| Litter type | Litter designation | The value of the absence of the specified label |
| Functional and stylistic | Book, colloquial, simple, scientific, newspaper, publ., Stationary, office-affairs, artist. | Interstyle word |
| Limiting the scope of use | Territe: region, dial., Southern., Uralsk. etc. Prof .: spec., Mat., Ling., Gram., Marine, geodesy. etc. Soc .: jarg., Argot. | Common word |
| Indicating the fixation of a word for a passive stock | New, neol .; arch., history., obsolete | Belongs to active vocabulary |
| Indicating the emotional-expressive coloring of the word | Poet., Sublim., Rude., Decrease., Caress. etc. | The word is emotionally expressively neutral |
List of used literature:
M. N. Kozhina The stylistics of the Russian language. M., 1983.
The culture of Russian speech. Textbook for universities / Ed. prof. L. K. Graudina and prof. E. N. Shiryaeva. M., 2000.
Russian language and culture of speech: Textbook. for universities / A. I. Dunev, M. Ya. Dymarsky, A. Yu. Kozhevnikov and others / Ed. V. D. Chernyak. SPb., 2002.
Questions for self-control:
1. Name the style and linguistic features of the spoken style.
2. Name the style and language features of the official business style.
3. Name the style and language features of the scientific style.
4. Name the style and language features of the journalistic style.
5. What is the specificity of the literary and artistic style?
Lecture 12
LANGUAGE PERSONALITY OF THE RHEETOR AND THE AUDIENCE
Plan.
1. The image of the speaker.
2. Visually perceived elements of speech.
3. Types of audience.
4. Behavior of the speaker in the audience.
Speaker image
The listeners do not separate the information that the speaker communicates from the personality of the speaker himself (whether we love or dislike the subject depends on the teacher). The audience remembers the speaker and then what he said. In the speaker, the audience wants, first of all, to see personality, individuality, dissimilarity from others, wants to know his distinctive features, what position he takes, whether he can be trusted.
The personality of the speaker is:
1. Lexicon (vocabulary) - must exceed the lexicon of the partner or audience. The linguistic personality of the rhetorician is modeled according to the following parameters:
· Linguistic biography - human speech development;
· Language passport (gender, age, nationality, profession, education, emotional state at the time of speech);
· Linguistic erudition - knowledge of the language and texts in the language;
· Rhetorical activity;
· Linguistic act - speech performance of the speaker, which is strategically aimed at changing his biography, career, activity.
2. Pragmaticon - a system of value attitudes and motives of the speech activity of the rhetorician. The addressee or audience must understand the motives of the rhetorician's activity and they must have a moral basis.
3. Picture of the world - a system of categorical concepts in the mind of the rhetorician, which determines the view of the world.
4. Knowledge of precedent texts - stable units (phraseological units, proverbs, sayings, aphorisms), reflecting the rhetorician's worldview in its national version.
5. Etiquette portrait.
The image of the rhetorician is created by the efforts of the speaker himself, who tries to create in speech the impression that he has an individual manner of communication, an individual style of speech.
The rhetorician must be a person of a special warehouse:
- create an impression of benevolence (the rhetorician must show that he will not infringe on the interests of the partner);
- create the impression of verbal erudition;
- to create the impression of a person capable of a speech act;
- the rhetorician must have his own image - a system of preferences realized by the personality (manner of dressing, smiling, facial expression, manner of speaking), the main thing in him is integrity.
Any audience perceives the speaker's personality in a simplified way, bringing it under stereotypical schemes and roles; dreamer, practitioner, sucker, old man, moralist, bureaucrat, merry fellow. You need to take care that your image is favorable, reflects your personality, and you are perceived the way you want to present yourself. The individuality, the dissimilarity of the speaker to others should be obvious to the audience, you need to demonstrate it, you don't need to work for someone else. The individuality of the speaker increases the suggestibility of the audience, all prominent speakers were individuals.
Functional-style layering of vocabulary is only partly recorded in explanatory dictionaries by stylistic labels for words. The most consistently distinguished are book words, special, colloquial, vernacular, rude vernacular.
Stylistic labels in the dictionary of S. I. Ozhegov and in the MAS differ; neither one nor the other vocabulary discloses the full completeness of the functional-style layering of vocabulary. In the "Dictionary of the Russian language" S.I. Ozhegov, the following stylistic marks indicate the functional fixation of words:
(book), i.e. bookish. The word is typical for written, book presentation. Often such words are synonymous with neutral words. For example, abracadabra (book) is a meaningless, incomprehensible set of words; permanent (book) - permanent, continuous.
(high), i.e. high. The word gives speech a shade of solemnity, elation; characteristic of journalistic, oratory and poetic speech; high words are a kind of book words. For example, the words have such a label: battle (high) - battle; future (high) - future.
(official), i.e. official. It is characteristic of the speech of official relations, as well as of clerical and administrative speech. These words are the words: place of residence (official) - place of permanent residence; testator (officer) - a person who made a will
(colloquial). The word is characteristic of everyday, colloquial speech, serves as a characteristic of the phenomenon in the circle of certain everyday relations; it does not go beyond the norms of literary usage, but imparts a certain ease to speech. For example: roar (colloquial) - one who often cries
(simple). The word is characteristic of mass colloquial speech and is used in literary language as a stylistic input device to give speech a playful, dismissive, rude tone. The words are marked with such a mark: exactly (simple) - just, exactly; Skoda (simple) - mischief that does harm
(region), i.e. regional. Local, dialect words used in literary speech, if necessary, to characterize this or that phenomenon by expressive means of local dialect, dialect. There are relatively few such words in comparison with the ones listed above. One of these words, for example, - broth (region) - a decoction of dried fruits, berries, leaves.
(contempt.), (disapproval), (negligible), (joking), (ironic), (abusive) - the word contains the corresponding emotional, expressive assessment of the designated phenomenon. Litters of this type are also rare in the Ozhegov dictionary. These are words such as: equivocal (disapproved) - ambiguous hints, evasions; newly appeared (iron.) - recently appeared, first manifested itself; groveling (contempt) - sycophancy.
But there is no litter in Ozhegov's dictionary that would highlight journalistic vocabulary.
In the Dictionary of the Russian Language of the Russian Academy of Sciences, stylistic labels serve to characterize that part of the vocabulary of the Russian language, which for one reason or another is limited in use. It can be:
1. Restrictions due to the belonging of a word to those layers of vocabulary that are outside the literary language or stand on its border.
2. Restrictions due to the highly specialized nature of the terms science, craft, technology, art.
3. Restrictions due to the fact that a particular word can be used only in a certain style of literary speech.
In the Academic Dictionary, only labels are used: dec. (colloquial word), vernacular. (a vernacular word, that is, colloquial, but in addition to this "possessing the property of rudely lowering the form of expression"), reg. (regional word), outdated. (obsolete), folk poet., obsolete. everyday life. ("outdated for modern life or other occupation, custom, etc.", such as: incantation, talking, whispering illness, medicine man, etc.), special. (a special word related to professional or scientific and technical terminology).
At the same time, several expressive qualifications have been adopted: joke. (jokingly) iron. (ironically) and bran. These marks appear to be very insufficient to determine the range of use of the word. For example, the words occupant and occupant, defined by means of occupant, are left without any stylistic evaluation. Only the word settler itself is considered outdated (pp. 890-891). In the same way, the woman-lover and the woman-lover are not stylistically delimited and left without any marks (p. 78); hard-hearted and hard-hearted (p. 98; compare hard-heartedness); pole and pole (p. 83); gold prospecting (gold prospecting parties) and gold prospecting (gold prospecting experience), which for some reason are identified (p. 1317) and many others. etc. There are no stylistic indications for the words: desire (p. 14), zherlitsa (p. 87), sacrificial (p. 92), golden-haired (p. 1323), gold-headed (p. 1317), withered, dry out (p. 196-197), hardener (p. 493), loan (p. 482), boil over (p. 512), jurisprudence (p. 549), statute (p. 553), sealer (p. 589), freezing (p. . 652), recluse (p. 967-968), gaping (p. 1231 - 1232), winter-hardy (p. 1230) and many others. etc. It is curious that such book words as architect (p. 1310), mirror (obsolete, p. 1221), amphibian (p. 1208), etc., are considered as words of a neutral style, without any attempt to give them stylistic characteristics.
In contrast to the Ozhegov dictionary, in the MAC, words with labels such as
Rude. simple. - the word is outside of literary speech. Such labels are also found in the Ozhegov dictionary, however, not as a separate group, but as separate words with a double label. An example from the MAC might be, for example, the word - vomit (rude simple) - profuse vomiting
Trad. - poetic. - the word is typical for literature, poetry.
Folk poetry - words that retain their oral and poetic coloring and, although they are used in the literary vocabulary, do not merge with it. For example: white stone (nar.-poet.) - made of white stone.
Comparing the two dictionaries, one can notice that in Ozhegov's dictionary there is a category of words that is marked in the IAS with the marks “trad. - poetic. " and "folk-poetical" is not noted. Therefore, such words are equated with common ones. Meanwhile, in the Small Academic Dictionary there are no marks indicating the emotional coloring of words (in Ozhegov's dictionary, such words have marks: (abusive), (ironic), (joking), etc.).
According to the form of speech activity in both dictionaries, both book and colloquial vocabulary are noted (for example: the owner (book) - the one who possesses the black-and-white; the spoiled person (colloquial) - the one who worries, cares about the candidate. business).
According to the situation of speech activity, both dictionaries mark the official and solemn vocabulary, however, the unofficial and familiar vocabulary has no special marks in any of the dictionaries.
Emotionally, labels such as (contempt), (disapproved), (joking), etc. exist only in the Ozhegov dictionary (for example: the leftist (contempt) - the same as the left). The Small Academic Dictionary, as mentioned above, does not have such marks.
According to the literary genre, the vocabulary is divided only by the compilers of the IAS, however, they distinguish only two categories - traditional-poetical. and folk poetry. vocabulary. But there are no special marks indicating journalistic or scientific vocabulary. In the Dictionary of the Russian language of S.I. Ozhegov, there is no division according to this principle.
In accordance with the generally accepted norm in both dictionaries, vocabulary is divided into vernacular and literary. (eg: bucha (simple) - noisy commotion, vanity). Literary vocabulary has no special marks
In terms of social community and corporate community, there is no division of vocabulary in either of the two dictionaries. Neither jargon, nor argotism have any special marks with them.
According to the professional community, the labels are available only in the IAS (such labels as astr. - astronomy, physical. - physics, etc.). In the Ozhegov dictionary there is no designation of the belonging of words to a particular professional environment.
According to the territorial community, both dictionaries mark only regional words, not highlighting dialectisms, localisms, etc. (chapyzhnik (obl.) - frequent shrub; big-haired (obl.) - the oldest hostess in the house).
By the time of use, the creators of both dictionaries mark outdated and old vocabulary (for example: good behavior (outdated) - good behavior, good breeding; black man (old) - the same as a monk).
In this work, the systems of stylistic labels of two dictionaries were compared - the Small Academic Dictionary of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Dictionary of the Russian language by S.I. Ozhegov. On the basis of this work, it can be concluded that the stylistic coloring of words in them is noted unequally; using only one dictionary, it is impossible to identify all the stylistic shades of vocabulary.
The compilers of the Academic Dictionary prefer to use stylistic marks very sparingly and use them as rarely as possible. In cases where stylistic assessments are given to words, connections and relationships with similar words are not always taken into account, the place of the word in the circle of stylistically homogeneous or correlative lexical series is not always determined.
In the dictionary of the Russian Academy of Sciences, emotionally colored vocabulary is not distinguished by special marks; there is no emphasis on jargon.
In explanatory dictionaries of the Russian language, stylistically colored words are accompanied by stylistic marks. Stylistic litters - this is an indication of the normative dictionary on the stylistic coloration of a word or phraseological expression. Litter colloquial - colloquial indicates the colloquial nature of the word and the appropriateness of its use in a colloquial style. Litter scientific.- scientific means that the word is a scientific term and is used in a scientific style. It should be borne in mind that language is a developing phenomenon, therefore, stylistic labels in dictionaries of different years reflect the stylistic coloration of a word that it had at the time of creation of the dictionary. The stylistic coloration of words changes over time.
876. Some scholars argue that words prestige, privilege, principle, problem, perspective, situation, trend, elementary, element(in the meaning of "natural phenomenon"), etc., which in the "Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language" edited by D. N. Ushakov (1934-1940) were certified as books, later lost this stylistic coloration and turned into stylistically neutral. Do you agree with this point of view? Check the correctness of your point of view using the modern explanatory dictionary.
877. The words competence and compilation, starting with the fourth edition of the "Dictionary of the Russian language" by S. I. Ozhegov, they began to be marked bookish. Can it be argued on this basis that at first they were stylistically neutral, and then became bookish? Write down words from the current dictionary that do not have stylistic marks, but are perceived by native speakers as bookish or colloquial. Prove your point of view is correct.
878. In the first edition of the "Dictionary of the Russian language" by S. I. Ozhegov, the word television accompanied by droppings special, denoting the belonging of a word to a certain range of professional (scientific, technical, etc.) use. In subsequent editions, this litter was eliminated. How can this be explained? Give your examples of changes in the stylistic coloring of words that have come into active use in the last 15-20 years. To do this, take explanatory dictionaries from different years (1970s or 1980s editions) and compare the words you have chosen for them and dictionaries published in recent years.
879. In the explanatory dictionaries of the modern Russian literary language, the word wilderness given without stylistic notes. On this basis, can we agree with the compilers of the dictionaries that it is stylistically neutral? Prove your answer and write a short text using this word. Where can such a text sound?
880. In the "Dictionary of the Russian language" S. I. Ozhegov, which appeared in 1949, the word be arrogant was shown without stylistic markings. In 1952, in the second and in 1953 in the third editions, a litter appeared with the word disapproving. In the 1960 edition and in all subsequent editions, the label is given instead colloquial.
What do you think are the reasons for such changes: a change in the stylistic coloration of a word or a refinement of the stylistic characteristics of a word?
Can it be argued that this word has a neutral (zero) emotional-evaluative coloration? Prove it.
881. The author of one of the popular science brochures referred the words below to book vocabulary. Do you agree that each of these words, speaking in their direct meaning, is bookish? Check your answer in dictionaries and give examples of the use of these words. Make sentences and write them down.
Freedom, labor, party, Russian, order, court, sentence, lawyer, judge, investigator, contract, diplomat, order, visit, delegation.
Self-test questions
1. What synonyms are called stylistic? How do they differ from other words with similar meanings?
2. Why does a literate person need knowledge of stylistic synonyms? Prove it.
3. What is the stylistic coloration of a word?
4. What types of stylistic coloration do Russian words have?
5. What marks are used to mark the stylistic coloration of words in the dictionary?
6. Is the stylistic coloration of a word a permanent feature of this word? What does it depend on? Give examples.
7. Why do you need to know if a word has a stylistic coloration? Prove it.
882. Read the excerpts from synonymous dictionary entries. Analyze them and answer these questions.
1. Which of the indications do you consider indisputable and why?
2. What guidelines do you find unreasonable and why?
3. What would need to be added to the characteristics of individual words?
Find literary and journalistic examples of the use of these words today or make your own sentences.
Farmer, tiller, grain grower, farmer (region), grain grower.
Word farmer in modern language it has a bookish and official character, it is used when a general description of the occupation and position of a person is given; even more rarely used farmer; more often than others, especially in the press, are used digger and grain grower, which are gradually losing their regional character; word farmer is outdated and is usually used in relation to the past ... (Dictionary of synonyms of the Russian language: In 2 volumes / Edited by A. P. Evgenieva. - L., 1970. - T. 1. - P. 400).
PEASANT, farmer, plowman, plowman, grain grower; digger (region); man (mouth and region); farmer, peasant, villager, villager (mouth); oratay, raty (mouth, poet, and folk poet.); peyzan (mouth, joking and iron.) / to pl. sobir :. peasant (mouth, simple)(Alexandrova Z.E. Dictionary of synonyms of the Russian language. - 4th ed. - M., 1975. - p. 205).
883. Place the data below the word in the table you have created. Look for the meanings of unfamiliar words in the explanatory dictionary.
Destiny, sudarushka, piety, children, creator, present, faithful, peeping, little hand, panacea, warrior, overdressed, snatch, reincarnation, voice, thief, bullshit, whopper, sculptor, master, warrior, vaunted, boldly.
Which column has few examples? Find missing examples from fiction, newspapers, and magazines.
Conversational style
Sphere of existence colloquial style of speech - everyday life, informal communication, mainly in oral form. In colloquial and everyday speech, words and forms are often used that give speech a relaxed character and allow expressing different emotions and feelings: blond-blond, window-window, hesitate-procrastinate. Colloquial words usually include words with subjective suffixes: pen-hand-hand-hand, tiny-small-small, verbal forms like jump, knock, kick etc. The sentences that make up spoken language, as a rule, are simple in composition, incomplete sentences are often found. This is due to the specifics of colloquial speech - it is predominantly conversational in nature. If everyday speech is presented in written form (personal letters, diary entries), then, as a rule, its lexical and grammatical nature remains the same as in oral form.
In the texts of the colloquial style, one can find colloquial and dialectal words that are impossible in such book styles as scientific, official-business and journalistic: punch-pound-pound-punch-bang; friend-comrade-buddy-buddy. Such words in most cases are outside the literary language, their use is justified only in the colloquial style of speech and in the language of fiction. The spoken style of speech is not so strict and demanding in the selection of linguistic means, a certain "decline" distinguishes it from the book styles. In addition, expressively colored means (suffixes, prefixes) predominate in the colloquial style, conveying the positive or negative attitude of the author of the speech to what he is talking about. True, one should not forget that the "decline" of the colloquial style of speech should not be understood too literally, for example, as permissiveness. An educated person needs to remember that a person is always characterized by his speech. By what and how a person says, you can always determine what his educational and cultural level is.
In the language of fiction, the conversational style is used by the writer to create the credibility of the narrative and the speech characterization of the hero.
884. Read it. Look for signs of conversational style. Mark them, try replacing common words and phrases with neutral synonyms. What can you say about the author of the speech?
The doctor is cheerful. For the most part, a specialist in nervous and children's diseases. He approaches the patient's bed with an open face and friendly laughter. "Well? Are we a little ill? Let's see, now we'll see. Well, show your tongue. The tongue is good, we will prescribe the sweet mixture. "
(A. K. Tolstoy)
885. Read the text. Indicate the language means of the spoken style. Write down colloquial and colloquial words, indicate what their color is. What can you say about the relationship between the characters? Why did you decide so?
Grandfather Kokovani has a booth at the mowing spoons in the forest. So they came there with the girl Darenka and the cat Murenka. They hibernate. And Daryonka got used to the forest. She herself says to the old man:
Dedo, you should go to the factory for a horse. We must take the corned beef home.
Kokovanya was even surprised:
What a wise girl you are, Daria Grigorievna! How big has judged. Only you will be afraid, come on, alone.
What, - he answers, - to be afraid. And you quickly turn around all the same!
As it got dark, Daryonka got excited. He only looks - Murenka lies calmly. She also cheered up.
(According to P. Bazhov)
886. Read the text and imagine the communication situation, restore it, enter the beginning of the situation, the dialogue of the characters and the end of the communication. The following plan will help you with this: 1. Who is speaking? 2. Who is he talking to? 3. Why does the hero speak like that? 4. How can this dialogue end?
Children, you didn’t receive any telegram without me? Yes, stop buzzing and tell me plainly how it was.
(A. Gaidar)
887.
Read the forms of your own name. Use them as phrases in your sentences. Indicate those of them that can be used in an informal setting. What is the color of each appeal? Pronounce the sentences so that it is clear in what communication situation they are appropriate and who your addressee: director or
teacher, grandfather or uncle, older stranger, friend or younger brother.
Alexander Alexandrovich; Alexander; grandfather Sasha; grandfather Sanya; Sanya; Sasha; Sasha; Sasha; Alex; Sandro.
888. Pay attention to how strangers address each other in an informal setting (in the yard, in a store, in transport, in a clinic). Mark among the references that are neutral and conversational, positively or negatively colored. Give your recommendations on how to approach each other in an informal setting.
889. Replace the given sentences with their colloquial synonyms. Rate each option for its relevance to a specific informal setting.
1. When sending a letter, do not forget to write a return address on the envelope. 2. At the end of the class, you must report to the principal. 3. Since Petrov is late, he will not be allowed to participate in the competition. 4. In case of unfavorable weather conditions, the ski trip will be rescheduled to the next Saturday. 5. Ivanov is a good athlete, but nevertheless he could not win in this tournament. 6. He received a "good" mark in the final exam, so an honors degree is out of the question.
890. Highlight words, phrases and sentences in the sentences that are characteristic of the spoken style of speech. By what signs did you recognize them?
1. This boy came ... The boy's name was Vanka. Such a small, small sprout. (Shuksh.) 2. A song old woman appeared. - Sasha is so pale, so weak, so tender. (Sol.) 3. After reading in the eyes of Smury<...>petty dog scary<...>she answered. (Trif.) 4. So there is a club? - Yes, Pasha. (Shuksh.) 5. There is a cow and a caretaker at home. (Dashing.) 6. And here is another popular pink fairy tale. (PP.)
Self-test questions
1. What spheres of a person's life does the conversational style serve?
2. What is the difference between the conversational style and other styles of speech?
3. Is it obligatory to comply with the norms of the literary language in the spoken style of speech? Why?
4. What are the linguistic features of the spoken style (rate of speech, vocabulary, word formation, morphology and syntax)? Give examples.
5. In what written genres is the conversational style of speech implemented?
6. Why do we find features of the colloquial style in works of fiction?
7. What can you learn about a person if you listen carefully to his speech?
Self-study assignments
891. In the poem "Dead Souls" by Nikolai Gogol, find a fragment in which the conversational style is presented. Explain your choice. Prove that the linguistic means that you classify as colloquial are truly conversational.
892. In the passages below from literary works, find the features of the spoken style, indicate them and define the role of each of them in the literary text.
I. The school yard was already full of children. The guys gathered in groups. Each class is separate. I quickly tracked down my class. The guys saw me and with a joyful cry ran to meet me, began to slap on the shoulders, on the back. I never thought it was like this
will be delighted at my arrival.
Where is Fedya Rybkin? - asked Grisha Vasiliev.
True, where is Fedya? - the guys shouted. - You always walked together. Where did you lose it?
No Fedya, - I answered. - He will no longer study with us.
He left our city with his parents.
How so?
Very simple.
Aren't you lying? - asked Alik Sorokin.
Here's another! I'm going to lie!
The guys looked at me and smiled incredulously.
Guys, there is no Vanya Pakhomov either, - said Lenya Astafiev.
And Seryozha Bukatin! - the guys shouted.
(N. Nosov)
II. The truck snorted, Timokhin climbed into the cab. The truck snorted louder and louder, trying to move from its place ... Now it moved: moved back, then forward and back again. She will leave now, the gates will be closed, the lantern will be extinguished, and everything will be over.
Seryozha stood aside under the snow. He remembered his promise with all his might and only occasionally sobbed in long, bleak, almost soundless sobs. And a single tear seeped down on his eyelashes and shone in the light of a lantern - a difficult tear, no longer an infant, bitter, acrid and proud tear ... And, unable to be here longer, he turned and walked towards the house, hunched over with grief ...
Stop! - desperately shouted Korostelev and drummed Timokhin. - Sergey! Well! Alive! Get ready! You will go!
And he jumped to the ground.
Alive! What's in there? Junk. Toys. One spirit. Come on!
Mitya, what are you! Mitya, think! Mitya, you're out of your mind! - Aunt Pasha and mother spoke, looking out of the cab. He answered excitedly and angrily:
Yah you. What is this, you know. This is vivisection (an operation on a live animal in order to study the functions of the body, the effect of various substances on it, the development of treatment methods). As you wish, but I cannot. And that's all.
Lord you: my God! He will die there! - shouted Aunt Pasha.
You go, - said Korostelev. “I’m responsible for him, okay?” He's not going to die a damn thing. Your nonsense. Come on, come on, Earring!
(V. Panova)
893. Read the story "The Young Lady-Peasant Woman" by Alexander Pushkin and follow Liza-Akulina's speech. Find a date scene in which the heroine was close to revealing her secret. Why did this happen?
Scientific speech style
Science is served by scientific style of speech, which is characterized by abstraction, strict logic of presentation, a large number of special terms. The scientific style uses mainly book, special, and stylistically neutral vocabulary. Syntactic constructions in scientific speech are mainly complex sentences. Scientific-style sentences use direct word order; simple two-part sentences are complicated by separate definitions, expressed participial phrases and homogeneous terms with generalizing words. The syntax of scientific speech is distinguished by an impersonal manner of presentation: the phenomenon is called, the fact exists, the theorem is proved.
General properties of scientific speech: accuracy, strict sequence, conciseness, "intellectuality", regular use of terms, restriction of stylistically colored means of language, etc. Scientific speech differs depending on the field of knowledge not only in terms of terminology (each science has its own terms), but also by the nature of the presentation. For example, in a mathematical text, the material is presented in the form of conventional signs, symbols, formulas. There is a lot of descriptive material in a literary or historical text, metaphors and comparisons are permissible.
In the scientific style, various genres are distinguished: monograph, dissertation, review, abstract, abstract, textbook, popular science book, teacher's lecture, scientific report, synopsis, etc. Each genre has its own specific features. So, popular science speech, in contrast to scientific speech itself, is characterized by liveliness of presentation, the presence of figurative means, some proximity to artistic speech.
894. Compare texts from textbooks in physics, literature, biology and history. Indicate the signs of a scientific style of speech and note how a scientific text on physics differs from a text on literature, and a text on biology from a historical one.
895. Find in your textbooks two terms from different sciences: mathematics, physics, history, literature, Russian language, biology, geography. Indicate the meaning of each term and the field of science in which it is used, make sentences with them.
896. Remember 10 special words related to your future profession, explain their meanings, make sentences with them and write them down.
897. Read the texts. What style of speech would you attribute them to? Why? What is the name of this genre? Note the characteristic features of the genre.
1. We live in a world of crystals, and even our body is partly composed of them, but not of ordinary, but so-called liquid crystals ...
Crystals are called "flowers of the earth" not so much for their extraordinary external beauty, but for their hidden beauty - the wonderful harmony of geometrically precise constructions. A high order of arrangement and a strict periodicity of repetition of the same particles is the main feature of a crystal. Then what are "liquid crystals"? Indeed, in liquids and gases there is no strictly ordered arrangement of particles, their main feature is ionic similarity of properties. Liquid crystals are a kind of intermediate state of matter, they are fluid like water, reversed droplets, but they have an ordered structure and physical properties that are not the same in different directions.
(According to G.Ya.Solganik)
II. There is more dust in space than previously thought. The well-known phenomenon of the zodiacal light (the glow of the night sky in the plane of the constellations of the zodiac), as it was recently established, is the reflection of light from particles of cosmic dust.
Albedo is a beautiful word, similar to the name of a Spanish city. However, there is no such city on the map. In Russian albedo means "whiteness". This is not a simple word, but a serious scientific term that denotes the ratio of the amount of light reflected by a section of a surface in all directions, to the amount of light falling on that area.
Everyone can distinguish wood from metal, glass from stone, aluminum from copper. Using such properties of a substance as color, brightness, transparency, shine, a person can determine what a given object is made of.
(According to G.Ya.Solganik)
Abstract- this is a short record of the content read. An outline of an article or book helps to better understand its content, remember the most important points and, if necessary, regularly refer to the text.
Rules for taking notes:
2. Leave margins on the left and right. On the left, the pages, the original, the structural sections of the article or book (paragraph names, subheadings, etc.) are marked, the main problems are formulated. In the margins on the right, you write your own conclusions, links to other materials, topics and problems for further development of the issue.
3. In the central part of the synopsis, a summary of the content of the text is written. It should include quotes from other secret text.
4. It is necessary to preserve the structure of the outlined source (its composition, sequence of presentation and thematic sections).
5. The pages of the synopsis should be numbered and a list of abstracts contained in it should be compiled in the same notebook.
898. Familiarize yourself with the rules for taking notes and make a summary of the textbook article specified by the teacher.
annotation- a brief description of the article, book, etc. in terms of its purpose, content, form and other features. The purpose of the abstract is to answer the question of what is said in the article, book, that is, to give a general idea of the article or book. The annotations reflect:
2. Topic of the article (book). The general topic of the source is indicated. In this case, the following expressions are used: the article is devoted to a topical, controversial, important topic, issue, problem.
3. Problems. The list of questions or problems that are raised in the article is listed. The following expressions are used: the article analyzes (highlights, describes, discloses, considers) the following problems; an analysis is given (characteristics, description); the results are presented; the theory (history, methodology, problem) is presented; the question is investigated (problem, process, dependence, properties).
4.Address. It is noted for whom the text is intended. The following expressions are used: the article is intended for specialists in the field; is of interest to (a wide range of readers, students of secondary schools and secondary specialized educational institutions, university students, graduate students, teachers) etc.
899. Almost every book contains a sample annotation. Familiarize yourself with the structure of the annotation and compose your own version of the abstract of the article indicated by the teacher.
abstract- this is a summary of the content of the article (book), including the basic factual information and conclusions necessary for the initial acquaintance with it and determining the appropriateness of referring to it. The purpose of the abstract is to answer the question of what is new and significant in the article (book). An abstract can be compiled from one source (abstract-summary) or several (abstract-review).
900 ... Check out the principles of writing an abstract-resume and write an abstract on the topic, book or article suggested by the teacher.
2. Topic. The general topic of the source is indicated using the following expressions: devoted to the topic (question, problem).
3. Composition. It indicates how many structural parts, which ones. In this case, the following expressions are used: consists of (includes, contains) sections (parts, chapters).
4. Main content. Specific results or conclusions of the author are presented in accordance with the structure of the article. The following expressions are used: the introduction indicates (notes) that; in the first chapter (part) the author notes (points out, concludes) that; the second chapter (part, section) is devoted (contains), according to the author; in the third chapter; in the conclusion it is indicated (it is noted, the author comes to the conclusion) that etc.
5. Availability of illustrative material. The presence of figures, tables, diagrams is noted. Expressions like: the author illustrates his reasoning with specific facts and examples, gives drawings, photographs, tables etc.
Self-test questions
1. Describe the scope of the scientific style of speech, its role in the life of society.
2. What are the main stylistic features of the language of science? Give examples.
3. What is the vocabulary of scientific speech? Give examples.
4. Give examples of linguistic terms or terms used in your future profession. What are the features of the term?
5. What are the syntactic features of scientific speech? Give examples.
6. What genres of scientific speech do you know? Indicate the similarities and differences between genres.
Self-study assignments
901. In the sentences below, find unnecessary words and phrases, eliminate verbosity, and correct mistakes. Determine the branch of science and the genre of scientific speech in which the given excerpts could be used.
1. The method of photoelasticity is very effective in studying the dynamic stress state of building structures. 2. This book contains a translation of the first volume of edited lectures on the most pressing issues of modern quantum chemistry. 3. When we systematize chemicals, then the chemical approach will be perfectly correct, but when we systematize structural types, then the chemical principle must be completely abandoned. 4. One cannot but take into account the fact that research of virgin fauna is also necessary in order to preserve the child of future generations accurate data on the animal population of endangered natural landscapes.
902. Read, compare unedited and edited versions of sentences. Explain what the revision was and why it was needed.
1. Considering the curves showing seasonal fluctuations in the average weight of birds, it can be seen that they have an individual character. - Curves showing seasonal fluctuations in the average weight of birds are individual. 2. Pallas finished his education in Holland. - Pallas finished his education in Holland. 3. This discovery belongs to one of the remarkable Russian zoologists of the last century. - This discovery belongs to a remarkable Russian zoologist of the 19th century.
903. Read the sentences. Find mistakes and fix them. Write down the sentences you have edited in your notebook.
1. The first conference was held three years ago. 2. A number of expeditions were planned. 3. The stripes approach each other. 4. The curves in this figure show that the process is intermittent. 5. Crystalline hydrates of uranyl nitrate are a kind of group of compounds. 6. The whole question of this expedition is presented in a new way.
Formal and business style
Official business the style serves the official-industrial and official-diplomatic relations: industrial, diplomatic, legal, i.e. relations between state power and the population, between countries, enterprises, institutions and organizations, between individuals and society. The formal business style refers to book styles and functions primarily in the written form of speech. The oral form of official business speech is speeches at solemn meetings, meetings, receptions, reports of statesmen and public figures, etc.
The official business style is characterized by high regulation of speech: high standardization, a certain supply of means of expression and methods of their construction, a large number of stable turns, cliches - to impose an obligation, due to absence, to take action; formality (accuracy of formulation, rigor of presentation and expression - words are usually used in their direct meanings, figurativeness, as a rule, is absent) and impersonality.
The famous French linguist Charles Bally wrote: “The official language differs sharply from common speech and has a pronounced social connotation; from notarial acts and police codes and ending with articles of the code and the constitution "(Bally Sh. French stylistics. - M., 1961. - S. 60-61).
The formal business style is subdivided into two sub-styles - official documentary (the language of diplomacy and the language of laws) and everyday business (official correspondence and business papers).
The language of diplomacy is very diverse, it has its own system of terms and etiquette words. I ask you, Mr. Ambassador, to accept the assurances of my highest consideration.- so it is customary to end a personal note. The syntax of the language of diplomacy is characterized by long, detailed sentences with a ramified union connection, with participial and participial phrases, introductory and isolated constructions. Often, a sentence consists of segments, each of which expresses a complete thought, is designed in the form of a paragraph, but is not separated from the others by a dot, but formally enters the structure of one sentence. Such a syntactic structure has, for example, the preamble (introductory part) of the Charter of the United Nations:
We peoples of the united nations determined
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our life has brought untold sorrow to humanity, and
reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equality of men and women, and in the equal rights of nations large and small, and
create conditions under which fairness and respect for obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be observed, and
promote social progress and better living conditions in larger freedom,
and for this purpose
be tolerant and live together, in peace with each other, as good neighbors, and
unite our forces to maintain international peace and security, and
to ensure, by adopting principles and establishing methods, that armed forces are used in no other way than in the general interest, and
use the international apparatus to promote the economic and social progress of all peoples,
decided to join our efforts to achieve our goals.
This entire piece of text is one sentence in which the significant parts of the document are highlighted in paragraphs and font: the goals and the subject of the contract.
The language of laws is the official language, the language of state power, in which it speaks with the people. It requires precision in expressing thoughts. Another important feature of the language of laws is the generalization of expression: The owner has the right to own, use and dispose of property within the limits established by law.
The language of laws is also characterized by a complete lack of individualization of speech, standard presentation.
The casual business variety of the formal business style caters to industrial relations and is implemented in a variety of business paper genres. These genres are: resume, statement, protocol, contract, receipt, act, official correspondence, power of attorney, autobiography, etc. The main feature of all official business documents is the standardization of form and means of expression, brevity (telegraphic style). We will get acquainted with the rules for creating basic production documents during the exercise.
Summary- a summary of the essence of the issue. In modern conditions, managers often ask to send a resume to the address of the enterprise before meeting with a job applicant. A resume does not replace an application; it is presented before the application is filed, but often gives the employer information about the need to meet with the applicant. The resume is written in free form. The author of the resume indicates all those information about himself that will most advantageously present him and convince the management that this particular applicant should take the vacant position.
Statement- an official written request with a request for something, which is submitted to the head of the enterprise or a superior person. An application is usually written about hiring, granting leave, etc. The application must briefly and clearly state the essence of the request, provide the necessary facts confirming the legitimacy of the applicant's appeal. Each new thought in the statement should be written with a red line. Please note: the application is handwritten.
904. Read the sample resume. Select parts of this document. Include formal business style features on your resume. Find the similarities and differences between the resume and the application.
In 1998 she graduated from secondary school № 127 in Moscow and received a certificate of secondary education.
In 1998 she entered the secondary specialized school No. 15, which she graduated in 2000, having received a diploma with honors in the specialty “secretary-assistant”.
In 1999 she graduated from the courses and received a certificate in the profession "computer operator".
In 2000 she graduated from the German language courses and completed an internship in Germany. I speak German fluently, I read professional literature in the language.
In 2001, she graduated from the courses for motorists and received a license to drive a passenger car.
In 1999, she successfully completed an industrial practice at the Mosenergo management, the recommendation of the head of the practice is attached.
From January 1999 to December 2000 she worked as an assistant secretary at Energon LLC, replacing a temporarily disabled employee. The recommendation of the President of the LLC is attached.
My address: Moscow, st. Pokrovka, 15, apt. 9, tel. 123-45-67.
905. Read the text of the application, pay attention to the form and content of the document. Note the formal business style features in this document.
Director of the Moscow Machine Tool Technical School
Ivanov Pavel Petrovich, residing at the address: 103107, Moscow, st. Lesnaya, d. 64, apt. eighteen,
statement.
I ask to be admitted to the entrance exams at the Moscow Machine-Tool Technical School for the evening department of the Electromechanical Faculty.
In 2001 I graduated from the vocational school № 23 in Moscow, received a diploma of graduation from the school and a qualification certificate of an electrician of the 5th category.
The following documents are attached to the application:
1) diploma;
2) health certificate;
3) characteristics;
4) 2 photos.
906. Write a job application.
907. Prepare and write a resume to the address of the company where you would like to work.
908. Write a vacation application.
UDC 81 "374
BOT: 10.17223 / 22274200/11/2
K.S. Kochergina
STYLISTIC LITTERS IN INTERPRETATION DICTIONARIES OF THE MODERN RUSSIAN LANGUAGE: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
The article analyzes the systems of stylistic marks based on the material of five explanatory dictionaries of the Russian language of the late XX - early XXI centuries, which are most actively involved in the process of linguistic expertise. The stylistic characteristics of negative-evaluative nouns are compared with the meaning of the name of a person and a group of persons represented in these dictionaries. An approach is proposed for objectifying the stylistic characteristics of words, which consists in comparing data from several lexicographic sources.
Key words: evaluative word, negative evaluation, stylistic mark, dictionary, legal linguistics, linguistic expertise.
Formulation of the problem. The dictionary is the main legitimate source that the expert uses when performing linguistic expertise. There is no generally accepted list of dictionaries recommended as sources for the interpretation and stylistic qualifications of words. As a rule, the goals of traditional and modern explanatory dictionaries of the Russian language do not always meet the requirements of linguistic expertise. For example, when solving issues related to the presence of negative information about a person (group of persons) and his (their) actions, lexical units with negative-evaluative semantics are considered as the main markers, while the stylistic characteristics of the searched words can differ significantly, as well as expert conclusions made on its basis. This determines the relevance of the analysis of the systems of stylistic marks adopted in explanatory dictionaries, which are most often used in carrying out linguistic examinations, as well as the comparison of the stylistic characteristics of the words presented in them.
The purpose of this article is to compare stylistic labels in explanatory dictionaries of the modern Russian language and to identify the possibilities of their use in the process of carrying out a linguistic examination.
The sources of material for the analysis were five explanatory dictionaries of the Russian language, reflecting the lexical system of the late XX - early XXI century: "Russian Semantic Dictionary", ed. N.Yu. Shvedova (1998); The Big Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language (2000) and the Modern Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language, ed. S. A. Kuznetsova (2002); two-volume “New Dictionary of the Russian Language. Explanatory and derivational "T.F. Efremova (2000); "The Big Dictionary of Russian Colloquial Expressive Speech" by V.V. Chemist (2004). The selection criteria for these sources were the predominant use in examinations, the volume and current composition of the vocabulary, a reflection of the functional and stylistic stratification of the vocabulary of the modern Russian language (hereinafter: FRY).
The material for this study was more than 2000 negative-evaluative lexical-semantic units - nouns with the meaning of the nomination of a person and a group of persons. The collection of material was carried out by the method of continuous sampling from the dictionaries under consideration, taking into account the presence in the dictionary entry not only of the connotation, recorded using stylistic markings, but also of the negative-evaluative component in the composition of the denotative meaning, as well as the mandatory component “name of a person (group of persons)”. The final sample included 337 lexical and semantic units (designating a person - 315, designating a group of persons - 22) belonging to the normative layer of the modern Russian literary language.
History of the issue. A number of fundamental works (N.D. Arutyunova, V.G. Gak, L.P. Krysin, A.A. Leont'ev, L.G. Samotik, I.A. Sternin, V.N. Telia, A.D.Shmelev and others). Special attention of researchers is paid to the problems of lexico-graphing of the structure of the meaning of a word (E.V.Belskaya, N.A.Lukyanova, V.P. Moskvin, L.G. Smirnova, T.A. Tripolskaya, etc.).
There are fundamental differences in the structure of the meanings of the actually nominative (neutral) and evaluative words: the evaluative unit is characterized by complicated semantics - the presence of connotative semes, since in addition to the designation of the concept itself, the evaluative unit simultaneously conveys the speaker's attitude towards it. Following V.A. Salimovsky under the stylistic connotation
We understand it as “additional in relation to the subject-logical and grammatical meaning of a linguistic unit, its expressive-emotional-evaluative and functional properties”. As noted by T.A. Trypolskaya, “the semantic features of an expressive word, which distinguish it from a non-expressive one, make it possible to single out an expressive unit as a specific object of lexicography, presenting a number of additional requirements for its lexicographic description. The most general requirement is that the vocabulary should strive to reflect both the denotative and connotative aspects of expressive meaning. "
Assessment words are described in explanatory and ideographic dictionaries, as well as in a special type - stylistic dictionaries. In the lexicographic tradition, there are two ways of interpreting and fixing the connotative meaning in the dictionary: through reflection in the definition and with the help of stylistic notation. Stylistic label (hereinafter referred to as SP) is "a kind of dictionary label, a lexicographic technique for indicating the stylistic features of the explained vocabulary unit." SP is used by lexicographers in compiling dictionaries as a means to designate functional-style, temporal (historical), expressive-emotional-evaluative stratification of vocabulary. The joint venture is given before the interpretation of the word, and in the case of its ambiguity - before a separate meaning or its shade. The absence of a SP in a word (meaning, shade) means that it is stylistically neutral. Also, in addition to the SP, if necessary, a stylistic commentary is used, clarifying or limiting the content of the functional-stylistic qualification of the word: often, more often, usually, sometimes, also.
As noted by O.N. Emelyanova, “in general, the system of S. p. (Stylistic marks. - K. K.) is far from perfect. This is evidenced by the fact that each explanatory dictionary uses its own system of syllabus, sometimes significantly different from the system of syllabus of other explanatory dictionaries. " The heterogeneity of the systems SP O.N. Emelyanova demonstrates on the example of explanatory dictionaries, ed. D.N. Ushakova, S.I. Ozhegova, A.M. Evgenieva. From the examples given by the researcher, it follows that, first, there is no clear hierarchical relationship between the marks; secondly, litters with one
Nom and the same word in different dictionaries may be different. This discrepancy in the stylistic description of the vocabulary is explained by the fact that the currently existing SP systems demonstrate an insufficient level of development of the modern theory of stylistics and lexicography. The researcher names the following as the reasons for this: 1) faster change of stylistic norms in comparison with others; 2) the absence of a stylistic theory of the word specially oriented to the needs of lexicography; 3) the coexistence of different approaches to the interpretation of the stylistic potential of the word; 4) significant differences in the understanding of the categories of emotiveness, evaluativeness, expressiveness and the relationship between them.
The problem of underdevelopment of the joint venture system in the aspect of legal linguistics was first noted by N.D. Golev. The presence of the human factor in the definition of the evaluative semantics of words, called N.D. The goal by the "intuition" of lexicographers, firstly, affects the objectivity of the characterization of this or that word, which is confirmed by the discrepancy between the opinions of the authors of the dictionaries in the stylistic characterization of lexemes; secondly, on the "quality" of these droppings and their comprehensiveness.
The discrepancy between the goals of explanatory dictionaries and the goals of forensic linguistic expertise is due to the difficulty of translating dictionary marks into legal terms "insult", "humiliation" and a number of others, which is due to the non-graduated nature of the evaluative signs of words: , contempt., disapproval, abusive, do not line up in a single row, although they express a negative assessment, they are hardly opposed to each other in terms of the degree of “negativity” (italics ours - K.K.) ”.
Researchers and experts note that the accuracy of the labels given in explanatory dictionaries is disputed by linguists, and this is due to several reasons: different levels of "intuition" of lexicographers; the discrepancy in the theoretical attitudes of the compilers of dictionaries; difference in material; objective stylistic changes in the language during the period that separates one dictionary from another (including the obsolescence of one of the dictionaries to the present moment). All this leads to the fact that often expert conclusions become subjective.
1. Comparative analysis of systems of stylistic labels.
Let us characterize the SP systems adopted in five dictionaries, which are selected as sources of material.
Russian Semantic Dictionary, ed. N.Yu. Shvedova (1998) (hereinafter RCC). The main source of the RCC was materials from the "Dictionary of the Russian language" by S.I. Ozhegov (1949-1989) and "Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language" by S.I. Ozhegova and N.Yu. Shvedova (1993-1997). The RCC retains the SP system adopted in these dictionaries: bookish, lofty, folk-poetic, colloquial, vernacular, special, outdated, old, affectionate, humorous, ironic, disapproving, dismissive, derogatory, contemptuous, rude, abusive. The order of bringing negative-evaluative marks may indicate that the compilers of the dictionary made an attempt to arrange them as the indicated "degree" of negativity increases, however, the theoretical justification for the dictionary does not indicate which criteria are the basis for the differentiation of the evaluative features indicated by these marks words and, consequently, the qualification of this or that word, for example, precisely as disapproving, and not contemptuous.
"The Big Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language" (2000) and "The Modern Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language" (2002), ed. S.A. Kuznetsov (hereinafter referred to as BTS and STS, respectively). BTS and STS are drawn up on the same basis: the commonality can be traced in the adopted system of litters. The functional and stylistic fixation of words is indicated by four series of SPs, highlighted by the compilers in the introduction to dictionaries: 1) characterizing the book form of the FRY; 2) characterizing the colloquial form of SRY; 3) characterizing the chronological stratification of vocabulary; 4) conveying an emotionally expressive assessment. On the periphery of the SP system, there is also a group of labels associated with the suffixes of subjective assessment, which not so much characterize the word stylistically as convey its lexical meaning: magnifying, diminutive, amplifying, softening. The structural and semantic property of lexical units, which consists in the expression of subjective qualitative and quantitative semantics, is called “intensity”, and the lexical units themselves, possessing this property, are called “intensives”.
“New dictionary of the Russian language. Explanatory and derivational "T.F. Efremova (2000) (hereinafter NS). The guiding principle of the NN is normativity, with the aim of strengthening which "a system of functional labels is used, which is a kind of stylistic commentary." A distinctive feature of this dictionary is the design of the stylistic characteristics of words in the format of a commentary, completing the interpretation and enclosed in parentheses, or placing it in a separate meaning. For example, the meanings of affection, magnification, diminutiveness, amplification, etc., conveyed using suffixes with appropriate semantics, are recorded as independent.
"The Big Dictionary of Russian Colloquial Expressive Speech" by V.V. Chemist (2004) (hereinafter BS). In the preface to this dictionary, there is no description of the SP system adopted in it, with the exception of an indication that SP are divided into two types: emotional-evaluative and functional-social. A certain sequence of their reduction is also indicated: first, emotional-evaluative, then functional-social marks are introduced. A mark placed in brackets at a word means the irregularity of the manifestation of one or another characteristic. The list of joint ventures is not presented separately, but it is extracted from the list of conditional abbreviations, as well as by analyzing dictionary entries.
The above-described systems of the joint venture of five explanatory dictionaries are given in comparison in table. 1. Note that SPs were entered in the table in accordance with the order in which they were indicated in the prefaces to the source dictionaries: in the RCC, the labels are given in a list in which three groups of SPs can be distinguished; in BTS and STS, compilers give notes systematically, dividing them into appropriate groups; in the case of NS, the joint venture and other methods of transmitting stylistic characteristics indicated in the preface were distributed based on other dictionaries; since in the BS the system of litters is not described, but they are isolated from the list of symbols, the joint ventures were distributed with a focus on the BTS and STS.
Table 1. Comparison of SP systems in the explanatory dictionaries of the SRYa
Group SP RCC (1998) BTS (2000), STS (2002) NS (2000) BS (2004)
Functional and style labels
Written (book) form FRY book book
official
journalistic
traditionally poetic
folk poetry folk poetry
traditional literary
special special
Oral (colloquial) form of FRU colloquial colloquial colloquial colloquial
colloquial decreased colloquial-impaired conversational-impaired
vernacular
regional
familiar familiar
traditional-folk traditional
folk-spoken common people
folk poetry folklore
"Inputs" professional-conversational commentary special
slang slang
The end of the table. 1
Chronological labels
Time characteristic obsolete obsolete obsolete. (deprecated, deprecated) deprecated
old historical
"Inputs" encyclopedic remarks encyclopedic commentary Sovietism
Expressive-emotional-evaluative labels
Positive - high
approving commented approving
petting petting tari petting
respectful respectful
Ambiva - humorous humorous humorous
taped ironic ironic ironic
Negative - mocking
condescending
negative
disapproving disapproving disapproving
dismissive dismissive
derogatory derogatory
contempt contempt contempt
rough rough rough
swearing swearing
vulgar vulgar
obscene
Intensive magnifying
diminutive diminutive
amplifying amplifying
softened softened
Other euphemisms
dysphemism
Functional and style labels. The most consistently highlighted marks are both written and oral forms of SAD in BTS and STS. In contrast to them, in the RCC, from the marks for writing, only book, high, folk poetry and special are distinguished, and in the NS and BS there are no such marks (in the case of BS, this is explained by the specifics of the material of this dictionary - colloquial speech).
Litter colloquial is presented in all five dictionaries, colloquial diminished / colloquial-diminished - in four (except for the PCC), the rest of the litter from the oral sphere of the FRF are allocated inconsistently and singularly. Let's comment on some of them.
Litter professional-colloquial (BTS, STS) correspond to the comment (NS), or the so-called "inputs" (RCC), or special litter (BS) in variations: medical, sports, technical, etc. Note that the special joint venture (BS) we refer to the SP, which characterizes the oral form of the RL, and not the written form, as in other dictionaries, since the object of BS lexicography is colloquial speech. Separately, the compilers of the National Assembly stipulate the status of professional and special vocabulary. Professionalisms are not marked in the form of labels: they either do not stand out from the layer of colloquial vocabulary and are labeled as colloquial, or their interpretation contains a special comment in parentheses, for example: (sayings of athletes); (speeches of hunters). Special vocabulary, i.e. vocabulary from the speech of specialists (including terms) also does not have a separate label, but, like professional, is accompanied by appropriate comments, for example: (in medicine); (in the printing industry).
In BS, much attention is paid to the varieties of slang droppings. So, in addition to the general joint venture jargon, thirteen variants of this litter are possible, characterizing a specific species: arm. (army jargon), maps. (gambling jargon), comp. (computer jargon), cream. (criminal jargon), police. (police jargon), young. (youth jargon), pestilence. (sailors jargon), muses. (musician jargon), narc. (jargon of addicts), div. (teenage jargon), stud. (student jargon), bargaining. (trade jargon), schools. (school lingo).
Chronological labels. In addition to the traditional labels of two types: obsolete (for words falling out of use in the FRY) and
old / historical (for words that have come out of everyday life) - there are other ways of marking the temporal characteristics of words: the sovietism litter (BS), as well as "inputs" (RCC) and encyclopedic remarks (BTS, STS), which clarify the temporal attribution of realities and are part of the interpretation: In the old days: ...; In Ancient Russia: ...; IN USSR: ... . Note that the chronological litter is outdated in the NS. without distinguishing between obsolete and obsolete meanings of words. In addition to this mark, an encyclopedic commentary is used in the National Assembly, which is part of the interpretation, completing it and enclosed in parentheses, for example: (in Russia IX-XVI centuries); (in the Russian state HUP-XIII centuries); (in the Russian state until 1917); (in the USSR and in Russia until 1991); (in Russia after 1991); (in old times); (in Ancient Greece); (in Ancient Rome), etc.
Expressive-emotional-evaluative marks. With respect to this group of SPs, it is possible to compare only four of the five dictionaries under consideration, since there are no labels as such in the NS: their function is performed by a commentary, or the estimated values are taken out as separate ones. The commentary is constructed according to the model “usually with a touch” plus one of the expressive-emotional assessments, for example: (usually with a touch of censure); (usually with a tinge of dismissiveness).
When comparing, all expressive-emotional-evaluative marks were divided into four groups according to the type of expressed meaning: positive, ambivalent, negative, intense, as well as others, which included SP euphemism and dysphemism “as a sign of a special semantic load”. The group of litters expressing positive semantics includes four SPs: high, approving, affectionate, and respectful / respectful. To the group of joint ventures with negative semantics - eleven: mocking, condescending, negative, disapproving, dismissive, derogatory, contemptuous, rude, abusive, vulgar, obscene. Let us stipulate that we consider two labels - humorous and ironic - to express ambivalent meanings, since a joke and irony can carry both positive and negative semantics, depending on the context of use and extralinguistic factors.
The data presented in the table allow us to conclude that
that the SP systems in all five dictionaries are different. None of these dictionaries reveal the full completeness of the functional-stylistic stratification of vocabulary, however, in BTS and STS, as well as BS, the range of labels is most widely represented (the latter is the leader in the number of evaluative labels: BS is distinguished by the presence of such STs that mark negative semantic shades of the meaning of the word , as mocking, condescending, negative, obscene), while in the NS, marks from stylistic markers go into the category of comments and even penetrate into the semantic composition of words.
The focus of this study is emotionally expressive-evaluative SP, which are associated with the expression of attitude to the subject (in the broad sense of the word), its assessment, and only negative evaluative marks are taken into account. Consider some controversial issues related to the qualification of litters as negative evaluations.
The litter colloquially reduced / colloquially reduced is recognized as negative-evaluative because its interpretation contains an indication of "intentionally rude expression" and "speech negligence and rude or rude expression), which corresponds to the negative-evaluative semantics of other SPs such as disapproving, dismissive, etc. however, it remains unclear how rough and rough expression can be correlated with the meanings of these SPs.
In BTS and STS of the litter, familiar marks the words used "in a casual, friendly communication, in an informal setting." At the same time, the word "familiar" is interpreted in the same dictionaries negatively as "overly laid-back, unceremonious, inappropriately cheeky (about a person, his behavior)", which contradicts the above interpretation of the joint venture. Consequently, this litter cannot be recognized as unambiguously marking a negative assessment in these dictionaries. Note that in the other three it is absent, and in the BS there is no explanation of the meaning of this label.
In the prefaces to BTS, STS and NS, two labels are given that are of interest from the point of view of labeling negative-evaluative semantics: SP folk-colloquial - "for words indicating belonging to irregular folk speech and used in texts as a means of reduced expression"
And the local joint venture - "with words characterized not only by their use in a certain territory, but also carrying something social, and therefore often signaling a sufficient stylistic decline and even about being outside the literary norm." According to this interpretation, these SPs carry the semantics of stylistic decline and non-normality, however, due to their inconsistent selection (these labels are highlighted only in the specified dictionaries), they cannot be unambiguously considered as part of the SP system, expressing the semantics of negative assessment.
Of the two labels expressing ambivalent evaluative meanings, the ironic ("for words used for the purpose of ridicule") can be more confidently considered negative evaluative, while the jocular ("for words containing a funny, frivolous, playful assessment") - rather positively evaluative. To determine the status of jokes and irony, let us turn to the interpretation of these concepts. Joke - “1. What they say is done with the aim of causing laughter; funny trick, trick or wit. " Examples of the use of this word in the opposite in "sign" combinations "innocent, harmless" and "evil, prickly" are given, from which the contextual dependence of this concept follows. Irony - “1. Subtle, hidden mockery. 2. A stylistic turnover, a phrase, a word, in which the opposite of what one thinks about a person or an object is deliberately stated. " Taunt - “1. An offensive joke about someone, smth. " ... The above interpretations of the words "irony" and "mockery" (through which "irony" is interpreted) indicate a negative component in their meaning, and, consequently, in the meaning of the corresponding SP.
On the basis of the analysis, it was determined that twelve marks are marking the negative-evaluative meaning of the word: colloquial reduced / colloquially reduced, ironic, mocking, condescending, disapproving, dismissive, derogatory, contemptuous, rude / rude, abusive / abusive, vulgar, obscene. Litters from this list are heterogeneous, since they belong both to the group of functional-style labels that characterize the oral form of ERF, and to labels expressing an expressive-emotional-evaluative characteristic, which
confirms the thesis about the lack of development in stylistics and lexicography of common grounds for the stylistic qualification of words.
2. Comparative analysis of the stylistic characteristics of words. Based on the comparison of the SP systems, three dictionaries were selected to study the stylistic characteristics of words: RCC, CTC and BS.
For comparison, 337 lexical-semantic units were taken, recorded in the vocabularies of all three dictionaries and having negative-evaluative SP. Let us illustrate the comparison performed (cases of coincidence of SPs are marked by underlining). In total, when comparing litters, several types of their ratio can be distinguished:
1) the litter is present only in one of the dictionaries: Buzoter (RSS: disapproved) (CTC: no) (BS: no), Okhlamon (RSS: contempt, also abusive) (CTC: no) (BS: no), Ekhidina (RCC: contempt.) (STS: no) (BS: no), Ogolets (RCC: no) (STS: ramp-down) (BS: no), Pickpocket (RCC: no) (STS: raz. -decrease) (BS: no), Crazy (RCC: no) (STS: ramp-down) (BS: no), Crow (RCC: no) (STS: no) (BS: abusive), Prostofil (RSS: no) (STS: no) (BS: mocking), Zuboskal (RSS: no) (STS: no) (BS: disapproved); Here and below, the quotes "" are removed.
2) the labels from the two dictionaries coincide, and the third is absent, while the labels can be completely the same: Gramotay (RSS: iron.) (CTC: iron.) (BS: no), Upstairs (RSS: disapproved.) (CTC: disapproved) (BS: no), Switchman (RSS: iron.) (STS: no) (BS: iron.), and partially: Limit (RSS: neg.) (CTC: no) (BS: negl. or contempt), Paskuda (RSS: rude) (STS: no) (BS: rude abusive vulg. neg.), Bitch (RSS: rude) (STS: no) (BS: rude contempt. ramp-down);
3) there are labels in three dictionaries, but they coincide only in two of them completely: Junk (RSS: neglected) (STS: neglected) (BS: contempt. STS: swearing) (BS: swearing); or partially: Dubina (RCC: contempt.) (STS: abusive) (BS: abusive rasp.-decline), Drunk (RCC: contempt.) (STS: usually abusive) (BS: contempt. ); and also in pairs: Spawn (RSS: contempt.) (STS: abusive) (BS: contempt. (abusive) rasp.-decrease), Bastard (RSS: abusive) (STS: rude) (BS: rude. . rasp.-downgraded.), Gadina (RSS: contempt.) (STS: abusive) (BS: abusive. contempt.);
4) the labels are the same in all three dictionaries (usually
for SP abusive) in full: Gad (RSS: abusive) (CTC: abusive) (BS: abusive) or partially: Gadina (RSS: abusive) (CTC: abusive) (BS: abusive contempt.), Blockhead (RCC: abusive) (STS: abusive) (BS: abusive deciphering-decreasing), Gopkompaniya (RSS: disapproved) (STS: disapproving) (BS: mocking disapproving deciphering-decreasing), Trash (RSS: contempt.) (STS: contempt.) (BS: contempt. (Abusive) rasp.-decrease.);
5) the labels do not match in any of the dictionaries: Khakhal (RCC: usually ironic) (STS: unapproved) (BS: unapproved), Sabbath (RCC: contempt) (STS: neglected) (BS : rude.), including in the absence in one of them: Foolish (RSS: no) (STS: abusive) (BS: rasp.-decrease.);
6) labels are absent in all three dictionaries, for example: Vertoprah, Zlyuchka, Bednyak, Mazurik, Sadist, Verkhushka.
From the given examples of matching labels, it follows that the predominantly stylistic characteristics of words differ in all three dictionaries.
Referring to the dictionary entries of the RCC, STS and BS allows you to trace their distinctive features. So, for example, in the RCC, double labels are frequent, indicating the polyfunctional use of words. Most often these are combinations of various litters with SP bran: negligible, also bran. (most frequent); contempt, also / usually abusive .; rude, also / usually abusive .; frowned upon, also bran .. In addition, there are compound marks of rude. bran. and rude. contempt. , which are not separately described in the preface to the dictionary, but seem to be independent, since between the two parts it is rough. and bran. there is no comma separation: Dog (contempt, also rude abusive), Infection (contempt, also rude abusive), Scum (contempt, also rude abusive), Paskuda (rude contempt, also abusive.) ). In addition, in RCC litters are complicated by the presence of quantifiers often, more often, usually, sometimes also.
In STS and BS, the presence of multicomponent expressive-emotional-evaluative joint ventures is noted. For STS, such cases are rare: Skin (rudely abusive); Bespectacled (jokingly neglected); Pharaoh (colloquial-decreasing contempt.); Type (neglected will soften.); The ball-skier (spoken-downward swearing). However, in BS, the stylistic characteristics of most words include up to five components: Creature (rude. Teteya (rude, mocking, disapproving deciphering-reduction); Little baby (rude swearing, contemptuous dissemination-decreasing neg.); Ass (rude vulgar disapproval or contempt (abusive)). The BS is characterized by the connection of the joint venture in
multicomponent litter as with the help of the conjunction "or": Chauffeur (pejorative or negligible deciphering-decreasing); Gang-watering can (jokingly disapproved or contemptuous deciphering); Moth (mock or ironic razd.-downgrade); Squishy (neglected or unapproved razg.-reduced); and with the help of a hyphen: Nesun (mock-ironic-deciphering); Negro (mocking-pejorative); Arkharovets (joke-iron.); Kopusha (jokingly condescending). Another feature of the BS is the use of the technique of specifying a label in brackets to mark an inconsistently manifested sign of the word: Trash ((abusive) rasp.-downgrade); Abomination (contempt (abusive) razd.-downgraded); Putana ((mocking)); Crocodile (mocking rude (abusive)).
These features of the stylistic characteristics of words in the dictionaries under consideration not only cause difficulties in comparing them with those available in other dictionaries, but also complicate a more accurate qualification of evaluative words, including during linguistic expertise.
Conclusions. Thus, the study showed that the problem of systematicity and homogeneity of the joint venture remains unresolved in stylistics and lexicography. SP systems are heterogeneous both in structure and in content: there is no generally accepted basis for the selection of certain droppings. It is required to bring the known classifications of joint ventures to a unified form, as well as, in the future, to adapt them to the goals of linguistic expertise. Due to the heterogeneity of the SP systems, labels for one word in different dictionaries may be different or may be absent in some dictionaries if present in others. The heterogeneous stylistic characteristics of words do not contribute to the accuracy and objectivity of examinations carried out on the basis of these dictionaries. To obtain the most objective and complete stylistic characteristics of words, several lexicographic sources should be compared.
Literature
1. Golev N.D., Matveeva O.N. Legal linguistic expertise: at the intersection of language and law // Siberian Journal of Philology. - 2003. - No. 1. - S. 146-157.
2. Russian semantic dictionary: Explanatory dictionary, systematized by classes of words and meanings / Russian Academy of Sciences. Inst rus. lang. them. V.V. Vinogradov; under total. ed. N.Yu. Shvedova. - Vol. 1: Indicating words
(pronouns). Naming words: nouns (All living things. Earth. Space). - M .: Azbukovnik, 1998 .-- 800 p.
3. The Big Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language / ed. S.A. Kuznetsova. - SPb .: Norint, 2000 .-- 1534 p.
4. Modern explanatory dictionary of the Russian language / ed. S.A. Kuznetsova. -SPb .: Norint, 2002 .-- 959 p.
5. Efremova T.F. New dictionary of the Russian language: Explanatory and derivational. - T. 1: A-O. - M .: Rus. yaz., 2000 .-- 1210 p.
6. Efremova T.F. New dictionary of the Russian language: Explanatory and derivational. - T. 2: P-Z. - M .: Rus. yaz., 2000 .-- 1084 p.
7. Chemist V.V. A large dictionary of Russian colloquial expressive speech. -SPb .: Norint, 2004 .-- 768 p.
8. Salimovsky VA Stylistic connotation // Stylistic encyclopedic dictionary of the Russian language / ed. M.N. Kozhina. - M., 2006. -S. 432-433.
9. Trypolskaya T.A. Semantic structure of an expressive word and its lexicographic description (based on emotional-evaluative nouns with the meaning of a person): author. dis. ... Cand. philol. sciences. - Tomsk, 1985 .-- 18 p.
10. Emelyanova ON Stylistic litter // Stylistic encyclopedic dictionary of the Russian language / ed. M.N. Kozhina. - M., 2006. -S. 444-447.
11. Golev N.D. Legalization of a natural language as a legal linguistic problem // Jurisingvistics-2: Russian language in its natural and legal existence: Interuniversity. Sat. scientific. tr. / ed. N. D. Goleva. - Barnaul, 2000 .-- S. 9-45.
12. Golev N.D. On the objectivity and legitimacy of the sources of linguistic expertise // Yurislingvistika-3: Problems of legal linguistic expertise: interuniversity. Sat. scientific. tr. / ed. N. D. Goleva. - Barnaul, 2002 .-- S. 14-29.
13. Golev N.D. A legal-linguistic dictionary of invective vocabulary of the Russian language (to the problem statement) // Actual problems of Russian studies: materials of the Intern. scientific. conf. / otv. ed. T.A. Demeshkin. - Tomsk, 2003. - Issue. 2, h. 1. -C. 92-98.
14. Belchikov Yu.A. Linguistic expertise on documentary and information disputes and dictionaries // Theory and practice of linguistic analysis of media texts in forensic examinations and information disputes: collection of articles. materials scientific and practical. seminar, Moscow, December 7-8, 2002 - Part 2 / ed. M.V. Gorbanevsky. - M., 2003 .-- S. 32-47.
15. Kukushkina OV, Safonova Yu.A., Sekerage T.N. Theoretical and methodological foundations of forensic psychological and linguistic examination of texts in cases related to countering extremism. - M .: RFTsSE under the Ministry of Justice of Russia, 2011 .-- 330 p.
16. Belskaya E.V. Lexicographic description of the intensive vocabulary of the dialect // Vestn. Volume. state un-that. Philology. - 2012. - No. 3 (19). - S. 5-13.
STYLISTIC LABELS IN DICTIONARIES OF THE MODERN RUSSIAN LANGUAGE: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Voprosy leksikografii - Russian Journal of Lexicography, 2017, 11, pp. 20-38. DOI: 10.17223 / 22274200/11/2
Kristina S. Kochergina, Tomsk State University (Tomsk, Russian Federation). Email: [email protected]
Keywords: evaluative word, negative evaluation, stylistic label, dictionary, juridical linguistics, linguistic expertise.
The article analyzes the systems of stylistic labels on the material of the five Russian language dictionaries of the late 20th century and of the early 21st century, which are most actively involved in linguistic expertise. The label systems of the five dictionaries are described and compared in a table. Three groups of labels are identified and characterized: 1) functional-style labels; 2) chronological labels; 3) expressive and emotional evaluation labels.
The data presented in the table suggest that the label systems of the five dictionaries are different. None of these dictionaries discloses all functional and stylistic separation of the vocabulary.
Some disputed issues related to the label qualification as negative-evaluative ones are also considered in the article. It is suggested that 12 labels mark the negative-evaluative meaning of a word: low colloquial, ironic, mocking, condescending, disapproving, neglecting, disparaging, contemptuous, rude, expletive, vulgar, obscene. The list of these labels is heterogeneous, because it contains both functional-style labels, which characterize the oral form of the modern Russian language, and other labels, which characterize expressive, emotional and evaluative meaning of a word. This confirms the thesis about the absence of common grounds for the stylistic classification of words in stylistics and lexicography.
The article compares the stylistic characteristics of the negative-evaluative nouns meaning a person name and of nouns meaning a person group name represented in these dictionaries. The 337 units with negative-evaluative labels from three dictionaries were taken for comparison. While comparing labels, several types of relationships were allocated: 1) a label is presented only in one of the dictionaries; 2) a label matches a second one from another dictionary but it is not presented in a third dictionary; 3) a label is presented in all three dictionaries but it matches only one and differs from another label; 4) all three labels from dictionaries match each other; 5) all three labels from dictionaries do not match each other; 6) all three labels are absent in the dictionaries. This suggests that the stylistic characteristics of a word are different in the three dictionaries.
The use of the dictionaries shows their distinctive features, for example, the presence of multi-labels. These features of word stylistic characteristics in the dictionaries not only cause difficulties while comparing them, but also complicate an accurate classification of evaluative words, including in cases of conducting linguistic expertise.
In conclusion, the author proposes an approach for the objectification of word stylistic characteristics, which is to compare the data from several lexicographic sources.
1. Golev, N.D. & Matveeva, O.N. (2003) Yurislingvisticheskaya ekspertiza: na styke yazyka i prava. Sibirskiy filologicheskiy zhurnal - Siberian Journal of Philology. 1. pp. 146-157.
2. Shvedova, N.Yu. (ed.) (1998) Russkiy semanticheskiy slovar ". Tolkovyy slovar", sistematizirovannyypo klassam slov i znacheniy. Vol. 1. Moscow: Azbukovnik.
3. Kuznetsov, S.A. (ed.) (2000) Bol "shoy tolkovyy slovar" russkogo yazyka. St. Petersburg: Norint.
4. Kuznetsov, S.A. (ed.) (2002) Sovremennyy tolkovyy slovar "russkogo yazyka. St. Petersburg: Norint.
5. Efremova, T.F. (2000) Novyy slovar "russkogo yazyka. Tolkovo-slovoobrazovatel" nyy. Vol. 1. Moscow: Russkiy yazyk.
6. Efremova, T.F. (2000) Novyy slovar "russkogo yazyka. Tolkovo-slovoobrazovatel" nyy. Vol. 2. Moscow: Russkiy yazyk.
7. Khimik, V.V. (2004) Bol "shoy slovar" russkoy razgovornoy ekspressivnoy rechi. St. Petersburg: Norint.
8. Salimovskiy, V.A. (2006) Stilisticheskaya konnotatsiya. In: Kozhina, M.N. (ed.) Stilisticheskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar "russkogo yazyka. Moscow: Flinta: Nauka.
9. Tripol "skaya, T.A. (1985) Semanticheskaya struktura ekspressivnogo slova i ee leksikograficheskoe opisanie (na materiale emotsional" no-otsenochnykh sushchestvitel "nykh so znacheniem litsa). Abstract of Philology Cand. Diss. Toms.
10. Emel "yanova, O.N. (2006) Stilisticheskaya pometa. In Kozhina, M.N. (ed.) Stilisticheskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar" russkogo yazyka. Moscow: Flinta: Nauka.
11. Golev, N.D. (2000) Yuridizatsiya estestvennogo yazyka kak yurislingvisticheskaya problema. In: Golev, N.D. (ed.) Yurislingvistika-2: Russkiy yazyk v ego estestvennom i yuridicheskom bytii. Barnaul: Altai State University.
12. Golev, N.D. (2002) Ob ob "ektivnosti i legitimnosti istochnikov lingvisticheskoy ekspertizy. In: Golev, N.D. (ed.) Yurislingvistika-3: Problemy yurislingvisticheskoy ekspertizy. Barnaul: Altai State University.
13. Golev, N.D. (2003). Aktual "nye problemy rusistiki. Proceedings of the international conference. Vol.2: 1. Tomsk: Tomsk State University. Pp. 92-98. (In Russian).
14. Bel "chikov, Yu.A. (2003). Teoriya i praktika lingvisticheskogo analiza tekstov SMI v sudebnykh ekspertizakh i informatsionnykh sporakh. Proceedings of the seminar. Moscow. 7-8 2002. Vol. 2. Moscow: Galeriya. Pp. . 32-47. (In Russian).
15. Kukushkina, O.V., Safonova, Yu.A. & Sekerazh, T.N. (2011) Teoreticheskie i metodicheskie osnovy sudebnoy psikhologo-lingvisticheskoy ekspertizy tekstov po delam, svyazannym s protivodeystviem ekstremizmu. Moscow: RFTsSE pri Minyuste Rossii.
16. Bel "skaya, E.V. (2012) Lexicographic description of intensive vocabulary of dialect. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya - Tomsk State University Journal of Philology. 3 (19). Pp. 5-13. (In Russian).
Litter system on the style of the word
|
functional and stylistic marks |
emotionally expressive labels |
|
(book), those. bookish, means that the word is characteristic of a written, bookish presentation; often these words, especially those of a foreign language in origin, are synonymous with words of neutral vocabulary; |
(high.), i.e. high, means that the word gives speech a shade of solemnity, elation; characteristic of journalistic, oratory, as well as poetic speech; |
|
(official), those. official, means that the word is characteristic of the speech of official relations, as well as of clerical and administrative speech; |
(contempt.) those. contemptuous |
|
(colloquial), those. colloquial means that the word is characteristic of everyday, colloquial speech, serves as a characteristic of the phenomenon in the circle of everyday relations; it does not go beyond the norms of literary use of words, but imparts ease to speech; |
(disapproved) those. disapproving |
|
(simple.), those. colloquial, means that the word is characteristic of non-literary urban colloquial speech, which contains many recent dialect words, words of slang origin, new formations that arise to characterize various everyday relations, word-formation variants of neutral vocabulary; a vernacular word is used in the literary language as a stylistic means to give speech a touch of playful, dismissive, ironic, rude, etc.; often these words are expressive, expressive synonyms of words of neutral vocabulary; |
(neglected), those. disparaging |
|
(region), those. regional, such a label is supplied with local, dialect words used in speech, if necessary, to designate a particular phenomenon by means not of a literary language, but of a local dialect, dialect; |
(joking), those. joking |
|
(iron.), those. ironic |
|
|
(abusive), those. swearing |
|
|
(rude), those. rude |
Examples of
Three words with one style tag
HOOK, -I, -you; nesov. (simple.)... Shout loudly and abruptly, bark (in 2 values). II single bark, - well, you know.
GLUPYSH, -a, m. (colloquial). Still an unreasonable child (affectionately).
HARMONIZE (-with, -you, 1 and 2 l. Not used), -says; not sov., with what (book). to be in accordance with something, to be in harmony (in 2 meanings). words are in harmony with deeds.
Three words with emotionally expressive labels
GENIUS, - I, m. 1. The highest creative ability. Literary town of Tolstoy. 2. A person with this ability. Creations of geniuses. Unrecognized Mr. (about who overestimates his abilities; iron.).
GIANTOMANIA, -and, well. ( disapproved). striving for practically unjustified organization of something. in very large sizes.
GLAS, -a, m. ( outdated. high). the same as the voice (in 1 and 3 digits).
Three words with emotionally expressive labels and functional style
GALDEZH, -ja, m. (colloquial disapproval.). polyphonic scream, noise. raise g. stop g.
PREPARE, - I want, - you want; nesov. 1. about geese: make characteristic sounds similar to "go-go-go". 2.the same as laughing (simple disapproval.).
GULKIN: with a gulkin nose ( colloquial joking.)- about someone. very little or little. himself with a gulkin's nose, and there, too, talking. I earned money from a gulkin's nose.
