The history of the emergence and development of the Russian language. Formation and development of the Russian national language

Introduction.

Origin and development of the Russian language.

Distinctive features Russian language.

Russian language in modern society.

Conclusion.

Literature.

Introduction

Language, our magnificent language

River and steppe expanse in it,

It has the screams of an eagle and the roar of a wolf,

The chant, and the ringing, and the pilgrim's incense.

K. D. Balmont

Russian language as the national language of the Russian people, the state language of the Russian Federation and the language of interethnic communication.

The Russian language is the language of the Russian nation, the language in which its culture was created and is being created.

The Russian language is the official language of the Russian Federation, serving all kinds of areas of human activity, which is taught in educational institutions, and documents of the country are written.

This language is understandable to everyone, and is native to a huge number of people.

The Russian language is the subject of a number of linguistic disciplines that study its current state and history, territorial and social dialects, and vernacular.

The combination of the Russian language is primarily closely related to the most general concept about the national Russian language.

National language is a socio-historical category denoting the language that is the means of communication of the nation.

The national Russian language, therefore, is a means of communication for the Russian nation.

The Russian national language is a complex phenomenon. It includes the following varieties: literary language, territorial and social dialects, semi-dialects, vernacular, jargons.

The Russian language is the language in which Russian culture is created, and, first of all, Russian literature. In its modern form, the Russian language first appeared in the 19th century, in the era of A.S. Pushkin. It is he who is considered the founder of the modern Russian language, which is understandable to all of us and which we speak.

The term "Russian language" is used in four meanings.

) It denotes the totality of all living languages ​​of the East Slavic branch: Great Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian.

) It is used to designate a written language that has developed on the basis of the common Slavic literary language (the so-called Church Slavonic language), performing literary functions in Kievan and Moscow Rus before the formation of the Russian (Great Russian) common national language.

) It denotes the totality of all dialects and dialects that the Russian people used and uses as their native language.

) Denotes the all-Russian national language, the language of the press, school, state practice.

Origin and development of the Russian language

The modern Russian language is a continuation of the Old Russian (East Slavonic) language. The Old Russian language was spoken by the East Slavic tribes, which formed in the 9th century. Old Russian nationality within the Kievan state.

This language was almost identical with the languages ​​of other Slavic peoples, but differed in some phonetic and lexical features.

All Slavic languages ​​(Polish, Czech, Slovak, Serbo-Croatian, Slovenian, Macedonian, Bulgarian, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Russian) come from a common root - a single Proto-Slavic language that probably existed until the 10th-11th centuries.

On the basis of a single language - Old Russian, during the collapse of the Kyiv state in the XIV-XV centuries. Three independent languages ​​arose: Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian, which, with the formation of nations, took shape in national languages.

The roots of the Russian language go back to ancient times. Approximately in the II-I-th millennium BC. e. from the group of related dialects of the Indo-European family of languages, the Proto-Slavic language stands out (at a later stage - approximately in the 1st-7th centuries - called Proto-Slavic). Where the Proto-Slavs and their descendants, the Proto-Slavs, lived is a debatable question. Probably Proto-Slavic tribes in the 2nd half of the 1st c. BC e. and at the beginning of e. occupied lands from the middle reaches of the Dnieper to the upper reaches of the Vistula, from Pripyat to the forest-steppe regions. In the 1st half of the 1st c. Proto-Slavic territory expanded dramatically. In the VI-VII centuries. Slavs occupied lands from the Adriatic in the southwest to the headwaters of the Dnieper and Lake Ilmen in the northeast. Proto-Slavic ethno-linguistic unity broke up. Three closely related groups were formed: eastern (Old Russian nationality), western (on the basis of which Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Lusatians, Pomeranian Slavs were formed) and southern (its representatives are Bulgarians, Serbo-Croats, Slovenes, Macedonians).

The East Slavic (Old Russian) language existed from the 7th to the 14th centuries. In the X century. on its basis, writing (the Cyrillic alphabet) arises, which has reached a high flowering (Ostromir Gospel, XI century; "Sermon on Law and Grace" of the Kyiv Metropolitan Hilarion, XI century; "The Tale of Bygone Years", early XII century; "Word of regiment of Igor", XII century; Russkaya Pravda, XI-XII centuries). Already in Kievan Rus (IX - early XII centuries), the Old Russian language became a means of communication for some Baltic, Finno-Ugric, Turkic, and partly Iranian tribes and nationalities. In the XIV-XVI centuries. the southwestern variety of the literary language of the Eastern Slavs was the language of statehood and the Orthodox Church in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and in the Principality of Moldavia. Feudal fragmentation, which contributed to dialect fragmentation, the Mongol-Tatar yoke (XIII-XV centuries), Polish-Lithuanian conquests led to the XIII-XIV centuries. to the collapse of the ancient Russian people. Gradually disintegrated and unity Old Russian language. 3 centers of new ethno-linguistic associations were formed that fought for their Slavic identity: northeastern (Great Russians), southern (Ukrainians) and western (Belarusians). In the XIV-XV centuries. on the basis of these associations, closely related, but independent East Slavic languages ​​are formed: Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian.

The Russian language of the era of Muscovite Russia (XIV-XVII centuries) had a complex history. Dialect features continued to develop. 2 main dialect zones took shape - Northern Great Russian (approximately north of the line Pskov - Tver - Moscow, south of Nizhny Novgorod) and South Great Russian (south of this line to the Belarusian and Ukrainian regions) dialects, overlapping with other dialect divisions. Intermediate Middle Russian dialects arose, among which the dialect of Moscow began to play a leading role. Initially, it was mixed, then it developed into a harmonious system. For him became characteristic: akanye; pronounced reduction of vowels of unstressed syllables; explosive consonant "g"; the ending "-ovo", "-evo" in the genitive singular masculine and neuter in the pronominal declension; the solid ending "-t" in the 3rd person verbs of the present and future tense; pronoun forms "me", "you", "myself" and a number of other phenomena. The Moscow dialect is gradually becoming exemplary and forms the basis of the Russian national literary language. At this time, in living speech, the final restructuring of the categories of time takes place (the ancient past tenses - aorist, imperfect, perfect and pluperfect are completely replaced by a unified form into "-l"), the loss of the dual number, the former declension of nouns according to six bases is replaced by modern types of declension, etc. The written language remains motley. the Russian language, divorced from the popular colloquial element.The state language (business) was based on Russian folk speech, but did not coincide with it in everything. It developed speech cliches, often including purely bookish elements. Written fiction was diverse in terms of linguistic means. Since ancient times, the oral language of folklore, which served until the 16th-17th centuries, played an important role. all segments of the population. This is evidenced by its reflection in ancient Russian writing (tales about the Belogorod jelly, about Olga's revenge, etc. in The Tale of Bygone Years, folklore motifs in the Tale of Igor's Campaign, vivid phraseology in Daniil Zatochnik's Prayer, etc. ), as well as archaic layers of modern epics, fairy tales, songs and other types of oral folk art. Since the 17th century the first recordings of folklore works and book imitations of folklore begin, for example, songs recorded in 1619-20 for the Englishman Richard James, lyric songs by Kvashnin-Samarin, "The Tale of Mount Misfortune", etc. The complexity of the language situation did not allow the development of uniform and stable norms. There was no single Russian literary language.

In the 17th century national ties arise, the foundations of the Russian nation are laid. In 1708 there was a separation of the civil and Church Slavonic alphabets. In the XVIII and early XIX centuries. secular writing became widespread, church literature was gradually relegated to the background and, finally, became the lot of religious rituals, and its language turned into a kind of church jargon. Scientific and technical, military, nautical, administrative and other terminology developed rapidly, which caused a large influx into the Russian language of words and expressions from Western European languages. A major role in the development of Russian phraseology and vocabulary from the 2nd half of the 18th century. Provided French. The clash of heterogeneous linguistic elements and the need for a common literary language posed the problem of creating unified national language norms. The formation of these norms took place in a sharp struggle of different currents. the democrats sought to bring the literary language closer to the people's speech, the reactionary clergy tried to preserve the purity of the archaic "Slovenian" language, obscure to the general population. At the same time, an excessive passion for foreign words began among the upper strata of society, which threatened to clog the Russian language. An important role was played by the language theory and practice of M.V. Lomonosov, the author of the first detailed grammar of the Russian language, who proposed to distribute various speech means, depending on the purpose of literary works, into high, medium and low “calms”. Lomonosov, V. K. Trediakovsky, D. I. Fonvizin, G. R. Derzhavin, A. N. Radishchev, N. M. Karamzin and other Russian writers paved the way for the great reform of A. S. Pushkin. The creative genius Pushkin synthesized various speech elements into a single system: Russian folk, Church Slavonic and Western European, and the Russian folk language, especially its Moscow variety, became the cementing basis. The modern Russian literary language begins with Pushkin, rich and diverse language styles (artistic, journalistic, scientific), closely related to each other, are determined, all-Russian phonetic, grammatical and lexical norms are obligatory for all who know the literary language, the lexical system develops and enriches. The great Russian writers of the 19th-20th centuries played an important role in the development and formation of the Russian literary language. (A. S. Griboyedov, M. Yu. Lermontov, N. V. Gogol, I. S. Turgenev, F. M. Dostoevsky, L. N. Tolstoy, M. Gorky, A. P. Chekhov). From the 2nd half of the XX century. the development of the literary language and the formation of its functional styles - scientific, journalistic, etc. - begin to be influenced by public figures, representatives of science and culture.

The Great October Socialist Revolution and the building of socialism in the USSR had a significant effect on the Russian language: the vocabulary of the language became more extensive, minor changes occurred in the grammatical structure, the stylistic means of the language were enriched, etc. In connection with the general spread of literacy and the rise in the cultural level of the population, the literary language became the main means of communication for the Russian nation, in contrast to the pre-revolutionary past, when the bulk of the people spoke local dialects and urban vernacular. The development of phonetic, grammatical and lexical norms of the modern Russian literary language is governed by two related trends: established traditions, which are considered exemplary, and the constantly changing speech of native speakers.

A significant place in the Russian language is occupied by dialects. Under the conditions of universal education, they are supplanted by the literary language, turning into a kind of semi-dialects. Dialects constantly influenced the literary language. Dialectisms are still used by writers for stylistic purposes.

Distinctive features of the Russian language

In the 16th-17th century, Polish became the main source of new lexical units in the Russian language, thanks to which such words of Latin, Germanic and Romance origin as algebra, dance and powder and directly Polish words, for example jar and duel, got into speech.

In Belarus, Russian is the state language along with the Belarusian language. In a number of countries former USSR Russian is recognized as the official language, that is, it has a privileged status, despite the presence of the state language.

In the US, in the state of New York, Russian is one of the eight languages ​​in which all official election documents are printed, and in California, you can take the driver's license test in Russian.

Until 1991, the Russian language was used for communication in the territory of the former USSR, being the state language. Therefore, the republics that left the USSR consider Russian as their native language.

In the literature there are such names of the Russian language as Russian and Great Russian, but they are used mainly by linguists and are not used in modern colloquial speech.

At the moment, the alphabet of the Russian language consists of 33 letters, which, by the way, has existed since 1918, but was officially approved in 1942, and before that time there were 31 letters in the alphabet, because Yo was equated to E, and Y to I.

Differences in dialects have never been an obstacle to communication between people, however, compulsory education, the advent of the press and the media, and large-scale migration of the population during the Soviet era, almost completely replaced the dialects from use, as they were replaced by standard Russian speech. Echoes of dialects are heard to this day in the speech of the older generation, who live mainly in the countryside, but since television, the media, and radio are developing densely, their speech is gradually acquiring a modern Russian dialect.

In modern Russian, many words came from Church Slavonic. In addition, the vocabulary of the Russian language was significantly influenced by those languages ​​with which he had been in contact for a long time. The oldest layer of borrowings has East Germanic roots, as evidenced by such words as, for example, camel, church or cross. A few, but often used words were borrowed from the ancient Iranian languages, the so-called Scythian vocabulary, for example, paradise or dog. Some Russian names, such as Olga or Igor, have a Germanic, most often Scandinavian origin.

Since the 18th century, the main flow of words has come to us from the Dutch (orange, yacht), German (tie, cement) and French (beach, conductor) languages.

It is also impossible not to note the influence of other languages, although to a much lesser extent than English, on the modern sound of the Russian language. Military terms (hussar, saber) came to us from Hungarian, and musical, financial and culinary (opera, balance and pasta) from Italian.

Despite the large number of borrowed words, the Russian language developed independently, giving the whole world a huge number of its own words-internationalisms: vodka, pogrom, samovar, dacha, mammoth, satellite, tsar, matryoshka, dacha and steppe.

Russian language in modern society

The Russian language plays a huge role in modern society, because it is an international language (one of the six official and working languages ​​of the UN).

Much attention is paid to the Russian language in society. Society's concern for the language is expressed in its codification, i.e. in streamlining linguistic phenomena into a single set of rules.

As one of 3,000 active languages, it is one of the most spoken languages ​​in the world and has an audience of over 100 million people. Interest in the state of the Russian language, its functioning in the post-Soviet space is due to the fact that the Russian language is, firstly, the most important factor in ensuring state interests and state security; secondly, it is the language of life of almost thirty million Russian compatriots in the near abroad; thirdly, the Russian language is the strongest integrating factor in the post-Soviet space.

The problem of the functioning of the Russian language is inextricably linked with the support of Russian culture and education in Russian. In fact, language-culture-education constitute a triune organism. The health or illness of any of his incarnations inevitably affects others.

Historical memory embodied in the word is the language of any people. The thousand-year-old spiritual culture, the life of the Russian people, was reflected in the Russian language, in its oral and written forms, in monuments of various genres - from ancient Russian chronicles and epics to works of modern fiction. And, therefore, the culture of languages, the culture of the word, appears as an inseparable bond of many, many generations.

The native language is the soul of the nation, its most important feature. In the language and through the language, such important features and traits as national psychology, the nature of the people, the way of thinking, the original uniqueness of artistic creativity, the moral state and spirituality are revealed.

N. M. Karamzin said: “Let there be honor and glory to our language, which in its native wealth, almost without any alien admixture, flows like a proud, majestic river - it makes noise, thunders - and suddenly, if necessary, softens, murmurs gentle stream and sweetly pours into the soul, forming all the measures that are only in the fall and rise of the human voice!

Russian is practically the most difficult language to learn. How to translate the phrase “yes, no” or “for sure, probably” into a foreign language? And it’s better to keep silent about slangisms in general. We can, as our heart desires, break sentences, rearranging words, interchanging them, replacing them with others or supplementing them with synonymous ones. Our accent is also flexible. Compare: city - cityOk - suburb. None of the languages ​​has such freedom. Rearrange the subject and predicate in German, and get an interrogative sentence instead of a declarative one. The richness of the language can be traced at all levels: in phonetics, grammar and vocabulary. The latter is more obvious. In our vocabulary there are words that describe feelings, shades of feelings and emotions that cannot be translated into another language without loss of meaning. And the rows of homonyms, synonyms, paronyms and antonyms! To know the expressive means of the language, to be able to use its stylistic and semantic riches in all their structural diversity - every native speaker should strive for this.

Language is the property of the people, it is in it that the famous Russian spirit, our soul, is enclosed. Not so long ago, linguists faced the problem of a large number of borrowings from the English language and asked themselves the question: is the language enriched with their help or impoverished? Within reasonable limits, borrowing is a normal phenomenon, it is due to it that vocabulary grows. But with an “overdose”, we forget our native speech and communicate with the help of “hi”, “okay” and other words, although we have our own “hello”, “hello”, “good evening”.

It is the people who are the custodian of the language, therefore each of us has one task - to preserve and increase the existing wealth.

One of the main works of Academician V.V. Vinogradov "Russian language", the largest philologist of our time, has become a necessary book for more than one generation of Russianists, linguists, philologists. The 1947 edition is now a bibliographic rarity, the second edition - 1972 - did not fully satisfy the need for it, and since then a new generation of its readers has grown up.

The Russian language, in addition to the fact that it unites us all, it also connects us with all those who are not indifferent to Russian culture. Russia, with all its might of a cultural power - as a Eurasian country - unites many nations, peoples precisely on the basis of, again, the Russian language, in which the greatest works of world literature are written. It is clear that our compatriots living outside the borders of the Russian Federation are also united by the great, powerful, powerful and melodious Russian language.

Conclusion

Russian language culture rule

Modern world introduces a lot of new things into the Russian literary language, especially in such areas as vocabulary and phraseology, word compatibility, their stylistic coloring, etc.

It is possible to single out the factors and conditions for the development of the modern Russian language. Impact on everyday speech environment each of them are both unequal and ambiguous at the same time.

Firstly, leading to a constant renewal of literary norms, to liberation from obsolete features and elements, this is the universality of the literary language.

Secondly, this is a wide and active familiarization of the modern educated reader with the work of such writers as V. Nabokov, B. Zaitsev, I. Shmelev, M. Aldanov, acquaintance with the works of N. Berdyaev, S. Bulgakov, P. Struve, P. Sorokin, V. Rozanov, G. Fedotov, E. Trubetskoy, P. Florensky, D. Andreev and many others. etc. All this affects the modern literary language, increasing its authority, educating the linguistic taste of speakers and writers.

Language is something fixed and unchanging. Under the influence of many various reasons language is in perpetual motion. An article by the Russian linguist I.A. Baudouin describes the surprise how, despite the various circumstances and reasons that affect changes in the language, he (the language) still does not change very much and retains its unity. But there is nothing particularly surprising in this. After all, language is the most important means of understanding people. And if the language did not retain its unity, then it could not perform this most important function.

Literature

1.The origins and fate of the Russian literary language. Ed.2 Filin F.P. 2010

2.Historical grammar of the Russian language, workshop, textbook allowance, Yanovich E.I., 2014

.The formation of the language of the Eastern Slavs. Ed.2 Filin F.P. 2010.

.Workshop on the Russian language and culture of speech, Skorikova T.P., 2014

.Russian language in aphorisms, Vekshin N.L., 2014

.Russian language. To the secrets of our language. Soloveichik M.S., Kuzmenko N.S., 2013

.Russian language. Educational and practical guide, Gaibaryan O.E., Kuznetsova A.V., 2014

.Modern Russian language. Text. Speech styles. Culture of speech, Blokhina N.G., 2010

9.Modern Russian language: history, theory, practice and culture of speech. Mandel B.R., 2014

10.Stylistics of the Russian language, Golub I.B., 2010

11.Modern Russian literary language, Phonetics, orthoepy, graphics and spelling, Knyazev S.V., Pozharitskaya S.K., 2011

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

Secondary school No. 2

abstract

on the topic:Origin of the Russian language

9th grade student

Umerova F.A.

Simferopol, 2014

Introduction

1. The formation and development of the book and writing tradition in Russia and the main stages in the history of the Russian language

2. Formation of the literary Russian language

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

Russian is one of the largest languages ​​in the world: in terms of the number of speakers, it ranks fifth after Chinese, English, Hindi and Spanish. The modern Russian language is a continuation of the Old Russian East Slavic language. The Old Russian language was spoken by the East Slavic tribes, which formed in the 9th century. Old Russian nationality within the limits of Ancient Russia.

All Slavic languages ​​(Polish, Czech, Slovak, Serbo-Croatian, Slovenian, Macedonian, Bulgarian, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Russian) come from a common root - a single Proto-Slavic language that probably existed until the 10th-11th centuries. Slavic languages ​​show great similarities among themselves.

In 1949, about s. Gnezdovo (near Smolensk), excavations were carried out at mound No. 13, dating from the first quarter of the 10th century, which give us valuable information about the history of culture and writing of the peoples of Ancient Russia. Among the many items of everyday life and life of the villagers discovered there, shards of a korchaga were found - an amphora, on which scientists were able to read the inscription in Cyrillic - gorushna (gorushna).

In the XIV-XV centuries. As a result of the collapse of Kievan Rus, on the basis of a single language of the Old Russian people, three independent languages ​​arose: Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian, which, with the formation of separate nations, took shape in national languages. They are the closest and most similar to each other and form the East Slavic subgroup of the Slavic group of the Indo-European family.

The Slavic branch originates from the Indo-European language family, which also includes Indian (Indo-Aryan), Iranian, Greek, Italian, Romance, Celtic, Germanic, Baltic language groups, as well as Armenian, Albanian and other languages. Of all the Indo-European languages, the Baltic languages ​​are closest to Slavic: Lithuanian, Latvian and the dead Prussian language, which finally disappeared by the first decades of the 18th century. The collapse of the Indo-European linguistic unity is usually attributed to the end of the III - the beginning of the II millennium BC. Apparently, at the same time, processes took place that led to the emergence of the Proto-Slavic language, to its separation from the Indo-European.

Proto-Slavic is the ancestral language of all Slavic languages. It had no written language and was not fixed in writing. However, it can be restored by comparing the Slavic languages ​​among themselves, as well as by comparing them with other related Indo-European languages.

A common source - the Proto-Slavic language - makes all Slavic languages ​​related, endowing them with many similar features, meanings, sounds ... In the Tale of Bygone Years, an Old Russian chronicle of the beginning of the 12th century, it says: "But the Slovenian language and Russian are one ... ". The word language is used here not only in the ancient meaning of "people", but also in the meaning of "speech".

The ancestral home of the Slavs, that is, the territory where they developed as a people with their own language and where they lived until their separation and resettlement to new lands, has not yet been precisely determined due to the lack of reliable data. However, with relative certainty it can be argued that it was located in the east of Central Europe, north of the foothills of the Carpathians. Many scientists believe that the northern border of the ancestral home of the Slavs ran along the Pripyat River (the right tributary of the Dnieper), the western border - along the middle course of the Vistula River, and in the east the Slavs settled the Ukrainian Polesie to the Dnieper.

According to the degree of their proximity to each other, Slavic languages ​​are usually divided into three groups:

South Slavic - Bulgarian, Serbo-Croatian, Slovenian and Macedonian;

West Slavic - Polish, Czech, Slovak, Kashubian, Upper and Lower Lusatian languages ​​and the dead Polabian language, which completely disappeared by the end of the 18th century;

East Slavic - Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian.

The ancestor of modern Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian languages ​​was Old Russian (or East Slavic) language. Two main eras can be distinguished in its history: pre-literate (from the collapse of the Proto-Slavic language to the end of the 10th century) and written.

The collapse of the Old Russian language led to the emergence of the Russian language, which differs from Ukrainian and Belarusian. This happened in the XIV century, although already in the XII-XIII centuries. in the Old Russian language, phenomena were outlined that distinguished the dialects of the ancestors of the Great Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians from each other. The modern Russian language is based on the northern and northeastern dialects of Kievan Rus.

1. The formation and development of the book and writing tradition in Russia and the main stages in the history of the Russian language

The first texts written in Cyrillic appeared among the Eastern Slavs in the 10th century.

After the baptism of Russia in 988, book writing arose. In Kievan Rus, a mixed language was used, which was called Church Slavonic. All liturgical literature, being written off from Old Slavonic, Byzantine and Bulgarian sources, reflected the norms of the Old Slavonic language. The originals for the East Slavic handwritten books were mainly South Slavic manuscripts dating back to the works of the students of the creators of the Slavic script Cyril and Methodius. In the process of correspondence, the original language was adapted to the East Slavic language, and the Old Russian book language was formed - the Russian version of the Church Slavonic language. However, words and elements of the Old Russian language penetrated into this literature.

In parallel to this style of language, secular and business literature also existed. If the Psalter, the Gospel, and so on serve as examples of the Church Slavonic language, then the Tale of Igor's Campaign, The Tale of Bygone Years, and Russian Truth are considered examples of the secular and business language of Kievan Rus.

Secular and business literature reflects the linguistic norms of the living spoken language of the Slavs, their oral folk art. Based on the fact that Kievan Rus had such a complex dual language system, it is difficult for scientists to explain the origin of the modern literary Russian language. Their opinions differ, but the most common is the theory of Academician V.V. Vinogradov, according to which two varieties of the literary language functioned in Kievan Rus:

1) book-Slavonic literary language, based on Old Church Slavonic and used mainly in church literature;

2) folk-literary language, based on the living Old Russian language and used in secular literature.

According to V.V. Vinogradova, these are two types of language, and not two special languages, i.e. there was no bilingualism in Kievan Rus. These two types of language long time interacted with each other. Gradually they became closer, and on their basis in the XVIII century. a unified literary Russian language was formed.

2. Formation of the literaryRussianlanguage

The Russian language of the era of Muscovite Russia (XIV-XVII centuries) had a complex history. Dialect features continued to develop. Two main dialect zones took shape - Northern Great Russian (approximately north of the line Pskov - Tver - Moscow, south of Nizhny Novgorod) and South Great Russian (south of this line to the Belarusian and Ukrainian regions) dialects, overlapping with other dialect divisions. Intermediate Middle Russian dialects arose, among which the dialect of Moscow began to play a leading role. Initially, it was mixed, then it developed into a harmonious system. For him became characteristic: akanye; pronounced reduction of vowels of unstressed syllables; explosive consonant "g"; the ending "-ovo", "-evo" in the genitive singular masculine and neuter in the pronominal declension; hard ending "-t" in the verbs of the 3rd person of the present and future tense; forms of pronouns "me", "you", "myself" and a number of other phenomena. The Moscow dialect is gradually becoming exemplary and forms the basis of the Russian national literary language.

The language of writing remains motley. Religion and the rudiments of scientific knowledge were mainly served by book-Slavonic, by origin Old Bulgarian, which experienced a noticeable influence of the Russian language, cut off from the popular colloquial element. The language of statehood (the so-called business language) was based on Russian folk speech, but did not coincide with it in everything. Speech cliches developed in it, often including purely bookish elements; its syntax, in contrast to the spoken language, was more organized, with the presence of cumbersome complex sentences; the penetration of dialect features into it was largely prevented by standard all-Russian norms. Written fiction was diverse in terms of linguistic means. Since ancient times, the oral language of folklore played an important role, serving until the 16th-17th centuries. all segments of the population. This is evidenced by its reflection in ancient Russian writing (tales about the Belogorod jelly, about Olga's revenge, etc. in The Tale of Bygone Years, folklore motifs in the Tale of Igor's Campaign, vivid phraseology in Daniil Zatochnik's Prayer, etc. ), as well as archaic layers of modern epics, fairy tales, songs and other types of oral folk art.

During the period of the Muscovite state of the XIV-XVI centuries. the main styles of the Russian literary language were clearly defined:

1. Literary and artistic (ascending to the "Tale of Igor's Campaign);

2. Documentary and business style (these include ancient treaties, letters, "Russian Truth");

3. Journalistic style (correspondence of Ivan the Terrible with Kurbsky).

4. Industrial-professional style (various manuals and management manuals).

5. The style is epistolary.

Second half of the 16th century in the Muscovite state was marked by such a great event, which had a valuable cultural and historical significance, as the appearance of the first printed books. Typography was of great importance for the fate of the Russian literary language, culture and education. The first printed books were church books, primers, grammars, dictionaries. In 1708, a civil alphabet was introduced, on which secular literature was printed.

Since the 17th century the trend towards convergence of book and spoken language is increasing. In petitions, in various kinds of private letters and letters, words and expressions of an everyday nature that have not previously been encountered in book speech are increasingly being used. For example, in the "Life of the Prototope Avvakum" the colloquial elements of Russian colloquial and everyday speech are presented very fully. Non-colloquial words and expressions are used here ( lying on his belly, they suddenly shout, fools, there are a lot of fleas and lice etc.), but also colloquial meanings of well-known words.

In the XVIII and early XIX centuries. secular writing became widespread, church literature was gradually relegated to the background and, finally, became the lot of religious rituals, and its language turned into a kind of church jargon. Scientific and technical, military, nautical, administrative and other terminology developed rapidly, which caused a large influx into the Russian language of words and expressions from Western European languages. Especially great impact from the second half of the XVIII century. French began to render Russian vocabulary and phraseology. The clash of heterogeneous linguistic elements and the need for a common literary language posed the problem of creating unified national language norms. The formation of these norms took place in a sharp struggle of different currents. Democratic-minded sections of society sought to bring the literary language closer to folk speech, the reactionary clergy tried to preserve the purity of the archaic "Slovenian" language, which was incomprehensible to the general population. At the same time, an excessive passion for foreign words began among the upper strata of society, which threatened to clog the Russian language. The language theory and practice of M.V. Lomonosov, the author of "Russian Grammar" - the first detailed grammar of the Russian language, who proposed to distribute various speech means, depending on the purpose of literary works, into high, medium and low "calms".

Development grammar science in the second half of the XVIII century. and in the first decades of the nineteenth century. led to the emergence of two main points of view on grammatical phenomena: structural-grammatical and logical-semantic. In the XVIII century. The Russian language is becoming a literary language with generally recognized norms, widely used in both book and colloquial speech. M.V. Lomonosov, V.K. Trediakovsky, D.I. Fonvizin, G.R. Derzhavin, A.N. Radishchev, N.M. Karamzin and other Russian writers paved the way for the great reform of A.S. Pushkin.

19th century can be considered the first period of development of the modern literary Russian language. The beginning of the stage of development of the modern Russian literary language is considered to be the time of the great Russian poet Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, who is sometimes called the creator of the modern Russian literary language. The language of Pushkin and writers of the 19th century. is a classic example of the literary language up to the present day. The creative genius of Pushkin synthesized various speech elements into a single system: Russian folk, Church Slavonic and Western European, and the Russian folk language, especially its Moscow variety, became the cementing basis. The modern Russian literary language begins with Pushkin, rich and diverse linguistic styles (artistic, journalistic, scientific, etc.) are closely related to each other. All-Russian phonetic, grammatical and lexical norms, obligatory for all those who speak the literary language, are determined, the lexical system is developed and enriched. slav cyrillic colloquial literary

In his work, Pushkin was guided by the principle of proportionality and conformity. He did not reject any words because of their Old Slavonic, foreign or common origin. He considered any word acceptable in literature, in poetry, if it accurately, figuratively expresses the concept, conveys the meaning. But he opposed the thoughtless passion for foreign words, and also against the desire to replace mastered foreign words with artificially selected or composed Russian words.

If the scientific and literary works of the Lomonosov era look rather archaic in their language, then the works of Pushkin and all literature after him became the literary basis of the language we speak today. A.S. Pushkin streamlined the artistic means of the Russian literary language and significantly enriched it. Based on various manifestations of the folk language, he managed to create in his works a language that was perceived by society as a literary one. “With the name of Pushkin, the thought of a Russian national poet immediately dawns,” wrote N.V. Gogol. “He, as if in a lexicon, contained all the richness, strength and flexibility of our language. He is more than anyone, he further pushed his boundaries and more showed all its space.

Of course, since the time of A.S. Pushkin, a lot of time has passed and a lot has changed, including the Russian language: something has gone out of it, a lot of new words have appeared. Although the great poet did not leave us a grammar, he was the author of not only artistic, but also historical, journalistic works, he clearly distinguished between the author's speech and characters, i.e. practically laid the foundations for the modern functional and stylistic classification of the literary Russian language.

End of the 19th century and up to the present time - the second period of development of the modern literary Russian language. This period is characterized by well-established linguistic norms, but these norms are being improved to this day. In the development and formation of the modern Russian literary language, such Russian writers of the 19th-20th centuries also played a big role. like A.S. Griboyedov, M.Yu. Lermontov, N.V. Gogol, I.S. Turgenev, F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, M. Gorky, A.P. Chekhov and others.

Since the second half of the XX century. the development of the literary language and the formation of its functional styles - scientific, journalistic and others - are also beginning to be influenced by public figures, representatives of science and culture.

The development of phonetic, grammatical and lexical norms of the modern Russian literary language is governed by two related trends: established traditions, which are considered exemplary, and the constantly changing speech of native speakers. The established traditions are the use of speech means in the language of writers, publicists, theater artists, masters of cinema, radio, television and other means of mass communication. For example, the exemplary "Moscow pronunciation", which became common Russian, developed in the late 19th - early 20th centuries. at the Moscow Art and Maly theatres. It changes, but its foundations are still considered unshakable.

Conclusion

The modern Russian language is represented by a number of stylistic, dialectal and other varieties that are in complex interaction. All these varieties, united by a common origin, a common phonetic and grammatical system and the main vocabulary, constitute a single national Russian language, the main link of which is the literary language in its written and oral forms. Shifts in the very system of the literary language, the constant impact on it of other varieties of speech lead not only to its enrichment with new means of expression, but also to the complication of stylistic diversity, the development of variance.

List of literaturecheers

1. Old Russian language: textbook. allowance for ist. fak. un-tov / N.G. Samsonov. - M.: "High School", 1973. - 295 p. : ill.

2. History of Russian linguistics: textbook. allowance for philol. specialties / F.M. Berezin. - M.: Higher. school, 1979. - 223 p.

3. History of the Russian literary language: textbook. allowance for students ped. in-t on spec. "Russian language and literature in the national school." / L.V. Sudavichen, N.Ya. Serdobintsev, Yu.G. Kadkalov; ed. I.F. Protchenko. - 2nd ed. finalized - L.: Enlightenment; Leningrad. Department, 1990. - 319 p.

4. History of the Russian literary language / A.N. Gorshkov. - M.: Higher. school, 1969. - 366 p.

5. Historical grammar of the Russian language: textbook. for students ped. in-t on spec. "Russian language and lit." / V.V. Ivanov. - 3rd ed., revised. and additional - M. : Enlightenment, 1990. - 400 p. : ill.

6. History of the Russian literary language: a course of lectures / A.I. Efimov. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow. un-ta, 1954. - 431 p.

7. History of the Russian literary language / A.I. Efimov. - 3rd ed., corrected. - M.: Publishing House "Higher School", 1971. - 295.

8. P.Ya. Chernykh. On the issue of the Gnezdovskaya inscription / P.Ya. Chernykh // Izv. Dep. Liter. and language. - 1950. - Vol. 9, issue. 5. - S. 401.

9. Legends about the beginning of Slavic writing / rev. ed. V.D. Korolyuk. - M.: Publishing house "Nauka", 1981. - 197 p. - Monuments of the medieval history of the peoples of Central and Eastern Europe.

10. Reader on the history of grammatical teachings in Russia / comp. V.V. Shcheulin, V.I. Medvedev. - M.: Publishing house "Higher school", 1965. - 355 p.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

Similar Documents

History and main reasons for the formation and decay of the Old Russian language, its lexical and grammatical features. Place and assessment of the significance of the Russian language among other languages. The emergence of a written language among the Eastern Slavs, its currents and styles.

term paper, added 07/15/2009


Causes and main directions of reforming the Russian language. Analysis and key points of the main reforms of the Russian language that have influenced modern speech and spelling. Determining the prospects for the further development of the Russian spoken language.

term paper, added 03/19/2015


Modern Russian is one of the richest languages ​​in the world. High dignity and vocabulary of the Russian language. Features of the functional, expressive, colloquial, scientific, bookish, journalistic, official business style of the Russian language.

abstract, added 12/15/2010


Russian language in modern society. Origin and development of the Russian language. Distinctive features of the Russian language. The ordering of linguistic phenomena into a single set of rules. The main problems of the functioning of the Russian language and the support of Russian culture.

abstract, added 04/09/2015


Review of the functional styles of the literary Russian language. Origin and meaning of the word "style". Concretization of the meaning of colloquial, journalistic, business, scientific styles, characteristics of each of its varieties, description of the most important features.

control work, added 11/06/2013


Classification of styles of the modern Russian literary language. Functional varieties of language: bookish and colloquial, their division into functional styles. Book and colloquial speech. The main features of the newspaper language. Conversational styles.

test, added 08/18/2009


The history of the emergence of the Russian language. Specific features of the Cyrillic alphabet. Stages of the formation of the alphabet in the process of the formation of the Russian nation. Common features characteristic of the language of mass communication in the modern society of the Russian Federation. The problem of the barbarization of the Russian language.

abstract, added 01/30/2012


Legacy of the past in the language of Pushkin's works. Stylistic tasks of the language. Completion of the consolidation of the Russian vernacular language in literature. Common people and folklore in Pushkin's fairy tales. The verbal element of Pushkin's prose and poetry.

abstract, added 11/06/2012


Word-building system of the Russian language of the XX century. Modern word production (end of the twentieth century). The vocabulary of the Russian literary language. Intensive formation of new words. Changes in the semantic structure of words.

abstract, added 11/18/2006


Theories of the emergence of language as a means of communication between people. Engels' doctrine of the origin of language. The process of formation of individual languages, the main patterns of their development. Education, formation and development of the vocabulary of the Russian language.

The history of the emergence and development of the Russian language

A Brief History of the Russian Language

Russian is one of the largest languages ​​in the world: in terms of the number of speakers, it ranks fifth after Chinese, English, Hindi and Spanish. Russian is one of the official and working languages ​​of the UN. The number of Russian speakers is about 180 million people. It belongs to the eastern group of Slavic languages. Among the Slavic languages, Russian is the most widespread. All Slavic languages ​​show great similarities among themselves, but Belarusian and Ukrainian are closest to the Russian language. Together, these languages ​​form the East Slavic subgroup, which is included in Slavic group Indo-European family.

The history of the origin and formation of the Russian language

The history of the origin of the Russian language go back to ancient times. Approximately in the 2nd-1st millennium BC. e. from the group of related dialects of the Indo-European family of languages, the Proto-Slavic language stands out (at a later stage - approximately in the 1-7th centuries - called Proto-Slavic).

Already in Kievan Rus (9th - early 12th centuries), the Old Russian language became a means of communication for some Baltic, Finno-Ugric, Turkic, and partly Iranian tribes and nationalities. In the 14-16 centuries. the southwestern variety of the literary language of the Eastern Slavs was the language of statehood and the Orthodox Church in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and in the Principality of Moldavia.

Feudal fragmentation, which contributed to dialect fragmentation, the Mongol-Tatar yoke (13-15 centuries), Polish-Lithuanian conquests led to the 13-14 centuries. to the collapse of the ancient Russian people. The unity of the Old Russian language also gradually disintegrated. 3 centers of new ethno-linguistic associations were formed that fought for their Slavic identity: northeastern (Great Russians), southern (Ukrainians) and western (Belarusians). In the 14-15 centuries. on the basis of these associations, closely related, but independent East Slavic languages ​​are formed: Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian.

The history of the development of the Russian language - the era of Moscow Russia

The Russian language of the era of Moscow Russia (14-17 centuries) had a complex history. Dialect features continued to develop. Two main dialect zones took shape - Northern Great Russian approximately in the north from the line Pskov - Tver - Moscow, south of Nizhny Novgorod, and South Great Russian in the south from this line to the Belarusian and Ukrainian regions - dialects overlapped by other dialect divisions. Intermediate Middle Russian dialects arose, among which the dialect of Moscow began to play a leading role. Initially, it was mixed, then it developed into a harmonious system. For him became characteristic: akanye; pronounced reduction of vowels of unstressed syllables; explosive consonant "g"; the ending "-ovo", "-evo" in the genitive singular masculine and neuter in the pronominal declension; hard ending "-t" in the verbs of the 3rd person of the present and future tense; forms of pronouns "me", "you", "myself" and a number of other phenomena. The Moscow dialect is gradually becoming exemplary and forms the basis of the Russian national literary language. At this time, in live speech, the final restructuring of the categories of time takes place (the ancient past tenses - aorist, imperfect, perfect and pluperfect are completely replaced by a unified form with "-l"), the loss of the dual number, the former declension of nouns according to six bases is replaced by modern types of declension and etc. The written language remains colorful.

In the 17th century national ties arise, the foundations of the Russian nation are laid. In 1708, the civil and Church Slavonic alphabets were separated. In the 18th and early 19th centuries secular writing became widespread, church literature was gradually relegated to the background and, finally, became the lot of religious rituals, and its language turned into a kind of church jargon. Scientific and technical, military, nautical, administrative and other terminology developed rapidly, which caused a large influx into the Russian language of words and expressions from Western European languages. Especially great impact from the 2nd half of the 18th century. French began to render Russian vocabulary and phraseology.

The clash of heterogeneous linguistic elements and the need for a common literary language posed the problem of creating unified national language norms. The formation of these norms took place in a sharp struggle of different currents. Democratic-minded sections of society sought to bring the literary language closer to folk speech, the reactionary clergy tried to preserve the purity of the archaic "Slovenian" language, which was incomprehensible to the general population. At the same time, an excessive passion for foreign words began among the upper strata of society, which threatened to clog the Russian language.

In modern Russian, there is an active (intensive) growth of special terminology, which is caused, first of all, by the needs of the scientific and technological revolution. If at the beginning of the 18th century. terminology was borrowed by Russian from German language, in the 19th century. - from French, then in the middle of the 20th century. it is borrowed mainly from the English language (in its American version). Special vocabulary has become the most important source of replenishment of the vocabulary of the Russian general literary language, however, the penetration of foreign words should be reasonably limited.

There are three periods in the history of the Russian language: 1) 6th-7th - 14th centuries; 2) 15th - 17th centuries; 3) 18 - 21 centuries.

1) Early period The history of the Russian language begins after the collapse of the Proto-Slavic language and the separation of the Common East Slavic language - the ancestor of the three East Slavic languages ​​- Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian. The Common East Slavic language, which is also called Old Russian, existed until the 14th century, that is, before it began to be divided into three independent East Slavic languages. Since that time, one can speak of Russian proper, or of the Great Russian language, which differs not only from the languages ​​of the southern and western Slavs, but also from the Ukrainian and Belarusian languages ​​closest to it. The Great Russian language also went through a long path of development - from the language of the Great Russian people to the modern Russian national language - the language of the Russian nation. The history of the Russian language is the history of the Old Russian language, the language of the Great Russian people and the language of the Russian nation; The structure of the modern Russian language has developed from elements dating back to different eras of its development.

Borkowski identifies three periods in the history of language development:

1) the Old Russian period is the same as the source of all three modern East Slavic languages ​​(from ancient times to the 14th century);

2) the Old Russian period (15-17 centuries);

3) new, modern Russian language (since the 18th century).

The main border between different types literary language - pre-national and national period. For the Russian language, this is the border between the Middle Ages and modern times - the middle - the second half of the 17th century. A distinctive feature of the pre-national period is that another language can act as a literary language, in this case Church Slavonic, according to Shakhmatov, Tolstoy. During the national period, the literary language changes its base: it focuses on dialectal speech, and is formed on a national basis. During this period, the oral form of the literary language begins to form.

Vostokov, Karamzin distinguish three periods: ancient (10-13 centuries), middle (14-18 centuries), new (from the end of the 18th century). These frames coincide with the chronology of historical changes.

Separation of the Eastern Slavs from the common Slavic unity (approximately in the 6th-7th centuries) linguistically, it was accompanied by the development of such features that were inherent in all Eastern Slavs and distinguished them from the southern and western Slavs. These include the following phonetic features: the presence of ch, zh in place of the ancient tj, dj: candle, boundary; full-vowel combinations oro, ere, olo in place of the ancient or, ol, er, el: beard, coast; the presence of o at the beginning of the word with je in other Slavic languages: lake, deer, autumn, one.

In strengthening the unity of the Old Russian language, the development Kyiv Koine(common colloquial language), it combined features of the north (horse, veksha, istba) and primordially southern (for example, vol, brehati, lepy). In the Old Kievan Koine, sharp dialectal features are leveled, as a result of which it could become a language that satisfies the needs of Kyiv in its relations with all of Russia, which strengthened the unity of the Russian people. The question of the development of the Old Russian language in the Kievan era is connected with the question of the origin of writing and the beginning of the development of the Russian literary language. 907 - an agreement between the Russians and the Greeks, preserved in later lists. Consequently, the writing of the Eastern Slavs originated long before the baptism of Russia and the ancient Russian letter was alphabetic.

During this period, the literary language also developed, reflected in the monuments of various genres. The first written monuments of the Old Russian language date back to the 11th century; The oldest inscription on a vessel found during excavations of the Gnezdovsky mounds near Smolensk dates back to the beginning of the 10th century.

In the 10th century, with the adoption of Christianity, church books written in Old Church Slavonic began to arrive in Russia from Bulgaria. This contributed to the spread of writing. The books were copied by Russian scribes, who mastered the features of the Old Slavonic language. But Art.-Sk. language absorbs local linguistic features. So in the 11-12 centuries, local varieties of the old-sl. language; the totality of these editions is called the Church Slavonic language. It was the common literary language of the Slavs throughout the medieval period. It was used to write texts on church topics, canonical and similar. During this period, secular genres of writing also existed - records and comments on real historical events, travel descriptions, texts of laws and private correspondence. The language of this writing is the Old Russian language, filled with words and forms of living East Slavic speech, it reflected the Koine.

The works of secular literature written in the Old Russian language are divided into two groups: 1) chronicle stories and artistic and narrative literature: the works of Vladimir Monomakh (late 11th - early 12th centuries), "The Prayer of Daniel the Sharpener" (1st quarter of the 13th century), etc. .; 2) monuments of a business nature and private correspondence (Birch bark letters).

The vast territory of Kievan Rus, with a diverse population in terms of economic, ethnic, and cultural characteristics, early began to show tendencies towards disintegration. By the middle of the 12th century, and especially in its second half, the process of weakening Kyiv as a common center and the process of strengthening new, local centers led to the loss of Kyiv's leading role. Life began to concentrate around other centers in the north, northeast and northwest (Vladimir, Suzdal, Rostov, etc.). Feudal fragmentation is intensifying, which leads to a deepening of dialect differences in the Old Russian language. In the written monuments of the 12th - early 13th centuries. a number of dialects of the Old Russian language are reflected. It was a period when the Eastern Slavs were going through a common process for all Slavs. loss of reduced, which entailed consequences that are different for the south and for the rest of the territory of the Old Russian language. According to the fate of the primordial e and o, which received lengthening in the position before the lost b and b and later diphthongization, according to the fate of combinations of smooth c b and b between consonants and other phenomena, the south and southwest of Ancient Russia turned out to be opposed to the north and northeast. However, there were also dialectal differences.

2) The beginning of the second period is the collapse of the single East Slavic language and the emergence of the language of the Great Russian people.

Strengthening the feudal fragmentation of Russia, further separation of northeastern Russia from western and southwestern during the Mongol-Tatar yoke, as well as as a result of the processes of development of the western and southern lands as part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (and later Poland), economic growth and political strengthening northeastern Russia leads to the fact that in the 14-16 centuries. the Great Russian state and the Great Russian nationality are formed.

North-Eastern (Suzdal) Russia becomes the center of the gathering of Russian lands and the struggle against the Golden Horde. Beginning in the 14th century rise of Moscow originally a small city of Suzdal Rus, which later turned into the political, economic and cultural center of the state. Under the rule of Prince M., the lands located to the north, south and west of Moscow are collected. Somewhat earlier in the west, the rise of the Principality of Lithuania begins. Lithuanian princes seized Western Russia in the 13th century, in the 13th-14th centuries. making forays into the southwest. In the 14th century, the Galicia-Volyn lands and Kyiv were part of the Lithuanian principality. In the 14th-15th centuries. On the territory of the Lithuanian Principality, on the basis of Old Russian dialects, the Ukrainian and Belarusian languages ​​are formed. The formation here of two, and not one, language is explained by the comparative disunity of the various parts of this state formation, as well as by the fact that different lands at different times were part of it.

Evidence of the formation of the Great Russian nationality and its language was the emergence throughout the territory of the settlement of the nationality of linguistic neoplasms that were not characteristic of the languages ​​of the Ukrainian and Belarusian nationalities. A change in weak b and b in combination with the previous smooth one in o and e, the development of ûy, yy in oh, her. In the field of morphology, there is a loss of the vocative form, the replacement of whistling with posterior lingual in the forms of declension (legE instead of nozE), the development of plural forms. I.p. on –a (shores, forests), the formation of imperative mood forms in –ite instead of –Ete, the appearance of imperative mood forms with g, x, k in back language verbs (help instead of help).

Structurally, the language of the Great Russian people was already close to the S.R.Y.: there was a change of e into o, a functional unification of u, s with their phonetic difference. A system of hard-soft and voiced-deaf consonants was established, the old system of past tenses of the verb was lost, there was a unification of declension types, etc.

The core of this territory was dialectally unified, but the gradual expansion of the emerging state, the annexation of new territories was accompanied by an increase in dialect diversity, because. in the annexed territories there were both S.-E.-R. and S.-E.-R. dialects. Both become dialects of the Great Russian language, with the leading role played by the Rostov-Suzdal dialect, which included the Moscow dialect. Moscow, which became a political and cultural center from the 2nd quarter of the 14th century, played a special role in the unification of the norms of the Russian language. Around the Moscow Principality, a number of other principalities united, and in the 15th century a vast state, Muscovite Russia, was created. In the 16th century, the norms of Moscow colloquial speech were gradually developed, which reflected the features of the northern and southern. The colloquial speech of Moscow was reflected in the business documents of the Moscow orders, and the language of these orders influenced the Old Russian literary language, which was reflected in the language of many works of the 15th-17th centuries. In the literary language of the Muscovite state, the book and written traditions of Kievan Rus continue to develop. At the same time, structural changes separating it from the written language are increasing in the Russian spoken language. The Great Russian language is influenced by extralinguistic factors. Victory in the Battle of Kulikovo destroys the age-old yoke on Russian soil. The Ottoman Empire captures the capital of Byzantium in 1453 and establishes dominance in the Balkans. Figures of the South Slavic and Byzantine cultures come to Moscow Russia. By the 14th - early 15th centuries. editing of Slavic church books under the guidance of Metropolitan Cyprian is carried out to bring them into their original form, corresponding to the originals. This was the "second South Slavic influence". Russian writing approaches the Slavic.

In the book-Slavic type of the literary language, archaic spellings based on the South Slavic spelling norm are becoming widespread. A special rhetorical manner of expression arises, saturated with metaphors - “ weaving words.” This complex of phenomena is called the second South Slavic influence. The folk-literary type of language was not subjected to it. During this period, the functions of the business language are expanding. New genres of business writing are emerging: sudnikov, article lists of Russian ambassadors, "Domostroy", "Stoglav", etc. Spelling practice and word usage of the business language influenced the formation of the norms of the literary language. In the second half of the 16th century, book printing began in the Muscovite state.. The first printed book was The Apostle (1564). In 1566 The Clockworker was published. Church books of grammar, dictionaries, primers necessary for education and enlightenment are printed. The first printed educational books were Primer (1574), Slovenska Grammar by Lavrenty Zizaniy (1576), Slovene Grammar by Melety Smotrytsky (1618).

3) In the 17th century, the Russian nation was formed. During this period, the ratio of the national language and dialects changes. The development of new dialect features stops, the old ones remain stable. From the middle of the 17th century, a new period in the history of the Russian literary language begins - the national one. Dialects begin to level out.

The development of economic and political ties of Muscovite Rus, the growth of Moscow's authority, the spread of Moscow orders contributed to the growth of the influence of Moscow's oral speech on the territory of Russia, the dialect of Moscow formed the basis of the national language. The formation of a new literary language was facilitated by the widespread distribution of literature in the democratic strata of society, the language of which was formed on the basis of oral and business speech.

In 1708, a civil alphabet was introduced, in which secular literature was printed, the Cyrillic alphabet was used for confessional purposes. In the literary language of the late 17th - 1st half of the 18th centuries. Book Slavonic, often even archaic, lexical and grammatical elements, words and turns of speech of a folk colloquial and business nature and Western European borrowings are closely intertwined and interact. The vocabulary of the language becomes more diverse, but stylistically disordered. There is a need to normalize the literary language. The first attempts to describe the norms of the literary language were made by A. D. Kantemir, V. K. Trediakovsky, V. E. Atoturov.

The leading role in the transformation of the Russian literary language in the description of its norms belongs to Lomonosov. He is the founder of the science of the Russian language, laid the foundation for the descriptive and comparative historical study of the Russian language, and characterized the subject of linguistics as a science. In "Letters on the Rules of Russian Poetry", "Rhetoric", "Russian Grammar", "Foreword on the Usefulness of Church Books and the Russian Language", he described the norms of the Russian literary language at all levels of the language system, showed ways historical development, created the doctrine of the three styles.

He connected the theory of three styles with the national originality of the historical development of the Russian literary language, which consisted in the long-term interaction and mutual influence of two elements: book-Slavic and Russian folk. The stylistic theory based the norm on those words, turns of speech, grammatical forms that were stylistically neutral, limited the use of Slavicisms and borrowings, and allowed the use of vernacular in literary speech.

In the development of the language, the role of individual author's styles gradually increases and becomes decisive. The greatest influence on the process of development of the Russian literary language of this period was exerted by the work of G. R. Derzhavin, A. N. Radishchev, I. A. Krylov, N. M. Karamzin. Their works are characterized by an orientation towards live speech use. Moreover, the use of colloquial elements was combined with the stylistically purposeful use of Slavism. A major role in the normalization of the Russian literary language of the late 18th - early 19th centuries. played an explanatory dictionary of the Russian language - "Dictionary of the Russian Academy."

In the early 90s. In the 18th century, “Letters from a Russian Traveler” and Karamzin’s stories appear. They cultivated the language of description, which was called the Russian syllable. It was based on the principle of convergence of the literary language with the spoken language, the rejection of the abstract schematism of the literature of classicism, the interest in inner world person. Karamzin set a goal to form a language accessible to all: for books and for society, in order to write as they say and speak as they write. The downside was that he focused on the language of high society, included a large number of gallicisms that were absent in general use.

The writers of the early 19th century took a significant step towards bringing the literary language closer to the spoken language, in updating the norms of the new literary language. By the 19th century, the genre and style of works of literature were no longer determined by the rigid attachment of words, grammatical forms and constructions. The role of a creative linguistic personality has increased, the concept of a true linguistic taste in an individual author's style has arisen.

The first third of the 19th century is Pushkin period. In his work, the formation of the national Russian literary language is completed. In the language of his works, the main elements of Russian writing and oral speech came into balance. He found such ways of merging the three linguistic elements - Slavic, colloquial and Western European elements, which influenced the development of the norms of the national Russian literary language. This language has basically survived to this day. From this period begins the era of the new Russian literary language. In the work of Pushkin, uniform, national norms were developed and consolidated, which linked together the oral and written varieties of the Russian literary language. The creation of unified national norms concerned not only the lexical and grammatical structure, but also systemic and functional styles. Having completely destroyed the system of three styles, he created a variety of styles, stylistic contexts, welded together by theme and content, opened up the possibility of their endless, individual artistic variation. All subsequent development of the Russian literary language was a deepening and improvement of the norms laid down in this era. In the development of the Russian literary language, the formation of its norms, the language practice of the largest Russian writers of the 19th and early 20th centuries (Lermontov, Gogol, Dostoevsky, etc.) played an important role. With Pushkin, the system of functional speech styles was finally established in the Russian literary language, and then improved. In the second half of the 19th century, a significant development of the journalistic style was noted. He begins to influence the development of fiction. Scientific-philosophical, socio-political terminology appears in the literary language. Along with this, the literary language incorporates vocabulary and phraseology from territorial dialects, urban vernacular and socio-professional jargons.

After 1917, there is a significant change in the language and its norms. The social base of native speakers is changing. Moscow, as a carrier of the capital's Koine, acquires the character of a multinational city, under the influence of these factors, the norms of the language begin to change rapidly. The development of public education, publishing, the interest of the broad masses in literature and journalism, the emergence of radio, etc. led to the fact that the functions of the literary language became more complex and expanded. New conditions for the relationship between literary and non-literary language arose. There are changes in the expressive coloring of some words (master, master). The language of the Communist Party and its leaders has an impact on the literary one (for example, dizziness from success, to catch up and overtake). Extralinguistic factors influence the formation of new words and expressions (council, five-year plan, collective farm, sabotage). The special technical language is enriched in connection with achievements in science and technology, etc.

In Soviet times, academic grammars, normative dictionaries, books on the culture of speech, and magazines played an important role.

In the 20th century, the vocabulary of the Russian literary language was significantly enriched. In particular, the development of science and technology contributed to the replenishment of the literary language with special terminological vocabulary, some shifts occurred in word formation, grammatical structure, and stylistic means were enriched.

We thank Andrey Anatolyevich Zaliznyak and the Moomin school
for providing the transcript of the lecture.

I decided that today it's worth telling you briefly about what, in my opinion, is missing in school curricula - about the history of the Russian language.

The course of the history of the Russian language is taught in full at universities, sometimes for a year, sometimes for two years, so you yourself understand what it is in full. To try, however, to tell you something significant about all this in one lesson is a somewhat daring task. But I still think that this is not meaningless, although, of course, it will be necessary to mention various aspects of the matter from such a vast subject very superficially. I hope that in some way this will expand your understanding of how the language was formed, which we all know. I will have to repeat something from what I have already said a little in this audience on a different occasion, since these are related things, but you will bear with me. In the same way, I will have, among other things, to tell some well-known things. A significant part of those present should already know them, but again - be restrained, because for integrity we will sometimes need them. So, the conversation will focus on the main topics that arise in the study of the history of the Russian language.

The first small preliminary digression is to once again (because I have already talked to you about this) to responsibly declare the numerous inventions about the infinite antiquity of the Russian language to be nonsense. The fact that the Russian language existed three thousand years ago, five thousand years ago, seven thousand years ago, seventy thousand years ago - you can find similar statements in various writings. About those who are fond of this kind of fiction, it was wonderfully said that these are theories of how a person came from a Russian.

In fact, the history of any language with a certain name: French, Russian, Latin, Chinese - is the history of the period of time when this name exists. Moreover, we cannot draw any clear boundary that separates the language from the previous stage of its existence. Generational change with small changes from one generation to another occurs continuously throughout the history of mankind in every language, and, of course, our parents and our grandfathers speak the same language from our point of view as we do. We digress from trifles and generally believe that two or four hundred years ago we spoke the same language. And then there are some doubts.

Can you say that our ancestors, who lived a thousand years ago, spoke the same language as we do? Or is it still not the same? Note that no matter how you decide this question, these people also had their own ancestors who lived a thousand, two, three thousand years earlier. And each time from generation to generation, the change in language was insignificant. From what moment can we say that this is already the Russian language, and not its distant ancestor, which - and this is very significant - is the ancestor not only of our Russian language, but also of a number of related languages?

We all know that Ukrainian and Belarusian are closely related to the Russian language. The common ancestor of these three languages ​​existed - by the standards of history - not so long ago: only about a thousand years ago. If you take not a thousand, but three thousand years, five thousand years, and so on deep into antiquity, it turns out that the people to whom we go back purely biologically are the ancestors not only of today's Russians, but also of a number of other peoples. Thus, it is clear that the history of the Russian language proper cannot be extended indefinitely into the depths of time. Somewhere we have to set some conditional start point.

In reality, such a point is almost always the moment when the current name of the language is fixed for the first time. That is, temporary s Here the boundaries turn out to be connected not with the essence of the language itself as a means of communication, but with the fact that the people who speak it call themselves some kind of term. And in this sense, different languages ​​have very different depths of history. For example, the Armenian language is called by the same name hai, as it is now, for several thousand years. Some other languages ​​have relatively recent history in this sense. For the Russian language, this is a period of about a few more than a thousand years, since the first mention of the word Rus belong to the end of the first millennium AD.

I will not go into the complex history of where the word itself came from. There are several theories about this. The most common and most likely of them is the Scandinavian theory, which consists in the fact that the word itself Rus not Slavic in origin, but Old Norse. There are, I repeat, competing hypotheses, but in this case we are not talking about this, it is important that this name itself begins to be mentioned in the 9th-10th centuries. and initially clearly applies not yet to our ethnic ancestors, but to the Scandinavians. In any case, in the Greek tradition the word grew up denotes the Normans, and it begins to denote our Slavic ancestors only from about the 10th-11th centuries, passing to them from the name of those Varangian squads that came to Russia and from which the princes of Ancient Russia came.

Starting around the 11th century. this name extends to the Slavic-speaking population of the territory around Kyiv, Chernigov and Pereslavl South. During a certain period of the history of Eastern Slavs, the term Rus denoted a relatively small area, roughly corresponding to the current north-eastern Ukraine. So, for a long time Novgorodians did not consider themselves Russian at all, did not consider that the word Rus belongs to their territory. In Novgorod birch bark letters, as well as in chronicles, for some time there are stories that such and such a bishop in such and such a year went to Russia from Novgorod, that is, he went south, to Kyiv or Chernigov.

This is easy to trace through the annals. Such word usage is normal for the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries. and only in the XIV century. we see for the first time that the Novgorodians, fighting with some of their external enemies, call themselves Russians in the annals. Further, this name expands, and from about the 14th century. it already corresponds to the entire East Slavic territory. And although at this time in this territory there are already the beginnings of three different future languages, they are all equally called Russian.

In a remarkable way, this term narrowed again later: now we call Russian only a part of the East Slavic population, namely, that which can be called otherwise Great Russian. And two other languages ​​in this territory: Belarusian and Ukrainian - have already formed as independent languages, and the word Russian broadly, they are no longer generally applied to them. (True, about two hundred years ago, such word usage was normal that all this is a Russian population, which has a Great Russian part, a Little Russian [now Ukrainian] part, and a Belarusian part.) This is how the expansion first occurred, and then the narrowing of the term “Russian ".

Most of you have an idea about the genealogical tree of the Russian language to one degree or another, but nevertheless I will briefly repeat this information. Now this genealogical tree in a simplified form should be derived from some reconstructed ancient language, called Nostratic, to which the languages ​​of a very significant part of the inhabitants of the globe go back. It has existed for a very long time; estimates vary, but apparently on the order of twenty-five thousand years ago.

One of its branches is the Indo-European branch, which includes most of the languages ​​\u200b\u200bof Europe and India, hence the name itself Indo-European languages. In Europe, they are an absolute majority, in India - a significant part, but also, in general, the majority. In the east, these are the Indian and Iranian groups; in Europe - Latin with the Romance languages ​​​​that arose from it: French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian; and the Greek branch, which in antiquity is represented by the ancient Greek language, and now by modern Greek. Further, the Germanic branch: German, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, Icelandic, English; and the Balto-Slavic branch, which combines the Baltic languages ​​and Slavic. Baltic is Latvian, Lithuanian and now extinct Old Prussian. Slavic, well known to you, is traditionally divided into three groups: South Slavic, West Slavic and East Slavic languages.

Now there are some adjustments to this traditional division of the Slavic languages, but the traditional scheme is just that. The South Slavic languages ​​are Bulgarian, Serbian, Slovenian, Macedonian; Western - Polish, Czech, Slovak, Lusatian. And the East Slavic languages, originally united according to the traditional scheme, are Russian (otherwise Great Russian), Ukrainian and Belarusian.

After this general introduction, let us touch on some of the more technical aspects of the history of language. First of all, it should be understood that language is an unusually complex mechanism that includes a number of aspects, each of which may have some specificity and some dynamics and instability. This is primarily a variety of styles of the same language. Within any language there is what can be called high style or good literary language, and there is the opposite pole - vernacular, vulgar speech. Between them there are various kinds of intermediate layers such as colloquial, everyday language. All this is fully observed in the Russian language, including at the present moment, as well as at any moment in history.

This is one side of the matter. The other side of the matter is that any language is heterogeneous in the dialectal sense, in any language there is a wide variety of local dialects, and sometimes even dialects that differ quite a lot from each other. From this point of view, languages ​​can be different, that is, more or less monolithic. There are languages ​​in which the differences are so great that mutual understanding is not at all easy. An example is modern Italy, where the dialect of the extreme south and the dialect of the north, say Venice, differ so significantly that understanding between them, although possible, may well be difficult. And what they have in common is precisely the literary form of the language. The situation is the same in many other languages ​​of the world. It is especially strong in the Chinese language, where the northern and southern dialects in their oral incarnation actually do not provide the possibility of direct mutual understanding.

In some other languages, the situation is more favorable. So, in the Russian language, the differences in dialects are small, the native speaker of the literary language has no special problems in understanding even when communicating with the most distant dialects. Of course, we will not understand some words, in some cases there may be individual misunderstandings, but on the whole, this distance is still relatively small.

But, I repeat, differences between dialects and dialects exist in any language. Thus, several different linguistic mechanisms coexist, interacting with each other and generating various complex effects in the way the central literary form of the language is formed. The literary language, as a rule, to some extent absorbs elements of different dialects. It rarely happens that the literary language exactly coincides with the dialect of, say, the capital of the state, as it sometimes seems at first glance. Similarly, for the Russian language, the situation is such that although our literary language is very close to the dialects of the Moscow region, it still does not completely coincide with them. It absorbed a number of elements more distant to the north, south, east and west.

Further. The complexity of the mechanisms of functioning of any language is determined by the fact that no language exists in complete isolation from its neighbors. Even in such extreme cases as, for example, Iceland, an island country where, it would seem, there are no contacts with its neighbors, there are still some connections. Someone travels from Iceland to the outside world, someone comes to Iceland and brings with them some elements of foreign speech. So even the Icelandic language, although it is more protected from foreign influences than any other, nevertheless, to some extent, perceived these influences.

As for the languages ​​that closely communicate with each other in neighboring territories, then mutual influence and mutual penetration can be very active. It is especially active where there is a two-part, three-part or multi-part population in the same territory. But even if state and ethnic boundaries are relatively clearly defined, contacts are still quite intense. This is expressed, first of all, in the penetration into any of the languages ​​of a certain number of foreign words. And a deeper influence consists in the penetration of some elements of the grammatical structure of neighboring languages.

In particular, the Russian language, which is not separated from its immediate neighbors by any seas, has always been in intensive contact with them both in the direction of the west and in the direction of the east, partly in the direction of the south and even to some extent in the direction of the north, although the population there is no longer so dense. . So in modern Russian there are traces of influences from almost all four corners of the world.

In general, the degree of foreign influences at different moments in the life of a language community or a given state can be very different. It is clear that these influences become especially intense during times, for example, of foreign occupation or with a massive introduction of a new population into some part of the old territory, etc. And in calm periods of weak communication, they will be less intense. In addition, it often happens that more or less foreign influence can be strongly promoted or, on the contrary, opposed by purely internal events in the history of a given community. It is quite obvious that in the last twenty years or so the Russian language has been in a state of unusually active absorption of foreign elements, primarily English, with an intensity many times greater than what it was only half a century ago. This is happening in connection with major social changes, the opening of international contacts on a scale that was unthinkable two or three decades ago. There is an introduction of new technology, new elements of a foreign civilization, etc. We all feel this ourselves.

There have been times like this in the past. There was, say, in the history of the Russian language a period of intensive penetration of elements of the French language, in an earlier era - an intensive penetration of elements of German, and even earlier - an intensive penetration of elements of Polish.

I will give some illustrations of how the modern Russian language was fueled in various ways with words from other neighboring languages. Of course, influences concern not only words, but it is more difficult to talk about it, and words are just a very visual thing.

This story can be started from any point - actually from the Russian language or, delving further into the past, from the Proto-Slavic language. It is possible, generally speaking, to consider even borrowings from the Proto-Indo-European time, but this will be too far for us. If we start with the Proto-Slavic, then it is essential to point out that it contains a significant layer of Germanic borrowings, which were later preserved not only in Russian, but also in all Slavic languages. They took root and became part of the actual Slavic lexicon.

Now, about some of them, it’s even hard for us to believe that these are not native Russian words; but historical linguistics inexorably shows that many words have just such an origin. For example, the word prince, surprisingly, is exactly the same word as the German Konig or English king. Its ancient form kuningaz, which was borrowed, eventually gave the Russian word prince. Or let's say the word bread is the same word as English loaf"bun". This borrowing, most likely, should be attributed to the period of wide expansion of the Goths, when these active Germanic tribes owned vast territories of almost all of modern Ukraine, a significant part of the Balkans, Italy, Spain, part of France, etc. So there is nothing surprising in the fact that in all the languages ​​​​of these countries there are some traces of the ancient Gothic rule.

It is worth mentioning Crimea specifically, since the Goths lived in Crimea until the 16th century. Dutch diplomat of the 16th century Busback was surprised to find that he understood some of the words in the speech of a Crimean resident speaking an unknown language. It turned out to be the Crimean-Gothic language, the latest remnant of the Gothic language, which had died out in all other places.

Germanic borrowings in Slavic are also, for example, the word regiment or verb buy; in modern German the corresponding Old Germanic words gave Volk"people" and kaufen"buy'.

Here it must be pointed out that if the word is borrowed from German, then the German word in itself about m Germanic was not necessarily native. Often it was itself borrowed from somewhere else. So, the German word that gave the German kaufen, is a borrowing from Latin. And whether the corresponding word is originally in Latin is still a debatable question. After all, it often turns out that Latin words are borrowed from Greek, and Greek words are borrowed from Egyptian.

I'll take a word from another row: emerald. Its initial origins are established not quite reliably. Most likely, the original source was some kind of Semitic language, from where the word was borrowed into Sanskrit. During the campaigns of Alexander the Great, it was borrowed from Sanskrit into Greek, from Greek - into Arabic, from Arabic - into Persian, from Persian - into Turkish, and the Russian word comes from its Turkish form emerald. So here linguistics can establish six or seven stages of the “journey” of this word, which resulted in our Russian word emerald.

Some of the foreign borrowings do not cause us any surprise. For example, we call a certain fruit kiwi. It is clear that the word is not Russian. Until relatively recently, no one suspected that such a thing existed. Some 20-30 years ago this word did not exist, because the subject did not exist. That is, when the object itself comes from some distant country, it is quite obvious that it comes along with its name. And then it is quite natural that we call it as it was called there. There are a huge number of such examples in the Russian language, many hundreds. Perhaps even thousands.

But, of course, examples like bread, or regiment, or prince where everything seems to be our own. Let's say words letter is also an Old German loanword. It's the same word as the name of the tree beech. Initially, there were wooden beech plates on which something was carved, and, accordingly, the sign itself carved on them bore the same name. And in Russian there are both words: and beech, and letter Both are borrowed from Germanic.

Another example: word a donkey; but it can still be said about him that this animal is still not found at every turn in Russian lands, that is, it can be classified as exotic animals. But in some other cases it will not work. So, Germanic borrowings are also the words glass, boiler, painter, hut and many others.

I will not list borrowings from Greek, they have been throughout the existence of the Russian language. The most ancient of them are still quite simple words, for example ship or sail. Sail is the same word as Greek pharos, - in the Slavic version. AT in large numbers there are Greek borrowings among the words of high style. Some of them are borrowed directly (say, Eucharist from the church lexicon), part - by tracing, that is, the transfer of the original word by Slavic means ( blessing, piety etc. - all these are calques, exact equivalents of Greek compound words with their constituent parts).

Throughout a long history, starting from the Proto-Slavic time and further practically to the present day, there has been a strong influence of Eastern languages ​​​​on Russian. In this sense, the Eurasian position of the Russian language, which, on the one hand, has contacts in the direction of the West, on the other hand, in the direction of the East, is very clearly reflected in the language. Sometimes Eastern borrowings are roughly called Tatar, but this is very conditional. In a broad sense, they are Turkic, since there are many Turkic languages ​​\u200b\u200bthat have been in contact with Russian. This is Turkish, and Tatar, and Chuvash, and Bashkir, and Chagatai - the ancient literary language of Central Asia, and the Kipchak language of the Polovtsy, with whom our ancestors have been in contact since antiquity, and the language of the Pechenegs. So it is often not possible to establish from which particular Turkic language this or that word is borrowed, since these languages ​​are closely related to each other. It is important that this fund of such words in the Russian language is very large.

It is clear that many of these words denote typical Eastern concepts. But there are many more words general meaning; so, of Turkic origin, for example, words such as shoe, boar, cap,brick, product, lumber room, Cossack, cauldron, mound.

Often a word is borrowed in a different way than it has in the source language. For example, the word mess, which now stands for a mess, actually does not mean it at all in Turkish: there it is a designation for a certain type of fried meat.

Very often, Turkish or Tatar, like German, turn out to be transmitters for other Eastern languages, in particular, for such a huge source of vocabulary for the entire East as Arabic; another such primary source is Persian, less often Chinese.

Such is, for example, the word watermelon which came to us from Persian through Turkic media.

Note that a linguist can recognize such words as not actually Slavic, even without knowing their origin. Yes, the word watermelon has a structure that is abnormal for Slavic languages: the root of the word consists of two syllables, and with an unusual set of vowels.

Using the example of this word, one can even show how linguists can generally establish that the word came from, say, Turkish to Russian, not from Russian to Turkish.

This is a typical situation that is useful to understand. The principle here is always the same: if a word is native, then it breaks up into meaningful parts within the framework of a given language and has related words in it. For example, in modern French there is a word snacks It is not, of course, an active word in the French language, but it exists nonetheless. And one could say here too: “Perhaps our word snacks borrowed from French? Why not, if in French and in Russian they say the same: snacks?»

The answer is very simple: snacks- a Russian word, not a French one, because in Russian it is perfectly divided into meaningful parts: prefix per, root cous, suffix to, the ending and. Each of them is meaningful and appropriate. For the root cous you can find other words for the prefix per there are many other examples, there are a huge number of words with the suffix to. And in French, this word falls out of all the norms of the French language. So French words are not built, there is nothing similar.

Here is the main criterion: within the framework of one language, the word is natural, while in other languages ​​it betrays its heterogeneity by a number of signs and there are no words related to it.

The same with the word watermelon. In Persian it is watermelon, where char it's 'donkey', and buza- "cucumber'. Together it turns out" donkey cucumber', and, by the way, it means there not a watermelon, but a melon.

Among the words of Eastern origin, there are also many that may surprise us. We are not surprised that the word emerald foreign: the emerald is really not very common in Russian life. And here is the word fog at first glance it gives the impression of a Russian. Nevertheless, it was born in the Persian language, and there its sound composition has its own foundations. From Persian it passed into Turkish, and from Turkish into Russian. Similar origins are, for example, bazaar, barn, attic.

Sometimes words are misleading. Linguistically interesting in this sense is the word flaw. It denotes a certain defect, shortcoming, and sounds very Russian: something was removed from some object or from some norm, and thus it turned out to be an object with a flaw. It turns out, however, that this is not a Russian word at all, but a borrowing from Persian, either directly or through Turkish.

In Persian, this is a word with a slightly different order of phonemes: ziyan; it means “lack, vice” and is quite derivable from the Iranian lexicon. And flaw is the form that ziyan adopted in Russian, that is, the word has undergone some change, giving it meaning. Indeed, ziyan says nothing to the Russian ear, but flaw this is already almost clear, especially since the meaning is already ready - this is a “flaw”. This is what is called folk etymology: the people slightly correct the foreign word in the direction of greater clarity.

It's great that the word ziyan in a somewhat less explicit form is found in Russian in another word very well known to us - a monkey. A monkey is Arabic-Persian Abuziyan. Word ziyan has a second meaning - "sin, vicious action'. And abu is the ‘father’. So the monkey is the ‘father of sin’, for obvious reasons.

Western languages ​​also contribute to the Russian vocabulary.

First in order is the closest language of the Western world to us - Polish. This is a related language, but it absorbed the words of Western languages ​​much more actively than Russian, firstly, because of its proximity to the Germanic and Romance world, and secondly, due to Catholicism. So the Polish vocabulary is saturated with Western elements incomparably more strongly than the Russian one. But many of them switched to Russian. This happened in the 16th-17th centuries, in the era of active Polish influence. A mass of new words then entered the Russian language; in some cases the Polish form is directly visible, in others it is established only by linguistic analysis. In most cases, however, these are not actually Polish words, but words that in turn came from German, and into German - usually from Latin. Or they came to Polish from French, but got into the Russian language already in the Polish form.

This series includes, for example, the words knight, mail, school, sword- all of them have a Polish form in Russian. Let's say in a word school there would be no initial shk, would cleavage, if it were borrowed directly from Western languages. This is the German transition effect that gives sh in Polish, and from Polish it is sh goes into Russian.

There are a number of Swedish loanwords, for example herring, herring. One of the wonderful Swedish loanwords is the word Finns. Because, as you may know, the Finns not only do not call themselves Finns, but, strictly speaking, a normal, not very trained Finn cannot even pronounce this word, because there is no phoneme in the Finnish language f. Finns call themselves suomi; a Finns- this is the name that the Swedes called them. phoneme in swedish f is, and it occurs frequently. In Swedish, this is a meaningful word, with the meaning "hunters'," seekers' - from the Swedish verb finna"to find' (= English. find). This word has entered not only the Russian language, but all the languages ​​of the world, except Finnish. So the country is called by the Swedish name - this is such a particularly refined case of foreign borrowing.

The next cultural and lexical onslaught on the Russian language was made by the German language, mainly in the 18th, partly in the 19th century. True, in Peter's time - along with the Dutch. In particular, most of the maritime terms are borrowed from the Dutch language - in accordance with the hobbies of Peter I and with his direct ties with Holland, where, as you know, he even worked as a carpenter. The words cruiser, skipper, flag- Dutch. There are dozens of such words.

There are even more German words, as the German influence was wider and longer lasting. And again, some of them are easily identified as German, for example the hairdresser. But there are also words of German origin that you would never recognize without special analysis. About the word plane it definitely does not occur to me that this is not a Russian word: it seems that it is so named because it has something cut down or cut down. In fact, they do something else, however, we perceive it as a very good name. It's actually a German word. Rauhbank- "cleaning board".

Another tricky word baking sheet on which they are fried. A completely Russian type of word. But it's German Bratpfanne- "frying pan". Simplifying and Russifying, Bratpfanne gave not just a Russian, but a folk Russian word baking sheet. There is also an option baking sheet- also not random and even older.

Painter, dance, patch, soldier, pharmacy and many others - all these words came directly from the German language, but now they have taken root very well.

Next, 19th century gave an extensive layer of French borrowings. Many of them have taken root quite well, let's say bottle, magazine, nightmare, courier, scam.

Continuing this list, one could also cite Portuguese, Spanish, old English borrowings. And there is nothing to say about new English - you yourself, perhaps, can name them more than linguists.

Thus, you see how strongly neighboring language arrays influence the vocabulary of a language. In particular, for the Russian language, this story includes communication with at least two dozen languages. And if we count isolated cases, then with long-distance connections there will be dozens more.

Now let's move on to the next topic: let's talk about stylistic differences within the Russian language at different points in its history. It turns out that in this respect the Russian language has been in a difficult situation since ancient times.

For all languages ​​with a certain cultural tradition, it is normal that there is a language of high style, perceived as more elevated, more refined, literary. And this situation is not always the same. So, there are languages ​​where one of the variants, dialects, dialects that exist within the same language, which for some reason has received more prestige, is used as a high style. In Italy, for a long time, the dialect of Florence was considered the most prestigious and, accordingly, the Tuscan dialect since the time of Dante was taken as the most refined, highly literary form of speech on the Apennine Peninsula.

And in some languages, a situation arises when not their own language, but some foreign one is used as a high-style language. Sometimes it may not even be related to its own, then this is pure bilingualism. But more often there are examples of this kind using another language, closely related to the one spoken by the people. In the Romanesque world throughout the Middle Ages, Latin was used as a high language, despite the fact that the own languages ​​​​of these Romance peoples come from Latin and Latin is close to them to some extent. Not enough to understand, but, in any case, they have a lot of common words.

Sanskrit played a similar role in India. It was used along with those languages ​​that had already gone very far from the Sanskrit state and were used in everyday communication. In essence, there is something similar in the current Arab world, where there is the classical Arabic language of the Koran, which is already very different from the living languages ​​of Morocco, Egypt, Iraq. The high language, which is considered the only one suitable for a certain type of texts - religious, highly solemn - remains classical Arabic for the Arab world. And for everyday communication there is the language of the street.

A similar situation was in the history of the Russian language. I gave foreign examples to show that this is not a unique case, although, of course, the situation is far from being the same in all languages. In the history of the Russian language from the time when we are dealing with the word Russian, two Slavic languages ​​exist and are used: Russian proper and Church Slavonic.

Church Slavonic is, in essence, the Old Bulgarian language, closely related, but still not identical to Russian. It was the language of the church and of any text requiring stylistic loftiness. This left an imprint on the further development of the Russian language throughout its history and continues to influence to some extent to this day. The Russian language turned out to be, as it were, linguistically bifurcated into the natural that arose in the everyday, colloquial language, and that which corresponded to Russian forms and syntactic turns in the Church Slavonic language.

Of course, you know the most striking difference: this is the so-called full agreement and disagreement. Fullness is side, watchman, Coast, head With -oro-, -here-, -olo-, and disagreement - country, guardian, shore, chapter. The Russian form has two vowels here, and the Church Slavonic one.

Now we do not perceive the word at all country as something alien to us. This is a normal part of our natural vocabulary with you. And it's natural for us to say chapter of the book, and it does not occur to me that this is something imposed. We don't feel like talking book head, just like we won't try to name a country side.

The Russian language throughout its history has absorbed a huge number of Church Slavonic words, which occasionally mean the same thing as in Russian, but almost never one hundred percent. Sometimes it's just not the same at all; So, head and chapter- these are completely different meanings, they could well be called words that have nothing in common with each other. In other cases, it's just a stylistic nuance, but it is clearly felt. Let's say enemy and enemy is, of course, more or less the same in meaning, but in the word enemy there is a connotation of nationality, folklore, poetry, which in the word enemy missing.

The modern Russian language has used these Church Slavonic units as separate words or separate variants of the word, and thus has already mastered them.

The same thing happened in the history of the Russian language with syntactic constructions. And here it must be said that, since for most of the history of the Russian language it was Church Slavonic that was literary and high, our literary syntax is much more Church Slavonic than Russian.

This is where I really express my disappointment. Because now, in many respects, that authentic folk Russian syntax, which is best seen on birch bark letters, has been lost. In many respects, they are admired precisely by the fact that there are absolutely no Church Slavonic turns in them - this is pure colloquial Russian. Unlike our literary language. The Russian literary language at every step uses syntactic devices that are not found in the living language, but come from Church Slavonic.

First of all, almost all participles: doing, doing, who saw, seen etc. The only exception is the short forms of the passive participles of the past tense. Made is the Russian form drunk is the Russian form. And here is the full form: made- already Church Slavonic. And all the sacraments on -yushchy, -ing Church Slavonic, which is already evident from the fact that there are suffixes -usch-, -yusch-. I did not say this, but you probably know yourself about the ratio of Church Slavonic sch and Russian h. Night, power- Church Slavonic night, be able- Russian. For -yushchy, -ing, -ing Russian correspondences, therefore, would be - uchy, -yuchy, -yachiy. They are in Russian, but in Russian they are no longer participles, but simply adjectives: ebullient, dense, standing, sedentary, recumbent. Their meaning is close to participles, but still not the same with them. And the real participles, which can be used in syntax precisely as a verb form (and which we really learned to use as a convenient syntactic tool, because they help us, for example, save ourselves from unnecessary words which the), represent Church Slavonicism.

Less well known is another phenomenon of this kind. In everyday conversation, we often deviate from how we should write if we handed over our literary essay to the editor. And you wouldn't get approval if in your school essay you started a sentence like this: Do you know what I saw yesterday?. Meanwhile, the initial a - this is a completely normal form of colloquial Russian speech: And here's what I'll tell you. And after that, there was this and that. In live speech a almost most sentences begin. And this is exactly what we observe in birch bark letters. Word a at the beginning of a phrase means something like this: "Here's what I'm going to tell you now." But in the norms of the Church Slavonic language this word was absent. The Church Slavonic norm not only did not use it, but also forbade it. That is, it prohibited, of course, not in the sense of a state edict, but in the sense of editorial pressure, which is still in effect. Editor you this a cross out now.

Excuse me, this is outdated now, there are almost no editors now. But in the recent past, editors were an essential part of any publishing business. It is now that a mass of books comes out with monstrous misprints and flaws of all kinds, because they were not edited at all; a new era has come with an inattentive attitude to the quality of the text. But even a relatively recent era required the actual observance of the Church Slavonic norm, although the editor, of course, did not know this. Russian literature also observes this norm, despite the fact that the same authors in everyday speech, referring to their own children or wife, spoke, of course, in normal Russian, almost every sentence starting with a.

Such details show that the duality of the Russian language, which has two sources: Russian and Church Slavonic, is expressed not only in the choice of words and in their forms, but also in syntax. And Russian literary syntax is thus noticeably different from Russian colloquial syntax.

Not without reason, about 25 years ago, a new direction in the study of the Russian language arose - the study of Russian colloquial speech. They began to write their own grammars for it, they began to describe it as if it were a separate independent language, with respect for every element of what is really heard. The very possibility and the very need to approach this in this way is largely a consequence of this ancient situation that developed in the tenth century, more than a thousand years ago, when a related, but different language, Church Slavonic, came to Russia as a literary and high language.

I'll move on to the next aspect.

This is that aspect of the history of the Russian language that is related to dialects and dialects, to dialect division and interaction. The traditional scheme in the general view I told you above. It consists in the fact that around the tenth century. there was a single Old Russian language, also known as East Slavic, from which, over time, by branching, developing some differences, three modern East Slavic languages ​​\u200b\u200bare originated: Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian. And in each of these three languages, according to the traditional scheme, there are even thinner branches. The Russian language has, say, Vologda, Arkhangelsk, Novgorod, Kursk dialects, Siberian dialects, etc. In Ukraine, a number of dialects can also be distinguished; the same in Belarus. And inside, for example, a block of Vologda dialects, still small groups of some districts or even sometimes individual villages stand out. Here is a tree that branches from a powerful trunk to the smallest branches at the end.

This is a simple traditional scheme. But in it, as I have already warned you, you will have to make some adjustments. To a large extent, these adjustments arose after the discovery of birch bark letters.

Birch-bark letters, which in their vast majority come from Novgorod, showed that in Novgorod and the surrounding lands there was a dialect that was more different from the rest than was imagined before the discovery of birch-bark letters. In it, even some grammatical forms were not the same as in the classical Old Russian language known to us from traditional literature. And, of course, there were some of their own words.

At the same time, an amazing, unexpected and unpredictable event from the point of view of the representations that existed before the discovery of birch bark letters was as follows: it turned out that these features of the Novgorod dialect, which distinguished it from other dialects of Ancient Russia, were most clearly expressed not at a later time, when, it would seem, they could already gradually develop, but in the most ancient period. In the XI-XII centuries. these specific features are presented very consistently and clearly; and in the XIII, XIV, XV centuries. they weaken somewhat and partially give way to more common features for ancient Russian monuments.

More precisely, the statistics simply change. So, in the Old Novgorod dialect, the nominative case of the masculine singular had the ending -e: livestock- this is the Novgorod form, in contrast to the traditional form, which was considered common Russian, where the same word had a different ending: in antiquity -ъ, and now zero. The difference between the common Old Russian livestock and Novgorod livestock found from ancient times. And the situation looks like this: in the letters of the XI-XII centuries. the nominative singular masculine form in about 97% of cases has an ending -e. And the remaining 3% are easily explained by some extraneous reasons, for example, the fact that the phrase is church. From this we can conclude that in the ancient period the end -e was practically the only grammatical arrangement for the nominative singular. And in letters of the XV century. the picture is already significantly different: approximately 50% livestock and 50% livestock.

Thus, we see that the features of the Old Novgorod dialect partially lose their brightness with the passage of time. What does this mean and why was it such news and surprise for linguists?

This means that, along with the traditional scheme, which looks like a branching tree, the opposite phenomenon must also be recognized in the history of languages. The phenomenon that something originally united is divided into several parts is called divergences, that is, splitting, divergence. If, however, the opposite occurs, that is, something originally different becomes more similar, then this convergence- convergence.

Little was known about convergence, and its very existence in the history of dialects and dialects of the Old Russian language was practically not discussed in any way and did not attract attention. Therefore, the evidence of birch bark letters turned out to be so unexpected. If in the ancient Novgorod birch bark letters of the XI-XII centuries. type endings livestock make up 100%, and in the 15th century - only 50%, and in the remaining 50% there is a central (it can be conditionally designated as Moscow) ending livestock- this means that there is a convergence of dialects. Partial rapprochement, the Novgorod dialect still does not completely lose its features, but already expresses them inconsistently, in contrast to antiquity, when it was consistent. We see a typical example of convergence, that is, the convergence of what was originally different.

And this forces us to thoroughly reconsider the traditional scheme of how the dialect relations of Ancient Russia were arranged. We have to admit that in the X-XI centuries, that is, in the first centuries of written history, on the territory of the Eastern Slavs, the division was not at all the same as one might imagine on the basis of today's division of languages: Great Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian. It ran very differently, separating the northwest from everything else.

The northwest was the territory of Novgorod and Pskov, and the rest, which can be called the central, or central-eastern, or central-east-south, simultaneously included the territory of the future Ukraine, a significant part of the territory of the future Great Russia and the territory of Belarus. Nothing to do with the modern division of this territory into three languages. And it was a really profound difference. There was an ancient Novgorod dialect in the northwestern part and some more familiar classical form of the Old Russian language, which equally united Kyiv, Suzdal, Rostov, the future Moscow and the territory of Belarus. Relatively speaking, the zone livestock to the northwest and the zone livestock in the rest of the territory.

Scott and livestock is one of the very significant differences. There was another very important difference, which I will not talk about now, because it would take a very long time. But it is just as solid, and the territorial division here was exactly the same.

It may seem that the northwestern part was small, while the central and southern parts were very large. But if we take into account that at that time the Novgorodians had already colonized a huge zone of the north, then in fact the Novgorod territory turns out to be even larger than the central and southern ones. It includes the current Arkhangelsk region, Vyatka, the northern Urals, the entire Kola Peninsula.

And what will happen if we look beyond the Eastern Slavs, look at the West Slavic territory (Poles, Czechs) and the South Slavic territory (Serbs, Bulgarians)? And we will try to somehow continue the revealed line of separation in these zones. Then it will turn out that the northwestern territory is opposed not only to Kyiv and Moscow, but also to the rest of the Slavs. In all other Slavs, the model is presented livestock, and only in Novgorod - livestock.

Thus, it is revealed that the northwestern group of Eastern Slavs is a branch that should be considered separate already at the level of Proto-Slavism. That is, Eastern Slavism developed from two initially different branches of the ancient Slavs: a branch similar to its western and southern relatives, and a branch that is different from its relatives - Old Novgorod.

Similar to the South and West Slavic zones - this is primarily the Kyiv and Rostov-Suzdal land; and it is essential that, at the same time, we do not see any essential differences between them for the ancient period. And the ancient Novgorod-Pskov zone is opposed to all other zones.

Thus, the current Ukraine and Belarus are the heirs of the central-east-south zone of Eastern Slavism, which is more linguistically similar to Western and Southern Slavism. And the Great Russian territory turned out to consist of two parts, approximately equal in importance: northwestern (Novgorod-Pskov) and central-eastern (Rostov, Suzdal, Vladimir, Moscow, Ryazan).

As we now know, these were the two main components of the future Russian language in dialect terms. At the same time, it is not easy to say which of these two parts took part in the creation of a single literary language to a greater extent. If you count by signs, then the score is about 50 to 50.

As already mentioned, the central and southern dialects of the Old Russian language differed from Novgorod in a number of important features, but did not differ from each other in any significant way. The new borders between the future Great Russia and the future Ukraine, together with Belarus, largely coincide with the political borders of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the XIV-XV centuries, when the expansion of Lithuania led to the fact that the future Ukraine and Belarus were under the rule of Lithuania. If you map the borders of the possessions of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the 15th century, it will be approximately the same border that now separates Russian Federation from Ukraine and Belarus. But the fifteenth century - this is a later time in relation to our ancient articulation.

Let us consider more specifically a number of dialectal phenomena and their correspondence in the modern literary Russian language.

Words with root type structure whole, with initial ce-(from former cѣ-), are typical for the central-eastern region. In the northwest, these roots had an initial ke-. Behind this is a very important phonetic phenomenon, which can be talked about at length; but here I must confine myself to a simple statement of the fact. Another related fact is that in the northwest they spoke On the hand, while in the east it was on the hand. Now we're talking whole, but On the hand. This is nothing but a combination of whole that comes from the east, so On the hand which comes from the northwest.

The nominative singular masculine form in the northwest was city(as well as livestock). And in the east she was city. The modern literary Russian form, as we see, comes from the east.

Genitive singular feminine: in the northwest - sister, in the east - sister

Prepositional case: in the northwest in the ground, on a horse, in the east - into the lands, on horseback. Literary forms - northwestern.

Plural feminine (take the example of a pronoun): in the northwest - my cow, in the east - my cows. Literary form- eastern.

Former dual number two villages is the northwestern form. Eastern form - two villages

help, eastern help. Literary form - northwestern.

Third person present tense of the verb: in North-west lucky, in the east - lucky. The literary form is oriental.

Imperative: northwestern take, eastern - you're lucky. Literary form - northwestern.

Northwestern gerund carrying, eastern - luck. Literary form - northwestern.

You see that the ratio is really about 50 to 50. This is what our modern Russian language is morphologically. This is a clear result of the convergence of the two main dialects - like a deck of cards, where the two halves of the deck are inserted into each other.

Linguistics in some cases can give, if not a definitive, then a conjectural answer, why in some points the northwestern member of the pair won, and in others the eastern one. Sometimes it can, sometimes it can't. But this is not the most important.

First of all, the very fact that the modern literary language obviously combines the features of the ancient northwestern (Novgorod-Pskov) dialect and the ancient central-east-south (Rostov-Suzdal-Vladimir-Moscow-Ryazan) dialect is essential. As I have already said, this fact was unknown before the discovery of birch bark letters. A much simpler scheme of a tree branching by pure divergence was presented.

From this follows, by the way, a very significant consequence for some of today's not linguistic, but social or even political ideas. This is that the slogan, popular in present-day Ukraine, of the primordial ancient difference between the Ukrainian branch of the language and the Russian one, is incorrect. These branches are, of course, different. Now these are, of course, independent languages, but the ancient articulation did not take place at all between Russian and Ukrainian. As already mentioned, the Rostov-Suzdal-Ryazan language zone did not differ in any significant way from the Kiev-Chernigov zone in antiquity. Differences arose later, they date back to a relatively recent, by linguistic standards, time, starting from the XIV-XV centuries. And, on the contrary, the ancient differences between the northwest and the rest of the territories have created a special situation in modern Russian, where elements of two originally different dialect systems are combined.

Please questions.

E. Shchegolkova ( Grade 10): You spoke about the place of foreign languages. What is it like in English in India?

A. A. Zaliznyak: Yes, the current English language in India does indeed have a special position, since it is not just a foreign language along with the local one. In India, as you know, there are a huge number of languages, it is believed that up to two hundred. Thus, in some cases, the only way to communicate between Indians is that both will know English. In this situation, the English language finds itself in a functionally very special role, not just an imposed foreign language but also means of communication. So this is somewhat similar to the situations that I described, but in view of the multilingualism of the country, the case is perhaps special.

- You said that before the XIV century. Novgorodians did not call their language Russian. Is there a word that the Novgorodians used to call their language and themselves?

A. A. Zaliznyak: They called themselves Novgorodians. It is well known that the question "Who are you?" the normal answer of a simple person - a peasant, a fisherman - who lives somewhere permanently, will be: "We are Volgars, we are Vologda, we are Pskov." He will not say that he is Russian, Tatar or French, but will name a relatively narrow area. This is not a nation or a special language, it is essentially a territorial indication. For example, it was difficult to get Belarusians to call themselves Belarusians, because they are used to talking about themselves: Mogilev, Gomel etc. Only special propaganda brought them to their consciousness that they should call themselves Belarusians. This concept was actually formed very late.

G. G. Ananin ( a history teacher): Did I understand correctly that you associate the formation of the Ukrainian and Belarusian languages ​​exclusively with the political moment of the Polish-Lithuanian influence?

A. A. Zaliznyak: Not exclusively. Exceptional - that would be overkill. But it defined the boundaries of the division. As always happens in different parts of the territory, there, of course, various phonetic and other changes naturally occurred. And they were not connected with political reasons. But some separation from each other of the two communities, which began to develop separately, was largely political. And the actual linguistic development was, of course, independent.

– Why did two languages ​​develop: Ukrainian and Belarusian?

But this is a very difficult question. It is being very hotly and sharply discussed now in Ukraine and Belarus. The differences between these languages ​​are significant. At the same time, the Belarusian language as a whole is much more similar to Russian than to Ukrainian. The proximity between the Belarusian language and the South Great Russian dialects is especially great.

The situation is also complicated by the fact that Ukraine is a large country, while Belarus is not very big. And someone may be tempted to look at it as such a small appendage of the great Ukraine. But historically it has been exactly the opposite. Historically, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania used the language, which is correctly called Old Belarusian. Although the Lithuanian princes were Lithuanians by origin and spoke Lithuanian in everyday life with their servants, in all other cases of life they spoke Old Belarusian. And all state activity in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was carried out in the Old Belarusian language; sometimes it is also called Western Russian. So culturally, the selection of Belarus precedes the allocation of Ukraine. This creates extremely difficult problems, which I would not even like to formulate here, since whatever I say should cause a protest from the opposite side.

- When can we talk about separating the Ukrainian and Belarusian languages ​​from Russian? At least a century.

A. A. Zaliznyak: Not from Russian. This is a division of what is called Western Russian or, otherwise, Old Belarusian, which had a Ukrainian dialect in the south. There was a purely linguistic emphasis, simply as a function of time. Conscious selection by some writers, writers, consciously calling themselves Belarusians or Ukrainians, occurs rather late, around the 18th century.

– The modern Russian language has developed as a result of convergence. Are there other examples of the same convergence?

A. A. Zaliznyak: Yes there is. Now I am not very sure that I will immediately give you such a thing so that there is a balance of the components. Because balance is a unique case. And if we are not limited only to those examples where there really is an balanced participation, then, of course, this is literary English. The Old English zones varied quite a bit in language, and the enormity of modern English orthography is largely a product of that. Say why what is written bury, read take? But simply because they are different dialect forms. The dialect had its own pronunciation, but at the same time the old spelling remained, in which there should have been a different reading. Such examples in English language quite a bit of. Although, of course, in English it is not so bright.

- Can you still give some explanation, a small example, why the northwestern or eastern form won?

A. A. Zaliznyak: An example can be given, but not a small one. Because I will have to back off so far that it will be half a lecture. You are asking me a very difficult task. I can only try to describe the scheme of what would have to be explained here. I would then have to consider not only illustrative examples, but the whole system of declension in one dialect and the whole system of declension in another. In each it is about fifty phenomena. And I would show that if at a certain point such and such a change occurs, then this will generally create a more consistent system. But you yourself understand that if I now begin to analyze fifty of those phenomena and fifty others, then the audience will not approve of you a little.

A. B. Kokoreva ( geography teacher): I have a question about verbs withdraw and gape. Does linguistics allow such a thing that in different, completely unrelated languages, one-sounding words can arise?

A. A. Zaliznyak: It could be by accident, of course. Moreover, it is unbelievable that this does not happen anywhere. It's unlikely, but every unlikely event will ever happen.

A. B. Kokoreva: Then the question arises, what is the proof that the word withdraw is Persian in origin?

A. A. Zaliznyak: The fact is that this word is fixed in the monuments in the form flaw recently, and in the XVI century. it is written ziyan.

– Can we talk about a separate Pskov dialect? Are there any borrowings from there?

A. A. Zaliznyak: I constantly spoke to you either about the Novgorod or the Novgorod-Pskov dialect. In fact, there is some linguistic difference between Novgorod and Pskov. And this difference is remarkable in such a way - perhaps this is unexpected against the background of what I told you - that the real purity of the Novgorod dialect is observed in Pskov. The true 100% Northwestern dialect is represented precisely in Pskov, while in Novgorod it is already slightly weakened. Apparently, this can be explained by the fact that Novgorod is already on the way from Pskov to the east, to Moscow.

For example, if the Novgorod-Pskov dialect is somewhat crudely described as a set of 40 characteristic phenomena, then it turns out that in Pskov all 40 are represented, and in Novgorod - 36 from this list. Pskov in this sense is the core of the dialect.

Dialectologists know that the Novgorod region is an interesting area for research, but still greatly spoiled by the many migrations that began with Ivan III and took place especially intensively under Ivan IV. In contrast to the Pskov zone, which remarkably preserves antiquity in the villages - better than anywhere else.

So you very correctly named the Pskov dialect, it is indeed one of the most linguistically valuable. It is not for nothing that a wonderful dialect dictionary, one of the two best, is the regional dictionary of the Pskov dialect. The dialect is chosen in particular for this reason, and the vocabulary is very sensibly done. It is not finished yet, but has many dozens of issues.

Thus, it is a dialect that has its own face and value. Some words can be borrowed from there. But it is difficult to say with certainty that there was no such word in Novgorod. You can say that there was a word when you once found it in some village. But to say that in some area there was no word - do you understand how much it takes to assert this?

- This is Persian. gape- same root as ours gape?

A. A. Zaliznyak: No, there is not gape, there is already a ready word ziyan. It is not the same root as Russian, it is of a different origin. It's a noun and gape as a verb it is actually a Russian word.

- A word burden associated with monkey?

A. A. Zaliznyak: Not, burden this is a Russian word. Normal about- and -bond, how in prisoner. There is consonance, but the words are from completely different sources.

E. I. Lebedeva: Thank you very much, Andrey Anatolievich!

Photo of a 10th grade student of the M-T school Anastasia Morozova.

See also other lectures by A. A. Zaliznyak at the Moomin school:
1) Some problems of word order in the history of the Russian language, 11/18/2005.
2) On historical linguistics, 12/12/2008.
3) On historical linguistics (continued), 02/05/2010.
4) About the language of ancient India, 02/11/2011.
5)