Introduction3 1.Linguistic taste. Language norm. Linguistic aggression.5 Conclusion12 References10
Introduction
The global changes that have occurred in our state over the past 10-15 years have radically influenced linguistics. Looking through the topic of modern linguistic works, one can make sure that in the field of view of Russian linguists, instead of ordinary problems of phonetics and morphology, word formation and syntax, there are increasingly problems, the development of which is intended to shed light on the violent changes in the Russian syllable of the present day. The desire of scientists to embrace these changes as a whole, to comprehend at least in general outline linguistic modernity, lead to the movement of linguistics itself in a direction that can be called a general philosophical essay on the subject modern language. Along with this, there is a noticeable bias from classical linguo-philosophical topics. As a result, works appear in a more Western style than in the Russian style. Relevance. A common person accepts the world as he imagines it, what is called “in front of himself,” grasping it as it is and being surprised at the changes. A person with a scientific bent of intelligence strives to see patterns and dynamics in absolutely everything, to find the reason for progress and regression, and to understand the general constant movement. Linguists in this sense are no exception. As a result, about evolution Russian language a lot has been written down. The law of interdependence of language and method of production, language and culture is derived. The formation and regression of a syllable is perceived as a direct reflection of profound changes in society. Could language formation be influenced, for example, by people's urgent moods? (After all, what kind of ties are in fashion this fall - monotone or polka dots - does not affect the global production shift). This question can be posed differently: does form affect content? Highly functional unit form? Does the unit have an impact on the public? What word is currently “in fashion”? In its most serious form, the desire to provide an answer to the information of the problem was undertaken within the framework of the hypothesis of linguistic relativity. However, the too massive scale of this hypothesis led researchers so far away from linguistic realities that they turned a generally reasonable approach into a kind of conceptual monument. At the same time, linguistics turned to practice provides a hint for the opportunity to get closer to the “fleeting”, taking on other positions. This is how the concept emerged to analyze the impact of language “norms” on speech and the public, without, however, deviating from the basic rules of traditional Russian linguistics. The purpose of the study is to establish the nature and functions of linguistic fashion. Research objectives: - to establish the range of information combined with the problem of language norms, the taste of aggression; - track the procedure for creating language “norms”; - discover the functions of the linguistic norm of aggression
Conclusion
Violations of the norms of Russian literary style are caused by - changed social conditions; - the emergence of mobile communications; - accessibility and lack of control of Internet sites; - the struggle for indicators within the media organization; - illiteracy; - irresponsibility towards the creators of the Russian literary language; - a simple understanding of the concept of “democratization of language” - the lack of propaganda in the media for a culture of speech that reflects the intellectuality of the community; According to V. Anushkin, Doctor of Philological Sciences, philologists should introduce and defend the following postulates in the social consciousness: What is the language, so is life. As is the language, so is the person. (A donkey is recognized by its ears, a person by its words. (Aphorism) “Linguistic ecology implies not only the detection of weak areas and edges in socio-speech practice and the construction of appropriate recommendations addressed to the subjects of language policy, but also the discovery, recording and promotion of successful results of language creativity of writers, correspondents, politicians, etc. In in this sense Such specialized publications are absolutely linguistic-ecological, such as, for example: dictionaries of synonyms, dictionaries of paronyms, dictionaries of epithets, dictionaries of comparisons, dictionaries of metaphors, dictionaries of popular texts and expressions, dictionaries and encyclopedias of aphorisms, dictionaries of poetry, etc. Dictionaries, reference books, and encyclopedias of this kind contain enormous linguistic wealth, which is allowed and should be used not only by professional communicators (teachers, correspondents, politicians absolutely all levels), but also absolutely everyone cultured people by and large. The trouble is that many people simply do not know about this lexicographic abundance.
Bibliography
Baron R., Richardson D. Aggression. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 1999. – 352 pp. Orthoepic Dictionary of the Russian Language. Pronunciation. Emphasis. Grammatical forms". M., “Russian Language”, 1983 Raisky “Work on speech errors in presentations and essays”, Bustard, 2006 Rosenthal D. E. “Handbook of spelling and literary editing.” M., Iris Press, 2004. Dictionary of accents for television and radio workers, edited by D. E. Rosenthal. Chudinov A.P. Typology of variation in verbal semantics. Sverdlovsk, 1988. Churilov I. I. Philosophical debate with everyday consciousness in aphorisms: Aphorisms new school. Perm, 2000. Shaburova O. Nostalgia: through the past to the future // Sociems. 1996. Vol. 5. Ekaterinburg, 1996. pp. 42-54. Shaimiev V. A. Compositional and syntactic aspects of the functioning of metatexts in a text (based on linguistic texts) // Russian text: Russian American Journal of Russian Philology. No. 4. St. Petersburg; Lawrence; Durham (USA), 1996. pp. 80-91. Shcherbina Y. V. “Aspects of work to overcome invective-slang word usage in students’ speech.” "Russian language", No. 3, 2009
Norms and standards of linguistic behavior and speech culture accepted by native speakers at a certain stage of development. I.. eras are largely connected with historical, turning points in the life of the people..
"Linguistic taste of the era." The word “taste,” which seems not to be related to linguistics, is nevertheless amazingly accessible and accurately explains what the author actually wants to say.
Such a feeling of freedom of scientific creativity and a change in research topics gives rise to a whole “fan” of non-traditional works in the field of modern Russian language.
The norm, as an integral part of a civilized society, exists in different areas of an individual’s life and is important for many types of human activity. There are various norms as requirements that must be met by the various products of human activity. Norms are regulators of relationships between people. They are established by society, and each individual of a given society develops an idea of what is normal for human communication and what is abnormal and, therefore, goes beyond the established norm.
The norm is also established in language; it is constantly present in a person’s statements. And this is quite natural, since language is an integral part, a product, not only of a civilized society, but of any human society in general. Norm is one of the central linguistic concepts. The norm in language is one of those problems of linguistics that have constantly been and are in the focus of attention for several generations of researchers. And depending on the level of development of linguistics, the theoretical views of researchers and the needs of society, it is solved very differently.
The normative approach to language has dominated in absolutely all linguistic traditions, from antiquity to our time. In absolutely all linguistic traditions, either from the very beginning or over time, the concept of a strict norm appears, from which it is impossible to deviate. In the European tradition, it appears already in late antiquity. The norm became even stricter in the Middle Ages. In the early stages of the development of individual traditions (antiquity, Ancient China), when there were no big differences between the spoken and written styles and there was no special sacred (sacred) language, the problems of the norm, although they were vital, were solved purely empirically, without separating any a strict corpus of normative texts.
None of the linguistic traditions was characterized by the idea of historical change in language and its norms. In turn, everything new in the language, which is constantly included in speech practice, brings with it a fleeting inconvenience and therefore, naturally, causes defensive feedback (anger).
In any norm, including the literary style, doubts, doublets, and variant actions occur. In addition, there is always a certain uncertainty in recognizing specific linguistic facts as normative or non-normative; there are always “areas of doubt.”
The norms of writing language are fixed in dictionaries, reference books, and grammar books.
Language norms
- * Orthoepic
- * Lexical
- * Morphological
- * Syntactic
- * Stylistic
- * Spelling
- * Punctuation
“Literary language feels the powerful influence of colloquial (including slang) vocabulary, which often breaks into the language under the slogan of emancipation and “democratization.” (D. E. Rosenthal)
The representation of the norm gradually begins to change into some special linguistic representation, reflecting the project of linguistic implementation and in various ways compared with the views of the schema (L. Elmslev), or the organization of language (E. Coseriu), in which the idea of its internal organization is reflected. Highlighting the social side of the definition of a norm, which is formed from the selection of linguistic components - cash, formed again and extracted from a passive reserve, S. I. Ozhegov focuses on the fact that norms are maintained by social speech practice (fiction, theatrical speech, radio broadcasting).
At a certain stage of their formation, literary works and radio broadcasts could in fact serve as a standard for normative use. Currently, the situation has changed. Not everything literary work and not every radio and television broadcast can serve as a standard for the normative use of language. The area of strict adherence to syllable norms has narrowed significantly. The literary norm, as a result of not only tradition, but also codification, presupposes a set of rather strict regulations and prohibitions that promote the unity and stability of the literary style. The integrity and universality of the norm is found in the fact that agents of different social strata and companies that make up a given society must adhere to the classical methods of linguistic formulation, as well as those laws and regulations that are found in grammars and dictionaries and are represented as a result of codification. Deviation from linguistic tradition, from dictionary and grammatical laws and advice is considered a violation of the norm and is usually assessed negatively by speakers of a given literary syllable. But the degree of obligatory language norms is not the same. A distinction is made between imperative language norms, the pathologies of which are regarded as a sign of not mastering the culture of speech, as gross oversights, and, on the other hand, non-strictly mandatory language norms that allow certain deviations.
The concept of norm is usually associated with the idea of correct, literary competent speech, and literary speech itself is one of the aspects of a person’s general culture.
The norm, as a socio-historical and deeply national phenomenon, characterizes, first of all, the literary language - recognized as an exemplary form of the national language. Therefore, the terms “language norm” and “ literary norm" are often combined, especially when applied to the modern Russian language, although historically they are not the same thing.
The linguistic norm is formed in the actual practice of verbal communication, worked out and consolidated in public use as usage (Latin usus - use, use, custom); The literary norm is undoubtedly based on usage, but it is also specially protected, codified, i.e. legitimized by special regulations, dictionaries, sets of rules, textbooks. [Lapteva 1983: p. 187]
Graudina L.K. Shiryaev E.N. distinguish in their book “Culture of Russian Speech” several types of language norms: orthoepic (pronunciation), orthographic (writing), word-formation (the use of derivative words established in the literary language, for example, nose-nose-“nosenok”), lexical (rules for the use of words in speech, for example, “biography of life”), morphological (grammatical forms of words, for example, delicious salami), syntactic (use of participles and participial phrases, prepositions, etc., for example, “come home from school”), punctuation, intonation [Graudina, Shiryaev 1999: p. 25-46].
A literary norm is the rules of pronunciation, word usage, and use of grammatical and stylistic linguistic means accepted in social and linguistic practice. The norm is historically mobile, but at the same time stable and traditional, it has such qualities as familiarity and universal obligatory nature. Peshkovsky A.M. said this convincingly and simply: “The norm recognizes what was, and partly what is, but is by no means what will happen" [Peshkovsky 1959: pp. 54-55].
The main reason for the change in norms is the evolution of the language itself, the presence of variation, which ensures the choice of the most appropriate variants of linguistic expression. The concept of exemplaryness and standardization of a normative language means increasingly includes the meaning of expediency and convenience.
The norm has a certain set of characteristics that must be present in it in its entirety. K. S. Gorbachevich writes in detail about the signs of a norm in the book “Word Variation and Linguistic Norms.” He identifies three main features: 1) stability of the norm, conservatism; 2) the prevalence of the linguistic phenomenon; 3) authority of the source. Each of the signs individually may be present in one or another linguistic phenomenon, but that's not enough. In order for a linguistic device to be recognized as normative, a combination of features is necessary. So, for example, in highest degree Errors may be common and may persist over long periods of time. [Gorbachevich 2009: p. 94]
The quality (sign) of the stability of a norm manifests itself differently at different language levels. Moreover, this sign of the norm is directly related to the systemic nature of the language as a whole, therefore, at each language level, the relationship “norm and system” is manifested in varying degrees. As for the authority of literary artists, there are special difficulties in assessing, since the language fiction, the artistry of which is often achieved precisely as a result of the fluent use of language.
Thus, a norm, having the listed characteristics, implements the following criteria for its evaluation: stability, prevalence, authority of the source.
In the modern Russian language, the norms of written and oral speech are moving closer together, and their active interaction is observed.
The present time is characterized by a reduction to a unified speech practice. There are serious social reasons for this - the spread of education and the increased role of the media. On this general background and the process of normalization takes place.
Russian language. Tickets - winter 2015.
Ticket 1. Modern Russian language. Stratification of the Russian national language. Literary language as highest form national language. Language situation and language policy.
Modern Russian language- the national language of the Russian people, a form of Russian national culture. It represents a historically established linguistic community and unites the entire set of linguistic means of the Russian people, including all Russian dialects and dialects, as well as various jargons.
There has been a dual understanding of the term “modern Russian language” and its interpretation corresponding to this understanding. First of all, modern Russian is a language that is reflected in texts created by speakers of Russian literary
language from the era of Pushkin (from about the 30s of the 19th century) to the present day, and existing in modern oral speech communication at the level of native speakers of a literary language, i.e. in oral public speech, in the language of radio, cinema, television speech and in colloquial literary speech. This understanding of the “modern Russian language,” despite the emerging clarifications of its chronological boundaries, remains valid. It was in the language of Pushkin, in the 20–30s. XIX century, that backbone of the literary language was formed, that national norm of literary expression, which serves as the basis further development and literary dictionary, and grammar, and phonetic structure, and orthoepy, and a system of functional varieties
literary language up to the present time.
* In a narrow sense - the Russian language of the post-revolutionary (1917) time.
Some researchers talk about 3 periods in the development of the Russian language after the October Revolution: 1st - 20s, 2nd - 30-40s, 3rd - from the early 50s to the present. In this case, the narrowest interpretation of the concept of modern Russian is possible - it is a language from the post-war (Great Patriotic War) years to the present, that is, the language of three coexisting and interacting generations - grandfathers, fathers and children
Stratification of the national Russian language:
1) literary language
2) extraliterary varieties (strata):
Territorial dialect
Semi-dialect*
Urban vernacular
Social dialect (jargon, argot)
Literary Russian language– the normalized form is general native language, excluding dialects, jargons, and colloquialisms. It is the language of all manifestations of culture expressed in written form. This is the highest form of manifestation of the national language, the language of the press, literature, and government documents. This is a historically established system of elemental languages, speech means that have undergone long-term cultural processing in the texts of authoritative masters of words, in the oral communication of educated native speakers.
Functional purpose of literary language: ensuring speech communication in the main areas of activity of the entire historically established group of people speaking given language; ensuring cultural and spiritual continuity of generations, people, nations.
Main features of the literary language: normativity, codification (consolidation of forms and rules in grammars, dictionaries, reference books), multifunctionality, stylistic differentiation, relative stability, common use and universal obligatory nature, traditionality and written fixation in texts.
Modern Russian literary language multifunctional, i.e. it performs the functions of the everyday language of literate people, the language of science, journalism, government controlled, cultural language, literature, education, media, etc.
The uniqueness of the Russian literary language lies in its replenishment and renewal through colloquial speech.
Literary language has two forms: oral and written, which are characterized by the peculiarities of lexical composition and grammatical structure. Written literary language is distinguished by greater complexity of syntax and has different functional styles: scientific, official business, journalistic, artistic.
The development of the literary language is directly related to the development of the culture of the people, especially their fiction.
Characteristic of a literary language normalization– subordination of language to certain norms and rules. Its result is the normalization of language. The normalization of a literary language lies in the fact that the composition of the dictionary in it is regulated, the meaning and use of words, pronunciation, spelling and the formation of grammatical forms of words follow a generally accepted pattern. The basic norms of the literary language were formed during the time of Pushkin. A. S. Pushkin arranged artistic media Russian literary language, significantly enriched it. He managed, based on various manifestations of the folk language, to create in his works a language that was perceived by society as literary.
Speech situation. Language is a powerful means of regulating people’s activities in various spheres, therefore, studying the speech behavior of a modern person, understanding how a person masters the richness of language, how affectively he uses it, is a very important and urgent task.
Every educated person must learn to evaluate speech behavior - his own and that of his interlocutors, and relate his speech actions to a specific communication situation.
Today, the speech of our contemporaries is attracting increasing attention from journalists, scientists of various specialties (linguists, philosophers, psychologists, sociologists), writers, teachers, and it is becoming the subject of heated discussions among ordinary Russian speakers. Feeling speech problems, they try to answer the question of what is causing the state of speech culture that worries many. The eternal Russian questions “what to do?” and “who is to blame?” are quite natural in relation to the Russian language and Russian speech.
In the in-depth study “Russian language of the end of the 20th century (1985-1995)” an attempt was made to highlight the most significant features of the Russian language of the end of the century. It notes: “The events of the second half of the 80s - early 90s are similar to a revolution in their impact on society and language. The state of the Russian language of our time is determined by a number of factors.
1. The composition of participants in mass and collective communication is sharply expanding: new segments of the population are joining the role of speakers, the role of writing in newspapers and magazines. Since the late 80s, thousands of people with different levels of speech culture have had the opportunity to speak publicly.
2. In the media, censorship and auto-censorship, which previously largely determined the nature of speech behavior, are sharply weakened.
3. Personality in speech increases. Faceless and addressless speech is replaced by personal speech and acquires a specific addressee. The biological nature of communication, both oral and written, is increasing.
4. The sphere of spontaneous communication, not only personal, but also oral public, is expanding. People no longer give or read pre-written speeches. They say.
5. Important parameters of the flow of oral forms of mass communication are changing: the possibility of the speaker directly addressing the listeners and feedback from the listeners to the speakers is created.
6. Situations and genres of communication are changing both in the field of public and personal communication. The rigid boundaries of official public communication are loosening. Many new genres of oral public speech are being born in the field of mass communication. The dry radio and TV announcer has been replaced by a presenter who thinks, jokes, and expresses his opinion.
7. Psychological rejection of the bureaucratic language of the past (the so-called Newspeak) is sharply increasing.
8. There is a desire to develop new means of expression, new forms of imagery, new types of addresses to strangers.
9. Along with the birth of the names of new phenomena, there is a revival of the names of those phenomena that return from the past, prohibited or rejected in the era of totalitarianism" (Russian language of the end of the 20th century. M., 1996).
Freedom and emancipation of speech behavior entail a loosening of language norms, an increase in language variability (instead of one acceptable form of a language unit, different options are acceptable).
Ticket 2. Speech culture in a normative aspect. Norm: definition, properties, typology, reasons for change. Codification. Linguistic taste and speech fashion.
The culture of speech presupposes, first of all, the correctness of speech, that is, compliance with the norms of the literary language, which are perceived by its speakers (speakers and writers) as an “ideal”, a model. The linguistic norm is the central concept of linguistic culture, and normative aspect speech culture is considered one of the most important.
The choice of linguistic means necessary for the goal is the basis of the communicative aspect of speech culture. The ethical aspect of speech culture prescribes knowledge and application of the rules of linguistic behavior in specific situations. Ethical standards of communication mean speech etiquette ( speech formulas greetings, requests, questions, thanks, congratulations, etc.; addressing “you” and “you”; choice of full or abbreviated name, address formula, etc.)
For use speech etiquette big influence have: the age of the participants in the speech act, their social status, the nature of the relationship between them (official, informal, friendly, intimate), time and place of speech interaction, etc. The ethical component of Rhea culture imposes a ban on foul language in the process of communication and condemns speaking “in a raised voice.”
Important characteristic personality is the level of its speech culture. There are distinguished the elite type of speech culture, the middle-literary type, the literary-colloquial and familiar-colloquial, as well as the slang and vernacular types of speech culture. The elite type of personality speech culture assumes that the speaker of this type speech culture complies with all ethical and communication norms, complies with the norms of literary speech, and masters all functional styles of the native language associated with the use of both oral and written speech. A person of an elite speech culture is characterized by the easy use of a functional style and genre of speech appropriate to the situation and goals of communication, and the “non-transfer” of what is typical for oral speech into oral speech. He knows and follows the rhetorical rules of communication, he has the habit of constantly checking himself, replenishing his speech knowledge using authoritative texts and dictionaries, and not by imitating what he heard on the radio or television, or read in newspapers. The average literary type of speech culture embodies the general culture of man in its forgiven and far from complete version. Speakers of average literary speech culture usually master two or three functional styles, usually the style of everyday communication (colloquial speech) and their professional style; these styles are often mixed in their speech. In the sphere of language use, for a speaker of this type of speech culture, self-confidence, expressed in upholding the point of view “the main thing is WHAT to say, and not HOW to say”, a “forgivable” attitude towards one’s own speech errors, overestimation of their speech knowledge, which is manifested in the frequent inappropriate use of terms and foreign words, on the one hand, and reduced and abusive vocabulary, on the other, in violation of language norms, and they are not aware of the inferiority of their own speech. Precedent texts for carriers of this type of speech culture are the media and mass literature. The lack of a large vocabulary in the minds of speakers of the average literary type of speech culture does not allow them to use the wide synonymous possibilities of the Russian language in their speech, which turns their speech into a rather cliched speech, or into a speech with a dominance of book vocabulary, which amounts to the desire to make speech more expressive. Literary-colloquial and familiar-colloquial types of speech culture differ only in the degree of speech impairment. In the literary-colloquial type, you - communication and household names like Seryozha predominate, in the familiar-colloquial type - you - communication becomes the only possible, and in address Seryozha, Seryoga are preferred. In both types there is a huge amount of jargon used in speech, but in f.-r. The proportion of rude words and colloquial elements is increasing. At the same time, in both types it occurs a large number of foreign language vocabulary and book words, which often become simple fillers of pauses, so that “specifically”, “in short”, “type”, “in kind” and “damn”, etc. are found nearby. There is no need to talk about any observance of ethical and communicative norms in these types of speech culture. Slang and colloquial types of speech culture are characterized by non-normativity, orientation towards one’s communication group, communication, vulgarisms, and the use of obscenities.
Language fashion. A manner of expression accepted in a particular community and relevant for a short time
Language taste. The idea of ideal text models and ideal speech production in general, formed in the process of social and speech activity
Ticket 3. Communicative qualities of speech as a result of the implementation of the normative, communicative and ethical aspects of speech culture.
Communication norms are dictated by expediency. In general, these are norms for choosing a form (oral or written, dialogue or monologue), a method of speech activity and means of communication (methods of evidence, language techniques, etc.). Communicative norms, in contrast to ethical and linguistic norms, are more variable: they are advisory in nature and must correspond to the communicative situation. Let's say parents must punish a child for bad behavior. In one family they will take some measures (reading lectures, depriving the child of the right to watch TV, walk, play computer games etc.) together. In another family, only the father will punish his son, and in the third, all family members will boycott the child. As we see, to implement one communication strategy as the main line of behavior (in our example, this is punishing the offender), different tactics can be used.
The key to the success of any interaction is the consistency of ethical and communication standards and their compliance by all participants in communication. This is confirmed by numerous Russian proverbs and sayings, which contain ethical requirements for speech behavior, for example: The enemy agrees, and the friend argues; Slander is like coal: if it doesn’t burn, it gets dirty; Good word to a person what is rain in a drought; A lie stands on one leg, truth on two; It was simply said, but it was not without reason that many, many others listened.