The main property of the literary language is. Literary language and its main features

To get directly to the topic of our article, we must start with some necessary introduction.

In Russian wall paintings of the XII-XVII centuries. in the composition of the "Last Judgment" on the left side of Christ, the "nations" coming to the court were depicted. The artists expressed their distinctive features mainly in their costumes, and sometimes in the types of faces. It was a topic in which, more than anywhere else, the artist's real observations of the surrounding life could be reflected. In this regard, the frescoes of the 17th century are remarkable. Yaroslavl, Romanov-Borisoglebsk (Tutaev), Rostov and others. Particularly interesting here are the images of representatives of the peoples of Western Europe, the Dutch and partly the British, with whom in the 17th century. The Russians carried on a brisk trade. They are presented extremely realistically: shaved, with trimmed mustaches or beards, with swords, in high hats, in jackets with lace collars and cuffs, in short trousers, over the knee boots or stockings and shoes. Their wives are usually depicted next to them (Fig. 1).

In earlier images of the Last Judgment, the place of the Dutch is taken by representatives of other peoples, with whom the Russians were then familiar. In this regard, the fresco "The Last Judgment" by Dionysius in the painting of the cathedral of the Ferapont Monastery (Fig. 2) is exceptionally interesting. Of the eight “peoples” represented here, seven have survived in their entirety, and the inscriptions defining them have survived in three.

Jews are depicted in front on the right; only small fragments of this group remain. Ahead on the left are the Greeks. Their faces are very expressive (a head with a dark beard is especially typical), their round white hats with raised brim are characteristic.

Above the next two groups of the foreground, the inscriptions have not been preserved (Fig. 3). Judging by the costumes, these are Eastern peoples. The people of the first group are characterized by white caps of the Phrygian type; an elderly man with a beard is dressed in a diagonally striped robe with lapels. These are most likely "kizilbashi" - Persians, usually depicted in the compositions of the "Last Judgment" of the 17th century. in striped clothes. In two beardless figures of the second group in colorful long clothes of an oriental character, without a border turning them off at the bottom, and in dark helmet-shaped hats, Tatars could be assumed. They have such hats in one of the hallmarks of the icon “Metropolitan Alexei with Life”, written, judging by the style, by Dionysius. However, on the Ferapontov fresco, these are, apparently, Ugrians, as can be guessed from the poorly preserved fragments of the inscription “eels” (traces of the inscription are visible on the negative of 1910-1911, but they were not preserved on the fresco). Ugrians (Hungarians) Dionysius could see in nature: the Hungarian embassy was at the end of the 15th century. from Moscow.

Rice. 1. "Germans" - the Dutch (detail of the fresco

Rice. 4. Dionysius.

The top row of the Ferapontov fresco depicts representatives of two peoples. On the right - "Polyakhs", which is evidenced by a well-preserved inscription. The types of their faces and costumes are peculiar. central figure
dressed in a dark ocher shirt, belted with a belt; visible and leg, fitted to the foot brown
cloth. This is undoubtedly a man of the West and, apparently, a knight. The shaved faces of the Poles have an oblong
oval. It is significant that, in contrast to the more “peaceful” nature of the images of the Poles on the icon of the “Last Judgment” of the second half of the 16th century. (Fig. 6), dressed in rich clothes of the laity, the Ferapontov Poles are clearly warriors, although unarmed. This feature becomes clear if we recall that on July 14, 1499 (according to other sources - 1500), the Moscow regiments won a famous victory over the Lithuanian-Polish army in the battle on the river. Buckets. Prince Konstantin Ostrozhsky himself and many other "voivodes and hetmans and pansky children" were taken prisoner; On July 17, the prisoners were driven to the capital and "then there was great joy in Moscow." Dionysius could see the prisoners in Moscow or Vologda, where the captured governors were subsequently exiled. If Dionysius depicted them as he saw them at the time they were brought to Moscow, then the strange “kerchiefs” on the heads of the Poles can be explained by the fact that the captives were deprived of weapons and armor and could only have balaclavas on their heads.

The real features we noted in the depiction of “peoples” on Dionysius’s fresco indicate the artist’s keen powers of observation and the accuracy of his visual memory. Let us recall the opinion of a contemporary about Dionysius and his art artel, who indicated that they were “elegant and cunning icon painters in the Russian land, moreover painters (discharge mine. - S. V)” Now let's move on directly to the topic of our note.

The “people”, depicted on the fresco of Dionysius to the left of the Poles, did not have the inscription preserved. Three male figures are presented here, differing from their neighbors in individual features (Fig. 7). They do not have headdresses, the artist emphasized their high (“slick”) foreheads; the heads depicted in the background are also bald. There are no oriental features in the appearance of faces and clothes. These are not Greeks, already depicted by the master and accompanied by an inscription. These are the people of Western Europe. It's hardly German. We are convinced of this by the image of the Germans on the aforementioned Last Judgment icon of the 16th century. (see Fig. 6, group below).

The fresco of Dionysius and the icon reflect various moments in the history of communication between Russia and Western Europe.

The end of the 15th century, when Dionysius lived and worked, was the time of the economic and political rise of the mighty centralized Russian state, headed by Moscow, the era of the grandiose construction of the Moscow Kremlin. Italian architects called by the Moscow government played a prominent role in this construction.

During the construction of the Moscow Kremlin, Dionysius worked in Moscow. It is known for certain that in 1482, for the Assumption Cathedral built by Aristotle Fioravanti, “the iconic Dionysius and the priest Timothy da Yarets da Konya wrote the Deesis with the feasts and the prophets velmi chuden.” In the same year, he rewrote the “Greek writing” icon of Hodegetria from the Kremlin Church of the Ascension, which had been burned in a fire: “And Deonisy the iconnik wrote on the same board in the same image.” Undoubtedly, the work of Dionysius in the Kremlin was not limited to these two tasks. But they also testify that at the time of the construction of the Moscow Kremlin, Dionysius was at the center of Russian artistic activity at the end of the 15th century. In Moscow, he worked, as is believed, in the 90s.

It is known with what lively interest the people of Moscow treated the still unfamiliar representatives of the foreign world. Of course, they attracted the attention of Dionysius himself. Did he not portray the Italians in the group of "peoples" under consideration? The type of their heads, with thin hooked noses and dark hair, well conveys the ethnic image of the people of sunny Italy. Moreover, similar types of heads can be found in a number of portraits of Italian Renaissance masters. If in the group of "peoples" Dionysius captured the "Poles" and "Ugrians" he saw, guided by his direct impressions, then the image of the Italians, with whom he constantly met during joint work in Moscow, is more than likely.

Of all the images of “peoples” we have examined on the Ferapontov fresco, the heads of the people of the group we are interested in are endowed with some kind of special “portrait” sharpness. If we really have “Fryazins” before us, then didn’t Dionysius present in his fresco specific masters known to us from the annals?

The head of the front figure is very expressive; she is somewhat thrown back, a large open forehead, a hooked nose, brown eyes, and a shaved face are characteristic; a clenched hand is placed on the chest at the throat in a very characteristic, dignified gesture. Whose image is this?

To answer this question, one should remember the meaning of the location of the figure being depicted. Let us recall the patriarchal life of ancient Russia, with its specific hierarchy of princes, localism of boyars, etc., as well as religion and the art associated with it. Let us also recall that, for example, in the apostolic rank of the iconostasis, the saints were located, depending on their significance, closer or further away from Christ sitting in the center. At the same time, a more “significant” saint was always placed on the right side. In Ferapontov's composition "The Last Judgment" the upcoming "nations" are arranged according to the same principle: in front are the most ancient historically known peoples - Jews and Greeks; while the Jews are placed on the right, as the first to know monotheism. Russia is depicted in the last place.

On the fresco of Dionysius, the front figure on the right side of the group of “Fryazins” is the main figure. Among the Italian masters, the leading one was undoubtedly Aristotle Fioravanti; it was he who was entrusted with the construction of the main temple of Moscow, he also supervised the construction of the Kremlin fortress. Could the figure we are interested in be a “portrait” of Aristotle, made by Dionysius from memory? Dionysius, of course, saw many times and, perhaps, personally knew the Italian builders and among them Aristotle Fioravanti. We think that Fioravanti could not but be interested in the artist who painted the iconostasis for the cathedral he built. It is very likely that Dionysius saw how Renaissance people, Italian architects, painted, and perhaps those glimpses of realism that we noticed in Ferapontov's frescoes are to some extent a consequence of this communication. Aristotle Fioravanti was about 60 years old during his trip to Moscow. Although the face of the front figure is devoid of direct signs of age (beard, mustache, etc.), the artist makes it clear that this person is not young, wise with experience, the impression of which is created by a large open forehead and a bald skull.

Placed in the foreground to the left of the first figure, the second figure of a man is distinguished by blue clothing with a white, apparently fur collar. Perhaps, with this special attire, Dionysius wanted to emphasize a different and special position of this person. Like the first "Fryazin", he has an open large forehead, brown eyes, and a nose slightly bent down; blonde hair and beard. If we proceed from the significance of the “Fryazins” who were then in Moscow, then this figure depicts Giovanni Battista della Volpe or “Ivan Fryazin”, who traveled as an ambassador to Italy for the bride of Ivan III, Sophia Paleolog. This was the type of a clever and shameless adventurer who managed to win over the king. During his betrothal to Sophia in Rome, he represented Ivan III. For the sake of profit, Volpe adopted the Orthodox faith; in Rome he posed as a Catholic. "Ivan Fryazin", who called himself in Italy the great boyar of Moscow, had to have an appearance that corresponded to the appearance of Russian boyars, who always wore a beard. In this he had to differ from his compatriots - architects.

The character depicted last in the group of Italians is endowed with the same typical features as the first. He also has a very expressive and lively face with a large open forehead, brown eyes, a straight nose and a shaved chin. In this image, one can probably see the main builder of the Kremlin towers and walls, Pietro Antonio Solari. He arrived in Moscow in 1490. At that time he was about 40 years old. Dionysius could not fail to see this architect, who had been working on the construction of the Kremlin since 1490 and who, in terms of his importance, was the second master after Aristotle Fioravanti. Solari died in 1493.

The three original frescoes of Dionysius supposed by us - Fioravanti, Solari and Volpe - were major figures of the era of Ivan III. By the time of Dionisy's works in Ferapontov, all of them were no longer alive, and the artist could write them from memory. And the very idea of portraying these outstanding foreigners as “coming to the Last Judgment” could only appear after the death of the latter, but not during their lifetime. Of course, the definitions of the characters in the Dionysius fresco that we have made are nothing more than a probable hypothesis.

Nevertheless, it should be remembered that “portrait” images of historical figures were by no means an exception in Russian art of the 15th century. So, on the famous sakkos of Metropolitan Photius (beginning of the 15th century) there are (of course, largely conditional) images of Grand Duke Vasily Dimitrievich and his wife Sophia Vitovtovna. A small icon of Cyril of Beloozersky, painted, according to legend, by Dionisy Glushitsky, who personally knew him (kept in the State Tretyakov Gallery) and then reproduced in numerous copies, no doubt has the features of a portrait image. The same can be said about the embroidered cover on the hand of Sergius of Radonezh (museum of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra), where the appearance of Sergius acquired the features of a living person. The inventory of the Volokolamsk monastery of 1545 mentions two icons of the end of the 15th century. with images on them of the specific Volokolamsk princes Ivan and Fyodor Borisovich, made by the comrades of Dionysius and his children - Paisius and "Novgorodets".

Our hypothesis about the “portrait” images of Dionysius on the Ferapontov fresco of the Italians he saw in Moscow seems to be confirmed by observations on his other fresco in the same cathedral, which, in our opinion, testifies to a special interest in the portrait of the famous artist who came from among the laity.

On the western side of the southwestern pillar of the Ferapontov Cathedral, a fresco, unusual in its plot, was painted in the vault, which did not preserve the inscription explaining its content (Fig. 8).

In the center of the composition is depicted Christ standing on a sandy hill. On the sides are, judging by the iconographic signs, the Moscow metropolitans Peter (to the right of Christ) and Alexei (to the left).

At the bottom of the composition there are two groups of people sitting on the sides of a hexagonal pond (Fig. 9). On the right side of the pond, a gray-haired old man with a small beard sits with his hands folded in prayer. His legs are bare above the knees (they are almost not preserved). An elderly woman sits behind him with her back to him; her face, facing the well, is shown in profile. Two men are sitting on the other side of the reservoir: the one in front, with blond hair and beard, is a tall and still young man, the other is quite a young man.

The fresco illustrates the text of the XI kontakion "Akathist of the Mother of God": "Every singing is conquered...". Comparing different versions of the depiction of the 11th kontakion by Russian artists of the 16th-17th centuries, one cannot fail to note the unusual solution of this plot by Dionysius and, in general, great creative freedom in interpreting this topic.

In the Bulgarian Psalter of Tomich (XIV century), stored in the Department of Manuscripts of the State Historical Museum, the 11th kontakion was depicted as follows: in the center at the top of the composition is an image of Christ blessing with both hands, below are four groups of saints coming to him in prayer poses, on the right are the monks and saints, on the left are martyrs and saints wives.

The studied image, as V.N. Nechaev informed me at one time, is closest to the composition on the extra-akathist theme “The Origin of the Honorable Trees of the Cross”, as it is interpreted in the Novgorod Sofia original of the 16th century. (images before the 16th century were unknown to V.N. Nechaev). In the last composition, the Mother of God, John the Baptist, Basil the Great and John Chrysostom are depicted along the edges of Christ standing on a smooth mountain against the background of the church. Below, on the sides of the reservoir, into which the flying angel usually lowers the cross, are the sick.

VN Nechaev believed that the reason for the current composition was the celebration in Byzantium on August 1 of the miraculous image of Christ, located on one of the towers of the Spassky Monastery, with a healing spring under it.

In the Moscow Assumption Cathedral, on the southern wall, behind the throne of Ivan the Terrible, there is a Byzantine or Yugoslav icon of the 14th-15th centuries - “Praise of the Mother of God” surrounded by the akathist marks. In a partially cleared stamp depicting the 11th kontakion of the akathist, Christ is depicted standing on a hill against the background of a rectangular tower, and the ecumenical saints facing him to the right and left. Below Christ is a reservoir with seven human figures located along the hill; three of them are depicted directly above the well. Apparently, the image of the 11th kontakion on this or another icon similar to it served Dionysius as a “model” for independently solving this composition of the 11th kontakion on the Ferapontov fresco.

Comparing the cited text of the 11th kontakion with the fresco of Dionysius, one cannot fail to note the artist's attentiveness to its content. Unlike almost all editions of this story known to us, the fresco of Dionysius more fully conveys the content and grateful meaning of the kontakion. So, in the kontakion, many songs are compared to countless sand. In accordance with this, the hill on which Christ stands is depicted by Dionysius precisely as a sandy hill. In his image, the artist proceeded (which is especially important for us) from real observations: a hill with a slight shadow along the edges is painted very vividly, not in the same way as stylized slate mountains are depicted in neighboring frescoes; there are no conditional whitewashing "heels" here. The reservoir depicted below symbolizes the source of "God's bounty." Judging by the fact that the legs of two men sitting in front of the pond are depicted naked, one can think that the artist wanted to express some specific idea about the healing power of the reservoir, which is, as it were, a “siloam font”, and he presented the sitting people as if “sweeping movements of water ", in order to receive healing or, according to the meaning of the kontakion, those who have already received it and thank God for it.

It is especially significant that the people depicted by the pond, apparently, make up one family. This is evidenced by the very arrangement of the figures. On the right, as elders, a husband and a wife behind him are depicted; on the left in front - the eldest son and behind him - the youngest. It is known that Dionysius had two sons, Theodosius and Vladimir, who, together with their father and other icon painters, worked in the Joseph-Volokolamsk monastery in 1485. Together they also worked on the painting of the cathedral of the Ferapontov Monastery. Above the northern entrance of the cathedral, they placed an inscription that the artists were “scribes Dionysios iconic with their children. O lord Christ, king of all, deliver them, Lord, from eternal torment. If Dionysius found it possible to certify and emphasize his authorship (for which there are almost no examples in ancient Russian painting before the 16th century) with an appeal to God for mercy in the inscription, as if as a reward for labors, then is it possible to assume that in the fresco in question he dared portray himself with his wife and "children"? This assumption finds support in some details from the life of Dionysius.

In the life of Pafnuty Borovsky, written shortly after his death by his disciple Archbishop Vassian of Rostov, two stories are given about the "healing" of Dionysius by Pafnuty. The latter once had such a severe pain in his legs that he could not work on the painting of the monastery cathedral. Then Paphnutius said to him: “Dionysius, may God bless you to embark on a good deed; start work and God and the Most Pure Mother of God will grant health to your feet. Dionysius set about painting the church and supposedly “his illness ran away.” Soon a new misfortune befell Dionysius. Paphnutius forbade the painters living in the monastery to eat “worldly food” in the monastery, ordering for this to “go to the nearest one.” Therefore, the icon painters dined in the "neighboring village". But one day, defying the abbot's prohibition, they took to the monastery what was left of the dinner, "a lamb made from an egg," that is, a leg of lamb fried with eggs. Dionysius, who first approached the forbidden dish, noticed that the eggs were teeming with worms. He was frightened and threw out the roast to the dogs, but nevertheless he was punished by a “severe disease”, he could not move, apparently his legs failed, besides, he was “attacked by a rush”: his whole body “in one hour one scab merged. Dionysius, in fright, repented to Paphnutius. He forgave him, taking the word not to violate his prohibition, and ordered Dionysius to go to church. After serving the prayer service for water, Paphnutius sprinkled Dionysius with "holy water" and ordered to moisten his body with it. After that, Dionysius fell asleep, and when the artist woke up, he was allegedly completely healthy, and the rash, like scales, disappeared from his body.

V. T. Georgievsky believes that the stories about the “miraculous healing” of Dionysius in the Pafnutiev Monastery were transmitted to the author of the life, Archbishop Vassian, by the artist himself, with whom Vassian was well acquainted. The story of the second "miracle", replete with realistic details and permeated with humor, is like an entertaining short story and exposes in Dionysius the vitality of his "worldly" inclinations and his free-thinking. The information reported in these stories about Dionysius's leg disease and his “use” of “holy water” in the second illness is quite real. They also coincide with the above-mentioned detail of the fresco painted by Dionysius, where a man near a healing reservoir is depicted with bare legs. This convinces us that Dionysius really placed here his "self-portrait" and a portrait image of his family, whose members are placed, as we have noted, according to their importance and age. The inventory of the Joseph-Volokolamsk Monastery allows us to determine the age of the sons of Dionysius, from which it is clear that Theodosius, who did more responsible work than Vladimir, was the eldest.

Our assumption is also confirmed by the difference in the depiction of the characters in the studied composition. There is more generalization and stereotyped schematization in the faces of Saints Peter and Alexei. The heads of the family group (see Fig. 8) are more realistic and painted more carefully. Of particular interest is the head of the eldest son, Theodosius. We, perhaps, will not find another such excellent head in the entire fresco of the temple. It has a lot of personality. The beard is drawn with great care, executed somewhat unusually, with light shading in the shadows and niello marks. Blue, like those of Dionysius himself, the eyes are not written as schematically as the eyes of the saints, the cheekbones and forehead are given with a very thin “flicker”. The legs are also realistically depicted (they are preserved in fragments). Apparently, the eldest, more gifted son enjoyed the special love of Dionysius: his head was painted by the master with special thoughtfulness and feeling. Although the figures of the youngest son, Vladimir, and the artist's wife are of secondary importance, one cannot fail to note the features of portraiture in them, especially in the face of the mother with his very expressive profile.

The portrait of Dionysius himself is so characteristic that, peering into it, one can very clearly imagine this little, lively old man, whose life is filled with energetic creative activity. Reading the inventory of the Volokolamsk Monastery, one is surprised at the huge number of works by Dionysius compared to the productivity of other masters. Recall that the grandiose ensemble of Ferapontovsk frescoes, striking in their artistic perfection and thoroughness of writing, was created by Dionysius and his sons, apparently, in just one summer of 1501.

Our hypothesis about the presence in two frescoes of Dionysius of “portrait” images of Moscow Italians and the family of the artist himself is not equally provable, as we ourselves realize: the definition of the characters of the group of “Fryazins” of the Last Judgment is more controversial. We are forced to return to the last question by some details of the fresco on the text of the 11th kontakion.

We see that by drawing the group of "nations" in the Last Judgment. Dionysius used live observations of contemporary Russian reality, reflected some of its specific phenomena. In the second fresco, one can also feel the close connection between the master's work and social life. The appearance here on the sides of Christ of the Moscow saints marks the strengthening of the national element in the composition: the Russian metropolitans not only glorify the deity, but are also the intercessors of their Moscow people. Therefore, the image of a group of specific Russians, Muscovites, the Dionysius family near the reservoir acquires a special meaning.

In the same respect, the architectural elements of this composition are interesting. In the frescoes of Dionysius, the master's desire to move away from conditional and traditional architectural motifs and an attempt to introduce images of Russian architecture into painting are noticeable. There are many examples of this. Such, for example, is the temple with a tiered zakomar top in the image of the Ecumenical Cathedral (Fig. 10), vividly reminiscent of the cathedral of the Ferapontov Monastery itself. In the composition "The Protection of the Virgin" the temple with two tower extensions on the sides, perhaps, goes back to the images of Vladimir-Suzdal architecture. Separate Russian architectural motifs enter into a bizarre combination with the traditional schemes of iconic architecture. This feature of the works of Dionysius allows us to especially appreciate the architectural staffing of the fresco depicting the family of Dionysius, where we noted the strengthening of the “Moscow” national principle.

Here, the background for the image of Christ is a fortress wall with battlements, and the figures of two saints correspond to square towers with small turrets at the corners, covered with tiled roofs. In the upper tier of the towers there is a row of rectangular windows-loopholes, three on each side. The towers and the fortress wall, apparently, symbolize the Moscow Kremlin, which at that time had just been built by the Italians. Let us recall that a century earlier the great artist Feofan Grek twice painted the image of the Moscow white-stone Kremlin in 1366-1367 - in the chambers of Prince Vladimir Andreevich and in the Archangel Cathedral. Another outstanding Russian painter, Dionysius, also responded in his work on the same theme, placing symbolic strongholds of the Russian capital in his freoca.

Some real elements of this image can also be noted. On the earliest image of the Kremlin in the work of S. Herberstein, who was in Moscow twice, in 1517 and 1525, but made his drawing, obviously from memory, some of the towers are equipped with hipped roofs, the same as on the plan of the Kremlin of the end 16th century , some of the towers do not have them. One must think that this detail reflects the real peculiarity of the Kremlin towers of that time; at first they did not have hip roofs at all, but due to our climatic conditions, they soon began to receive hip roofs, which we see on Godunov's plan. The small turrets depicted on the fresco on the top of the towers in the corners, apparently, are also not a product of fantasy: on the same plan of the Kremlin of the late 16th century. Konstantinovo-Eleninskaya strelnitsa has the same turrets. Thus, probably, Dionysius used his observations in these details of his fresco and tried to give not a fortress in general, but specifically depict the Moscow Kremlin. The impressive scale of the fortress in relation to human figures is also characteristic. We think that in the fresco of Dionysius we really have the earliest depiction of the Moscow Kremlin, written by a contemporary immediately after its construction.
The foregoing allows us to insist with greater confidence on our hypothesis about the depiction by Dionysius in his Last Judgment of the builders of the Moscow Kremlin themselves, Italian architects well known to him.

It is possible that the image of “peoples” in the scene of the “Last Judgment” appeared in Russian art even before the painting of the Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, painted in the 1420s by Daniil Cherny and Andrei Rublev, but it was from her that this theme received special development from us . Although this composition was destroyed when the painting was resumed in 1635, the fresco of the 17th century, which replaced the ancient one, has been preserved in fragments. The proximity of its construction to the Ferapontov composition of The Last Judgment indicates that the masters of the 17th century. retained the basic scheme of the Rublev composition and that the latter served as a "model" for Dionisy's painting. Apparently, the masters who painted at the beginning of the 16th century also imitated the Rublev composition. the Moscow Assumption Cathedral, as can be judged by the fresco of 1642-1643 that has come down to us, resuming the old one.
V. T. Georgievsky. Frescoes of the Ferapontov Monastery. SPb., 1911, pp. 110-111.
V. Borin. Two icons of the Novgorod school of the 15th century. St. Peter and Alexy, Metropolitans of Moscow. "Lamp", 1914, No. 4, pp. 23-32.
S. M. SOLOVIEV History of Russia, ed. II, vol. V, book. I, M., pp. 1471-1473.
Stored in the State Tretyakov Gallery.
PSRL, vol. VI, M., 1853, p. 46.
S. M. SOLOVIEV UK. op., stb. 1467.
The ambassador of the Teutonic Order to Vitovt, Count Kyburg, described in his diary the detachments of the Polish-Lithuanian cavalry he saw in Kovno. Among them "there was also a detachment of elderly people with long beards, in dark gray overcoats, with pointed hoods, which from a distance made them look like minorite brothers, and only multi-colored lower caftans distinguished them from the Franciscans" (D. Ilovaisky. History of Russia , M., 1896, vol. II, p. 181). Maybe Dionysius depicted similar hoods?
V. T. Georgievsky. UK. cit., p. 26.
The timing of the “portrait” images that we cite further were indicated in the annotations to the catalog of the exhibition “Ancient Monumental Painting of the Peoples of the USSR” (M., 1947, pp. 48 and 49).
Russian time book, vol. II, M., 1820, p. 168; V. T. Georgievsky. UK. cit., p. 25.
V. T. Georgievsky. UK. cit., pp. 29-30; V. N. Lazarev. Dionysius and his school. History of Russian Art, vol. III., M., 1955, p. 489. There is evidence that Dionysius painted the Church of the Savior in Chigasy in Moscow, founded in 1483. In 1547, Dionysius' wonderful paintings were destroyed in a fire. See I. M. Karamzin. History of Russian Goverment. SPb., 1892. Note N° 171; M. I. Aleksandrovsky. Index of ancient churches in the area of Ivanovo forty. M., 1917, p. 15.
By the time Dionysius worked in Ferapontov, Fioravanti was no longer alive. See V. L. Snegirev. Aristotle Fioravanti and the reconstruction of the Moscow Kremlin. M., 1935, p. 40. ↩ ↩ ↩

Tendency towards nationwide, supra-dialect (isolation from the narrow regional features of one or more dialects,

underlying it)

written fixation;

The existence of uniform codified norms (i.e., the rules of pronunciation, word usage, and the use of grammatical and other means of language adopted in social speech practice), which are formed in the process of socio-historical selection of linguistic elements; characteristics of the norm: stability, traditionality, limitation of variability, relative territorial uniformity;

The obligatory nature of norms and their codification (from Latin codificatio - systematization), which is intended to be fixed in grammars,

reference books, dictionaries, phenomena that have developed in the process of social language practice;

normalization (i.e., a vivid sense of preferring the correct use to the wrong one);

An extensive functional-stylistic system and expressive-stylistic differentiation of means of expression, highlighting styles - bookish (dating back to the literary written language of the previous period), neutral or colloquial (dating back to the common language of the urban part of the population) and familiar-colloquial (its source is the language of the urban lower classes , professional groups, jargons, dialects);

The dichotomy of the literary language, i.e., the combination of book and colloquial speech in its composition, which are opposed to each other as the main functional and stylistic spheres.

literary language of the people- is formed on the basis of one's own (for example, the Old Russian language in the Moscow State) and a foreign language (for example, in the Middle Ages, the Latin language among the Germanic, Romance and West Slavic peoples);

literary language of the nation- formed on a folk basis (on the basis of one or more dialects);

The literary language is characterized by the differentiation of functional styles, i.e., the ways of its use in various areas of written and oral communication - business, scientific, journalistic, everyday colloquial, etc.

Expressive-evaluative styles:

sublime, including poeticisms (face, rest, eyes);

neutral, including interstyle or common vocabulary (face, die, eyes);

neutral colloquial, including colloquial everyday vocabulary (physiognomy);

roughly colloquial (muzzle, snout, die, zenki, burkaly).

Literary language is opposed by:

in social terms - non-literary varieties of the national language -

¦ vernacular, characteristic of the semi-educated strata of the urban population, who have not mastered the norms of the literary language; it is not

has no territorial connection. Vernacular occupies an intermediate position between the literary language and the dialect;

¦ jargon- a set of linguistic elements, lexical and derivational, characteristic of a certain age or

professional group of people. Signs of jargon: social limitation, spontaneous occurrence, not a secret language, a sign of belonging to "one's own" (to a certain group or environment). A kind of jargon - slang, is created artificially for the purposes of

conspiracies. Words that have come from jargons into the literary language are called jargonisms;

in terms of territory - many territorial dialects, which are spoken by native speakers living in certain territories. There are also semi-dialects - forms of the language formed as a result of convergence (convergence) of dialects in the territory adjacent to a large center.

colloquial vocabulary- words and expressions common in non-literary colloquial speech, characteristic of poorly educated native speakers and clearly deviating from existing literary language norms.

Dialect words are words that are used only by the inhabitants of a particular locality. Many dialect words have synonyms in the literary language with other roots. But there are also words that do not have synonyms, since they name objects, phenomena and production processes that are characteristic of the life of the population of a particular area. Dialect words are not included in the literary language, however, some of them are used in works of art to convey the peculiarities of the speech of the inhabitants of a certain area, to create local color.

LITERARY LANGUAGE AS ONE OF THE VARIETY OF THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE.

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN ORAL AND WRITTEN SPEECH.

The similarity of both forms of speech lies in the fact that they are based on the literary language. Consequently, both forms are forced to adhere to the generally accepted norms of the Russian language. However, the oral form of speech, being tied to the colloquial style of speech, is freer from rationing and regulation than the written one. Both forms in practice occupy an approximately equal place in their significance, penetrating into all spheres of human life, including the sphere of production, management, education, jurisprudence, art, the media, etc.

The differences between them come down most often to the means of expression. Oral speech is associated with intonation and melody, non-verbal, it uses a certain amount of “own” language means, it is tied to the conversational style. The letter uses alphabetic, graphic designations, more often bookish language with all its styles and features, normalization and formal organization.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. Vvedenskaya L.A., Pavlova L.G., Culture and art of speech. Rostov-on-Don 1999

2. Vasilyeva A.N. Fundamentals of speech culture.-M, 1990

3. Psychology. Dictionary / Under the general. ed. A.V. Petrovsky. - M.: Politizdat, 1990. - 494 p.

4. Nemov R.S. Psychology. Proc. for students ped. textbook establishments. In 3 books. Book. 1. M.: Enlightenment, 1995. - 576 p.

The Russian national language, which is the object of study of the science of language, consists of several varieties:

NATIONAL LANGUAGE

literary language non-literary varieties

vernacular dialects

territorial social

(dialects) (slang)

The basic element of the language as a single sign system of communication and transmission of information is the Russian literary language, which is considered the highest exemplary form of the national language. This type of language developed gradually, and it is still in a state of constant development. It is influenced by writers, poets and other masters of the word, creating new literary norms. It is this type of language that is studied and promoted in schools and the media.

Literary language- supra-dialect subsystem (form of existence) of the national language; the common language of writing of one or another people, and sometimes several peoples - the language of official business documents, school education, written and everyday communication, science, journalism, fiction, all manifestations of culture expressed in verbal form, more often written, but sometimes in oral. The development of the literary language is directly related to the development of the culture of the people, especially their fiction. The language of fiction embodies the best achievements of the national speech culture, the main advantages of the literary language of one people, the national language as a whole.

The basis of the literary language is a monologue, a story, opposed to dialogue - colloquial speech. A monologue is an already organized system of thoughts put into a verbal form, which is by no means a replica, but a deliberate influence on others. Every monologue is a literary work in its infancy. No wonder the monologue must be taught. In an uncultured environment, only a few, people with this or that literary talent, are capable of a monologue; most are not able to tell anything coherently.

Function of literary language- ensuring speech communication in the main areas of activity of the entire historically established team of people who speak this national language.

The Russian literary language has two main forms of existence: oral and written.

oral form is the primary and only form of existence of a language that does not have a written language. For the spoken literary language, the oral form is the main one, while the book language functions both in written and oral form (report - oral form, lecture - written form).

Written form is later in time. Fiction exists mainly in written form, although it is also realized in oral form (for example, artistic reading, theatrical performances, any reading aloud).

In oral speech, those complex constructions are impossible that characterize, for example, the German written language and which, for their understanding, require at the end of a phrase the possibility of returning to their beginning. In written speech, the intonations of living speech and, in particular, the so-called logical stresses, cannot be conveyed in any way. Therefore, if a person wants to report that the person who came last night was Ivan Ivanovich, then he can say in oral speech: Ivan Ivanovich came last night, placing a logical emphasis on Ivan Ivanovich; but he cannot write like that, since in written speech it will be a message about the fact of Ivan Ivanovich's arrival last night. In order to express in writing the message that the person who came last night was Ivan Ivanovich, he must write: Ivan Ivanovich came last night. This example clearly shows the abyss separating the written literary language from the oral one, but it also shows an even greater gulf separating the literary language, which is most often still written, from the spoken language: in this latter intonation, logical stress are almost the main expressive means. , which essentially cannot be in written language. A practical rule of conduct follows from this: do not transfer the syntactic forms of colloquial speech into written speech, and if you do this, then only with great care.

In linguistics, the main features of the literary language are highlighted. These include:

· Traditionalism and written fixation. Each new generation improves the literary language, taking those means of expression from the speech of the older generations, developing those stylistic tendencies that best correspond to the new socio-cultural tasks and conditions of speech communication;

· Flexible stability. To characterize a particular literary language, to understand its national specifics, the social conditions of its existence, or the linguistic situation in which the literary language is formed, functions and develops, are of fundamental importance. The language norm opens the way for new trends that are replacing obsolete forms of the literary language, selects from the colloquial speech those linguistic elements that have or can acquire national significance;

· The universality of norms and their codification. “To be generally accepted, and therefore generally understood” is the main property of the literary language;

· Processedness. Literary language is a language processed by masters of the word: writers, poets, scientists, public figures;

· Functioning within the literary language of colloquial speech along with book speech. The interaction and mutual correlation of these two main functional and stylistic spheres of the literary language ensure its socio-cultural purpose - to be a means of communication for native speakers of the literary language, the main means of expressing national culture.

· obligatory for all native speakers.

The most amazing and wise thing that humanity has created is language.

Literary language is the main means of communication between people of the same nationality. It is characterized by two main properties: processing and normalization.

The processing of the literary language arises as a result of a purposeful selection of all the best that is in the language. This selection is carried out in the process of using the language, as a result of special studies by philologists and public figures.

Normalization - the use of language means, regulated by a single universally binding norm. The norm as a set of rules of word usage is necessary to preserve the integrity and comprehensibility of the national language, to transfer information from one generation to another. If there were no single language norm, then changes could occur in the language, in which people living in different parts of Russia would cease to understand each other.

The main requirements that a literary language must meet are its unity and general intelligibility.

The modern Russian literary language is multifunctional and is used in various fields of human activity.

The main ones are: politics, science, culture, verbal art, education, everyday communication, interethnic communication, press, radio, television.

If we compare the varieties of the national language (vernacular, territorial and social dialects, jargon), the literary language plays a leading role. It includes the best ways to designate concepts and objects, express thoughts and emotions. There is a constant interaction between the literary language and non-literary varieties of the Russian language. This is most clearly seen in the sphere of colloquial speech.

In the scientific linguistic literature, the main features of the literary language are highlighted:

1) processing;

2) stability;

3) mandatory (for all native speakers);

4) normalization;

5) the presence of functional styles.

Russian literary language exists in two forms - oral and written. Each form of speech has its own specifics.

The Russian language in the broadest sense is the totality of all words, grammatical forms, pronunciation features of all Russian people, that is, all those who speak Russian as their native language. The more correct and accurate the speech, the more accessible it is for understanding, the more beautiful and expressive it is, the stronger it affects the listener or reader. To speak correctly and beautifully, you need to follow the laws of logic (consistency, evidence) and the norms of the literary language, observe the unity of style, avoid repetition, take care of the harmony of speech.

The main features of Russian literary pronunciation have developed precisely on the basis of the phonetics of Central Russian dialects. Nowadays, dialects are being destroyed under the pressure of the literary language.

concept and signs literary language. The most amazing and wise thing that mankind has created is language. Literary language is the main means of communication between people of the same nationality.

concept and signs literary language.
Russian origin literary language language how common language

concept and signs literary language.
Russian origin literary language. Until the XIV century. there was an old Russian language how common language ancestors of Ukrainians, Belarusians and Russians.

concept and signs literary language.
Russian origin literary language. Until the XIV century. there was an old Russian language how common language ancestors of Ukrainians, Belarusians and Russians.

concept and signs literary language.
Russian origin literary language. Until the XIV century. there was an old Russian language how common language ancestors of Ukrainians, Belarusians and Russians.

Literary language is the highest form of national language, sign national identity, culture of speech.
Secondly, this concept associated with the choice of language- phonetic, lexical, grammatical - in a certain context.

The most important sign literary language its normativity is considered, which is manifested in written and oral form.
For example, in the 1930s and 1940s the words "graduate student" and "diploma student" were used to express the same concepts: "a student doing...