Attention to the word. Language is the most important means of human communication. When they talk about language they mean

Articles, although a basic topic in English, cause difficulties for language learners. Difficulties arise due to the fact that there are no articles in the Russian language, and we do not understand why they are needed at all, and when to put them in a sentence.

It is because of this that very often people forget about this little helper or confuse when to put an article and when not. Now we will help you fully understand them!

In this article you will learn:

• Why is the article needed in English?
• 2 types of articles
• In what cases should each of these types be used?

Why is the article needed in English?

Article - This is a small label that is placed in front of some words to make it easier for us to understand them. We do not translate articles into Russian. However, it is the article that is an indicator and helps us grasp information about the word. How? To answer this, let's look at the functions it performs.

The article performs the following functions:

• Shows what the object or creature in question. For example: table, chair, closet, cat, dog, student, teacher, etc.
• Shows that we are talking about something specific or about general concept . Compare the following two sentences.

General: I want a car.
Specific: I want this red car.

There are two types of articles in English: definite - the(when we are talking about something specific) and undefined - a/an(when talking about a general concept). Let's take a closer look at each of them.

Using the indefinite article a/an in English

The article occurred a/an from the word one and means "one joke", "some, some".

The indefinite article indicates that we are not talking about a specific subject, but rather a general concept.

For example, if a person says:
Give me a book / Give me a book.

By article a we can understand that the person is not referring to any specific book. Any book will suit him.

We use the article a/an when we speak about one subject, and we are talking only about those items that we can count. For example: pen, cup, hamster, student, etc.

What is the difference between the articles a and an?

The use of the article a or an depends on the sound with which the word denoting the object begins.

Article a in English

Article a consonants sounds.

Consonant- sound that consists of voice and noise. When we pronounce such a sound, the air encounters obstacles in the mouth: tongue, lips, teeth. Try to pronounce these consonant sounds yourself: [v], [m], [th].

Examples: a c ar (car), a p ear (pear), a t able (table), a d og (dog).

Article an in English

Article an we put before words that begin with vowels sounds.

Vowel- sound that can be pulled; air does not encounter obstacles during pronunciation; consists of voice. See for yourself, pronounce the following vowel sounds: [a], [o], [u].

Examples: an a pple (apple), an a rtist (artist), an e lephant (elephant), an u mbrella (umbrella)

note It's about the sound, not the letter.

Letter- this is what we write.
Sound- this is what we say or hear.

For example: letter C (Si) gives 2 sounds - [k] or [c]

Let's look at the following examples:

A h ome /[ X oum] - the word begins with a consonant sound.
An h our [?a??]/[ A ue] - the word begins with a vowel sound.

Why is there an article before the word hour? Look at the transcription of the word hour: it starts with [a]. And this is a vowel sound!

Moreover, if we say an hour- it will just be inconvenient. Try to say it wrong yourself - "e aue". Therefore, to make speech smoother, the British came up with the idea of ​​adding n between them. Now say the correct option - "en aue". Do you feel the difference?

Uses of the indefinite article a/an in English

Now let's look at in what situations we put the article a/an before the word. As you remember, it is vague because we are not talking about a specific thing, but about some general concept.

This article is used when:

1. You are talking about someone or something that has not been mentioned before, that is, your listener does not know about it.

I have read an interesting book.
I have read interesting book.
Explanation: The interlocutor does not know what book we are talking about; he is hearing about it for the first time

We have a problem.
We have a problem.
Explanation: The interlocutor does not yet know what problem we are talking about; he is hearing about it for the first time

2. You mean general things, not a specific person or thing.
For example, when you say, “I need a pen,” you don’t mean a specific pen, any pen will do.

He has to buy a cake.
He needs to buy a cake.
Explanation: The person was not told to buy a specific cake, he can buy any

She wanted to eat a sandwich.
She wanted to eat a sandwich.
Explanation: She wanted to eat any sandwich, it wasn't about any specific sandwich.

3. We talk about drinks in the sense of "portion".

May you bring me a tea?
Can you bring me some tea?
Explanation: This means a serving - a cup of tea

She ordered a wine.
She ordered wine.
Explanation: A man talks about a portion - a glass of wine

Using the definite article the in English

Article the came from the words this/that and means “this”, “this”, “this”, etc. Unlike the indefinite article, the definite article the can be placed in front of any objects/people in any quantity.

Defined means that we are talking about something specific, and our interlocutor understands what subject we are talking about.

Cases of using the definite article the in English

We put the article the before words when:

1. You have already mentioned this item or person, and your interlocutor knows what you are talking about.

I have read an interesting book. My friend gave me the book.
I read an interesting book. My friend gave me (this) book.
Explanation: When we mention a book in the second sentence, the interlocutor already knows that we are talking about the very book mentioned in the first sentence

We have a problem. We must solve the problem.
We have a problem. We must solve (this) problem.
Explanation: After the first sentence, the interlocutor understands that he will have to solve exactly the problem discussed in the first sentence

2. You talk about a specific thing/person when you show or point to a thing/person.
For example, a girl in a store holds a dress in her hands and says to the seller: “I want to buy the dress”, that is, she means a specific dress, and not any other.

The girl working here is my friend.
The girl working here is my friend.
Explanation: We're talking about a specific girl, not just any girl.

I liked the salad that you cooked.
I liked the salad you made.
Explanation: The man is talking about a specific salad. Both interlocutors understand what is being said

3. You are talking about something unique or something that everyone knows because it is part of our lives.

The weather is hot.
The weather is hot.
Explanation: Everyone understands what the weather is, a person cannot think about anything else

The Moon moves around the Earth.
The moon revolves around the Earth.
Explanation: Everyone knows what the Moon and the Earth are, it is part of our life.

So, the article gives us an idea of ​​​​the object before which it stands. Thanks to him, we understand what we are talking about: about a specific subject or about a general concept. Now let's consolidate theoretical knowledge in practice.

Reinforcement task

Translate the following sentences into English language:

1. I watched a new film. The film was very scary.
2. I want to buy a dress.
3. The girl in the red dress is my friend.
4. I drank coffee.
5. The apple is on the table. Bring me an apple.

Leave your answers in the comments below the article.

From Guest >>

Write a concise summary!!!
When people talk about language, they primarily mean words. Without knowing a large number of words, you cannot know a language or use it. This is especially clear when studying foreign languages. If you have studied the linguistic composition of a foreign language and its grammar, but you have a poor vocabulary, you will never be able to understand this language, read, much less speak it. However, it is the knowledge of a large number of words and the ability to use them that determines the degree of language proficiency. This is why the word is the most important element of language. Knowing a large number of words and using them correctly is also important in your native language. It would be wrong to think that all people whose native language is Russian speak the same way. The vocabulary of different people is different. To a certain extent, it characterizes the degree of culture of a person; scientists have calculated that the vocabulary of an average person speaking Russian is 3-4 thousand words, and the vocabulary of a great writer, for example Pushkin, is 21 thousand words. What explains this difference? The assimilation of words of the native language partly occurs purely mechanically; a person from childhood absorbs the words of his native language because from childhood he is surrounded by people who speak this language. However, along with such unconscious assimilation of the native language, active assimilation and conscious interest in the language play an important role. Therefore, even people living in the same conditions and having the same education speak differently. The language of some is monotonous, gray and inexpressive, while the language of others is colorful and rich.

Left a reply Guest

When talking about language, we first of all mean words. You cannot know a language and use it without knowing a large number of words. This becomes clear when learning a foreign language. Having studied the linguistic composition of a foreign language, but having a poor vocabulary, you will not be able to understand this language, read or speak it.
It is the knowledge of a large number of words and the ability to use them that allows one to judge the degree of language proficiency. Therefore, the word is the most important element of language. Knowing a large number of words and being able to use them correctly is also important in your native language. But people have different vocabulary. It indicates, first of all, the degree of human culture.
It is estimated that an ordinary person has a vocabulary of three to four thousand words, and Pushkin, for example, has a vocabulary of about 21 thousand words. This difference is easily explained. We remember some words purely mechanically, because the people around us speak this language. Another way is the active acquisition of the language, interest in it. Therefore, people with the same education speak differently. Some have a gray and inexpressive language, while others have a colorful and rich language.

By subject: " Russian language »

On this topic: " Language as the most important means of human communication »

INTRODUCTION

In Ancient Greece and Rome, the culture of the native word was already developing. Ancient world raised wonderful poets, writers, playwrights - masters of artistic speech. This world has given stories of outstanding speakers who posed and solved important issues of speech mastery. In society, understanding of the usefulness and necessity of good speech grew, and respect for those who knew how to appreciate and successfully use their native language strengthened. Techniques for exemplary language use were studied in special schools.

Later, in various countries, including Russia, progressive social circles jealously protected their native language from damage and distortion. The awareness grew that speech is a powerful force if a person is willing and knows how to use it. This consciousness became clearer and more definite the more successfully and widely developed artistic, scientific and journalistic literature.

In Russia, the struggle for speech culture received comprehensive development in the works of M. V. Lomonosov and A. S. Pushkin, N. V. Gogol and I. S. Turgenev, N. A. Nekrasov and A. P. Chekhov, A. I. Kuprin and M. Gorky - in the works of those whom we call classics of Russian literary expression; Political and judicial figures, orators, and scientists contributed to the formation of exemplary Russian speech.

In their practical activities and theoretical statements, an understanding of the multifaceted role of language in the development of fiction, science, and journalism was increasingly formed. The originality, richness and beauty of the Russian language, and the participation of the people in its development were increasingly appreciated. The activities of revolutionary democrats - V. G. Belinsky, A. I. Herzen, N. G. Chernyshevsky, N. A. Dobrolyubov, N. A. Nekrasov, M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin - made it possible to understand even more deeply the national significance of language and participation of literature in its improvement.

Marxist philosophical teaching played an important role in the development of correct views on language. K. Marx and F. Engels in “The German Ideology” (1845-1846) formulated the famous philosophical definition of language. It expresses thoughts about language as a means of communication and knowledge of reality, about the unity of language and thinking, about the original connection of language with the life of society.

The Marxist understanding of the role of language in people’s lives is briefly and clearly conveyed by the famous words of V.I. Lenin - “language is the most important means of human communication.” The need for communication was the main reason for the emergence of language in the distant past. The same need is the main external reason for the development of language throughout the life of society.

Communication between people using language consists of the “exchange” of thoughts, feelings, experiences, and moods.

Words, combinations of words and sentences express certain results of people’s mental activity (concepts, judgments, conclusions). For example, the word tree expresses the concept of one of the plant species. And in the sentence green tree the idea is expressed about the presence of a certain attribute (green) in a certain object (tree). Thus, the sentence expresses a qualitatively different result of a person’s cognitive work - compared to the result that is expressed in a separate word.

But words, their combinations and entire statements not only express concepts and thoughts: they participate in the very process of thinking, with their help thoughts arise, are formed, and therefore become a fact of a person’s inner life. I.P. Pavlov substantiated the materialist position that human thoughts cannot exist and develop outside of speech. The “second signaling system” (language) is involved in the formation of thoughts. This is why psychologists talk about improving thought in words.

LANGUAGE AS A MEANS OF HUMAN COMMUNICATION.

The world is full of miracles. Isn’t it a miracle that we can talk to people in another city and still see them? Or watch from Earth what is happening in spaceship? Or watch sports games taking place in another hemisphere? Is it just that? But among various miracles, we somehow do not pay attention to one of the most amazing ones - our native language.

Human language is an amazing, unique miracle. Well, what would we humans be worth without language? It is simply impossible to imagine us without languages. After all, it was language that helped us stand out from animals. Scientists realized this a long time ago. “For the scattered peoples to gather in hostels, to create cities, to build temples and ships, to take up arms against the enemy, and to carry out other necessary work for the allied forces, as would be possible if they did not have a way to communicate their thoughts to each other.” This was written by M.V. Lomonosov in the middle of the 17th century in his “Brief Guide to Eloquence.” Lomonosov pointed out two important features of language, or rather, two of its functions: the function of communication between people and the function of forming thoughts.

Language is defined as a means of human communication. This one of the possible definitions of language is the main thing, because it characterizes the language not from the point of view of its organization, structure, etc., but from the point of view of what it is intended for. But why is it important? Are there other means of communication? Yes, they do exist. An engineer can communicate with a colleague without knowing his native language, but they will understand each other if they use drawings. Drawing is usually defined as the international language of technology. The musician conveys his feelings through melody, and the listeners understand him. The artist thinks in images and expresses this through lines and color. And all these are “languages”, so they often say “the language of a poster”, “the language of music”. But this is a different meaning of the word language.

Let's take a look at the modern four-volume Dictionary of the Russian Language. It gives 8 meanings of the word language, among them:

1. Organ in the oral cavity.

2. This human organ involved in the formation of speech sounds and thereby in the verbal reproduction of thoughts; organ of speech.

3. A system of verbal expression of thoughts, which has a certain sound and grammatical structure and serves as a means of communication between people .

4. A type of speech that has certain characteristic features; style, syllable.

5. A means of wordless communication.

6. Outdated People.

The fifth meaning refers to the language of music, the language of flowers, etc.

And the sixth, outdated, means people. As we can see, to define a people, the most important ethnographic feature is taken - its language. Remember, in Pushkin:

Rumors about me will spread throughout Great Rus',

And every tongue that is in it will call me,

And the proud grandson of the Slavs, and the Finn, and now wild

Tungus, and friend of the steppes Kalmyk.

But all these “languages” do not replace the main thing - the verbal language of man. And Lomonosov wrote about this at one time: “True, besides our words, it would be possible to depict thoughts through various movements of the eyes, face, hands and other parts of the body, like pantomimes in theaters, but in this way it would be impossible to speak without light , and other human exercises, especially the works of our hands, were a great hindrance to such a conversation.”

Indeed, we are now convinced that with the help of “movement of body parts” it is possible, for example, to tell “Anna Karenina” by L.N. Tolstoy. We enjoy watching a ballet on this theme, but only those who have read the novel understand it. It is impossible to reveal the rich content of Tolstoy’s work in ballet. The language of words cannot be replaced by any other.

So, language is the most important means of communication. What qualities should he have to become exactly like this?

First of all, everyone who speaks it must know the language. There seems to be some general agreement that we will call the table the word table, and running - in a word run. How this happened cannot be decided now, since the paths are very different. For example, here is the word satellite in our time, it has acquired a new meaning - “a device launched using rocket devices.” The date of birth of this value can be indicated absolutely precisely - October 4, 1957, when the radio announced the launch of the first artificial Earth satellite in our country. “This word immediately became known in this meaning and entered into use among all peoples of the world.

So much for the “agreement”. Everything is simple here, although this meaning itself was already prepared by the Russian language: in the 11th-13th centuries it had the meaning of “comrade on the road” and “accompanying in life”, then - “satellite of the planets”. And from here it’s not far to a new meaning - “a device accompanying the Earth.”

But often not all words are known to speakers of a given language. And then normal communication is disrupted. Most of all, this is connected with words in foreign languages. But misunderstanding may also be associated with original Russian words, known only in a certain territory, or with words that are rarely used or outdated.

But if there are a lot of similar words, it makes reading the text difficult. Therefore, critics speak out against such a heap of dialectisms. This is also what satirists ridicule.

Communication is also made difficult by professional words known only to people of this profession. However, professional vocabulary is a very important part of the language vocabulary. It promotes more accurate and fruitful communication between people of a certain profession, which is extremely necessary. The larger and more accurate the dictionary, the more detailed it allows us to talk about processes, the higher the quality of work.

Ensures clarity of language his role in organizing people. Born as a product of collective labor, the language is now called upon to unite people in work, in the field of culture, etc.

The second quality on which depends communication, language should cover everything that surrounds a person, including his inner world. This, however, does not mean at all that language must exactly replicate the structure of the world. We really have “words for every essence,” as A. Tvardovsky said. But even that which does not have a one-word name can be successfully expressed by combinations of words.

It is much more important that the same concept in a language can have, and very often has, several names. Moreover, it is believed that the richer such series of words - synonyms, the richer the language is recognized. This reveals an important point; language reflects external world, but not absolutely adequate to it.

Here, for example, is the color spectrum. There are several primary colors of the spectrum. This is now based on precise physical indicators. As is known, light of different wavelengths excites different color sensations. It is difficult to separate exactly “by eye”, for example, red and purple, which is why we usually combine them into one color - red. How many words are there to denote this color? red, scarlet, crimson, bloody, red, red, ruby, garnet, red, and one could also add - cherry, raspberry etc.! Try to differentiate these words by the wavelength of light. This will not work because they are filled with their own special shades of significance.

The fact that language does not blindly copy the surrounding reality, but somehow in its own way, emphasizing some things more, giving less importance to others, is one of the amazing and far from fully explored mysteries.

The two most important functions of the language that we have considered do not exhaust all its advantages and features. Some will be discussed further below. Now let's think about how, by what signs we can evaluate a person. Of course, you say, there are many reasons for this: his appearance, attitude towards other people, towards work, etc. All this, of course, is true. But language also helps us characterize a person.

They say: you are greeted by your clothes, you are escorted by your mind. How do they learn about intelligence? Of course, from a person’s speech, from how and what he says. A person is characterized by his vocabulary, i.e. how many words he knows - few or many. Thus, the writers I. Ilf and E. Petrov, having decided to create the image of the primitive bourgeois Ellochka Shchukina, first of all, talked about her dictionary: “William Shakespeare’s dictionary, according to researchers, is twelve thousand words. The vocabulary of a black man from the cannibal tribe Mumbo-Yumbo is three hundred words. Ellochka Shchukina easily and freely managed with thirty...” The image of Ellochka the Ogress became a symbol of an extremely primitive person and one feature contributed to this - her language.

How many words does the average person know? Scientists believe that the vocabulary of an ordinary person, i.e. who does not specifically study language (not a writer, linguist, literary critic, journalist, etc.) is about five thousand. And against this background, the quantitative indicator of the genius of outstanding people looks very expressive. The “Dictionary of Pushkin’s Language,” compiled by scientists based on Pushkin’s texts, contains 21,290 words.

Thus, language can be defined as a means of knowing the human person, as well as a means of knowing the people as a whole.

This is what it is - a miracle of language! But that's not all. Every National language there is also a storehouse of the people who speak it, and their memory.

LANGUAGE IS THE PANTRY OF THE PEOPLE, ITS MEMORY.

When a historian seeks to restore and describe the events of the distant past, he turns to various sources available to him, which are objects of that time, eyewitness accounts (if they are written down), and oral folk art. But among these sources there is one most reliable - language. The famous historian of the last century, Professor B. K. Kotlyarevsky noted: “Language is the most faithful, and sometimes the only witness to the past life of the people.”

The words and their meanings reflect and have survived to this day the echoes of very distant times, the facts of life of our distant ancestors, the conditions of their work and relationships, the struggle for freedom and independence, etc.

Let's take a specific example. Before us is a series of words, seemingly unremarkable, but connected by a common meaning: share, fate, destiny, happiness, luck. They are analyzed in his work “Paganism of the Ancient Slavs” by academician B. A. Rybakov: “This group of words can even go back to the hunting era, to the division of prey between hunters who divided the spoils, gave each a corresponding share, partly, giving something to women and children - “happiness” was the right to participate in this division and receive their share (part). Everything here is quite concrete, “weighty, rough, visible.”

These words could have retained exactly the same meaning in an agricultural society with a primitive collective economy: share And Part meant the share of the total harvest that fell on a given family. But in the conditions of agriculture, old words could acquire a new dual-opposite meaning: when the highway of the primitive zadruga distributed work among plowmen and divided the arable land into plots, then one could get a good “destiny”, and the other a bad one. Under these conditions, the words required a qualitative definition: “good lot” (plot), “bad lot”. This is where the emergence of abstract concepts took place...”

This is what the historian saw in our modern words. It turns out that they contain the deepest memory of the past. And one more similar example.

In one of his works, N. G. Chernyshevsky noted: “The composition of the vocabulary corresponds to the knowledge of the people, testifies... to their everyday activities and way of life and partly about their relations with other peoples.”

Indeed, the language of each era contains the knowledge of the people in that era. Trace the meaning of the word atom in different dictionaries from different times, and you will see the process of comprehending the structure of the atom: first – “further indivisible”, then – “split”. At the same time, dictionaries of past years serve as reference books for us about the life of those times, about people’s attitude to the world and the environment. No wonder " Dictionary living Great Russian language" V. I. Dal is considered "an encyclopedia of Russian life." In this amazing dictionary we find information about beliefs and superstitions, about the way of life of people.

And this is not an accident. If you try to reveal the content of a word, you will inevitably have to touch upon the phenomena of life that words denote. Thus, we come to the second sign, called by N. G. Chernyshevsky “everyday activities and way of life.” The everyday activities of Russian people are reflected in numerous words that directly name these activities, for example: beekeeping - extracting honey from wild bees, tar farming - forcing tar out of wood, carriage - winter transportation of goods by peasants when there was no agricultural work, etc. The words kvass, cabbage soup (shti), pancakes, porridge and many others reflect Russian folk cuisine; monetary units of long-existing monetary systems are reflected in the words penny, altyn, and kryvennik. It should be noted that metric, monetary and some other systems, as a rule, were expressed by different nations in their own words, and this is precisely what constitutes the national characteristics of the vocabulary of the folk language.

Relationships between people, moral commandments, as well as customs and rituals are reflected in stable combinations of the Russian language. M. A. Sholokhov in the preface to V. I. Dahl’s collection “Proverbs of the Russian People” wrote: “The diversity is boundless human relations, which are imprinted in minted folk sayings and aphorisms. From the abyss of time, in these clots of reason and knowledge of life, human joy and suffering, laughter and tears, love and anger, faith and unbelief, truth and falsehood, honesty and deception, hard work and laziness, the beauty of truths and the ugliness of prejudices have come down to us.”

The third point noted by N. G. Chernyshevsky is also important - “relations with other peoples.” These relations were not always kind. Here there are invasions of enemy hordes and peaceful trade relations. As a rule, the Russian language borrowed from other languages ​​only what was good in them. A. S. Pushkin’s statement on this matter is curious: “...An alien language spread not by sabers and fires, but by its own abundance and superiority. What new concepts, requiring new words, could a nomadic tribe of barbarians, who had neither literature, nor trade, nor legislation, bring to us? Their invasion did not leave any traces in the language of the educated Chinese, and our ancestors, groaning under the Tatar yoke for two centuries, prayed to the Russian god in their native language, cursed the formidable rulers and conveyed their complaints to each other. Be that as it may, hardly fifty Tatar words have passed into the Russian language.”

Indeed, language as the basis of the nation was preserved very carefully. An excellent example of how people value their language are the Nekrasov Cossacks. The descendants of the participants in the Bulavin uprising, who suffered religious persecution in Russia, went to Turkey. They lived there for two or three centuries, but kept their language, customs, and rituals pure. Only concepts that were new to them were borrowed in the form of words from the Turkish language. The original language was completely preserved.

The formation of the Russian language took place in difficult conditions: there was a secular language - Old Russian, and Church Slavonic, in which services were conducted in churches and spiritual literature was published. A. S. Pushkin wrote; “Are we convinced that the Slavic language is not the Russian language, and that we cannot mix them willfully, that if many words, many phrases can happily be borrowed from church books, then it does not follow from this that we can write and lie kiss me instead of kiss me.”

And yet the role of borrowing as a result of communication between peoples cannot be discounted. The borrowings were the result important events. One of these events was baptism in Rus' in the 10th-11th centuries and the adoption of Byzantine-style Christianity. Of course, this had to be reflected in the language. I. reflected. Let's start with the fact that books were needed that would set out church canons. Such books appeared, they were translated from Greek. But in the church the service was held in the Old Church Slavonic language (aka Church Slavonic). Therefore, translations were made into Old Church Slavonic.

And the people in Rus' spoke secular - Old Russian language. It was used for chronicles and other literature. The parallel existence of two languages ​​could not but affect the influence of Old Church Slavonic on Old Russian. That is why many Old Church Slavonic words have been preserved in our modern Russian language.

And the further history of our country can be traced through outbreaks of foreign language borrowings. Peter I began to carry out his reforms, build a fleet - and the Dutch language appeared, german words. The Russian aristocracy showed interest in France - French borrowings invaded. They did not come mainly from the war with the French, but from cultural ties.

It is curious that the best was borrowed from each nation. What, for example, did we borrow from French? These are words related to cuisine (the famous French cuisine), fashion, clothing, theater, ballet. The Germans borrowed technical and military words, and the Italians borrowed musical and kitchen words.

However, the Russian language has not lost its national specificity. The poet Ya. Smelyakov said very well about this:

...You, our great-grandfathers, are in trouble,

Having powdered my face with flour,

ground in a Russian mill

visiting Tatar language.

You took a little German,

at least they could do more,

so that they are not the only ones who get it

scientific importance of land.

You, who smelled like rotten sheepskin

and grandfather’s spicy kvass,

was written with a black splinter,

And a white swan feather.

You are above the price and the price -

in the year forty-one, then,

written in a German dungeon

on weak lime with a nail.

The rulers also disappeared,

instantly and for sure

when they accidentally encroached

to the Russian essence of the language.

And it is also worth remembering here the words of academician V.V. Vinogradov: “The power and greatness of the Russian language are indisputable evidence of the great vital forces of the Russian people, their original and high national culture and their great and glorious historical destiny.”

HOW THE LANGUAGE IS BUILT.

Language can successfully fulfill its main purpose (i.e., serve as a means of communication) because it is “composed” of a huge number of different units connected to each other by linguistic laws. This fact is what is meant when they say that language has a special structure (structure). Learning the structure of language helps people improve their speech.

In order to present the language structure in the most general terms, let’s think about the content and construction of a single phrase, for example, this: (Pushkin). This phrase (statement) expresses a certain, more or less independent meaning and is perceived by the speaker and the listener (reader) as an integral unit of speech. But does this mean that it is not divided into smaller segments or parts? No, of course it doesn't. We can detect such segments, parts of a whole statement, very easily. However, not all of them are the same in their characteristics. To make sure of this, let’s try to first isolate the smallest sound segments of our utterance. To do this, we will divide it into parts until there is nothing left to divide. What will happen? The resulting vowels and consonants will be:

D-l-a b-i-r-e-g-o-f a-t-h-i-z-n-y d-a-l-n-o-y T-y p-a-k -i-d-a-l-a k-r-a-y ch-u-z-o-y.

This is what our statement looks like if it is divided into individual sounds (the literal representation of these sounds here is not very accurate, because the sound of speech cannot be accurately conveyed by ordinary means of writing). Thus, we can say that the sound of speech is one of those linguistic units that, in their totality, form a language, its structure. But, of course, this is not the only unit of language.

Let us ask ourselves: why are speech sounds used in language? The answer to this question is not immediately apparent. But still, apparently, one can notice that the sound shells of words are built from the sounds of speech: after all, there is not a single word that is not composed of sounds. Further, it turns out that speech sounds have the ability to distinguish the meanings of words, that is, they reveal some, albeit very fragile, connection with meaning. Let's take a few words: house - dam - gave - small - ball - was - howled - ox. How does each subsequent word in this series differ from its predecessor? Just a change in sound. But this is enough for us to perceive the words of our series as differing from each other in meaning. Therefore, in linguistics it is customary to say that speech sounds are used to distinguish between the meanings of words and their grammatical modifications (forms). If two different words are pronounced identically, that is, their sound shells are composed of the same sounds, then such words are not distinguished by us, and in order for their semantic differences to be perceived by us, these words must be put in connection with other words, i.e. i.e. substitute into a statement. These are the words braid"tool" and braid(maiden) key"spring" and key(key) start(hours) and start(puppy). These and similar words are called homonyms.

Speech sounds are used to distinguish the meanings of words, but in themselves they are insignificant: neither the sound a, nor the sound y, nor the sound zhe, nor any other individual sound is associated in the language with any specific meaning. As part of a word, sounds together express its meaning, but not directly, but through other units of language called morphemes. Morphemes are the smallest semantic parts of the language used to form words and to change them (these are prefixes, suffixes, endings, roots). Our statement is divided into morphemes like this:

For the shores, you are far away from home. You are a foreign land.

The sound of speech is not associated, as we have seen, with any specific meaning. The morpheme is significant: with each root, suffix, ending, with each prefix, one or another meaning is associated in the language. Therefore, we should call the morpheme the smallest structural and semantic unit of language. How to justify such a complex term? This can be done: a morpheme is, indeed, the smallest semantic unit of language, it participates in the construction of words, and is a particle of the structure of language.

Having recognized the morpheme as a semantic unit of language, we must not, however, lose sight of the fact that this unit of language is deprived of independence: outside the word it has no specific meaning, and it is impossible to construct a statement from morphemes. Only by comparing a number of words that are similar in meaning and sound do we discover that the morpheme turns out to be the bearer of a certain meaning. For example, the suffix -nik in the words hunter-nik, season-nik, carpenter, balalaika player, eysot-nik, defender-nik, worker-nik has the same meaning - it informs about the figure, the character; the prefix po- in the words ran, no-played, sat, no-read, groaned, no-thought informs about the short duration and limitations of the action.

So, speech sounds only distinguish meaning, while morphemes express it: each individual speech sound is not associated in the language with any specific meaning, each individual morpheme is connected, although this connection is found only as part of a whole word (or a series of words), which and forces us to recognize the morpheme as a dependent semantic and structural unit of language.

Let's return to the statement For the shores of your dear homeland, you left a foreign land. We have already identified two types of linguistic units in it: the shortest sound units, or speech sounds, and the shortest structural semantic units, or morphemes. Does it have units larger than morphemes? Of course there is. These are well-known words (at least by name) to everyone. If a morpheme is, as a rule, built from a combination of sounds, then a word, as a rule, is formed from a combination of morphemes. Does this mean that the difference between a word and a morpheme is purely quantitative? Not at all. There are also words that contain a single morpheme: you, cinema, only, what, how, where. Then - and this is the main thing! - a word has a definite and independent meaning, but a morpheme, as already mentioned, is not independent in its meaning. The main difference between a word and a morpheme is created not by the amount of “sounding matter”, but by the quality, ability or inability of a linguistic unit to independently express a certain content. The word, due to its independence, is directly involved in the construction of sentences, which are divided into words. A word is the shortest independent structural and semantic unit of language.

The role of words in speech is very great: our thoughts, experiences, feelings are expressed in words, combined statements. The semantic independence of words is explained by the fact that each of them denotes a certain “object”, a phenomenon of life and expresses a certain concept. Tree, city, cloud, blue, alive, honest, sing, think, believe - behind each of these sounds there are objects, their properties, actions and phenomena, each of these words expresses a concept, a “piece” of thought. However, the meaning of a word is not reducible to a concept. The meaning reflects not only the objects, things, qualities, properties, actions and states themselves, but also our attitude towards them. In addition, the meaning of a word usually reflects the various semantic connections of this word with other words. Having heard the word native, we perceive not only the concept, but also the feeling that colors it; in our consciousness there will arise, albeit very weakened, ideas about other meanings historically associated in Russian with this word. These ideas will be different for different people, and the word native itself will cause some differences in its understanding and assessment. One, having heard this word, will think about his relatives, another - about his beloved, a third - about friends, a fourth - about his Motherland...

This means that both sound units (speech sounds) and semantic units, but not independent ones (morphemes), are needed, in the end, in order for words to arise - these shortest independent carriers of a certain meaning, these smallest parts of statements.

All the words of a language are called its vocabulary (from the Greek lexis "word") or vocabulary. The development of language unites words and separates them. Based on their historical association, various vocabulary groups are formed. These groups cannot be “lined” in one row for the reason that they are distinguished in the language on the basis of not one, but several different characteristics. Thus, a language has vocabulary groups formed as a result of the interaction of languages. For example, in the vocabulary of modern Russian literary language There are many words of foreign origin - French, German, Italian, ancient Greek, Latin, ancient Bulgarian and others.

By the way, there is a very good guide for mastering foreign language vocabulary - “Dictionary of Foreign Words”.

There are also vocabulary groups of a completely different nature in the language, for example, active and passive words, synonyms and antonyms, local and general literary words, terms and non-terms.

It is curious that among the most active words of our language are the conjunctions and, a; prepositions in, on; pronouns he, I, you; nouns year, day, eye, hand, time; adjectives big, different, new, good, young; verbs to be, be able, speak, know, go; adverbs very, now, now, possible, good, etc. Such words are most common in speech, that is, they are most often needed by speakers and writers.

Now we will be interested in a new, important question in the study of the structure of language: it turns out that individual words themselves, no matter how active they are in our speech, cannot express coherent thoughts - judgments and conclusions. But people need a means of communication that can express coherent thoughts. This means that language must have some kind of “device” with the help of which words could be combined to construct statements that can convey a person’s thought.

Let's return to the sentence For the shores of your dear homeland, you left a foreign land. Let's take a closer look at what happens to words when they are included in a statement. We can relatively easily notice that the same word can change not only its appearance, but also its grammatical form, and therefore its grammatical features and characteristics. Thus, the word shore is placed in our sentence in the genitive plural form; the word fatherland is in the genitive case form singular; the word distant is also in the genitive singular form; the word you appeared in its “initial” form; the word leave “adapted” to the word you and the expressed meaning and received signs of the past tense, singular, feminine; the word edge has features of the accusative singular; the word alien is endowed with the same signs of case and number and received a masculine form, since the word edge “requires” precisely this generic form from the adjective.

Thus, by observing the “behavior” of words in various statements, we can establish some patterns (or rules) according to which words naturally change their form and are associated with each other to construct statements. These patterns of regular alternation of grammatical forms of a word when constructing statements are studied in school: declension of nouns, adjectives, verb conjugation, etc.

But we know that declension, conjugation, and various rules for linking words into sentences and constructing sentences are no longer vocabulary, but something else, what is called the grammatical structure of a language, or its grammar. You should not think that grammar is some kind of body of information about a language compiled by scientists. No, grammar is, first of all, patterns and rules (patterns) inherent in the language itself, which govern the change in the grammatical form of words and the construction of sentences.

However, the concept of “grammar” cannot be clearly explained unless the question of the duality of the very nature of the word is not fully considered, at least schematically: for example, the word spring is an element of the vocabulary of the language and it is also an element of the grammar of the language. What does it mean?

This means that each word, in addition to individual characteristics inherent only to it, also has common characteristics that are the same for large groups of words. The words window, sky and tree, for example, are different words, and each of them has its own special sound and meaning. However, they all have common characteristics: they all denote an object in the broadest sense of the term, they all belong to the so-called neuter gender, they can all change according to cases and numbers and will receive the same endings. And with its individual characteristics, each word is included in the vocabulary, and with its general characteristics, the same word is included in the grammatical structure of the language.

All words of a language that share their common characteristics form one large group called part of speech. Each part of speech has its own grammatical properties. For example, a verb differs from a numeral both in meaning (the verb denotes an action, the numeral - quantity), and in formal features (the verb changes in moods, tenses, persons, numbers, gender - in the past tense and the subjunctive mood; all verbal forms have a voice and specific characteristics; and the numeral changes according to cases, genders - only three numerals have gender forms: two, one and a half, both). Parts of speech relate to the morphology of language, which in turn is integral part its grammatical structure. A word enters into morphology, as already mentioned, by its general characteristics, namely: 1) by its general meanings, which are called grammatical; 2) by their general formal features - endings, less often - suffixes, prefixes, etc.; 3) general patterns (rules) of its change.

Let's take a closer look at these signs of words. Do the words have anything in common? grammatical meanings? Of course: walk, think, talk, write, meet, love - these are words with a general meaning of action; walked, thought, spoke, wrote, met, loved - here the same words reveal two more common meanings: they indicate that actions were performed in the past, and that they were performed by one person of the “masculine gender”; below, in the distance, in front, above - these words have a general meaning of a sign of certain actions. It is enough to look at the verbs just given to be convinced that the words also have common formal features: in the indefinite form, verbs of the Russian language usually end with the suffix -т, in the past tense they have the suffix -л, when changing in the present tense, the persons get the same endings, etc. Adverbs also have a kind of general formal feature: they do not change.

That words have general patterns (rules) of their change is also easy to see. Forms I read - I read - I will read are no different, if you keep in mind general rules changes of words, from forms I play – I played – I will play, I meet – I met – I will meet, I know – I knew – I will know. It is important that grammatical changes in a word affect not only its “shell”, external form, but also its general meaning: read, play, meet, know denote an action performed by one person at 1 moment of speech; read, played, met, knew indicate an action carried out by one person in the past; A I will read, I will play, I will meet, I will know express concepts about actions that will be carried out by one person after the moment of speech, i.e. in the future. If a word does not change, then this feature - immutability - turns out to be common to many words, i.e. grammatical (remember adverbs).

Finally, the morphological “nature” of a word is revealed in its ability to enter into relations of dominance or subordination with other words in a sentence, to require the addition of a dependent word in the required case form, or to itself take one or another case form. So, nouns easily subordinate to verbs and just as easily subordinate to adjectives: read (what?) book, book (what?) new. Adjectives, subordinate to nouns, almost cannot enter into connection with verbs; they relatively rarely subordinate nouns and adverbs. Words belonging to different parts of speech participate in different ways in the construction of a phrase, that is, a combination of two significant words related by the method of subordination. But, having started talking about phrases, we move from the area of ​​morphology to the area of ​​syntax, to the area of ​​sentence construction. So, what have we been able to establish by looking closely at how language works? Its structure includes the shortest sound units - speech sounds, as well as the shortest non-independent structural and semantic units - morphemes. A particularly prominent place in the structure of language is occupied by words - the shortest independent semantic units that can participate in the construction of a sentence. Words reveal the duality (and even triplicity) of their linguistic nature: they are the most important units of the vocabulary of a language, they are components of a special mechanism that creates new words, word formation, they are also units of the grammatical structure, in particular the morphology, of a language. The morphology of a language is a set of parts of speech in which the general grammatical meanings of words, the general formal features of these meanings, the general properties of compatibility and the general patterns (rules) of change are revealed.

But morphology is one of two components of the grammatical structure of a language. The second part is called the syntax of the language. Having encountered this term, we begin to remember what it is. Not very clear ideas about simple and complex sentences, about composition and subordination, about coordination, management and adjacency. Let's try to make these ideas more clear.

Once again we will call on our offer for help For the shores of your distant homeland you left a foreign land, In its composition, the following phrases are easily distinguished: For the shores of (what? whose?) homeland (which?) distant, you left (what?) a foreign land (which?). Each of the four marked phrases contains two words - one is main, dominant, the other is subordinate, dependent. But none of the phrases individually, nor all of them together, could express a coherent thought if there were not a special pair of words in the sentence, constituting the grammatical center of the utterance. This couple: you left. These are the subject and predicate we know. Connecting them with each other gives a new, most important from the point of view of expression of thought, unit of language - the sentence. A word as part of a sentence acquires temporarily new characteristics for it: it can become completely independent, it can dominate - it is the subject; a word can express such a feature that tells us about the existence of an object designated by the subject - this is a predicate. A word as part of a sentence can act as an addition, in which case it will denote an object and will be in a dependent position in relation to another word. Etc.

The members of a sentence are the same words and their combinations, but included in the statement and expressing different relationships to each other based on its content. In different sentences we will find identical members of the sentence, because parts of statements of different meanings can be connected by the same relationships. The sun illuminated the earth And Boy read a book- these are statements very far from each other, if we keep in mind their specific meaning. But at the same time, these are identical statements, if we keep in mind their general grammatical features, semantic and formal. The sun and the boy equally denote an independent object, illuminated and read equally indicate such signs that tell us about the existence of the object; land and book equally express the concept of the object to which the action is directed and extended.

The sentence, with its specific meaning, is not included in the syntax of the language. The specific meaning of the sentence is included in various areas human knowledge about the world, therefore it is of interest to science, journalism, literature, it is of interest to people in the process of work and life, but linguistics is cold towards it. Why? Simply because specific content is the very thoughts, feelings, experiences for the expression of which both language as a whole and its most important unit, the sentence, exist.

A sentence enters into syntax by its general meaning, general grammatical features: meanings of narrative interrogative, incentive, etc., general formal features (intonation, word order, conjunctions and allied words, etc.), general patterns (rules) of its construction.

The entire infinite number of already created and newly created utterances based on grammatical features can be reduced to relatively few types of sentences. They differ depending on the purpose of the statement (narrative, interrogative and motivating) and on the structure (simple and complex - compound and complex). Sentences of one type (say, narrative) differ from sentences of another type (say, incentive) both in their grammatical meanings, and in their formal features (means), for example, intonation, and, of course, in the patterns of their construction.

Therefore, we can say that the syntax of a language is a set of different types of sentences, each having its own general grammatical meanings, general formal features, general patterns (rules) of its construction, necessary to express a specific meaning.

Thus, what in science is called the structure of language turns out to be a very complex “mechanism”, consisting of many different component “parts”, connected into a single whole according to certain rules and together performing a large and important job for people. The success or failure of this “work” in each case depends not on the linguistic “mechanism”, but on those people who use it, on their ability or inability, desire or reluctance to use its powerful power.

ROLE OF LANGUAGE.

Language was created and developed because the need for communication constantly accompanies the work and life of people, and its satisfaction turns out to be necessary. Therefore, language, being a means of communication, has been and remains a constant ally and assistant of a person in his work, in his life.

Labor activity people, no matter how complex or simple it may be, is carried out with the obligatory participation of language. Even in automatic factories, which are run by a few workers and where the need for language would seem to be small, it is still necessary. Indeed, in order to establish and maintain the smooth operation of such an enterprise, it is necessary to build perfect mechanisms and train people capable of managing them. But for this you need to acquire knowledge, technical experience, you need deep and intense work of thought. And it is clear that neither mastering work experience nor the work of thought is possible without the use of a language that allows you to read, books, listen to lectures, talk, exchange advice, etc.

Even more obvious and easier to understand is the role of language in the development of science, fiction, and educational activities of society. It is impossible to develop science without relying on what it has already achieved, without expressing and consolidating the work of thought in words. Poor language in essays in which certain scientific results are presented makes it very difficult to master science. It is no less obvious that serious shortcomings in the speech with which the achievements of science are popularized can erect a “Chinese wall” between the author of a scientific work and its readers.

The development of fiction is inextricably linked with language, which, in the words of M. Gorky, serves as the “primary element” of literature. The more fully and deeply a writer reflects life in his works, the more perfect their language should be. Writers often forget this simple truth. M. Gorky was able to convincingly remind her in time: “The main material of literature is the word, which shapes all our impressions, feelings, thoughts. Literature is the art of plastic representation through words. The classics teach us that the simpler, clearer, clearer the semantic and figurative content of a word, the more strong, truthful and stable the image of the landscape and its influence on a person, the image of a person’s character and his relationship to people.”

The role of language in propaganda work is also very noticeable. Improve the language of our newspapers, radio broadcasts, television programs, our lectures and conversations on political and scientific topics- the task is very important. Indeed, back in 1906, V.I. Lenin wrote that we must “be able to speak simply and clearly, in a language accessible to the masses, decisively throwing away the heavy artillery of sophisticated terms, foreign words, memorized, ready-made, but still incomprehensible to the masses, unfamiliar her slogans, definitions, conclusions.” Now the tasks of propaganda and agitation have become more complex. The political and cultural level of our readers and listeners has increased, therefore the content and form of our propaganda and agitation must be deeper, more diverse, and more effective.

It is difficult to even approximately imagine how unique and significant the role of language is in the work of a school. A teacher will not be able to give a good lesson, impart knowledge to children, interest them, discipline their will and mind if he speaks inaccurately, inconsistently, dryly and clichedly. But language is not only a means of transmitting knowledge from teacher to student: it is also a tool for acquiring knowledge, which the student constantly uses. K. D. Ushinsky said that the native word is the basis of all mental development and the treasury of all knowledge. A student needs a good command of the language in order to acquire knowledge and quickly and correctly understand the teacher’s word or book. The level of a student’s speech culture directly affects his academic performance.

Native speech, skillfully used, is an excellent tool for educating the younger generation. Language connects a person with his native people, strengthens and develops a sense of the Motherland. According to Ushinsky, “in language the entire people and their entire homeland are spiritualized,” it “reflects not only the nature of the native country, but also the entire history of the spiritual life of the people... Language is the most living, most abundant and lasting connection connecting obsolete, living and future generations of the people into one great, historical living whole. It not only expresses the vitality of the people, but is precisely this very life.”

TONGUE STORAGE.

Writers are always searching. They are looking for new, fresh words: it seems to them that ordinary words can no longer evoke the necessary feelings in the reader. But where to look? Of course, first of all, in the speech of the common people. The classics also aimed at this.

N.V. Gogol: “...Our extraordinary language is still a mystery... it is limitless and can, living like life, be enriched every minute, drawing, on the one hand, lofty words from the language of the Church and Bible, and on the other hand, choosing a choice of apt names from their countless dialects scattered throughout our provinces.”

Writers' turn to colloquial folk speech, to dialects, is a reliable way to develop vocabulary. How happy the writer is to find an apt, figurative word, as if rediscovered for himself!

A. N. Tolstoy once remarked: “The language of the people is unusually rich, much richer than ours. True, there is not a whole series of words and phrases, but the manner of expression, the richness of shades is greater than ours.” The writer compares the literary Russian language (“ours”) and the “folk language.” But we agreed that there are two varieties of this “folk language”. However, here's the thing. Actually, dialect vocabulary does not allow people to communicate only with its help: it serves as an addition to the main vocabulary fund, to well-known words. This is like a local “seasoning” to the well-known vocabulary.

However, folk dialects as a source of replenishment of the language are now being questioned. Young people living in different areas, under the influence of drugs mass media- radio, television - they forget local words and are embarrassed to use them in speech. Is it good or bad?

This question interests not only us, Russian people. The American writer John Steinbeck expresses concern about this in his book Travels with Charlie in Search of America: “The language of radio and television takes standard forms, and we perhaps never speak so clearly and correctly. Our speech will soon become the same everywhere, just like our bread... Following the local accent, local speech rates will die. Idiomaticity and imagery, which so enrich it and, testifying to the time and place of their origin, give it such poetry, will disappear from the language. And in return we will get a national language, packaged and packaged, standard and tasteless.”

A sad forecast, isn't it? However, we must remember that scientists are not asleep. In various localities, dialect material was collected, and regional dictionaries of local dialects were created. And now work is underway to publish editions of the “Dictionary of Russian Folk Dialects”, more than 20 books of which have already been published. This is a wonderful storehouse that both writers and scientists will look into, a storehouse that can be used in the future. This dictionary summarizes the work of all regional dictionaries and will indicate the existence of each word with its individual meanings.

Our classic writers dreamed of such a “folk language” dictionary. “Really, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to take up the lexicon, or at least criticize the lexicon!” - exclaimed A.S. Pushkin.

N.V. Gogol even began work on “Materials for a dictionary of the Russian language”, and specifically on the dictionary of the “folk language”, because dictionaries of the literary language had already been created by the Russian Academy. Gogol wrote: “For many years, studying the Russian language, being amazed more and more by the accuracy and intelligence of his words, I became more and more convinced of the essential need for such an explanatory dictionary that would show, so to speak, Russian word in its literal meaning, would illuminate it, would show more palpably its dignity, so often unnoticed, and would partly reveal its very origin.”

To a certain extent, this problem was solved by V.I. Dahl’s Dictionary, but it did not satisfy the needs of writers.

LANGUAGE IN ACTION IS SPEECH.

Usually they say not “culture of language”, but “culture of speech”. In special linguistic works, the terms “language” and “speech” are in wide use. What is meant when the words “language” and “speech” are deliberately distinguished by scientists?

In the science of language, the term “speech” refers to language in action, that is, language used to express specific thoughts, feelings, moods and experiences.

Language is the property of everyone. He has the means necessary and sufficient to express any specific content - from the naive thoughts of a child to the most complex philosophical generalizations and artistic images. The norms of the language are universal. However, the use of language is very individual. Each person, expressing his thoughts and feelings, selects from the entire stock of linguistic means only those that he can find and that are needed in each individual case of communication. Each person must combine the means selected from the language into a harmonious whole - into a statement, a text.

Opportunities available various means language, are realized, realized in speech. The introduction of the term “speech” recognizes the obvious fact that the general (language) and the particular (speech) in the system of means of communication are united and at the same time different. We are accustomed to calling means of communication, taken in abstraction from any specific content, language, and the same means of communication in connection with specific content - speech. The general (language) is expressed and realized in the particular (in speech). The particular (speech) is one of many specific forms of the general (language).

It is clear that language and speech cannot be opposed to each other, but we must not forget about their differences. When we speak or write, we perform certain physiological work: the “second signaling system” operates, therefore, certain physiological processes take place in the cerebral cortex, new and new neuro-cerebral connections are established, the speech apparatus works, etc. What turns out to be a product of this activity? Just those very statements, texts that have an internal side, i.e. meaning, and an external side, i.e. speech.

The role of an individual in the formation of speech is very significant, although far from unlimited. Since speech is built from units of language, and language is universal. The role of an individual in the development of a language is, as a rule, insignificant: the language changes in the process of verbal communication of the people.

Such definitions as “correct”, “incorrect”, “accurate”, “inaccurate”, “simple”, “heavy”, “light”, etc. are not applicable to the language of the people. But these same definitions are quite applicable to speech. Speech shows greater or lesser compliance with the norms of the national language of a certain era. In speech, deviations from these norms and even distortions and violations of them may be allowed. Therefore, it is impossible to talk about the culture of language in the usual sense of these words, but we can and should talk about the culture of speech.

Language in grammars, dictionaries, scientific literature described, as a rule, in abstraction from specific content. Speech is studied in its relation to one or another specific content. And one of the most important problems of speech culture is the most appropriate selection of language means in accordance with the expressed content, goals and conditions of communication.

By distinguishing the terms “language” and “speech”, we will have to establish differences between the terms “language style” and “speech style”. In comparison with language styles (discussed above), speech styles represent its typical varieties, depending on the language style used, the conditions and goals of communication, the genre of the work, and the attitude of the author of the statement to the language; Speech styles differ from each other in the features of the use of linguistic material in certain specific verbal works.

But what does it mean to relate to language? This means that not all people know their native language and its styles equally. This means, further, that not all people evaluate the meaning of words in the same way, and not everyone approaches words with the same aesthetic and moral requirements. This means, finally, that not all people are equally “sensitive” to those subtle shades of meaning that words and their combinations reveal in specific statements. Due to all these reasons, different people select linguistic material in different ways and organize this material within a speech work in different ways. In addition, speech styles also reflect differences in people’s attitudes towards the world and man, their tastes, habits and inclinations, their thinking skills and other circumstances that do not relate to the facts and phenomena studied by the science of language.

CONCLUSION .

The struggle for a culture of speech, for a correct, accessible and vibrant language is an urgent social task, recognized especially clearly in the light of the Marxist understanding of language. After all, language, while working, constantly participates in the activity of consciousness, expresses this activity, and actively influences it. Hence the colossal power of influence of words on people’s thoughts, feelings, moods, desires, and behavior...

We need constant protection of the word from damage and distortion, it is necessary to declare war on the distortion of the Russian language, the war that V.I. Lenin spoke about. We still too often hear sloppy (and sometimes simply illiterate), “some kind of” speech. There are people who do not know well and do not appreciate our public wealth - the Russian language. So there is someone and something to protect this property from. We urgently need everyday, smart, demanding defense of Russian speech - its correctness, accessibility, purity, expressiveness, effectiveness. We need a clear understanding that “with a word you can kill a person and bring him back to life.” It is unacceptable to look at the word as something of secondary importance in people’s lives: it is one of the affairs of men.

LIST OF REFERENCES USED:

1. Leontyev A.A. What is language? M.: Pedagogy - 1976.

2. Grekov V.F. and others. A manual for classes in the Russian language. M., Education, 1968.

3. Oganesyan S.S. Culture verbal communication/ Russian at school. No. 5 – 1998.

4. Skvortsov L.I. Language, communication and culture / Russian at school. No. 1 – 1994.

5. Formanovskaya N.I. Culture of communication and speech etiquette / Russian language at school. No. 5 – 1993.

6. Golovin B.N. How to speak correctly / Notes on the culture of Russian speech. M.: graduate School – 1988.

7. Gvozdarev Yu.A. Language is the confession of the people... M.: Enlightenment - 1993.

There are a great variety of languages ​​on our planet. Some languages ​​are so similar that, knowing one language, you can almost easily understand all or almost all of what is said or written in another language. There are languages ​​that are so different that at first glance there is nothing in common between them. The diversity of human languages ​​is their most amazing property.

Currently, the linguistic situation on planet Earth is as follows: there are from 3 to 6 thousand different languages. There are several reasons for such a significant discrepancy in estimates. Firstly, some languages ​​are still practically unstudied and uncounted. Secondly, there are still no clearly formulated criteria for separating language and dialect, and it is often difficult to say whether we are dealing with two different languages or we have a language and one of its dialects. The apparent diversity of existing languages ​​has prompted linguists to compare language systems. Linguistic comparativeism arose as a result of the search for an answer to a number of questions: are there any features inherent in all languages? What determines the uniqueness of each language? What structural properties are possible or impossible in a language?

If we compare two languages ​​and find certain similarities between them, we can try to explain this in one of four ways. Firstly, the similarities may turn out to be coincidences, although such cases are quite rare. Secondly, the similarity can be explained by the genetic relationship of languages, the presence of a common ancestor language. Thirdly, speakers of two languages ​​can be in contact with each other for a long time due to their proximity, and as a result, the languages ​​of neighbors acquire some common features. Finally, the presence of similarities can be explained by linguistic universals. Since linguistic similarities can be of a different nature, there are several types of interlingual comparison in linguistics.

In genetic comparison, elements of one language system are presented as a result of the development of another language system. The genetic classification of languages ​​is traditionally represented as a tree, each point of which indicates a common ancestor language. All languages ​​descending from this ancestor language form a genetically related group.

The importance of genetic classification in modern linguistics is so great that very often, when they talk about the classification of languages, they mean genetic classification. However, this is not the only possible way to classify languages.

Genetic research has traditionally been opposed

Not genetic, i.e. those that compare languages ​​that are not necessarily related. All attempts to compare unrelated languages ​​can be divided into two groups: linguistic-geographical, when material from geographically adjacent languages ​​is studied, and non-localized.

The linguogeographical classification of languages ​​is also called areal. This method of classification is based on the opinion that, as a result of constant contacts of speakers, neighboring languages ​​acquire common features that distinguish these languages ​​from languages ​​of other areas. If we compare genealogical and areal classifications, we will find that they are based on a different attitude to the time factor: similarities between languages ​​that arose as a result of contacts have a much later origin compared to similarities due to genetic kinship.

In non-localized comparative studies, no restrictions are imposed on the nature of the language material being studied. Linguistic typology is a branch of general linguistics that deals with the comparative study of the structural and functional properties of languages, regardless of the nature of the genetic and geographical relationships between them. Consequently, the typological comparison of languages ​​is non-genetic and non-localized. The meaning of typological classifications is to use them to make generalizations regarding the properties of not only specific languages, but also human language in general.

The initial assumption of typological research is this: the structural characteristics of languages ​​and their repetition are not random or arbitrary. These structural characteristics can be described in terms of linguistic universals. To broadly generalize the situation, we can say that typology has a dual purpose: to define linguistic universals and to establish the range of variation between existing languages.

Linguistic typology and comparative historical linguistics are close in their interest in comparing languages, but the main difference between genetic and typological comparison of languages ​​is the complete arbitrariness of typological classification. In principle, it is possible to construct as many classifications as there are criteria that the researcher considers suitable for dividing languages ​​into groups and classes.

In addition, in typology, the concept of correspondence is not necessarily two-dimensional and can be limited only to the form or only to the meaning of the compared linguistic phenomena. As part of typological research, various classifications of the world's languages ​​are created, and since the classifications are based on different characteristics, they talk about the existence of different typologies. Most often, the term typology refers to the structural classification of languages. The subject of structural typology is the internal organization of language systems. Another type of typological classification of languages ​​is functional typology. The subject of functional typology is language as a communicative means, and here the similarities and differences of language systems associated with the characteristics of their use are of particular interest to researchers.

The main goal of typological research is to create classifications of languages ​​into certain types. The type of language is usually understood as either a type as a classification characteristic of the language system as a whole, or a type as a way of expressing grammatical or other relations in a language, as a way of formally organizing language units.

Let's look at examples of what exactly is meant when two interpretations of the concept “type” in linguistic typology are separated. Let us turn to two levels of the language system - the level of word structure and the level of sentence structure. In the Russian language, in most cases, a word can be divided into a root, a stem, word-forming morphemes and inflectional morphemes. At the same time, we are often faced with a situation where the root does not exist in the form of a separate word, and this situation is typical for most independent parts of speech. If we look at how things are in Turkish, we will see that there the root is always equal to the stem. If we further turn to the analysis of derivational morphemes, we will find that in the Russian language the combination “root + derivational morpheme” also often does not exist in the form of an independent word - the completeness of a word in many cases is determined by the presence of an inflectional morpheme.

Thus, each language has some peculiar features that distinguish it from other languages, and the set of these features is not random. We can say that in each specific case this set of characteristics constitutes a certain stable system. Thus, a stable set of leading features of a language that are in certain relationships with each other is a type of language. The presence or absence of any one feature determines the presence or absence of another feature or series of features.

In other words, a language type is a model, one of the possible ideal schemes for the structure of a language system. Let's turn to the concept of type in language. Here we must pay attention to the presence in the previous definition of the phrase of the leading features of language. If there are presenters, i.e. dominant features, which means that the language must also have features that are not leading, but have been preserved in the language historically and exist in the form sustainable system. For example, it is known that the English language in its current state is characterized by a lack of agreement. However, we find some cases where agreement is necessary, for example, demonstrative pronouns must agree in number with the nouns to which they refer, for example, this car - these cars. It turns out that several linguistic types of structure organization can be implemented in one language system.

Typological studies are necessarily carried out on the material of several languages. However, differences in grammatical organization do not allow the use of only a structural criterion focused exclusively on linguistic form. If we limit ourselves only to the structural criterion, we will lose sight of all those grammatical phenomena that do not fit into a pre-developed scheme. Therefore, in typological research, the role of this important criterion, which makes typological research in principle possible, is played by the semantic criterion. Analyzing the problem of the possibility of typological comparison, W. Croft writes that the semantic criterion must be understood as broadly as possible, including the pragmatic and discursive components, which also influence the selection of grammatical means. Then the algorithm for typological comparison of linguistic phenomena looks like this:

2) in the compared languages, means for expressing these semantic relations are found;

3) the relationship between these linguistic means and others is studied linguistic phenomena: in particular, we will be interested in the structural features of linguistic means that express a given semantic relationship, as well as the possibility of transmitting other meanings using the linguistic means we have identified. This research algorithm assumes a close relationship between the form of linguistic means and the functions they perform (Croft, 2003).

In many cases, the main grammatical categories in the languages ​​being compared are easily identified, based on the intuition of the researcher. Often, information about the ways of expressing certain semantic relations is drawn from translation, which is also a semantic research method. There is another way to identify linguistic similarities and differences - to introduce a standard language into the study.

Subject: “Russian language”

On the topic: “Language as the most important means of human communication”

INTRODUCTION

In Ancient Greece and Rome, the culture of the native word was already developing. The ancient world raised wonderful poets, writers, playwrights - masters of artistic speech. This world has given stories of outstanding speakers who posed and solved important issues of speech mastery. In society, understanding of the usefulness and necessity of good speech grew, and respect for those who knew how to appreciate and successfully use their native language strengthened. Techniques for exemplary language use were studied in special schools.

Later, in various countries, including Russia, progressive social circles jealously protected their native language from damage and distortion. The awareness grew that speech is a powerful force if a person is willing and knows how to use it. This consciousness became clearer and more definite the more successfully and widely developed artistic, scientific and journalistic literature.

In Russia, the struggle for speech culture received comprehensive development in the works of M. V. Lomonosov and A. S. Pushkin, N. V. Gogol and I. S. Turgenev, N. A. Nekrasov and A. P. Chekhov, A. I. Kuprin and M. Gorky - in the works of those whom we call classics of Russian literary expression; Political and judicial figures, orators, and scientists contributed to the formation of exemplary Russian speech.

In their practical activities and theoretical statements, an understanding of the multifaceted role of language in the development of fiction, science, and journalism was increasingly formed. The originality, richness and beauty of the Russian language, and the participation of the people in its development were increasingly appreciated. The activities of revolutionary democrats - V. G. Belinsky, A. I. Herzen, N. G. Chernyshevsky, N. A. Dobrolyubov, N. A. Nekrasov, M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin - made it possible to understand even more deeply the national significance of language and participation of literature in its improvement.

Marxist philosophical teaching played an important role in the development of correct views on language. K. Marx and F. Engels in “The German Ideology” (1845-1846) formulated the famous philosophical definition of language. It expresses thoughts about language as a means of communication and knowledge of reality, about the unity of language and thinking, about the original connection of language with the life of society.

The Marxist understanding of the role of language in people’s lives is briefly and clearly conveyed by the famous words of V.I. Lenin - “language is the most important means of human communication.” The need for communication was the main reason for the emergence of language in the distant past. The same need is the main external reason for the development of language throughout the life of society.

Communication between people using language consists of the “exchange” of thoughts, feelings, experiences, and moods.

Words, combinations of words and sentences express certain results of people’s mental activity (concepts, judgments, conclusions). For example, the word tree expresses the concept of one of the plant species. And in the sentence green tree the idea is expressed about the presence of a certain attribute (green) in a certain object (tree). Thus, the sentence expresses a qualitatively different result of a person’s cognitive work - compared to the result that is expressed in a separate word.

But words, their combinations and entire statements not only express concepts and thoughts: they participate in the very process of thinking, with their help thoughts arise, are formed, and therefore become a fact of a person’s inner life. I.P. Pavlov substantiated the materialist position that human thoughts cannot exist and develop outside of speech. The “second signaling system” (language) is involved in the formation of thoughts. This is why psychologists talk about improving thought in words.

LANGUAGE AS A MEANS OF HUMAN COMMUNICATION.

The world is full of miracles. Isn’t it a miracle that we can talk to people in another city and still see them? Or watch from Earth what is happening in the spaceship? Or watch sports games taking place in another hemisphere? Is it just that? But among various miracles, we somehow do not pay attention to one of the most amazing ones - our native language.

Human language is an amazing, unique miracle. Well, what would we humans be worth without language? It is simply impossible to imagine us without languages. After all, it was language that helped us stand out from animals. Scientists realized this a long time ago. “For the scattered peoples to gather in hostels, to create cities, to build temples and ships, to take up arms against the enemy, and to carry out other necessary work for the allied forces, as would be possible if they did not have a way to communicate their thoughts to each other.” This was written by M.V. Lomonosov in the middle of the 17th century in his “Brief Guide to Eloquence.” Lomonosov pointed out two important features of language, or rather, two of its functions: the function of communication between people and the function of forming thoughts.

Language is defined as a means of human communication. This one of the possible definitions of language is the main thing, because it characterizes the language not from the point of view of its organization, structure, etc., but from the point of view of what it is intended for. But why is it important? Are there other means of communication? Yes, they do exist. An engineer can communicate with a colleague without knowing his native language, but they will understand each other if they use drawings. Drawing is usually defined as the international language of technology. The musician conveys his feelings through melody, and the listeners understand him. The artist thinks in images and expresses this through lines and color. And all these are “languages”, so they often say “the language of a poster”, “the language of music”. But this is a different meaning of the word language.

Let's take a look at the modern four-volume Dictionary of the Russian Language. It gives 8 meanings of the word language, among them:

1. Organ in the oral cavity.

2. This human organ involved in the formation of speech sounds and thereby in the verbal reproduction of thoughts; organ of speech.

3. A system of verbal expression of thoughts, which has a certain sound and grammatical structure and serves as a means of communication between people.

4. A type of speech that has certain characteristic features; style, syllable.

5. A means of wordless communication.

6. Outdated People.

The fifth meaning refers to the language of music, the language of flowers, etc.

And the sixth, outdated, means the people. As we can see, to define a people, the most important ethnographic feature is taken - its language. Remember, in Pushkin:

Rumors about me will spread throughout Great Rus',

And every tongue that is in it will call me,

And the proud grandson of the Slavs, and the Finn, and now wild

Tungus, and friend of the steppes Kalmyk.

But all these “languages” do not replace the main thing - the verbal language of man. And Lomonosov wrote about this at one time: “True, besides our words, it would be possible to depict thoughts through various movements of the eyes, face, hands and other parts of the body, like pantomimes in theaters, but in this way it would be impossible to speak without light , and other human exercises, especially the works of our hands, were a great hindrance to such a conversation.”

Indeed, we are now convinced that with the help of “movement of body parts” it is possible, for example, to tell “Anna Karenina” by L.N. Tolstoy. We enjoy watching a ballet on this theme, but only those who have read the novel understand it. It is impossible to reveal the rich content of Tolstoy’s work in ballet. The language of words cannot be replaced by any other.

So, language is the most important means of communication. What qualities should he have to become exactly like this?

First of all, everyone who speaks it must know the language. There seems to be some general agreement that we will call the table by the word table, and running by the word run. How this happened cannot be decided now, since the paths are very different. For example, the word satellite has acquired a new meaning in our time - “a device launched using rocket devices.” The date of birth of this value can be indicated absolutely precisely - October 4, 1957, when the radio announced the launch of the first artificial Earth satellite in our country. “This word immediately became known in this meaning and entered into use among all peoples of the world.

So much for the “agreement”. Everything is simple here, although this meaning itself was already prepared by the Russian language: in the 11th-13th centuries it had the meaning of “comrade on the road” and “accompanying in life”, then - “satellite of the planets”. And from here it’s not far to a new meaning - “a device accompanying the Earth.”

But often not all words are known to speakers of a given language. And then normal communication is disrupted. Most of all, this is connected with words in foreign languages. But misunderstanding may also be associated with original Russian words, known only in a certain territory, or with words that are rarely used or outdated.

But if there are a lot of similar words, it makes reading the text difficult. Therefore, critics speak out against such a heap of dialectisms. This is also what satirists ridicule.

Communication is also made difficult by professional words known only to people of this profession. However, professional vocabulary is a very important part of the language vocabulary. It promotes more accurate and fruitful communication between people of a certain profession, which is extremely necessary. The larger and more accurate the dictionary, the more detailed it allows us to talk about processes, the higher the quality of work.

The understandability of language ensures its role in organizing people. Born as a product of collective labor, the language is now called upon to unite people in work, in the field of culture, etc.

The second quality on which communication depends is that language must cover everything that surrounds a person, including his inner world. This, however, does not mean at all that language must exactly replicate the structure of the world. We really have “words for every essence,” as A. Tvardovsky said. But even that which does not have a one-word name can be successfully expressed by combinations of words.

It is much more important that the same concept in a language can have, and very often has, several names. Moreover, it is believed that the richer such series of words - synonyms, the richer the language is recognized. This reveals an important point; language reflects the outside world, but is not absolutely adequate to it.

Here, for example, is the color spectrum. There are several primary colors of the spectrum. This is now based on precise physical indicators. As is known, light of different wavelengths excites different color sensations. It is difficult to separate exactly “by eye”, for example, red and purple, which is why we usually combine them into one color - red. And how many words exist to designate this color: red, scarlet, crimson, bloody, red, red, ruby, garnet, red, and one could also add cherry, raspberry, etc.! Try to differentiate these words by the wavelength of light. This will not work because they are filled with their own special shades of significance.

The fact that language does not blindly copy the surrounding reality, but somehow in its own way, emphasizing some things more, giving less importance to others, is one of the amazing and far from fully explored mysteries.

The two most important functions of the language that we have considered do not exhaust all its advantages and features. Some will be discussed further below. Now let's think about how, by what signs we can evaluate a person. Of course, you say, there are many reasons for this: his appearance, attitude towards other people, towards work, etc. All this, of course, is true. But language also helps us characterize a person.

They say: you are greeted by your clothes, you are escorted by your mind. How do they learn about intelligence? Of course, from a person’s speech, from how and what he says. A person is characterized by his vocabulary, i.e. how many words he knows - few or many. Thus, the writers I. Ilf and E. Petrov, having decided to create the image of the primitive bourgeois Ellochka Shchukina, first of all, talked about her dictionary: “William Shakespeare’s dictionary, according to researchers, is twelve thousand words. The vocabulary of a black man from the cannibal tribe Mumbo-Yumbo is three hundred words. Ellochka Shchukina easily and freely managed with thirty...” The image of Ellochka the Ogress became a symbol of an extremely primitive person and one feature contributed to this - her language.

How many words does the average person know? Scientists believe that the vocabulary of an ordinary person, i.e. who does not specifically study language (not a writer, linguist, literary critic, journalist, etc.) is about five thousand. And against this background, the quantitative indicator of the genius of outstanding people looks very expressive. The “Dictionary of Pushkin’s Language,” compiled by scientists based on Pushkin’s texts, contains 21,290 words.

Thus, language can be defined as a means of knowing the human person, as well as a means of knowing the people as a whole.

This is what it is - a miracle of language! But that's not all. Each national language is also a storehouse of the people who speak it and their memory.

LANGUAGE IS THE PANTRY OF THE PEOPLE, ITS MEMORY.

When a historian seeks to restore and describe the events of the distant past, he turns to various sources available to him, which are objects of that time, eyewitness accounts (if they are written down), and oral folk art. But among these sources there is one most reliable - language. The famous historian of the last century, Professor B. K. Kotlyarevsky noted: “Language is the most faithful, and sometimes the only witness to the past life of the people.”

The words and their meanings reflect and have survived to this day the echoes of very distant times, the facts of life of our distant ancestors, the conditions of their work and relationships, the struggle for freedom and independence, etc.

Let's take a specific example. Before us is a series of words, seemingly unremarkable, but connected by a common meaning: share, fate, lot, happiness, luck. They are analyzed in his work “Paganism of the Ancient Slavs” by academician B. A. Rybakov: “This group of words can even go back to the hunting era, to the division of prey between hunters who divided the spoils, gave each a corresponding share, partly, giving something to women and children - “happiness” was the right to participate in this division and receive their share (part). Everything here is quite concrete, “weighty, rough, visible.”

These words could have retained exactly the same meaning in an agricultural society with a primitive collective economy: share and part meant that share of the total harvest that fell on a given family. But in the conditions of agriculture, old words could acquire a new dual-opposite meaning: when the highway of the primitive zadruga distributed work among plowmen and divided the arable land into plots, then one could get a good “destiny”, and the other a bad one. Under these conditions, the words required a qualitative definition: “good lot” (plot), “bad lot”. This is where the emergence of abstract concepts took place...”

This is what the historian saw in our modern words. It turns out that they contain the deepest memory of the past. And one more similar example.

In one of his works, N. G. Chernyshevsky noted: “The composition of the vocabulary corresponds to the knowledge of the people, testifies... to their everyday activities and way of life and partly about their relations with other peoples.”

Indeed, the language of each era contains the knowledge of the people in that era. Trace the meaning of the word atom in different dictionaries from different times, and you will see the process of comprehending the structure of the atom: first – “further indivisible”, then – “split”. At the same time, dictionaries of past years serve as reference books for us about the life of those times, about people’s attitude to the world and the environment. It is not for nothing that V. I. Dahl’s “Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language” is considered “an encyclopedia of Russian life.” In this amazing dictionary we find information about beliefs and superstitions, about the way of life of people.

And this is not an accident. If you try to reveal the content of a word, you will inevitably have to touch upon the phenomena of life that words denote. Thus, we come to the second sign, called by N. G. Chernyshevsky “everyday activities and way of life.” The everyday activities of Russian people are reflected in numerous words that directly name these activities, for example: beekeeping - extracting honey from wild bees, tar farming - forcing tar out of wood, carriage - winter transportation of goods by peasants when there was no agricultural work, etc. The words kvass, cabbage soup (shti), pancakes, porridge and many others reflect Russian folk cuisine; monetary units of long-existing monetary systems are reflected in the words penny, altyn, and kryvennik. It should be noted that metric, monetary and some other systems, as a rule, were expressed by different nations in their own words, and this is precisely what constitutes the national characteristics of the vocabulary of the folk language.

Relationships between people, moral commandments, as well as customs and rituals are reflected in stable combinations of the Russian language. M. A. Sholokhov in the preface to V. I. Dahl’s collection “Proverbs of the Russian People” wrote: “The diversity of human relationships is immeasurable, which are imprinted in the minted folk sayings and aphorisms. From the abyss of time, in these clots of reason and knowledge of life, human joy and suffering, laughter and tears, love and anger, faith and unbelief, truth and falsehood, honesty and deception, hard work and laziness, the beauty of truths and the ugliness of prejudices have come down to us.”

The third point noted by N. G. Chernyshevsky is also important - “relations with other peoples.” These relations were not always kind. Here there are invasions of enemy hordes and peaceful trade relations. As a rule, the Russian language borrowed from other languages ​​only what was good in them. A. S. Pushkin’s statement on this matter is curious: “...An alien language spread not by sabers and fires, but by its own abundance and superiority. What new concepts, requiring new words, could a nomadic tribe of barbarians, who had neither literature, nor trade, nor legislation, bring to us? Their invasion did not leave any traces in the language of the educated Chinese, and our ancestors, groaning under the Tatar yoke for two centuries, prayed to the Russian god in their native language, cursed the formidable rulers and conveyed their complaints to each other. Be that as it may, hardly fifty Tatar words have passed into the Russian language.”

Indeed, language as the basis of the nation was preserved very carefully. An excellent example of how people value their language are the Nekrasov Cossacks. The descendants of the participants in the Bulavin uprising, who suffered religious persecution in Russia, went to Turkey. They lived there for two or three centuries, but kept their language, customs, and rituals pure. Only concepts that were new to them were borrowed in the form of words from the Turkish language. The original language was completely preserved.

The formation of the Russian language took place in difficult conditions: there was a secular language - Old Russian, and Church Slavonic, in which services were conducted in churches and spiritual literature was published. A. S. Pushkin wrote; “Are we convinced that the Slavic language is not the Russian language, and that we cannot mix them willfully, that if many words, many phrases can happily be borrowed from church books, then it does not follow from this that we can write and lie kiss me instead of kiss me.”

And yet the role of borrowing as a result of communication between peoples cannot be discounted. Borrowings were the result of important events. One of these events was baptism in Rus' in the 10th-11th centuries and the adoption of Byzantine-style Christianity. Of course, this had to be reflected in the language. I. reflected. Let's start with the fact that books were needed that would set out church canons. Such books appeared, they were translated from Greek. But in the church the service was held in the Old Church Slavonic language (aka Church Slavonic). Therefore, translations were made into Old Church Slavonic.

And the people in Rus' spoke a secular - ancient Russian language. It was used for chronicles and other literature. The parallel existence of two languages ​​could not but affect the influence of Old Church Slavonic on Old Russian. That is why many Old Church Slavonic words have been preserved in our modern Russian language.

And the further history of our country can be traced through outbreaks of foreign language borrowings. Peter I began to carry out his reforms, build a fleet - and Dutch and German words appeared in the language. The Russian aristocracy showed interest in France - French borrowings invaded. They did not come mainly from the war with the French, but from cultural ties.

It is curious that the best was borrowed from each nation. What, for example, did we borrow from the French language? These are words related to cuisine (the famous French cuisine), fashion, clothing, theater, ballet. The Germans borrowed technical and military words, and the Italians borrowed musical and kitchen words.

However, the Russian language has not lost its national specificity. The poet Ya. Smelyakov said very well about this:

You, our great-grandfathers, are in trouble,

Having powdered my face with flour,

ground in a Russian mill

visiting Tatar language.

You took a little German,

at least they could do more,

so that they are not the only ones who get it

scientific importance of land.

You, who smelled like rotten sheepskin

and grandfather’s spicy kvass,

was written with a black splinter,

And a white swan feather.

You are above the price and the price -

in the year forty-one, then,

written in a German dungeon

on weak lime with a nail.

The rulers also disappeared,

instantly and for sure

when they accidentally encroached

to the Russian essence of the language.

And it is also worth remembering here the words of academician V.V. Vinogradov: “The power and greatness of the Russian language are indisputable evidence of the great vital forces of the Russian people, their original and high national culture and their great and glorious historical destiny.”

HOW THE LANGUAGE IS BUILT.

Language can successfully fulfill its main purpose (i.e., serve as a means of communication) because it is “composed” of a huge number of different units connected to each other by linguistic laws. This fact is what is meant when they say that language has a special structure (structure). Learning the structure of language helps people improve their speech.

In order to present the linguistic structure in the most general terms, let’s think about the content and construction of a single phrase, for example, this: For the shores of your dear homeland, you left a foreign land (Pushkin). This phrase (statement) expresses a certain, more or less independent meaning and is perceived by the speaker and the listener (reader) as an integral unit of speech. But does this mean that it is not divided into smaller segments or parts? No, of course it doesn't. We can detect such segments, parts of a whole statement, very easily. However, not all of them are the same in their characteristics. To make sure of this, let’s try to first isolate the smallest sound segments of our utterance. To do this, we will divide it into parts until there is nothing left to divide. What will happen? The resulting vowels and consonants will be:

D-l-a b-i-r-e-g-o-f a-t-h-i-z-n-y d-a-l-n-o-y T-y p-a-k -i-d-a-l-a k-r-a-y ch-u-z-o-y.

This is what our statement looks like if it is divided into individual sounds (the literal representation of these sounds here is not very accurate, because the sound of speech cannot be accurately conveyed by ordinary means of writing). Thus, we can say that the sound of speech is one of those linguistic units that, in their totality, form a language, its structure. But, of course, this is not the only unit of language.

Let us ask ourselves: why are speech sounds used in language? The answer to this question is not immediately apparent. But still, apparently, one can notice that the sound shells of words are built from the sounds of speech: after all, there is not a single word that is not composed of sounds. Further, it turns out that speech sounds have the ability to distinguish the meanings of words, that is, they reveal some, albeit very fragile, connection with meaning. Let's take a series of words: house - dam - gave - small - ball - was - howled - ox. How does each subsequent word in this series differ from its predecessor? Just a change in sound. But this is enough for us to perceive the words of our series as differing from each other in meaning. Therefore, in linguistics it is customary to say that speech sounds are used to distinguish between the meanings of words and their grammatical modifications (forms). If two different words are pronounced identically, that is, their sound shells are composed of the same sounds, then such words are not distinguished by us, and in order for their semantic differences to be perceived by us, these words must be put in connection with other words, i.e. i.e. substitute into a statement. These are the words scythe “tool” and scythe (maiden), key “spring” and key (lock), wind (watch) and wind (puppy). These and similar words are called homonyms.

Speech sounds are used to distinguish the meanings of words, but in themselves they are insignificant: neither the sound a, nor the sound y, nor the sound zhe, nor any other individual sound is associated in the language with any specific meaning. As part of a word, sounds together express its meaning, but not directly, but through other units of language called morphemes. Morphemes are the smallest semantic parts of the language used to form words and to change them (these are prefixes, suffixes, endings, roots). Our statement is divided into morphemes like this:

For the shores, you are far away from home. You are a foreign land.

The sound of speech is not associated, as we have seen, with any specific meaning. The morpheme is significant: with each root, suffix, ending, with each prefix, one or another meaning is associated in the language. Therefore, we should call the morpheme the smallest structural and semantic unit of language. How to justify such a complex term? This can be done: a morpheme is, indeed, the smallest semantic unit of language, it participates in the construction of words, and is a particle of the structure of language.

Having recognized the morpheme as a semantic unit of language, we must not, however, lose sight of the fact that this unit of language is deprived of independence: outside the word it has no specific meaning, and it is impossible to construct a statement from morphemes. Only by comparing a number of words that are similar in meaning and sound do we discover that the morpheme turns out to be the bearer of a certain meaning. For example, the suffix -nik in the words hunter-nik, season-nik, carpenter, balalaika player, eysot-nik, defender-nik, worker-nik has the same meaning - it informs about the figure, the character; the prefix po- in the words ran, no-played, sat, no-read, groaned, no-thought informs about the short duration and limitations of the action.

So, speech sounds only distinguish meaning, while morphemes express it: each individual speech sound is not associated in the language with any specific meaning, each individual morpheme is connected, although this connection is found only as part of a whole word (or a series of words), which and forces us to recognize the morpheme as a dependent semantic and structural unit of language.

Let's return to the statement: For the shores of your dear homeland, you left a foreign land. We have already identified two types of linguistic units in it: the shortest sound units, or speech sounds, and the shortest structural semantic units, or morphemes. Does it have units larger than morphemes? Of course there is. These are well-known words (at least by name) to everyone. If a morpheme is, as a rule, built from a combination of sounds, then a word, as a rule, is formed from a combination of morphemes. Does this mean that the difference between a word and a morpheme is purely quantitative? Not at all. There are also words that contain a single morpheme: you, cinema, only, what, how, where. Then - and this is the main thing! - a word has a definite and independent meaning, but a morpheme, as already mentioned, is not independent in its meaning. The main difference between a word and a morpheme is created not by the amount of “sounding matter”, but by the quality, ability or inability of a linguistic unit to independently express a certain content. The word, due to its independence, is directly involved in the construction of sentences, which are divided into words. A word is the shortest independent structural and semantic unit of language.

The role of words in speech is very great: our thoughts, experiences, feelings are expressed in words, combined statements. The semantic independence of words is explained by the fact that each of them denotes a certain “object”, a phenomenon of life and expresses a certain concept. Tree, city, cloud, blue, alive, honest, sing, think, believe - behind each of these sounds there are objects, their properties, actions and phenomena, each of these words expresses a concept, a “piece” of thought. However, the meaning of a word is not reducible to a concept. The meaning reflects not only the objects, things, qualities, properties, actions and states themselves, but also our attitude towards them. In addition, the meaning of a word usually reflects the various semantic connections of this word with other words. Having heard the word native, we perceive not only the concept, but also the feeling that colors it; in our consciousness there will arise, albeit very weakened, ideas about other meanings historically associated in Russian with this word. These ideas will be different for different people, and the word native itself will cause some differences in its understanding and assessment. One, having heard this word, will think about his relatives, another - about his beloved, a third - about friends, a fourth - about his Motherland...

This means that both sound units (speech sounds) and semantic units, but not independent ones (morphemes), are needed, in the end, in order for words to arise - these shortest independent carriers of a certain meaning, these smallest parts of statements.

All the words of a language are called its vocabulary (from the Greek lexis "word") or vocabulary. The development of language unites words and separates them. Based on their historical association, various vocabulary groups are formed. These groups cannot be “lined” in one row for the reason that they are distinguished in the language on the basis of not one, but several different characteristics. Thus, a language has vocabulary groups formed as a result of the interaction of languages. For example, in the vocabulary of the modern Russian literary language there are many words of foreign origin - French, German, Italian, ancient Greek, Latin, ancient Bulgarian and others.

By the way, there is a very good guide for mastering foreign language vocabulary - “Dictionary of Foreign Words”.

There are also vocabulary groups of a completely different nature in the language, for example, active and passive words, synonyms and antonyms, local and general literary words, terms and non-terms.

It is curious that among the most active words of our language are the conjunctions and, a; prepositions in, on; pronouns he, I, you; nouns year, day, eye, hand, time; adjectives big, different, new, good, young; verbs to be, be able, speak, know, go; adverbs very, now, now, possible, good, etc. Such words are most common in speech, that is, they are most often needed by speakers and writers.

Now we will be interested in a new, important question in the study of the structure of language: it turns out that individual words themselves, no matter how active they are in our speech, cannot express coherent thoughts - judgments and conclusions. But people need a means of communication that can express coherent thoughts. This means that language must have some kind of “device” with the help of which words could be combined to construct statements that can convey a person’s thought.

Let's return to the sentence For the shores of your dear homeland, you left a foreign land. Let's take a closer look at what happens to words when they are included in a statement. We can relatively easily notice that the same word can change not only its appearance, but also its grammatical form, and therefore its grammatical features and characteristics. Thus, the word shore is placed in our sentence in the genitive plural form; the word fatherland is in the genitive singular form; the word distant is also in the genitive singular form; the word you appeared in its “initial” form; the word leave “adapted” to the word you and the expressed meaning and received signs of the past tense, singular, feminine; the word edge has features of the accusative singular; the word alien is endowed with the same signs of case and number and received a masculine form, since the word edge “requires” precisely this generic form from the adjective.

Thus, by observing the “behavior” of words in various statements, we can establish some patterns (or rules) according to which words naturally change their form and are associated with each other to construct statements. These patterns of regular alternation of grammatical forms of a word when constructing statements are studied in school: declension of nouns, adjectives, verb conjugation, etc.

But we know that declension, conjugation, and various rules for linking words into sentences and constructing sentences are no longer vocabulary, but something else, what is called the grammatical structure of a language, or its grammar. You should not think that grammar is some kind of body of information about a language compiled by scientists. No, grammar is, first of all, patterns and rules (patterns) inherent in the language itself, which govern the change in the grammatical form of words and the construction of sentences.

However, the concept of “grammar” cannot be clearly explained unless the question of the duality of the very nature of the word is not fully considered, at least schematically: for example, the word spring is an element of the vocabulary of the language and it is also an element of the grammar of the language. What does it mean?

This means that each word, in addition to individual characteristics inherent only to it, also has common characteristics that are the same for large groups of words. The words window, sky and tree, for example, are different words, and each of them has its own special sound and meaning. However, they all have common characteristics: they all denote an object in the broadest sense of the term, they all belong to the so-called neuter gender, they can all change according to cases and numbers and will receive the same endings. And with its individual characteristics, each word is included in the vocabulary, and with its general characteristics, the same word is included in the grammatical structure of the language.

All words of a language that share their common characteristics form one large group called part of speech. Each part of speech has its own grammatical properties. For example, a verb differs from a numeral both in meaning (the verb denotes an action, the numeral - quantity), and in formal features (the verb changes in moods, tenses, persons, numbers, gender - in the past tense and the subjunctive mood; all verbal forms have a voice and specific characteristics; and the numeral changes according to cases, genders - only three numerals have gender forms: two, one and a half, both). Parts of speech relate to the morphology of a language, which, in turn, is an integral part of its grammatical structure. A word enters into morphology, as already mentioned, by its general characteristics, namely: 1) by its general meanings, which are called grammatical; 2) by their general formal features - endings, less often - suffixes, prefixes, etc.; 3) general patterns (rules) of its change.

Let's take a closer look at these signs of words. Do words have common, grammatical meanings? Of course: walk, think, talk, write, meet, love - these are words with a general meaning of action; walked, thought, spoke, wrote, met, loved - here the same words reveal two more common meanings: they indicate that actions were performed in the past, and that they were performed by one person of the “masculine gender”; below, in the distance, in front, above - these words have a general meaning of a sign of certain actions. It is enough to look at the verbs just given to be convinced that the words also have common formal features: in the indefinite form, verbs of the Russian language usually end with the suffix -т, in the past tense they have the suffix -л, when changing in the present tense, the persons get the same endings, etc. Adverbs also have a kind of general formal feature: they do not change.

That words have general patterns (rules) of their change is also easy to see. The forms I read - I read - I will read do not differ, if we keep in mind the general rules for changing words, from the forms I play - played - I will play, I meet - I met - I will meet, I know - I knew - I will know. It is important that grammatical changes in a word affect not only its “shell”, external form, but also its general meaning: I read, play, meet, know denote an action carried out by one person at one moment of speech; read, played, met, knew indicate an action carried out by one person in the past; and I will read, I will play, I will meet, I will know express concepts about actions that will be carried out by one person after the moment of speech, i.e. in the future. If a word does not change, then this feature - immutability - turns out to be common to many words, i.e. grammatical (remember adverbs).

Finally, the morphological “nature” of a word is revealed in its ability to enter into relations of dominance or subordination with other words in a sentence, to require the addition of a dependent word in the required case form, or to itself take one or another case form. So, nouns easily subordinate to verbs and just as easily subordinate to adjectives: read (what?) book, book (what?) new. Adjectives, subordinate to nouns, almost cannot enter into connection with verbs; they relatively rarely subordinate nouns and adverbs. Words belonging to different parts of speech participate in different ways in the construction of a phrase, that is, a combination of two significant words related by the method of subordination. But, having started talking about phrases, we move from the area of ​​morphology to the area of ​​syntax, to the area of ​​sentence construction. So, what have we been able to establish by looking closely at how language works? Its structure includes the shortest sound units - speech sounds, as well as the shortest non-independent structural and semantic units - morphemes. A particularly prominent place in the structure of language is occupied by words - the shortest independent semantic units that can participate in the construction of a sentence. Words reveal the duality (and even triplicity) of their linguistic nature: they are the most important units of the vocabulary of a language, they are components of a special mechanism that creates new words, word formation, they are also units of the grammatical structure, in particular the morphology, of a language. The morphology of a language is a set of parts of speech in which the general grammatical meanings of words, the general formal features of these meanings, the general properties of compatibility and the general patterns (rules) of change are revealed.

But morphology is one of two components of the grammatical structure of a language. The second part is called the syntax of the language. Having encountered this term, we begin to remember what it is. Not very clear ideas about simple and complex sentences, about composition and subordination, about coordination, control and adjacency emerge in our consciousness. Let's try to make these ideas more clear.

Let us once again call for help our proposal For the shores of a distant fatherland, you left a foreign land. In its composition, phrases easily stand out: For the shores of (what? whose?) distant fatherland (which?) did you leave (what?) land (how oh th?) stranger. Each of the four marked phrases contains two words - one is main, dominant, the other is subordinate, dependent. But none of the phrases individually, nor all of them together, could express a coherent thought if there were not a special pair of words in the sentence, constituting the grammatical center of the utterance. This couple: you left. These are the subject and predicate we know. Connecting them with each other gives a new, most important from the point of view of expression of thought, unit of language - the sentence. A word as part of a sentence acquires temporarily new characteristics for it: it can become completely independent, it can dominate - it is the subject; a word can express such a feature that tells us about the existence of an object designated by the subject - this is a predicate. A word as part of a sentence can act as an addition, in which case it will denote an object and will be in a dependent position in relation to another word. Etc.

The members of a sentence are the same words and their combinations, but included in the statement and expressing different relationships to each other based on its content. In different sentences we will find identical members of the sentence, because parts of statements of different meanings can be connected by the same relationships. The sun illuminated the earth and the boy read the book - these are very far from each other statements, if we keep in mind their specific meaning. But at the same time, these are identical statements, if we keep in mind their general grammatical features, semantic and formal. The sun and the boy equally denote an independent object, illuminated and read equally indicate such signs that tell us about the existence of the object; land and book equally express the concept of the object to which the action is directed and extended.

The sentence, with its specific meaning, is not included in the syntax of the language. The specific meaning of a sentence is included in various areas of human knowledge about the world, so it interests science, journalism, literature, it interests people in the process of work and life, but linguistics is cold to it. Why? Simply because specific content is the very thoughts, feelings, experiences for the expression of which both language as a whole and its most important unit, the sentence, exist.

A sentence enters into syntax by its general meaning, general grammatical features: meanings of narrative interrogative, incentive, etc., general formal features (intonation, word order, conjunctions and allied words, etc.), general patterns (rules) of its construction.

The entire infinite number of already created and newly created utterances based on grammatical features can be reduced to relatively few types of sentences. They differ depending on the purpose of the statement (narrative, interrogative and motivating) and on the structure (simple and complex - compound and complex). Sentences of one type (say, narrative) differ from sentences of another type (say, incentive) both in their grammatical meanings, and in their formal features (means), for example, intonation, and, of course, in the patterns of their construction.

Therefore, we can say that the syntax of a language is a set of different types of sentences, each having its own general grammatical meanings, general formal features, general patterns (rules) of its construction, necessary to express a specific meaning.

Thus, what in science is called the structure of language turns out to be a very complex “mechanism”, consisting of many different component “parts”, connected into a single whole according to certain rules and together performing a large and important job for people. The success or failure of this “work” in each case depends not on the linguistic “mechanism”, but on those people who use it, on their ability or inability, desire or reluctance to use its powerful power.

ROLE OF LANGUAGE.

Language was created and developed because the need for communication constantly accompanies the work and life of people, and its satisfaction turns out to be necessary. Therefore, language, being a means of communication, has been and remains a constant ally and assistant of a person in his work, in his life.

The labor activity of people, no matter how complex or simple it may be, is carried out with the obligatory participation of language. Even in automatic factories, which are run by a few workers and where the need for language would seem to be small, it is still necessary. Indeed, in order to establish and maintain the smooth operation of such an enterprise, it is necessary to build perfect mechanisms and train people capable of managing them. But for this you need to acquire knowledge, technical experience, you need deep and intense work of thought. And it is clear that neither mastering work experience nor the work of thought is possible without the use of a language that allows you to read, books, listen to lectures, talk, exchange advice, etc.

Even more obvious and easier to understand is the role of language in the development of science, fiction, and educational activities of society. It is impossible to develop science without relying on what it has already achieved, without expressing and consolidating the work of thought in words. Poor language in essays in which certain scientific results are presented makes it very difficult to master science. It is no less obvious that serious shortcomings in the speech with which the achievements of science are popularized can erect a “Chinese wall” between the author of a scientific work and its readers.

The development of fiction is inextricably linked with language, which, in the words of M. Gorky, serves as the “primary element” of literature. The more fully and deeply a writer reflects life in his works, the more perfect their language should be. Writers often forget this simple truth. M. Gorky was able to convincingly remind her in time: “The main material of literature is the word, which shapes all our impressions, feelings, thoughts. Literature is the art of plastic representation through words. The classics teach us that the simpler, clearer, clearer the semantic and figurative content of a word, the more strong, truthful and stable the image of the landscape and its influence on a person, the image of a person’s character and his relationship to people.”

The role of language in propaganda work is also very noticeable. Improving the language of our newspapers, radio broadcasts, television programs, our lectures and conversations on political and scientific topics is a very important task. Indeed, back in 1906, V.I. Lenin wrote that we must “be able to speak simply and clearly, in a language accessible to the masses, decisively throwing away the heavy artillery of sophisticated terms, foreign words, memorized, ready-made, but still incomprehensible to the masses, unfamiliar her slogans, definitions, conclusions.” Now the tasks of propaganda and agitation have become more complex. The political and cultural level of our readers and listeners has increased, therefore the content and form of our propaganda and agitation must be deeper, more diverse, and more effective.

It is difficult to even approximately imagine how unique and significant the role of language is in the work of a school. A teacher will not be able to give a good lesson, impart knowledge to children, interest them, discipline their will and mind if he speaks inaccurately, inconsistently, dryly and clichedly. But language is not only a means of transmitting knowledge from teacher to student: it is also a tool for acquiring knowledge, which the student constantly uses. K. D. Ushinsky said that the native word is the basis of all mental development and the treasury of all knowledge. A student needs a good command of the language in order to acquire knowledge and quickly and correctly understand the teacher’s word or book. The level of a student’s speech culture directly affects his academic performance.

Native speech, skillfully used, is an excellent tool for educating the younger generation. Language connects a person with his native people, strengthens and develops a sense of the Motherland. According to Ushinsky, “in language the entire people and their entire homeland are spiritualized,” it “reflects not only the nature of the native country, but also the entire history of the spiritual life of the people... Language is the most living, most abundant and lasting connection connecting obsolete, living and future generations of the people into one great, historical living whole. It not only expresses the vitality of the people, but is precisely this very life.”

TONGUE STORAGE.

Writers are always searching. They are looking for new, fresh words: it seems to them that ordinary words can no longer evoke the necessary feelings in the reader. But where to look? Of course, first of all, in the speech of the common people. The classics also aimed at this.

N.V. Gogol: “...Our extraordinary language is still a mystery... it is limitless and can, living like life, be enriched every minute, drawing, on the one hand, lofty words from the language of the Church and Bible, and on the other hand, choosing a choice of apt names from their countless dialects scattered throughout our provinces.”

Writers' turn to colloquial folk speech, to dialects, is a reliable way to develop vocabulary. How happy the writer is to find an apt, figurative word, as if rediscovered for himself!

A. N. Tolstoy once remarked: “The language of the people is unusually rich, much richer than ours. True, there is not a whole series of words and phrases, but the manner of expression, the richness of shades is greater than ours.” The writer compares the literary Russian language (“ours”) and the “folk language.” But we agreed that there are two varieties of this “folk language”. However, here's the thing. Actually, dialect vocabulary does not allow people to communicate only with its help: it serves as an addition to the main vocabulary fund, to well-known words. This is like a local “seasoning” to the well-known vocabulary.

However, folk dialects as a source of replenishment of the language are now being questioned. Young people living in different areas, under the influence of the media - radio, television - forget local words and are embarrassed to use them in speech. Is it good or bad?

This question interests not only us, Russian people. The American writer John Steinbeck expresses concern about this in his book Travels with Charlie in Search of America: “The language of radio and television takes standard forms, and we perhaps never speak so clearly and correctly. Our speech will soon become the same everywhere, just like our bread... Following the local accent, local speech rates will die. Idiomaticity and imagery, which so enrich it and, testifying to the time and place of their origin, give it such poetry, will disappear from the language. And in return we will get a national language, packaged and packaged, standard and tasteless.”

A sad forecast, isn't it? However, we must remember that scientists are not asleep. In various localities, dialect material was collected, and regional dictionaries of local dialects were created. And now work is underway to publish editions of the “Dictionary of Russian Folk Dialects”, more than 20 books of which have already been published. This is a wonderful storehouse that both writers and scientists will look into, a storehouse that can be used in the future. This dictionary summarizes the work of all regional dictionaries and will indicate the existence of each word with its individual meanings.

Our classic writers dreamed of such a “folk language” dictionary. “Really, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to take up the lexicon, or at least criticize the lexicon!” - exclaimed A.S. Pushkin.

N.V. Gogol even began work on “Materials for a dictionary of the Russian language”, and specifically on the dictionary of the “folk language”, because dictionaries of the literary language had already been created by the Russian Academy. Gogol wrote: “For many years, studying the Russian language, being amazed more and more by the accuracy and intelligence of his words, I became more and more convinced of the essential need for such an explanatory dictionary that would, so to speak, put a face to the Russian word in its direct meaning, illuminate If only he would show his dignity, so often unnoticed, more palpably, and would partially reveal his very origin.”

To a certain extent, this problem was solved by V.I. Dahl’s Dictionary, but it did not satisfy the needs of writers.

LANGUAGE IN ACTION IS SPEECH.

Usually they say not “culture of language”, but “culture of speech”. In special linguistic works, the terms “language” and “speech” are in wide use. What is meant when the words “language” and “speech” are deliberately distinguished by scientists?

In the science of language, the term “speech” refers to language in action, that is, language used to express specific thoughts, feelings, moods and experiences.

Language is the property of everyone. He has the means necessary and sufficient to express any specific content - from the naive thoughts of a child to the most complex philosophical generalizations and artistic images. The norms of the language are universal. However, the use of language is very individual. Each person, expressing his thoughts and feelings, selects from the entire stock of linguistic means only those that he can find and that are needed in each individual case of communication. Each person must combine the means selected from the language into a harmonious whole - into a statement, a text.

The possibilities that various means of language have are realized and realized in speech. The introduction of the term “speech” recognizes the obvious fact that the general (language) and the particular (speech) in the system of means of communication are united and at the same time different. We are accustomed to calling means of communication, taken in abstraction from any specific content, language, and the same means of communication in connection with specific content - speech. The general (language) is expressed and realized in the particular (in speech). The particular (speech) is one of many specific forms of the general (language).

It is clear that language and speech cannot be opposed to each other, but we must not forget about their differences. When we speak or write, we perform certain physiological work: the “second signaling system” operates, therefore, certain physiological processes take place in the cerebral cortex, new and new neuro-cerebral connections are established, the speech apparatus works, etc. What turns out to be a product of this activity? Just those very statements, texts that have an internal side, i.e. meaning, and an external side, i.e. speech.

The role of an individual in the formation of speech is very significant, although far from unlimited. Since speech is built from units of language, and language is universal. The role of an individual in the development of a language is, as a rule, insignificant: the language changes in the process of verbal communication of the people.

Such definitions as “correct”, “incorrect”, “accurate”, “inaccurate”, “simple”, “heavy”, “light”, etc. are not applicable to the language of the people. But these same definitions are quite applicable to speech. Speech shows greater or lesser compliance with the norms of the national language of a certain era. In speech, deviations from these norms and even distortions and violations of them may be allowed. Therefore, it is impossible to talk about the culture of language in the usual sense of these words, but we can and should talk about the culture of speech.

Language in grammars, dictionaries, and scientific literature is described, as a rule, in abstraction from specific content. Speech is studied in its relation to one or another specific content. And one of the most important problems of speech culture is the most appropriate selection of language means in accordance with the expressed content, goals and conditions of communication.

By distinguishing the terms “language” and “speech”, we will have to establish differences between the terms “language style” and “speech style”. In comparison with language styles (discussed above), speech styles represent its typical varieties, depending on the language style used, the conditions and goals of communication, the genre of the work, and the attitude of the author of the statement to the language; Speech styles differ from each other in the features of the use of linguistic material in certain specific verbal works.

But what does it mean to relate to language? This means that not all people know their native language and its styles equally. This means, further, that not all people evaluate the meaning of words in the same way, and not everyone approaches words with the same aesthetic and moral requirements. This means, finally, that not all people are equally “sensitive” to those subtle shades of meaning that words and their combinations reveal in specific statements. Due to all these reasons, different people select linguistic material in different ways and organize this material within a speech work in different ways. In addition, speech styles also reflect differences in people’s attitudes towards the world and man, their tastes, habits and inclinations, their thinking skills and other circumstances that do not relate to the facts and phenomena studied by the science of language.

CONCLUSION.

The struggle for a culture of speech, for a correct, accessible and vibrant language is an urgent social task, recognized especially clearly in the light of the Marxist understanding of language. After all, language, while working, constantly participates in the activity of consciousness, expresses this activity, and actively influences it. Hence the colossal power of influence of words on people’s thoughts, feelings, moods, desires, and behavior...

We need constant protection of the word from damage and distortion, it is necessary to declare war on the distortion of the Russian language, the war that V.I. Lenin spoke about. We still too often hear sloppy (and sometimes simply illiterate), “some kind of” speech. There are people who do not know well and do not appreciate our public wealth - the Russian language. So there is someone and something to protect this property from. We urgently need everyday, smart, demanding defense of Russian speech - its correctness, accessibility, purity, expressiveness, effectiveness. We need a clear understanding that “with a word you can kill a person and bring him back to life.” It is unacceptable to look at the word as something of secondary importance in people’s lives: it is one of the affairs of men.

LIST OF REFERENCES USED:

1. Leontyev A.A. What is language? M.: Pedagogy - 1976.

2. Grekov V.F. and others. A manual for classes in the Russian language. M., Education, 1968.

3. Oganesyan S.S. Culture of speech communication / Russian language at school. No. 5 – 1998.

4. Skvortsov L.I. Language, communication and culture / Russian at school. No. 1 – 1994.

5. Formanovskaya N.I. Culture of communication and speech etiquette / Russian language at school. No. 5 – 1993.

6. Golovin B.N. How to speak correctly / Notes on the culture of Russian speech. M.: Higher School - 1988.

7. Gvozdarev Yu.A. Language is the confession of the people... M.: Enlightenment - 1993.

Mira. This picture of the world, localized in the mind, constantly replenished and adjusted, regulates human behavior. The purpose of this course work is to consider language as a system of signs of a special kind that express ideas; as a system subject to its own order. 1. Language is the most important means of human communication. We speak and write to convey to others...

Subject of research: pedagogical conditions for organizing educational cooperation in Russian language lessons in primary schools. Research hypothesis: the organization of educational cooperation in the process of teaching junior schoolchildren the Russian language will contribute to the effective acquisition of knowledge in the subject if the teacher: · Creates conditions for emotional and meaningful support for each student; ...

A. N. Tolstoy rightly believed that “to handle the language somehow means to think somehow: inaccurately, approximately, incorrectly.” And I. S. Turgenev called: “take care of our language, our beautiful Russian language, this treasure, this heritage passed on to us by our predecessors...” Nowadays, the Russian language is truly becoming international. And this commands us to hold high the banner of the Russian language. ...

From this idea comes another idea of ​​postpositivism - about the identity of the “mental” and the “physical”, this idea is propagated by “elinative materialists”. They believe that the “mental terms” of the theory of language and thinking should be eliminated as unscientific and replaced with terms of neurophysiology. To solve this problem, it is necessary, first of all, as they believe, to reject the “myth of the given,” i.e. statement...