, along with the words year, year, anniversary, the words pogddno, last year, two-year-old, two-year-old, annual, no-gddie, re-annual, etc. However, despite the shortcomings, the value of this dictionary is great:

he was the first normative explanatory dictionary of the Russian language 9.

The second, even more complete (51,388 words) 6-volume explanatory dictionary was the “Dictionary of the Russian Academy, arranged in alphabetical order” (1806-1822). It differs from the previous dictionary in its large lexical volume and proper alphabetic (not 9 The word explanatory was not used either in the first or in subsequent editions of the dictionary. But, in essence, all philological dictionaries are "explanatory" in which explanations are given, t This name has been used recently, even in some dictionaries of the encyclopedic type, for example: N. I. Yasulevich, Explanatory Dictionary of Terms Used in Ship Engineering, Leningrad, 1966 .

only by the root word, but also by all derivatives) by the arrangement of the material. In terms of explanations, stylistic and grammatical characteristics, the dictionary preserves the traditions of the previous one and is, as it were, its 2nd edition.

The next in time and importance was the 4-volume "Dictionary of the Church Slavonic and Russian Language"

(1847), compiled by the II (verbal) department of the Academy of Sciences. In it, a significant place is occupied by the vocabulary of the living spoken language of the beginning of the 19th century, richer illustrative material, more foreign words that were used in speech. The dictionary includes twice as many words (114,749), arranged in alphabetical order. It uses stylistic marks more widely: in addition to those that were used in previous dictionaries, there are also those that indicate the scope of use - arithm., astro., geod., kants., med., rem. etc.;

for belonging to the passive stocks of the dictionary - old., obvet [saloe].;

on stylistic affiliation and emotionally expressive assessment - simple;

affectionate [gentle]., emollient [tender]. etc. The illustrations are much fuller and more expressive - examples are given from the works of N. M. Karamzin, I. A. Krylov, A. S. Pushkin and others. In 1867, the dictionary was republished without changes.

A large role in lexicographic practice was played by the 4-volume "Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language" by V.I. . The 1st edition was published in 1863-1866, the 2nd - in 1880-1882, the 3rd - in 1903-1909.

and 4th - in 1912-1914. edited by I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay. Then the 2nd edition of the dictionary, printed by photomechanical method, was repeated several times.

V. I. D al, a contemporary and friend of A. S. Pushkin, dedicated more than 50 years of his life to the dictionary. He included more than 200 thousand words in it, while trying to free the Russian language from excessively bookish words, as well as words of foreign origin. V. I. Dal tried to replace them with proper Russian ones, often composed (not always successfully) by himself: logic - reasoning;

muffler - nose-keeper, conifer;

egoist - self-motivated, 2* fucker;

an ellipse is a long circle, etc. With this approach to foreign borrowings, the patterns of their occurrence, the international character of some of them, etc. were not taken into account. Many words (especially socio-political terms) were not clearly explained. In their interpretation, encyclopedic (i.e., description of reality, as well as concepts about it) and proper philological (description of the meaning of a word) approaches were mixed. The dictionary contains few illustrations from fiction, they are replaced by examples from dialect speech, numerous proverbs, sayings (over 30 thousand), colloquial phraseological units, as well as examples composed by Dahl himself. The use of the dictionary is somewhat hampered by the nested principle of word presentation: only root words are arranged alphabetically, the selection of which is often subjective. The remaining (non-prefixed) words, one way or another connected, according to Dahl, with the root ones, are given in the same nest, i.e., in one dictionary entry.

See, for example, the following dictionary entry:

Vocabulary - lat. words, in meaning. individual words, a list of words with translation for memorization. Vokylny - musical.

This article combines three words that are completely different in origin and word-formation connections: vokabula - came through the Polish medium (wokabula) in the Peter the Great era. It comes from the Latin vocabulum (word). Vocal - from the French vocal, which goes back to the Latin vocalis, i.e.

voice. Vacancy (Dal's calling) - came through the Polish language (wokancja) from the French vacance, which, in turn, goes back to the Latin vacans / va saga - empty, free. There are many such examples.

However, no shortcomings noted from the point of view of modern lexicography can reduce the overall high assessment of a completely unique dictionary, which is still the golden fund of living Russian speech of the 19th century.

It should be noted that the 1st and 2nd editions were carried out by V. I. Dal himself, the 3rd and stereotypical 4th editions were edited for seven years by Professor of St. Petersburg University I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay. He made significant changes to the dictionary: he replaced the nested arrangement of words with a proper alphabetical one, clarified many etymological information, explanations of meanings and grammatical comments. In accordance with his lexicographic views, Baudouin de Courtenay significantly supplemented the dictionary with non-literary vocabulary. In general, it was a completely new work. Therefore, all subsequent reprints are carried out from the 2nd author's edition.

In the middle of the XIX century. the preparation of a new academic dictionary began. The principles of its compilation were determined: normativity, the presence of detailed stylistic marks, the restriction of lexical material due to the rejection of narrow dialect and colloquial words.

It was decided to include common vocabulary from the time of Lomonosov to the end of the 19th century in the dictionary. Many linguists, writers, and leading experts in other fields of science took part in the discussion of the principles of compiling the new dictionary. However, things moved slowly, and only in the 80s, after the appointment of Ya. K. Grot as editor, did practical work begin.

In 1895, the first volume was published, which included 21,648 words starting with the letters A - D. In it, the system of word interpretation, as well as grammatical and stylistic marks, are clear, rich illustrative material is provided from the works of Russian writers of the 18th and 19th centuries.

However, many explanations were politically biased.

After the death of J.K. Grot, the editing of the dictionary was entrusted to A.A. Shakhmatov, who abandoned the principle of normativity and proposed to expand the boundaries of the dictionary, including dialect words, Church Slavonicisms, and even individual author's neologisms. Until 1929, the dictionary was published taking into account the provisions put forward by A. A. Shakhmatov. However, despite the significant changes that occurred in the lexical system after significant historical events of the 20th century, the boundaries and composition of the dictionary did not reflect these changes. Even the spelling remained the same. After 1929, the methods of working on the dictionary changed: it was decided to publish a dictionary of the literary Russian language, reflecting the history of its development and modern norms.

In 1935-1940. A 4-volume "Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language" was published under the editorship of D.N. Ushakov (hereinafter - Ushakov's Dictionary). This dictionary was republished in 1946-1948. The Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language, edited by D.N. Ushakov, served as a kind of standard for creating subsequent explanatory dictionaries.

Ushakov's Dictionary included 85,289 words of the general literary language. Words are dialectal, simply river words, little-known professional-terminological vocabulary are presented in an insignificant amount. A dictionary is very valuable for normative provisions, such as information about spelling, pronunciation, and grammatical properties. There is a special section devoted to this “How to Use a Dictionary” (vol. 1). Of great interest are detailed stylistic notes and rich illustrative material. The dictionary was republished by photomechanical method in 1947-1948.

and is still a useful guide, although it has some shortcomings (for example, uncertainty in distinguishing between the polysemy of words and homonymy, not always an accurate interpretation of meanings), which became especially noticeable in connection with the development of the scientific foundations of modern lexicography.

By 1999 (since 1949), more than twenty editions of the one-volume “Dictionary of the Russian Language” by S.I. Ozhegov (hereinafter referred to as Ozhegov’s Dictionary) were published. To date, about 57,000 words have been included in it (the first edition contained 50,100 words). The dictionary actively uses the latest scientific data on lexicology and stylistics, reflects post-war vocabulary and phraseology. The interpretation of meanings is clear and concise, the selection of words is limited to the common vocabulary. All the latest editions were prepared by N.Yu. Shvedova, the editor of the dictionary, including the thoroughly revised one (more than 60 thousand entries).

words) 21st edition, which is already in print.

A significant event was the publication in 1950-1965. The 17-volume academic "Dictionary of the Modern Russian Literary Language" (Large Academic Dictionary, hereinafter - BAS), prepared by the dictionary sector of the Institute of the Russian Language of the USSR Academy of Sciences. This dictionary is both explanatory and normative. It contains linguistic explanations of words, including phraseological turns. The meanings of words and the features of their use are illustrated by numerous examples from the artistic, scientific and socio-political literature of the 19th-20th centuries. The grammatical characteristics of words are given, the features of their pronunciation and spelling are noted, stylistic marks are given, various types of lexical compatibility of the word are shown (and quite widely), some information of a historical nature is reported (on word formation, spelling, stress, etc.), as well as information about the etymological composition of words, their origin, information about the time they were reflected in Russian dictionaries.

In total, over 120 thousand words are explained in the dictionary.

Since 1988, the printing of the 2nd edition of this dictionary has begun. As K. S. Gorbachevich notes, “the re-edition of the Big Academic Dictionary (BAS) involves not only updating the selection of vocabulary, but also revising the normative characteristics of many words and word forms from the point of view of the modern perception of linguistic facts” 11. The volume of the dictionary has also been significantly increased: it will be 20 volumes.

In 1957-1961 a 4-volume academic Dictionary of the Russian Language (Small Academic Dictionary, hereinafter - MAC) was published. It includes 82,159 words and phraseological units covering the period from Pushkin to the present day. The dictionary is normative, it contains a variety of grammatical and stylistic marks, and illustrative material is widely used.

In 1981 - 1984 the 2nd edition of this dictionary was published, corrected and supplemented (already 83,016 words). It reflects the current state of the vocabulary, includes all the words and phraseological units that have replenished the lexical system after 1961, when the last volume of the 1st edition was released. The dictionary is still normative, it contains a wide variety of stylistic and proper stylistic marks (see § 48 on this), etymological references are given to foreign words. A large place in the new edition is devoted to illustrations. By 1999 several editions had been published.

11 Gorbachevich K S. Word variance and language norm.

L., 1978. S. 43.

In addition to explanatory dictionaries, the Institute of the Russian Language of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR in 1971 issued a dictionary reference book on the materials of the press and literature of the 1960s "New Words and Meanings". It is published in separate series "New in Russian vocabulary" (see more about this in § 58).

Note. In 1984, a new type of educational dictionary was published: "The Lexical Basis of the Russian Language". Its authors - V. V. Morkovkin, N. O. Boehme, I. A. Dorogonova, T. F. Ivanova, I. D. Uspenskaya - tried to give a practical synthesis of the lexical system of the Russian language: the core of the modern Russian literary language;

b) to make explicit the systemic connections of each lexico-semantic unit included in this core;

c) to detect semantic, morphological, orthoepic and other features of the words that make up the lexical core;

d) establish and show the reader what kind of work and on what material is useful in mastering the lexical core of the Russian language.

Other types of Russian monolingual linguistic dictionaries will be considered in the order of presentation adopted in this book;

information about dictionaries of homonyms, synonyms, etc. is given after the sections devoted to the description of these phenomena in Russian.

EXERCISES Exercise 1. Compare dictionary entries from the Great Soviet Encyclopedia (I) and Ozhegov's Dictionary (II). Point out the differences in the structure and content of the articles, explain these differences.

I waves. Contents I. The concept of waves ...

II. General properties of waves...

III. Waves in other bodies...

IV. Waves on the surface of a liquid...

V. Electromagnetic waves...

VI. Other types of waves...

The concept of waves. Waves are the process of propagation of perturbations (changes of state) in any media. Thus, a blow to one end of a steel rod causes a state of local compression at this end, which then propagates along the rod at a speed of approx. 5 km per second, - sound waves propagate along the rod ... [more than 6 pages of text].

II Wave, s, pl. waves, waves, waves (and waves), g. one.

A water bank formed by the oscillation of the water surface. The color of the sea wave (greenish-blue). 2. Oscillatory motion in a physical medium, as well as the propagation of this motion. Sound in. short wave transmission. Air in. 3. trans., what. About something.

moving one after another in multitude at a certain distance;

about the mass manifestation of something. New in.

aircraft. V. discontent || adj. wave, -th, -6e (to 1 and 2 values;

Exercise 2. Compare the entries from Dahl's Dictionary (I) and Ushakov's Dictionary (II). Reveal the differences in the construction of dictionary entries, their content, the nature of the interpretation of the meanings of words and spelling.

I D1alektika w. Greek reasoning, logic in dl, in prensh, the science of correct reasoning;

according to the abuse of Hiio, the art of persuasive idle talk, clever argument, verbiage. D "julectical, related to d1alektik. D1alektik, dexterous, skillful debater, closer;

sometimes a sophist. Dimekt m. speaking, local, regional language, speaking.

II Dialectics, and, pl. no, w. [Greek dialektike]. 1. The science of the universal laws of motion and development of nature, human society and thinking as a process of accumulation of internal contradictions, as a process of struggle of opposites, leading to a sudden, revolutionary transition from one quality to another.

(..) The laws of dialectics: the law of the unity and struggle of opposites, the law of the transition of quantity into quality and vice versa, the law of negation of negation. 2. The ability to apply logical arguments in a dispute (obsolete). 3. The very process of such movement and development (book).

D. events. D. history.

Exercise 3. Compare the construction and content of dictionary entries in BAS (I) and in the reference dictionary "New words with meanings" (II). Indicate what causes the differences in the explanation of the meanings of the word blue.

I Blue, oh, oh. Having the color of a clear sky;

light blue, azure, azure. Blue wallpaper. (...) f Blue heights, distance, blue light, etc. (...) And as soon as they stopped talking - in the distance the blue Pillar was already spinning golden sand. Lerm. Three palm trees. () Blue day, blue morning - bright, clear, cloudless.

And the days are better than each other - blue, cloudless. (...) Blue fox - smoky with a blue tint. () Blue horse - an ash-colored horse, similar to the color of a mouse. (...) - Sreznevsky: blue, dove - blue field, the main color of the fabric;

Leke. 1762: l o l b o y;

Cellarius 1771, p. 101

II Blue, oh, oh. 1. One that does not reflect ...

does not take into account the shortcomings;

idealized (ironically) .... They gave a debauchery to the “blue” characteristic ...

2. Blue fuel. About natural gas burning with a bluish flame. (...) Much more extensive reserves of blue fuel were discovered nearby ...

3. Blue screen. About TV;

about the TV screen... And now we see the heroes no longer on blue screens, but in the Blue Editorial Hall...

SEMANTIC STRUCTURE OF THE WORD § 7. Concept and word. Meaning of a word Semantic connections within a word, ie analysis of the dependence of its semantic components, are determined by the relationship between the meaning of the word and the concept.

The subject-logical correlation of the word indicates that it is directly connected with ideas about reality, which then become the basis of various kinds of concepts called with the help of words. It is in them that a person draws up, formulates his ideas and concepts about certain objects, phenomena, physical and mental states, a system of social relations, etc. But a concept is a logical category, and a word with its meaning is a linguistic category. In order for a logical meaning to be perceived as a unit of a linguistic system, it must be related to a specific word.

The connection between the word and the concept is very close. And one of the main tasks of semasiology is precisely the study of the question of how extralinguistic reality is displayed in words.

The concept of an object, phenomenon, quality, state or action is a kind of generalized reflection in the minds of people of the basic ideas about the properties of the real world, which is known in the process of social and labor activity.

Initially, only concretely visible, felt, tangible objects were reflected in the minds of people, i.e., everything that a person perceived with the help of the five senses (hearing, sight, taste, touch, smell). As a result of the development of thinking, a person acquires the ability to abstract ideas. The consciousness of people reflects not only real objects, but also all abstract processes, phenomena (for example, concepts of joy, excitement, courage, etc.). Cognizing objects and phenomena, a person abstracts from everything insignificant in their properties, qualities, i.e., focuses on the main features. Then he compares his ideas obtained from the knowledge of similar or the same type of objects. Thus, in his mind, thinking, concepts about objects and phenomena of reality are formed. (In this case, the question of cognition of reality is only partially touched upon, due to the need to give some idea of ​​the concept. The theory of knowledge itself, or epistemology, is an independent philosophical science.) The concept does not reflect all the qualities and features inherent in a particular subject , action, but only general, basic, most essential, which allow to distinguish one object (or phenomenon) from another.

So, if we are talking about fish, then for this concept the most significant idea is that we have before us a variety of vertebrates that live in water spaces, breathe with gills, and have limbs in the form of fins. It is these features that make it possible to distinguish fish from other vertebrates (birds, mammals). Other features and qualities inherent in fish are less significant in this case - they will be necessary to create some more specific, particular characteristics of families, species, subspecies, etc. l and with with and fishes.

The concept fixes the name, the word, i.e.

the concepts themselves are also formed with the help of linguistic means. The connection between the word and the concept is established in the process of joint activity of people. Therefore, words are more or less equally understood by all members of society, speaking a given language at the same time of its historical development.

Consequently, when studying the correlation of words with the objects and phenomena of reality they designate (through the concept of them), it is necessary to take into account the data of history. Denoting an object, phenomenon, sign, action, etc., expressing the concept of them, the word performs its main function - naming, or nominative (lat. - and m i), which allows you to select an object (phenomenon, feature, action) from a number of similar or many other diverse objects, or denotations.

In Russian, not all words name some concept. For example, interjections, modal words, conjunctions, prepositions, particles, as well as, to some extent, pronouns and proper names do not directly name concepts, that is, they are not directly related to them. All words have meaning. Only for some it is directly connected with the concept, and they are intellectually, or conceptually, meaningful (taking into account the grammatical role, they are also called denominative words and ). These words have both lexical and grammatical meaning. Other words do not have such a connection, they are not characterized by direct correlation with the subject. Similar words (interjections, modal words, prepositions, conjunctions, particles, etc.) are, as it were, conceptually ambiguous (in grammar, the last three groups of words are called auxiliary). They also have both lexical and grammatical meanings, but in their semantic structure the expression of volitional impulses, feelings, attitudes towards reality, etc., is predominant (i.e., emotional and evaluative content, often called a connotation, see p. 12) or an indication of a connection between meaningful words, rather than a direct, direct correlation with a logical concept.

Thus, the concept is the most essential element of the meaning of the word, but not always the only one.

The meaning of a word can include both evaluative and expressive elements, and grammatical features, and contextual and stylistic associations. For example, the color concept of whiteness can be expressed in a word with the main meaning of quality - white;

the same concept serves as the basis of the emotional-evaluative form - white, "with it (the concept) one can easily associate the word naming the state (as an action) - turn white", it is the basis of the idea of ​​a specific object - protein and abstract - whiteness etc. From the point of view of grammatical affiliation, all the above words are different: white (and white) - an adjective;

protein and whiteness are nouns;

to whiten is a verb. And in meaning they are similar, since the meaning of each of them is associated with the general concept of a certain color, that is, in their meaning there is a common semantic feature.

The lexical meaning of a word is, according to the definition of V.V. general semantic system of the dictionary of this language” 12.

It is fixed by social and linguistic practice, is the basis of the semantic structure of the word and, as a rule, is called denotative.

Note. The word is also the subject of study of other branches of the science of language, such as phonetics, morphology, etc.

In each of them, the meaning is clarified - phonetic, grammatical. Lexical meaning is considered in the lexicon.

To determine the lexical meaning of a word, it is necessary, firstly, to find out its subject-material and conceptual-logical content (i.e., the connection with the denotation);

secondly, to establish how the reality called by the word is connected with those that objectively exist in the surrounding reality;

thirdly, to identify how the defined lexical meaning correlates with other meanings, since the word “expresses its meanings not in isolation, not in isolation from 12 Vinogradov VV The main types of lexical meanings of the word / / Vopr. linguistics. 1953. No. 5. S. 10.

lexico-semantic system of a given particular language, but inextricably linked with it, as its constituent element” 13;

fourthly, to find such a distinctive feature that would allow isolating this particular lexical meaning from a number of similar ones. The need for this kind of step-by-step, consistent definition of the meaning of a word has been convincingly proven by modern lexicologists (N. Z. Kotelova, A. A. Ufimtseva, N. M. Shansky, D. N. Shmelev, and others).

For example, the following features should be included in the definition of the word chair: 1) an indication of the general subject relatedness - “furniture”;

2) disclosure of the general nature of the purpose - "seating only furniture";

3) an indication of the features of the form - “with a back”;

4) specifying the nature of the appointment - "for sitting one person." All of the listed signs (or “meaning elements”) are very important, essential, firstly, to distinguish the word chair from other paradigmatically similar units, and secondly (and most importantly), to determine this particular meaning of the word: “a kind of furniture only for seating, with backrest, designed for one person. (It is not without interest to recall that this word, as noted on p. 13, is included in different paradigmatic groups. Now we can make an additional clarification: according to the first sign, the word chair is opposed to a table, wardrobe, bedside table and many other items of furniture, according to the second - sofa, ottoman;

on the third - a stool;

on the fourth - a sofa, a bench.) So, the lexical meaning of a word is not only its direct (or indirect) correlation with the displayed concrete (or abstract) object. The meaning of a word (i.e., its semantic structure) reflects both general subject-logical connections, and relations with the lexical meanings of other words of a given (or close) lexical paradigm, and the boundaries of lexical compatibility, and the nature of lexico-grammatical reference (namely therefore, dictionaries indicate the part of speech to which the defined word belongs, as well as general formal-categorical meanings), and the emotionally expressive properties inherent in the word. (N. 3. Kotelova names 1 V. V. Vinogradov. The main types of lexical meanings of the word.

twelve basic semantic features that characterize the word. All of them, in her opinion, should be included in the definition of lexical meaning 14.) The meaning of a word is a historical concept. It does not remain unchanged, its content reflects those essential (linguistic and extralinguistic) features that are characteristic of each period of vocabulary development, directly related to extralinguistic reality. This is especially important to take into account for those who will constantly deal with the word, and not only modern (for example, when commenting, translating texts of previous eras, in the process of using various kinds of historical reminiscences, comparisons, etc.).

Explanatory dictionaries reflect the historical fate of the development of the meaning of a word with greater or lesser accuracy and completeness (see § 6). In them, the order in which the meanings are interpreted often indicates the development of the word: first, the meaning in the modern sense is given, and then those meanings that have undergone changes follow.

EXERCISES Exercise 4. Compare the definitions of lexical meaning and indicate which features unite these definitions, which distinguish them.

1. Meaning - “a reflection of the object of reality (phenomenon, relationship, quality, process) in the mind, which becomes a fact of language due to the establishment of its constant and inseparable connection with the definite. the sound in which it is realized ... "

(O. S. Akhmanova. Dictionary of linguistic terms).

2. “The meaning of a word is a historically formed connection between the sound of words and the reflection of an object or phenomenon that occurs in our minds” (RA Budagov. The history of words in the history of society).

3. “The meanings of language units do not exist in human consciousness, but in these units themselves, that is, not in the human brain, but in speech. (...) However, the whole point is that meaning is not an entity at all, but a relation. (...) This is the relation of a sign to something, 14 See: Kotelova N. 3. The meaning of a word and its compatibility (to formalization in linguistics). S. 7.

lying outside the sign itself, and is the meaning of the sign"

(L. S. Barkhudarov. Language and translation).

4. “Meaning - that which is denoted by a word - is some fact or phenomenon of reality, about which one person wants to communicate to another in his speech and which should be understood equally by both the speaker and the listener” (L. A. Bulakhovsky "Introduction to Linguistics".

5. The lexical meaning of a word is its "objective* material content, designed according to the laws of the grammar of a given language and being an element of the general semantic system of the dictionary of this language"

(VV Vinogradov. Main types of lexical meanings of a word).

6. “The meaning of a language unit is a conventional designation of one of the features of a given concept (motivated or unmotivated)” (I. R. Galperin.

Informativeness of language units).

7. “The meaning of a word is the totality of its lexico-semantic variants. The lexical meaning of a word is an obligatory element of the word;

there can be no word without meaning, but meaning is not something once and for all attached to the word...” (V. A. Zvegintsev, Semsiology).

8. “The meaning of a word is its correlation, connection with certain phenomena of reality”

(L. V. Kalinin. Vocabulary of the Russian language).

9. "... The semantics of the word essentially coincides with the concept as a logical form, the concept expressed in the word" (G.V. Kolshansky. Logic and structure of the language).

10. "The meaning of a word is the realization of the concept by means of a certain language system ..."

(L. S. Kovtun. On the meaning of the word).

11. “The meaning of a word is a systemic and socially conscious relation of a word to a certain concept in a given language of a given period, which together with it performs the function of a generalized abstract designation of realities. (...) The lexical meaning is explicated by a set of differential features, which reflect the properties of the designated reality and the nature of its generalization by thinking” (Ya. 3. Kotelova.

The meaning of the word and its compatibility).

12. “The meaning of a word is a permanent content socially fixed for a given sound and all its varieties, covering, in addition to lexical, also grammatical elements”

(K-A. Lvakovskaya. Theory of the word, the principles of its construction and aspects of the study of lexical material).

13. “The meaning of a word is a known reflection of an object, phenomenon or relationship in the mind ... entering into the structure of the word as its so-called inner side, in relation to which the sound of the word acts as a material shell, necessary not only for expressing meaning and for communicating it to other people, but also for its very emergence, formation, existence and development” (A.I. Smirnitsky, The meaning of the word).

14. “... The lexical meaning of a full-meaning word is an ideal entity that reflects real things, phenomena and their connections in the objective world, as well as concepts and representations of qualifying (evaluative) ethical and mental spheres of native speakers” (A. A. Ufimtseva. Lexical meaning:

The principle of the semiological description of the lexicon).

15. “Independent words, therefore, always appear before us as words correlated with this or that phenomenon. This correlation of a word with some phenomenon of objective reality, historically fixed in the minds of the speaker, is usually considered a lexical meaning. However, this is not quite true. The correlation of a word as a linguistic unit with a certain extralinguistic fact is only one of the obligatory components of lexical meaning. The latter also includes the expression by the word of the concept and the relation of the word to a certain lexico-grammatical category "

(N. M. Shansky. Lexicology of the modern Russian language).

16. “The meaning of a word is a reflection in the word of one or another phenomenon of reality (object, quality, relationship, action, state). I distinguish between the grammatical and lexical meanings of the word. (...) The lexical meaning is determined both by the correlation of the word with the corresponding concept (which is the core of the lexical meaning of the word) and its place in the lexical system of the language (i.e., various connections and the given words with other words and) ... "

(D.N. Shmelev. The meaning of the word / / Russian language: Enc and klopedia).

3 - Exercise 5. Familiarize yourself with the dictionary entries from the four explanatory dictionaries of the Russian language, paying special attention to the ways of revealing the meanings of words. Indicate if there are differences in the interpretation of the meanings and what causes them.

I 1. Dictionary D a l I Plasma, plasma j. dark green agate.

2. Dictionary Ushakov Plasma, s, pl. no, w. [Greek plasm a - formation]. 1. Liquid component of various organic tissues, predominantly. blood and lymph (biol.). 2. Dark green chalcedony (min.).

3. Dictionary of Ozhegov and Plasma, s, zh. (specialist.). 1. The liquid part of the blood.

2. Substance subjected to strong ionization as a result of strong heating or impact || adj. plasmatic, -th, -th (to 1 value) and plasma, -th, -th (to 2nd value).

4. B A S P lasma, s, zh. 1. Spec. Liquid part of blood. [Kurkov:] Red blood cells go into the plasma, the blood becomes discolored. Lavren. We will live! 2. Outdated.

Protoplasm. Only those parts of the plasma that contain the nucleus have the ability to form fiber. Timir. Life is growing. 3. Dark Green Chalcedony. Dark green plasma, well known in amulets and adornments of the eastern Mediterranean and Rome, which is common in antique rings, is enigmatic. It is a dark translucent stone. Fersman. Pts. according to ist.

words. Acad. 1847: plazma - from Greek. plasm a - fashioned, figure.

II 1. Dictionary of Dal P lakat m. passport for people of the taxable estate of v1ya. Annual poster passport.

2. Dictionary of Ushakov P lakat, a, m. [lat. placatum - evidence].

1. A large colored drawing with a short text, hung out on the street or in a public place for the purpose of announcing something. or advertising. Cinema movie posters. || Agitation drawing with a short text Revolutionary p. P. Mayakovsky. || Generally a big announcement about something. 2. Passport issued to representatives of taxable estates (philistines, peasants;

history of ic.).

3. Ozhegov's Dictionary Poster, -a, m. Colored wall drawing with propaganda or advertising text. || adj. poster, th, th. Poster painting. Poster style (translated: bright, simple and catchy).

4. BAS Plakat, a, oil 1. Artistic drawing accompanied by a short text that is organically connected with the image and calls for certain actions. Posters depicting an airplane, a donkey and a tortoise appeared on the scaffolding at the main entrance - a comparative image of the pace of work of the brigades during the socialist competition. Cover. open book.

2. A piece, a strip of fabric, paper, etc. with an appeal, a slogan. (...) And now, over the section of the brigade of Yakov Shumny, on two long poles driven into the ground, now puffing up in an arc from a light breeze, then falling off, a poster appeared: “Let's overtake Levashov's brigade!” Tendryak.

Among the forests (...) || An announcement written on something (...) Posters were hung at the stations: carpenters, carpenters, carpenters, fitters, turners were needed. Peacock flax. In the East.

3. Outdated. A passport issued in pre-revolutionary times to peasants and philistines (...) Don't touch it, let it go! Go, he says, according to the poster! shouted in the crowd to the coachman. Naumov. Web.

Nordsteth, Words. 1782: poster - German. P lak at from fr. poster.

h* Exercise 6. Using Ushakov's Dictionary, write down the definitions of the lexical meaning of the given words, then analyze these dictionary interpretations in terms of the sufficiency (or insufficiency) of the listed similar and different features underlying the definitions.

Reservoir, bay, canal, sea, lake, ocean, strait, pond, river, stream.

Exercise 7. Using the Ozhegov Dictionary, write down the definitions of the lexical meaning of the given words;

compare these definitions and single out essential similar and differential semantic features in each of them.

Sparrow, thrush, crossbill, warbler, nightingale, bullfinch, goldfinch.

§ 8. The main types of lexical meanings of words The lexical meaning of a word, being an element of the general language system, nevertheless has sufficient independence. It has its own semantic, i.e., specific properties inherent only to it, for example, different ways of nominating objects, concepts, phenomena, signs according to the nature of correlation with reality (direct-indirect, or figurative), according to the degree of motivation (non-derivative - derivative), according to the methods and possibilities of lexical compatibility (free - not free), according to the nature of the functions performed (nominative - expressive-synonymous).

1. According to the way of nationality, i.e. the nature of the connection between the meaning of a word and the object of objective reality, two types of lexical meanings are distinguished - direct, or basic, and indirect, or portable. The direct meaning is named because the word that possesses it directly points to the object (phenomenon, action, quality, etc.), i.e., is directly correlated with the concept or its individual features. The main (or main) is usually called the meaning of the word (in terms of synchronous analysis of vocabulary), which is less than all other meanings due to the properties of its compatibility. The basic meaning is clearly and definitely paradigmatically conditioned. The direct meaning, which acts as the main, stable nomination of an object in the modern period of language development, is also called primary (see below for the relative nature of this name).

Indirect (or figurative) is such a meaning of the word, the appearance of which is due to the occurrence of comparisons, associations that unite one object with another. A figurative meaning appears as a result of transferring the direct (basic) designation of an object to a new object. Portable values ​​are private, they are called secondary.

However, it should be noted that the concepts of “primary” and “secondary”, used in this case, apply only to modern systemic relations in the lexicon. Considered diachronically, many definitions (primary, secondary) will turn out to be displaced. For example, the modern main nominative meaning of color in the adjectives red and dark is not historically primary. The word dark was originally known with a moral-evaluative meaning, that is, it was used in combinations such as dark speech. The same can be said about the word red, in which researchers consider the meaning “beautiful, beautiful, good” to be historically primary. Thus, the allocation of direct (primary) and indirect (secondary) meanings in different historical periods of the development of the lexical system of a language does not always coincide. This is especially important to know for all those who often have to deal with more than just contemporary texts.

For example, the word leg (reduced leg) has a basic, direct meaning - "one of the two lower limbs of a person." Due to the similarity of the functions performed, as well as the location, this name was also used to name the “support, lower end (furniture, mechanisms)”: table legs, chassis legs, etc.

From the lexico-semantic point of view, this meaning is no longer direct, but figurative. Among the latter there are many such meanings that have lost their original imagery of similarity, the sharpness of associations that made it possible to reuse the same nomination.

For example, a figurative meaning - the legs (legs) of a table or chair are already devoid of vivid imagery. She seemed to be erased, "extinguished." But for many words, figurative meanings retain the brightness and freshness of primary figurative comparisons. Such words perform certain emotional functions.

The word scale in modern dictionaries (in particular, in BAS) contains the following meanings:

1. Foam, sediment formed on the surface of a liquid as a result of boiling. Get the scale off your ear...

2. Translated. All that boiled up ... a heavy feeling, an unpleasant aftertaste. [Palashka] was indignant, scum was gathering in her soul...

Czech. My life.

3. Translated. About the scum of society. Where did Victor go? Tramps, rabble, golden army, vagrants, all the scum thrown away from the mine. Hunchback. Donbass.

So, depending on the nature of the nominative function, the connection of a word with objects and phenomena of reality, two types (or types) of lexical meanings are considered: direct, basic (main) and figurative, particular meanings. Portable ones, in turn, can be subdivided into portable ones with an extinct imagery (the nose of a ship, wings of an airplane) and portable ones (a golden heart, a stone face, and many others).

2. According to the degree of semantic motivation, two types of word meanings are distinguished:

non-derivative (unmotivated, primary) and derivative (motivated by primary, initial value, which is secondary).

So, D. N. Shmelev, comparing the words earth, forest, earthly, countryman, forest, noted that the first two are considered unmotivated, and the rest - motivated, derivatives. “It can be said,” he concludes, “that derivatives have a “connected” meaning in a derivational sense, while the original word itself is relatively “free” 15. If we analyze the semantics of the word nakip from these positions, then all three of its meanings will turn out to be derivatives motivated.

But the sequence and degree of their motivation is not the same: the main (direct) meaning is motivated by the direct, primary meaning of the word boil - “seeth, bubbling, evaporating from strong heat”, and figurative meanings are, firstly, derived from the main meaning of the noun nakip , secondly, are motivated by the secondary figurative meanings of the original verb to boil.

Consequently, both direct, basic meanings, and themes Shmelev D. N. Problems of semantic analysis of vocabulary (based on the material of the Russian language). S. 194.

more portable ones can be different in nature and degree of motivation (or lack of motivation). For some, motivation is semantically associated with the original, primary nomination, as in the figurative meaning of the word table - "food" (for example, rent a room with a table)", for others, the nature of the motivation of derived meanings is much more complicated:

in addition to the connection with the primary meaning, the general derivational dependence is significant, as in the meanings of the word nakip.

UDC 811.161.1

BBK 81.2Rus-92.3

At 15
Valgina N.S.

Rosenthal D.E.

Fomina M.I.
Modern Russian: Textbook / Edited by N.S. Valgina. - 6th ed., revised. and additional

Moscow: Logos, 2002. 528 p. 5000 copies

Reviewers: Doctor of Philology, Professor N.D. Burvikov,

Doctor of Philology Professor V.A. Pronin

Contains all sections of the modern Russian language course: vocabulary and phraseology, phonetics, phonology and orthoepy. graphics and spelling, word formation, morphology, syntax and punctuation. In preparing this edition, achievements in the field of the Russian language over the past 15 years have been taken into account. Unlike the fifth edition (M.: Vysshaya shkola, 1987), the textbook includes materials covering active processes in the modern Russian language, and the list of word-formation methods has been replenished. trends in the use of forms of grammatical number, gender and case are noted, changes in syntax are taken into account.
For students of higher educational institutions studying in philological and other humanitarian areas and specialties.

ISBN ISBN 5-94010-008-2

© Valgina N.S., Rozental D.E., Fomina M.I., 1987

© Valgina N.S. Reworked and supplemented, 2001

© Logos, 2002

Valgina N.S.

Rosenthal D.E.

Fomina M.I.

Modern Russian

^ From the publisher

This textbook is intended primarily for students of philological specialties of higher educational institutions. But it is also designed for use in the educational process in a wide range of humanitarian specialties - of course, primarily those where the possession of the expressive means of literary speech is a prerequisite for successful professional activity. It seems that in any case the textbook will be useful to future lawyers, teachers, art critics, and journalists.

The peculiarity of the publication - conciseness and compactness of the presentation of the material - takes into account the diversity of the needs of a possible audience. Therefore, the duration of the lecture course, practical and self-study using this textbook may vary depending on the direction, the specialty of training humanities, as well as the form of education: daytime, evening or correspondence.

The textbook contains all sections of the modern Russian language course; vocabulary and phraseology, phonetics, phonology and orthoepy, graphics and spelling, word formation, morphology, syntax and punctuation.

In preparing this edition, achievements in the field of the Russian language over the past fifteen years have been taken into account. The wording of certain theoretical positions has been changed, new concepts have been introduced, terminology has been clarified, illustrative materials and bibliography have been partly updated, active processes in the modern Russian language, especially in the field of vocabulary and syntax, have been highlighted.

The content of sections and paragraphs has been supplemented with new information, in particular: the provision on the slightly changed status of the literary language is substantiated; the list of word formation methods has been expanded; trends in the use of grammatical number forms are noted; data are given on sentences of real and irreal modality, coordination of forms of the subject and predicate, genitive sentences, as well as on the ambiguity of resolving the issue of homogeneity and heterogeneity of predicates, etc.

Thus, the name of the textbook - "Modern Russian Language" - reflects the essential features of the educational material presented in it. Moreover, the textbook to some extent reveals those trends that, as can be foreseen today, will determine the development of the Russian language in the 21st century.

This sixth edition was prepared by N.S. Valgina based on the stable textbook of the same name, which went through five editions.

Introduction

The modern Russian language is the national language of the great Russian people, a form of Russian national culture.

The Russian language belongs to the group of Slavic languages, which are divided into three subgroups: Eastern - Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian; southern - Bulgarian, Serbo-Croatian, Slovenian, Macedonian; western - languages ​​​​Polish, Czech, Slovak, Kashubian, Lusatian. Going back to the same source - the common Slavic language, all Slavic languages ​​\u200b\u200bare close to each other, as evidenced by the similarity of a number of words, as well as phenomena of the phonetic system and grammatical structure. For example: Russian tribe, Bulgarian tribe, Serbian tribe, Polish plemiê, Czech pl e mě, Russian clay, Bulgarian clay, Czech hlina, Polish glina; Russian summer, Bulgarian lato, Czech l e to, Polish lato; Russian red, Serbian red a San, Czech kr a sn y; Russian milk, Bulgarian milk, Serbian milk, Polish mieko, Czech ml e ko etc.

Russian National language represents a historically established linguistic community and unites the entire set of linguistic means of the Russian people, including all Russian dialects and dialects, as well as social jargons.

The highest form of the national Russian language is Russian literary language.

At different historical stages of the development of the national language - from the language of the people to the national one - in connection with the change and expansion of the social functions of the literary language, the content of the concept of "literary language" changed.

Modern Russian literary language is a standardized language that serves the cultural needs of the Russian people; it is the language of state acts, science, the press, radio, theater, and fiction.

“The division of the language into literary and folk,” wrote A.M. Bitter, means only that we have, so to speak, a “raw” language and processed by masters.

The standardization of the literary language lies in the fact that the composition of the dictionary is regulated in it, the meaning and use of words, pronunciation, spelling and the formation of grammatical forms of words obey the generally accepted pattern. The concept of the norm, however, does not exclude in some cases options that reflect the changes that are constantly taking place in the language as a means of human communication. For example, accent options are considered literary: far - far, high - high, otherwise - otherwise; grams, forms: waving - waving, meowing - meowing, rinsing - rinsing.

The modern literary language, not without the influence of the media, noticeably changes its status: the norm becomes less rigid, allowing variation. It focuses not on inviolability and universality, but rather on communicative expediency. Therefore, the norm today is often not so much a ban on something as a choice. The boundary between normativity and non-normativity is sometimes blurred, and some colloquial and vernacular linguistic facts become variants of the norm. Becoming a common property, the literary language easily absorbs previously forbidden means of linguistic expression. It is enough to give an example of the active use of the word "lawlessness", which previously belonged to the criminal jargon.

Literary language has two forms: oral and written, which are characterized by features both from the side of the lexical composition and from the side of the grammatical structure, because they are designed for different types of perception - auditory and visual.

Written literary language is different from oral, primarily by the greater complexity of syntax and the presence of a large amount of abstract vocabulary, as well as terminological vocabulary, in particular international. Written literary language has stylistic varieties: scientific, official business, journalistic, artistic styles.

Literary language, as a normalized, processed common language, is opposed to local dialects and jargon. Russian dialects are combined into two main groups: the North Russian dialect and the South Russian dialect. Each of the groups has its own distinctive features in pronunciation, vocabulary and grammatical forms. In addition, there are Central Russian dialects, which reflect the features of both dialects.

Modern Russian literary language is the language of interethnic communication of the peoples of the Russian Federation. The Russian literary language introduces all the peoples of Russia to the culture of the great Russian people.

Since 1945, the UN Charter has recognized the Russian language as one of the official languages ​​of the world.

Karamzin, Pushkin and Gogol, Belinsky and Chernyshevsky, Turgenev and Tolstoy.

The course of the modern Russian language consists of the following sections: vocabulary and phraseology, phonetics and phonology, orthoepy, graphics and spelling, word formation, grammar (morphology and syntax), punctuation.

Vocabulary and phraseology study the vocabulary and phraseological composition of the Russian language and the patterns of its development.

Phonetics describes the sound composition of the modern Russian literary language and the main sound processes occurring in the language, the subject of phonology is phonemes - the shortest sound units that serve to distinguish the sound shells of words and their forms.

Orthoepy studies the norms of modern Russian literary pronunciation.

Graphic arts introduces the composition of the Russian alphabet, the relationship between letters and sounds, and word formation studies the morphological composition of the word and the main types of formation of new words: morphological, morphological-syntactic, lexical-semantic, lexical-syntactic.

Morphology is the doctrine of grammatical categories and grammatical forms of the word. She studies the lexico-grammatical categories of words, the interaction of lexical and grammatical meanings of a word, and ways of expressing grammatical meanings in Russian.

Syntax is the doctrine of sentences and phrases. Syntax studies the basic syntactic units - a phrase and a sentence, types of syntactic connection, types of sentences and their structure.

Based on the syntax, punctuation is built - a set of rules for punctuation.

^ VOCABULARY AND PHRASEOLOGY

Vocabulary of the Russian language

The concept of vocabulary and lexical system

Vocabulary the whole set of words of the language, its vocabulary is called. The section of linguistics that studies vocabulary is called lexicology(gr. lexikos - dictionary + logos - teaching). There is a difference between historical lexicology, which studies the formation of vocabulary in its development, and descriptive lexicology, which deals with the meaning of a word, semantics (gr. semantikos - denoting), volume, structure of vocabulary, etc., i.e. considering various types of word relationships in a single lexico-semantic system. Words in it can be related by similarity or opposite meanings (cf., for example, synonyms and antonyms), commonality of functions performed (cf., for example, groups of colloquial and book words), similarity of origin or proximity of stylistic properties, as well as belonging to the same part of speech and etc. This kind of relationship of words in different groups, united by a common feature, is called paradigmatic(gr. par a deigma - example, sample) and are the main ones in determining the properties of the system.

A kind of system connections is the degree of lexical compatibility of words with each other, otherwise the relationship syntagmatic(Greek syntagma - something connected), which often influence the development of new paradigms. For example, for a long time the word state was associated in meaning only with the word state as "a political organization of society headed by the government or its bodies." Being a relative adjective in meaning, it was combined with a certain circle of words like: system, border, institution, employee and under. Then its syntagmatic relations expanded: it began to be used in combination with the words thinking, mind, person, action, deed etc., while acquiring the qualitative-evaluative meaning "capable of thinking and acting broadly, wisely." This, in turn, created the conditions for the emergence of new paradigmatic connections, which also influenced the development of new grammatical meanings and forms: since the word in certain cases performs the functions of qualitative adjectives, it became possible to form abstract nouns from it - statehood, quality adverbs - state, antonyms - non-state, anti-state etc.

Consequently, both types of systemic relations are closely related to each other and form a complex lexico-semantic system as a whole, which is part of the general language system.

^ Semasiological characteristics of the modern lexical system

WFD course

G.N. Bolshakova

Literature

Dictionaries

45. Shansky N. M., Bobrova T. A. School etymological dictionary of the Russian language. - M., 1997.

46. ​​Shansky N. M., Ivanov V. V., Shanskaya T. V. Brief etymological dictionary of the Russian language. - M., 1975 (and subsequent editions).

PREPARATION PLANS FOR PRACTICAL EXERCISES DURING THE WINTER SESSION

PR #1: Lexicology as a linguistic discipline. Lexico-semantic level of the language and its basic units. The word as the central unit of language. Lexical meaning.

Questions and tasks:

1. What does lexicology study? What are the tasks of semasiology (lexical semantics) and lexicology proper?

2. Explain what are the specifics of the semasiological and onomasiological approaches to the study of lexical units?

3. Prove: is the word really the central unit of the language?

4. List the constitutive features of the word. Illustrate the manifestation of each sign (or deviation from some signs) with examples.

5. What is lexical meaning? How correlated meaning and
concept? How is lexical meaning different from grammatical meaning?

6. Give definitions word, lexeme, sememe, lexical-semantic variant, word form.

7. What does semiotics study? What types of lexical meanings are considered in the semiotic aspect?

8. How do you understand the statement: “Sememe is the structure of semes”? Is the statement true: “The word is the structure of semes”? Argument your point of view.

9. What is the inner form of a word? Can the inner form be considered the invariant meaning of a polysemantic word?

10. What classification of values ​​did V. V. Vinogradov propose?

11. Prepare to analyze the structure of the direct meaning of words wolf and saw through: write out definitions from explanatory dictionaries and carry out (if necessary) a step-by-step identification procedure to detect hypersemes (archisemes).

12. Analyze the meanings of the highlighted words (LSV), based on the Vinogradov typology of meanings: strong a thread; strong love; lost a thread speeches; redhead fox; Oh you, fox!; crackling freezing.

Sample execution:

Of you come out wonderful teachers.

1. Meaning indirect-nominative (portable, with extinct figurativeness).

2. Motivated (semantic motivation: (3) log off ← (2) log off).

3. Non-free: constructively limited (only with the form of the genus p. “from whom”, “from what”), syntactically conditioned (implemented only in sentences constructed according to the model “Y will come out of X”).

4. nominative (performs a nominative function).

PR #3: PARADIGMMATIC RELATIONSHIPS IN VOCABULARY.

SYNONYMY, ANTONYMY, CONVERSION AND HOMONYMY

Questions and tasks:

1. Define the following concepts: systemic relations in vocabulary, epidigmatic and paradigmatic relations, lexical paradigm, polysemy, synonymy, antonymy, conversion, homonymy, lexical homonyms, functional homonyms, paronyms, paronymy, paronomasia.

2. Determine the type/kind of system relations between lexemes. Indicate cases when it is difficult to unambiguously determine the nature of systemic connections, and try to explain what causes difficulties in qualifying certain lexical phenomena: a) hunger - hunger; b) close - near; c) vagrant - vagrant;
d) wandering - nomadic; e) lacquered - lacquered; e) currant - currant.

3. Specify the type/kind of system relations between lexical units.

1) hall - hall

2) plant raspberries– delicious raspberry

3) high - low

4) tall Human - high ideas

5) doctor - to heal

6) doctor - patient

7) doctor - doctor

8) doctor - treat

9) linguistics - linguistics

10) science - linguistics

4. Find antonyms, converses, synonyms, homonyms in the following texts and analyze them (see plans and samples below):

(1) You are rich, I am very poor;

You are a prose writer, I am a poet;

You are blush, like a poppy color,

I, like death, and thin and pale (A. P.).

(2) Has a third eye

all-seeing eye, -

the sculptor was awarded them,

artist and poet ... (K. Nek.).

(3) Sensation! Kasparov lost to the computer! (TV).

(4) Marshak once said,

As one Marshak could say:

– I am a translator in Russia

And I value the word.

But I, unlike a taxi.

I don’t translate everyone (Y. Kozl.).

Synonym analysis plan (synonymous paradigm):

1) synonyms in the text or a synonymic row (paradigm), its dominant; 2) integral features; 3) differential signs; 4) semantic type of synonyms; 5) structural type of synonyms; 6) Usual or contextual; 7) features of the use and functions of synonyms - semantic and stylistic.

Sample analysis:

I still believe in goodness, in truth, but I not only believe, I believe now(L. T.).

1. Believe (dominant) - believe.

2. Integral signs:

a) grammatical: "sign", "procedural";

b) lexical:

X believes in Y

X thinks something like this:

I know Y exists

because I feel it.

3. Differential features:

a) in the meaning of " believe” includes the semes “consciousness”, “intensity”, which can be expressed something like this:

X knows what many people think:

Y does not exist.

you can live without Y.

X knows that Y exists

one cannot live without Y;

b) pragmatic differences: "believe" - ​​unnecessary, high;

c) semantic and pragmatic differences are reflected in the syntagmatic properties of synonymous words: compare “believe in yourself”, “believe
into a fairy tale" and the dubious "believe in yourself", the wrong "believe
into a fairy tale."

4. Partial (non-absolute) synonyms, as they are characterized by contrasting distribution and equipotent opposition. Ideographic and stylistic.

5. One-root ().

6. Usual.

7. Used in an open way, contact synonyms perform semantic refinement function(on the one hand, the differentiating context: the adversative union “but”, the comparative-gradational union “not only, (but also / a)”, the contextual antonyms “still” and “now” - actualize mismatched meanings in the meanings of synonyms, and on the other hand, the repetitions of synonymous words, their location along the line of ascending gradation create the effect of “increment of meaning”: the meanings of “believe” and “believe” seem to be combined and allow expressing a high degree of manifestation of a feature/state), stylistic(participate in the reception of gradation, increase the expressiveness of the statement) and style-forming functions (required) believe correlates with abstract nouns. good, true).

Opposition analysis plan

Analysis plan of the antonymic paradigm:

1) antonyms in the text (antonymic paradigm); 2) integral features; 3) differential (opposite) features;
4) semantic class; 5) structural type; 6) usual or occasional; 7) features of use (antonymic context) and functions in the text (semantic and stylistic).

Conversion paradigm analysis plan:

1) converses in the text (conversive paradigm); 2) direct and inverted structures; 3) semantic class; 4) structural type; 5) features of use (open or hidden way of using) and functions in the text (semantic and stylistic).

Analysis Samples:

I wanted to, but I could not overcome the passions:

Over the soul reigns insatiable flesh(O. Khayyam).

Antonymic paradigm

1) soul - flesh (body);

2) "two principles in man"

3) soul flesh

a) intangible material

b) spiritual physical

c) immortal mortal

d) source of spiritual source of physical

experiences, feelings of pleasure and pain

e) internal organ -

life, located

somewhere in the human chest

4) inaccurate antonyms, since semantic oppositions are complicated by additional differences (3 e); belong to the second semantic class, since they express a complementary opposite: the whole is “man”, the parts are “soul and body”, “soul and flesh” (cohyponyms that have opposite signs in their seme composition);

5) heterogeneous ();

6) usual;

7) used in the antonymic context "X over Y", antonyms express the result of the confrontation of opposite entities (semantic function); are used as a stylistic device for designating the contradictory essence of a person, they are a means of figurative expression of the author's feelings (stylistic functions, functions of expressing author's intentions).

Conversational paradigm

1) to reign - to submit (submit);

3) "influence";

4) converse verbs;

5) with a hidden method of use (the author chooses one lexeme from the conversion paradigm), the conversions perform a semantic function: the choice of one of the possible structures (“The insatiable flesh reigns over the soul”) suggests a hidden synonym (“The soul submits to the insatiable flesh”), which allows the author place semantic accents: the flesh (corruptible, material!) reigns over the soul (imperishable, divine!); in addition: since the usual antonyms are used as actants, the conversives also perform a stylistic function - they increase the expressiveness and emotionality of the utterance.

Plan for the analysis of homonyms (homonymic paradigm)

1) members of the paradigm; 2) the lexical meaning of each member of the paradigm; 3) class of homonyms according to the form of manifestation of homonymy; 4) type by origin or formation of homonymous words; 5) criteria for distinguishing between homonymy and polysemy;
6) features of use (use in mutually exclusive strong positions, contact use in one statement, overlap) and functions in the text (semantic, stylistic).

Sample Analysis

Loved students to fall asleep

He, apparently, because

What did they like to fall asleep

At his lectures (Ya. Kozl.).

1. Fall asleep 1 - fall asleep 2

2. Fall asleep 1 - “fall asleep”

Fall asleep 2 - "by asking difficult questions, forcing to reveal bad knowledge in something that leads to failure in the exam."

3. Lexical homonyms, partial: fill in 1 non-transition. verb, it has no forms of the passive voice; fall asleep 2 – v. transition.

4. Homonyms with a pronounced morphological structure, formed as a result of word-formation processes:

fall asleep ← fall asleep

fall asleep ← fall asleep

Homonymy of affixes and different degrees of articulation: 1, 2.

5. Tokens are homonyms, because:

a) find different word-formation connections

sleep → fall asleep → fall asleep → fall asleep

fall asleep

Fall asleep

fall asleep

b) differ in non-coinciding distribution (different syntagmatic connections): fall asleep 1 late, early, at the table, with difficulty; the child does not fall asleep on time; fall asleep 2 students on the exam, test;

c) enter into different paradigmatic relationships:

synonyms antonyms

fall asleep 1 - wake up

fall asleep 2 fill up pull

d) differ in functional-style and stylistic significance:

fall asleep 1 - commonly used, interstyle, neutral

fall asleep 2 - slang (student jargon), colloquially lowering, disapproving.

e) there are no common semes in the meanings of words:

fall asleep 1 – state verb (start to sleep)

fall asleep 2 – actional verb with causative semantics (make something happen)

6. Homonymous words perform both a semantic function, since the contextual environment (strong position) makes it possible to distinguish between their meanings, and a stylistic function: the use of homonymous rhyme is a means of creating a comic effect in an epigram.

PREPARATION FOR THE SUMMER SESSION

1. REVIEW AND STUDY THE TEXTBOOK MATERIALS ON THE FOLLOWING TOPICS:

(1) Dictionary macrostructures: thematic group, lexico-semantic paradigm, semantic field.

(2) Hyponymic and partitive relations in vocabulary. Hyper-hyponymic and partitive paradigms.

(3) The history of the formation of the lexical-semantic system of the Russian language. Primordial vocabulary and its historical layers.

(4) Borrowed vocabulary. Mastering foreign borrowings.

(5) Vocabulary of limited use.

(6) Outdated vocabulary.

(7) New words. Neologisms, potential words, occasionalisms.

(8) Functional and stylistic systematization of the vocabulary of the modern Russian language. Book and colloquial vocabulary.

(9) Lexicography as a scientific and applied discipline.

(10) Typology of dictionaries.

(11) Phraseology as a linguistic discipline.

(12) Phraseologisms: their distinctive features and main types.

(13) Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations in Russian phraseology.

(14) Russian phraseography.

2. Describe at least five linguistic dictionaries of various types (see the list of dictionaries) according to the plan:

(2) The name of the dictionary.

(3) Dictionary type.

(4) Appointment.

(5) Addressee.

(6) Housing.

(7) The structure of the dictionary entry.

3. Complete the tasks:

(1) Having studied the indicated literature, make the following tables:

Table 1

Vocabulary of the Russian language

table 2

Slavic vocabulary

Table 3

Plan for a complete lexico-semantic analysis

Sample Analysis

Depriving me seas, rabega and expansion

And giving the foot the emphasis of violent earth,

What have you achieved? Brilliant calculation:

You could not take away the moving lips (O. Man.).

Word-centric analysis

I. Epidigmatic Relations

1) there are no formal options;

2) a polysemantic word (three LSVs).

The semantic structure of the word

LSV	Seme composition of meaning	semantic type. relations	Seed type. connections	Presentation method. connections
1. Black Sea	part of the ocean isolated land or heights of the underwater relief ...... coast depth depth expanse movement size (huge)
2. Sea of ​​Wheat	· space · land · vast · filled with someone or something weak movement excitement …… intensity. "very" figurativeness (X, as it were, the sea)	1 → 2 figurative metaphor	associative (at the level of peripheral and connotative components)	implicit
3. Sea of ​​​​fun	· quantity or mass · of something · huge intensity. "very" figurative (X-and so much, as if it were the sea)	1 → 3 emotive metaphor	– " –	– " –

2. The meaning of (1) LSV is free, (2) and (3) LSV are bound (structurally limited): (2) LSV + noun. (odush or neod.) in the form of a genus. n. (sea of ​​rye, sea of ​​people) or (2) LSW + def. (human sea); (3) LSV + n. in the form of the genus. n. (sea of ​​blood, sea of ​​suffering).

3. (1) LSV has a nominative function, (2), (3) LSV has an expressive function.

II. paradigmatic relationship.

2.3. There are no linguistic synonyms and antonyms. Possible coreferential usages, such as "a lot of suffering" - "a sea of ​​\u200b\u200bsuffering" cannot be considered as synonymous due to the different part-of-speech attribution of lexemes lot and sea.

7. Partitive paradigm:

holonym ocean (1): ocean (2)

sea ​​(1) partitives

8. (1) LSV refers to substantives naming natural objects: sea, river, mountain, tree…

(2) LSV refers to substantives naming artifacts or natural objects (secondary nomination of land space filled with something).

(3) LSV belongs to the class of existential-quantitative predicates (cf.: There was a lot of fun and There was a lot of fun).

9. Lexico-semantic group:

water

space body of water

ocean sea lake river …

Semantic fields:

III. Sociolinguistic characteristic:

1. The word is originally Russian, of common Slavic origin.

2. Refers to common vocabulary.

3. Refers to the active dictionary. Frequency (frequency index - 315).

4. (1) LSV - interstyle, neutral. (2) and (3) LSV are not used in the genres of scientific and official business speech.

5. (2) and (3) LSV are related to expressive vocabulary, due to the figurative and intensive components of meanings.

Text-centric analysis

1. Style - fiction, genre - poetry.

2. Occasional meanings are realized in the text:

1) the first is associated with the usual meaning sea(1) metonymically and arises on the basis of semantic implications: deprive the seas means something like this: to deprive the opportunity to live (be) on the seas;

2) the second - symbolic-metaphorical - is due to the poetic context as a whole and multi-level connections with other units of the text:

a) used in a number of units runaway, runaway(metaphors of poetic creativity), the word begins to “shine through” the connotative components of the first usual meaning: “space”, “movement”, implicatively associated with the meaning of “freedom” (the indicated meaning is also supported by intertextual connections of an allusive nature (cf., for example, Pushkin’s “To the sea "")).

b) an unusual combination deprive the seas perceived against the background of the ordinary take away life and is associated with an unusual combination violent land, which, in turn, is related to the usual violent death; allusive convergences of realized occasional combinations with typical usual ones actualize the opposite components in the meanings of the lexemes "sea" and "land", which become contextual antonyms, and their meanings are opposed for several reasons: the sea is associated with freedom, the earth - with lack of freedom, the sea - that which desirable, the earth - that which is undesirable, imposed.

Contextual antonyms, heterogeneous, realizing a complementary opposite, perform the function of opposition and serve to implement the author's intentions.

The process of hypersemantization can be shown in the diagram:

3. The word in the text is expressive, despite the fact that its textual meanings are associated with the meaning of a neutral word, devoid of expression. In contrast to the usual expressiveness, due to the presence of intense, emotive, figurative (internal form) components in the structure of meaning (see p. III.5), the expression of a literary word has a content-figurative basis (M. V. Nikitin). Semantic factors, factors of semantic interaction with text units and (implicitly!) non-textual units, underlie expressiveness.

Questions for the exam

1. Lexicology as a linguistic discipline. The subject and tasks of lexicology.

2. Semasiology and onomasiology as two aspects of the study of lexical meaning.

3. Lexico-semantic system and systems of other levels of the language. Types of system relations in vocabulary.

4. The word as the main nominative unit of the language. Constitutive features of the word.

6. The nature of lexical meaning. Meaning and concept.

7. Semiotic aspect of lexical meaning: denotative, significative and pragmatic meaning.

8. Word structure: form and meaning. Structural-semantic aspect of lexical meaning.

9. Semantic structure of the word. internal form of the word. connotations.

10. Lexical and grammatical meanings. Lexical value types.

11. Epidigmatic relations in vocabulary. Formal and formal style options.

13. Semantic types of polysemy. Metaphor and metonymy.

14. Associative and associative-semantic ambiguity. Topological types of polysemy.

15. Paradigmatic relations in vocabulary.

17. Classification of homonyms. homonymic paradigm. Functions of homonyms.

18. Homonymy and polysemy. Criteria for differentiation. Dictionaries of homonyms.

19. Paronymy. Paronyms and paronomasia. Dictionaries of paronyms.

21. Synonymous paradigm. Synonym functions. Synonym dictionaries.

22. Oppositives in vocabulary. Logical and semantic grounds for the opposition of meanings.

24. Antonymic paradigm. Functions of antonyms.

26. Dictionary macrostructures. Formal, formal-semantic, semantic classes of words.

27. Thematic group and lexico-semantic paradigm. semantic field.

28. Hyponymic and partitive relations in vocabulary. Hyper-hyponymic and partitive paradigms.

29. Syntagmatic relations in vocabulary. Syntagmatic and paradigmatic properties of lexical units. Types of relations of lexical units.

30. The history of the formation of the lexical-semantic system of the Russian language. Primordial vocabulary and its historical layers.

31. Borrowed vocabulary. Mastering foreign borrowings.

32. Reasons for lexical borrowings. The attitude of society towards borrowed words.

33. Signs of borrowed words. Lexical papers. Exoticisms. Barbarisms.

34. Borrowings from related and unrelated languages. Old Slavonicisms and their role in the modern Russian language.

35. Common vocabulary and vocabulary of limited use. dialect words. Classification of dialectisms. Functions of dialect words.

36.. Social dialects: jargon, slang, slang. Jargotisms and argotisms. vernacular.

37. Special vocabulary. Professionalisms and terms.

38. Vocabulary in terms of frequency and relevance. Active and passive vocabulary.

39. Outdated vocabulary. Historicisms and archaisms. Their functions.

40. New words. Neologisms, potential words, occasionalisms. Dictionaries of new words and language changes.

41. Functional and stylistic systematization of the vocabulary of the modern Russian language. Book vocabulary, its layers.

42. Colloquial vocabulary, its varieties. Functions of spoken words.

43. Vocabulary is neutral and stylistically marked. expressive vocabulary.

44. Lexicography as a branch of linguistics. Typology of dictionaries.

45. Basic types of dictionaries. Encyclopedic and linguistic dictionaries.

46. ​​Explanatory and aspect dictionaries. Complex dictionaries.

47. Lexicography today: dictionaries of a new type.

48. Phraseology as a linguistic discipline. The subject and tasks of phraseology.

49. The concept of a phraseological unit. Features of phraseological units. Phraseological dictionaries of the Russian language.

50. The main types of phraseological units according to the degree of cohesion of the components: phraseological unions, unity, combinations and expressions.

51. Grammatical typology of phraseological units.

52. The concept of phraseological system. Variation and synonymy of phraseological units.

53. Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations in the phraseological system. Homonymy of phraseological units.

54. Stylistic stratification of Russian phraseology. Phraseological composition dynamics.

Items marked with an asterisk (*) refer to text-centric analysis; we include these points, because, firstly, a complete analysis of a lexical unit as an actualized sign involves a combination of two aspects and, secondly, this plan serves scheme knowledge and skills in the field of lexical semantics and lexicology.

Roman numerals denote: I - syntagmatic connections, II - paradigmatic connections, III - associative connections.

WFD course

G.N. Bolshakova

LEXICOLOGY OF THE MODERN RUSSIAN LITERARY LANGUAGE

Literature

1. Bobunova M.A. Russian lexicography of the XXI century: Proc. allowance. - M., 2009.
2. Valgina N.S., Rosenthal D.E., Fomina M.I. Modern Russian language. - M., 2001.
3. Gvozdarev Yu.A. Modern Russian language. Lexicology and Phraseology: Textbook. - Rostov n / D., 2008.
4. Dibrova E.I., Kasatkin L.L., Shcheboleva I.I. Modern Russian language: Theory. Analysis of language units: In 3 hours: Part 1. - Rostov-on-Don, 1997.
5. Rosenthal D.E. Modern Russian language. - M., 2008.
6. Modern Russian / Ed. L. A. Novikova. SPb., 2001.
7. Tokarev G.V. Modern Russian literary language. Lexicology: Proc. Benefit. – Tula, 2008.

8. Fomina M. I. Modern Russian language. Lexicology. 4th ed., rev. - M., 2003.

Dictionaries

1. Alexandrova E. E. Dictionary of synonyms of the Russian language. - M., 1968 (and subsequent editions).

1. Apresyan Yu. D., Boguslavskaya O. Yu., Levontina I. B. et al. A new explanatory dictionary of Russian synonyms. First edition. 2nd edition. - M., 1999 (subsequent editions and releases).

2. Aristova T.S. etc. Dictionary of figurative expressions of the Russian language. Ed. V.N. Telia - M .: "Fatherland", 1995.

3. Akhmanova O. S. Dictionary of homonyms of the Russian language. - M., 1974 (and subsequent editions).

4. Belchikov Yu. A., Panyusheva M. S. Dictionary of paronyms of the modern Russian language. - M., 1994.

5. Berkov V.P., Mokienko V.M., Shulezhkova S.G. Big dictionary of winged words of the Russian language. - M., 2000.

6. Birich, A.K., Mokienko V.M., Stepanova, L.I.: Dictionary of Russian Phraseology. Historical and etymological reference book. - St. Petersburg: Folio-Press 2001

1. Great Dictionary of Russian language. Ch. ed. S.A. Kuznetsov. - St. Petersburg, 2004.
2. Big phraseological dictionary of the Russian language. Meaning. Use. cultural commentary. - M., 2008.

9. Big encyclopedic dictionary: Linguistics. M., 1998.

10. Vasyukova I. A. Dictionary of foreign words. - M., 1998.

11. Vvedenskaya L.A. Dictionary of antonyms of the Russian language. - M., 2002.

12. Gorbachevich K.S. Dictionary of synonyms of the Russian language. - M., 2006.

13. Dal V.I. Explanatory dictionary of the living Great Russian language. In 4 volumes. 7th ed. - M., 1970 (and subsequent editions).

14. Dubrovina, K.N.: Biblical phraseological units in Russian and European culture. - M., 2012.

15. Kolesnikov N. P. Dictionary of homonyms of the Russian language. - M., 1978 (and subsequent editions).

16. Zhukov V.P. Dictionary of Russian proverbs and sayings. - M., 1991.

17. Zimin V.I., Spirin A.S. Proverbs and sayings of the Russian people. Explanatory words. - M., 1996.

18. Krasnykh V.I. Explanatory dictionary of paronyms of the Russian language. - M., 2003.

19. Krysin L.P. Explanatory dictionary of foreign words. - M., 2005.

20. Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary. - M., 1990.

21. Lvov M. R. Dictionary of antonyms of the Russian language. - M., 1985 (and subsequent editions).

22. Lvov M. R. School dictionary of antonyms of the Russian language. - M., 1980 (and subsequent editions).

23. Melerovich A.M., Mokienko V.M. Phraseologisms in Russian speech. Vocabulary. - M., - 2001

24. Mokienko V.M., Nikitina T.G. Big dictionary of Russian jargon. - St. Petersburg, 2000.

25. New words and meanings. Dictionary-reference book on the materials of the press and literature of the 60s / Ed. N. Z. Kotelova, Yu. N. Sorokina. - M., 1971.

26. New words and meanings. Dictionary-reference book on the materials of the press and literature of the 70s / Ed. N. Z. Kotelova. - M., 1984.

27. Ozhegov S. I. Dictionary of the Russian language / Pod. Ed. N. Yu. Shvedova. - M., 1972 (and subsequent editions).

28. Ozhegov S. I., Shvedova N. Yu. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. - M., 1993 (and subsequent editions).

29. Rogozhnikova R.P. Dictionary of obsolete words of the Russian language. - M., 2005.

30. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. In 4 volumes. Ed. D. N. Ushakova. - M., 1935-1940 (and subsequent editions).

31. Dictionary of the modern Russian language. Tt. 1–17. – M.–L., 1948–1965. (BAS-1)

32. Dictionary of the modern Russian language. At 20 t. ed. since 1991 (BAS-2)

33. Dictionary of the Russian language / Ed. A. P. Evgenieva. In 4 volumes. - M., 1957-1961. (MAS-1)

34. Dictionary of the Russian language / Ed. A. P. Evgenieva. In 4 volumes. - M., 1981-1984. (MAS-2)

1. Dictionary of synonyms, ed. A.P. Evgenieva. - M., 1975 (and subsequent editions).
2. Modern dictionary of foreign words. - M., 1999.

37. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language of the late twentieth century. Language changes / Under. Ed. G.N. Sklyarevskaya. - St. Petersburg, 1998.

1. Explanatory dictionary of the modern Russian language. Language changes at the end of the 20th century / OR RAN; Ed. G.N. Sklyarevskaya. - M., 2001.
2. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language at the beginning of the XXI century. Current vocabulary. Ed. G.N. Sklyarevskaya. - M., 2007.

40. Fasmer M. Etymological dictionary of the Russian language: In 4 volumes - M., 1964-1973 (and other editions).

41. Phraseological dictionary of the Russian language. Ed. A.I. Molotkova. 2nd ed. - M., 1968.

42. Phraseological dictionary of the Russian language. / Comp. A.N. Tikhonov. - M., 2003.

43. Phraseological dictionary of the Russian literary language. In 2 volumes / Comp. A.I. Fedorov. - M., 1997.

44. Frequency dictionary of the Russian language / Ed. L. N. Zasorina. M., 1977.

UDC 811.161.1

BBK 81.2Rus-92.3

Valgina N.S.

Rosenthal D.E.

Fomina M.I.

Modern Russian: Textbook / Edited by N.S. Valgina. - 6th ed., revised. and additional

Moscow: Logos, 2002. 528 p. 5000 copies

Reviewers: Doctor of Philology, Professor N.D. Burvikov,

Doctor of Philology Professor V.A. Pronin

Contains all sections of the modern Russian language course: vocabulary and phraseology, phonetics, phonology and orthoepy. graphics and spelling, word formation, morphology, syntax and punctuation. In preparing this edition, achievements in the field of the Russian language over the past 15 years have been taken into account. Unlike the fifth edition (M.: Vysshaya shkola, 1987), the textbook includes materials covering active processes in the modern Russian language, and the list of word-formation methods has been replenished. trends in the use of forms of grammatical number, gender and case are noted, changes in syntax are taken into account.

For students of higher educational institutions studying in philological and other humanitarian areas and specialties.

ISBN ISBN 5-94010-008-2

© Valgina N.S., Rozental D.E., Fomina M.I., 1987

© Valgina N.S. Reworked and supplemented, 2001

© Logos, 2002

Valgina N.S.

Rosenthal D.E.

Fomina M.I.

Modern Russian

From the publisher

This textbook is intended primarily for students of philological specialties of higher educational institutions. But it is also designed for use in the educational process in a wide range of humanitarian specialties - of course, primarily those where the possession of the expressive means of literary speech is a prerequisite for successful professional activity. It seems that in any case the textbook will be useful to future lawyers, teachers, art critics, and journalists.

The peculiarity of the publication - conciseness and compactness of the presentation of the material - takes into account the diversity of the needs of a possible audience. Therefore, the duration of the lecture course, practical and self-study using this textbook may vary depending on the direction, the specialty of training humanities, as well as the form of education: daytime, evening or correspondence.

The textbook contains all sections of the modern Russian language course; vocabulary and phraseology, phonetics, phonology and orthoepy, graphics and spelling, word formation, morphology, syntax and punctuation.

In preparing this edition, achievements in the field of the Russian language over the past fifteen years have been taken into account. The wording of certain theoretical positions has been changed, new concepts have been introduced, terminology has been clarified, illustrative materials and bibliography have been partly updated, active processes in the modern Russian language, especially in the field of vocabulary and syntax, have been highlighted.

The content of sections and paragraphs has been supplemented with new information, in particular: the provision on the slightly changed status of the literary language is substantiated; the list of word formation methods has been expanded; trends in the use of grammatical number forms are noted; data are given on sentences of real and irreal modality, coordination of forms of the subject and predicate, genitive sentences, as well as on the ambiguity of resolving the issue of homogeneity and heterogeneity of predicates, etc.

Thus, the name of the textbook - "Modern Russian Language" - reflects the essential features of the educational material presented in it. Moreover, the textbook to some extent reveals those trends that, as can be foreseen today, will determine the development of the Russian language in the 21st century.

This sixth edition was prepared by N.S. Valgina based on the stable textbook of the same name, which went through five editions.

Introduction

The modern Russian language is the national language of the great Russian people, a form of Russian national culture.

The Russian language belongs to the group of Slavic languages, which are divided into three subgroups: Eastern - Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian; southern - Bulgarian, Serbo-Croatian, Slovenian, Macedonian; western - languages ​​​​Polish, Czech, Slovak, Kashubian, Lusatian. Going back to the same source - the common Slavic language, all Slavic languages ​​\u200b\u200bare close to each other, as evidenced by the similarity of a number of words, as well as phenomena of the phonetic system and grammatical structure. For example: Russian tribe, Bulgarian tribe, Serbian tribe, Polish plemiê, Czech pl e mě, Russian clay, Bulgarian clay, Czech hlina, Polish glina; Russian summer, Bulgarian lato, Czech l e to, Polish lato; Russian red, Serbian red a San, Czech kr a sn y; Russian milk, Bulgarian milk, Serbian milk, Polish mieko, Czech ml e ko etc.

Russian National language represents a historically established linguistic community and unites the entire set of linguistic means of the Russian people, including all Russian dialects and dialects, as well as social jargons.

The highest form of the national Russian language is Russian literary language.

At different historical stages of the development of the national language - from the language of the people to the national one - in connection with the change and expansion of the social functions of the literary language, the content of the concept of "literary language" changed.

Modern Russian literary language is a standardized language that serves the cultural needs of the Russian people; it is the language of state acts, science, the press, radio, theater, and fiction.

“The division of the language into literary and folk,” wrote A.M. Bitter, means only that we have, so to speak, a “raw” language and processed by masters.

The standardization of the literary language lies in the fact that the composition of the dictionary is regulated in it, the meaning and use of words, pronunciation, spelling and the formation of grammatical forms of words obey the generally accepted pattern. The concept of the norm, however, does not exclude in some cases options that reflect the changes that are constantly taking place in the language as a means of human communication. For example, accent options are considered literary: far - far, high - high, otherwise - otherwise; grams, forms: waving - waving, meowing - meowing, rinsing - rinsing.

The modern literary language, not without the influence of the media, noticeably changes its status: the norm becomes less rigid, allowing variation. It focuses not on inviolability and universality, but rather on communicative expediency. Therefore, the norm today is often not so much a ban on something as a choice. The boundary between normativity and non-normativity is sometimes blurred, and some colloquial and vernacular linguistic facts become variants of the norm. Becoming a common property, the literary language easily absorbs previously forbidden means of linguistic expression. It is enough to give an example of the active use of the word "lawlessness", which previously belonged to the criminal jargon.

Literary language has two forms: oral and written, which are characterized by features both from the side of the lexical composition and from the side of the grammatical structure, because they are designed for different types of perception - auditory and visual.

The written literary language differs from the oral language primarily in the greater complexity of syntax and the presence of a large amount of abstract vocabulary, as well as terminological vocabulary, in particular international. Written literary language has stylistic varieties: scientific, official business, journalistic, artistic styles.

Literary language, as a normalized, processed common language, is opposed to local dialects and jargon. Russian dialects are combined into two main groups: the North Russian dialect and the South Russian dialect. Each of the groups has its own distinctive features in pronunciation, vocabulary and grammatical forms. In addition, there are Central Russian dialects, which reflect the features of both dialects.

Modern Russian literary language is the language of interethnic communication of the peoples of the Russian Federation. The Russian literary language introduces all the peoples of Russia to the culture of the great Russian people.

Since 1945, the UN Charter has recognized the Russian language as one of the official languages ​​of the world.

There are numerous statements of great Russian writers and public figures, as well as many progressive foreign writers about the strength, wealth and artistic expressiveness of the Russian language. Derzhavin and Karamzin, Pushkin and Gogol, Belinsky and Chernyshevsky, Turgenev and Tolstoy spoke enthusiastically about the Russian language.

The course of the modern Russian language consists of the following sections: vocabulary and phraseology, phonetics and phonology, orthoepy, graphics and spelling, word formation, grammar (morphology and syntax), punctuation.

Vocabulary and phraseology study the vocabulary and phraseological composition of the Russian language and the patterns of its development.

Phonetics describes the sound composition of the modern Russian literary language and the main sound processes occurring in the language, the subject of phonology is phonemes - the shortest sound units that serve to distinguish the sound shells of words and their forms.

Orthoepy studies the norms of modern Russian literary pronunciation.

Graphic arts introduces the composition of the Russian alphabet, the relationship between letters and sounds, and spelling- with the basic principle of Russian spelling - morphological, as well as phonetic and traditional spellings. Spelling is a set of rules that determine the spelling of words.

word formation studies the morphological composition of the word and the main types of formation of new words: morphological, morphological-syntactic, lexical-semantic, lexical-syntactic.

Morphology is the doctrine of grammatical categories and grammatical forms of the word. She studies the lexico-grammatical categories of words, the interaction of lexical and grammatical meanings of a word, and ways of expressing grammatical meanings in Russian.

Syntax is the doctrine of sentences and phrases. Syntax studies the basic syntactic units - a phrase and a sentence, types of syntactic connection, types of sentences and their structure.

Based on the syntax, punctuation is built - a set of rules for punctuation.

VOCABULARY AND PHRASEOLOGY

Vocabulary of the Russian language

The concept of vocabulary and lexical system

Vocabulary the whole set of words of the language, its vocabulary is called. The section of linguistics that studies vocabulary is called lexicology(gr. lexikos - dictionary + logos - teaching). There is a difference between historical lexicology, which studies the formation of vocabulary in its development, and descriptive lexicology, which deals with the meaning of a word, semantics (gr. semantikos - denoting), volume, structure of vocabulary, etc., i.e. considering various types of word relationships in a single lexico-semantic system. Words in it can be related by similarity or opposite meanings (cf., for example, synonyms and antonyms), commonality of functions performed (cf., for example, groups of colloquial and book words), similarity of origin or proximity of stylistic properties, as well as belonging to the same part of speech and etc. This kind of relationship of words in different groups, united by a common feature, is called paradigmatic(gr. par a deigma - example, sample) and are the main ones in determining the properties of the system.

A kind of system connections is the degree of lexical compatibility of words with each other, otherwise the relationship syntagmatic(Greek syntagma - something connected), which often influence the development of new paradigms. For example, for a long time the word state was associated in meaning only with the word state as "a political organization of society headed by the government or its bodies." Being a relative adjective in meaning, it was combined with a certain circle of words like: system, border, institution, employee and under. Then its syntagmatic relations expanded: it began to be used in combination with the words thinking, mind, person, action, deed etc., while acquiring the qualitative-evaluative meaning "capable of thinking and acting broadly, wisely." This, in turn, created the conditions for the emergence of new paradigmatic connections, which also influenced the development of new grammatical meanings and forms: since the word in certain cases performs the functions of qualitative adjectives, it became possible to form abstract nouns from it - statehood, quality adverbs - state, antonyms - non-state, anti-state etc.

Consequently, both types of systemic relations are closely related to each other and form a complex lexico-semantic system as a whole, which is part of the general language system.

Semasiological characteristics of the modern lexical system

The lexical meaning of the word. Its main types

The word differs in its sound design, morphological structure and the meaning and meaning contained in it.

Lexical meaning of the word is its content, i.e. the correlation between the sound complex and the object or phenomenon of reality, historically fixed in the minds of speakers, "formulated according to the grammatical laws of a given language and being an element of the general semantic system of the dictionary."

The meaning of words does not reflect the entire set of known features, objects and phenomena, but only those that help to distinguish one object from another. So, if we say: this is a bird, then in this case we are only interested in the fact that we have before us a kind of flying vertebrates, whose body is covered with feathers, and the forelimbs are transformed into wings. These features make it possible to distinguish a bird from other animals, such as mammals.

In the process of joint labor activity, in their social practice, people learn objects, qualities, phenomena; and certain signs of these objects, qualities or phenomena of reality serve as the basis for the meaning of the word. Therefore, for a correct understanding of the meaning of words, a broad acquaintance with the social sphere in which the word existed or exists is necessary. Consequently, extralinguistic factors play an important role in the development of the meaning of a word.

Depending on which feature is the basis of the classification, four main types of lexical meanings of words can be distinguished in the modern Russian language.

By connection, correlation with the subject of reality, i.e. according to the method of naming, or nomination (lat. nominatio - naming, name), direct, or basic, and figurative, or indirect meanings are distinguished.

Direct meaning is one that is directly related to an object or phenomenon, quality, action, etc. For example, the first two meanings of the word hand will be direct: "one of the two upper limbs of a person from the shoulder to the end of the fingers ..." and "... as an instrument of activity, labor."

portable is a meaning that arises not as a result of direct correlation with the object, but through the transfer of direct meaning to another object due to various associations. For example, the following meanings of the word hand will be portable:

1) (only singular) manner of writing, handwriting; 2) (plural only) labor force;

3) (only pl.) about a person, a person (... with a definition) as the owner, owner of something; 4) a symbol of power; 5) (only singular, colloquial) about an influential person who is able to protect, provide support; 6) (only singular) about the consent of someone to marriage, about the readiness to marry.

The connections of words with a direct meaning depend less on the context and are conditioned by subject-logical relations, which are quite wide and relatively free. The figurative meaning depends much more on the context; it has a living or partially extinct imagery.

According to the degree of semantic motivation, the meanings are divided into unmotivated(or non-derivative, idiomatic) and motivated(or derivatives of the first). For example, the meaning of the word hand- unmotivated, and the meanings of words manual, sleeve and others - are already motivated by semantic and derivational connections with the word hand.

According to the degree of lexical compatibility, the meanings are divided into relatively free(these include all the direct meanings of words) and not free. Among the latter, there are two main types:

1) phraseologically related meaning is called such that occurs in words in certain lexically indivisible combinations. They are characterized by a narrowly limited, stably reproducible range of words, the links between which are determined not by subject-logical relations, but by the internal laws of the lexico-semantic system. The boundaries of the use of words with this meaning are narrow. Yes, the word bosom the figurative meaning "sincere, sincere" is realized, as a rule, only in combination with the word friend (friendship);

2) syntactically determined meaning is called such that appears at the word when it performs an unusual role in a sentence. In the development of these meanings, the role of context is great. For example, when using the word oak as characterizing person: Oh, you, oak, did not understand anything- its meaning "dumb, insensitive" (colloquial) is realized.

A variety of syntactically conditioned meanings includes the so-called structurally limited, which occurs only when the word is used in a certain syntactic construction. For example, the relatively recent meaning of "district, region, scene" of the word geography due to its use in a construction with a noun in the genitive case: geography of sports victories.

According to the nature of the performed nominative functions, the meanings are actually nominative and expressive-synonymous.

Nominative are called those that directly, immediately name an object, phenomenon, quality, action, etc. In their semantics, as a rule, there are no additional signs (in particular, evaluative ones). Although over time, such signs may appear. (In this case, various kinds of figurative meanings develop, but this group is distinguished according to a different classification feature. See type 1.)

For example, the words writer, assistant, make noise and many others. others

Expressive-synonymous the meaning of the word is called, in the semantics of which the emotional-expressive feature predominates. Words with such meanings exist independently, are reflected in the dictionary and are perceived as evaluative synonyms for words that have a proper nominative meaning. Wed: writer - scribbler, hack writer; assistant - accomplice; make noise - make noise. Consequently, they not only name the object, action, but also give a special assessment. For example, roam(simple) not just “make noise”, but “behave noisily, fussily, dissolutely, dishonorably”.

In addition to these main types of lexical meanings, many words in the Russian language have shades of meanings, which, being closely related to the main one, still have differences. For example, along with the first direct meaning of the word hand in dictionaries, its shade is also given, i.e. a semicolon indicates "part of the same limb from the metacarpus to the end of the fingers." (Compare in the dictionary the shades of meanings of the word book and many other words.)

The word as a lexical and grammatical unit of the language

The word as the basic unit of language is studied in various sections of linguistics.

Yes, in terms of phonetic the sound shell is considered, those vowels and consonants that make up the word are distinguished, the syllable on which the stress falls is determined, etc.

Lexicology(descriptive) first of all finds out everything related to the meaning of the word: clarifies the types of meanings, determines the scope of the word, stylistic coloring, etc. For (historical) lexicology, the question of the origin of the word, its semantics, sphere of use, stylistic affiliation, etc. is important. during different periods of language development.

From point of view grammatical the belonging of a word to one or another part of speech, the grammatical meanings and grammatical forms inherent in the word (see § 106 for more details), and the role of words in a sentence are revealed. All this complements the lexical meaning of the word.

Grammatical and lexical meanings are closely related, so a change in lexical meaning often leads to a change in the grammatical characteristics of a word. For example, in the phrase voiceless consonant word deaf(in the meaning of "sound formed only with the participation of one noise, without the participation of voice") - this is a relative adjective. And in the phrase hollow voice word deaf(meaning "muffled, obscure") - this is a qualitative adjective, having degrees of comparison, a short form. Consequently, the change in meaning also affected the morphological characteristics of the word.

Lexical meanings influence not only the ways of forming individual grammatical forms, but also the formation of new words. So, as a result of the historical development of the meanings of one word fur There are two different words that mean different things: squirrel fur and blacksmith's fur(see § 5 about this).

The lexical meaning in a word can be unique (such words are called unambiguous), but it can also coexist with other lexical meanings of the same word (such words are called polysemantic).

Polysemy of a word

ambiguity, or polysemy(gr. poly - many + sma - sign), the property of words is called to be used in different meanings. So, the word core in modern Russian has several meanings:

1) the inner part of the fetus in a hard shell: And the nuts are not simple, all the shells are golden,nuclei- pure emerald(P.); 2) the basis of something (bookish): On the Volga it was destroyedcorefascist army; 3) the central part of something (spec.): core atom; 4) an old gun shell in the form of a round cast body: are rollingnuclei, whistling bullets, hanging cold bayonets(P.). The semantic connection of the selected meanings is close, therefore all of them are considered as meanings of the same word.

Word pipe, for example, in phrases water pipe or Spyglass has the meaning "a long, hollow, usually round object." Trumpet a wind brass musical instrument with a strong sonorous timbre is also called: My creator! deafened, louder than anypipes! (Gr.). This word is also used in such a special sense as “a channel in the body for communication between organs”, for example, Eustachianpipe.

Thus, in the process of its historical development, in addition to its original meaning, a word can acquire a new, derived meaning.

The ways of forming the meanings of words are different. A new meaning of a word can arise, for example, by transferring the name according to the similarity of objects or their features, i.e. metaphorically (from Gr. metaphora - transfer). For example; according to the similarity of external signs: nose(person) - nose(ship), object shapes: Apple(Antonov) - Apple(eye), according to the similarity of sensations, assessments: warm(current) - warm(participation), etc. It is also possible to transfer names according to the similarity of the functions performed (i.e. functional transfers): feather(goose) - feather(steel), conductor(official accompanying the train) - conductor(in engineering - a device that guides a tool).

A new meaning may arise as a result of the appearance of associations by adjacency (the so-called metonymic transfers, Greek metonymia - renaming). For example, the name of a material is transferred to a product made of this material: chandelier frombronze(name of material) - An antique shop was selling an antiquebronze(product from this material). In a metonymic way, various kinds of connotations also arise (gr. synekdochē), i.e. name in one word for an action and its result, cf.: embroider- exhibition of artistic embroidery; part and whole (and vice versa), cf.: Flashedjacketscapless and grayovercoats(i.e. sailors and foot soldiers; in this case, a person is named after a piece of clothing), etc.

Different meanings of a word, as well as their shades, make up its so-called semantic structure and serve as a vivid example of the manifestation of systemic connections within a single word. It is this type of relationship that allows writers and speakers to widely use polysemy, both without a special stylistic predestination, and for a specific purpose: to give speech expressiveness, emotionality, etc.

In the event of a break or complete loss of semantic links between different meanings, it becomes possible to name completely different concepts, objects, etc. with an already known word. This is one of the ways to develop new words - homonyms.

Lexical homonyms, their types and role in the language

Homonyms(gr. homos - the same + onima - name) words are called that are different in meaning, but the same in sound and spelling. In lexicology, two types of lexical homonyms are studied: complete and incomplete, or partial.