c) Synonymy. The ability of a language to express the same content by different means is manifested at the lexical-semantic level in that the language has a large number of synonyms - words that are identical or close in meaning.
Synonyms in the language are characterized by various functions - semantic and stylistic. The stylistic functions of synonyms (evaluation function and aesthetic function) in modern dialects are carried out in a peculiar way due to the mutual influence of dialects and the influence of the literary language, which became especially intense in the second half of the 20th century. The inclusion of words from other dialects and the literary language in the synonymic series leads to a restructuring of relations between its members, which can be seen in the example of the synonymic series considered above with the meaning of a lot "(§ 143). In it, the restructuring of relations between members is associated with the former ambiguity of some of them and the appearance in the synonymic row of the adverb full in the meaning of a lot (only in relation to objects)", whereas initially the meaning of plurality in this word was necessarily associated with the filled volume (there is a lot of water in the jar). Losing this element of meaning, the adverb completely becomes a doublet of the word marvelous, as a result of which the word marvelously falls into disuse, remaining only in the speech of the older generation. The most common is the stylistically neutral adverb many, which has no restrictions on compatibility.
Synonymy is associated with polysemy due to the fact that a polysemantic word in its different meanings (variants) is a member of different synonymic series. For example, in the Narym dialect of the Tomsk region, the word strong is included in three synonymous rows, since it has the corresponding meanings here: I - rich1 - black earth - strong "- prolific fertile (about the earth)"; II. rich2 - strong2 - strong "wealthy (about a good owner)"; III. strong3 - mighty - becoming - hefty strong (about a person, animal, machine)".
3 groups according to the definition of ambiguity:
1. many-valued. words, meaning cat. known to the entire population (walking - having fun, cheating on a spouse)
2. polysemy. at st. generation., are unambiguous in the pier. (pillar - vertical standing log; participant in land allocated for common use for 100 peasants; road separating plots)
3. word, cat. polysemantic in dialect, as a single lexico-sem. s-me, but not in the speech of each of the native speakers (they say - one meaning, art. - another: family at art. 10-50 people (I didn’t live in the family, only my husband is mother-in-law and father-in-law), at the pier. - husband, wife, children.
Enrichment of the literary language with the vocabulary of dialects.
Ex. 2 t.sp.
1. Efimov: lit. the dial is no longer replenished. words, excellent in the 19th century
2. Vinogradov: from ser. 19th century inclusion of regions. nar. vocabulary in the dictionaries of Russian.lit.yaz. become tense, diversified. and fast.
Thu. figure it out, no. took sl. Ushakova, 17-vol. BAS Russian language and MAC. The sampling method was used to select words marked regional: in Ushakov 3286 words, in BAS and MAC 1063. These words are used. and in the last dictionaries:
Name of persons by type d-ti (raft breeder)
Estimated vocabulary (lohmotnik)
Rodsvt. connections (matchmaker, brother-in-law)
Flora (hazel, moss mushroom)
Fauna (boba, billhook)
Pr-you life (golik, sheepskin coat)
Yavl-I pr-dy (mound, snowstorm)
Distraction lesika (flash, carols)
Ch. (bocharnichat, zhuhnut) + zvukopodr. (crow)
from 1063 - 405 n. without marks, 196 ch., 108 adj., 3 nar.
712 unmarked, 182 open, 91 obsolete, 58 special, 15 nar-poet.
Ways and reasons for the transition of dialect vocabulary into the literary language.
Reasons and conditions for the transition:
1. extralingu.
change in the region lang. interaction. Economy reasons: the development of new. r-in, involvement b. masses into production, migration, expansion of contacts with native speakers of the Lithuanian language, democrats of native speakers, Dr.
Art. Izv-ti words (media, os. newspapers)
Areal character: the wider the distribution, the more. b. the benefits of entering Lit. (carpet)
Factor ots-I equivalent dial. word in lith. (kizyaki - bricks made of clay, manure, straw)
F-r sl \ arr req. understanding by a native speaker sl \ reverse models) noun. + suf. = hooker
Motivation: Transition unmotivated. sv. limited, mainly motivation (hazel - no root in Lithuanian, mountain ash, viburnum, raspberry ...). often go over polynomial. the words
Expressions (choromina)
1. immediately
2. mediate
W/w city. vernacular; terminol. with-mu; language. thin liters, f-ra. The significance of the paths is different. Conductors: educational, special, scientific, art. liters, press, media, docs
Dialect phraseology.
It is customary to call dialect phraseology a set of dialect phraseological units - stable phrases with a holistic meaning, regularly reproduced in speech.
As in the literary language, the stability of a phraseological unit in dialects is understood as the unity of the composition and structure of a phraseological unit, the ability to have a well-established character fixed by tradition. The integrity of the meaning of a phraseological unit is manifested in its semantic and functional, but grammatical proximity to the word (to sit on the comb - "spin").
The regular use of phraseological units in the speech of speakers of a particular dialect is the main form of existence of these lexical units in the dialect language.
A distinctive feature of dialect phraseology, as well as literature, is its inherent pronounced figurative-emotional assessment of actions, qualities of objects that already have their own names in the language. For example: to fall through a stick - to become weak, weak. "It is natural that it is precisely because of their expressiveness that most phraseological units characterize the properties and state of a person. For example: a greedy person is a glutton"; dirty navel - "sloppy". The figurative and expressive essence of phraseological units is especially pronounced in cases where phraseological units are formed as a result of metaphorical transfer: swallow the sun - "yawn"; do not cover the tooth - "laugh"; to sit in rotten places - "to be bored, to lead a monotonous life."
Dialect phraseological units are semantically heterogeneous. In Russian folk phraseology, a significant number of thematic groups can be distinguished related to the reflection of the spiritual culture of the people, their production activities, the environment, etc. Phraseological units can characterize the properties, state of a person: to eat a tooth - to be experienced, "with a pestle in a mortar do not understand - \ mother - about a fidgety person; human actions: roar F loudly, cry for a long time, "walk - crawl"; can characterize natural phenomena: sweaty weather - thaw; pel, orphan winter - "warm, mild winter", horse water ~ ts dirty rain water"; can be the second names of household items: black shag - poker", steel pencil - | "scrap", etc. Dialect phraseological units actively reflect the people1-! rituals: shouting thresholds - asking for a gift from the bride", to go with whitewash - "to bring gifts to the bride", etc.
Dialectal phraseological units in their composition correlate with nouns (a rahman bobylka - ■ [a woman who does not know how to run a household"), adjectives (a century-old maiden - a girl who did not marry; an old maid"), verbs (past the mouth poking around - spinning in the head, in the language; about something familiar, but forgotten at the moment "), adverbs (kuda razh -I ■ very well"), interjections (forget the thunderbolt, split the scare, take you - abusive expressions of annoyance , dissatisfaction). In phraseological turns, the degree of fusion of components can be represented in different ways. So, in some phraseological units, figurativeness and figurative meaning are motivated (nests to play - to celebrate several weddings at once "), in others, the meaning is not motivated by the components that make up the phraseological unit. In such phraseological units it is impossible to establish the ways of forming a figurative meaning, to outline an image that carries the main expressive load (barma yaryzhka is a stupid person"). Phraseologism, as well as a free phrase, can be characterized by the following syntactic links between the components: agreement - in native boots (barefoot") walked for a long time, control - there is no one to reason with - consult "adjacent - the radio speaks the program well (predicts") - about the weather .
Dialects are characterized by turns of a tautological nature, which is due to the speaker's desire to clarify the direct nominative meaning of the first word in a phraseological unit, to increase the expressiveness of the entire phraseological turn. So, in the dialects of the Moscow region, the idiom ravat spring - "sow spring crops" is typical, in Voronezh dialects elephants are used to loiter - "to mess around", in Ryazan dialects - to rave nonsense - to talk nonsense", in Siberian - to run in races - to compete in running ", etc. d.
For phraseological units formed by the repetition of words of the same root, the loss of independent meaning in the second component is characteristic, which serves mainly to give the whole phraseological unit more expressiveness, emotionality, and also to enhance the semantic connotation: ; Right about the r about m, the legs are burning; Once I would talk about ltk and chat. Why talk in vain? Go work.
Tautological phraseological units can be different in their structure. 1) Verb + one-root adverb formed from a noun in the form of creation. p .: let's walk, throw kidkdm. 2) Verb + single-root noun in the form of other indirect cases: stand on the ground, lie down in the field. 3) Verb ol -+- single-root component in the form of a verbal adverb for -mya (-ma): fall down, sit down, burn bitterly. 4) Noun -+- adjective: dark darkness, good year. 5) Noun + verb: summer to fly, hours to watch, call to click. 6) Noun -\- noun with a preposition: day by day.
Are you one of the features of dialect phraseology? its inherent variability, which is revealed when a phraseological unit is repeatedly reproduced by the same person or when using a phraseological unit in the speech of residents of different settlements of the same region, as well as several; regions.
Phraseological variability implies the replacement of some components by others in case of identity of semantics. The reasons for the occurrence of variability are many factors, including the time frame for the use of phraseological units, the territory of functioning of phraseological units.
The variability of phraseological units in dialects in many cases arises in connection with the penetration and approval of new norms: accentological ones (to sell beauty - to sell beauty, to curl a chicken - to curl a chicken - a rite in which the bride was planted near a decorated Christmas tree, they sang songs to her, and the boyfriend or groom gave ransom), phonetic (horse fire - horseback in "fire - flame"), morphological, which are manifested most often in the forms of case, gender, number of nouns (collect length - mblino collect - collect molina - collect molina - a rite in which they gave gifts young gifts; shouting hubbub - shouting hubbub - shouting loudly, calling for help "; like a brown wolf - like brown wolves - work a lot, hard"), syntactic (howl in a voice - howl in a voice; walk around - walk in a circle - walk in circles - lead a round dance "; walk on a broom - walk for a broom - a wedding ceremony in which before the wedding, the bride, in front of the bath, stops by the groom's house to get together with a broom m treat).
Lexical variability is the most common phenomenon in dialect phraseology, which is largely due to the presence of synonyms in the speech of native speakers, the use, under the influence of radio, television, cinema, the school of literary, folk words along with dialect ones, etc. For example: add (expand) eyes ( light) - to be surprised, to be amazed, to look at something with surprise, "to collect (thresh, carry, chat, harrow, weave) around the head and into the bosom" - talk nonsense, like a spinner (vertnik, spinner) spin - behave fussily."
The variation of the components does not violate the integrity of the phraseological unit and does not destroy its semantics, but, on the contrary, makes it possible to more accurately convey the emotional and evaluative characteristics of the phenomenon.
Some dialect phraseological units may include words that are common with the literary language (far from relatives - a big difference "), others include dialect lexemes as a component (neither a candle to God, nor a burn to hell, cf. neither a candle to God, nor a poker to hell ; here the dialect phraseological unit varies the literary phraseological unit due to the use of the dialect word burn in its composition - "a stick that replaces the poker, which is interfered with by coals; a piece of wood burnt at the end"). The third type of phraseological units includes both dialect and literary words, but it differs in its peculiar structure and semantics (to ash one's head - "to do evil, to harm").
Interrelation of Dialectal and Literary Phraseology Osu
schestvuet through nationwide models, common as for the dialect
Noah, and for literary phraseology. Phraseological
model is a structural type of phraseological unit that provides
determines both its reproducibility and semantic stability
ness. According to one model, dialect phraseological units are created
virtuous maiden, untransplanted maiden and literary phraseolo
gism old maid.
Under the influence of the literary language, dialect phraseological units can change their lexical composition by replacing one of the components with a literary lexeme (to be in the scraps to be in the neighbors). A dialectal distinguishing feature may be lost if a dialectal phraseological unit is structurally trimmed to a literary phraseological unit (head to head).
In modern Russian dialects, not all thematic groups of phraseological units are included in the active vocabulary of dialect speakers. In connection with the change in the worldview and psychology of people in the conditions of universal literacy, the penetration of radio and television into rural life, many thematic groups of phraseological units are moving into a passive reserve. So, the phraseological units stake to stake - neither stake nor yard, "shepherdess to grab - to determine which of the fortune-telling friends will marry first", to eat fragments - "to be refused during matchmaking", etc. are preserved only in the speech of the older generation. Other phraseological units continue to live in new conditions, but change their original meaning and acquire a new meaning. So, the phraseological unit to sit in rotten places, formed from the name of the village of Gnilushki, which at first had the meaning of living in a remote village surrounded by swamps and forests, "changed its original semantics and began to be used in the meaning of" bored, lead a monotonous lifestyle "(There is nothing for us to sit in rotten places, We'll be watching TV soon.
Despite the increasing leveling influence of the literary language on dialects, the dialect language is replenished with new phraseological units that convey figurative representations based on the local specific situation, reflecting the life, work and character of the Russian people. The composition of such phraseological units may include expressions that characterize the new social conditions of life in a modern village (the chairperson road is an impeccable, impeccable, principled line of behavior, "to live in the bosses -" to be in a leadership position ", to a learned mind - with knowledge of the matter", to walk with tenth grade - to have a secondary education").
Dialect phraseology makes the speech of the speakers of this or that dialect figurative, vivid, emotional. And it is natural that it is this phraseology that is reflected in the contemporary works of art by many Soviet writers.
As a manuscript
KOBELEVA Irina Arnoldovna
MODERN RUSSIAN
DIALECT PHRASEOLOGY:
LEXICO-GRAMMATICAL AND
LEXICOGRAPHICAL ASPECTS
Specialty 10. 02. 01 - Russian language
dissertations for a degree
Doctor of Philology
Syktyvkar
The dissertation was completed at the Department of Russian and General Linguistics, Syktyvkar State University
Official opponents:
Lead organization:
KOSTUCHUK LARISA YAKOVLEVNA,
Doctor of Philology, Professor BRYSINA EVGENIA VALENTINOVNA,
Doctor of Philology, Professor VASILIEV VALERY LEONIDOVICH,
FGBOU HPE "SAINT PETERSBURG STATE UNIVERSITY"
The defense will take place on March 22, 2012 at 12.00. at a meeting of the dissertation council D 212.168.09 for the defense of dissertations for the degree of Doctor of Philology at Novgorod State University. Yaroslav the Wise at the address: 173014, Veliky Novgorod, Antonovo, Humanitarian Institute of Novgorod State University, room. 1213.
The dissertation can be found in the Scientific Library of Novgorod State University. Yaroslav the Wise, with an abstract - on the official website of the VAK at: http: // www.vak.ed.gov.ru, posted by "" 2011
Scientific Secretary of the Dissertation Council,
candidate of philological sciences, associate professor V.I. Makarov
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK
This dissertation is devoted to the problems of modern Russian dialectal phraseology and phraseography.
There are many scientific works that analyze the phraseological composition and use of phraseological units in the Russian language (see, for example, the works of V. L. Arkhangelsky, A. M. Babkin, V. V. Vinogradov, A. V. Zhukov, V. P. Zhukov, B. A. Larina, V. M. Mokienko, A. M. Molotkova, V. N. Telia, N. M. Shansky and others). Phraseologism is covered in them from different angles, which is of great importance both for its characterization as a special unit of the language, and for the characterization of properties related to its form, content, and use.
At present, the level of development of Russian phraseology as a scientific linguistic discipline is quite high: various types of dictionaries have seen the light, a special section of phraseology has appeared - phraseography, phraseological units from different areas of the Russian national language are studied in different aspects. There are also sections that scientifically describe the phraseological spectrum of territorial dialects - dialect phraseology and dialect phraseography.
A decade ago, R. N. Popov reasonably stated: “If the vocabulary of folk dialects has already been largely described, then the lexicographic development of their phraseology, in essence, is just beginning.” Recently, to the few former well-known dialect phraseological dictionaries: “Materials for the phraseological dictionary of dialects of the Northern Kama region” (1972), “Dictionary of phraseological units and other set phrases of Russian dialects of Siberia” (1972), “Phraseological dictionary of Russian dialects of Siberia” (1983) - added "Materials for the dictionary of phraseological units and other stable combinations of the Chita region" (1999-2004), "Dictionary of Pskov proverbs and sayings" (2001), "Phraseological dictionary of Perm dialects" (2002), "Materials for the ideographic dictionary of Novgorod phraseological units" (2004 ), Phraseological Dictionary of Russian Dialects of the Komi Republic (2004), “A Man in Russian Dialect Phraseology” (2004), “Phraseological Dictionary of Russian Dialects of the Baikal Region” (2006), “Phraseological Dictionary of Russian Dialects of the Lower Pechora” (2008). It is no coincidence that many researchers today talk about the “lexicographic boom”, about the “lexicographicization of modern linguistics”, about the “tendency towards lexicographic parametrization of the language”, while the creation of any regional dictionaries is recognized as extremely difficult, more time-consuming and in many respects more complex than compiling dictionaries of the Russian literary language.
Modern Russian dialectology is characterized by many scientific achievements, one can name a lot of fundamental works devoted to the study of vocabulary, phonetics, word formation, grammar of Russian dialects. Dialectal phraseology is also developing intensively, with the main attention being paid to the formal (structure, variation), semantic, etymological and ethno-cultural aspects of the dialectal phraseological unit. The grammatical aspect of dialectal phraseology has not yet attracted the attention of researchers, and since the grammatical side of dialectal phraseology is one of the least described, this negatively affects its lexicographic development. Meanwhile, the grammatical properties of phraseological units of the literary language have already been analyzed in sufficient detail (see, for example, the works of V. T. Bondarenko, L. P. Gasheva, V. G. Didkovskaya, M. L. Ermilova, A. V. Zhukov, V. P. Zhukova, G. I. Lebedeva, V. A. Lebedinskaya, T. N. Lyakhova, A. I. Molotkova, F. I. Nikonovaite, A. P. Okuneva, A. A. Khusnutdinova, A. M. Chepasova and others). Since the dialectal phraseological unit according to categorical features corresponds to the phraseological unit of the literary language, the task of describing the grammar of the dialectal phraseological unit, focusing on the current level of development of phraseological science, becomes relevant.
What has been said determines
Relevance ongoing research. It consists in the fact that today we need a comprehensive, comprehensive description of the phraseology of dialects (including vocabulary) and, most importantly, the development of the principles of such a theoretical and lexicographic representation, taking into account the latest achievements in the field of phraseology and phraseography of the Russian literary language, according to which at present it is possible to show almost all the parameters of a dialectal phraseological unit (its form, grammar, meaning, compatibility, paradigmatic relations). Consequently, the phraseology of Russian folk dialects can now be scientifically described and lexicographically represented and, thus, “pulled up” to the phraseology of the Russian literary language.
The theoretical basis of the study are works based on the recognition of phraseology as a special unit of language, which cannot be identified with either a word or a phrase and which has its own set of categorical features: 1) lexical (phraseological) meaning, 2) grammatical meaning, 3) a special component structure.
Object of study in the dissertation work are phraseological units used in modern Russian folk dialects.
Subject of study make up the semantics and grammatical properties of these units and their lexicographic interpretation.
Purpose of the study- to give a multidimensional description of the phraseology and phraseography of modern Russian folk dialects and develop the principles of lexicographic description of a dialectal phraseological unit.
To achieve this goal, it is necessary to solve tasks:
1) analyze the ways of presenting phraseological units in general and special dialect dictionaries,
2) consider the grammar of dialect phraseological units,
3) analyze the form (component composition) of dialect phraseological units,
4) consider the semantics (system relations) of dialect phraseological units,
5) to develop the structure of the dictionary entry of the dialect phraseological dictionary,
6) determine the composition of the dialect phraseological dictionary.
During the work on the dissertation, the following research methods:
1) a method of linguistic description, including observation, systematization, generalization of linguistic facts and allowing to explain the features of the structure and functioning of linguistic units, taking into account transitional cases;
2) the method of component analysis, which allows studying the semantic structure of phraseological units and ways of explication of certain aspects of their meaning;
3) a method of contextual analysis that allows you to establish the composition of phraseological units and identify the features of their implementation in the context;
4) the method of comparative analysis, which allows to correlate the phraseological systems of the literary language and folk dialects, as well as the methods of phraseographic representation of these systems;
5) the method of phraseological application, which consists in "imposing" a phraseological unit on a free combination and allowing to determine the degree of semantic fusion of its components and the integrity of its meaning;
6) the method of lexicographic description, which makes it possible to typify the formal and meaningful indicators of language units, text illustrations for them, etc.;
7) the method of etymological analysis, which allows to determine the internal form and origin of phraseological units;
8) the method of continuous sampling of linguistic facts, which allows taking into account not only the lexicographed linguistic material, but also the material contained in the illustrative fragments of dictionary entries;
9) method of quantitative processing and characterization of the material, allowing to clarify or identify the ratio of dialectal (if necessary, and literary) phraseological units.
Scientific novelty of the research. For the first time, an analysis of the current state of Russian dialect phraseography and its comprehensive critical assessment is given. The theoretical basis for the development of a dialectal phraseological unit in the dictionary is proposed. A unified program for the grammatical characteristics of dialect phraseological units recorded in dialect dictionaries is being implemented. The description of the grammar of a phraseological unit is carried out on the basis of the formal and meaningful features of a phraseological unit, manifested in its syntactic relations and connections with words as part of a phraseological combination. The degree and nature of the correlation between the grammar of dialect phraseological units, on the one hand, and literary phraseological units, on the other hand, are revealed. The main requirements for the description of the grammatical properties of phraseological units in dialect dictionaries are formulated.
Research hypothesis. The lexico-grammatical characteristic of a phraseological unit is its constant feature. The component composition and compatibility of phraseological units are closely related to their lexical and grammatical indicators and are conditioned by their belonging to certain lexical and grammatical categories, each of which is necessary for a person as a pragmatic means of linguistic categorization of reality. The unity and integrity of the description of phraseological units in the dialect dictionary is possible only with regard to their lexical and grammatical status.
Theoretical significance of the work consists in the fact that for the first time it develops and proposes for implementation in modern dictionaries of Russian dialects a single algorithm for presenting phraseological material with the obligatory consideration of the lexical and grammatical characteristics of the latter.
The practical significance of the study. The dissertation updated the applied nature of the proposed concept. The materials and the results achieved can be used in lexicographic practice when compiling phraseological dictionaries and dictionaries of words - both dialectal and those dedicated to the literary language. The fact of fixing the shortcomings of the lexicographic reflection of dialect phraseology can be valuable for groups of authors currently working on compiling dictionaries of Russian folk dialects. The results of the dissertation research can be important for the practice of university teaching when lecturing on modern and historical phraseology, dialectology, morphology, syntax, and when developing special courses on Russian idiomatics. Since "any kind of lexicography has a learning function", the results obtained in the dissertation can serve as the basis for developing the problem under consideration in a methodological aspect.
Sources and research material. The study of the phraseology of modern Russian dialects is currently possible on the basis of many dialect lexicographic sources. The dissertation essay is built primarily on the material of dictionaries, in which the phraseological spectrum of dialects of the Russian North is recorded. These include general dictionaries: “Arkhangelsk Regional Dictionary”, “Live Speech of the Kola Pomors”, “Novgorod Regional Dictionary”, “Regional Dictionary of Vyatka Dialects”, “Pomorskaya Speaking”, “Pskov Regional Dictionary with Historical Data”, “Dictionary of Vologda Dialects”, “Dictionary of Dialects of the village of Akchim, Krasnovishersky District, Perm Region”, “Dictionary of Dialects of the Russian North”, “Dictionary of Dialects of the Solikamsky District of the Perm Region”, “Dictionary of Perm Dialects”, “Dictionary of Russian Dialects of Karelia and Adjacent Regions”, “Dictionary of Russian dialects of the Nizovaya Pechora”, “Expressive Dictionary of a Dialect Personality”, “Yaroslavl Regional Dictionary”; special dictionaries: "Materials for the ideographic dictionary of Novgorod phraseological units", "Materials for the phraseological dictionary of dialects of the Northern Kama region", "Dictionary of Pskov proverbs and sayings", "Phraseological dictionary of Perm dialects", "Phraseological dictionary of Russian dialects of the Lower Pechora". Phraseological material from dictionaries of Russian dialects of other regions and from consolidated dialect dictionaries is also involved. The actual material used in the study was obtained by continuous sampling from the named primary sources. In total, the volume of the analyzed phraseological material is more than 30 thousand dictionary entries, and this number makes it possible to draw objective conclusions regarding the features of modern Russian dialect phraseology, as well as positive and negative assessments of the design of set expressions in dialect general and special dictionaries. The accumulated amount of linguistic material made it possible to raise the question of the semantics and grammatical properties of dialect phraseological units as a special problem requiring special study.
Defense provisions.
1. The lexical material of regional dictionaries has become the object of description in many scientific works, while the phraseological part of the dictionaries has not even received an overview comment: for this reason, it needs to be analyzed from the side of the vocabulary development of phraseological units, their quantitative and qualitative characteristics. In terms of the accuracy and depth of definitions, the completeness of grammatical information, the disclosure of the features of functioning, the representation of units in their external and internal consistency, the dictionary representation of dialect phraseology cannot be compared with the development of dialect vocabulary. Phraseology is an integral part of the vocabulary of the dialect along with words, respectively, and its dictionary description in terms of quality should be no less satisfactory than the description of dialect vocabulary. Regional dictionaries, which form a system of dialect lexicographic sources, reflect phraseology more narrowly and less consistently than vocabulary, so dialect phraseology needs a specific model for presenting material, which has not yet been developed.
2. Numerous differential dialect dictionaries invest in the concept of "phraseology" the most diverse content in nature and volume, showing heterogeneous verbal stable complexes behind the signs of phraseological units. In dialect dictionaries, arbitrariness and subjectivism are observed in establishing the degree of stability and in determining the semantic center of phraseological units, transferring the methods of lexicographic word qualification to phraseological material. Phraseological composition should be separated and described separately from the lexical composition of dialects, while the description of a dialectal phraseological unit should be based on the real properties of the phraseological unit itself and should be carried out on the basis of those of its features that determine its originality as a special unit of the language.
3. The necessary parameters for describing a dialectal phraseological unit include form, meaning, compatibility, lexical and grammatical characteristics, and emotional and expressive characteristics. Based on the extensive and unique dialect phraseological material, it is currently possible to develop the principles of a comprehensive, comprehensive theoretical and lexicographic description of the phraseology of Russian dialects, taking into account the latest achievements in the field of phraseology and phraseography of the Russian literary language, according to which it is possible to present almost all the parameters of a dialect phraseological unit - its form, meaning, grammar, compatibility, paradigmatic connections.
4. A dialectal phraseological unit exhibits grammatical properties that are different from the grammatical properties of a word, has a defective grammatical paradigm and different communicative significance of paradigmatic forms. The methods of describing the grammatical properties of phraseological units accepted in modern dictionaries of Russian folk dialects are insufficient and do not correspond to the modern level of phraseography: the grammatical information contained in dictionaries is fragmentary, inconsistent and limited to extremely rare special marks in phraseological units. In reality, the description of the grammar of a phraseological unit should not consist only in special marks, since the grammatical characteristic of a dialectal phraseological unit can be reflected in all elements of the dictionary entry (in the title, in the interpretation, in indicating the valence properties, in the illustrative material).
5. The lexico-grammatical characteristic is a mandatory, constant feature of any dialectal phraseological unit, it is with it that the main differentiation of the phraseological composition of Russian folk dialects is connected. Ignoring the belonging of a phraseological unit to one or another lexical and grammatical category leads to an incorrect definition of the status, component composition, type of definition, compatibility, systemic relations of dialect phraseological units.
6. General theoretical study and lexicographic description of the phraseological composition of modern Russian folk dialects should be correlated with each other.
7. The lexicographic and general theoretical description of dialect phraseology should be correlated with the lexicographic and general theoretical description of literary phraseology, while the parameters of the lexicographic representation of a dialect phraseological unit may be greater than that of a literary phraseological unit (the description of a dialect phraseological unit may be wider, since it is possible to show the ratio of dialect phraseological units different dialects). Many phraseological units are the result of individual creativity, and it is much more difficult to distinguish them from commonly used phraseological units in a dialect than in a literary language. Attracting a broad comparative background - extensive Northern Russian or other phraseological material - makes it possible to determine the status of a particular phrase used in a dialect text.
8. The lexicographic description of dialect phraseological units, if possible, should be correlated in different modern dictionaries of Russian folk dialects.
Approbation of the research results. The main results of the dissertation research are presented in 74 publications with a total volume of 60.93 pp. (below are the most significant of them). The most important provisions of the dissertation at all stages of work were discussed at scientific, scientific-practical and scientific-methodological conferences (meetings, symposiums) of various levels, including international ones: "Christianization of the Komi Territory and its role in the development of statehood and culture" (Syktyvkar 1996), "General problems of teaching languages: teaching the Russian language to Finno-Ugric audiences" (Syktyvkar 1998), "Transitional phenomena in the field of vocabulary and phraseology of Russian and other Slavic languages" (Veliky Novgorod 2001), "Avanesov Readings" (Moscow 2002), "Phraseology and worldview of the people" (Tula 2002), "Problems of modern Russian dialectology" (Moscow 2004), "The vocabulary heritage of V.P. Zhukov and the development of Russian and general lexicography" (Veliky Novgorod 2004), "Information potential of the word and phraseological unit" ( Orel 2005), "Actual problems of Russian dialectology" (Moscow 2006), "Word, phraseological unit, text in the literary language and dialects" (Orel 2010), "Literary and dialectal phrases geology: history and development” (Veliky Novgorod, 2011); All-Russian: “The theme of nature in fiction” (Syktyvkar 1995), “V. I. Dal and Russian regional lexicology and lexicography” (Yaroslavl 2001), “Russian culture and XXI century: problems of preservation and use of historical and cultural heritage” (Vologda 2004), “Slovo. Vocabulary. Literature: socio-cultural coordinates" (St. Petersburg 2005), "Russian word: literary language and folk dialects" (Yaroslavl 2007), "Lexical atlas of Russian folk dialects" (St. Petersburg 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009) ; republican and interuniversity: "Dialectical processes in phraseology" (Chelyabinsk 1993), "New in teaching the Russian language at school and university" (Ivanovo 1997), "Spiritual culture of the North: results and prospects of research" (Syktyvkar 1998), "Problems of studying Russian language at the present stage" (Ivanovo 1999), "Russian language at the end of the twentieth century" (Syktyvkar 2000), "Pskov dialects: synchrony and diachrony" (Pskov 2001).
Terminological base of research. 1) The work recognizes the definition of a phraseological unit, which is reflected in the "Dictionary of Phraseological Terminology" and which, as indicated, is accepted by most researchers, cf.: "Phraseological unit (phraseological unit, phraseological unit). 1. A relatively stable, reproducible, expressive combination of lexemes, which (as a rule) has a holistic meaning. Etc.: bring to light, no candle to God, no poker to hell, stick in the teeth. Use: Babkin A. M. 1964, 8; Larin B. A. 1977, 91, 148; Molotkov A. I. 1977, 29; Mokienko V. M. 1980, 4; Ivashko L. A. 1981, 7; Zhukov V.P. 1986, 5 and more. etc.” . Dialect phraseological units do not differ from literary phraseological units in terms of categorical features, but they have differences associated with existence in a certain territory. Dialect phraseological units in the dissertation work are those units that are not recorded in the dictionaries of the Russian literary language and in the dictionaries of jargons. 2) A scientific description is understood as a characteristic of a dialectal phraseological unit in all its parameters, under a lexicographic development - a presentation of a phraseological unit in the form of a dictionary entry.
Work structure. The dissertation consists of an Introduction, five Chapters, a Conclusion, a List of abbreviations adopted in the work, a List of used literature, including the names of 71 sources and 414 theoretical works, 9 of which are in foreign languages.
MAIN CONTENT OF THE THEsis
In Administered the general characteristics of the dissertation essay are presented, the object and subject of research, its goals and objectives are defined, the degree of development of the issue is highlighted. It also reflects the relevance, scientific novelty, theoretical and practical significance of the work done, describes the sources of factual material, indicates the theoretical basis of the research undertaken, lists the methods and terms used.
First chapter "General characteristics of Russian dialect phraseography", consisting of three paragraphs, is devoted to general issues of modern Russian dialect idiomatics. The first paragraph discusses the stages of formation and development of Russian dialect phraseology and phraseography, the history of which is closely connected with lexicography: the collection and description of stable combinations in word dictionaries led to the emergence, formation and development of this special linguistic science. At the same time, the very solution of the problems associated with the description of set expressions in general dictionaries influenced the lexicographic development of phraseological material, predetermined the need for a special presentation of it in special collections in which it could be described taking into account the specifics of its form and content. The authors of such collections as "Russians in their proverbs" (1831-1834), "Proverbs of the Russian people" (1861-1862), "Winged words" (1890) and others, not only systematized stable combinations, but developed criteria distinguishing them from other combinations of words, outlined ways of their dictionary representation, many of which are still taken into account and used in lexicographic publications.
A special place in the descriptions of the regional phraseology of the 19th century is occupied by the lexicographic works of V.I. active lexicographic development. In later dictionary works, the attention of scientists has also always been drawn to the peculiarities of dialect phraseology, its difference from the phraseological composition of the national Russian language. In any of the very first general dictionaries of Russian dialects, unusual "walking expressions" used in speech as ready-made, reproducible units certainly found a place. Turning to the “Dictionary of the Regional Vologda Dialect” by P. A. Dilaktorsky, or to the “Smolensk Regional Dictionary” of V. N. Dobrovolsky, or to any other regional dictionary of the Russian language of the early twentieth century, the reader will find that they also contain a large the number of stable folk turns of speech, placed either as independent entries, or, more often, inside dictionary entries and testifying to the expressiveness of the peasant language. These dictionaries made up for the lack of information about Russian dialects, they to some extent reflected not only phonetic or grammatical, but also idiomatic features of dialects, and long before the appearance of dialect lexicology and phraseology, the lexical and phraseological composition of the dialects of large regions of Russia was described.
The authors of most general regional dictionaries that appeared during the twentieth century do not aim to distinguish between idioms and other types of stable combinations, but strive to reflect them as fully as possible in all formal variants and with all shades of meaning, investing in the concept of "phraseology" diverse in nature and volume of content. Dialect dictionaries dedicated to the purely phraseological component of Russian folk dialects appear only in the second half of the 20th century.
The second paragraph analyzes those phenomena in the modern lexicographic interpretation of Russian dialect phraseology that can be characterized as innovative. In the most recent years, several specialized dictionaries have been published at once, describing the phraseological richness of a particular dialect, and the vast majority of these dictionaries demonstrate new approaches to the lexicographic development of the phraseological spectrum of Russian folk dialects. This is expressed both in the implementation of the idea of semantic presentation of the material, and in the expansion of the volume of the dictionary entry and the increase in the number of parameters that characterize the dialectal phraseological unit. Based on this, the dissertation examines in detail the varieties of ideographic representation of phraseological units and the content side of the etymological commentary in modern dialect phraseological dictionaries.
As for the ideographic approach to the study of Russian dialect phraseology, we note that many scientists consider the knowledge of individual phraseological-semantic fields and groups to be the most relevant today and tend to think about the need to create not alphabetic, but ideographic dictionaries of dialect phraseology. Thanks to such dictionaries, published or being prepared for publication, the lexicographic embodiment of the systemic relations that exist between dialect phraseological units contributes (in addition to ideographic dictionaries of literary language phraseological units) to a more objective representation of the Russian phraseological picture of the world. The definition of new extensive thematic arrays of dialect phraseological units provides more opportunities for identifying the features of the cultural and national worldview. It is fair to say that "the ideographic organization of phraseological material is interesting not only in the linguistic, but also in the cultural aspect, because with such a presentation, priority topics and speech situations are identified in which phraseological units are in demand" .
Another “innovation” that is increasingly found in modern phraseological dictionaries of Russian dialects is the introduction of a reference apparatus as an element of a dictionary entry describing one or another dialectal phraseological unit. The etymological commentary is awarded primarily to those phraseological units, which include a component that goes back to territorially limited lexemes. These components form several thematic groups, primarily denoting ethnorealities, representatives of evil spirits, body parts, geographical objects, animals. It is obvious that an adequate perception of the motivation of one or another dialectal phraseological unit largely depends on the understanding of its internal form. In addition, the inclusion of a reference apparatus in the structure of the dictionary entry, with the help of which the authors of the dictionaries explain the archaic, relic words and forms preserved in dialect phraseological units, sometimes going back centuries, allows us to speak in the aspect of retrospection about new sources of data for the history of the language, etymology, history. people.
The third paragraph is devoted to the grammatical characteristics of a phraseological unit as an aspect of its description in a dialect dictionary. The grammar of the phraseological unit is an integral part of the general grammar of the language, however, the categorical difference between the phraseological unit and the word as different units of the language predetermines the different manifestation of a single grammatical structure in the lexical and phraseological systems.
Phraseologisms are used in speech only with words, connecting with them as members of a sentence and forming phraseological combinations of categorically different units of the language (phraseological units and words), opposed to phrases consisting of categorically the same type of units (words). As part of the phrase-lexical combination, the features of the grammatical meanings of the phraseological unit and the ways of their expression in the language are manifested, which require an objective and exhaustive description in dictionaries. The quality of the lexicographic development of a phraseological unit directly depends on how fully and accurately it is described in terms of those parameters that determine its originality as a special unit of the language, different from both the word and the phrase. These parameters include, in particular, the following grammatical indicators: firstly, belonging to the lexico-grammatical category and, secondly, compatibility with the immediate lexical environment.
In the introductory articles of almost any general dialect dictionary there are sections called "Grammatical (morphological) characteristics of the word": these sections indicate which grammatical features of dialect words are described in the dictionary entry, and the grammatical marks used in the dictionary for dialect lexemes are explained. In any such dictionary, a fairly large number of phraseological units are also described, however, the introductory articles of none of the general dictionaries of Russian folk dialects contain a special section devoted to describing the grammatical properties that phraseological units that are included in the vocabulary of a particular dictionary have. In special dictionaries that describe exclusively the phraseological composition of dialects, there are also no sections in which the parameters for describing the grammatical characteristics of phraseological material would be specified. Only in rare cases, the introductory part of one or another dictionary of Russian folk dialects (primarily phraseological orientation) reveals the desire of the authors to demonstrate at least some grammatical features of dialect phraseological units, which include the grammatical compatibility of phraseological units, as well as their ability to change. At the same time, grammatical information about any dialectal phraseological unit can be occasionally presented directly in the corpus of dictionaries: when analyzing dictionary entries, some data about the grammar of a phraseological unit are found that are not specified in the introductory article as parameters for its description (for example, possible forms of number, gender, case, tense, type; syntactic model of use; lexical and grammatical correspondence to the word of one or another part of speech). Thus, it turns out that some grammatical information about dialect phraseology can, firstly, be predetermined by the introductory part of a particular dictionary (even if there is no special section devoted to this aspect of the lexicographic description of phraseological units in the dictionary) and, secondly, secondly, to be found in dictionaries, the prefaces of which do not contain any direct indications of the spectrum of grammatical indicators of one or another dialectal phraseological unit. Separate references to one or another grammatical feature can accompany phraseological units, while they leave aside many similar cases and therefore look disorderly: these indications are expressed by marks that are used extremely irregularly, only occasionally slipping through the entire corpus of the dictionary, now in one, then in another dictionary entry. In general, to characterize the lexicographic state of the grammar of dialect phraseology, one can use the figurative expression of V. V. Vinogradov: “Randomness reigns here”. Since the grammatical side of dialect phraseological units is objectively one of the two components of the unified grammar of the Russian colloquial language, along with the grammar of words and in comparison with it is no less important, just as original and unique, the grammar of dialect phraseological units has every right to be comprehensive and thorough (and not fragmentary or episodic, as is done so far) description in a dialect dictionary of any type - general or special (phraseological).
Second chapter "Lexical and grammatical characteristics of a phraseological unit" is devoted to the lexico-grammatical aspect of Russian dialectal phraseology and consists of two paragraphs. The first paragraph of Chapter 2 discusses the lexical and grammatical categories of dialect phraseological units. Isolation of the lexical and grammatical categories of phraseological units is a question that is solved ambiguously on the material of the literary language, since when assessing the phraseological composition from the point of view of the lexical and grammatical characteristics, there are serious discrepancies caused by different understanding of both the form and the meaning of the phraseological unit by scientists. This predetermines the allocation of a different number of lexical and grammatical categories of phraseological units of the Russian language, their mixing with each other, the diversity of terminology. In relation to dialect material, this question was hardly raised: in scientific works describing the phraseological composition of Russian folk dialects, some lexical and grammatical categories of phraseological units are mentioned, but their list, as a rule, is not final, as a result of which the units of the most problematic categories are within the framework of the lexico-grammatical classification, hiding behind abbreviations like "and others." A. I. Molotkov believes that the lexical and grammatical categories of phraseological units of the Russian literary language and the lexical and grammatical categories of dialect phraseological units, limited in their use only to a certain area, will be essentially the same, having common features, common criteria for delimitation.
The beginning of the lexico-grammatical classification of phraseological material, which we adhere to, was laid by the "Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language" (1967), where, based on the combination of three indicators (common meaning, the presence of the same set of grammatical categories, the same type of relationship with words in a sentence), six lexico-grammatical categories of phraseological units: nominal, adjective, adverbial, verbal, verb-propositional and interjectional. Since not all phraseological units of the Russian literary language fit into this classification, the lexical and grammatical affiliation of each described unit was not indicated in the named dictionary, but it was reflected in the types of definitions. The phraseological units remaining outside these six categories were considered by the editor of the Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language, A. I. Molotkov, as exceptions requiring special comments. Subsequently, it turned out that these “exceptions” are independent lexico-grammatical categories (indefinitely quantitative, pronominal, adverbial-predicative, modal phraseological units), it’s just that the significance of each of the three developed criteria for distinguishing these lexico-grammatical categories is not the same.
In this paper, a lexical and grammatical classification of phraseological units is adopted, consisting of ten categories: all dialectal phraseological material, drawn from the dictionaries of Russian dialects involved in the study, is divided into nominal, adjective, adverbial, verbal, verbal-propositional, indefinitely quantitative, pronominal, adverbial-predicative, modal and interjectional units (the classification of phraseological material in all these categories has already been applied in a number of dictionaries). Each of these categories is given a semantic and grammatical characteristic, emphasizing the unity of the form and content of a phraseological unit as a special unit of the language.
I. Nominal phraseological units are united by a common meaning of objectivity and are included in several semantic groups: they denote a person ( IRON PURPOSE‘greedy person’), a set of persons ( BRAKE‘influential persons who support smb.’), a specific subject ( SVATIA WITH A COOL HEART‘thundercloud’), speech segment ( WILD TALK‘lie, untruth, fiction that only a fool would believe’), time period ( THIN CHASINA‘time of action of evil spirits’), place ( RABBIT ISLAND‘cut off by the river from roads, from the “big world” section’), process ( DEMON HVATOVSCHINA‘drunkenness’), state ( BAY-KOROBEY‘disorder, chaos’), have a collective ( SHUHA-VALYUKHA‘something, any worthless rags; unnecessary things’) or a real value ( DAMN LEATHER‘black calico’). Each nominal phraseological unit can be characterized by gender (with the exception of units that have only the plural form of the BAB'I ZAPUKI type). The grammatical meaning of a number can be determined for any nominal phraseological unit, since each nominal phraseological unit has the form of either the singular or the plural. Dialect nominal phraseological units can be used in any case form and can have all the meanings assigned in Russian to one or another case. Typical syntactic functions for dialect nominal phraseological units are the functions of the subject, object, compound nominal predicate. Also, the nominative case form is very common when using nominal phraseological units as an address and application. The most typical syntactic models of dialect nominal phraseological units are: SUBJECT (nominal phraseological unit) + PREDICT; SUBJECT + PREDICT (nominal phraseological unit); PREDICT + ADDITION (nominal phraseological unit); PREDICT + CIRCUMSTANCE (nominal phraseological unit).
II. Adjective phraseological units designate a non-procedural sign of a person or object and can be divided into semantic groups with meanings: a property of a person ( LEATHER COVERED‘honest, decent, kind’), facial condition ( LIKE A BEER BOTTLE‘drunk’), item quality ( EXTENSIBLE ARM‘requiring a long time for its decision’). Adjective phraseological units have common grammatical categories of gender and number, some phraseological units - and the category of case. These categories are completely predetermined by the corresponding categories of words with which phraseological units are combined, and manifest themselves in different ways: synthetically and analytically. We observe a synthetic way of expressing grammatical meanings when an adjective ( ON THE STOMACH SHOULDER‘about a man with a big belly and greedy for food’), participle ( LIKE THE RAIN‘upset, unhappy, bent from failure’), pronoun-adjective ( ALL ABOVE‘about an open, trusting person’), a verb in the personal form ( SOON TO CHOOSE‘very greedy, stingy; stingy'). In such adjectival phraseological units, grammatical meanings are assigned to the named components and are expressed through them. We are dealing with an analytical way of expressing grammatical meanings when adjectival phraseological units are invariable and there are no components in their composition that could form grammatical forms with the meanings of gender, number or case ( FROM THAT SHORE‘about a dexterous, dodgy person’, GREAT LITERATURE‘about someone who has received an education’, FROM YOUR HANDS‘about something homemade’). In the colloquial language, adjectival phraseological units can be used in the functions of a compound nominal predicate, inconsistent definition and, subject to substantivation, subject or object. Syntactic models of the use of dialect adjective phraseological units can be divided into predicative ones, in which the adjective phraseological unit performs the function of a predicate: Subject + predicate (adjective phraseological unit), and attributive, in which the adjective phraseological unit performs the function of definition: SUBJECT + DEFINITION (adjective phraseological unit), APPENDIX + DEFINITION (adjective phraseological unit).
III. Adverbial phraseological units are combined into one category on the basis that, combined with verbs and adjectives, they designate, respectively, a sign of an action or a degree of manifestation of another sign. Phraseologisms that are combined with verbs are divided into several semantic groups: they denote the time of action ( FROM DARK TO DARK‘all daylight hours; from dawn to dawn’), scene ( ON THE SEVENTH END‘very far away’), the purpose of the action ( WITH DIFFERENT HANDS‘with different intent’), the reason for the action ( WITH A SIMPLE HEAD‘by its simplicity’), the compatibility of the implementation of the action ( WHOLE GAMAZ‘crowd’), mode of action ( HOW TO SHEET‘in a straight line’), the degree of completeness of the implementation of the action ( BEFORE EYE OUT‘to the point of exhaustion, from the last strength’) or characterize the actual action ( NEITHER GRAY NOR WHITE‘not very good, but not bad either’). Phraseologisms that are combined with adjectives indicate the degree of manifestation of the attribute in its pure form; their meaning can be expressed in words like very, absolutely, absolutely or, for more specificity, turns with these words, for example: ON EARS‘very, extremely (pleased)’, NOT IN A YEAR, BUT IN THE MOUTH‘very urgently (needed, necessary)’. Since adverbial phraseological units are invariable units, they are not associated with any grammatical categories and, therefore, have a zero grammatical paradigm. A typical syntactic function of adverbial phraseological units is the function of circumstances. A typical syntactic model of dialectal adverbial phraseological units is the PREDIC + CIRCUMSTANCE model (an adverbial phraseological unit).
IV. Verbal phraseological units designate an action as a process and are divided into semantic groups with meanings: the existence of a person ( GRASS TO CRUSH‘live’), his social and household activities ( COUGH LIKE A MAID‘live according to urban customs in the countryside’), behavior ( STEALING FROM YOUR PERIOD‘unusually save, cut back on food’), movement ( FEELING'pass the; overcome some. walking distance’), speaking ( TRABACHEL‘talk, talk in vain’), mental activity ( THROW DREAMS‘thinking, come to different decisions’), change in physical condition ( KUMAC SELL‘blush’), change in emotional state ( ENTER NERV‘come into a nervous, excited state; get nervous '), an active influence on someone or something ( THROW LOGS‘make some obstacles, interfere’), the attitude of one person to another ( RUN IN MUGS‘to look after someone, to please someone’), the action of a non-person ( FIELD LOOKING‘come to an end, end’), etc. The aspect category covers all verbal phraseological units without exception. A large number of verbal phraseological units can express the meanings of both the perfect and the imperfect form and form aspect pairs. There are two distinct groups of phraseological units that can be used either only in the form of an imperfect aspect, or only in the form of a perfect aspect. The tense category of verbal phraseological units is realized taking into account their specific characteristics: perfective phraseological units form past and simple future tense forms, imperfective phraseological units form past, present and future tense forms. For many verbal phraseological units that can have all potentially possible aspectual-temporal forms, some of these forms are not actually used in real speech practice: first of all, this concerns the forms of the future tense of the imperfective aspect. The category of mood is characteristic of any verbal phraseological unit, but it is realized with a different proportion of its constituent forms: dialectal verbal phraseological units in the form of indicative mood are the most communicatively significant. Any dialect phraseological units of the verbal type can change by person, which is manifested in the formation of the present and future forms of the indicative mood and the imperative mood forms from them. If gaps or restrictions appear in the personal paradigm of a verbal phraseological unit, this may mean a change in the lexical and grammatical characteristics of the original phraseological unit - its transition to the category of adjective phraseological units. Verbal phraseological units, denoting an action in relation to its object and subject, can be used in one voice or another, which is associated with such verb indicators as transitivity and reflexivity. All transitive phraseological units, characterized by the meaning of the active voice, are able to control a noun (pronoun) in the form of an accusative case without a preposition; intransitive verbal phraseological units cannot carry a controlled noun (pronoun) in the direct accusative case. Attaching a return postfix -sya to the verbal component of a transitive phraseological unit makes it intransitive, however, it translates this unit not into a passive, but into a reflexive-medial voice, giving it one of the possible meanings in this voice (for example, mutually reflexive, general reflexive, indirectly reflexive, etc.) . In a sentence, dialect verbal phraseological units are primarily characterized by the function of a predicate, performing which personal, infinitive and participle forms of verbal phraseological units are used in a common predicative model for them, which is realized in different versions: SUBJECT + PREDICT (verbal phraseological unit); SUBJECT + PREDICT (verbal phraseological unit) + COMPLETE; SUBJECT + PREDICT (verbal phraseological unit) + CIRCUMSTANCE.
V. Verb-propositional phraseological units denote a dynamic or static state and are distributed into several semantic groups with meanings: the physical state of a person ( APPETITE WITHOUT MISS FLYING‘about a good appetite’), a person’s state of mind ( DUSHENKA WILL GET TOGETHER IN THE HEEL‘about strong emotional excitement’), both the physical and mental state of a person ( HEART IN PLACE AND NAVAL IN THE HEART‘about the state of mental balance and physical health’), the state of relations between people ( ADVISORY DIDN'T TAKE‘no agreement, friendship’), mental abilities of a person ( BIBIKS DO NOT WORK‘no intelligence, ingenuity’), moral qualities of a person ( GLOBLI SHORT‘there are no stable moral norms’), a person’s ability to speak ( LESHAK DOES NOT GO FROM THE MOUTH‘about the constant use of the swear word “leshak”’), the movement of a person in space ( BADOG WHEELS‘about the fast walking of an old man leaning on a stick’), the property status of a person ( CHEETS CLICKING‘nothing to eat’), a state of affairs or a set of circumstances that develop for someone ( DOES NOT FORG, DOES NOT FLAT‘nothing comes out, it doesn’t work out’), a person’s appearance ( CHEEKS CLASH‘about the appearance of a healthy, full of strength man’), business qualities of a person ( HANDS INSERTED WRONG‘about a lazy and negligent person’), a person’s age ( YEARS FAR AWAY‘about the onset of old age’), the state of the object ( AFONYA LAPTI MOCHIT‘about sour food’), the state of the weather, nature ( THE GRAY OLD MAN HAS ARRIVED‘about the strong morning frost in autumn’), the state of the environment, the situation ( DAW IN SPRING HIDES‘about the good sprouts of bread’). Verb-propositional phraseological units, unlike verbal and adjective units, cannot be combined with the subject in the form of the nominative case: they are combined with nouns and pronouns that stand only in indirect cases and usually indicate the subject, whose state is characterized by verbal-propositional phraseological units. The category of time is characteristic of all verb-propositional phraseological units. If there is a verbal component, its tense form depends on its aspectual meaning. Those verbal-propositional phraseological units, which do not contain a verbal component, are able to show the grammatical meaning of time through a copula. The aspect category is inherent only in those verbal-propositional phraseological units, which include a verbal component in the personal form. In different contexts of use, the specific meaning of a phraseological unit may vary: more often than others, a specific change in the verbal component is fixed in those verb-propositional phraseological units that are included in semantic groups with the meaning of the physical or mental state of the subject. In verb-propositional phraseological units, the opposition of the forms of the indicative, imperative and subjunctive moods is possible, but in fact it is absent, since the phraseological units of the analyzed lexico-grammatical category are used in the overwhelming majority of cases in the form of the indicative mood. Verb-propositional phraseological units always perform the function of a predicate in one-part impersonal sentences. The most typical syntactic models of dialectal verb-propositional phraseological units are: PREDICT (verb-propositional phraseological unit) + COMPLEMENT (with the meaning of the subject); PREDICT (verb-propositional phraseological unit) + PLUS (with the meaning of the subject) + PLUS (with the meaning of the object); PREDICIAL (verb-propositional phraseological unit) + APPENDIX (with the meaning of the subject) + CIRCUMSTANCE; PREDICT (verb-propositional phraseological unit) + CIRCUMSTANCE.
VI. Indefinitely quantitative phraseological units denote an indefinite number of persons or objects, in semantic terms they can be identified with the indefinitely quantitative words "many", "little" and divided into two semantic groups opposed to each other: 1. denote an indefinitely large number of someone or something ( HOW IT IS PACKED'lot', WHOLE BODY‘very much, in large numbers’, BAS-BASY'lots of'); 2. denote an indefinitely small amount of someone or something ( CAT ON A SPOON‘very little smth.’, COCK CHOKING'very little', ON THE BACK TOOTH‘very few things.’). A specific grammatical feature of the category of indefinitely quantitative phraseological units is their regular compatibility with nouns and pronouns in the genitive case: nouns can be concrete, real, collective, abstract, but at the same time they must necessarily denote something that can potentially be subjected to account or measure. Dialect indefinitely quantitative phraseological units can perform the function of a subject, object and predicate in a sentence. Their typical syntactic models are: Subject (a combination of an indefinitely quantitative phraseological unit and a noun in the form of Gen. p.) + PREDICT; APPENDIX (in the form Gen. p.) + PREDICIAL (indefinitely quantitative phraseological unit); PREDICT + ADDITION (a combination of an indefinitely quantitative phraseological unit and a noun in the form Gen. p.).
VII. Pronominal phraseological units indicate a person ( BROTHER AND SWAT‘every one, anyone, anyone’, AND WITH THE FOOT, AND WITH THE HORSE, AND WITH THE LOSHI‘with anyone, with anyone, with everyone’), subject ( EVERY PLACE'anything; anyone, whatever, EVERY HOLE‘everything, a lot’), a sign of a person or object ( EVERYONE - EVERYONE 1. ‘of all possible kinds, varied’, 2. ‘from different places, different nationalities’, EVERYONE - EVERYONE‘any’), the missing number of persons or objects ( NO CAPO‘not at all’, NO CALL‘not at all’). The grammatical characteristic of dialectal phraseological units is revealed on the basis of their correlation with various categories of pronominal words. Pronominal phraseological units that can act instead of noun pronouns include units that replace personal ( MY SOUL‘I, myself’), attributive ( ANY PLACE‘anything’), interrogative ( WHAT ASS?‘who?’), negative ( NO AZ, NO EYE‘nothing’), indefinite pronouns ( MAN-OTHER‘someone, one person, someone’). The few pronominal phraseological units that can act instead of pronouns-adjectives include units that replace definitive pronouns ( ANY AND EACH'any', RAW AND BOILED‘everything and in every form’). Pronominal phraseological units that can act instead of pronouns-numerals include units that replace a negative pronoun not at all (NO CAPO‘not at all’). In a sentence, pronominal phraseological units perform a syntactic function according to the pronouns of what “partial affiliation” they replace: if they replace pronouns-nouns or substantiated pronouns-adjectives, then they have the function of a subject or object; if they replace pronouns-adjectives, then they are characterized by the function of a definition or a predicate; if they replace the pronoun-numeral, then they perform the function of an addition. Typical syntactic models of dialectal pronominal phraseological units are: SUBJECT (pronominal phraseological unit) + PREDICT; PREDICT + ADDITION (pronominal phraseological unit); SUBJECT + PREDICT (pronominal phraseological unit); ADDITION + PREDICT (pronominal phraseological unit).
VIII. Adverbial-predicative phraseological units express the meaning of someone's attitude to someone or something and are divided into the following semantic groups: 1. denote an approving or disapproving attitude of someone to something or someone ( TO HEART'Like', ON UMU‘to your liking’); 2. express an indifferent attitude, lack of interest of anyone in something or someone ( LIKE A COCK CANE‘at all, not at all, absolutely not needed, not interested’, BEFORE THE BODY‘indifferent, uninteresting’); 3. express familiarity / unusualness of something for someone ( IN CUSTOM‘usually’ NOT addicted‘out of habit’). Adverbial-predicative phraseological units are characterized by immutability and, consequently, the absence of form-changing grammatical categories. However, in some cases, with the help of a copula coordinating with the subject in gender and number, adverbial-predicative phraseological units can express a temporal meaning. Adverbial-predicative phraseological units are always used in two-part sentences in the function of a predicate in the general syntactic model SUBJECT (with the meaning of the object) + PREDICT (adverbial-predicative phraseological unit) + OBJECT (noun or pronoun in the form of Dat. p. with the meaning of the subject). Varieties of this model depend on how the subject is expressed.
IX. Modal phraseological units, expressing various expressions of the speaker's will, denote his rational reaction to something and are included in several semantic groups with meanings: confidence or uncertainty in something ( BATYUSHKO GOD, THE TRUE CHRIST!‘assurance of being right, swearing’), the desirability or undesirability of something ( CHUR ON THE COUNTY!‘defend God!’), a wish for someone in accordance with the requirements of etiquette ( EVE YES INCENSE!‘wish at a funeral or commemoration’), an unkind wish to someone ( KOROCHUN ON YOUR LANGUAGE‘wishing illness’), concession to someone or something in a hopeless situation ( CROSS trumps‘alas, there is nothing to do’), the result of what was said or the reaction to what was said ( HERE IS A BARY‘here’s the thing’), making a request to someone ( BE NATIVE'be kind'). Modal phraseological units are, as a rule, unchangeable units. For the most part, they are devoid of syntactic connections with words and, therefore, do not form phraseological combinations. Only those units that express various kinds of wishes can have syntactic distribution with personal (less often - possessive) pronouns, indicating the person to whom this or that wish is addressed.
X. Interjectional phraseological units are a verbal representation of emotions and serve to convey mental states, sensations, involuntary emotional reactions of the speaker: his joy, admiration, annoyance, discontent, surprise, fright, grief, etc. The same interjectional units are able to express a variety of feelings. This phenomenon is called the poly-emotionality of interjectional phraseological units, which makes it difficult to "semantic" differentiation of the latter. It seems that, more or less definitely, dialectal interjectional phraseological units can be divided into the following groups: POOR TROUBLE‘interjection, mournful exclamation’, EPISHKI'S GORRY!‘an exclamation expressing a feeling of annoyance’, THAT'S SAMARA-CITY!‘expression of displeasure, irritation, annoyance’); 2. "multi-valued" phraseological units expressing different feelings in different contexts ( GOD YES CHRIST‘expression of surprise, irritation, etc.’, MOTHER SANIE‘emotional exclamation (annoyance, surprise)’, PALM OF THE GROSS!‘an exclamation expressing various feelings’). Interjectional phraseological units do not change and do not have any grammatical categories. In any sentence, they occupy a syntactically isolated position, are in no way connected with other words and are not members of the sentence.
The second paragraph of Chapter 2 is devoted to the analysis of transitional phenomena that are observed in the system of lexical and grammatical categories of dialect phraseological units. Here we consider such facts of phrase formation that are associated with the grammar of a dialect phraseological unit, namely, with the transition of phraseological units from one lexico-grammatical category to another: the focus is on the processes of formation of adjective and verb-propositional phraseological units from verbal phraseological units, as well as the reflection of these phenomena in lexicographic practice.
The first section of the paragraph analyzes the process of transition of verbal dialect phraseological units into adjectival units, which is observed when the verbal component is fixed in one grammatical form (mainly in the form of the 3rd person of the present or future tense: DOES NOT EAT ONLY FIREWOOD‘about an unpretentious, illegible person in food’, MILK WILL NOT SPILL‘lazy’), while the phraseological unit loses its procedural meaning and acquires the meaning of a permanent feature of a person or, less often, an object. Such phraseological units, which have undergone the process of “deverbalization” and assimilated with the class of adjectival phrases, are divided into several semantic groups: they denote the physical state of a person ( THE MOUNTAIN WILL BE MOVED‘very healthy, strong, hardy’), denote the external qualities of a person ( NAILS LOOKING FOR‘about a hunchbacked man’), characterize a lazy, idle person ( CONSTRUCTION WILL NOT BE INTERRUPTED‘about a lazy, negligent person’), characterize a dexterous, dodgy person ( BETWEEN THE EYES THE NOSE IS RESISTANT‘about a clever, cunning person, a thief’), characterize a lively, restless person ( ON THE SIDE DIRA TURNS‘about a restless person’), characterize a skillful, skillful person ( BREAD WILL GET ON THE BORA‘about a dexterous, skillful worker’), characterize a greedy, stingy person ( STONE WILL NOT ALLOW HEAD TO BREAK‘about the greedy’). The meaning of these phraseological units is associated not with processuality, but with a qualitative characteristic of a person or object, which also manifests itself at the grammatical level: in dictionary entries headed by a verbal phraseological unit, which is the source for the formation of an adjective phraseological unit, there is often a violation of the aspect correlation between the verbal component in the title and the verb in the definition. Wed: ASK THE POP FOR A MARE‘to be bold, impudent’, FROM SAND ROPE TO TWIST‘be a good craftsman, craftsman’, EAR WITH EYE PULL'to be active, active, courageous', etc. Such attempts to interpret an allegedly verbal phraseological unit through an infinitive turn can hardly be considered successful: in the examples given, a constant sign of a person is indicated, the value of a qualitative characteristic prevails over processuality, therefore it would be more correct to give an interpretation according to attributive formula, thus avoiding the grammatical characteristics inherent in verbal phraseological units (for example: POP'S MARE REQUEST‘brave, impudent’, SOVIET ROPE FROM SAND‘skilled, skilful’, EAR WITH EYE WILL RIP‘active, active, courageous’), especially since these phraseological units fit into the above semantic groups of “verbal-adjective” phraseological units. The possibility of the transition of verbal phraseological units to the category of adjectives may be due to the fact that one of the syntactic models characteristic of phraseological combinations of adjective phraseological units coincides with the syntactic model typical of verbal phraseological units.
In the second section of the paragraph under review, the process of “passivization” of verbal phraseological units is considered, which is characteristic, firstly, of units that control nouns that can take on the function of the subject (for example: LINK BY HANDS AND FEET someone > someone. BOUND BY HANDS AND FEET ), and, secondly, units that include nouns in the accusative case in their component composition (for example: CONFUSE ALL CARDS > ALL CARDS CONFUSED). In the dictionaries of Russian folk dialects, many phraseological units that appear with a participial form in the composition are designed as verbs. This participial form, which is an exceptionally short passive participle of the past tense, is part of phraseological units belonging to different types. The difference between these types depends on the structure of the verbal phraseological unit: 1. if the direct accusative case is not implemented as part of the phraseological unit, then the participle formed from the verbal component forms the participial form of the verbal phraseological unit (for example, GROW ON THE DOLONKE ‘to spoil’ > GROWN ON THE DOLONKEK); 2. if the phraseological unit includes a noun controlled by a transitive verb in the accusative case, then the participle formed from the verbal component forms a phraseological unit of another lexical and grammatical category - not verbal, but verbal-propositional (for example, BREAK LANGUAGE 'learn to speak the local dialect ' > LANGUAGE NALOMAN for whom). In relation to both verbal and verbal-propositional phraseological units, we can talk about the presence in each case of its own paradigm, its own set of phraseological forms, cf.: verbal phraseological unit (all forms have the meaning of action): -Oh, -I) LANGUAGE, BREAK (-EAT, -ET, -EM, -ETE, -UT) LANGUAGE, BREAK (-А, -О, -И) WOULD BREAK (-TE) LANGUAGE, BREAK ( -AYA, -HER, -IE) LANGUAGE, BREAKING THE LANGUAGE; verbal-propositional phraseological unit (all forms have the meaning of the state): LANGUAGE WOULD BE BLOCKED in someone, LANGUAGE WAS BREAKED in someone, LANGUAGE WOULD BE BLOCKED in someone, LANGUAGE WOULD BE BLOCKED in whom. Such verbal-propositional phraseological units should either be given in separate dictionary entries, or, having placed a verbal phraseological unit inside the dictionary entry, provide for a special filiation for them and highlight them with a red line, font or in some other way, thereby indicating the specificity and reality of their use.
So, the categorical identity of dialectal and literary phraseological units made it possible to apply the lexico-grammatical classification of phraseological units of the Russian literary language, which includes ten categories, to the phraseological composition of Russian dialects. Such a comparison of dialectal and literary phraseology shows their common and distinctive features both in grammatical and semantic terms. In dialects, as in the literary language, all lexico-grammatical categories of phraseological units fall into semantic groups, but in some cases there are significant differences in the relationship of these groups to each other compared to their literary counterpart. For example, the category of dialectal verb-propositional phraseological units differs from the corresponding category in the literary language by the presence of a very large group of units denoting a subjectless state; this group can rightly be called a “hotbed of phraseology”, which somewhat muffles the generally recognized anthropocentric dominant in phraseology and shows a rather high significance of other spheres and realities in human life. In the category of dialect nominal phraseological units, the group of units denoting a person has its own striking distinctive features: in Russian dialects, the phraseological nomination of persons of any (more often female) gender is characterized by a very high degree of gender marking, which is manifested in the ability of many personal phraseological units to designate either exclusively a man or exclusively woman. Such data are indicative, for example, as a means of solving problems that may be the subject of "gender phraseology" (in the terminology of A. M. Emirova).
The role of lexical and grammatical characteristics and the necessity and possibility of establishing the belonging of each dialectal phraseological unit to a certain lexical and grammatical category is emphasized by numerous real examples from the dictionaries of Russian dialects, in which there is a mixture of different units precisely because of inattention to the lexical and grammatical qualification of phraseological units that objectively exists in the folk language . Over time, a change in the lexical and grammatical characteristics of a particular phraseological unit is quite real. This can mean both the transition of a phraseological unit from one lexico-grammatical category to another (in our case, it was a transition from the category of verbal phraseological units to the category of adjective units), and the formation of a new phraseological unit, provided that the original phraseological unit is simultaneously preserved in the dialect phraseology ( in our case, the formation of verb-propositional phraseological units from verbal phraseological units was considered). In the process of such transformations, the verbal phraseological unit undergoes a number of changes in form, in lexical and grammatical meaning. Both the transition to the category of adjectival units and the formation of verb-propositional units became possible as a result of the weakening of the procedural meaning of verbal phraseological units. In "verbal" adjective and verbal-propositional phraseological units, one can note a narrowing of the range of verbal grammatical categories in comparison with verbal phraseological units. The lexicographic embodiment of such transformations in the sphere of verbal phraseology is still inconsistent even within the framework of one source, which should be treated critically, since the scientific value of any dictionary is determined not only by the categorical uniformity of the units included in it, but also by the uniformity of their lexicographic development.
Third chapter "Syntagmatics of a Phraseological Unit in a Dialect Dictionary" consists of three paragraphs and is devoted to the compatibility of dialect phraseological units. In speech, phraseological units are not used in isolation, but are combined with words, and phraseological combinations arise. Compatibility (both grammatical and lexical) is a constant and important property of a phraseological unit, which determines the correct establishment of the component composition, the accuracy of determining the meanings of phraseological units and the differentiation of these meanings. The lexical compatibility of phraseological units with a certain range of words is determined by the lexical meanings of the phraseological unit and the word, and the grammatical compatibility is determined by the lexical and grammatical properties of the phraseological unit and the word.
The first paragraph of Chapter 3 is devoted to the grammatical compatibility of dialect phraseological units. In general explanatory and especially in special phraseological dictionaries of the modern Russian literary language, information about the syntactic connection of phraseological units with words is reflected quite fully (the ways of such a connection are shown using pronouns, which are located after the heading of the dictionary entry). In the dictionaries of Russian folk dialects, even those that appeared quite recently, the existing experience of lexicographic reflection of the relationship of phraseological units with words is practically not used. This is manifested in the fact that the obligatory grammatical compatibility of phraseological units in the overwhelming majority of cases is reflected only in illustrative material, and the component composition of phraseological units is often “blurred” when accompanying words are included in it. The presented paragraph analyzes the presentation of grammatical compatibility of dialect phraseological units in the headings of dictionary entries, as well as its implementation in illustrations of the use of phraseological units. The role of grammatical compatibility in the development of polysemantic phraseological units is shown, since often the units that are presented as ambiguous are assigned meanings that do not coordinate with each other grammatically. The correlation of lexico-grammatical characteristics and grammatical compatibility of phraseological units is traced and it is established that grammatical discrepancies between the presented separate meanings of one or another allegedly polysemantic phraseological unit do not allow recognizing it as one unit (this is observed in those cases when in a dictionary entry under the guise of different meanings of one and of the same phraseological unit are placed units belonging to different lexical and grammatical categories and differing in grammatical compatibility).
The second paragraph of Chapter 3 is devoted to the lexical compatibility of dialect phraseological units, the peculiarity of which is that different phraseological units have an unequal degree of connection with the words of the context. Showing both free and connected functioning, dialectal phraseological units are characterized by wide compatibility (combined with a significant number of words that are different in semantics), limited (combined with words of a certain thematic group) and single (combined only with certain words). The paragraph proves that the compatibility of a phraseological unit with words is closely related to its lexical and grammatical affiliation: the confinement of a phraseological unit to a particular category objectively determines both its boundaries, and its compatibility, and the type of its definition. A reliable determination of the component composition and compatibility of a phraseological unit is possible only when taking into account which lexical and grammatical category it belongs to. Failure to distinguish, on the one hand, phraseological units and, on the other hand, phraseological combinations, entails ignoring the belonging of a phraseological unit to a certain lexico-grammatical category and mixing these categories. As a result, the component composition of phraseological units very often expands due to the words of the obligatory lexical environment, while the uniformity of the design of phraseological units in the dictionaries of Russian dialects is violated, compare, for example: FOR THE WHOLE FUCK‘very loud’ [NOS 2, 110], on the one hand, and MOAN ALL THE FUCK‘shout loudly’ [NOS 10, 162], on the other hand. Such examples indicate that in many cases the role of such an important parameter as lexical compatibility is not taken into account in the lexicographic development of a phraseological unit. Dialectal lexicographic practice shows that of all lexico-grammatical categories, phraseological units related to adjective, adverbial, indefinite quantitative and pronominal units are subject to the greatest risk of not distinguishing between phraseological units, on the one hand, and phraseological combinations, on the other hand.
The third paragraph of the chapter under review is devoted to dialectal phraseological combinations that are formed when phraseological units and words are combined with each other, the relations of which are built on the basis of both grammatical and lexical connections. Accordingly, in this paragraph, the first section is devoted to the analysis of phraseological combinations, reflecting the grammatical compatibility of a phraseological unit, the second section is devoted to the analysis of phraseological combinations, reflecting the lexical compatibility of a phraseological unit. In relation to both types of compatibility, it can be argued that the connections of phraseological units and words are realized in different ways. It can be a connection: 1. obligatory (phraseological units are not used out of combination with certain words) and optional (phraseological units are used out of combination with certain words); 2. variable (close semantic relationships between a phraseological unit and its verbal environment within a phraseological combination can be realized by different formal means) and non-variable (compatibility of a phraseological unit is manifested only in a single variant of an equal or dependent word); 3. regular (syntactic links are reproduced constantly) and irregular (syntactic links are rare); 4. one-sided (a phraseological unit is combined with one word) and non-one-sided (a phraseological unit is combined with several words); 5. predicative (phrase-lexical combination forms the grammatical basis of the sentence) and non-predicative (phrase-lexical combination acts as an integral element of the sentence, but does not form its grammatical basis); 6. equal (the components of a phrase-lexical combination coordinate with each other) and unequal (one of the components in a phrase-lexical combination depends on the other). Resorting to the typology of the periods identified by M. V. Vlavatskaya in relation to the lexicographic fixation of the compatibility properties of words, it should be recognized that the fixation of both lexical and especially grammatical compatibility of phraseological units in dialect dictionaries still corresponds to the “illustrative” period in Russian history of lexicographic reflection of the compatibility of lexemes (when the lexical and grammatical connections of the head words were demonstrated in contexts, with the help of illustrative examples). Obviously, for modern Russian dialect phraseography, the need to improve the lexicographic presentation of the features of the syntactic connection of phraseological units and words within the phraseological combination is relevant. An analysis of the formal and semantic relations of a phraseological unit and the words surrounding it, arising within phraseological combinations, gives reason to assert that relationships that are characterized by obligatoriness and, accordingly, regularity, should be rigorously reflected in the heading of the dictionary entry devoted to the development of phraseological units. In the meantime, examples of worthy lexicographic design of objective syntactic links of a dialectal phraseological unit with its indispensable verbal environment make up an insignificant fraction of the total number of all cases in modern dialect dictionaries that require such design. Today, in the vast majority of cases, the grammatical compatibility of phraseological units is not represented in dialect dictionaries. The lexical compatibility of a phraseological unit in the dialect dictionary is presented more fully and can be characterized by the features under consideration already at the level of the heading of the dictionary entry.
Fourth chapter "Paradigmatics of Dialect Phraseological Units" consists of two paragraphs, the first of which is devoted to the analysis of the reflection of the paradigmatic relations of phraseological units in the dictionaries of Russian dialects. It analyzes the ways of lexicographic presentation of polysemantic dialectal phraseological units, as well as units that are in the relationship of variability, synonymy, antonymy. The analysis is carried out from the point of view of the possibility of obtaining information about these relations and from the point of view of the correctness of their lexicographic development.
In the dictionaries of Russian folk dialects, only about 5% of phraseological units are presented as having more than one meaning. To distinguish between different meanings of the same phraseological unit, there are several criteria that in dialect dictionaries can have both explicit and implicit expressions. Explicit signs of polysemy are realized as independent elements of a dictionary entry, and they include, first of all, an indication of the compatibility of a phraseological unit - lexical and / or grammatical. Implicit signs are found in other elements of the dictionary entry, mainly in interpretation and illustrative material. More than others, polysemy is developed by such stable combinations, which, performing the function of a secondary nomination, name the object not directly, but through a figurative representation of it ( FROG DRESS 1. ‘frog skin’, 2. ‘green duckweed covering the surface of the water’). A significant number are also multi-valued dialect phraseological units of a metaphorical nature, which can be correlated with free phrases of a similar lexical composition ( DOUBLE-LOOP KACHULA 1. ‘fickle person’, 2. ‘indecisive person’). In dialects, polysemantic phraseologisms mainly have no more than two or three meanings, and in the structure of these meanings, semantic shades are extremely rarely distinguished. Dictionary materials, however, indicate that semantic nuances with individual meanings of dialect phraseological units can be represented more widely, and the allocation of independent meanings of a particular unit is often not justified, since in contexts illustrating the use of phraseological units, the meanings of the latter can either practically be combined, or correlated with each other as a separate value and its variety (shade), cf., for example: BYPASS (RUN) RUSSA AND LADOGA <...>2. ‘learn a lot in life’: Vanya walked around Russa and Ladoga, nibbled at the goryushka. This old man went around Rusa and Ladoga, he knows everything.(Novg.), 3. ‘to experience a lot of bad things’: What we have not seen in life, as they say, Rusa and Ladoga bypassed.(St.). [NOS, 6, 99] - it seems that with the meaning of ‘learn a lot in life’, one should place the connotation ‘experience a lot of bad things in life’. Such examples show how diffuseness can manifest itself in the semantics of dialect phraseological units, when "one meaning imperceptibly passes into another" . In some cases, in relation to the phraseological units developed in the dictionaries of Russian folk dialects, one does not have to talk about polysemy for another reason: the illustrative material presented in the dictionary entries convincingly indicates that different meanings belong not to one, but to different units that differ from each other in component terms. composition and, as a result, by lexical and grammatical affiliation, cf., for example: EAT THE WRAP 1. ‘about a stalemate’: I don’t know what to do, at least eat the wrapper.(Art.), 2. ‘starve’: If you're not working, eat wrapping for you.(Novg.). [NOS, 2, 140] - it seems that the first meaning should accompany another (not verbal, but modal) phraseological unit AT LEAST EAT THE WRAP, which is an expression of a feeling of despair, impotence when it is impossible to find a way out of a difficult situation.
As for the variance of the components of a phraseological unit, here it is necessary to distinguish between a change in its component composition, firstly, in order to “individualize, strengthen the structural and semantic differences between individual units”, and, secondly, “for the formal expression of the relations and connections of a phraseological unit with words in a sentence. In the first case, we are talking about variants, in the second - about paradigmatic forms of phraseological units. Phraseological variants have a common meaning, are characterized by the complete identity of the figurative structure and expressive-stylistic coloring, and can function in parallel in various contexts. The variance of phraseological units in dialects has a wider scope compared to phraseological variance in the literary language, and this is associated with the peculiarity of their functioning, namely, with the use in oral speech. The variability of dialect phraseological units, as a rule, is reflected in regional dictionaries, while the authors of the latter can, firstly, purposefully stipulate in introductory articles both the types of lexicographed phraseological variants and the principles of their presentation (this applies primarily to special, phraseological, and thereby enhances their reputation). Secondly, the introductory article may not contain information at all about whether phraseological variants will be presented in the dictionary (and if so, how exactly): this remark concerns, first of all, dictionaries of a general type, nevertheless, on the pages of these lexicographic sources, options dialect phraseological units find their place. Variants of dialect phraseological units can be presented both in one and in different dictionary entries. The first design option for phraseological variants is more acceptable, since it allows you to avoid inconsistencies both in the headings and in the interpretive parts of dictionary entries, which are sometimes allowed when variants of the same phraseological unit are reflected separately, cf., for example: AROUND THE BATH YES TO THE BATH‘without a wedding (about a wedding)’ [FSPG, 17] and WEDDING AROUND THE BANYA YES FOR THE BATH‘wedding without a wedding and without observing rituals’ [FSPG, 322], etc. Similar to phraseological variants, different phraseological units can also be formed, differing from each other in their component composition and related to different lexical and grammatical categories, cf., for example: YEARS (UP TO YEARS) HAVE REACHED‘the time has come for adulthood, adulthood’: Now the years have already come, it’s time for the zamush.(Onezh. Prn.). <...> The Ras went to war, they did not reach the Godof, the haymaking was done.(Karg. Ldn.). [AOS 11, 290] - phraseological units verb-propositional ( YEARS HAVE REACHED‘someone has become an adult, adult’) and verbal ( GO TO YEARS‘to become an adult, to become an adult’). Paradigmatic forms arising from the declension or conjugation of the basic component of a phraseological unit and showing the relationship of the latter with words in speech are often presented as variants of one or another phraseological unit, while often not covering its entire paradigm, the full volume of which is presented only in the illustrative part. dictionary entry, see for example: EVERY PLACE (EVERY PLACE)‘about many things, everything, diverse’ [SRGC 1, 250], FALLING FROM THE SKY (PALO)'obtained without difficulty, easily' [FSPG, 259], etc. Undoubtedly, in the dictionary, the paradigmatic forms of a phraseological unit should be clearly distinguished from its formal variants, since the same phraseological unit can have, on the one hand, paradigmatic forms, on the other - formal variants of components.
Synonymous associations of dialect phraseological units in dictionaries that follow the ideographic principle are established due to the distribution of material by headings. In general dictionaries, synonyms can be identified thanks to the labels "The same as ..." and "Compare", for example: LAMB TO CARRY- the same as ALILYUSHKI BREED ‘talk about something frivolous, insignificant, talk nonsense, trifles’ [SVG 1, 21]; ENTER THE HOUSE‘having married, settle in the wife’s house’, cf. EXIT INTO THE BELLIES [SVG 1, 77]. The materials of modern dialect dictionaries make it possible to compose inter-dialect phraseological series, the units in which have the same or similar meaning (compare, for example, verb-propositional phraseological units with the general meaning “there are too many people somewhere”: NEEDLE DO NOT PUSH (DO NOT PUSH)‘a lot (about a large crowd of people)’ [SRGC 2, 264], NO WHERE TO STEP ON‘very crowded’ [FSWG, 120], SOUR APPLE DOES NOT RIDE‘crowded (about a large crowd of people)’ [MISNF, 160], etc.). Such colorful strings of Russian dialectal phraseological units could qualify for a special dictionary fixation, since they can easily continue the already fixed rows of synonyms of the Russian language. For example, our selection can supplement such a synonymous series from the “Explanatory Dictionary of Phraseological Synonyms of the Russian Language” (ed. by V.P. Zhukov), as THE APPLE IS NO WHERE (NO WHERE) TO FALL,<ШАГУ>NO WHERE (NO WHERE) TO STEP, NO WHERE TO SPIT (NO WHERE), A NEEDLE (NEEDLE) NO WHERE (NO WHERE) TO STICK (PUT), BEAT (BREATH) NO WHERE, A FINGER NO WHERE (NO WHERE) TO POKE, filed with the meaning "in a huge amount (usually about a large cluster people in some place)”.
The search for phraseological units-antonyms in general dialect dictionaries is very difficult, they can be found only if the researcher makes a continuous selection of phraseological material from the entire corpus of the dictionary, cf., for example: HORSE LITTLE‘many’ [SRGC 3, 193] and HORSE MUCH‘few’ [SRGC 3, 242]. Unlike general dictionaries, it is not difficult to find phraseological units-antonyms in special dictionaries. With the nested method of placement, phraseological antonyms that include the same component in the composition are practically next to each other. See, for example, the Phraseological Dictionary of Perm dialects, where, behind one common vocabulary Cost antonyms are found DO NOT BE LISTENED‘to be worse than smb.’ and PURCHASE COST‘possess valuable qualities, significance’. In a fairly large number of antonyms are presented in dialect phraseological dictionaries of the ideographic type, where there is a division into headings that oppose one or another concept.
So, modern dictionaries of Russian dialects can provide information about any paradigmatic connections and relationships in the field of phraseology: about the polysemy and variation of phraseological units, about their belonging to synonymous series and antonymic pairs, semantic fields and other semantic associations. Only the ambiguity of phraseological units is characterized by the same type of representation in all dialect dictionaries; variance and synonymy have an ambiguous presentation; in ideographic dialect dictionaries we find thematic and semantic fields, groups, blocks, within which it is possible to establish synonymous and antonymic relations of phraseological units. As for the legitimacy of the lexicographic development of paradigmatic relations in which certain dialect phraseological units are involved, in many cases it should be noted that the boundaries of the component composition of phraseological units are not observed, which entails ignoring the lexico-grammatical belonging of the latter and, as a result, the erroneous design of their polysemy (which may turn out to be imaginary), variance (which may also be fictitious), and synonymy (which may be confused with variance).
The second paragraph of Chapter 4 discusses the paradigmatic relations of dialect phraseological units, the establishment of which involves the study of individual phraseological blocks that exist within the vast phraseological array of Russian folk dialects. The phraseological composition of any dialect has a systemic character. This means that each dialectal phraseological unit, existing within a certain system, takes its place in it and, for one reason or another, correlates with its other units. Paradigmatic groupings (lexico-grammatical categories, thematic or semantic groups, phraseological units-synonyms, phraseological units-antonyms) are in certain hierarchical relationships: phraseological synonyms and antonyms can be distinguished only within the framework of semantic groups that are components of the lexico-grammatical categories of phraseological units, and the sequence of semantic analysis of a particular conceptual category in the application to phraseology can be as follows: conceptual category
AT fifth chapter "Principles of lexicographic description of dialectal phraseology" The problem of separateness of a phraseological unit and the definition of its distinctive features in comparison with both a word and a phrase is considered from a lexicographic point of view. It is established that in dialect dictionaries of a general type there is no clarity in the definition of the object and subject of description in relation to the phraseological segment of folk dialects, which leads to the loss of phraseological material and its confusion with lexical material. The loss of phraseological material means that it is found only among illustrations of the use of one or another dialect lexeme. This becomes most obvious when showing interest in the variability of phraseological units, when it turns out that one or several of the really existing options are denied phraseological status, for example: BEAT THE TOUCH‘talk, talk nonsense’ [JOS 1, 60], BORROW WITH YOUR TOUCH‘talk, idle talk’ [YOS 2, 16], TOUCH OUT‘chat’ [JOS 4, 22], but: junk‘talk, speak’: You only use your tongue. (Tutaevsky district). [JOS 1, 36]. The confusion of lexical and phraseological units means that the units of the lexical and phraseological composition of Russian dialects are not differentiated in similar situations. Firstly, there are different approaches to constructions that are combinations of a significant word and a functional word (some researchers deny such combinations the right to be considered part of the phraseological composition of the language, others, on the contrary, regard them as belonging to this composition), and both of these points of vision are simultaneously presented on the pages of dictionaries: prepositional-case combinations are developed either as phraseological units, or as adverbs, cf .: ? TO PAIN‘very much’ [AOC 2, 56] and Valor, adv. ‘very many’ [AOC 11, 184]. Secondly, dialect units that are similar, structurally and semantically similar to each other are formed in different ways and do not acquire the same status, cf.: > CHOKHOM-MAHOM‘somehow, carelessly’ [SRGC 6, 799] and step by step, adv. ‘somehow, out of order’ [SRGC 6, 818]. Thirdly, a lexeme and a phraseological unit with a component ascending to this lexeme are developed separately from each other, despite the fact that the same contexts for the use of these units are given in the illustrative material, cf.: EYE OUT‘deep swamp in a swamp’ and Hopeless‘bottomless’ [SGRS 1, 85]. Claims that can be made against general dialect dictionaries when analyzing the phraseological material developed there, incline to the idea of the need to create special dictionaries in which the phraseological part of the folk language would be described separately from its lexical part.
In 2004, the Phraseological Dictionary of Russian dialects of the Komi Republic was published by the author of the dissertation, which, it seems, demonstrates the real correspondence of the lexicographic design of dialect phraseology to the achievements that characterize modern phraseological science. The Dictionary describes 1 thousand dialectal phraseological units that fall under the concepts of "phraseological fusion" and "phraseological unity", according to V. V. Vinogradov, and the concepts of "idiom" and "metaphorical combination", according to B. A. Larin. This so-called narrow approach to the volume of the phraseological composition of the Russian language meets the well-known recommendations of A. M. Babkin, who believes that “the peculiarity of the structure of each of the categories of phraseology in the broad sense of the word, their genre diversity, and most importantly, the different functional role in the context exclude the possibility of their unity lexicographic processing - the principle to which the material of any dictionary should be subordinated. The loss of this guiding lexicographic principle turns the dictionary into a collection or, at best, into a collection of materials for a dictionary. Such a single-type and compact phraseological material could, without any deviations from the principles adopted in the Dictionary, be consistently and logically justified in a scientific work of a lexicographic plan. The obligatory parameters of the phraseological unit description in the Dictionary include the form indicating stress, component composition, variants, lexical and grammatical compatibility, lexico-grammatical and emotional-expressive characteristics, interpretation of the meaning (s), illustrative material, geographical and chronological fixation, correlation with others phraseological units within the studied dialects, as well as the formal and meaningful relationship with phraseological units that are noted in modern dialect dictionaries covering Russian dialects in the Russian North. Additional parameters are the determination of the genetic source and the explanation of dialect and foreign (Komi) words, to which this or that significant component of the phraseological unit goes back. All these parameters proposed in the Dictionary for the Development of Russian Dialect Phraseology are discussed in detail in the chapter under review. It seems that this chapter of the dissertation research sufficiently demonstrates that the author of the Phraseological Dictionary of Russian Dialects of the Komi Republic managed to solve at least two problems. Firstly, as far as possible, very common and very significant shortcomings of modern Russian dialect phraseography were taken into account. Secondly, as far as possible, they were accepted for implementation and brought together in one specialized lexicographic publication those fundamental recommendations of both dialectologists and phraseologists, which were given by the latter at different times and in various scientific works, one way or another related to the problems of Russian phraseology. and its lexicographic representation.
Conclusion contains the main results of the undertaken research. An analysis of the current state of Russian dialect phraseography made it possible not only to give it a general, rather critical, assessment, but also to offer a promising theoretical "foundation" suitable for the development of dialect phraseological units in the dictionary: the dissertation implements a unified program for the grammatical characteristics of phraseological units. Modern dictionaries of Russian folk dialects, being a unique treasury of dialect phraseological material, allow us to explore both the semantics and grammatical properties of dialect phraseological units. A complete, comprehensive characterization of the phraseological composition of dialects is possible only with a comprehensive description of the phraseological unit in all its parameters. At present, there is a need for a holistic description of the phraseology of the dialect, both in general theoretical and lexicographic terms. This task is solvable, there are all possibilities for its implementation today.
The provisions of the dissertation are reflected in the following main publications of the author:
Monographic works
1. Phraseology of Russian dialects of the Komi Republic. Proc. allowance Syktyvkar: publishing house of SyktGU, 1999. - 84 p. (4.8 p. l.).
2. Phraseological dictionary of Russian dialects of the Komi Republic. Syktyvkar: publishing house of SyktGU, 2004. - 312 p. (25 p. l.).
[Review]: Ivashko L. A. Phraseological dictionary of Russian dialects of the Republic of Komi // YALIK. Scientific information bulletin of St. Petersburg State University. 2005. No. 65. - S. 14.
3. Russian dialectal phraseography: grammatical aspect (based on the dialect dictionaries of the Russian North). St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2007. - 200 p. (11.5 p. l.).
[Review]: Brysina E. V. Actual problems of dialect phraseography (Kobeleva I. A. Russian dialect phraseography: grammatical aspect: Monograph. S.-Pb.: Nauka, 2007. 199 p.) // Izv. Volgograd. state ped. university Ser.: Philol. Sciences. - Volgograd, 2008. - No. 5 (29). - S. 164–166.
The monograph was recognized as the winner of the All-Russian competition for the best scientific book in 2007 among teachers of higher educational institutions, conducted by the National Education Development Foundation, and recommended "for use in the educational process and reprint for the general scientific community in Russia and abroad."
Articles in journals from the VAK list
4. [Rec. on the book:] Alekseenko M. A., Belousova T. P., Litvinnikova O. I. Man in Russian dialect phraseology: Dictionary // Russian speech. 2006. No. 1. - S. 120–123. - 3.5 s. (0.25 p. l.).
5. A place for the bride (on the internal form of phraseology in the dialect dictionary) // Russian speech. 2006. No. 3. - S. 113–117. - 5 s. (0.3 p. l.).
6. Master and craftswoman (dialect phraseological units denoting a person) // Russian speech. 2007. No. 3. - S. 98–103. - 5 s. (0.35 p. l.).
7. The grammatical status of some dialectal phraseological units with a participial form in the composition // Philological Sciences. 2007. No. 6. - S. 90–97. - 8 s. (0.45 p. l.).
8. Expression of the meaning of the state in Russian dialect idiomatics // Izvestiya RGPU im. A. I. Herzen. No. 11: Social and Human Sciences. SPb., 2008. - S. 45–49. - 5 s. (0.4 p. l.).
9. Beetle and toad, brother and matchmaker ... (about pronominal phraseological units in dialects) // Russian speech. 2009. No. 2. - S. 86–89. - 4 s. (0.25 p. l.).
10. Phraseological unit in terms of punctuation // Russian language at school. 2009. No. 5. - S. 36–39. - 3.5 s. (0.4 p. l.).
11. "In the mind" and "in the mind" // Russian speech. 2010. No. 4. - S. 94–97. - 3.5 s. (0.25 p. l.).
12. Contradictions in the lexicographic interpretation of some dialect data // North Russian dialects. Interuniversity. Sat. Issue. 11 / Rev. ed. A. S. Gerd. St. Petersburg: Faculty of Philology of St. Petersburg State University, 2010. - P. 125–132. - 6 s. (0.3 p. l.).
13. On two lexical and grammatical categories of phraseological units in the Russian language // Bulletin of the Kostroma State University. N. A. Nekrasova. 2011. No. 1. - S. 90–92. - 2.5 s. (0.3 p. l.).
Articles in other publications
14. Phraseology of some North Russian dialects in a comparative aspect // Bulletin of the Syktyvkar University. Series 8. History, Philology, Philosophy. Issue. 3. Syktyvkar: publishing house of SyktGU, 1999. - S. 72–78. - 6.5 s. (0.5 p. l.).
15. On the grammar of a dialectal phraseological unit // Bulletin of the Syktyvkar University. Series 9. Philology. Issue. 4. Syktyvkar: publishing house of SyktGU, 2001. - S. 95–101. - 7 s. (0.45 p. l.).
16. Phraseology of Northern Russian dialects in the lexicographic aspect // Pskov dialects: synchrony and diachrony. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works. Pskov: publishing house of PSPI im. S. M. Kirova, 2003. - S. 95–102. - 7.5 s. (0.5 p. l.).
17. Ideographic representation of phraseology in the dictionaries of Russian folk dialects // Information potential of the word and phraseological unit. Sat. scientific articles. Eagle: publishing house of OSU, 2005. - S. 413–417. - 4 s. (0.25 p. l.).
18. On the mutual dependence of lexical and grammatical characteristics, component composition and definition of phraseological unit (on the example of dictionaries of Russian folk dialects) // Actual questions of lexicology and phraseology: Sat. scientific works dedicated to the 90th anniversary of the birth of V. L. Arkhangelsky. Tula: publishing house of TSPU, 2005. - S. 334–339. - 6 s. (0.35 p. l.).
19. Polysemy of a phraseological unit in a dialect dictionary // Lexical Atlas of Russian Folk Dialects (Materials and Research) 2005 / Institute of Linguistics. research - St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2005. - S. 132–143. - 10.5 s. (0.65 p. l.).
20. On the reflection of the grammatical compatibility of a phraseological unit in dialect dictionaries // Word in the dictionary and discourse. Sat. scientific Articles for the 50th anniversary of Harry Walter. M .: publishing house "Elpis", 2006. - S. 421–423. (0.25 p. l.).
21. Russian dialect phraseology: new in lexicographic interpretation // Lexical atlas of Russian folk dialects (Materials and research) 2006 / Institute of Linguistics. research - St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2006. - S. 285–296. - 11 s. (0.7 p. l.).
22. About the dictionary of M. A. Alekseenko, T. P. Belousova, O. I. Litvinnikova “Man in Russian dialect phraseology” (M., 2004) // Lexical atlas of Russian folk dialects (Materials and research) 2006 / In- t lingu. research - St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2006. - S. 409–414. - 6 s. (0.4 p. l.).
23. Component composition of dialect phraseological units as a source of grammatical information // Bulletin of the Kostroma University. Specialist. issue for the 70th anniversary of prof. N. S. Gantsovskaya. T. 13. Kostroma: publishing house of KGU, 2007. - S. 123–126. - 3.5 s. (0.4 p. l.).
24. Phrase-lexical combinations in Russian folk dialects (on the grammatical compatibility of dialectal phraseology in the lexicographic aspect) // Lexical atlas of Russian folk dialects (Materials and research) 2007. Part 1 / In-t lingv. research - St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2007. - S. 180–191. - 10.5 s. (0.7 p. l.).
25. On the need for etymological explanations in the dialect phraseological dictionary // Russian culture of the new century: problems of studying, preserving and using the historical and cultural heritage. Sat. articles / Ch. ed. G. V. Sudakov. Vologda: Book heritage, 2007. - S. 818–823. - 6 s. (0.4 p. l.).
26. About the phraseology of the Vologda dialects // Dialects of the Vologda region: aspects of the study. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works / Responsible. ed. L. Yu. Zorina. Vologda: Publishing House of the VGPU, 2008. - S. 41–46. - 5.5 s. (0.3 p. l.).
27. The form of a dialectal phraseological unit (lexicographical assessment) // Living word. Folklore-dialectological almanac. Issue. 1 / Ed. E. V. Brysina, V. I. Suprun. Volgograd: VGIPK RO Publishing House, 2008. - P. 29–33. - 4 s. (0.3 p. l.).
28. On one grammatical mark with phraseological units in the dialect dictionary // Lexical atlas of Russian folk dialects (Materials and research) 2008 / Institute of Linguistics. research - St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2008. - S. 312–315. - 4 s. (0.25 p. l.).
29. Quantitative semantics in Russian dialect phraseology // Word and text in the cultural consciousness of the era. Sat. scientific works. Part 2 / Rep. ed. G. V. Sudakov. Vologda: VSPU, 2008. - S. 71–78. - 7 s. (0.45 p. l.).
30. Dictionary of Russian dialect p. Loima Priluzsky district of the Komi Republic (publication prospects) // Lexical atlas of Russian folk dialects (Materials and research) 2009 / Institute of Linguistics. research - St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2009. - S. 86–90. - 4 s. (0.25 p. l.).
31. On the structure of one conceptual category (on the basis of Russian dialectal phraseology) // Dialect Lexicon-2009 / Institute of Linguistics. research RAS - St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2009. - S. 198–209. - 11 s. (0.55 p. l.).
32. On the formation of Russian dialect phraseography // Living Word. Folklore-dialectological almanac. Issue. 3 / Ed. E. V. Brysina. Volgograd: Lyceum Publishing House No. 8 "Olympia", 2010. - P. 114–116. - 3 s. (0.3 p. l.).
33. On the possibility of creating a new dialectal phraseological dictionary // Word, phraseological unit, text in the literary language and dialects. Sat. scientific articles. Eagle: OSU, 2010. - S. 159–161. - 2.5 s. (0.3 p. l.).
Materials and abstracts of reports
34. Regional phraseological dictionary of the Russian language // New in teaching the Russian language at school and university. Materials scientific method. conf. to the 70th anniversary of the birth of N. N. Ushakov (Ushakov Readings). Ivanovo: publishing house of IvGU, 1998. - S. 157–161. - 4.5 s. (0.3 p. l.).
35. Phraseography in the educational process (from work experience) // Problems of learning the Russian language at the present stage. Materials II Ushakov readings. Ivanovo: publishing house of IvGU, 2000. - S. 167–173. - 6 s. (0.3 p. l.).
36. Lexicographic description of dialectal verb-propositional phraseological units // Transitional phenomena in the field of vocabulary and phraseology of Russian and other Slavic languages. Materials intl. scientific symp. (II Zhukovsky readings). Veliky Novgorod: publishing house of NovGU, 2001. - S. 152–154. - 2 s. (0.2 p. l.).
37. Participle forms of verb phraseological units in the dictionary // Phraseology in the aspect of science, culture, education. Abstracts int. scientific-practical. conf. to the 75th anniversary of prof. A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: Publishing House of ChGPU, 2001. - S. 68–72. - 4 s. (0.15 p. l.).
38. Phraseological variants in the dialect dictionary // Questions of the semantics of the modern Russian language. Interuniversity materials. scientific-practical. seminar. Kostroma: publishing house of KSU im. N. A. Nekrasova, 2002. - S. 43–48. - 6 s. (0.3 p. l.).
39. The role of lexical and grammatical characteristics in the lexicographic description of a dialect phraseological unit // Avanes Readings. Abstracts of reports int. scientific conf. M.: publishing house "MAKS Press", 2002. - S. 144–146. - 2.5 s. (0.15 p. l.).
40. Dialect phraseological dictionary as an intermediary between cultures // Phraseology and intercultural communication. Materials Intl. scientific conf. Phraseology and worldview of the people. At 2 o'clock. Part 2. Tula: publishing house of the TSPU. L. N. Tolstoy, 2002. - S. 95–99. - 3.5 s. (0.2 p. l.).
41. About some Finno-Ugric sources in Russian dialect phraseology // Spiritual culture of the North: results and prospects of research. Conf. Syktyvkar: publishing house of SyktGU, 2002. - S. 169–175. - 6 s. (0.4 p. l.).
42. Principles of presentation of phraseological units in the "Phraseological Dictionary of Russian Dialects of the Republic of Komi" // V. P. Zhukov's Dictionary Heritage and the Ways of Development of Russian and General Lexicography (III Zhukovsky Readings). Materials Intl. scientific symposium. Veliky Novgorod: publishing house of NovGU, 2004. - S. 474–479. - 5 s. (0.3 p. l.).
43. A single context of use as a fact in the history of dialectal phraseology // Russian word in historical development (XIV-XIX centuries). Materials of the section "Historical lexicology and lexicography" XXXIV Int. philol. conf. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2005. - S. 177–186. - 9.5 s. (0.4 p. l.).
44. On the imaginary uniqueness of some dialectal phraseological units (based on the materials of dictionaries of Russian folk dialects) // Phraseological readings in memory of prof. V. A. Lebedinskaya. Sat. materials Vseros. scientific conf. Issue. 3 / Ans. ed. N. B. Usacheva. Kurgan: Publishing House of KSU, 2006. - S. 143–146. - 2.5 s. (0.2 p. l.).
45. On one way of forming adjective phraseological units in the dialects of the Russian North // V. I. Dal in the paradigm of the ideas of modern science: language - literature - lexicography - phraseography. Materials III Vseros. scientific conf. Ivanovo: IvGU, 2006. - S. 158–169. - 11 s. (0.5 p. l.).
46. On the problem of interpreting the meaning of a phraseological unit in a dialect dictionary // Russian word: literary language and folk dialects. Materials Vseros. scientific Conf. dedicated to the 100th anniversary of G. G. Melnichenko / Ed. ed. T. K. Khovrina. Yaroslavl: YaGPU Publishing House, 2008. - S. 155–161. - 6 s. (0.25 p. l.).
47. Illustrative text of the dialect dictionary as a source of information about phraseology // Phraseology in the text and text in phraseology (IV Zhukovsky readings). Materials Intl. scientific symposium. Veliky Novgorod: publishing house of NovGU, 2009. - S. 263–265. - 3 s. (0.3 p. l.).
48. Historical and etymological comments as a source of information about Russian dialect phraseology // Ethnolinguistics. Onomastics. Etymology. Materials intl. scientific conf. / Ed. E. L. Berezovich. Yekaterinburg: Publishing House Ural. un-ta, 2009. - S. 121–122. - 2 s. (0.15 p. l.).
49. About new dialect phraseological dictionaries // Actual problems of Russian dialectology and the study of the Old Believers. Abstracts of reports Int. conf. / Rev. ed. L. L. Kasatkin. Moscow: In-t Rus. language them. V. V. Vinogradov RAN, 2009. - S. 112–113. (0.1 p. l.).
50. Russian phraseography in the light of systemic relations of dialect phraseological units // Literary and dialect phraseology: history and development (Fifth Zhukovsky Readings). Materials Intl. scientific Symposium dedicated to the 90th anniversary of the birth of V.P. Zhukov. In 2 vols. T. 1. Veliky Novgorod: publishing house of NovGU, 2011. - S. 335–338. -3 s. (0.22 p. l.).
See about this: Kryukova N. A. Reflection of the syntactic relations of a phraseological unit with words in phraseological dictionaries // Dictionary heritage of V. P. Zhukov and the ways of development of Russian and general lexicography. Materials Intl. scientific symposium (Third Zhukovsky readings). Veliky Novgorod, 2004. - S. 159–163.
Vinogradov VV About some questions of the theory of Russian lexicography // Vinogradov VV Selected works. Lexicology and lexicography. M., 1977. - S. 255.
I've done the work:
8 B class student
Shagrov Anton
Supervisor:
2010
1. Introduction.
2. Phraseology as a science.
3. Sources of the appearance of phraseological units in the Russian language.
4. Dictionary of dialect phraseological units.
5. Conclusion. Findings.
6. Bibliography.
Relevance: Phraseological units more than other units of the language contain information about the material, social and spiritual life of the people. In this sense, the study of dialect phraseological units, rooted in the worldview of our ancestors, may be of particular interest. Being a means of communication, such units have a great emotional load and poetic perception. Typically, only older people use such figurative expressions. Grandchildren, on the other hand, often do not even know the meaning of dialect phraseological units, and yet they contain our history, which should be known.
We live in the village of Galyugaevskaya. Terek Cossacks lived and live here. The speech of our countrymen is emotional, bright, witty. Unfortunately, we do not know the meaning of all local language units, in particular, figurative expressions, phraseological units. We consider our study relevant, because phraseological units more than other units of the language contain information about the spiritual, material and social life of our ancestors - the Terek Cossacks. And the old-timers of the village of Galyugaevskaya, in whose speech they sound, will help us to study dialect phraseological units.
Thing: dialect phraseological units
An object: speech of the inhabitants of the village of Galyugaevskaya
Target: to learn and study the dialect phraseological units that sound in the speech of the old-timers of the village of Galyugaevskaya
Tasks
- To study the literature on the research topic; Get skills in linguistic local history; Collect and analyze dialect phraseological units; Compile a dictionary of dialect phraseological units; Submit the materials of the work to the school museum of local lore; Make a research paper in front of the residents of the village.
Hypothesis: if you study dialect phraseological units, you can get knowledge about the culture of interpersonal relations and the life of your ancestors.
Research methods
- Survey of informants (respondents) Descriptive Etymological Systematization of material
Chronological framework: of the year
Novelty of work: for the first time an attempt is made to study the dialectal phraseological units of the village of Galyugaevskaya.
1. Phraseology as a science.
Phraseology (from Greek phrásis) - a section of linguistics that studies the phraseological composition of the language in its current state and historical development.
Phraseology as an independent linguistic discipline arose in linguistics in the 40-50s. 20th century (work and his school). The prerequisites for the creation of phraseology were laid in the works of de Courtenay, K. Brugmann, G. Paul, and others, who singled out close verbal groups in speech, irregular in meaning and syntactically indecomposable. The theoretical foundations of the functional-semantic analysis of phraseological units within the framework of lexicology were first developed by S. Bally.
Phraseologism is a phraseological unit, an idiom, a stable combination of words, which is characterized by a constant lexical composition, grammatical structure and a meaning known to native speakers of a given language (in most cases, figuratively), not derived from the meaning of the constituent phraseological components. This meaning is reproduced in speech in accordance with historically established norms of use.
Linguists give different definitions to phraseological units. The Encyclopedic Dictionary says: “Phraseology is a stable phrase in most cases with a figurative meaning that is not derived from the meanings of its components; with a constant lexical composition.
defines a phraseological unit as “a stable turn of speech characteristic of a certain language and therefore not literally translated into other languages, having an independent meaning, which as a whole is not the sum of the meanings of its constituent words”.
Under the phraseologism they understand "a stable expression with an independent meaning close to idiomatic".
phraseologism considers "a turnover freely reproduced in speech, built on the model of coordinating and subordinating phrases and having a holistic (or less often partially holistic) meaning." Phraseologism begins where the semantic independence of its constituent parts ends. The main features of phraseology are stability, reproducibility, integrity of meaning.
and briefly call phraseologisms stable combinations of words that are similar in lexical meaning to one word. Therefore, the phraseological unit can be replaced by one word, but less expressive: far away - far away, complain - cry in a vest
Thus, a phraseological unit (phraseological phrase) is a lexically indivisible, stable expression, a phrase that is integral in meaning.
There are several groups of phraseological units in Russian:
- phraseological fusions: eat the dog
- phraseological unity: take the bull by the horns
- phraseological combinations: deep silence
Phraseological units, as well as individual words, can have synonyms: grated kalach - shot sparrow (meaning "experienced person") and antonyms: no end (meaning "a lot") - one or two and miscalculated (meaning "little").
And also they can be unambiguous: "rest on one's laurels" - to be satisfied with what has been achieved and multivalued: "twisting on the tongue" -
1) I really want to say; 2) don't remember at all
Sometimes, with the help of a phraseological unit, a person can express his thought not only figuratively, but also more accurately than usual: A lot or an apple has nowhere to fall
2. Sources of the appearance of phraseological units in the Russian language.
Phraseological units appear in the language in various ways. The first group includes borrowed phraseological units, which are divided into Old Slavonic and Western European. Old Slavonic phraseological units were fixed in the Russian language after the introduction of Christianity. Most often they are of a bookish nature. The source of a large number of expressions now known is the Bible: whoever has ears, let him hear, in the image and likeness, cast pearls before swine and others. In Russia, the Bible was originally rewritten in Church Slavonic, so many words in biblical expressions have unusual forms or are not very clear at all: nothing hesitant (nothing - not at all, hesitating - doubting), the voice of one crying in the wilderness (a voice - a voice crying - screaming), not from this world (this - this one), a parable by the town (tongue - the old form of the sentence fell. plural. From the word language in the meaning of the people), the promised land (promised - promised).
Phraseological units borrowed from Western European languages include the oldest borrowings from Latin or Ancient Greek. In the Russian language there are phraseological units that arose from the myths of ancient Greece. The most common: Achilles' heel, Ariadne's thread, Augean stables, between Scylla and Charybdis. For example, Achilles' heel- a weak point taken from the Greek myth of Achilles, whose body was invulnerable, with the exception of the heel, by which his mother, the goddess Thetis, held him, plunging into the miraculous sacred river Styx.
There are phraseological units that have arisen due to errors associated with translation from another language. For example, have the pip“to feel uncomfortable, uncomfortable.” When translating the French proverb Ne pas etre dans son assiette ordinaire. An error has occurred due to the fact that the French word "assiette" has two meanings: position and plate. The mistake was noticed, but it was too late: the saying took root and entered the speech of the people.
In Russian, there are also such words that are formed by literal translation from foreign languages: put a dot over "I"- from French blue stocking- from English, etc.
The second group includes author's phraseological units. Both borrowed phraseological units and native Russian ones were created either by the people as a whole or by individuals. Let's give examples of author's phraseological units. So, for example, phraseology trishkin caftan arose from a fable published in 1815 in the journal Son of the Fatherland; it ridiculed the landowners who pledged their estates several times to the Board of Trustees. Already in the composition of the fable, this expression became a phraseological unit with the meaning "a matter when the elimination of some shortcomings entails new shortcomings."
The third group includes native Russian phraseological units.
- Most of them came to the Russian language from colloquial everyday speech. Apt folk expressions, often tinged with humor, pass from generation to generation. : look for the wind in the field; stuffed pea; lose your head in the buff; don't spill water
etc. People easily remember such expressive phrases and repeat them over and over again. Over time, some words that are found in phraseological units go out of active use. But if the expression has gained nationwide fame, then this does not interfere with its popularity. The phraseological unit itself, in which there are words that are incomprehensible to modern native speakers, is only becoming more stable. Many phraseological units known to us are parts of proverbs and sayings, which are now almost never used in their entirety. We list a few proverbs and sayings, highlighting in them the part that is well known today: wet chicken, but also cocks; Every day is not Sunday, there will be Great Lent; Horses do not roam from oats, but from good is not looking for good; hassle mouth full and nothing to eat. A well-known proverb Take care of honor from a young age, which he put as an epigraph to the story "The Captain's Daughter", is part of the expression Take care of the dress again, and honor from a young age. Many oral expressions that were used by people of different professions became phraseological units. Expressions clumsy work, walnut came from the speech of joiners, set the tone- from the speech of musicians, baffle- from the speech of railway workers, bring to a common denominator from mathematicians. Some phraseological units came from folk tales. For example, expressions at the behest of the pike, milky rivers and jelly banks. Many primordially Russian phraseological units arose from free combinations of words. For example, before beat the buckets meant splitting an aspen block into buckwheat and making small items out of it, that is, a very easy thing. smoke rocker- now it means noise, din, and earlier in Russia, in chicken coops, the smoke from the stove came out, depending on the weather, either in a "pillar" - straight up, or "drag" - clinging to the bottom, or "yoke" - knocking out with a club, and then waddling over in an arc .
Many scientists (,) call phraseological units of the third group ethnospecific. According to
Such phraseological units "exist only in the Russian language, since they originated on Russian soil, are conditioned by Russian realities, customs and traditions, they store the memory of the history of the Russian people."
3. Dictionary of dialect phraseological units.
In our research work, we will single out territorially limited, dialectal phraseological units from the third group. It is to them that our study will be devoted.
The speech of the inhabitants of the village of Galyugaevskaya belongs to the South Russian dialect. We have collected phraseological units that can be divided into two groups:
Dialect phraseological units that were actively used in the speech of the Terek and Don Cossacks, i.e., characteristic of the entire southern dialect; Dialect phraseological units that are only in the dialect of the inhabitants (Cossacks) of the village of Galyugaevskaya (table attached).
The first group includes the following phraseological units:
semantic field | Phraseologism | Meaning |
Condition and quality | To the point | very necessary |
Like Christ in the bosom | very well, safely, in abundance - usually about life |
|
a curiosity | for the first time, no experience, unusual |
|
out of hand | uncomfortable, inexperienced |
|
At worst | ||
eventually | ||
Once and forever | ||
spend time | ||
space | Where do the eyes look | |
God knows where | ||
amount | More than enough | |
swarmed swarmed | ||
What the hell | ||
out of the blue | For no apparent reason |
|
greetings | You live well | Hello |
for Christ's sake | please |
|
expression | God forbid | Cautions |
Here's one for you | Surprise |
|
What the heck | resentment |
|
damn it | resentment |
4. Conclusion.
Unfortunately, we were not able to trace the history of the appearance of all phraseological units in speech, but we know for sure that in the very formation of dialect phraseological units, i.e. in the selection of images, their connection with cultural and national stereotypes and standards can be traced. This information is then, as it were, resurrected in connotations that reflect the connection of the associative-figurative basis with culture.
The work on the study allowed us to get to know dialect phraseological units in more detail - one of the best means of decorating our speech. She helped to attract the old-timers of the village, classmates, teachers, parents to this interesting work.
While doing the work, we learned a lot of new and interesting things. In the course of research activities, they learned to select and systematize material on a specific topic, to highlight the main thing. They learned how to conduct a survey, process this information. We consider our project necessary not only to expand our knowledge on the topic “Phraseology”, but most importantly, to educate the young generation of village residents of a caring attitude towards their native language, the language of their ancestors.
Findings:
· Dialectal phraseological units reflect the national identity of the language, they capture rich historical experience.
· The study of phraseology, in particular dialectal, improves not only the culture of speech, but also the general culture of a person.
· Appeal to the study of the local dialect will help the young person to resist the onslaught of lack of spirituality, to preserve the purity of the soul, the rich national traditions of his native people.
5. Bibliography.
· Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language / Ed. . - M., 1986.
Shan nationally marked phraseological units //РЯШ.-1996.-№2
Stolbunov units in the novel "Quiet Flows the Don" //РЯ.-2004.-№34
Skornyakova and ethnospecific in Russian phraseology //РЯШ.-2009.-№5
Kurnosov (God's) light in folk phraseology// РЯШ. - 2009. -№7
· Zimin approaches to the study of the cultural content of phraseological units of the Russian language. //РЯШ.-2010.- №2
1. DICTIONARIES AND VOCABULARY MATERIALS
2. Alekseenko M. A., Belousova T. P., Litvinnikova O. I. Man in Russian dialect phraseology. Vocabulary. M.: ITI TECHNOLOGIES, 2004.238 p.
3. Arkhangelsk Regional Dictionary / Ed. O. G. Getsova. Issue. 1-12. M.: Moscow State University, 1980-2004.
4. Balyasnikov A. V., Sokolova O. I. Materials for the dictionary of dialect phraseology of the village. Gorki, Varnavsky district, Gorky region // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 272. Questions of phraseology. VIII. Samarkand, 1975. - S. 21-57.
5. Belyaeva O. P. Dictionary of dialects of the Solikamsk district of the Perm region / Ed. E. A. Golushkova. Perm: Sh NI, 1973. - 706 p.
6. Birikh A. K., Mokienko V. M., Stepanova L. I. Dictionary of phraseological synonyms of the Russian language / Ed. V. M. Mokienko. Rostov n / a: Phoenix, 1996. - 352 p.
7. Botina L. G., Sanzharova V. P. Materials for dialectal phraseological dictionary (Budki village, Kursk region) // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 272. Questions of phraseology. VIII. Samarkand, 1975.1. pp. 82-119.
8. Bystrova E. A., Okuneva A. P., Shansky N. M. Brief phraseological dictionary of the Russian language. St. Petersburg: Education, 1992. - 269 p.
9. Vasnetsov N. M. Materials for the explanatory dictionary of the Vyatka dialect. Vyatka: Lip. stat. com-t, 1907. - 357 p.
10. Gerasimov M. K. Dictionary of the county Cherepovets dialect // Collection of the Society of the Russian Language and Literature of the Academy of Sciences. T. 87. No. 3. St. Petersburg, 1910. - 111 p.
11. Gruzberg JI. A. Materials for the dictionary "Aphoristics of the Perm Territory" // Living speech of the Perm Territory in synchrony and diachrony: materials and research. Issue. 2 / Rev. ed. I. I. Rusinova. Perm: Perm. state un-t, 2008. - S. 4-124.
12. Dal V. I. Proverbs of the Russian people: Collection. In 2 vols. M.: Khudozh. lit., 1984.
13. Dal V. I. Explanatory dictionary of the living Great Russian language. In 4 volumes. Moscow: Rus. lang., 1989-1991.
14. Dolenko M. T. Materials for the dictionary of dialect phraseological units of Podolia // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 272. Questions of phraseology. VIII. Samarkand, 1975. - S. 131-161.
15. Living Kostroma word. Brief Kostroma Regional Dictionary / Comp. N. S. Gantsovskaya, G. I. Mashirova; resp. ed. N. S. Gantsovskaya. Kostroma: GOUVPO KGU im. N. A. Nekrasova, 2006. - 347 p.
16. Zhukov V. P., Zhukov A. V. Shkolny phraseological dictionary of the Russian language. M.: Enlightenment, 1994. - 431 p.
17. Zhukov V. P., Sidorenko M. I., Shklyarov V. T. Dictionary of phraseological synonyms of the Russian language / Ed. V. P. Zhukov. M.: Russian language, 1987. -448 p.
18. Zhukov V. P., Sidorenko M. I., Shklyarov V. T. Explanatory Dictionary phraseological synonyms of the Russian language / Ed. V. P. Zhukov. M.: ACT, Astrel, Ermak, 2005. - 445 p.
19. Ivanova A. F. Phraseological units in Moscow dialects (Materials for a dialect dictionary) // Uch. app. MOPI them. N. K. Krupskaya. T. 160. Issue. 11. Russian language: Questions of Russian phraseology / Ed. ed. I. V. Ustinova. M., 1966. —S. 345-352.
20. Kobeleva I. A. Phraseological dictionary of Russian dialects of the Komi Republic. Syktyvkar: SyktGU, 2004. - 312 p.
21. Lyutikova V.D. Dictionary of dialect personality. Tyumen: Tyumen State University, 2000. - 188 p.
22. Materials for phraseological Dictionary of dialects of the Northern Kama region / Comp. K. N. Prokosheva. Perm: 11G11I, 1972. - 115 p.
23. Melnichenko G. G. Short Yaroslavl Regional Dictionary, combining materials from previously compiled dictionaries (1820-1956). In 2 volumes. Yaroslavl: Publishing house of the Yaroslavl state. ped. in-ta, 1961.
24. Merkuriev I. S. Live speech of the Kola coast-dwellers / Under scientific. ed. B. L. Bogorodsky. Murmansk: Murmansk books. publishing house, 1979. - 184 p.
25. Moseev I. I. Pomorska speaking. Brief dictionary of the Pomeranian language. Arkhangelsk: OR "The Truth of the North", 2005. - 372 p.
26. Nefedova E. A. Expressive Dictionary of a Dialect Personality. M.: MSU, 2001.-144 p.
27. Novgorod Regional Dictionary / Ed. ed. V. P. Strogova. Issue. 113. Novgorod: NovGU im. Yaroslav the Wise, 1992-2000.
28. Novgorod Regional Dictionary / Comp. A. V. Klevtsova, A. V. Nikitin, L. Ya. Petrova, V. P. Strogova / Ed. A. V. Klevtsova, L. Ya. Petrova / Ed. prepared A. N. Levichkin and S. A. Myznikov. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2010.-1435 p.
29. Regional dictionary of Vyatka dialects / Ed. V. G. Dolgushev and 3. V. Smetanina. Issue. 1-5. Kirov: VSTU, 1996-2008.
30. Ogoltsev V. M. Dictionary of stable comparisons of the Russian language (synonymous-mo-antonymic). M.: Russian dictionaries, Astrel, ACT, 2001. - 798 p.
31. Orel M. V. Dialectal phraseology of the Middle Ob old-timer dialects (Materials for a dictionary) // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 237. Questions of phraseology. VI. Samarkand, 1972. - S. 205-260.
32. Pakhotina N. K. Project " Dictionary of stable turns of Russian old-timer dialects of the Omsk region» // Issues of Siberian dialectology. Issue. 2. Omsk: Omsk state. ped. in-t, 1976. - S. 63-82.
33. Pashchenko V. A. Materials for the dictionary of phraseological units and other stable combinations of the Chita region. Part I-V. Chita: ZabGPU, 1999-2004.
34. Podvysotsky A. O. Dictionary of the regional Arkhangelsk dialect in its everyday and ethnographic application. St. Petersburg: Second part. imp. Acad. Sciences, 1885. -198 p.
35. Podyukov I. A., Khorobrikh S. V., Antipov D. A. Ethnolinguistic dictionary of wedding terminology of the Northern Kama region / Nauch. ed. I. A. Podyukov. Usolye, Solikamsk, Berezniki, Perm: Permsk. books. publishing house, 2004. -360 p.
36. Prokosheva K. N. Phraseological dictionary of Perm dialects. Perm: Perm. state ped. un-t, 2002. - 432 p.
37. Pskov regional dictionary with historical data / Redkol. B. A. Larin and others. 1-17. L., St. Petersburg: Publishing House of Leningrad State University, St. Petersburg State University, 1967-2005.
38. Roizenzon L. I., Andreeva L. A. Dictionary of Russian dialect phraseology of the southern part of the Olkhon district of the Irkutsk region // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 237. Questions of phraseology. VI. Samarkand, 1972. -S. 114-204.
39. Roizenzon L. I., Balyasnikov A. V. Dictionary of dialect phraseology of the village of Koty (Oeksky district of the Irkutsk region) // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 237. Questions of phraseology. VI. Samarkand, 1972. - S. 325-341.
40. Roizenzon L. I., Khazova L. N. Materials for the dialect phraseological dictionary of folk dialects of the Nizhnedevitsky district of the Voronezh region // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 237. Questions of phraseology. VI. Samarkand, 1972. - S. 290-306.
41. Roizenzon L. I., Shchigareva B. K., Nikolova O. I. Materials for the Dictionary of Dialect Phraseology of the Nevelsky District of the Pskov Region // Problems of Phraseology. X. Samarkand, 1976. - S. 123-151.
42. Seliger: Materials on Russian dialectology. Dictionary / Ed. A. S. Gerda. Issue. 1-2. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg State University, 2003-2004.
43. Semenkova R. V. Phraseological dictionary of Russian dialects of the Republic of Mordovia. Saransk: Publishing House of Mordov. un-ta, 2007. - 332 p.
44. Sergeeva L. N. Materials for ideographic Dictionary of Novgorod phraseological units. Veliky Novgorod: NovGU im. Yaroslav the Wise, 2004. - 307 p.
45. Dictionary of Vologda dialects / Ed. T. G. Panikarovskaya, L. Yu. Zorina. Issue. 1-12. Vologda: Publishing House of the Vologda State. ped. in-ta, 1983-2007.
46. Dictionary of the dialect of the village of Akchim, Krasnovishersky district, Perm region / Ch. ed. F. L. Skitova. Issue. 1-4. Perm: PTU im. A. M. Gorky, 1984-1999.
47. Dictionary of dialects of the Russian North / Ed. A. K. Matveeva. T. 1-4. Yekaterinburg: Publishing house Ural, un-ta, 2001-2009.
48. Dictionary of dialects of the Solikamsk district of the Perm region / Comp. O. P. Belyaeva / Ed. E. A. Golushkova. Perm: PSPI, 1973.
49. Dictionary of Don dialects of the Volgograd region / Authors-comp. E. V. Brysina, R. I. Kudryashova, V. I. Suprun / Ed. R. I. Kudryashova. Issue. 1-3. Volgograd: VGIPK RO Publishing House, 2006-2007.
50. Dictionary of the regional Vologda dialect. According to the manuscript of P. A. Dilaktorsky 1902 / Ed. prepared A. N. Levichkin, S. A. Myznikov St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2006. - 677 p.
51. Dictionary of the regional Olonets dialect in its everyday and ethnographic application. Collected on the spot and compiled by Herman Kulikovsky. Edition of the Department of the Russian Language and Literature of the Imperial Academy of Sciences. St. Petersburg: Typography imp. Acad. Sciences, 1898. -151 p.
52. Dictionary of figurative expressions of the Russian language / Ed. V. N. Telia. M.: Fatherland, 1995. - 368 p.
53. Dictionary of figurative words and expressions of folk dialect / Ed. O. I. Blinova. Tomsk: Publishing house of Tomsk, un-ta, 2001. - 312 p.
54. Dictionary of Oryol dialects / Ed. T.V. Bakhvalova. Issue. 1-4. Yaroslavl: YaGPI im. K. D. Ushinsky, 1989-1991; Issue. 5-14. Eagle: OGPI, 1992-2003.
55. Dictionary of Perm dialects / Comp. Bazhutina G. V., Borisova A. N., Podyukov I. A., Prokosheva K. N., Fedorova JI. V., Shlyakhova S. S., Misyura E. K., Solovieva O. E. Vol. 1-2. Perm: Book World, 2000-2002.
56. Dictionary of Pskov proverbs and sayings / Comp. V. M. Mokienko, T. G. Nikitina. St. Petersburg: Norint, 2001. - 176 p.
57. Dictionary of Russian dialects of Karelia and adjacent areas / Ch. ed. A. S. Gerd. Issue. 1-6. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University, 1994-2005.
58. Dictionary of Russian dialects of Nizovaya Pechora / Ed. JL A. Ivashko. T. 1-2. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University, 2003-2005.
59. Dictionary of Russian folk dialects / Ed. F. P. Filin and F. P. Sorokoletov. T. 1-41. M., L., St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1965-2007.
60. Dictionary of the modern Russian folk dialect (village Deulino, Ryazan district, Ryazan region) / Comp. G. A. Barinova, T. S. Kogotkova, E. A. Nekrasova, I. A. Ossovetsky, V. B. Silina, K. P. Smolina / Ed. I. A. Ossovetsky. Moscow: Nauka, 1969.
61. Dictionary of phraseological units and other stable phrases of Russian dialects of Siberia / Comp. N. T. Bukhareva, A. I. Fedorov / Ed. F. P. Filina. Novosibirsk: Science. Sib. department, 1972. - 207 p.
62. Dictionary of phraseological homonyms of the modern Russian language / Ed. N. A. Pavlova. Omsk: Heritage. Dialog-Siberia, 2003. - 290 p.
63. Timofeev V.P. Dialect dictionary of personality. Proc. allowance / Ed. M. A. Kolmogortsev. Shadrinsk: publishing house not specified., 1971. - 141 p.
64. Fedotova V.P. Phraseological dictionary of the Karelian language / Ed. ed. A. S. Stepanova. Petrozavodsk: Karelia, 2000. - 260 p.
65. Phraseological dictionary of Russian dialects of the Lower Pechora / Comp. N. A. Stavshina. T. 1-2. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2008.
66. Phraseological dictionary of Russian dialects of the Baikal region / Comp. S. S. Aksenova, N. G. Bakanova, N. A. Smolyakova / Nauch. ed. N. G. Bakanova. Irkutsk: Irkut. state un-t, 2006. - 296 p.
67. Phraseological dictionary of Russian dialects of Siberia / Ed. A. I. Fedorova. Novosibirsk: Science. Sib. department, 1983. - 232 p.
68. Phraseological dictionary of the Russian literary language / Comp.
69. A. I. Fedorov. In 2 vol. M.: Citadel, 1997.
70. Phraseological dictionary of the Russian language / Comp. L. A. Voinova,
71. V. P. Zhukov, A. I. Molotkov, and A. I. Fedorov, Ed. A. I. Molotkova. M.: Russian language, 1986. - 543 p.
72. Shestakova E. N. Materials for the dialect phraseological dictionary of the Voronezh region // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 237. Questions of phraseology. VI. Samarkand, 1972. - S. 261-298.
73. Shturbabina O. I. Materials for the Dictionary of Dialect Phraseology of the Nevelsky District of the Pskov Region // Questions of Russian and Slavic Phraseology. Samarkand, 1978. - S. 78-98.
74. Yarantsev R I. Dictionary-reference book on Russian phraseology. M.: Russian language, 1981. - 304 p.
75. Yaroslavl Regional Dictionary / Ed. G. G. Melnichenko and others. Issue. one-
76. Yaroslavl: Publishing house of the Yaroslavl state. ped. in-ta, 1981-1991.* *
77. Lepeshau I. Ya. Mshsk: Higher school, 1991. - 110 p.
78. NichevaM. Phraseological riverman in Bulgarian ezik. Plovdiv: Ed. house "Hermes", 2002. - 365 p.1. SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE
79. Avaliani Yu. Yu. On the theory of the semantic field in phraseology (thematic-semantic groups) // Questions of Phraseology. Issue. XIV. Scientific works of SamSU named after. A. Navoi. Samarkand, 1979. - S. 4-15.
80. Avdeeva O. I. Features of syntagmatic relations of a phraseme as a linguistic sign // Topical issues of lexicology and phraseology. Sat. scientific Proceedings for the 90th anniversary of V. L. Arkhangelsky / Ed. ed. D. A. Romanov. Tula: TSPU, 2005. —S. 116-121.
81. Alekseenko M. A. Phraseology as a source of replenishment of the vocabulary of the language // Problems phraseological and lexical semantics. Materials Intl. scientific conf. / Editorial board: V. M. Mokienko et al. M.: ITI Technologies, 2004. —S. 35-41.
82. Alekseenko M. A. Feminisms in lexical and phraseographic reflection // Slavic languages in the light of culture. Sat. scientific articles / Rep. ed. M. A. Alekseenko. M., Szczecin, Greifswald: A Temp, 2006. - S. 146-160.
83. Alefirenko N. F. Theoretical questions of phraseology. Kharkov: Vy-scha school, 1987. - 135 p.
84. Aleshina L. V. On the question of experimental lexicography // V. I. Dahl and Russian regional lexicology and lexicography. Materials Vseros. scientific conf. Yaroslavl: YaGPU, 2001. - S. 130-133.
85. Apresyan Yu. D. Lexical semantics (synonymous language means) / Ed. ed. V. Yu. Rozentsveig. M.: Nauka, 1974. - 367 p.
86. Apresyan Yu. D. Interaction of vocabulary and grammar: lexicographic aspect // Russian language in scientific coverage. 2002. No. 1 (3). - S. 10-29.
87. Apresyan Yu. D. Studies in semantics and lexicography. Vol. 1: Paradigmatics. M.: Languages of Slavs, Cultures, 2009. - 568 p.
88. Arsentiev D. 3. Phraseology of one Oryol dialect in a systemic aspect. Abstract dis. cand. philol. Sciences. M., 1986. - 16 p.
89. Arsentiev D. 3. Types of systemic relations within the thematic group // Systemic connections and relations of phraseological units. Sat. scientific works. Sverdlovsk: SGPI, 1989. - S. 98-104.
90. Arsent'eva E. F. Phraseology and phraseography in a comparative aspect (based on Russian and English languages) / Nauch. ed. E. A. Balalykina. Kazan: Publishing House of the Kazan State. un-ta, 2006. - 172 p.
91. Arkhangelsky VL On the concept of a stable phrase and types of phrases // Problems of phraseology and the task of compiling a phraseological dictionary of the Russian language. Abstracts. L.: Institute of Russian. yaz., 1961. - S. 11-15.
92. Arkhangelsky VL Set phrases in modern Russian. Fundamentals of the theory of set phrases and problems of general phraseology. Rostov n / Don: Rost Publishing House, University, 1964. - 315 p.
93. Arkhangelsky VL Homonymic correspondences of stable phrases and free sentences (on the material of the Russian language) // Questions of history and theory of the Russian language. Sat. articles / Rep. ed. V. L. Arkhangelsky. Tula: TSPI im. L. N. Tolstoy, 1970. - S. 66-69.
94. Akhmanova about. C. The content and tasks of phraseology in relation to lexicography // Problems of phraseology and tasks of compiling a phraseological dictionary of the Russian language. Abstracts. L.: Institute of Russian. lang., 1961. - S. 8-10.312■ "." And 1 "S K!,
95. Lupova R. A. Phraseographic description of the Tatar, Russian and English languages. Abstract dis. doc. philol. Sciences. Kazan, 2010. - 36 p.
96. Babich N. D. On the phraseological dictionary of Bukovinian dialects // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 272. Questions of phraseology. VIII. Samarkand, 1975. - S. 5-13.
97. Babkin A. M. Lexicographic development of Russian phraseology. M., L.: Nauka, Leningrad. department, 1964 a. - 76 p.
98. Babkin A. M. Phraseology and lexicography (tasks of the Russian phraseological dictionary) // Problems of Phraseology. Research and materials. Sat. articles / Ed. A. M. Babkina. M., L.: Nauka, Leningrad. department, 1964 b. - S. 7-36.
99. Babkin A. M. Lexicography // Theoretical problems of Soviet linguistics. Sat. articles / Rep. ed. F. P. Filin. M.: Nauka, 1968. - S. 278-286.
100. Babkin A. M. Russian phraseology, its development and sources. Leningrad: Nauka, Leningrad. department, 1970. - 263 p.
101. Babkin A. M. New academic dictionary of the Russian language. Avenue. Leningrad: Nauka, Leningrad. department, 1971. - 41 p.
102. Babkin A. M. Word in context and dictionary // Modern Russian lexicography. 1976. L.: Nauka, Leningrad. Department, 1977. - S. 3-36.
103. Babkin A. M. Idiomatics and grammar in the dictionary // Modern Russian lexicography. 1980. L.: Nauka, Leningrad. Department, 1981. - S. 5-43.
104. Bazhutina GV Peculiarities of external connections of verbal phraseological units in comparison with connections of variable phrases. Abstract dis. . cand. philol. Sciences. M., 1975. - 25 p.
105. Bayramova L. K., Nelyubina E. A. Basic principles for compiling a thematic-ideographic dictionary of phraseological units // Russian language in the national school. 1988. No. 11. - S. 6-10.
106. Bakanova N. G. Principles of constructing a phraseological dictionary of Russian dialects of the Baikal region // Dialectical processes in phraseology. Abstracts of interuniversity reports. scientific conf. / Rev. ed. A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: ChGPI, 1993. —S. 153-155.
107. Balakai A. G. Russian speech etiquette and its principles lexicographic descriptions. Novokuznetsk: NGPI, 2002. - 228 p.
108. A. N. Baranov and D. O. Dobrovolsky, “On the problem of constructing a thesaurus of Russian idioms,” Izvestiya AN. Literature and Language Series. T. 51. M., 1992. No. 5. -WITH. 60-67.
109. Baranov A. N., Dobrovolsky D. O. Principles of the semantic description of phraseology // Questions of linguistics. 2009. No. 6. - S. 21-34.
110. Baranov A. N., Dobrovolsky D. O. Classification of phraseological units: a new look at the classical problem // Word, phraseological unit, text in the literary language and dialects / Ed. T. V. Bakhvalova and others. Sat. scientific articles. Eagle: OSU, 2010. - pp. 80-87.
111. Bakhvalova T. V. Characterization of human intellectual abilities by lexical and phraseological means of language (on the material of Oryol dialects). Proc. allowance. Eagle: 01 II, 1993. - 130 p.
112. Belyaeva E. V. Problems of defining the boundaries of phraseological units // Phraseography in the Machine Fund of the Russian Language / Ed. ed. V. N. Teliya. M.: Nauka, 1990. - S. 67-72.
113. Birikh A. K., Volkov S. S., Nikitina T. G. Dictionary of Russian phraseological terminology / Under the general. ed. V. M. Mokienko. München: Verlag Otto Sagner, 1993. -136 p.
114. Birich A. K diachronic analysis of phraseosemantic fields // Problems of Linguistics. 1995. No. 4. - S. 14-24.
115. Bobunova M. A. Folklore lexicography: formation, theoretical and practical results, perspectives. Kursk: Publishing House Kursk, State Univ. University, 2004. - 240 p.
116. Bogdanova A.F. How many meanings does a phraseological unit have? // Formation and functioning of phraseological units. Sat. articles / Rep. ed. Yu. A. Gvozdarev. Rostov n / Don: Publishing House of Rostov University, 1981 a. - S. 134-138.
117. Bogdanova A. F. Compatibility of phraseological unit with words in speech and differentiation of its lexical meanings (on the material of Russian verbal phraseological units). Abstract dis. cand. philol. Sciences. L., 1981 b. - 12 s.
118. Boitsov AS Phraseographic representation of stable comparisons of South Russian dialects // Problems of regional lexicology, phraseology and lexicography. Eagle: LIGHTS, 1994. - S. 19-20.
119. Bolshakova NV Dialect dictionary: from quote to text // Pskov dialects: synchrony and diachrony. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific Proceedings / Ed. L. Ya. Kostyuchuk. Pskov: PSPI, 2003. - S. 32-41.
120. Bondarenko V. T. On the parts of speech in the Russian language in relation to the phraseological composition // Proceedings of the Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 219. Part 2. Questions of phraseology. V. Samarkand, 1972. - S. 140-145.
121. Bondarenko V. T. On the role of syntactic specialization in the formation of phraseological units // Problems of Russian phrasing. Sat. articles / Rep. ed. V. L. Arkhangelsky. Tula: Tula ped. in-t, 1973. - S. 142-155.
122. Bondarenko V. T. Predicative phraseological units with the grammatical meaning of the state in modern Russian. Abstract dis. . cand. philol. Sciences. Kalinin, 1975 b. - 23 s.
123. Bondarenko V. T. On the semantic-grammatical classification of phraseological units in the Russian language // Problems of Russian phraseology. Sat. articles / Rep. ed. V. L. Arkhangelsky. Tula: Tulsk. state pedin-t them. L. N. Tolstoy, 1977. - S. 42-50.
124. Bondarko A. V., Bulanin L. L. Russian verb. Handbook for students and teachers / Ed. Yu. S. Maslova. Leningrad: Enlightenment, Leningrad. department, 1967. -192 p.
125. Borisova A. N. On the relation of dialect phraseology to the national one (based on the phraseology of dialects of the Northern Kama region) // Literary language and folk speech. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works. Perm: Publishing House of Perm University, 1981. -S. 52-58.
126. Bragina A. A. Semantic relations between synonyms and antonyms (the role of negative forms) // Russian language at school. 1979. No. 5. - S. 95-97.
127. Brysina E. V. Compatibility as an indicator of the categoricalness of phraseological units // Grammatical categories and units: syntagmatic aspect. Vladimir: VSPU, 1997. - S. 35-36.
128. Brysina E. V. Communicative and pragmatic aspects of dialect phraseography // Phraseology - 2000. Materials of All-Russian. scientific conf. "". Tula: Publishing house of TSPU, 2000. - S. 305-308.
129. Brysina E. V. Ethnocultural idioms of the Don Cossacks. Volgograd: Change, 2003. - 293 p.
130. Brysina E. V., Kudryashova R. I., Suprun V. I. Actual problems of modern dialect lexicography // Zhivoe slovo. Folklore-dialectological almanac. Issue. 1 / Ed. E. V. Brysina, V. I. Suprun. Volgograd: VGIPK RO Publishing House, 2008. - S. 57-68.
131. Burina T. G. Ways of interpreting objective phraseology in the dictionary // Dialectical processes in phraseology. Abstracts of interuniversity reports. scientific conf. / Rev. ed. A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: 41 NI, 1993. - S. 160-162.
132. Burmistrovich Yu. Ya. Talking about phraseological units can be anything, but not contradictory // Phraseological memory reading
133. V. A. Lebedinskaya. Issue. 2. Materials Vseros. scientific conf. / Rev. ed. N. B. Usacheva. Kurgan: KGU, 2005. - S. 34-37.
134. Bushui A. M. Lexicographic description of phraseology. Proc. allowance. Samarkand: SamGU, 1982. - 114 p.
135. Bushui A. M. Lexicographic and bibliographic representation of phraseology. Abstract dis. doc. philol. Sciences. Samarkand, 1982. - 32 p.
136. Bushui A. M. Dictionary representation of phraseology // Phraseology in text and dictionary. Samarkand: SamGU, 1986. - S. 4-19.
137. WeilP., Genis A. Matryoshka principle // New World. 1989. No. 10. -1. C. 247-250.
138. Vasiliev L. M. Semantic and grammatical properties of phraseology as a unit of language // L. M. Vasiliev. Theoretical problems of general linguistics, Slavistics, Russian studies. Sat. selected articles. Ufa: RIO Bash-GU, 2006 a. -WITH. 94-100.
139. Vasil'ev L. M. Names and predicates in the semantic field of a set // L. M. Vasil'ev. Theoretical problems of general linguistics, Slavic studies, Russian studies. Sat. selected articles. Ufa: RIO BashGU, 2006. - S. 368-370.
140. Vasilyeva O. V. On grammatical transitivity in Pskov dialects // Pskov dialects: synchrony and diachrony. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific Proceedings / Ed. L. Ya. Kostyuchuk. Pskov: PSPI, 2003. - S. 52-57.
141. Velikanova E. V. Category of the gender of objective phraseological units with abstract meaning // Phraseological readings in memory of V. A. Lebedinskaya. Sat. scientific articles / Rep. ed. N. B. Usacheva. Kurgan: Publishing House of the Kurgan State. un-ta, 2004. - S. 47-55.
142. Verbitskaya L. A., Kazansky N. N., Kasevich V. B. National corpus of the Russian language // Modern Russian speech: state and functioning. Sat. analyte mater. / Ed. S. I. Bogdanova and others. St. Petersburg: Faculty of Philology of St. Petersburg State University, 2004. - P. 113-126.
143. Vinogradov V. V. On the interaction of lexico-semantic levels with grammatical in the structure of the language // Thoughts on the modern Russian language / Ed. V. V. Vinogradova. M .: Education, 1969. - S. 5-23.
144. Vinogradov VV Russian language: Grammatical doctrine of the word. Proc. allowance for philol. specialties of un-comrade. M.: Higher school, 1972. - 614 p.
145. Vinogradov V. V. Basic concepts of Russian phraseology as linguistic disciplines // Vinogradov VV Selected works. Lexicology and lexicography. M.: Nauka, 1977 a. - S. 118-139.
146. Vinogradov VV On the main types of phraseological units in the Russian language // Vinogradov VV Selected works. Lexicology and lexicography. M.: Nauka, 1977 b. - S. 140-161.
147. Vinogradov VV About some questions of the theory of Russian lexicography // Vinogradov VV Selected Works. Lexicology and lexicography. M.: Nauka, 1977. - S. 243-264.
148. Vlavatskaya M. V. Reflection of word compatibility in Russian dictionaries of the 18th-20th centuries. // Avanes Readings. Abstracts of reports Int. scientific conf. / Under the total. ed. M. L. Remneva and M. V. Shulga. M.: MAKS Press, 2002. - S. 55-58.
149. Vlasova N. A. Polydialect phraseological nests with somatic components // Oryol dialects: Problems of study. Sat. scientific works / Nauch. ed. T. V. Bakhvalova. Eagle: OSU, 1997. - S. 58-66.
150. Questions of phraseology and grammatical building language. Sat. articles / Rep. ed. Ch. Kh. Bakaev and Yu. Yu. Avaliani. Tashkent: Fan, 1967. - 171 p.
151. Questions of phraseology and compilation of phraseological dictionaries. Materials of the IX All-Union. coordination meetings / Rep. ed. A. A. Orudzhev. Baku: Ed. AN AzSSR, 1968. - 175 p.
152. Gasheva JI. P. The position of procedural phraseological units in a sentence (semantic-grammatical and communicative aspects). Chelyabinsk: ChGPU, 1999. -130 p.
153. Gasheva JI. P. To the problem phraseography multi-valued units // Dictionary heritage of V.P. Zhukov and ways of development of Russian and general lexicography. Materials Intl. scientific symposium (Third Zhukovsky readings). Veliky Novgorod: NovGU, 2004. - S. 36-39.
154. Gvozdarev Yu. A. Fundamentals of Russian phrase formation. Rostov n / Don: Publishing house Rost, un-ta, 1977. - 184 p.
155. Gvozdarev Yu. A. Comparative description of the phraseology of different languages // Formation and functioning of phraseological units / Ed. ed. Yu. A. Gvozdarev. Rostov on / Don: Publishing House of Rostov University, 1981. - S. 116-121.
156. Gerd AS Dictionary meaning of the word and meaning // Actual problems of theoretical and applied lexicography. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works. Ivanovo: Yunona, 1997. - S. 192-198.
157. Gerd A. S. Dictionary of Russian dialects of Karelia and adjacent regions (vols. 1-6, 1994-2004): Results and lessons // Problems of dialect lexicology and lexicography (on the 80th anniversary of F. P. Sorokoletov). St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2004. - S. 46-54.
158. Glukhov V. M. Properties of vernacular-dialect phraseology // Formation and functioning of phraseological units / Otv. ed. Yu. A. Gvozdarev. Rostov on / Don: Publishing House of Rostov University, 1981. - S. 77-83.
159. Grammar of the Russian language. In 2 vols. M.: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1960.
160. Grammar of the modern Russian literary language. M.: Nauka, 1970. -767 p.
161. Grigorieva E. A. Quantitative semantics of a phraseological unit as a linguistic sign // Semantics and form of phraseological signs of a language. Abstracts of the Vseros. scientific conf. Kurgan: Publishing House of the Kurgan State. un-ta, 2003. - S. 40-42.
162. Grineva A. G. Reflection of national culture in phraseological units with a quantitative component // Phraseological readings in memory of V. A. Lebedinskaya. Issue. 2. Materials Vseros. scientific conf. / Rev. ed. N. B. Usacheva. Kurgan: Publishing House of KGU, 2005. - S. 68-70.
163. Grishanova VN To the question of the criteria for delimiting the meanings of poly-semantic phraseological units // Russian language at school. 1979. No. 6. - S. 84-88.
164. Grishanova VN Some issues of dialect phraseography // Information potential of the word and phraseological unit. Sat. scientific articles. Orel: OGU, 2005. —S. 407-410.
165. Grotto Y. K. Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language by V. I. Dahl // Proceedings of J. K. Grot. SPb., 1899. T. II (Philological research). - S. 1-45.
166. Grunchenko O. M. Phraseological units of Oryol dialects with no component // Oryol dialects: Problems of study. Sat. scientific works / Nauch. ed. T. V. Bakhvalova. Eagle: OSU, 1997. - S. 72-79.
167. Guzhanov S. I. Syntactic functions of substantive-adjective phraseological units // Russian language at school. 1989. No. 3. - S. 92-94.
168. Gutenev VF About the educational dictionary of phrasematic compatibility of idioms of the Russian language // Studia Rossica Posnaniensia. Poznan, 1979. - S. 25-33.
169. Dal V. I. Naputnoe // Proverbs of the Russian people: Collection. In 2 vols. T. 1. M .: Khudozh. lit., 1984. - S. 5-21.
170. Dal V. I. Spurious word // Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language. In 4 vols. T. 1. M .: Rus. lang., 1989-1991. - S. XXI-XXXVII.
171. Danilovich N. A. The development of phraseography in Belarus // To the 60th anniversary of Professor A. V. Zhukov. Anniversary Sat. scientific works. Veliky Novgorod: NovGU, 2007. - S. 40-47.
172. Devel L. A. British lexicography in the XXI century (explanatory educational / pedagogical dictionaries of the English language) // Philological Sciences. 2008. No. 1. —S. 55-67.
173. Devkin VD On unborn German and Russian dictionaries // Questions of linguistics. 2001. No. 1. - S. 85-97.
174. Didkovskaya VG Syntagmatic properties of phraseological combinations in the Russian language. Proc. allowance for the special course. Novgorod: NGPI, 1992. - 63 p.
175. Dobrydneva E. A. Communicative-pragmatic paradigm of Russian: phraseology / Nauch. ed. N. F. Alefirenko. Volgograd: Change, 2000 a.—224 p.
176. Dobrydneva E. A. Communicative-pragmatic transformations of phraseological units // Phraseology - 2000. Materials of All-Russian. scientific conf. " Phraseology at the turn of the century: achievements, problems, prospects". Tula: TSPU, 2000 b. - S. 237-239.
177. Dyadechko L.P. Basic principles of modern eptography // Slavic languages in the light of culture. Sat. scientific articles / Rep. ed. M. A. Alekseenko. M., Szczecin, Greifswald: A Temp, 2006. - S. 188-204.
178. Bvgen'eva A. P. About some lexicographic issues related to the publication of the Big Dictionary of the Modern Russian Literary Language of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR // Lexicographical collection. Issue. II. M.: State. foreign publishing house and national dictionaries, 1957. - S. 167-177.
179. Ermakova O. P. On the dependence of lexicology on lexicography // Russian language today. Issue. 3. Problems of Russian lexicography. Sat. articles / Rep. ed. L. P. Krysin. M.: In-t of the Russian language. V. V. Vinogradova, 2004. - S. 90-97.
180. Ermilova M. L. Lexical and grammatical compatibility of phraseological units of the modern Russian language. Abstract dis. . cand. lol. Sciences. SPb., 1994. - 16 p.
181. Ermilova M. L. Phrase-lexical combination as the main linguo-methodological unit in teaching Russian phraseology to foreigners // Communicative-pragmatic aspects of phraseology. Abstracts of reports Int. conf. Volgograd: Change, 1999. - S. 190-192.
182. Ermolaeva Yu. A. Principles of lexicographic description of Russian phraseology (on the material of dictionary entries in general and educational dictionaries). Abstract dis. cand. philol. Sciences. L., 1990. - 17 p.
183. Zhukov A. V. Verb-adverbial expressions and adverbial phraseological units // Systematicity of the Russian language. Sat. scientific works / Resp. ed. V. P. Zhukov. Novgorod: LGPI im. A. I. Herzen, 1973. - S. 167-182.
184. Zhukov A. V. Objective phraseology in the Russian language // Semantic and grammatical characteristics of phraseological units of the Russian language. Sat. scientific works. Leningrad: LGPI im. A. I. Herzen, 1978. - S. 43^8.
185. Zhukov A. V. Transitional phraseological phenomena in the Russian language. Novgorod: NovGU Publishing House, 1996. - 132 p.
186. Zhukov V. P. On phraseological units with an estimated value // Questions of phraseology and grammar of the Russian language. Uch. app. Novgorod state. ped. inta. Volume XII. Philological Sciences. Novgorod: Novgorod State. ped. in-t, 1967. -S. 3-17.
187. Zhukov V. P. On the management of verbal phraseological units of the Russian language // Philological Sciences. 1971. No. 1. - S. 48-58.
188. Zhukov V. P. Level position of phraseological units in the language system // Semantic-grammatical characteristics of phraseological units of the Russian language. Sat. scientific works / Ch. ed. V. P. Zhukov. L .: LGPI, 1978 a. - S. 6-11.
189. Zhukov V.P. Semantics of phraseological turns. Proc. allowance for students ped. in-comrade. M.: Enlightenment, 1978 b. - 160 s.
190. Zhukov V.P. Russian phraseology: Proc. allowance for philol. specialist. universities. M.: Higher school, 1986. - 310 p.
191. Zhukov V.P. Phraseologism in its relation to the part of speech // Phraseologisms in the system of language levels. L., 1986. - S. 5-12.
192. Zhukov V.P., Zhukov A.V. Morphological characteristics of phraseological units of the Russian language. Proc. special course allowance. Leningrad: LGPI im. A. I. Herzen, 1980. - 97 p.
193. Zhuravlev AF Should a dialectologist be an ethnographer? // Russian speech. 1988. No. 5. - S. 89-96.
194. Zhuravlev AF Observations on the current state of Russian dialect lexicography // Actual problems of Russian dialectology. Abstracts Int. conf. M.: In-t of the Russian language. V. V. Vinogradova, 2006. - S. 60-61.
195. Zagorovskaya Island in. Semantics of the dialect word and problems of dialect lexicography // Otv. ed. Yu. N. Karaulov. M.: Institute of the Russian language of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1990. -300 p.
196. Zakharov B. F. To the problem etymological explanations in the dialect phraseological dictionary // Actual problems of studying Russian folk dialects. Interuniversity materials. scientific conf. Arzamas: AGPI im. A. P. Gaidar, 1996. - S. 41 ^ 14.
197. Zimin V. I. On the benefits of biased consideration of the internal form of phraseological units // Information potential of the word and phraseological unit. Sat. scientific articles. Eagle: OSU, 2005. - S. 173-177.
198. Zolotova G. A. On the new possibilities of lexicography // Questions of linguistics. 1994. No. 4. - S. 85-95.
199. Zubova Zh. A. Some features phraseosemantic fields " human condition» (on the material of Oryol dialects) // Oryol dialects: problems of study. Sat. scientific works / Nauch. ed. T. V. Bakhvalova. Issue. 2. Eagle: OSU, 2001. - S. 59-63.
200. Zubova Zh. A. On the work on phraseological Dictionary of Oryol dialects // Questions of vocabulary and phraseology of the Russian language. Sat. scientific articles. Eagle: "Orlik", 2004. - S. 64-67.
201. Zueva T. A. On the question of the polysemy of phraseological units // Systemic connections and relations of phraseological units. Sat. scientific works. Sverdlovsk: SGPI, 1989. —S. 53-59.
202. Ivanenko G. S. Structural-semantic and functional properties of phraseological units of the model of a simple two-part sentence. Abstract dis. . cand. philol. Sciences. Volgograd, 1996. - 25 p.
203. Ivashko JI. A. Essays on Russian Dialect Phraseology. I: Leningrad State University, 1981.—111p.
204. Ivashko L. A. Dialect phraseology and its formation on the basis of the vocabulary of folk speech. Dis. in the form of scientific report doc. philol. Sciences. SPb., 1994. - 38 p.
205. Ivashko L. A. On the lexicographic development of sustainable comparisons // Pskov dialects (Pskov Regional Dictionary and Actual Problems of Regional Lexicography). Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works / Responsible. ed. L. Ya. Kostyuchuk. Pskov: PSPI, 2001. - S. 90-93.
206. Ivashko L. A. Pick up tambourines. // Dictionary heritage of V.P. Zhukov and the development of Russian and general lexicography. Materials Intl. scientific symposium (Third Zhukovsky readings). Veliky Novgorod: NovGU, 2004. - S. 470-474.
207. Ignatieva L. D. Polysemy of phraseological units with components - subordinating unions of qualitatively circumstantial semantics // Systemic connections and relations of phraseological units. Sat. scientific works. Sverdlovsk: SGPI, 1989. - S. 20-28.
208. Ideographic and historical and etymological analysis of Slavic phraseology. Abstracts of reports Int. symposium / Rev. ed. L. Ya. Kostyuchuk. Pskov: PSPI, 1994. - 114 p.
209. IonovaI. A. Phraseological units with adjectival meaning in the modern Russian language (to the question of correlation of phraseological units with parts of speech). Abstract dis. cand. philol. Sciences. M., 1975. - 25 p.
210. History of Russian lexicography / Ed. ed. F. P. Sorokoletov. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1998. -610 p.
211. Kazachuk I. G. Dynamism of procedural phraseological units in the passive participial form // Phraseology in the aspect of science, culture, education. Abstracts of reports Int. scientific-practical. conf. to the 75th anniversary of A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: ChGPU, 2001. - S. 76-80.
212. Kazachuk I. G. Procedural phraseological units of the Russian language (categories of being and relationships) / Nauch. ed. A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: ChGPU publishing house, 2004. -310 p.
213. Kazachuk I. G. Management of object procedural phraseological units / Nauch. ed. A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk, 2006. - 172 p.
214. Kalimullina L. A. The history of emotive vocabulary and phraseology of the Russian language / Nauch. ed. L. M. Vasiliev. Ufa: Eastern University, 2004. - 120 p.
215. Kveselevich D. I. Phraseological synonyms and context // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 339. Questions of phraseology. XI. Samarkand, 1977. - S. 4-7.
216. Klobukov E. V., Mamechkov S. G. Substantive gender in Russian: a category with content or structural dominant? // Philological sciences. 2009. No. 6. - S. 42-52.
217. Kovaleva L. G. Verb-propositional phraseological units of the Russian language (lexical and grammatical analysis). Abstract dis. . cand. philol. Sciences. SPb., 1993. - 17 p.
218. Kovalenko E. G. Classification of phraseological units as linguistic problem // Phraseological readings in memory of V. A. Lebedinskaya. Issue. 3. Sat. materials Vseros. scientific conf. / Rev. ed. N. B. Usacheva. Kurgan: publishing house of KSU, 2006. -S. 42-45.
219. Kogotkova T. S. Russian dialect lexicology (state and prospects). M.: Nauka, 1979. - 335 p.
220. Kogotkova T. S. Notes on modern regional lexicography // Russian speech. 1988. No. 1. - S. 52-59.
221. Kozyreva L. F. Syntagmatic connections of stable phrases in speech // Formation and functioning of phraseological units / Otv. ed. Yu. A. Gvozdarev. Rostov on / Don: Publishing House of Rostov University, 1981. - S. 63-69.
222. Kolesnikov N.P. What is missing in our dictionaries // Modern Russian lexicography. 1976. L.: Nauka, Leningrad. department, 1977. - S. 198-201.
223. Kostyuchuk L. Ya. On the grammatical and lexical originality of dialect stable phrases (based on Pskov dialects) // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 237. Questions of phraseology. VI. Samarkand, 1972. - S. 342-347.
224. Kostyuchuk L. Ya. On synonymic and antonymic set phrases in Pskov dialects // Pskov dialects. Issue. 3. Pskov, 1973. - S. 311-316.
225. Kostyuchuk L. Ya. Pskov phraseology in its past and present (in connection with general questions of phraseology). Proc. allowance for the special course. L .: LGPI, 1983 a. -82 p.
226. Kostyuchuk L. Ya. Processes of formation and functioning of stable combinations of words in Pskov monuments and folk dialects. Abstract dis. doc. philol. Sciences. L., 1983 b. - 48 s.
227. Kostyuchuk L. Ya. The method of placing phraseology in dialect dictionaries as a result of the study of the material // Dialect word in the lexicographic aspect. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works / Responsible. ed. V. A. Kozyrev. Leningrad: LGPI im. A. I. Herzen, 1986. - S. 91-99.
228. KostyuchukL. Ya. Informative significance of the dialect lexical map at the end of the 20th century // Lexical atlas of Russian folk dialects (Materials and research - 1998). St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2001 a. - S. 39-46.
229. Kotelova N. 3. Lexical compatibility of a word in a dictionary // Modern Russian lexicography. 1976. L.: Nauka, Leningrad. Department, 1977. - S. 36-53.
230. Kotova M. Yu. On the issue of bilingual dictionaries of proverbs // Phraseological dictionaries and computer phraseography. Abstracts of the school-seminar reports. Eagle: OGPI, 1990. - S. 107-109.
231. Kosheleva T. I. Violations of the morphological norm of the use of phraseological units // Phraseology in the aspect of science, culture, education. Abstracts of reports Int. scientific-practical. conf. dedicated to the 75th anniversary
232. A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: Publishing House of ChGPU, 2001. - S. 139-142.
233. Brief Russian grammar / Ed. N. Yu. Shvedova and
234. V. V. Lopatina. M.: Rus. yaz., 1989. - 639 p.
235. Kryukova N. A. About a new phenomenon in phraseology // V. I. Dahl in the paradigm of ideas of modern science: language - literature - culture - dictionaries. Materials II All-Russian. scientific conf. Ivanovo: Ivan. state un-t, 2004 a. - S. 247-252.
236. Kryukova N. A. Reflection of syntactic relations of a phraseological unit with words in phraseological dictionaries // Dictionary heritage of V. P. Zhukov and ways of development of Russian and general lexicography. materials
237. Int. scientific symposium (Third Zhukovsky readings). Veliky Novgorod: NovGU, 2004 b. - S. 159-163.
238. Ksenofontova L. V. Semantic and syntactic features of phraseological units in isolated use // Semantics and form of phraseological signs of the language. Abstracts of the Vseros. scientific conf. Kurgan: KSU, 2003. —S. 63-66.
239. Kubryakova E. S. Language and knowledge. On the way to gaining knowledge about the language: Parts of speech from a cognitive point of view. The role of language in the knowledge of the world. M.: Languages of Slavic culture, 2004. - 560 p.
240. Kuznetsova O.D., Sorokoletov F.P. On the typology of Russian dialect dictionaries // Russian language: history, dialects, modernity. Sat. scientific works. Issue. VI. M., 2005. - S. 34-39.
241. Kuzmina I. B., Nemchenko E. V. Syntax of participial forms in Russian dialects. M.: Nauka, 1971. - 310 p.
242. Kunin A. V. Stable adjectival comparisons in Russian and English (an experience of comparative analysis) // Russian language abroad. 1969. No. 3. - S. 80-87.
243. Kunin A. V. To the question of lexicographic development of Russian phraseology // Modern Russian lexicography. 1976. L.: Nauka, Leningrad. Department, 1977. -S. 177-180.
244. Kurilovich E. R. Notes on the meaning of the word // Questions of linguistics. 1955. No. 3. -WITH. 73-81.
245. Kournikova N.V. Intonation marked phraseological units as one of the ways of expressing the emotionality of Russian speech // Phraseology and worldview of the people: Materials of the Int. scientific conf. At 2 o'clock
246. Phraseology and intercultural communication / Comp. V. T. Bondarenko, G. V. Tokarev. Tula: TSPU im. L. N. Tolstoy, 2002. - Part 2. - S. 165-169.
247. Lavrov N. I. The semantic structure of a dialectal phraseological unit. Proc. allowance for the special course / Ed. ed. V. P. Zhukov. Novgorod: NGPI, 1992. -90 p.
248. Lazutkina E. M. Grammatical conditionality of stable expressions (based on somatic speeches) // Facets of words. Sat. scientific articles. M.: LLC "Publishing House ELPIS", 2005. - S. 104-110.
249. Larin B. A. On folk phraseology // Larin B. A. History of the Russian language and general linguistics (Selected works). Proc. allowance for students ped. in-tov / Comp. prof. B. L. Bogorodsky, N. A. Meshchersky. M.: Enlightenment, 1977 b. - S. 149-162.
251. Lebedeva L. A. Non-free lexical compatibility and phraseological connections of words in the Russian language. XXVIII. 1983. No. 1.-8. 20-24.
252. Lebedeva L. A. Stable comparisons of the Russian language in phraseology and phraseography. Krasnodar: Kuban. state un-t, 1999. - 196 p.
253. Lebedinskaya VA On the issue of studying the morphological specifics of phraseological units // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 219. Part 2. Questions of phraseology. V. Samarkand, 1972. - S. 114-116.
254. Lebedinskaya VA Procedural phraseological units of the modern Russian language. Proc. special course allowance. Chelyabinsk: ChGPI, 1987. - 80 p.
255. Lebedinskaya VA Functioning of morphological categories of procedural phraseological units // Dialectical processes in phraseology. Abstracts of interuniversity reports. scientific conf. / Rev. ed. A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: ChGPI, 1993. - S. 14-15.
256. Lebedinskaya VA Interaction of semantic and grammatical properties of procedural phraseological units. Abstract dis. doc. philol. Sciences. Eagle, 1996. -40 p.
257. Lebedinskaya VA Dynamism of the external form of procedural phraseological units // Dynamics of the phraseological composition of the language. Abstracts Int. scientific conf. Kurgan: Publishing House of the Kurgan State. un-ta, 1999. - S. 42-43.
258. Lebedinskaya V. A., Usacheva N. B. Semantics of procedural phraseological units. Kurgan: Publishing House of the Kurgan State. un-ta, 1999. - 186 p.
259. Ledenev Yu. I. On systemicity in the language (a class of ambiguous words) // Incomplete words. Issue. 2. Stavropol: publishing house THEY, 1977. - S. 3-13.
260. Lexicographic development of phraseological units for dictionaries of various types and for the Machine Fund of the Russian language. Materials for the methodical school-seminar. M.: Nauka, 1988. - 197 p.
261. Lepeshev I. Ya. Belarusian dialectal phraseology in dictionaries of various types (Lexicographic review) // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 237. Questions of phraseology. VI. Samarkand, 1972. - S. 100-113.
262. Lomov A. G. Usual changes in non-literary phraseological units // Phraseology - 2000. Materials of All Russia. scientific conf. " Phraseology at the turn of the century: achievements, problems, prospects". Tula: TPTU, 2000. - S. 239-242.
263. Lukov VD Is it possible to describe the pragmatics of a word in an ideographic dictionary? // Linguistic pragmatics in the dictionary: types of implementation and methods of description. Sat. articles / Ed. G. N. Sklyarevskaya. SPb.: OR RAN, 1997. —S. 71-73.
264. Lukyanova N. A. Expression of content " in great numbers»Language Means of the Literary Language and Dialect // Questions of Language and Literature of the Peoples of Siberia. Sat. scientific works / Responsible. ed. E. I. Ubryatova. Novosibirsk: Sib. Department of the Academy of Sciences, 1974. - S. 107-121.
265. Lukyanova N. A. Some issues of dialect lexicology. Proc. manual for students-philologists. Novosibirsk, 1979.
266. Lyakhova TN Syntax of a phraseological unit (on the basis of nominal phraseological units) // Syntax in school and university teaching. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works. Ivanovo: IvGU, 1991. - S. 55-63.
267. Lyakhova T. N. Syntax of a phraseological unit. Abstract dis. . cand. philol. Sciences. SPb., 1992. - 16 p.
268. Mazilova A. Yu. Grammar characteristics of words in the Yaroslavl Regional Dictionary // Russian folk dialects: problems of study. Abstracts of interuniversity reports. scientific conf. Yaroslavl: YaGPU, 1997. - S. 100-102.
269. Mazilova A. Yu. Possibilities of using regional dictionaries for studying dialect grammar // V. I. Dal and Russian regional lexicology and lexicography. Materials Vseros. scientific conf. Yaroslavl: YaGPU, 2001. —S. 128-130.
270. Makarov V.I. The concept of “ultimacy” in Russian phraseological units with numeral components // Phraseological unit and word in language and speech. Sat. articles / Redkol. V. G. Didkovskaya and others. Veliky Novgorod: publishing house of the Novgorod State University. Yaroslav the Wise, 2007. - S. 229-240.
271. Melerovich A. M. The problem of semantic analysis of phraseological units of the modern Russian language. Proc. special course allowance. Yaroslavl: Publishing House YAG11I them. K. D. Ushinsky, 1979. - 80 p.
272. Melnichenko G. G. On the use of old dictionaries in compiling new regional dictionaries // Abstracts of reports for VIII dialectological meeting May 15-18, 1961. M.: In-trusskosh language of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1961. - S. 43-45.
273. Melnichenko GG Tasks of studying dialect vocabulary and phraseology // Uch. app. MOPI them. N. K. Krupskaya. T. 160. Issue. 11. Russian language: Questions of Russian phraseology / Ed. ed. I. V. Ustinova. M., 1966. - S. 321-333.
274. Melnichenko GG On the principles of compiling regional dictionaries // Regional lexicology and lexicography. Selected works. Yaroslavl: YaGPU, 2007. —S. 5-151.
275. Merkulova V. I. Systemic relations in dialectal phraseology (on the basis of Oryol dialects) // Systemic connections and relations of phraseological units. Sat. scientific works. Sverdlovsk: SGPI, 1989. - S. 140-147.
276. Miloslavsky I. G. Morphological categories of the modern Russian language. M.: Enlightenment, 1981. - 254 p.
277. Mitelskaya Zh. 3. Linguistic properties of modal phraseological units - units of speech etiquette // Phraseologism: semantics and forms. Sat. articles / Rep. ed. N. B. Usacheva. Kurgan: Publishing house Kurgan, un-ta, 2001. - S. 69-74.
278. Mythological stories and legends of the Russian North / Comp. and commenter. O. A. Cherepanova. St. Petersburg: Publishing house of St. Petersburg State University, 1996. - 211 p.
279. Mikhailova OA My world is my home. The system of specialized actants in " Dictionary of Russian dialects of the Middle Urals» // News of the Ural state. university Humanitarian sciences. Issue. 4. 2001. No. 20. - S. 178-183.
280. Mokienko V. M. Contradiction of phraseology and its dynamics. Abstract dis. doc. philol. Sciences. JL, 1976. - 32 p.
281. Mokienko V. M. On the thematic-ideographic classification of phraseological units // Dictionaries and linguistics. M.: Russian language, 1982. - S. 108-121.
282. MokienkoV. M. Slavic phraseology. 2nd ed., rev. and additional M.: Higher school, 1989. - 287 p.
283. Mokienko V. M. Ideography and historical and etymological analysis of phraseology // Questions of linguistics. 1995. No. 4. - S. 3-13.
284. Molotkov A. I. The form of phraseology (on the material of the Russian language) // Problems of phraseology and the tasks of its study in higher and secondary schools. Vologda: North-Western book publishing house, 1967. - S. 175-184.
285. Molotkov AI Fundamentals of phraseology of the Russian language. L.: Nauka LO, 1977. -283 p.
286. Molotkov AI Difficult cases of lexical and grammatical characteristics of phraseological units of the Russian language // Russian Linguistics. Kyiv. 1985. No. 10. -S. 3-9.
287. Molotkov A. I. Phraseologisms of the Russian language and the principles of their lexicographic description // Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language / Ed. A. I. Molotkova. St. Petersburg: Variant, 1994 a. - S. 5-21.
288. Molotkov A. I. Afterword to the reprint “ Phraseological dictionary of the Russian language» // Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language / Ed. A. I. Molotkova. St. Petersburg: Variant, 1994 b. - S. 537-541.
289. Molotkov A.I., ZhostM.-L. Educational Russian-French phraseological dictionary. M.: Astrel, ACT, 2001. - 330 p.
290. Molotkov AI, Tseslinska V. Educational Russian-Polish Phraseological Dictionary. M.: Astrel, ACT, 2001. - 336 p.
291. Mordvilko A.P. Essays on Russian phraseology (nominal and verbal phraseological turns). M.: Enlightenment, 1964. - 132 p.
292. I. A. Morozov, I. S. Sleptsova, and L. Ostrovsky. B., Smolnikov S. N., Minyukhina E. A. Spiritual culture of the Northern Belozerye: Ethno-dialect dictionary. M.: IAE, 1997. - 432 p.
293. Neupokoeva Yu. I. Semantic classification of subject phraseological units // Phraseologism: semantics and forms. Sat. articles dedicated to the anniversary of V. A. Lebedinskaya / Ed. ed. N. B. Usacheva. Kurgan: Publishing House of the Kurgan State. un-ta, 2001. - S. 84-87.
294. Nikitina TG Problems of ideographic description of folk phraseology. M.: From the depths, 1995 a. - 96 p.
295. Nikitina T. G. Ideographic aspects of the study of folk phraseology (based on Pskov dialects). Abstract dis. . doc. philol. Sciences. SPb., 1995 b. -32 s.
296. Nikitina T. G. Problems of studying the ethno-cultural specifics of phraseology. Pskov: PSPI, 1998. - 208 p.
298. Novitskaya VV Phraseologisms with quantitative meaning in modern Russian // Studies in semantics. Interuniversity. scientific Sat. Ufa: Publishing House of the Bashkir State University, 1986. - S. 116-123.
299. Nosenko I. G. Types of interpretation of phraseological units (issues of taxonomy and modeling) // Phraseography in the Machine Fund of the Russian Language / Ed. ed. V. N. Teliya. M.: Nauka, 1990. - S. 167-177.
300. Ogoltsev V. M. On grammatical marks in the dictionary of stable comparisons // Semantic and grammatical characteristics of phraseological units of the Russian language. Sat. scientific works. Leningrad: LGPI im. A. I. Herzen, 1978. - S. 21-29.
301. Ozhegov S. I. About three types of explanatory dictionaries of the modern Russian language // Lexicology. Lexicography. A culture of speech. Proc. allowance for universities. M .: Higher school, 1974 a. - S. 158-182.
302. Ozhegov S.I. On the structure of phraseology (in connection with the project of a phraseological dictionary of the Russian language) // Lexicology. Lexicography. A culture of speech. Proc. allowance for universities. Moscow: Higher school, 1974 b. - S. 182-219.
303. Ozhegov S. I. Questions of lexicology and lexicography // Lexicology. Lexicography. A culture of speech. Proc. allowance for universities. M.: Higher school, 1974. - S. 228-244.
305. Orel M. V. To the question of the study of dialect phraseology // Questions of linguistics and Siberian dialectology. Proceedings of the Tomsk State. un-ta im. V. V. Kuibyshev. T. 84. Issue. 3. Tomsk: Publishing House of Tomsk University, 1973. - S. 65-70.
306. Orel M. V. Stable combinations of Russian dialects of Siberia and their reflection in the dictionary // Phraseological dictionaries and computer phraseography. Abstracts of the school-seminar reports. Eagle: OGPI, 1990. - S. 27-28.
307. Ossovetsky I. A. Types of dialect dictionaries // Abstracts of reports at the VIII dialectological meeting on May 15-18, 1961. M .: Institute of the Russian language of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1961. - S. 37-42.
308. Ossovetsky I. A. Vocabulary of modern Russian folk dialects. M.: Nauka, 1982. - 198 p.
309. PakM. K. Dialect phraseology as a source of ethno-cultural information (on the material of the Arkhangelsk dialects) // Avanes Readings. Abstracts of reports Int. scientific conf. / Under the total. ed. M. L. Remneva and M. V. Shulga. M.: MAKS Press, 2002. - S. 212-213.
310. Pegina T. P. On the semantics of interjectional idioms // Dialectical processes in phraseology. Abstracts of interuniversity reports. scientific conf. / Rev. ed. A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: ChGPI, 1993. - S. 31-32.
311. Pegina T. P. Communicative characteristics of interjectional emotional idioms // Information potential of words and phraseological units. Sat. scientific articles. Eagle: OSU, 2005. - S. 240-244.
312. Petrova 3. M. Non-conjugated verb forms in the regional dictionaries of the Russian language // Pskov dialects: synchrony and diachrony. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific Proceedings / Ed. L. Ya. Kostyuchuk. Pskov: PSPI, 2003. - S. 231-236.
313. Pilgun M. A. On the question of the means of expressing the grammatical gender of names nouns// Avanes Readings. Abstracts of reports Int. scientific conf. / Under the total. ed. M. L. Remneva and M. V. Shulga. M.: MAKS Press, 2002. —S. 225-227.
314. Pleshakova VV Russian traditional good wishes (To the question of traditional statements) // Philological sciences. 2006. No. 4. - S. 50-60.
315. PodyukovI. A. Folk phraseology in the mirror of folk culture. Proc. allowance. Perm: PSPI, 1990. - 127 p.
316. Podyukov IA Cultural-semiotic aspects of folk phraseology. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of the Russian State Technical Technical University im. A. I. Herzen, 1997. - 360 p.
317. Polyakova E. K. Phraseological units of the literary language as part of sayings // V. I. Dal in the paradigm of the ideas of modern science: language - literature - culture - dictionaries. Materials II All-Russian. scientific conf. Ivanovo: Ivan. state un-t, 2004. - S. 178-188.
318. Polyakova E. K. Idioms in the collection of V. Dahl “ Proverbs of the Russian people» // V. I. Dal in the paradigm of the ideas of modern science: language - literature lexicography - phraseography. Materials III Vseros. scientific conf. Ivanovo: Ivan. state un-t, 2006. - S. 90-99.
319. Popov R. N. Phraseological units of the modern Russian language with archaic meanings and word forms. Proc. allowance for philol. specialist. ped. in-comrade. M.: Higher school, 1976. - 200 p.
320. Popov R. N. Problems of studying dialectal phraseology // Phraseology - 2000. Materials of All-Russian. scientific conf. " Phraseology at the turn of the century: achievements, problems, prospects". Tula: TSPU, 2000. - S. 295.
321. Popova A. R. Phraseologisms with a hand component denoting labor activity in Oryol dialects // Oryol dialects: problems of study. Sat. scientific works / Nauch. ed. T. V. Bakhvalova. Issue. 2. Orel: OSU, 2001. —S. 101-103.
323. Prokosheva K. N. Verbal phraseological units that form series in the dialects of the Kama region // Linguistic local history of the Kama region. Perm: PSPI, 1979. —S. 17-25.
324. Radchenko EV Dynamism and dialectic of subject and procedural phraseological units // Philological Sciences. 2006. No. 1. - S. 98-107.
325. Ratushnaya E. R. Phraseological units with pronominal semantics in modern Russian // Phraseological readings in memory of V. A. Lebedinskaya. Sat. scientific articles / Rep. ed. N. B. Usacheva. Kurgan: KGU, 2004. —S. 174-180.
326. Revia M. L. Phraseological ways of expressing a large number in the Bulgarian language // Phraseology - 2000. Materials of All-Russian. scientific conf. " Phraseology at the turn of the century: achievements, problems, prospects". Tula: TSPU, 2000. - S. 285-286.
327. Roizenzon L. I. Problems of studying dialectal phraseology // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 237. Questions of phraseology. VI. Samarkand, 1972. - S. 1-57.
328. Romet AE Lexicographic development of Russian phraseological units in a bilingual phraseological dictionary. Abstract dis. . cand. lol. Sciences. M., 1983. - 20 p.
329. Romet A. E. Russian Nominal Phraseological Units in Russian-Estonian phraseological dictionary // Meaning of language units and categories. Sat. scientific articles. Tallinn: publishing house of the Tallinn Ped. in-ta im. E. Vilde, 1984. -S. 83-90.
330. Rostova A. N. Text and metatext in the dialect dictionary // Problems of regional Russian philology. Abstracts of reports and communications. Vologda: VGPI, "Rus", 1995. - S. 94-96.
331. Russian grammar. In 2 vols. M .: Nauka, 1980. - T. 1. - 784 e.; T. 2. - 710 p.
332. Sviridova AV Functioning of the category of negation and the means of its expression in the Russian language. M.: Company Sputnik +, 2006. - 166 p.
333. Selezneva G. Ya. Structural and semantic characteristics of phraseological series // Semantics of the word and syntactic construction: Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works / Responsible. ed. 3. D. Popova. Voronezh: Publishing House of the Voronezh University, 1977. -S. 144-152.
334. Sergeev VN How dictionaries are made // Russian speech. 1990. No. 3. - S. 82-87.
335. Sergeev VN Phraseology in the New Academic Dictionary // Immediate tasks of Russian academic lexicography. Sat. articles. SPb.: Izd. OR RAN, 1995. —S. 114-123.
336. Sergeeva LN Dialect phraseological units of absolutive use (based on the dialects of the Novgorod region) // Semantic-grammatical characteristics of phraseological units of the Russian language. Sat. scientific works. L .: LGPI, 1978 a. - S. 76-80.
337. Sergeeva LN Verbal phraseology of dialects of the Novgorod region. Abstract dis. cand. philol. Sciences. L., 1978 b. - 17 s.
338. Sergeeva LN Dialect phraseology: problems of description // Dictionary heritage of VP Zhukov and ways of development of Russian and general lexicography. Materials Intl. scientific symposium (Third Zhukovsky readings). Veliky Novgorod: NovGU, 2004. - S. 491-496.
339. Sidorenko MI On the issue of the boundaries of the lexical composition of phraseological units // Problems of Phraseology. Research and materials. Sat. articles / Ed. A. M. Babkina. M., L.: Nauka, Leningrad. Department, 1964. - S. 126-130.
340. Sidorenko M.I. Paradigmatic relations of phraseological units in modern Russian. L .: publishing house of LGPI im. A. I. Herzen, 1982. -108 p.
341. Sidorenko MI Paradigmatic relations of phraseological units in the modern Russian language. Abstract dis. doc. philol. Sciences. L., 1986. -32 p.
342. Silina VB About some types of dialectal phraseology // Materials and researches on Russian dialectology / Sat. articles. New series. Issue. II. Moscow: Acad. Sciences of the USSR, 1961. - S. 160-168.
343. Syntactic models of phraseological units. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific Proceedings / Ed. A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: 41 NI, 1989. - 180 p.
344. Consistency of the Russian language. Sat. scientific works / Resp. ed. V. P. Zhukov. Novgorod: LGPI im. A. I. Herzen, 1973. - 263 p.
345. Dictionary of the Russian language of the XIX century. Project / Resp. ed. 3. M. Petrova. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2002. - 204 p.
346. Solovyov N. V. On the question of the correspondence of the grammatical characteristics of a word in the explanatory dictionary to grammatical theories // Immediate tasks of Russian academic lexicography. Sat. articles. St. Petersburg: Izd. OR RAN, 1995. —S. 44-57.
347. Sorokoletov F. P. The semantic structure of the word in dialect dictionaries // Questions of studying the vocabulary of Russian folk dialects (dialect vocabulary) 1971 / Ed. F. P. Filin and F. P. Sorokoletov. L .: Nauka LO, 1972. - S. 181-189.
348. Sorokoletov F. P., Kuznetsova O. D. Essays on Russian dialect lexicography / Ed. V. V. Kolesov. L.: Nauka LO, 1987. - 231 p.
349. Stepanov Yu. S. Constants. Dictionary of Russian culture. Research experience. M.: School " Languages of Russian culture", 1997. - 824 p.
350. Structural and grammatical properties of Russian phraseological units. Collective. monograph. / Nauch. ed. A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: ChGPU, 2002. - 263 p.
351. Tagiev M. T. Verbal phraseology of the Russian language (Experience in the study of phraseological units in the environment). Baku: Maarif, 1966. - 251 p.
352. Tagiev M. T. Verbal phraseology of the modern Russian language (problems of environment and distribution of phraseological units). Auto-ref. dis. doc. philol. Sciences. Baku, 1967. - 53 p.
353. Telia VN What is phraseology? M.: Nauka, 1966. - 86 p.
354. Telia VN Phraseology // Theoretical problems of Soviet linguistics. M.: Nauka, 1968. - S. 257-277.
355. Telia VN Types of language meanings. The associated meaning of the word in the language. M.: Nauka, 1981. - 269 p.
356. Telia VN The connotative aspect of the semantics of nominative language units. M.: Nauka, 1986. - 143 p.
357. Teliya VN Semantics of idioms in functional-parametric mapping // Phraseography in the Machine Fund of the Russian Language / Ed. ed. V. N. Teliya. M.: Nauka, 1990. - S. 32-47.
358. Telia VN Cultural-national connotations of phraseological units (from worldview to worldview) // Slavic Linguistics. XI Intl. congress of Slavists. Reports of the Russian delegation / Ed. ed. N. I. Tolstoy. M.: Nauka, 1993. —S. 302-314.
359. Telia VN Russian phraseology. Semantic, pragmatic and linguoculturological aspects. M.: School " Languages of Russian culture", 1996. -288 p.
360. Tikhonov A. N. On grammatical forms, variants and derivatives of phraseological units // Problems of phraseology and the tasks of its study in higher and secondary schools. Vologda: North-Western Book Publishing House, 1967. —S. 220-231.
361. Tikhonova M. Yu. Lexico-phraseological microsystem "many" in modern Russian. Abstract dis. cand. philol. Sciences. Samarkand, 1971. -27 p.
362. Trubinsky V. I. Essays on Russian Dialect Syntax. Leningrad: Leningrad State University im. A. A. Zhdanova, 1984.
363. Trubinsky V. I. On grammar in the dictionary // Pskov dialects (Pskov Regional Dictionary and Actual Problems of Regional Lexicography). Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works / Responsible. ed. L. Ya. Kostyuchuk. Pskov: PSPI, 2001. —S. 209-213.
364. Fedorov AI Observations on the Russian Dialect Phraseology of Siberia // Proceedings of the Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 237. Questions of phraseology. VI. Samarkand, 1972. - S. 58-90.
365. Fedorov A. I. Dialect phraseology and its reflection in regional dictionaries // Questions of Russian dialectology / Otv. ed. V. I. Chagisheva. Sat. scientific works. Leningrad: LGPI im. A. I. Herzen, 1976. - S. 106-110.
366. Fedorov A. I. Siberian dialectal phraseology / Ed. ed. K. A. Timofeev. Novosibirsk: Nauka, Sib. department, 1980. - 192 p.
367. Fedorov A. I. Lexicographical characteristics of Siberian dialect phraseology in the dictionary // Phraseological Dictionary of Russian Dialects of Siberia / Ed. A. I. Fedorova. Novosibirsk: Nauka, Sib. Department, 1983. - S. 4-6.
368. Fedorov AI Phraseological semantics and its interpretation in dictionaries // Syntactic and lexical semantics (On the material of languages of different systems). Sat. articles / Rep. ed. L. G. Panin, M. I. Cheremisina. Novosibirsk: Nauka, Sib. Department, 1986. - S. 178-183.
369. Filin F. P. On the structure of the modern Russian literary language // Questions of linguistics. 1973. No. 2. - S. 3-12.
370. Filin F. P. On lexico-semantic groups of words // Filin F. P. Essays on the theory of linguistics. M.: Nauka, 1982. - S. 227-239.
371. Filonenko T. M. Phraseological image in the language model of quantity. Magnitogorsk: MGPI, 1999. - 105 p.
372. Phraseography in the Machine Fund of the Russian language / Ed. ed. V. N. Teliya. M.: Nauka, 1990. - 208 p.
373. Phraseologism and its lexicographic development. Materials IV Int. symposium in the framework of the meeting Int. commission on the problems of Slavic phraseology at the Int. Committee of Slavists / Ed.-comp. A. S. Aksamitov. Minsk: Science and technology, 1987. - 146 p.
374. Kharlova NM Structural features of verb phraseological units of one model // Dialectical processes in phraseology. Abstracts of inter-university reports. scientific conf. / Rev. ed. A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: ChGPI, 1993. - S. 78-79.
375. Khusnutdinov A. A. On the issue of syntactic features of phraseological units of the Russian language // Syntax in school and university teaching. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works / Responsible. ed. V. E. Mamushin. Ivanovo: IvGU, 1991. —S. 64-69.
376. Khusnutdinov A. A. Lexico-grammatical characteristics of phraseological units of the Russian language. Proc. allowance / Nauch. ed. F. V. Farkhutdinova. Ivanovo: IvGU, 1993. - 63 p.
377. Khusnutdinov A. A. Grammar of a phraseological unit. Abstract dis. doc. philol. Sciences. SPb., 1996. - 32 p.
378. Khusnutdinov A. A. V. I. Dahl and Russian lexicography // V. I. Dal in the paradigm of the ideas of modern science: language - literature - self-consciousness - culture. Materials Vseros. scientific conf. At 2 o'clock - Ivanovo: Ivan. state un-t, 2001 a. —Ch. 1. -S. 124-132.
379. Khusnutdinov A. A. V. I. Dahl and Russian phraseography: aspects of study // V. I. Dal in the paradigm of ideas of modern science: language - literature - culture - dictionaries. Materials II All-Russian. scientific conf. Ivanovo: Ivan, state. un-t, 2004. - S. 36-44.
380. Chepasova A. M. Semantic and grammatical classes of Russian phraseological units. Proc. allowance. Chelyabinsk: Publishing House 41 PI, 1974. - 103 p.
381. Chepasova AM Semantic and grammatical properties of phraseological units. Proc. allowance for the special course. Chelyabinsk: ChGPI, 1983. - 93 p.
382. Chepasova AM Morphological categories of subject phraseological units // Phraseology - 2000. Materials of All-Russia. scientific conf. " Phraseology at the turn of the century: achievements, problems, prospects". Tula: TPTU, 2000. - S. 122-128.
383. Chepasova A. M. Study of the form of phraseological units by Chelyabinsk phraseologists // Phraseology: semantics and forms / Ed. ed. N. B. Usacheva. Sat. articles. Kurgan: KGU, 2001. - S. 132-142.
384. Chepasova A. M. Subject phraseological units of the Russian language / Nauch. ed. V. M. Mokienko. Chelyabinsk: ChGGGU, 2003. - 267 p.
385. Chepasova A. M. Theoretical and practical problems of phraseography // Phraseological readings in memory of V. A. Lebedinskaya. Sat. scientific articles / Rep. ed. N. B. Usacheva. Kurgan: KSU, 2004. - S. 219-235.
386. Chepasova A. M. Word and phraseological unit in the system paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations // Information potential of the word and phraseological unit. Sat. scientific articles. Eagle: OSU, 2005. - S. 122-127.
387. Chepasova A. M., Ivashko L. A. The problem of structural phraseological meaning // Phraseological meaning in language and speech. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works. Chelyabinsk: ChGPI, 1988. - S. 17-32.
388. Chepurenko A. A. Semantic-grammatical principle of interpretation of the meanings of phraseological units // Phraseology in the aspect of science, culture, education. Abstracts of reports Int. scientific-practical. conf. to the 75th anniversary of A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: ChGPU, 2001. - S. 37-41.
389. Chepurenko A. A. The problem of the boundaries of phraseological units in phraseography // Information potential of the word and phraseological unit. Sat. scientific articles. Eagle: OSU, 2005. - S. 425-428.
390. Zhu S. Phraseology in the works of S. T. Aksakov (composition and use). Abstract dis. cand. philol. Sciences. Ivanovo, 2006. - 21 p.
391. Shansky NM Phraseology of the modern Russian language. Proc. allowance for universities on special. "Rus. lang. or T.". M.: Higher school, 1985. - 160 p.
392. Shapiro A. B. Essays on the syntax of Russian folk dialects. The structure of the proposal. Moscow: Acad. Sciences of the USSR, 1953. - 318 p.
393. Shapoval V. V. I. Dahl and criticism of dictionaries: a headword with a question mark // Russian language in scientific coverage. 2009. No. 1 (17). - S. 158-181.
394. Shapovalova L. I. On the ways of presenting phraseological units in the “Dictionary of Mogilev-Smolensk border dialects” // Problems of regional linguistics. Yaroslavl: YaGPU, 1996. - S. 74-76.
395. Shakhovsky VI Linguistics of emotions // Philological sciences. 2007. No. 5. -WITH. 3-13.
396. Schwarzkopf B. S. Morphological paradigmatics of phraseological unit and norm // Grammar and norm. Sat. articles / Rep. ed. L. I. Skvortsov. M.: Nauka, 1977. - S. 171-178.
397. Schwarzkopf BS Morphological norm of a phraseological unit and variation // Literary norm in vocabulary and phraseology. M.: Nauka, 1983. —S. 158-173.
398. Shvedova N. V. On the problem of creating a private dictionary of phraseological units with the “god” component // Phraseological readings in memory of V. A. Lebedinskaya. Issue. 2. Materials Vseros. scientific conf. / Rev. ed. N. B. Usacheva. Kurgan: KSU, 2005. —S. 219-222.
399. Shestakova E. N. One of the types of dialectal phraseology (On the question of the interaction of the literary language and dialects) // Izvestiya Voronezhgos. ped. in-ta. Questions of grammar, stylistics and dialectology of the Russian language. T. 81. Voronezh, 1968. - S. 104-114.
400. Shiganova G. A. Relative phraseological units of the Russian language / Nauch. ed. A. M. Chepasova. Chelyabinsk: ChGPU, 2003. - 306 p.
401. Shimchuk E. G. Russian lexicography. Proc. allowance. M.: MGU, 2003.320 p.
402. Shirokov V. A. On the foundations of the theory of lexicographic systems // Russian language today. Issue. 3. Problems of Russian lexicography. Sat. articles / Rep. ed. J.I. P. Krysin. M.: In-t of the Russian language. V. V. Vinogradova, 2004.1. pp. 338-347.
403. Shmelev D. N. Essays on the semasiology of the Russian language. M.: Enlightenment, 1964. - 244 p.
404. Shugurova I. JI. The first experience of creating a phraseological dictionary of one dialect // Proceedings of the Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 272. Questions of phraseology. VIII. Samarkand, 1975. - S. 120-130.
405. Shcherba JL V. Experience of the general theory of lexicography // Selected works on linguistics and phonetics. T. 1. JL: Leningrad Publishing House. un-ta, 1958. - S. 54-91.
406. Emirova AM Some topical issues of modern Russian phraseology (Experience of semantic analysis of phraseological units). Proc. manual for a special course for philologists. Samarkand: Samarkand, state. un-t, 1972 a. -97 p.
407. Emirova A. M. To the study of antonymic relations in phraseology // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 219. Part 2. Questions of phraseology. V. Samarkand, 1972 b. - S. 189-193.
408. Emirova AM Structural semantic characteristics of one phraseological field // Proceedings of Samarkand University. New series. Issue. 339. Questions of phraseology. XI. Samarkand, 1977. - S. 11-15.
409. Emirova AM The structure and semantics of the phraseological field of emotion // Questions of General Linguistics and Structural-Typological Studies of Languages. Proceedings of SamSU. New series. Issue. No. 349. Samarkand, 1978. - S. 46-52.
410. Emirova A. Opposition "man - woman" in Russian phraseology // Facets of words. Sat. scientific articles. M .: LLC "Publishing House ELPIS", 2005. - S. 165-169.
411. Yantsenetskaya M. N. Dialect phraseological units in regional dictionaries (based on the dialects of the Tomsk region) // Abstracts of reports at the VIII dialectological meeting on May 15-18, 1961. M .: Institute of the Russian language of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1961. -S. 50-51.
412. Yartseva VN The relationship between grammar and vocabulary in the language system // Studies in the general theory of grammar / Ed. ed. V.N.Yartsev. M.: Nauka, 1968. - S. 5-57. * *
413. Aksamgau A. S. Belarusian phrase-alopia. Mshsk: Higher school, 1978. -223 p.
414. Hartmann R. R. K. The History of Lexicography: Papers from the Dictionary research center seminar at Exeter, March 1986 / Ed. by R. R. K. Hartman. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: Benjamins, 1986. - 265 p.
415. Hartmann R. R. K. Theoretical and practical aspects of lexicography // Theoretical and practical aspects of lexicography. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works. Ivanovo: Ivan. state un-t, 1997. - S. 5-18.
416. Koczur K. Sposoby przekladu frazeologizmôw // Word. Phrase. Text. Sat. scientific articles for the 60th anniversary of M. A. Alekseenko. M.: Azbukovnik, 2002. - S. 223-232.
417. Reverse Index to the Dictionary of Russian Dialects / Frank V. Gladney. Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1991. - 565 p.
418. Wierzbicka A. The semantics of grammar. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: J. Benjamins Pub. Co., 1988. - 617 p.
47. Ways and reasons for the transition of dialect vocabulary into the literary language.
Reasons and conditions for the transition:
1. extralingu.
change in the region lang. interaction. Economy reasons: the development of new. r-in, involvement b. masses into production, migration, expansion of contacts with native speakers of the Lithuanian language, democrats of native speakers, Dr.
Art. Izv-ti words (media, os. newspapers)
Areal character: the wider the distribution, the more. b. the benefits of entering Lit. (carpet)
Factor ots-I equivalent dial. word in lith. (kizyaki - bricks made of clay, manure, straw)
F-r sl \ arr req. understanding by a native speaker sl \ reverse models) noun. + suf. = hooker
Motivation: Transition unmotivated. sv. limited, mainly motivation (hazel - no root in Lithuanian, mountain ash, viburnum, raspberry ...). often go over polynomial. the words
Expressions (choromina)
1. immediately
2. mediate
W/w city. vernacular; terminol. with-mu; language. thin liters, f-ra. The significance of the paths is different. Conductors: educational, special, scientific, art. liters, press, media, docs
48. Dialect phraseology.
It is customary to call dialect phraseology a set of dialect phraseological units - stable phrases with a holistic meaning, regularly reproduced in speech.
As in the literary language, the stability of a phraseological unit in dialects is understood as the unity of the composition and structure of a phraseological unit, the ability to have a well-established character fixed by tradition. The integrity of the meaning of a phraseological unit is manifested in its semantic and functional, but grammatical proximity to the word (to sit on the comb - "spin").
The regular use of phraseological units in the speech of speakers of a particular dialect is the main form of existence of these lexical units in the dialect language.
A distinctive feature of dialect phraseology, as well as literature, is its inherent pronounced figurative-emotional assessment of actions, qualities of objects that already have their own names in the language. For example: to fall through a stick - to become weak, weak. "It is natural that it is precisely because of their expressiveness that most phraseological units characterize the properties and state of a person. For example: a greedy person is a glutton"; dirty navel - "sloppy". The figurative and expressive essence of phraseological units is especially pronounced in cases where phraseological units are formed as a result of metaphorical transfer: swallow the sun - "yawn"; do not cover the tooth - "laugh"; to sit in rotten places - "to be bored, to lead a monotonous life."
Dialect phraseological units are semantically heterogeneous. In Russian folk phraseology, a significant number of thematic groups can be distinguished related to the reflection of the spiritual culture of the people, their production activities, the environment, etc. Phraseological units can characterize the properties, state of a person: to eat a tooth - to be experienced, "with a pestle in a mortar do not understand - \ mother - about a fidgety person; human actions: roar F loudly, cry for a long time, "walk - crawl"; can characterize natural phenomena: sweaty weather - thaw; pel, orphan winter - "warm, mild winter", horse water ~ ts dirty rain water"; can be the second names of household items: black shag - poker", steel pencil - | "scrap", etc. Dialect phraseological units actively reflect the people1-! rituals: shouting thresholds - asking for a gift from the bride", to go with whitewash - "to bring gifts to the bride", etc.
Dialectal phraseological units in their composition correlate with nouns (a rahman bobylka - ■ [a woman who does not know how to run a household"), adjectives (a century-old maiden - a girl who did not marry; an old maid"), verbs (past the mouth poking around - spinning in the head, in the language; about something familiar, but forgotten at the moment "), adverbs (kuda razh -I ■ very well"), interjections (forget the thunderbolt, split the scare, take you - abusive expressions of annoyance , dissatisfaction). In phraseological turns, the degree of fusion of components can be represented in different ways. So, in some phraseological units, figurativeness and figurative meaning are motivated (nests to play - to celebrate several weddings at once "), in others, the meaning is not motivated by the components that make up the phraseological unit. In such phraseological units it is impossible to establish the ways of forming a figurative meaning, to outline an image that carries the main expressive load (barma yaryzhka is a stupid person"). Phraseologism, as well as a free phrase, can be characterized by the following syntactic links between the components: agreement - in native boots (barefoot") walked for a long time, control - there is no one to reason with - consult "adjacent - the radio speaks the program well (predicts") - about the weather .
Dialects are characterized by turns of a tautological nature, which is due to the speaker's desire to clarify the direct nominative meaning of the first word in a phraseological unit, to increase the expressiveness of the entire phraseological turn. So, in the dialects of the Moscow region, the idiom ravat spring - "sow spring crops" is typical, in Voronezh dialects elephants are used to loiter - "to mess around", in Ryazan dialects - to rave nonsense - to talk nonsense", in Siberian - to run in races - to compete in running ", etc. d.
For phraseological units formed by the repetition of words of the same root, the loss of independent meaning in the second component is characteristic, which serves mainly to give the whole phraseological unit more expressiveness, emotionality, and also to enhance the semantic connotation: ; Right about the r about m, the legs are burning; Once I would talk about ltk and chat. Why talk in vain? Go work.
Tautological phraseological units can be different in their structure. 1) Verb + one-root adverb formed from a noun in the form of creation. p .: let's walk, throw kidkdm. 2) Verb + single-root noun in the form of other indirect cases: stand on the ground, lie down in the field. 3) Verb ol -+- single-root component in the form of a verbal adverb for -mya (-ma): fall down, sit down, burn bitterly. 4) Noun -+- adjective: dark darkness, good year. 5) Noun + verb: summer to fly, hours to watch, call to click. 6) Noun -\- noun with a preposition: day by day.
Are you one of the features of dialect phraseology? its inherent variability, which is revealed when a phraseological unit is repeatedly reproduced by the same person or when using a phraseological unit in the speech of residents of different settlements of the same region, as well as several; regions.
Phraseological variability implies the replacement of some components by others in case of identity of semantics. The reasons for the occurrence of variability are many factors, including the time frame for the use of phraseological units, the territory of functioning of phraseological units.
The variability of phraseological units in dialects in many cases arises in connection with the penetration and approval of new norms: accentological ones (to sell beauty - to sell beauty, to curl a chicken - to curl a chicken - a rite in which the bride was planted near a decorated Christmas tree, they sang songs to her, and the boyfriend or groom gave ransom), phonetic (horse fire - horseback in "fire - flame"), morphological, which are manifested most often in the forms of case, gender, number of nouns (collect length - mblino collect - collect molina - collect molina - a rite in which they gave gifts young gifts; shouting hubbub - shouting hubbub - shouting loudly, calling for help "; like a brown wolf - like brown wolves - work a lot, hard"), syntactic (howl in a voice - howl in a voice; walk around - walk in a circle - walk in circles - lead a round dance "; walk on a broom - walk for a broom - a wedding ceremony in which before the wedding, the bride, in front of the bath, stops by the groom's house to get together with a broom m treat).
Lexical variability is the most common phenomenon in dialect phraseology, which is largely due to the presence of synonyms in the speech of native speakers, the use, under the influence of radio, television, cinema, the school of literary, folk words along with dialect ones, etc. For example: add (expand) eyes ( light) - to be surprised, to be amazed, to look at something with surprise, "to collect (thresh, carry, chat, harrow, weave) around the head and into the bosom" - talk nonsense, like a spinner (vertnik, spinner) spin - behave fussily."
The variation of the components does not violate the integrity of the phraseological unit and does not destroy its semantics, but, on the contrary, makes it possible to more accurately convey the emotional and evaluative characteristics of the phenomenon.
Some dialect phraseological units may include words that are common with the literary language (far from relatives - a big difference "), others include dialect lexemes as a component (neither a candle to God, nor a burn to hell, cf. neither a candle to God, nor a poker to hell ; here the dialect phraseological unit varies the literary phraseological unit due to the use of the dialect word burn in its composition - "a stick that replaces the poker, which is interfered with by coals; a piece of wood burnt at the end"). The third type of phraseological units includes both dialect and literary words, but it differs in its peculiar structure and semantics (to ash one's head - "to do evil, to harm").
The relationship between dialectal and literary phraseology is carried out through popular models common to both dialectal and literary phraseology. A phraseological model is a structural type of a phraseological unit that ensures both its reproducibility and semantic stability. According to one model, the dialectal phraseologisms the stale maiden, the untransplanted maiden and the literary phraseological unit the old maid were created.
Under the influence of the literary language, dialect phraseological units can change their lexical composition by replacing one of the components with a literary lexeme (to be in the scraps to be in the neighbors). A dialectal distinguishing feature may be lost if a dialectal phraseological unit is structurally trimmed to a literary phraseological unit (head to head).
In modern Russian dialects, not all thematic groups of phraseological units are included in the active vocabulary of dialect speakers. In connection with the change in the worldview and psychology of people in the conditions of universal literacy, the penetration of radio and television into rural life, many thematic groups of phraseological units are moving into a passive reserve. So, the phraseological units stake to stake - neither stake nor yard, "shepherdess to grab - to determine which of the fortune-telling friends will marry first", to eat fragments - "to be refused during matchmaking", etc. are preserved only in the speech of the older generation. Other phraseological units continue to live in new conditions, but change their original meaning and acquire a new meaning. So, the phraseological unit to sit in rotten places, formed from the name of the village of Gnilushki, which at first had the meaning of living in a remote village surrounded by swamps and forests, "changed its original semantics and began to be used in the meaning of" bored, lead a monotonous lifestyle "(There is nothing for us to sit in rotten places, We'll be watching TV soon.
Despite the increasing leveling influence of the literary language on dialects, the dialect language is replenished with new phraseological units that convey figurative representations based on the local specific situation, reflecting the life, work and character of the Russian people. The composition of such phraseological units may include expressions that characterize the new social conditions of life in a modern village (the chairperson road is an impeccable, impeccable, principled line of behavior, "to live in the bosses -" to be in a leadership position ", to a learned mind - with knowledge of the matter", to walk with tenth grade - to have a secondary education").
Dialect phraseology makes the speech of the speakers of this or that dialect figurative, vivid, emotional. And it is natural that it is this phraseology that is reflected in the contemporary works of art by many Soviet writers.
