No 4 (2023)

The continuous process of borrowing, proceeding with varying intensity and activating innovations from a particular language in certain epochs, requires constant attention to the orthoepy of this category of words by both non-specialists and phonetic scientists, including lexicographers. For this topic, the question of the pronunciation of the consonant before the letter e has always been and remains one of the most relevant, because, unlike native Russian words, where it indicates the softness of the preceding consonant, foreign-language borrowings in this regard are not the same: for some words, a soft consonant (term) will be correct, for others – a hard one (fake), for the third – the literary norm permits the use of both soft and hard consonants (aggression). How not to make a mistake in choosing the “right” consonant? The answer to this question is not at all simple, because: 1) the pronunciation of consonants before e (with the exception of the position of the end of unchangeable words) cannot be described using rules; 2) the general process of phonetic development of words like progress is contradictory and therefore does not exclude the updating of recommended norms; 3) a large number of lexicographic sources does not guarantee that the word of interest to the speaker will be fixed by them and provided with orthoepic instructions; 4) there is no consensus on the norm for a number of even common and at the same time long-standing borrowings; 5) when evaluating the option as correct, not only average native speakers, but also teachers do not always understand the nature of the differences between the two phenomena – the literary norm and the norm for working in the media. To learn the pronunciation of foreign words, the efforts of native speakers themselves are necessary (without studying scientific recommendations and observing the pronunciation of the word professionals can not do), and orthoepists (a resource similar to an academic Spelling project is needed).

Abstract: The article focuses on the reception of the dialect by its native speakers, namely representatives of the older generation living on the territory of the Ilmen Lake district. Despite the fact that the introduction and imposition of standard Russian language as the only correct and legitimate version through the education system and public institutions could not completely eradicate the local dialect, it did not contribute to its prestige and positive representation in the minds of native speakers. The examples from the interviews with local residents prove that they evaluate their own dialect in axiological categories in relation to the ideal norm – codified Russian. It appears that the native speakers have contradictory opinions regarding their dialect as a reaction to the situation of unbalanced diglossia. In addition, the article analyzes factors contributing to the displacement of regional dialects on the territory of the Ilmen Lake district. The examples of the representatives’ discourse help to describe current linguistic situation in the Lake district villages, the main characteristic of which is that linguistic competences of the representatives vary.

Modern linguistics pays special attention to semantic areas that correlate with the basic concepts of universal significance and in many ways form a person's idea of themselves and the reality around them. In dialects, where vibrant dialectal features are gradually being lost, these basic concepts preserve the territorial characteristics of their scope and content. Based on the analysis of the semantics and compatibility of the word zemlyá (earth) and its derivatives, the article defines the scope and content of the universal concept “ZEMLYA”, characteristic of the bearers of the traditional folk culture of the Russian North. The article describes customs, beliefs and prohibitions associated with the earth or land. The earth appears in them as the mother earth, mother, mom, the earth is holy, it feeds us, it needs to be entertained, cleaned, it needs be bowed to, on holidays it cannot be touched, disturbed, it cannot be disturbed, this day the earth is a birthday girl. After harvesting, the land is motionless. A person should live on his own land, put down roots into the earth, become rooted to the earth, people need to be planted on the ground. All the nuances of meanings are covered by the idea of the maternal origin of the earth. Many customs and beliefs that make up the mythology of the earth are almost forgotten or already lost by the speakers of modern Arkhangelsk dialects. However, the language has preserved memories of them in the form of precedent texts, stable phrases that contain the folk philosophy of life and death. The analysis of the material revealed that the concept of ZEMLYA is embedded in the main semantic oppositions that form the model of the world. The opposition “bottom – top” is represented by the opposition of the earth to the sky, in the opposition “nature – agrarian culture” the earth appears as an object of processing and a source of nutrition. In the opposition “friend – foe” the earth is the place where a person was born, his own, native land, in the opposition “life – death” the earth is associated with the arrival of a person to this world and with his inevitable departure.

The article discusses some types of epithets characteristic of the idiostyle of K. M. Simonov, the poet. A productive type for the author is the hypallage, which serves as a means of creating new, more fractional names for objects and phenomena. At the same time, hypallages puts forward categories that are significant for Simonov. Thus, many transferred epithets are associated with temporal and spatial division and have mythopoetic origins. Another type of epithets in Simonov's poetry is associated with the use of relative adjectives in structures with impaired lexical compatibility. Such adjectives have an ambiguous grammatical nature. A number of them continue to point to the attitude, but take in the author's assessment of the phenomena and appeal to a complex network of associations. Others improve and approach the metaphor. Finally, a special group consists of detailed epithets expressed by a participial turnover. Reliance on idioms, inclusion in a homogeneous series with simple epithets, grammatical transformation, punctuation and graphic design emphasize integrity of the phrase. The identified types of epithets are intended to be a means of subject and conceptual concretization, to formalize the idea of a special subclass of objects and phenomena. In some cases, epithets contribute to the objectification of psychological analysis.

The article analyzes “A Dictionary of 2017-2018 Changes” (2022), compiled by M. Vishnevetskaya, as a lexicographic phenomenon in line with historical, cultural, social and linguistic transformations in the colloquial speech of modern time. The originality of the concept of the publication, which is a dictionary-chronology of new phenomena that arose in 2017-2018 and entrenched in journalism, the Internet and speech practice of different segments of the population, is noted. It is stated that the borrowings, phraseological units, elements of socio-political and everyday jargon, meme expressions and syntactic idioms presented in the book are largely of an occasional nature. They became a reaction of society to force majeure situations and concrete actions and remarks of statesmen and media persons, creatively reinterpreted by journalists and correlated with historical realities. It is said about the expressiveness of the language models, the metaphoricity of its images and forms. It is pointed out that the methods of word usage in 2017-2018 differ from the standard neologisms of the late 1990s in symbolism, the effect of a cultural explosion and have not yet been fully entrenched in national use. They make up an increasingly increasing layer of uncodified elements of the Russian language, which pushes the traditional division into speech styles. The most striking and unusual examples of the “philology of the absurd” are commented on, reflecting the dynamics of modern communicative polylingualism. The variety of phonetic, grammatical, lexical and stylistic ways of creating spontaneous speech, the uniqueness of accompanying examples and connotations are emphasized. “A Dictionary” can serve as a source of replenishment of lexicographic neology. Its materials will be useful not only to specialists in culture of language, journalists and speechwriters, but also to codifiers of language changes. The article examines the issue of professional selection of neologisms by immersing them in the natural element of live speech and adapting them to traditional formulas of publicism and normative stylistics. The problem of analysis and classification of the substandard, which goes beyond the accepted schemes of consistency and tiering of linguistic phenomena, is posed. The conclusion is made about the need to study the active processes of the Russian language taking into account the constantly changing sociolinguistic situation.