Open Access
Access granted
Subscription Access
No 5 (2024)
Issues of Modern Russian Language
Discourse complex i da ‘and yes’ as a dialogue actualizer in modern Russian speech
Abstract
The article examines semantic and pragmatic features of the discursive complex i da (“and yes”). The relevance of the research is explained by the active inclusion of i da in contemporary speech practice, various genres and styles over the past decade, which was not observed before. The novelty of the research lies in the fact that the element i da becomes the object of linguistic analysis for the first time. This study contributes to the understanding of the discursive complex i da in the context of modern linguistic practices. The findings of this research can be beneficial for further linguistic studies and practical applications. The element i da is not recorded in dictionaries and reference books, which also testifies to the novelty of the material presented in the article, which was extracted from the “National Corpus of the Russian Language”, the electronic media bank “Integrum”. The paper is also based to some degree on the personal observations of the authors. This study provides a fresh perspective on the linguistic element i da, contributing to the existing body of linguistic research. The research was conducted within the framework of the structural and descriptive method using semantic, syntactic, and contextual analysis. As a result, the main discursive role of the complex i da was established, i. e., maintaining the interactive nature of conversation through a ‘delayed response’ mechanism, which allows considering i da as a feedback marker. The discursive complex i da involves a real or potential (in the case of a monologue) interlocutor/opponent in the discourse, performing the role of a dialogic actualizer. The core seme of the complex (‘agreement’) can be explicitly supported by the context, and the addressee of the agreement can be not only the ‘other’ but also the speaker himself. The study reveals the rhetorical potential of i da in monologic speech. This research provides a comprehensive analysis of the discursive complex i da, highlighting its role in dialogic actualization and its rhetorical potential in monologic speech. The variants of punctuation design of the complex i da identified during the research indicate the need for its further study and the creation of a theoretical basis for subsequent codification in punctuation guides. The study proposes a hypothesis about the appearance of i da in Russian as a result of calquing English phrases and yes / and yeah, which are of international nature. This research emphasizes the importance of further investigation into the discursive complex i da, its punctuation variants, and its origins in the Russian language.
7-19
A “naïve” perception of punctuation marks
Abstract
This paper deals with the figurative meanings of Russian terms that refer to punctuation marks and are used in everyday language, namely, tochka (‘period, full stop’), skobki (‘parentheses’), kavychki (‘quotation marks’), zapiataia (‘comma’), znak voprosa (‘question mark’). It attempts to identify the ordinary native speakers’ “naive” conceptions of these punctuation marks and their functions. It shows that most expressions with the word tochka reflect the idea of the period as a sign of the complete end. The main function of parentheses (skobki) for ordinary speakers is to indicate that some statement (or its part) is optional. The main function of quotation marks (kavychki) as the speakers understand them is to refer to a non-standard use of a linguistic expression (in particular, an ironic use). The most typical phrases and set expressions with the word zapiataia are cherez zapiatuiu (literally, ‘through a comma, separated by a comma’) and do poslednei zapiatoi (‘to the last comma’). The former reflects the idea of listing, and the differences between the listed objects are presented as insignificant. The latter expression indicates thoroughness and attention to detail (perhaps even excessive). The phrase znak voprosa indicates uncertainty or doubt.
It is suggested that revealing speakers’ conceptions of the functions of punctuation marks may be useful for clarification and refinement of the punctuation rules.
20-33
From the History of the Russian Language
Textual studies of the era of big data and neural networks
Abstract
This article analyses the emergence of new technologies for working with big data which can be highly helpful to philologists, studying the diachronic development. First of all, that applies to the study and publication of Old Russian manuscripts with traditional liturgical texts used for church service. These manuscripts existed in a huge number of folios, and in the process of copying were subjected to considerable textual unification. That makes it very difficult to study them by the laborious methods of traditional textual criticism. Now, when the full text of the monuments can be automatically processed, the creation of the Linguistic intellectual environment (LIE) has been lounged. This tool will provide new opportunities for the study of Slavonic liturgical texts from different historical periods. As a result, we will create a corpus of liturgical texts of the 11th–17th centuries, obtained using a program for automatic text recognition of manuscripts, with annotation und search module. The user of the LIE will be able to receive a complete list of variant readings for each fragment of a liturgical book of the widest range of manuscripts. In fact, we are talking of a new type of publication of traditional liturgical texts, when the user can set the parameters for the edition in accordance with his research interests.
34-47
N. M. Karamzin’s notes to D. I. Fonvisin’s letter — a reply in the debate about language
Abstract
The discussion about language plays a crucial role in Russian literature of the early 19th century. It begins with Nikolay Karamzin’s essay Why Are There Few Talented Authors in Russia? (1802) and Alexander Shishkov’s book Discourse on the Old and New Style in Russian Language (1803), which criticizes Karamzin. The traditional view is that Karamzin refrains from answering Shishkov. The present paper presents an alternative hypothesis, arguing that Karamzin does react, but indirectly. Karamzin’s reply takes the form of comments on Denis Fonvizin’s letter addressed to Osip Kozodavlev, where Fonvizin discusses his work on the Dictionary of the Russian Academy. In October 1803 Karamzin publishes this letter in Vestnik Evropy, the magazine he edits since 1802.
In this letter Fonvizin discusses borrowings from foreign languages in Russian; Karamzin follows suit. The question of borrowings is central in Shishkov’s book. Karamzin takes a moderate course, recommending that a borrowing should be discarded if the same meaning is expressed by an existing Russian word. However, his general opinion is that borrowings are useful, as they help express notions that Russian still lacks. This attitude is contrary to Shishkov’s intent to rid Russian of any borrowings.
This disagreement reflects the difference between two views on language as such. Karamzin sees language as means of expressing notions, which can be international; thus notions may be borrowed as well as words, and along with them if needed. For Shishkov, words come before notions; each word is viewed as a complex of meanings together with its formal and semantic links to other lexical units. These features are specific for any culture, so, in Shishkov’s view, changing this structure by adding borrowings means destroying the language rather than enriching it.
48-60
The Language of Fiction
Family “passports” of N. V. Gogol's comedy “Marriage”
Abstract
The article explores the meaning of the surnames in Gogol’s comedy “Marriage”. The origin of the names of the grooms Zhevakin (zhevat’ — chew) and Onuchkin is associated with the folk saying “Chew onuchka.” Regarding the surname Yaichnitsa (yaichnitsa — fried eggs), an episode of the play is drawn in, where the bride warns the groom with the words: “I hope you won’t be angry... At the table there will only be cabbage soup... and drochenoye.” Drochenoye or drachena is a dish very similar to “fried eggs”. According to Gogol’s entry regarding the characterization of the “portly” Yaichnitsa, he can be described as “a spoilt, fat child”.
In addition, an article proposes an explanation of the situational synonymy contained in the play. The “road” surnames of two more characters in the play — Podkolesin (pod — under, koleso — wheel) and Kochkarev (kochka — hummock) — are associated with Gogol’s spiritual aspirations to show “paths and roads... for everyone” to the “lofty and beautiful” in the “dark and confused present”. The analysis of linguistic means allowed to reveal the individual features of Gogol’s poetics as a satirical writer and a denouncer of human “vulgarity”. The article pays close attention to the fact that expressive vocabulary plays an important role in creating the image of the exposed hero. A penetrating sharp word, various “abusive” and derogatory expressions, a popular nickname, a characteristic surname close to an “epigram” make up the artist’s arsenal not only for creating a comic effect. To an even greater extent, negatively colored evaluative means serve to educate contemporaries.
61-71
The polysemy of the lexeme “bread” and its functioning in the Russian folk riddle
Abstract
In this article, the authors examine the polysemy of the lexeme bread, which can be found in a Russian folk riddle. The proverbs recorded in the collection “Riddles” prepared by V. V. Mitrofanova served as a material for the analysis. The paper analyzes the uses of the polysemantic lexeme bread both in the answer and in the text of the riddle itself.
The designation of the original denotation using the lexeme bread is based on the denotative meaning, while the most popular are two main lexical-semantic options: ‘a food product baked from flour’; ‘grains (rye, wheat, etc.)’. The polysemy of the word influences the division of the riddles with the answer bread according to thematic content into two sections of the collection: “Food, drink”, “Arable land, mowing, sowing and processing of bread”.
In the question part of the lexeme, bread is used both in literal and figurative meaning. The derived meaning that arises on the basis of the metaphor is due to associative features that are not semantically essential for ideas about bread. The lexical ambiguity of the word bread serves as a linguistic means of realizing the playful nature of the riddle process.
The peculiarities of the use of lexical-semantic variants of the lexeme bread in the question and answer parts indicate that polysemy is a genre-forming property of this type of proverb.
84-95
Scientific terms as a part of comparative tropes of modern Russian prose
Abstract
Modern Russian prose is characterized by the active use of scientific terms from different fields of knowledge, which act as images of comparison for comparative tropes. Such tropes are marked by stylistic emphasis, as they contain new information for the addressee. Comparative tropes are defined as metaphors and similes of various structural types. The purpose of our work is to analyze the use of scientific terms as images of comparison for comparative constructions and determine their functions in the texts of modern Russian prose. The material for the study is the works of E. Vodolazkin, A. Ivanov, A. Ilichevsky, A. Matveeva, V. Pelevin, D. Rubina, A. Salnikova, O. Slavnikova, M. Stepnova, O. Vasyakina and others. The article discusses terms in tropes representing different fields of science: physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, biology, physiology, linguistics, literary criticism, art history, and computer science. The most active in the comparative tropes of modern prose are biological, medical, physical and computer terms. The productivity of these terms is associated with the rapid development of these areas of knowledge and their role in modern society. Regarding parts of speech, most of them are substantives. By metaphorizing, terms are subject to determinologization. In prose texts, terms often have distributors that clarify, specify or modify the image of comparison. In modern prose, scientific terms as part of tropes perform a number of functions: the function of figurative characteristics of a person, object or phenomenon, the evaluative function, the text-forming and conceptualizing functions. Scientific terms as part of metaphors and similes replenish and update the literature language.
96-107
Localization and pauses duration in Russian iambic tetrameter in the poetry of A. S. Pushkin
Abstract
This article is a continuation of a study dedicated to the role of pauses in the prosodic structure of the Russian iambic tetrameter. New data on the localization and duration of the pauses in Alexander Pushkin’s “Eugene Onegin,” as voiced by three speakers, corroborate previously identified patterns in the organization of poetic lines at the prosodic level. Pauses of varying durations, occurring with different frequencies at various junctures, emphasize the depth of the varying degree of internal division within a line. The method of multidimensional classification revealed five groups of pause durations, ranging from ultra-short to super-long. It was found that within a line, ultra-short and short pauses predominate, while longer pauses tend to occur more towards the middle and less towards the beginning. The absence or brevity of pauses near the end of a line highlights a more prolonged inter-line pause. Individual pause strategies manifest in the observance or omission of inter-line pauses, their duration, the frequency of prosodic breaks within a line, and the frequency of using pauses of a particular duration group. High correlation coefficients indicate a consistent use of pauses among the three speakers.
72-83
“I desire to live and live... thousands of other lives”: multimythologism in I. A. Bunin’s onomastic code
Abstract
The article considers the manifestation of multimythologism as a characteristic feature of I. A. Bunin’s artistic worldview at the level of the individual author’s poetic mythonymicon. The paper identifies lexical units referring to the characters (gods, wizards, heroes, fantastic birds and animals), places, magic objects of the mythologies of the ancient Greeks and Romans, Sumerians and Akkadians, Indians and Iranians, as well as Egyptians, Scandinavians and. It is noted that the organization of the sound system of I. A. Bunin’s poetic speech is provided by regular graphic-phonetic transformations of mythonyms, and the uniqueness of the onomastic code of his lyrical texts is created by the inclusion of special mythonyms-bilexemes, onymized appellatives and mythological names with a low level of precedent and occasional units. It is established that for explication of philosophical and symbolic subtexts, representation of key motives and binary oppositions I. A. Bunin subordinates traditional sacral genealogies to the author’s individual picture of the world, matches and simultaneously uses mythonyms belonging to different national mythological onomasticons. The author comes to the conclusion that all the lexical units of Bunin’s poetic mythonymicon are connected by a single ideological attitude, aimed, on the one hand, at overcoming the autonomy of cultural worlds, and on the other hand, at preserving cultural pluralism.
108-118
“Hunting to die looking at the epoch...” (On the “Shakespeare Sonnet” by A. Voznesensky)
Abstract
The article analyzes the epochal ambitions of Andrei Voznesensky, one of the most authoritative representatives of the Sixtiers, based on the material of his so-called “Shakespeare Sonnet”. The article considers the poet’s translation skills and estimates whether the analyzed poem can be considered a translation of sonnet 66 by W. Shakespeare and whether it is a sonnet in the proper sense. It turns out that the time concept “epoch”, along with its occasional synonym “era”, is represented very widely in Voznesensky’s vocabulary. Despite the fact that the poet turned to translation more than once, he never became a professional translator: his poetic personality was too vivid. Therefore, his translations were not even transcriptions, but rather original works written based on foreign-language poems, the texts of which he addressed in one way or another. “Shakespeare Sonnet”, written by him in 1983, is strikingly different from the traditional translations of the 66 sonnet underlying it. Voznesensky maximally authorized it both stylistically and structurally in terms of versification.
119-127