Speech culture - modern linguistic situation. What is a speech situation? Modern speech situation

Content

1. Introduction

1. Speech accuracy and clarity

2.1 Accuracy of word usage…………………….………………..……7

2.2 Stylistic assessment of dialectisms, jargons………………..…8

2.3 Stylistic assessment of borrowed words……………………….….9

2.4 Paronymous words and speech accuracy…………………………………….11

2.5 Accuracy of inflection and form formation……………………….13

2.6 Clarity of syntactic constructions………………………….……....14

1. Conclusion………………………...………………………………………………………....15
2. Literature………...…………..…………………………………………….16

Modern speech situation

Language is a powerful means of regulating people’s activities in various spheres, therefore, studying the speech behavior of a modern person, understanding how a person masters the richness of language, how affectively he uses it, is a very important and urgent task.

Every educated person must learn to evaluate speech behavior - his own and that of his interlocutors, and relate his speech actions to a specific communication situation.

Today, the speech of our contemporaries is attracting increasing attention from journalists, scientists of various specialties (linguists, philosophers, psychologists, sociologists), writers, teachers, and it is becoming the subject of heated discussions among ordinary Russian speakers. Feeling speech problems, they try to answer the question of what is causing the state of speech culture that worries many. The eternal Russian questions “what to do?” and “who is to blame?” are quite natural in relation to the Russian language and Russian speech.

In the in-depth study “The Russian Language of the End of the 20th Century (1985-1995),” an attempt was made to highlight the most significant features of the Russian language of the end of the century. It notes:

“The events of the second half of the 80s - early 90s are similar to a revolution in their impact on society and language. The state of the Russian language of our time is determined by a number of factors.

1. The composition of participants in mass and collective communication is sharply expanding: new segments of the population are joining the role of speakers, the role of writing in newspapers and magazines. Since the late 80s, thousands of people with different levels of speech culture have had the opportunity to speak publicly.

2. In the media, censorship and auto-censorship, which previously largely determined the nature of speech behavior, are sharply weakened.

3. Personality in speech increases. Faceless and addressless speech is replaced by personal speech and acquires a specific addressee. The biological nature of communication, both oral and written, is increasing.

4. The sphere of spontaneous communication, not only personal, but also oral public, is expanding. People no longer give or read pre-written speeches. They say.

5. Important parameters of the flow of oral forms of mass communication are changing: the possibility of the speaker directly addressing the listeners and feedback from the listeners to the speakers is created.

6. Situations and genres of communication are changing both in the field of public and personal communication. The rigid boundaries of official public communication are loosened. Many new genres of oral public speech are being born in the field of mass communication. The dry radio and TV announcer has been replaced by a presenter who thinks, jokes, and expresses his opinion.

7. Psychological rejection of the bureaucratic language of the past (the so-called Newspeak) is sharply increasing.

8. There is a desire to develop new means of expression, new forms of imagery, new types of addresses to strangers.

9. Along with the birth of the names of new phenomena, there is a revival of the names of those phenomena that return from the past, prohibited or rejected in the era of totalitarianism” (Russian language of the end of the 20th century. M., 1996).

Freedom and emancipation of speech behavior entail a loosening of language norms, an increase in language variability (instead of one acceptable form of a language unit, different options are acceptable).

Language and speech

Linguists of the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries, overcoming the universalism and dogmatism of naturalists (Schleicher), delved more and more into the study of individual linguistic facts and brought their research to the speech of an individual person. The successes of the new science - psychology - contributed to these aspirations - to bring research to the individual. These views, in their extreme manifestation, went as far as denying language as the property of the collective and calling into question the existence of languages.

Thus, A. A. Shakhmatov believed that “real existence has the language of each individual; the language of a village, city, region, people turns out to be a well-known scientific fiction, for it is composed of facts of language that are part of certain territorial or tribal units of individuals.” (Shakhmatov A. A. Essay on the modern Russian literary language, 4th ed. M., 1941. p. 59.)

Supporters of such views, according to the Russian proverb, “can’t see the forest for the trees.” W. Humboldt (1767-1835) wrote about this: “...in reality, language always develops only in society, and a person understands himself insofar as experience has established that his words are also understandable to others.” (Humboldt V. On the differences in the structure of human languages ​​and its influence on the spiritual development of the human race, see: Zvegintsev V. A. History of linguistics of the 19th-20th centuries in essays and extracts. 3rd bridle. M., 1964. Part 1 . p. 97)

This thought in Marx’s formulation sounds as follows: language is “... existing for other people and only thereby existing also for myself” (Marx K. German Ideology // Marx K. and Engels F. Works 2 - ed. T. 3. P. 29.), and if language is always the property of a collective, then it cannot represent a mechanical sum of individual languages. Rather, the speech of each speaker can be considered as a manifestation of a given language in the conditions of a particular life situation. But the individual characteristics in the speech of each person are also an indisputable fact.

This raises a very important problem: languages ​​of speech. These concepts are often confused, although it is clear that; for example, physiologists and psychologists deal only with speech, in pedagogy it is important to talk about the development and enrichment of students’ speech, in medicine - about speech defects, etc.; in all these cases, “speech” cannot be replaced by “language”, since we are talking about a psychophysiological process.

Speech, its features

If language is a system of signs and symbols, then speech is the process of using language. Speech is the realization of language, which reveals itself only through speech.

In linguistics, speech is understood as specific speaking that occurs over time and is expressed in audio form (including internal pronunciation - inner speech) or written form. Speech also includes the products of speaking in the form of a speech work (text), recorded in memory or writing. The differences between speech and language are as follows.

Firstly, speech is specific, unique, relevant, unfolds in time, and is realized in space. Let us remember the ability of some speakers, for example, Cuban leader F. Castro or Soviet President M. Gorbachev, to talk for hours. The collected works of many writers number dozens of volumes.

Secondly, speech is active, linear, and strives to combine words in the speech stream. Unlike language, it is less conservative, more dynamic, and mobile. Thus, with the announcement of openness and freedom of speech in our country, the manner of presenting information, especially about political leaders and social processes, has noticeably changed. If earlier messages were kept strictly in an official style, now rarely does anyone write about these processes and leaders without slight irony.

Thirdly, speech as a sequence of words involved in it reflects the experience of the speaker, is determined by the context and situation, is variable, can be spontaneous and disordered. We often come across examples of such speech in everyday life and at work.

Speech, on the one hand, using already known linguistic means, fundamentally depends on the language. At the same time, a number of characteristics of speech, such as tempo, duration, timbre, degree of loudness, articulatory clarity, accent, are not directly related to language. Of particular interest is the use in speech of words that are not found in the language. To study and enrich the Russian language in linguistics, the following areas are identified and developed: “Stylistics of the Russian language” and “Culture of speech”.

Subject and tasks of practical stylistics

The term “practical stylistics” is found in V.V. Vinogradova, G.O. Vinokura, K.I. Bylinsky and other researchers of stylistic problems. It is also used in foreign science... Manuals are being created on the normative stylistics of national languages. Attempts are being made to define the concept of normativity, linguistic (and stylistic) norm.

The concept of norm is important for any literary language. Even in the artistic-fictional style, where the freedom of choice of linguistic means is widely used and the uniqueness of the writer’s individual manner is reflected, a complete departure from the national norm is impossible, because “the language of a truly artistic work cannot deviate far and significantly from the basis of the national language, otherwise it will cease to be generally understandable.” "

In practical stylistics, where lexical and grammatical synonymy plays a huge role, the norm is “the set of the most suitable (“correct”, “preferred”) means of language for serving society, which develops as a result of the selection of linguistic elements (lexical, pronunciation, morphological, syntactic ) from among those coexisting, present, newly formed or extracted from the passive stock of the past in the process of social, in the Broad sense, assessment of these elements.”

The normative nature of practical stylistics brings it closer to that broad section (of philological science, which is called “culture of speech.” If we consider that, in addition to the objective historical study of the speech life of society in a certain era, the task of this philological discipline is to reveal the norms of the literary language in all "levels" of the language system and the establishment on a scientific basis of rules for using language, then we can talk about a direct connection between some problems of stylistics and problems of speech culture. So G. O. Vinokur wrote: "The task of stylistics... is to teach the members of a given social environment actively and expediently handling the linguistic canon, dissecting the linguistic tradition and such an attitude that would allow speakers to actively use all the elements contained within its broad framework, depending on the specific social and everyday situation, on the purpose that each given act implies individual speaking."

Characteristics of the concept “Culture of speech”

The concept of speech culture is closely related to the literary language. The ability to express one’s thoughts clearly and clearly, to speak competently, the ability not only to attract attention with one’s speech, but also to influence listeners, mastery of speech culture is a unique characteristic of professional suitability for people of various professions: diplomats, lawyers, politicians, school and university teachers, radio and television workers, managers, journalists.

Speech culture is important for everyone who, by the nature of their work, is connected with people, organizes and directs their work, conducts business negotiations, educates, takes care of health, and provides various services to people.

What is speech culture?

Speech culture is understood as mastery of the norms of the literary language in its oral and written form, in which the selection and organization of linguistic means are carried out, allowing, in a certain communication situation and subject to communication ethics, to ensure the necessary effect in achieving the communication goals.

Speech culture contains three components: normative, communicative and ethical.

Speech culture presupposes, first of all, the correctness of speech, i.e., compliance with the norms of the literary language, which are perceived by its speakers (speakers and writers) as an “ideal” or model. The linguistic norm is the central concept of speech culture, and the normative aspect of speech culture is considered one of the most important.

However, the culture of speech cannot be reduced to a list of prohibitions and definitions of “right and wrong.” The concept of “speech culture” is associated with the patterns and characteristics of the functioning of language, as well as with speech activity in all its diversity. It also includes the opportunity provided by the language system to find a new language form to express specific content in each real situation of speech communication.

Speech culture develops the skills of selecting and using linguistic means in the process of verbal communication, helps to form a conscious attitude towards their use in speech practice in accordance with communicative tasks. The choice of linguistic means necessary for a given goal is the basis of the communicative aspect of speech culture. The famous philologist, major specialist in speech culture G. O. Vinokur wrote: “Every goal has its own means, this should be the slogan of a linguistically cultural society.”

Communicative expediency is considered one of the main categories of the theory of speech culture, therefore it is important to know the basic communicative qualities of speech and take them into account in the process of speech interaction.

In accordance with the requirements of the communicative aspect of speech culture, native speakers must master the functional varieties of language, as well as focus on the pragmatic conditions of communication, which significantly influence the optimal choice and organization of speech means for a given case.

The ethical aspect of speech culture prescribes knowledge and application of the rules of linguistic behavior in specific situations. Ethical standards of communication are understood as speech etiquette (speech formulas of greeting, request, question, gratitude, congratulations, etc.; addressing “you” and “you”; choosing a full or abbreviated name, form of address, etc.).

The use of speech etiquette is greatly influenced by extralinguistic factors: the age of the participants in a speech act (purposeful speech act), their social status, the nature of the relationship between them (official, informal, friendly, intimate), time and place of speech interaction, etc.

The ethical component of the culture of speech imposes a strict ban on foul language in the process of communication and condemns speaking in “raised tones.” Accuracy and clarity of speech are important.

Accuracy of word usage

Accuracy and clarity of speech are interrelated. However, the speaker (writer) should be concerned about the accuracy of the statement, and the listener (reader) evaluates CLARITY.

We put our thoughts into words. For speech to be accurate, words should be used in full accordance with the meanings assigned to them in the language. L.N. Tolstoy jokingly remarked: “If I were a king, I would make a law that a writer who uses a word whose meaning he cannot explain will be deprived of the right to write and receive 100 blows of the rod.”

Finding the only necessary word in a text requires the writer to exert creative forces and tireless work. This work is sometimes reflected in manuscripts, allowing us to familiarize ourselves with the lexical substitutions that the author made, polishing the style of the work. For example, in the draft of the story by A.S. Pushkin’s “Dubrovsky” we find the following correction: “Members (of the court) met him (Troekurov) with expressions of [deep humiliation, deep devotion] deep servility” - the last word most expressively characterized the behavior of the officials bribed by Troekurov, and the writer left it in the text.

The stylistic editing of the writers in the manuscript reflects the last stage of work on the text, and what kind of work preceded this, how many drafts were written and then destroyed, how many times the author uttered this or that phrase “to himself” before writing it down on paper - you can talk about this just guess.

A careless attitude to the choice of words in our everyday speech becomes the cause of annoying lexical errors, for example: Spring has come, the martens will soon have an inheritance (meaning offspring); I decided to become an officer because I want to continue the family dynasty (instead of: tradition).

In such cases, they talk about using a word without taking into account its semantics (that is, meaning). Such speech errors cause illogicality and even absurdity of speech: And our Far Eastern birches stand in their wedding shroud (the author confused the shroud and veil). Such “slips of the tongue” are explained by false associations (these are associative errors).

Ambiguity of a statement can arise when using polysemantic words and homonyms, if the context reveals a meaning not intended by the author. For example: The growth of young figure skaters is stimulated through demonstration performances. It would be better to say: By participating in demonstration performances, young figure skaters improve their skills. The sports commentator did not take into account the possible distortion of the meaning of the following phrase: You see Gavrilov on the screen in a beautiful combination.

The inaccuracy of word usage is explained by the inattention or low speech culture of the author. But sometimes they deliberately do not want to use this or that word in order to veil the negative meaning of the statement. They say he fantasizes instead of lies, accepted gifts instead of took bribes, etc. Let us recall an episode from the story of A.I. Kuprin "Inquiry":

“Ask him, did he take boots from Esipaki?

The second lieutenant was again convinced that he stole his inexperience and cowardice, because out of some bashful and delicate feeling he could not pronounce the real word.”

Words and expressions that soften the rough meaning of speech are called euphemisms (from the gr. ei - good, phemi - - I say). The euphemism of speech is often explained by the author’s desire to dull the critical edge of the statement when describing negative phenomena.

The wrong choice of word can cause anachronism - a violation of chronological accuracy when using words associated with a certain historical era. For example: In ancient Rome, plebeians dissatisfied with the laws organized rallies (the word rally was coined much later, including in England).

Stylistic assessment of dialectisms, jargons

Our speech is subject to various influences, in particular impoverishment and clogging. Various weeds spoil our speech.” These can be dialect words, jargon and vulgarisms, unjustified borrowings. All of them require an objective stylistic assessment, both in book texts and in colloquial speech.

The Russian language is rich in folk dialects: a resident of the northern regions can utter a phrase that even Voronezh or Orel will not understand. And only the Moscow ambition, which underlies the Russian literary language, will be understandable to all Russian people. One writer, in order to show the uniqueness of local Russian dialects, wrote an “elegy” in the Vyatka dialect, the content of which must be “translated” into Russian, because it contained many incomprehensible dialectisms (this is the name for words used in local dialects, that is, dialects) .

Slang vocabulary denotes concepts that already have names in the common language. Jargon is a type of colloquial speech used by a certain circle of native speakers, united by common interests, occupations, and position in society. In modern Russian, youth jargon, or slang, is distinguished (from the English slang - words and expressions used by people of certain professions or age groups). Many words and expressions have come from slang into colloquial speech: cheat sheet, cram, tail (academic debt), swim (do poorly on an exam), fishing rod (satisfactory grade), etc.

The emergence of many jargons is associated with the desire of young people to express their attitude to a subject or phenomenon more clearly and emotionally. Hence such evaluative words: amazing, awesome, cool, laugh, go crazy, get high, donkey, plow, sunbathe, etc. All of them are common only in oral speech and are often absent from dictionaries.

What is the assessment of jargon? Of course, the one who studied Russian with L.S. Pushkina, M.Yu. Lermontova, L.N. Tolstoy, will not admire the jargon. In addition, jargon is incomprehensible to the uninitiated, and this creates the ground for misunderstandings. However, in the oral speech of young people, jargon is ineradicable; they give it liveliness, sometimes an ironic tint. But the scope of their use is narrow: it is oral speech, and stylistically reduced, non-literary.

Stylistic assessment of borrowed words

You can often hear that foreign words “clog” the Russian language and therefore you need to “fight” them. Indeed, in colloquial speech we often use “fashionable” foreign words out of place. The language of advertising is filled with Americanisms; there are many unjustified borrowings in magazines and newspapers.

The Russian language has always been open to expanding its vocabulary from foreign language sources. Borrowings from ancient languages ​​(Greek, Latin), Turkisms, Gallicisms, words of Dutch, German, English origin, Polonisms, Ukrainianisms and others were mastered by the Russian language in different historical eras, without damaging its national identity, but only enriching it and expanding its boundaries . However, too large an influx of foreign words into our language at certain periods caused concern among figures of Russian culture.

In the late 80s - 90s, the influx of foreign words into the Russian language increased especially strongly due to changes in the sphere of political life, economics, culture, and ideology.

We are seeing an unprecedented expansion of foreign language vocabulary in all areas. She took leading positions in the political life of the country, getting used to new concepts: president, parliament, inauguration, speaker, impeachment, electorate, department, municipality, legitimate, consensus, etc.; foreign language terms have become dominant in the most advanced branches of science and technology: computer, display, file, driver, modem, monitoring, player, pager, fax, as well as in financial and commercial activities: auditor, barter, broker, business, dealer, investment, conversion, sponsor, trust, holding, etc. Words are invading the cultural sphere: bestsellers, westerns, thrillers, hits, showmen, digests, etc. Everyday speech quickly accepts new realities with their non-Russian names - speaker, twix, hamburger, cheeseburger, sprite, coca, marketing, supermarket, shopping, etc. Even vernacular and jargons replenish their vocabulary with Americanisms, most often distorted, mutilated - gerla, shopnik , face, shoes, bucks, greens, teen (abbreviated teenager). The pursuit of a new, “beautiful”, sonorous, and sometimes incomprehensible to the uninitiated name leads to the fact that the individual peasant wants only to be a farmer, the bandit-extortionist is called nothing more than a racketeer (or even more sonorously - a racketeer), and a murderer - killer.

Dictionaries of foreign words do not have time to master new borrowings, so a reader who does not speak English often finds himself helpless when encountering incomprehensible words in newspapers and magazines, replete with foreign language terms: exclusive (exceptional), press release (special newsletter for media workers, published government agency), consensus (lat. agreement).

Observing all the sad consequences of the “total Americanization” of our language, it is difficult to maintain objectivity in the ongoing debate about the appropriateness of foreign borrowings in the modern Russian language. And yet, voices are heard in defense of non-Russian words that are becoming entrenched in communication.

In recent years, new phenomena have entered our lives, and with them new words. Similar processes of vocabulary enrichment through borrowing occur in all modern languages. In our time, the flow of new ideas, things, information, technologies requires quick naming of objects and phenomena, forces us to involve already existing foreign names in the language, and not expect the creation of original words on Russian soil. Scientific, technical, military, financial, banking, sports vocabulary all over the world is striving for internationalization. The desire for scientific and technological progress and civilization is reflected in the language. In part, the Russian language dictionary is being aligned to the international standard. How much this will change the appearance of the Russian language, whether it will enrich it or “spoil” it, time will tell.

And yet you should not get carried away with foreign words, because many new borrowings are incomprehensible, so you need to speak more simply, in pure Russian.

Paronyms and speech accuracy

Paronyms (from the Greek Para - “near”, “past” and onyta - “name”) are words similar in sound, but not the same in meaning. The words that make up the ferry series, as a rule, are correlated with each other in logical and semantic terms, which can cause them to shift in speech. The semantic similarity of paronyms arises, as a rule, on the basis of word-formation relationship: these are words with the same root (alien and alien, noisy, noisy and noisy). However, sometimes there are paronyms that do not have a general meaning (for example, the similarity of the words turkey - Indian was used by the children's writer V. Dragunsky to create a comic effect: the girl Alenka, having smeared her face, as the Indians do, announces that she is an Indian).

A striking feature of paronyms (as opposed to synonyms) is that they are not interchangeable. If synonyms can replace each other in the text (there was a cry - there was a cry; a moral person - a virtuous person), then paronyms, as a rule, do not have this property (for example, you cannot say military ID instead of a military ID). The differences in the meanings of paronyms are usually so important that replacing one word with another without violating the meaning is impossible.

However, sometimes paronyms in certain meanings and combinations can act as synonyms. For example, you can say both distant and distant lands, and a grassy and grassy field.

As a rule, paronyms included in a pair are combined with a different set of words, and this must be taken into account when using them. If it is difficult to choose the correct form of a paronym or a word with which a paronym can be combined, it is necessary to refer to dictionaries of paronyms of the Russian language or to explanatory dictionaries.

It is the differences in compatibility that make it possible to distinguish between paronymous words. For example, the paronyms guaranteed and guaranteed are combined with a different set of nouns. Guarantee can be: capital, loan, securities, documentation, passport, letter, obligation, contract, repair. In combination with the word guaranteed, you can use the following words: advance, income, earnings, loan, salary, salary, production, circulation, return, work, rest, harvest. Differences in compatibility are associated with differences in meaning: guarantee - relating to a guarantee, serving as a guarantee; guaranteed - conditioned, supported by law, and also secured.

Let us also compare the paronyms demonstrative (performed for the purpose of demonstration) and demonstrative (intended for demonstration, display), which in speech can be combined with different words. The word demonstrative has three meanings, but demonstrative has only one.

From paronym dictionaries you can find out that the following are combined with the adjective demonstrative: nouns denoting actions, manifestations of a person’s attitude towards someone or something (action, care, attention, respect, character); nouns related to “military” vocabulary (attack, fire); nouns lecture, method, etc.

The adjective demonstration combines with a limited range of nouns, mainly denoting a training room for lectures, classes, demonstration of something. (lecture, auditorium, class, hall). Therefore, it is impossible to say, for example: “In classes with children we use blocks, posters, bright diagrams and other demonstrative materials.” The material can only be demonstrative, but if someone slams the door loudly when leaving, such behavior can be demonstrative.

As a rule, the dictionary entry in a paronym dictionary provides comprehensive information about the meanings of paronyms and the words with which they are combined: the dictionary warns the reader against possible errors and inaccuracies. The task of paronym dictionaries is to find out the compatibility features of words with the same root based on a comparison of their semantics.

For the convenience of considering the material, we can conditionally distinguish three groups of paronyms. 1. Coincident or similar in meaning. 2. Coinciding in some meanings. 3. Significantly different in meaning. Let's consider these groups.

Paronyms with the same root are mostly close in meaning, but differ in subtle shades of meaning. For example, the paronyms pay and pay have similar meanings.

When comparing the values, it is easy to make sure that they coincide in many respects (the highlighted part is the common one). However, the paronyms pay and pay are combined with different elephants. For example, you can pay (that) travel, sledge), bill, but pay (that) fees, debt. The verb shake is combined with nouns and the instrumental case (to pay with money, currency), which are not combined with the verb to pay. You can pay for something (for travel, for shopping!, but you cannot say, for example: pay for travel. In this case, you need to use the form pay for travel, since the verb pay does not combine with nouns with the preposition for. The ability of paronyms to combine with different The elephants and shapes of the layers present the main difficulty in their use.

Paronyms can be combined with the same forms of words, but differ in subtle shades of meaning. For example, the paronyms simplify - simplify have the general meaning of “make simpler,” but the second word is characterized by an additional connotation of “simpler than it should be.” For example: simplify your singing style and simplify your speech. The semantic nuances of paronyms are usually so important that replacing one word with another without violating the meaning is impossible.

PARONOMASIA

The phenomenon of paronomasia (from the gr. para - near, onomazo - I call) consists in the sound similarity of words that have different morphological roots (cf.: pairs - sledges, pilot - boatswain, clarinet - cornet, injection - infection). As with paronymy, lexical pairs in paronomasia belong to the same part of speech and perform similar syntactic functions in a sentence. Such words may have the same prefixes, suffixes, endings, but their roots are always different. Apart from random phonetic similarity, the words in such lexical pairs have nothing in common; their subject-semantic relevance is completely different.

Paronomasia, unlike paronymy, is not a natural and regular phenomenon. And although there are many phonetically similar layers in the language, comparing them as lexical pairs is the result of individual perception: one will see paronomasia in a chara circulation - type, another - in a circulation - a mirage, a third - in a circulation - a turn. However, paronymy and paronomasia are close in terms of the use of similar-sounding words in speech.

Accuracy of inflection and form formation

Accuracy and clarity of speech sometimes requires us to be clear in the use of gender and case forms of nouns. Try to guess who - a man or a woman - says about himself: “I am an orphan, an unfortunate orphan!” Everyone will think: of course, a woman! Indeed, for modern speech it has become the norm to agree in meaning with common nouns (they are equally applicable to men and women - slob, sweet tooth, coquette, smart girl). But among the writers of the past one can find a different agreement: Come, dear grandfather, take pity on me, an unfortunate orphan (Ch., “Vanka”),

Now we say: He has a terrible sweet tooth; This boy is such a slob...

However, there are cases when the incorrect use of forms of adjectives that agree with common nouns introduces ambiguity. For example: He stood amazed, but soon became filled with compassion for the little one lying in front of him. But the girl took the child in her arms and, calling the boy cute, carried her away. Are we talking about a boy or a girl?

Case endings can clarify the meaning of some nouns. Teak, in the nominative plural form of bread, means standing cereals, and breads mean products baked from flour. Therefore, the following phrase cannot be considered true: The housewife took the bread out of the oven. The endings in the following nouns should not be confused: bellows (blacksmith's) - bellows (dressed hides); images (literary and artistic) - images (icons); orders (knightly and monastic societies) - orders (insignia); belts (geographical) - belts (parts of clothing); omissions (oversights - passes (documents); sables (animals) - sable (fur); brakes (obstacles) - brakes (instruments); flowers (plants) - colors (color); junkers (until 1945 in Germany this was the name for large landowners) - cadets (cadets in military schools of Tsarist Russia).

We should not forget about the semantic differences in some grammatical forms of adjectives.

Often the long form of adjectives indicates a permanent attribute of an object, and the short form indicates a temporary one. Compare: he is sick - he is sick, she is so kind - be kind, his movements are calm - his face is calm.

In other cases, the full form of adjectives denotes an absolute attribute not related to a specific situation, and a short relative attribute in relation to a specific situation: the ceiling is low (a trait in general) - the ceiling is low (for high furniture). Wed. also: the boots are small, the boots are large, the passage is narrow.

Particular precision should be observed when using pronouns. Their ability to replace previous ones cannot cause ambiguity in the statement. For example, how to understand the phrase about love for animals? - Sasha knew that if, after three days of keeping the dogs in a special place, the owners did not come for them, they would be destroyed (the owners or the dogs?). Such use of pronouns often gives rise to ambiguity and inappropriate comedy: Teachers are worried about a teenager’s free time and how to kill him...

When using a verb, ambiguity may arise due to the possibility of double interpretation of forms in -sya, for example; Children who are lost on the streets gather here (do they gather themselves or are they collected?). Failure to distinguish between subject-object relations in such cases can create an inappropriately comic statement: The chicks are fed by insects; A dog is harnessed to the sleigh to help the hunter.

Clarity of syntactic structures

The accuracy and clarity of speech is determined by the correctness of grammatical structures, the construction of phrases and sentences.

The ability to combine words into phrases in different ways creates ambiguity: The teacher had to explain a lot (did the teacher explain it or did someone explain it to him?).

The reason for the ambiguity of the statement may be the incorrect order of words in the sentence: 1. Spacious loggias are framed by screens made of reinforced glass. 2. Seven operating platforms serve several hundred people. In such sentences, the subject does not differ in form from the direct object and therefore it is unclear what (or who) is the subject of the action. An example of such confusion is the Sun covered by a cloud.

Of course, such sentences can be corrected if they are used in written speech; it is enough to change the order of the words: 1. Reinforced glass screens frame the spacious loggias. 2. Several hundred people operate seven operating platforms. And, of course: The cloud covered the sun. But if you hear a phrase with the wrong word order, you may misinterpret it. This is what L.P.’s joke is based on. Chekhov: “I wish you to avoid all kinds of troubles, sorrows and misfortunes.”

Semantic ambiguity sometimes arises in combinations such as a letter to the mother (written by her or addressed to her), criticism of Belinsky, portraits of Repin, etc.

Ambiguity can also arise in complex sentences with attributive clauses such as: The illustrations for the stories that were sent to the competition were executed masterfully (were illustrations or stories sent to the competition?). In these cases, it is recommended to replace subordinate clauses with participial phrases: Illustrations sent to the stories. Or: Illustrations for submitted stories.

Conclusion

Language is an integral part of our lives; every day people communicate with each other, exploring the world through communication. Therefore, knowledge of your language, its literary norms is necessary now - in conditions of changing norms, the introduction of new words and expressions. Only by studying the stylistics and culture of speech will we be able to preserve the Russian language as it is at the moment and embellish it. Only understanding of your speech by others will allow you to occupy a high position in society. The quality and beauty of speech make it clear the level of human development.

Literature:

1. Vvedensky L.A., Pavlova L.G., Kashaeva E.Yu., “Russian language and culture of speech” - textbook, “Phoenix”, Rostov-on-Don, 2001
2. Golub I.B., “Stylistics of the Russian language”, “Iris-press”, Moscow, 1997
3. Golub I.B., “Russian language and culture of speech” - textbook, “Logos”, Moscow, 2003
4. Dunev A.I., Dymarsky M.Ya., Kozhevnikov A.Yu. “Russian language and culture of speech”, “Higher School”, Moscow, 2002
5. Maksimov V.I. , Kazarinov N.V., Barabanova N.R., “Russian language and culture of speech” - textbook, “Gardariki”, Moscow, 2002
6. Reformatsky A.A., “Introduction to Linguistics”, “Aspect Press”, Moscow, 2000
7. Rosenthal D.E., “Practical statistics of the Russian language”, “AST-LTD Publishing House”, Tula, 1998

Main trends in the cultural and speech situation: general characteristics. Among the trends and factors in the development of the cultural and speech situation of our time, three leading ones can be distinguished. The effects on the everyday speech environment of each of them are both unequal and ambiguous at the same time (Fig. 1). The main trends characterizing the cultural and speech situation are closely related to the changes currently taking place in society and reflect the peculiarities of the functioning of the Russian language at the present stage.

Among the factors in the development of the cultural and speech situation of our time, three leading factors can be identified. The effects on the everyday speech environment of each of them are unequal and ambiguous at the same time.

Rice. 1. The main trends that can be traced in the modern cultural and speech situation. Firstly, this is the democratization of language, which is associated with the blurring of boundaries between social strata and groups, which leads to the constant updating of literary norms, to the disappearance of differences between speech styles. Here we can highlight such trends as: – loosening of literary norms; – insufficient culture of oral and written speech; – use of profanity and jargon. Secondly, this is globalization and dialogization of cultures of different peoples, which reveal the development of the following trends: – multi-ethnicity; – widespread and active use of foreign words; – narrowing the scope of distribution of the Russian language.

Thirdly, total technicalization currently plays a special role: – the sharply increased importance of computers and new computer technologies, which leads to the emergence of “computer slang” and “electronic language”; – an increase in the number and types of computer games, which entails a significant decrease in the number of the reading population.

Thus, the picture of the modern cultural and speech situation remains contradictory and ambiguous. Language is transformed and transformed and is in constant motion. As noted in this regard by L.Yu. Buyanova and V.Yu. Mezentsev, “Russian speech of the early 21st century is experiencing active semantic and procedural modifications that reflect the dynamism and globality of extralinguistic changes that modern Russia is experiencing. ... This problem is most acute in the space of media discourse, in the language of journalism and the media in general, which is due to the pragmatic purpose of these speech-text formations - to form an information slide in such a way as to most effectively influence the consumer of information and “force” him with this information by verbal means perceive and use it in your activities.

In this regard, a characteristic feature of the media language is its pragmatic “anti-normality”, programmed by the goals and strategies of the media themselves” (Buyanova, Mezentseva, 2007: 107). From the point of view of I.A. Sternin, “the modern linguistic situation in Russia provides the researcher with rich opportunities to identify and describe the social factors and processes that form the main directions of changes in the Russian language at the present stage of development.” In general, the Russian language of the late 20th century, according to the researcher, is characterized by the following general development trends: “the intensity and speed of changes in the language; the determining influence of socio-political processes on language development; the predominant changes occur in vocabulary and phraseology; quantitative changes prevail over qualitative ones; functional changes prevail over systemic ones” (Sternin, 2000: 4-16). I.A. Sternin believes that the period of intensive development of the Russian language has now passed its peak and is gradually declining.

This trend is manifested in a decrease in the aggressiveness of the dialogue, clear signs of stabilization of the stylistic norm, a decrease in the volume of borrowings and the active development of borrowed vocabulary.

The author makes the assumption that over the coming years the Russian language will experience a period of stabilization (ibid.). According to G.N. Sklyarevskaya, the most important processes occurring in the language at the present time are borrowing, democratization of language, word formation and semantic actualization. “These processes are universal, characteristic of all languages ​​throughout the entire course of linguistic evolution, and in our time of social cataclysms they differ only in their particular intensity.

True, the degree of their intensity is such that they give the impression of linguistic chaos: the disproportionate growth of individual groups of words, the breakdown of stable language models, word-formation redundancy, the immoderate democratization of the language - its “lumpenization” - at a superficial glance, these phenomena can be regarded as evidence of corruption , tongue diseases.

However, the crisis conditions of the language caused by the crisis of society (and this is undoubtedly the case) indicate the activity of the adaptive mechanisms of the language system, its ability to self-regulate, just as the external manifestations of a disease, which are perceived as the disease itself, are in fact the implementation of the adaptive, protective forces of the body "(Sklyarevskaya, 2001: 177-202). The researcher says that all the rapid linguistic changes are caused by social, economic and political changes, the rapidity of which causes the impression of linguistic cataclysms: “This circumstance gives grounds for many people, including linguists, to talk about damage, decay, decomposition, crisis, decline modern Russian language and raise the question of its preservation and salvation” (ibid.). The author draws attention to the huge array of new vocabulary, not yet included in explanatory dictionaries or recorded in dictionaries of the last decade, which is rapidly filling those thematic spaces that most fully reflect the changes taking place in the life of society.

The most important source of new vocabulary is G.N. Sklyarevskaya calls borrowings.

The array of borrowings is due to extralinguistic reasons - the openness of modern Russian society to international connections and contacts. But, as the researcher believes, there is no reason to worry. The flow of borrowings does not threaten the Russian language with clogging: “The modern Russian language, like the Russian language of the past, is a stable system that adapts well alien elements, adapting them to its linguistic systems and forcing them to serve its purposes” (Sklyarevskaya, 2001: 177-202 ). G.N. Sklyarevskaya notes the process of intensive democratization of language taking place in Russia, which, combined with the abolition of censorship, led to the fact that streams of reduced, slang, and often criminal and obscene language went beyond the boundaries of their social environment and became the property of all genres requiring expression: literary texts , newspaper and television reports, journalistic speeches, political debates.

The fact that jargon is now, as a rule, not explained in texts, does not require “translation” into a standard and generally accepted language, indicates that they “if they have not yet entered, then have already burst into the speech use of an educated society” ( Kostomarov, 1994: 63), demonstrating “freedom of expression” and the right to choose any means of expression.

It is quite clear that neither borrowings nor jargon could pour into the language with such pressure if they were not in demand by society and did not serve its needs. In a similar way, modern word formation, in the words of E.A. Zemskaya, “using the morphemic composition of the language, fulfills society’s order to create the names necessary for communication” (Zemskaya, 1996: 90). Yu.A. Belchikov notes that currently in Russia the system of literary norms is experiencing great tension: “In the speech communication of native speakers of the Russian literary language (oral and written), such negative trends and phenomena as the coarsening of literary speech, the detabooization of coarse colloquial speech (including public speech) have gained strength. ) vocabulary and phraseology, an influx of jargon, unmotivated use of barbarisms, mainly of English origin" (Belchikov, 2004: 27-33). Currently, there is a dynamic change and transformation of the system of literary norms that are acutely responsive to the process of democratization of the language. Modern dictionaries also testify to this: “Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language” (Ozhegov, Shvedova 1997); 1st volume of the “Russian Semantic Dictionary” (edited by Shvedova 1998); “Words that we have all encountered: An explanatory dictionary of Russian general jargon” (Ermakova, Zemskaya, Rozina, 1999). To date, certain experience has already been accumulated and research continues on the latest trends and processes occurring in the Russian language system, both in the lexical tier (N.M. Salnikov 1992; L. Ferm 1994; Yu.A. Belchikov 1996, etc.) and in its semantics, word formation and grammar (E.A. Zemskaya 1992, 1996; O.P. Ermakova 1996; M.Ya. Glovinskaya 1996; B.Yu. Norman 1998; E.S. Kubryakova 2004, etc.), in the field of stylistic characteristics of a word, the relationship between functional styles and speech genres is studied (E.V. Kakorina 1992, 1996; V.N. Vinogradova 1998, etc.). Particular attention is paid to foreign language borrowings that are actively used in the language (V.G. Kostomarov 1993; L.P. Krysin 1995; M.A. Breiter 1997; A.I. Dyakov 2003; O.E. Bondarets 2008, etc.) in his work “Foreign Words in the Context of Modern Social Life” L.P. Krysin notes the social reasons for the changes occurring in the Russian language. Among them, he names the democratization of Russian society, de-ideologization of many spheres of human activity, anti-totalitarian tendencies, the removal of various kinds of prohibitions and restrictions in political and social life, “openness” to trends from the West in the field of economics, politics, culture, etc. The influence of these factors on language, according to the author, is usually carried out not directly, but indirectly: “In some cases it is even difficult to determine what external reasons contribute to the activation of a particular word-formation model or syntactic structure, but a special analysis can show that the impetus for such activation was stimulated by social stimuli in nature” (Krysin, 1996: 142-161). The researcher believes that in some areas of the language the connection between the changes occurring in it and changes in society is more clearly manifested: an increase in the flow of English borrowings, the activation of certain speech genres that imply spontaneity of speech and relative freedom of speech behavior (genres of radio and television interviews, various talk shows , television games with many participants, etc.). Changes in society also affect the relationships between the subsystems, which together make up the system of the Russian national language, and the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of each of these subsystems.

From the point of view of L.P. Krysin, the current stage of development of the Russian language is distinguished from previous ones by two very noticeable processes: the jargonization of literary speech and the intensification of the process of borrowing foreign words. Currently, the Russian literary language is strongly influenced by the slang and vernacular language environment.

The author explains this phenomenon primarily by the influence of migration processes: the mixing of different segments of the population, the outflow of rural residents to cities, the complication of the social composition of townspeople, the intensification of communication between representatives of different (including in their language skills) groups, etc. The linguist traces the penetration of slang vocabulary into literary speech: “At first, slang vocabulary seeped mainly into its oral and colloquial variety, then, closer to the present day, into the language of the media, and then poured in a wide stream into journalism, into the public speeches of politicians, deputies and even writers" (Krysin, 1996: 142-161). The development of any language is characterized by the process of borrowing words from other languages.

Among the reasons that contribute to such a massive and relatively easy penetration of foreign neologisms into our language, L.P. Krysin names the reasons as socio-psychological.

Often, a foreign word is considered more prestigious in comparison with the corresponding word of the native language: “They often speak and write about a foreign-language flood that floods the Russian language, about the dominance of foreignness, under the yoke of which it is perishing, and such statements give rise to a feeling of hopelessness.

But we must not forget that language is a self-developing mechanism, the action of which is regulated by certain laws.

In particular, language can clean itself, get rid of what is functionally redundant and unnecessary” (Krysin, 1996: 142-161). From the point of view of Yu.N. Karaulova, the originality of the present moment in the state of the cultural and speech situation is explained by the changes that have occurred in our society over the past decades: the destruction of the previous political system and the desire to free ourselves forever from totalitarian thinking and language, the emergence of democratic freedoms (including freedom of speech), a change in forms ownership and composition of active participants in communication, the emergence of new layers of society with their inherent specificity of speech. Such processes, including the emergence of unprecedented glasnost, interpreted by Russian speakers not as permission to say what you want, but, first of all, as permission to speak as you want, led to the liberalization of the language, a decrease in speech culture and the weakening of literary norms (Karaulov, 1991 ). The democratization of the language is due to the fact that the modern era brings a lot of new things into the Russian language of our days, especially in such areas as vocabulary and phraseology, the compatibility of words, their stylistic coloring, etc. This affected, first of all, the fact that in recent decades artistic speech has lost the high status of exemplary speech, supported by a two-hundred-year tradition, which played a leading role in the formation of a national literary language. Many representatives of contemporary art, acutely aware of the changing cultural eras, see the reasons for these changes in the loss of the idea that lay at the foundation of Russian culture of modern times about the highest spiritual value of the word, capable of transforming the world. In the modern cultural and speech situation, there is an intensive convergence of book-written and oral means with colloquial vocabulary, vernacular, social and professional dialects.

However, such a emancipation of linguistic norms should not lead to their weakening or stylistic decline.

Such emancipation inevitably creates conditions for a variety of expressive means and, consequently, for improving speech culture.

At the same time, modern oral and written speech is stylistically reduced and coarsened.

The language of fiction tends toward impersonality and standardization.

The language of science suffers from unnecessary complexity and an abundance of not always justified foreign language borrowings in the field of terminology.

Journalism is prone to verbosity, vagueness and inexpressiveness. One aspect of the current trend of language democratization is the problem of language proficiency in government circles, which is currently particularly acute.

This is confirmed by the rector of RUDN University V.M. Filippov, who served as Minister of Education of the Russian Federation from 1998 to 2004. In his message, he talks about working on a pocket dictionary of correct pronunciation for officials.

Its volume will be about 200 – 300 words. In 2001, the minister proposed fining civil servants for language errors in public speeches and official documents.

The dean of the faculty of Moscow University S.G. addresses the same issue. Ter-Minasova, who notes the inability of politicians and officials to competently express their thoughts (Ter-Minasova, 2000). Yu.N. Karaulov attributes the actual linguistic reasons that influenced the formation of the modern cultural and speech situation in Russia to the process of manifestation in the language of globalization and dialogization of cultures of different peoples.

This is due to the fact that an unprecedented flow of foreign words has rushed into the Russian language - borrowings from the American version of English and some others (Karaulov, 1991). Among young people and on television, lexical Anglomania has recently taken hold: brain rings, remakes, jam sessions and all kinds of shows - talk shows, car shows, dog shows. The processes of globalization and dialogization are actively manifested in the sphere of speech culture, changes in which are occurring with great intensity.

In the 20th century, Russian culture developed under the sign of constant renewal, and therefore it is customary to note the innovative nature of such development, including in the field of language.

Regarding the trend of technicalization, it should be noted that “modern man lives in an environment where a large number of new products are simultaneously thrown onto television screens, sold in the form of cassettes and, of course, are present on the Internet.

The Internet is a great anonymity: authors here publish their texts and participate in discussions, having pseudonyms that allow any form of emancipation and violation of solid aesthetic and ethical norms. It is not for nothing that the book, traditional book knowledge, for which deep respect has always been maintained in Russia, has now truly lost its universal meaning” (Fedorov, 2008: 49-52). M.N. Volodina believes that currently “a special dialogical “network language” of the Internet is being formed, the specifics of which are interethnic in nature” (Volodina, 2008: 45). The so-called “electronic language” is becoming the subject of close attention of linguists.

O.V. Alexandrova in her work “The Correlation of Oral and Written Speech and the Language of the Media” compares network language as the language of international network communication with the formation of a new type of discourse covering network texts (Alexandrova, 2008: 345). Currently, the very forms of existence of classical literature texts have changed.

The modern young generation gets acquainted with the works of classics through intermediary texts: brief retellings of the content, collections of “golden works”, published in huge editions and reducing the level of school education.

The status of artistic speech itself ceases to play the role of a high example. The modern cultural and speech situation indicates a crisis in family communication.

“Communication” with the TV and computer comes to the fore; home reading, joint games, and conversations are a thing of the past.

“Computer jargon” often appears in youth vocabulary. Linguistic scientists also highlight positive trends occurring in modern speech culture. Yu.N. Karaulov believes that the structural organization of the Russian language is currently quite prosperous, and those trends in its development that observers note are in fact normal and natural. “All these are phenomena of linguistic evolution: a language can only exist by constantly changing over time, otherwise it dies, just as the languages ​​of small nations die.

In reality, when speaking about the state of the Russian language, we are talking about the state of the people who speak it, about those transformations that occur in the speech behavior (and therefore, inevitably, in the linguistic consciousness) of native speakers" (Karaulov, 2007: http:// www.gramota.ru/biblio/magazines/gramota/ruspress/28_609). Many modern linguists fix the problem of the rapid weakening of the language norm, but it is noted that at the same time the former rigidity and unambiguity of the norm is being lost. “Such a phenomenon in modern language as the variation of a norm is not a sign of its loosening and loss of stability, but an indicator of the flexibility and expedient adaptability of the norm to the life situation of communication” (Valgina, 2001: 15-19). In the printed media, changes occurring in the style of language can be traced - there is more irony and sarcasm, and this awakens and develops subtle nuances in the word.

On the one hand, the language of the media often does not meet literary standards, but at the same time it has become more natural and lifelike, reflecting changes in the speech behavior of native speakers.

It should be absolutely clear to representatives of the media and linguistic scientists that the Russian language must be protected from contamination with profanity, foreign borrowings and jargon, from stylistic decline and stylistic homogenization, from everything that leads to its impoverishment, and, consequently, to the impoverishment or deadening of thought.

The processes taking place now in the cultural and speech situation are natural; they do not indicate the death of the language, but its turbulent life and transformation. “The dynamics of language development are so noticeable,” notes N.S. Valgina, “which leaves no one indifferent either among the linguistic community, or among journalists and publicists, or among ordinary citizens not professionally associated with the language” (ibid.). The state of the modern cultural and speech situation worries writers, journalists, scientists, wide circles of educated people, everyone who is not indifferent to the fate of Russian speech, who is seriously concerned about the state of Russian culture. 1.3. Political regulation of the cultural and speech situation in Russia The processes taking place in the Russian language at the present stage require not only close public attention and discussion, but also state regulation.

Currently, one can note an undoubted increase in the interest of the State Duma and the Government of the Russian Federation in the cultural and speech situation in the country.

Laws are being adopted aimed at increasing the prestige of the Russian language and domestic verbal culture, Federal target programs are being implemented, the plan of which is approved by the Government of the Russian Federation for a period of five years. The goal of the Federal Target Program “Russian Language (2006 – 2010)” is “to create conditions for the full implementation of the functions of the Russian language as the state language of the Russian Federation and the language of interethnic communication to strengthen statehood, national security and prestige of the country, and develop integration processes in the participating states CIS, full entry of the Russian Federation into the world political, economic, cultural and educational space" (FTP, 2005: 2). The Program notes that in the Russian Federation there is a decrease in the level of proficiency in Russian as a state language, especially among representatives of the younger generation, a narrowing of the scope of its functioning as a means of interethnic communication, a distortion of literary norms and speech culture among politicians, civil servants, cultural workers, radio , television. The federal target program is the organizational basis for solving the problem of using the state language and the languages ​​of the peoples of the Russian Federation.

The development of the Program was determined by the following factors: – the need to create conditions for the functioning of the Russian language as the most important means of ensuring the state integrity of Russia and national security; – the need to provide conditions for the implementation of principles based on an understanding of the status of the state language, assigned to the Russian language by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, as a unifying element of the political, economic and cultural spheres of life of the country; – the country’s need to pursue a unified language policy in all constituent entities of the Russian Federation; – the need to create equal conditions for mastering the Russian language by all citizens of the Russian Federation; – the relevance of strengthening the role of the Russian language as one of the most important socio-cultural components of the unification of Russian civil society; – the need to support the Russian language as a means of interethnic communication in the CIS member states; – the need to strengthen the position of the Russian language in the world for the further development of political, economic, social and cultural relations with foreign countries, as well as Russian diasporas in them; – the need to form a positive attitude towards Russia in the world community (see: Federal Target Program, 2005). The experience of implementing the Federal target programs “Russian language (2002 – 2005)” and “Program for the Russian Federation to support integration processes in the field of education in the Commonwealth of Independent States” for 2004 – 2005 showed the feasibility of combining them to implement an integrated approach to solving state problems in the field education, as well as problems of using the state language and other languages ​​of the Russian Federation.

The implementation of the Federal Target Program “Russian Language (2002 – 2005)” made it possible to attract 7 federal districts to participate, including 36 constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as 3 CIS states. The language situation in Siberia, the Tyumen region, the Far North and the Far East was studied, and a series of collections “Human Rights and Legislation on Languages ​​of the Russian Federation” was published for eight constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

As a result of the research, qualification requirements for civil servants of the Russian Federation were developed regarding the level of proficiency in the Russian language and speech culture, and standard test materials were created.

The language legislation of the Baltic countries has been studied, principles and methods of sociolinguistic control of language situations in neighboring countries, in particular the Baltic countries, have been developed.

During the implementation of the Federal target programs “Russian language (2002–2005)” and “Program for the Russian Federation to support integration processes in the field of education in the Commonwealth of Independent States” for 2004–2005, it became obvious that, despite the emerging developments in the functioning of the Russian language positive changes, the following problems still remain acute: lack of an integrated approach to solving strategic problems; low efficiency of interdepartmental coordination; the need to involve civil society and business representatives in solving problems; insufficient budget funding (Federal Target Program, 2005). To implement the strategic objectives of the Program, it is envisaged to create centralized mechanisms for solving them at the federal level, use the results obtained at the regional and municipal levels, as well as create a system of indicators and indicators for the implementation of the Program.

This is only possible when using the program-target method.

But not only the Federal Target Program regulates the cultural and speech situation in the country.

Until the end of the last century, the Russian language did not have legal status. The special 68th article of the Russian Constitution “On the state language of the Russian Federation,” adopted in 1993, did not define the rules for the functioning of the Russian language.

But in connection with the current cultural and speech situation, the need arose for legislative regulation of the state language.

Three years have passed since deputies adopted the law in the first reading. The controversy around him either died down or resumed. The last peak of interest among politicians in linguistics occurred in the spring of 2005. As a result of this, on June 1, 2005, President of Russia V.V. Putin signed the Federal Law “On the State Language of the Russian Federation,” adopted by the State Duma on May 20 and approved by the Federation Council on May 25, 2005. The law is aimed at ensuring the use of the state language throughout Russia, ensuring the right of citizens of the Russian Federation to use the state language, as well as protecting and developing linguistic culture.

According to the document, the state language of the Russian Federation, in accordance with the Constitution, is Russian throughout the country.

The status of the Russian language as a state language provides for its mandatory use in areas defined by Russian legislation.

The law prohibits, when using Russian as the state language, the use of words and expressions that do not correspond to the norms of the modern Russian literary language. The only exceptions are foreign words that do not have commonly used analogues in the Russian language (see: On the state language of the Russian Federation: Federal Law No. 53-FZ, 2005). In order to protect and develop linguistic culture in Russia, federal authorities are instructed to promote the improvement of the education system and training of specialists in the field of the Russian language, support the publication of specialized textbooks and dictionaries, and monitor compliance with legislation on the state language of the Russian Federation. The Law especially emphasizes that the mandatory use of the state language of the Russian Federation should not be interpreted as a denial or derogation of the right to use the state languages ​​of the republics that are part of the Russian Federation and the languages ​​of the peoples of the Russian Federation (ibid.). The law establishes the areas of use of the state language, including the activities and names of government bodies, organizations of all forms of ownership, courts of all levels, etc. In addition, the Russian language is necessarily used when preparing all documents, as well as in the activities of all-Russian, regional and municipal media, for with the exception of media outlets specially created to present information in the state languages ​​of the republics. This Bill also establishes terminology.

The phrases “Russian language”, “state language”, “official language”, “national language” are now found in approximately 70 existing Federal laws and mean only what is officially called in the text of the Constitution “Russian language as the state language of the Russian Federation” (Butuzov , 2007: http://www.russian2007.ru/index_rus.html). The wording of the articles of this Bill has caused a lot of controversy among modern linguists.

Rector of the Moscow State Linguistic University, member of the International Group of Experts of the Council of Europe in the project “Linguistic Policy for a Multilingual and Political Culture Europe” I.I. Khaleeva, in an interview with Rossiyskaya Gazeta, commented on the Law “On the State Language of the Russian Federation”: “I do not agree with those of my colleagues who argue that such a living phenomenon as language cannot be limited by any laws or other acts.

Without language norms there will be no speech. Russians must speak standard, literate Russian.

But as a linguist and a person who also had a hand in this document, it is very difficult for me to call it ideal.

We are issuing a law on the state language of the Russian Federation, but we are writing it, to put it mildly, not in the best Russian language” (“RG”, 2005, No. 3789). I.I. Khaleeva notes that the Law is replete with many stylistic errors. Article 1, paragraph 5 talks about “increase”, but this is not the same as “multiplying”. “I think it is not only Russian scholars who understand that the word in the law is used incorrectly,” says the linguist.

In paragraph 6 of the same article, the phrase “when used is not allowed” appears twice. This is linguistic sloppiness. The authors of the law immediately violate it. The law restricts the use of foreign words, but they use them. Example: the word “analog” is in the article that formulates this very limitation. From the point of view of I.I. Khaleeva, the Law on the Russian Language is too laconic.

The list of areas of use of the Russian language is clearly not complete. That is, the Law opens up new discussions among both linguists and politicians. The Law refers to the norms of the Russian literary language, which are “approved by the Government of the Russian Federation.” However, no government can approve language norms. Another thing is the rules of Russian spelling and punctuation. “And the main thing that worries me,” says I.I. Khaleev, - the Law does not spell out the mechanism for putting its most important provisions into effect.

Without this, the document looks more like a memorandum, a declaration” (RG, 2005, No. 3789). On November 9, at the Faculty of Philology of Moscow State University, a round table was held dedicated to the Federal Law on the Russian Language and problems of legislation in the field of language. According to Professor A.A., who took part in it. Volkov, the modern Law on the State Language of the Russian Federation requires serious and thorough revision, since it contains a number of formulations that are not defined from a linguistic point of view: “foreign words that do not have commonly used analogues in the Russian language”, “protection and support of the Russian language”, “ other languages ​​of the peoples of the Russian Federation”, etc. “So, language as a system of signs does not need protection,” says the professor, “it is necessary to protect texts written in the language.

Forms of protection should be discussed. In this regard, as a rule, the question of censorship arises. The situation in the field of censorship is currently complicated by mass communication, when the media text is the collective production of a certain publication” (Volkova, 2005: http://www.gramota.ru/lenta/news/rl2007/ 8_2190). Another vague term in the Law is the very concept of “Russian language”. Does this term mean the language of the classics or is it a modern language? A.A. Volkov emphasized that in the texts of A.S. Pushkin contains a lot of words, the use of which does not correspond to the “norms of the modern Russian literary language” (ibid.). The situation is complicated by the fact that in modern society the concept of norm becomes negative.

In a democratic society, it is to a certain extent associated with the infringement of human rights.

A number of questions are also raised by the provision on the possibility of using vocabulary that does not comply with the norms of the Russian language in cases where it “is an integral part of the artistic concept,” for example, how the examination of the artistic concept is carried out. “The introduction of such abstract formulas into the Law makes it insignificant.

When drawing up the Law, all possible situations of the Law’s operation must be worked out and spelled out as clearly as possible,” emphasized A.A. Volkov (ibid.). On November 4, 2006, the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin declared 2007 the Year of the Russian Language. “Russia is open to everyone who identifies with its culture. We will spend 2007 as the Year of the Russian Language both in Russia and in the world where the Russian language is known, appreciated and loved,” the head of state said then. “The importance of the Russian language for the development of world civilization is obvious, because many books have been written in it, including about the history, culture, scientific discoveries of not only the Russian, but also other peoples - and not only the peoples of Russia, but almost all peoples in the world "- noted the President (Butuzov, 2007: http://www.russian2007.ru/index_rus.html). In his opinion, events related to the Year of the Russian Language will arouse great interest, be beneficial and strengthen international humanitarian contacts.

The Government of the Russian Federation was given a 2-month period to create an organizing committee for the Year of the Russian Language and approve its composition; approval of a plan of main activities, including activities in the field of culture, science and education, indicating the volumes and sources of their financing.

The Year of the Russian Language has become an event of not only Russian but also international significance. Its strategic goal is to attract the interest of the world community to the study of the Russian language, Russian literature and culture.

The start of the Year of the Russian Language was given on January 24, 2007 in Paris, at the Expolang 2007 exhibition, where Russia acted as the guest of honor. The event took place with the participation and under the patronage of the wife of the President of Russia L.A. Putina. On June 27, 2007, a press conference was held at the Reception House of the Government of the Russian Federation, at which the first results of the Year of the Russian Language in Russia were summed up.

It was attended by the Minister of Culture and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation A.S. Sokolov, Deputy Minister, Executive Secretary of the Organizing Committee for the Year of the Russian Language A.E. Busygin, Minister of Education and Science of the Russian Federation A.A. Fursenko, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation A.V. Yakovenko, head of Roskultura M.E. Shvydkoy, representatives of the diplomatic corps, cultural figures, heads of leading specialized universities. As part of the press conference, the opening of the photo exhibition “We Prefer Russian” took place.

Part one,” dedicated to outstanding historical figures and our contemporaries of foreign origin, who, having learned Russian, achieved great success in their careers. Among them are Empress Catherine II, associate of Peter the Great Franz Lefort, Austrian poet Rainer Maria Rilke, American astronauts Michael Lopez-Allegria and Sunnita Williams, French actress Consuelo De Aviland, Japanese figure skater Yuko Kawaguchi and others. A.S. Sokolov, speaking at a press conference, said in particular: “The subtleties of the Russian language are absolutely immeasurable.

And we ourselves, speaking this language, thinking in this language, are constantly amazed at the revelations that it gives us” (Butuzov, 2007: http://www.russian2007.ru/index_rus. html). During the meeting, the most interesting projects and events of the Year of the Russian Language were reported. Minister of Education and Science A.A. Fursenko noted that increasing the status of literature teachers and increasing the status of the Russian language is in line with the national project “Education”. During the year, it is planned to equip about a thousand classrooms of Russian language and literature at the highest level.

And the traditional August teachers’ council will be held under the slogan: “Russian language is the key to success!” A.A. Fursenko emphasized that in 2007 it is planned to open several new Russian-language schools in Azerbaijan and Armenia. According to the head of the Roszarubezhcenter under the Russian Foreign Ministry E.V. Mitrofanova, “the main achievement of the Year of the Russian Language should be several long-term, long-term projects.

In particular, the “Russian Language for All” program, which provides the opportunity for distance learning of the Russian language and advanced training for teachers abroad” (ibid.). Also, as part of the press conference, there was a presentation of the official website of the “Year of the Russian Language” project, which will become a unified information field for Russian and foreign media. The geography of the Year of the Russian Language is as wide as possible. During 2007, more than 800 events were held in Russia and in countries near and far abroad.

These include exhibition and presentation events, international forums and round tables, competitions and interactive events. Thus, in September 2007, a book fair was held in Moscow under the motto: “Books in the service of peace and progress.” In November, on National Unity Day, the “Main Words” event was held on the capital’s Red Square, during which, according to the initiators, everyone could come up to the microphone and pronounce in Russian the words that he considers the most important words spoken in his life.

And in December 2007, the final event of the Year of the Russian Language was held in Moscow: a ceremonial award ceremony for the winners of projects, competitions, Olympiads, and championships in the Russian language. The opinions of linguistic scholars are divided on whether the Year of the Russian Language can be considered a success. Rector of the State Institute of Russian Language named after A.S. Pushkin, professor Yu.E. Prokhorov, in his interview with the Ekho Moskvy radio station on December 23, spoke about foreign events that took place in 2007. Their implementation can be considered quite successful; the number of people wanting to learn Russian, according to him, has increased significantly.

At the same time, interest in learning the Russian language has especially increased among lawyers, economists, and representatives of the tourism business. Chairman of the Board of the Guild of Linguists Experts in Documentation and Information Disputes, Professor M.V. Gorbanevsky, in turn, speaking about the results of the Year of the Russian Language, used the stylistic figure of an oxymoron and called the holding of the Year a “disastrous success.” Indeed, many events were held abroad aimed at attracting attention to the Russian language, but in Russia itself there were very few of these events, and they were not effective enough.

Among the specific things that could have been done, but, unfortunately, were not carried out during the Year of the Russian Language, M.V. Gorbanevsky named the publication and distribution of books on the history and culture of Russia and Russian literature to school libraries across the country.

This kind of publication includes, for example, the book “The History of the Native Word: From Cyril and Methodius to the Present Day,” published in Kolomna in the spring of 2007, which deserves to be on the table of every literature teacher in Russia and in the home libraries of Russian families. However, the circulation of this book is ridiculously small, and yet right now, in the Year of the Russian Language, it could be published in thousands of copies.

According to Gorbanevsky, during the Year of the Russian Language it was necessary to provide state support to some cultural institutions that function only thanks to the efforts of enthusiasts. Among them is the museum of V.I. Dal in Moscow, occupying two small rooms in the outbuilding of the house where Vladimir Ivanovich wrote his famous dictionary. In this regard, M.V. Gorbanevsky reminded radio listeners that during the years of Soviet power, the revival of domestic lexicography was greatly facilitated by the passion of V.I. Lenin with the Dahl dictionary, and expressed the hope that in our days one of the top officials of the state will rediscover this book, even if this does not happen in the Year of the Russian Language (Larina, 2007: http://www.gramota. ru/lenta/news/8_2219) . From all of the above, we can conclude that the language policy pursued by the state and aimed at creating a positive image of Russia and the Russian language in the world community and within the country has a huge scale and geography.

The heads of regional authorities cannot fail to respond to it.

Thus, in the Ivanovo region, the former governor V.I. Tikhonov created a Russian language council several years ago. This is an advisory body that prepares proposals to support, disseminate and preserve the purity of the Russian language. He was recently accepted as a member of the Russian Society of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature. Following this, the Ulyanovsk governor decided to eradicate the illiteracy of regional officials.

S.I. Morozov intends to examine them for knowledge of the Russian language. In early 2007, the governor ordered that literacy assessments be included in civil service competitions. For S.I. This is not Morozov’s first experience. It turns out that while he was mayor of Dimitrovgrad in 2001-2004, he began to fight against the illiteracy of officials, but then, as he himself puts it, he “lacked influence and resources.” The main thing is S.I. himself. Morozov is also ready to take a literacy test. In case of “failure”, officials will be forced to undergo a retraining program with the involvement of Russian language teachers (“RG”, 2007, No. 4276). Such a language policy pursued by the state requires close attention and detailed coverage.

Therefore, the main task facing modern media is to convey to the reader as fully as possible information about the Federal target programs implemented in the country, adopted bills, ongoing events, etc. For these and other reasons, the media is currently faced with the acute problem of covering the cultural and speech situation in the country.

The media is a constantly operating information factor, therefore, the main task of a journalist is to cover the most pressing problems of modern reality. At the same time, it is necessary that the information provided to the audience is timely and understandable. Therefore, the media are obliged to provide readers with information about all innovations relating to language and literary innovations in the same way as they inform the audience about politics and economics.

Conclusions 1. Speech culture is 1) a section of philological science, the doctrine of the totality and system of communicative qualities of speech; 2) signs and properties, the totality of which speaks of its communicative perfection; 3) a set of human skills and knowledge that ensures the expedient and easy use of language for communication purposes. 2. The cultural-speech situation is an integral part (practical implementation) of the culture of speech, which includes cultural-speech situations that arose and existed in Russia in various historical eras.

These situations gradually replace each other, but never completely replace each other. 3. The main trends characterizing the cultural and speech situation are closely related to the changes currently taking place in society and reflect the peculiarities of the functioning of the Russian language at the present stage. 4. Currently, the Federal Target Program “Russian Language (2006 – 2010)” is being implemented in Russia, the plan of which is approved by the Government of the Russian Federation for a period of five years. Its goal is “to create conditions for the full implementation of the functions of the Russian language as the state language of the Russian Federation and the language of interethnic communication to strengthen statehood, national security and the prestige of the country...” (FTP, 2005: 2). 5. In 2005, adopted by the State Duma and signed by Russian President V.V. Putin Federal Law “On the State Language of the Russian Federation”, which, first of all, is aimed at protecting and developing linguistic culture. 6. 2007 was announced by the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin's Year of the Russian Language.

During the designated time, more than 800 events were held in Russia and in countries near and far abroad.

These include exhibition and presentation events, international forums and round tables, competitions and interactive events.

End of work -

This topic belongs to the section:

Principles and linguistic mechanisms for covering the cultural and speech situation in Russia in regional and federal print media (2003-2007)

This is required by the task of comprehensive social orientation of the audience and the holistic development of mass consciousness” (Prokhorov, 2007: 138). To this.. Modern linguists agree that “the vast majority.. In these conditions, the media as a means of social broadcasting (E.N. Ezhova) faces a large-scale task not only to be..

If you need additional material on this topic, or you did not find what you were looking for, we recommend using the search in our database of works:

What will we do with the received material:

If this material was useful to you, you can save it to your page on social networks:

Modern Russian language and social changes in society. Shaking traditional literary norms. Modification of language: the emergence of new and revival of old words; foreign borrowing; active “introduction” of slang words. A culture of speech.

The concept of the subject and task of stylistics, the problem of semantic accuracy when editing text. Stylistic norms. Functional styles of language, their features, application and genre varieties. The use of stylistic moderation in business speech.

The essence and features of morphological norms of the Russian literary language. Basic rules for difficult cases of using nouns. Analysis of the content of the concepts “purity of speech”, “appropriateness” and “understanding of speech”. The jargonous nature of professionalisms.

Aspects of speech culture. Communicative aspect of speech culture. Communicative qualities of speech. Correctness of speech as a communicative quality. Elimination of speech errors in the given sentences. Lexical meaning and stylistic coloring of phraseological units.

Subject of study and communicative aspects of speech culture. General characteristics of the main qualities of cultural speech, namely richness, brightness, imagery, expressiveness, clarity, intelligibility, accuracy, correctness, appropriateness, purity and logic.

The main stages of the emergence of language. Styles of modern Russian literary language; grammatical, lexical, spelling norms, typology of errors. Oral and written varieties of speech interaction, communicative, ethical aspects.

Practical skills in mastering the norms of the modern Russian language (searching for synonyms, paronyms, declensions, determining correct pronunciation, stress and sentence construction) in order to increase the level of speech culture of Russian society.

Forms of existence of language. Basic requirements for oral and written speech. A brief history of the Russian literary language. Pronunciation side of speech. Requirements for literary correctness and euphony. The influence of class jargon.

Manuals on normative stylistics of national languages. Attempts to define the concept of normativity, linguistic (and stylistic) norm. Information about language styles. Assessment of expressive-emotional coloring of language means. Synonymy of linguistic means.

A culture of speech. Speech styles. The richness of Russian speech. Taste of the era and fashion. The word, being the primary element of language, plays a multifaceted role in speech. It characterizes a person as an individual, conveys the experience of generations and changes with them.

Speech, both oral and written, is the essence of social interaction, and conversations are the subject of speech communication theory. Language is a multifunctional system that deals with the creation, storage and transmission of information.

Speech culture as the main component aspect of a person’s high general culture. The concept of linguistic (literary) norms in philology. Communication as a socio-psychological mechanism of human interaction. Etiquette and culture of modern speech communication.

Work experience of a teacher of Russian language and literature in a general education school in the formation of the speech culture of schoolchildren. The Dobroslov School program is a selection of practical materials that help students improve the culture of verbal communication.

The concept and characteristic features of the stylistic norm of the language. Stylistic coloring and its varieties, features and purpose. Functional styles of modern Russian language. Existing stylistic errors, their varieties and methods of avoidance.

Spoken speech as an oral form of language existence. Her emotionally expressive assessments. The main features of everyday conversational style. The doctrine of the communicative qualities of good speech, developed by B.N. Golovin. Correlations of speech with other concepts.

The essence of the concept of “speech culture”. Speech culture is the correctness, accuracy, expressiveness and variety of speech. Synonyms and approach to definition. Usage of synonyms. Synonymous assimilation of new words. Expressiveness and emotionality of speech.

Among the factors and conditions for the development of the modern Russian language (internal and external), in our opinion, we can highlight the following:

1. The trend of general linguistic development is towards democratization. The composition of participants in mass and collective communication has sharply expanded: new segments of the population are becoming familiar with the role of speakers and the role of writing in newspapers and magazines. Since the late 80s, thousands of people with different levels of speech culture have had the opportunity to speak publicly.

2. In the media, censorship and auto-censorship, which previously largely determined the nature of speech behavior, are sharply weakened.

3. Increases personal beginning in speech. Faceless and addressless speech is replaced by personal speech and acquires a specific addressee. Increasing dialogical communication, both oral and written.

4. The scope is expanding spontaneous communication not only personal, but also verbal and public. People no longer give or read pre-written speeches. They say!

5. Important parameters of the flow of oral forms of mass communication are changing: the possibility of the speaker directly addressing the listeners and feedback from the listeners to the speakers is created.

Situations and genres of communication are changing both in the field of public and personal communication. The rigid boundaries of official public communication are loosened. Many genres of oral public speech are born in the wake of mass communication. The dry radio and TV announcer has been replaced by a presenter who thinks, jokes, and expresses his opinion.

Psychological rejection of the bureaucratic language of the past is sharply increasing.

There is a desire to develop new means of expression, new forms of imagery, new types of speech etiquette formulas (in particular, new types of addresses to strangers).

Along with the birth of names for new phenomena, there is a revival of the names of those phenomena that return from the past, prohibited or rejected in the era of totalitarianism.

In modern literary language, there is an intensive convergence of traditional book-written and oral means with everyday spoken elements, urban vernacular, social and professional dialects. However, a certain emancipation of literary norms should not lead to their weakening or stylistic decline. As a normal and inevitable process, such emancipation creates conditions for the richness and diversity of all means of expression and, consequently, for the improvement of speech culture. At the same time, we are well aware that modern oral and written speech is stylistically reduced and coarsened. The language of fiction tends towards impersonality and standardization (including the standards of the latest modernism and underground) The language of science suffers from unnecessary complexity, an abundance of not always justified foreign language borrowings in the field terminology Journalism sometimes sins with verbosity, slurredness and inexpressiveness. The public's legitimate concern is caused by the argotic elements pouring into our press, monotonously used to “revive” texts. For example: download rights, in law(often in article titles), hang around, fool around, for free, hang out and many more etc. Such a deliberate coarsening of speech, of course, is not directly related to the normal processes of democratization of the literary language and is, rather, a reflection and indicator of an insufficiently high level of speech and general culture of speakers and writers, and a lack of linguistic taste.

The basics for describing a speech situation were given by Aristotle in his “Rhetoric” [Ancient rhetoric. M., 1978] He wrote that " speech is composed of three elements. From the speaker himself, from the subject about which he speaks, and from the person to whom he addresses; he is the ultimate goal of everything (I mean the listener) ". [Rhetoric: Book One] In addition to the speaker and the addressee (the person to whom the speech is addressed), others who witness what is happening often participate in a speech situation. For a speech situation, the relationships between the participants in communication are also important, and above all, taking into account the social roles of communication participants.Misunderstanding of their social speech by communication participants leads to conflicts and problems.

Speech situation– 1) speech situation, situational context of speech interaction; 2) a set of characteristics of the situational context that are relevant (significant) for the speech behavior of participants in a speech event, influencing their choice of speech strategies, techniques, and means.

The speech situation has the following signs:

1) participants (addressee, addressee, audience),

2) subject of speech,

3) circumstances (place, time, other significant conditions),

4) communication channel (method of communication) - either oral or written speech, conventional signs, etc. are used,

5) code (language, dialect, style),

6) speech genre (for example, sermon ),

7) event (for example, church service, one of the situations of which is the sermon situation ),

8) assessment of speech effectiveness ( did the sermon touch your heart? ),

9) goal - what, in the opinion of the participants, could be the result of speech in a given situation (Pedagogical speech science. Dictionary-reference book. Edited by T.A. Ladyzhenskaya and A.K. Michalskaya; compiled by A.A. Knyazkov M.: Flinta, Nauka, 1998).

Classification of communication situations by Z.A. Smelkova:

The main elements of a speech situation and those that determine it are the participants and the relationships between them. Speech communication partners are people who perform a certain role in a given speech situation (social and corresponding speech), who are in certain relationships with speech partners and fulfill (realize) their speech goals (intentions).

There can be two communicators in a speech situation, or one can communicate with several partners at once. Their role positions can be varied.

Characteristics of possible roles in communication:

1. Symmetrical - asymmetrical - equal or unequal in social status and age ( student - student; co-workers; student - teacher; subordinate - boss ).

2. Social roles of partners:

permanent – ​​gender, family ties, profession, level of culture, age;

variables – social role at the moment of communication – in relation to the partner ( patient – ​​doctor, passenger – conductor, etc. )

3. Official - informal nature of communication ( communication with family, colleagues, on vacation, etc. ).

External circumstances (conditions) of communication:

Spatio-temporal conditions – contact (oral visual) communication and distant ( letter, telephone conversation ) communication.

Internal circumstances – motives and goals of communication:

Communication intention includes communication strategy and communication tactics.

Typology of communicative intention (strategy):

- inform ( describe, tell, report ) – give an idea of ​​the subject of speech specifically and impartially;

- convince - persuade to your opinion, using the necessary arguments and evidence, appealing, first of all, to the mind of the interlocutor, to his life experience;

- to inspire - to appeal not only to the mind, but also to the feelings of the interlocutor (or audience), using logical and emotional means of influencing the personality;

- induce to action - call on, convince the interlocutor of the need for action in such a way that the response is direct action.

The success of verbal communication is the implementation of the communicative goal of the initiator of communication and the achievement of agreement by the interlocutors (Ostap Bender and Elochka).

The speaker’s ability to navigate a specific communication situation determines the effectiveness of speech activity.

1. Everyday (personal) communication (within one’s circle, loved ones, relatives).

2. Functional or business communication (work).

3. Communication in situations imposed on us (transport, store, hospital).

A person's quality of life depends on how they can communicate in these areas. Let us characterize typical areas of communication.

Everyday communication is communication related to our daily life and everyday life.

The conditions for the effectiveness of such communication are as follows:

1. Mutual desire to carry on a conversation (if one of the speakers answers in monosyllables, there is no need to force the conversation).

2. Choose a topic successfully (the topic of the conversation should be relevant and interesting for the interlocutor, the subject of discussion should be known to each of the speakers).

3. Find a common language. (The national language is a complex phenomenon. Among insufficiently literate people, mainly city residents, the vernacular is used, in rural areas - local dialects, there are jargons in the field of various professions, among young people, etc., the literary language is predominantly spoken by people who have received an education ). To speak the same language, you need to know the morals, characteristics, and customs of the people with whom you have to communicate.

Business communication – communication at work, during the performance of official duties, when solving production issues. Business communication will be effective if we take into account a number of conditions:

1. Partnerships. Business communication is built on an equal basis, it is necessary to take into account mutual interests, it is necessary to proceed from the interests of the business.

2. Regularity. In such communication, we are subject to established rules and restrictions. These rules are determined by the type of business communication (conversation, negotiations, telephone conversation, etc.), the degree of its formality, the goals and objectives of a particular meeting. Business etiquette plays a big role in such communication.

3. Following the principles of effective listening: (a) do not mistake silence for attention; b) be physically attentive - face to face, posture, facial expressions, gestures; c) don’t pretend to listen; d) let the interlocutor speak; e) do not interrupt unnecessarily; f) if interrupted, help the interlocutor restore his train of thought; g) do not make hasty conclusions, refrain from making judgments; h) do not be overly sensitive to emotional words; i) if the interlocutor has spoken, summarize his speech, ask what he meant; j) do not focus on the conversational characteristics of the interlocutor).

Business communication is classified as professional communication (included in the scope of professional duties) and as unprofessional communication (colleagues talking to each other during a break). In professional communication, the following genres can be distinguished: business conversation, business negotiations, business telephone conversation.

Speech ethics

Lecture outline:

1. Basic concepts of etiquette

2. Basic principles of etiquette.

3. Etiquette in the culture of communication

4. Speech distances and taboos

4.2.1. Basic concepts of etiquette

Etiquette is a kind of code of good manners and rules of behavior and communication between people accepted in a given society.

There are a lot of rules, it’s impossible to remember everything, but is it necessary?

Naturally, mastery of modern etiquette remains a necessary attribute of a well-mannered, cultured person. Without mastering etiquette, a person is like a driver who drove onto a busy street during rush hour without knowing the traffic rules. It is not difficult to imagine what conflicts, and perhaps tragedies, this could lead to.

Etiquette today has become less ceremonious, simpler and more democratic. It is designed to a greater extent to bring people closer, to their mutual understanding and mutual respect. Modern etiquette performs a number of functions that help us make communication and living in society mutually pleasant and, most importantly, useful

Let's consider the main functions of modern etiquette:

1. Anti-conflict - for example, if someone accidentally pushed you and asked for a deepest apology, you are unlikely to shout at him or throw the first heavy object that comes to hand at him. If you got to the wrong place, and they politely answered: “Sorry, perhaps you were mistaken, Petrov does not live in our apartment,” you will not be rude, I hope so. And in response to the phrase: “You don’t know how to use the phone” or “all sorts of people are calling here,” you, at best, silently put down the receiver and express all the adjective stock available in the dictionary.

2. Creating an atmosphere of mutual comfort - it is easy and pleasant to communicate with a polite person. Jesus Christ taught us this: in the Gospel of Matthew it is said: “As you want them to do to you, do the same to people.” If you want to be rude, then forget about etiquette. If you want me to yell at you, talk louder.

3. Signaling of belonging to a certain social and cultural environment. For example: determine who could apologize like this.

· Sorry. Excuse me, please - neutral

· I humbly ask you to excuse me - old intelligentsia

· Guilty! – military

· I'm sorry - colloquial

· THANK YOU - generation 90

· ??? - and you

4. Communicative – often the interlocutors cannot find a topic for conversation. A well-mannered person will always find a decent topic for conversation and make communication interesting and useful.

Remember the joke about Lieutenant Rzhevsky: A cadet approaches Lieutenant Rzhevsky: “Lieutenant, how do you manage to seduce a girl 10 minutes after meeting?” “Very simple: talk to her a little about the weather, animals, music - and she’s yours.” A cadet is walking down the street and sees a girl walking with a small white dog. “Dear dog,” he kicks the dog in the butt, “he’s flying low, probably towards the rain.” Do you have a drum at home?”

Remember, according to etiquette, they never say:

· about age;

· family and financial status;

· physical disabilities, illnesses;

· only about yourself;

· gossip; everything that is unpleasant to the interlocutor.

The main thing is to take into account the interests of the interlocutor: is it worth talking about the theater with a truck driver?

Let's read a poem by Sasha Cherny: how well the girl chose the topic for conversation, whether she managed to win the young man.

Urban fairy tale

The profile is thinner than a cameo, The eyes are like ripe plums, The neck is whiter than a lily, And the figure is like Lady Godiva. A maiden with a bottomless soul, Like the first violin of an orchestra - No wonder they called the Madonna of the sixth semester medical students. A philologist, Thaddeus Simeonovich Smyatkin, came to the Madonna. My story will not be long: The philologist fell deeply in love. Fell in love cruelly and immediately With her eyes, lips and ears. I muttered phrase after phrase, I languished like a fish on dry land. I wanted to be her cup, her brother or aunt, her enamel buckle, and even her toothbrush!.. “Are you tired, Varvara Petrovna? Oh, how your hands tremble!” - The philologist whispered lovingly, And thorns pierced his heart. "Tired. She opened up a student: the corpse was fat and flabby.

Cold... Tool steel. My hands, of course, were cold. Then, at the Kalinkin Bridge, I looked at my venereals. I was tired: there were up to a hundred of them. What's wrong with you? Are you looking for matches? The matches are on the window. Here you go. She came back, took out the kidneys from the cat and sewed them up carefully. Then my friend and I got: Rotten umbilical cord preparations. Then there was a boring analysis: Excretion of urea in the urine... Oh, me! I apologize: I forgot the role of the hostess - Colleague! Take the jam, I made it myself today.” Thaddeus Simeonovis Smyatkin Said silently: “Thank you!” And in my throat there was a sweet and sour lump, struggling like a fish in a net. I didn’t want to be her cup, nor her brother or aunt, nor her enamel buckle, nor her toothbrush!

4.2.2. basic principles of etiquette

Etiquette is really necessary, but at the same time, a huge number of etiquette rules have accumulated today. And remembering them all is almost impossible. Fortunately, this is not necessary - it is enough to learn the basic principles of etiquette.

First of all, this is the principle of humanism, humanity: the main thing is a kind attitude towards people. The requirements of a humane, kind attitude towards people are dictated by many rules of etiquette. For example, these:

· It’s not good to whisper in the presence of others: “Speak out loud more than two times.”

· You should not meticulously examine cutlery when visiting, especially if you do not wipe it with a napkin;

· You cannot smoke in the premises without the permission of those present;

· You cannot open the window without obtaining the consent of others;

Sometimes there is an opinion that politeness is something opposite to directness and sincerity, that it is a form of hypocrisy, especially when it comes to the need to show politeness to a person who does not inspire sympathy, with whom we are offended. But don’t forget: the main advantage! And they bring water to the offended! If a classmate comes towards you and won’t let you cheat, don’t turn your eyes away, don’t humiliate yourself, let him feel ashamed - say hello.

Politeness can be shown in a variety of forms and shades:

Correctness is a somewhat emphasized, official, dry politeness, the ability to control oneself in any circumstances, even the most conflicting ones. Anecdote: A true gentleman will even call a cat that has sprayed him from head to toe a cat.

Courtesy is a respectful politeness, usually shown towards elders. Jean de La Bruyère said (17th century): “the essence of courtesy is the desire to speak and behave in such a way that our neighbors are pleased with us and with themselves.”

Courtesy is politeness in which the desire to be pleasant and useful to another is clearly manifested. When communicating with people, do not forget about their interests: “It would be a courtesy to talk to a hunter about dogs, to a fan about gymnastic competitions, to lovers about beauties” (Plutarch “Table Talk”).

Delicacy is politeness, shown with particular gentleness, subtlety, and sensitivity towards the people with whom communication takes place. ON THE. Dobrolyubov, for example, believed that “The essence of a delicate nature is that if someone lent you money and you see that he is in need, you yourself will bear the need, but do not ask for his debt.”

Tactfulness is a sense of proportion that should be observed in relationships with other people, the ability to sense the boundary beyond which the person with whom we are communicating may become offended. Tactfulness includes the ability not to notice other people's mistakes, not to make comments in the presence of other people, not to ask questions that put a person in an awkward position.

As a profession, being a teacher is not very tactful.

Let us remember the famous phrase of A.P. Chekhov: “tactfulness lies not in not spilling sauce on the tablecloth, but in not noticing if someone else does it.”

The British have an old joke about the difference between politeness and tact. “One day two gentlemen were walking and talking about the difference between politeness and tact. They did not come to a consensus and decided to leave the dispute to the first person they met. It was a chimney sweep. After listening to the essence of the problem, the young man said that his education did not allow him to express scientific theories, but he could give an example: “I cleaned pipes in a large mansion,” he said. - Having finished work, I got lost and began to look for a way out. Pushing open one of the doors, I found myself in the bathroom, where a young lady lay in the bathtub among lacy soap suds. She screamed. And I said, “Sorry, sir!” - and quickly left. So, “excuse me” was politeness, and “sir” was tact.”

Modesty - a reserved, moderate, simple person. Modesty is not a complex, but an art, especially in our time. The French are considered the most modest people; they will never put themselves first when listing a number of people: “My parents and I...”, “My friends and I...” or “My dog ​​and I went hunting.” The second place is occupied by the modest Englishmen; among them it is considered bad form to excessively display one’s own erudition and generally categorically assert anything. Name at least one Russian person who will not get into an argument.

So, we talked about the basic principle of modern etiquette - humanity.

The second most important principle of modern etiquette is the principle of expediency of actions, i.e. We should be comfortable, just like those around us.

For example, over the centuries, a rule has developed according to which a woman, walking next to a man, took a position to his right. This was due to the fact that weapons were part of a man’s suit (even a civilian one). Today, weapons are not part of a man's suit, but this rule has remained. However, if today a woman walks next to a military man, then she should walk to his left. This will be advisable, since otherwise it will be awkward for her companion to salute.

What do you do when you encounter a person in a narrow corridor, from which side do you try to get around him? And everything is very simple - everyone takes a step to the left, thereby not irritating their interlocutor, without wasting precious minutes.

Or my favorite aphorism: “If it’s blowing through the bus window, give way to the elders.” The table is set in accordance with the principle of expediency. It is known that knives and forks lying to the left and right of the plate, respectively, form pairs. Therefore, they should be used as the dishes change, starting with those that lie further from the plate, so that the area they occupy is gradually reduced, and with the last plate the waiter takes away the last utensils. Reasonable and convenient!

The third principle is the beauty and aesthetic appeal of behavior. Indeed, a person who, having met an acquaintance, begins to unscrew a button on his coat during a conversation or, when talking about a visit to the dentist, begins to open his mouth wide and show a cured tooth, looks funny and ugly.

The fourth principle, which underlies the rules of modern etiquette, is due to the fact that among its norms and rules there are many that are difficult to explain from the perspective of the principles already mentioned. For example, why is it necessary to clink glasses when drinking alcoholic beverages? Because our ancestors were afraid of being poisoned or bewitched and always shared drops from their glass with others. The tradition of taking off the hat came to us from Ancient Rome, where slaves had to bare their shaved heads when meeting a free person, so that he could see that he was a slave. In the Middle Ages, knights removed their helmets, leaving their heads unprotected as a sign of trust in the person.

So, the principles of modern etiquette have evolved over centuries. I really love A.P. in this regard. Chekhov: “Well-mannered people cannot sleep in their clothes, see cracks in the wall with bedbugs, breathe crappy air, walk on a spit-stained floor, or eat from a kerosene stove. They try to tame and refine the sexual instinct as much as possible. What they need from a woman is not a bed, not horse sweat, not intelligence, expressed in the ability to pout with a fake pregnancy and lie tirelessly. They don't casually crack vodka. They drink only when they are free, on occasion.”

In accordance with the area that the rules regulate, the following types of etiquette are distinguished: etiquette in the culture of communication, etiquette of business communication, etiquette of appearance, etiquette of a feast, etc.

4.2.3. Etiquette in the culture of communication

Almost our entire life is about meeting and communicating with many people. And the mood, the relationship with people, and the result of our work depend on how these meetings proceed. The huge number of contacts that a person enters into every day requires him to fulfill a number of conditions and rules that allow him to communicate while maintaining personal dignity and distance from other people. Etiquette is a special language of communication that makes it possible, while maintaining the sovereignty of each individual, to achieve mutual understanding and respect.

Just by the way people greet, they show their attitude. Forms of greeting can vary from short and simple greetings, such as “Hello”, “Hai”, “Hello”, or long, tedious ones, for example, “I am glad to welcome you to our humble home.”

Of course, there are national specifics to welcome formulas. For example, in New Guinea the greeting goes something like this:

Let me lick your face.

Let me smell you all over.

The ancient Romans greeted each other with questions: “Are you sweating well?”; ancient Chinese: “Have you eaten today?”; Mongols: “Are your cattle healthy?”; Persians: “Be cheerful,” Russians wish you health. All these greetings are in one way or another connected with wishing a person good, health, and prosperity.

Let's look at the basic greeting formulas adopted in modern Russia.

Officials: Hello, allow me to greet you, I am glad to welcome you, my respects, good afternoon, good health to you.

Informal: good morning (evening), hello, great, kiss your hands, hi, smack.

Often when meeting, expressions accompanying greetings are used: How are you? How is your health? How are you doing? How are you? Well, what's new?

How we usually respond to these phrases: it’s normal that this is perceived as a refusal, a reluctance to talk. Your answer should not be complete, but not tiring, one or two words are enough, but meaningful from the point of view of emotional content, you must show that you are happy with the person, you are pleased with his concern for you. For example, thank you, thank you, good, excellent, wonderful, great, I can’t complain, better than everyone else, no worse than others, everything is the same as always. But in this case, it is necessary to take into account the situation and mood of your interlocutor: in an official setting it is enough to say thank you, if the person is sad, be closer to him, do not arouse envy.

Getting on the same emotional wavelength as your interlocutor is the most important condition for a successful dialogue. It is advisable that this mood be with a plus sign; you need to start the conversation with a positive, otherwise you are initially dooming your interlocutor to an unpleasant pastime. Here are the main methods of expressing joy at a meeting: I’m so glad to see you, how glad I am to meet you, I’m happy to see you, what a pleasant meeting, what a surprise, what a surprise, who do I see, is it you, what fates, long time no see , how many years, how many winters, haven’t seen you for a hundred years, etc.

What if you meet a person every ten minutes? Should I say hello every time or turn away? Etiquette rules recommend: you can use all polite greeting formulas; if they are exhausted, you can simply smile and politely nod your head. But you shouldn’t turn away and pretend that you didn’t notice him: “In terms of politeness, it’s better to over-salt than under-salt” (Cervantes).

Who should say hello first?

· A young man with a girl, superior in age and position

But there is no point in extending your hand; this initiative belongs to them.

· Anyone entering a room where other people are already present also greets first.

· A friend passing by says hello first

· When two couples meet, the girls greet first, then the women greet the men, and only after the man.

A few personal comments:

· It is considered a sign of good manners to bow to the person who greets your companion, even if you are strangers.

· when coming to visit, first greet the hostess and owner.

· if there are a large number of people with whom you need to greet, you can make a general bow.

· if you meet the same person all the time, but are not familiar with him, then, of course, greet him. Later this may turn out to be a profitable acquaintance.

If the addressee is unfamiliar to the subject of speech, then communication begins with acquaintance. Moreover, it can occur directly or indirectly. Of course, it is advisable to have someone introduce you, but there are times when you need to do it yourself.

Etiquette offers several possible formulas:

Let me get to know you.

I'd like to meet you.

Let's get acquainted.

Let's get to know each other.

When contacting an institution by phone or in person, it becomes necessary to introduce yourself:

Let me introduce myself.

My last name is Sergeev.

My name is Valery Pavlovich.

During communication, if there is a reason, people make invitations and express congratulations.

Invitation:

Let me invite you...

Come to the celebration (anniversary, meeting).

We'll be glad to see you.

Congratulation:

Let me congratulate you on...

Please accept my sincere (heartfelt, warm) congratulations...

Warm congratulations...

The expression of the request should be polite, delicate, but without excessive ingratiation:

Do me a favor...

If it’s not difficult for you (if it’s not difficult for you)…

Please be kind...

May I ask you...

I beg you very much...

Advice and suggestions should not be expressed in a categorical manner. It is advisable to formulate advice in the form of a delicate recommendation, a message about some important circumstances for the interlocutor:

Let me draw your attention to...

I would suggest you...

The wording of refusal to fulfill a request may be as follows:

- (I) cannot (unable, unable) to help (allow, assist).

It is currently not possible to do this.

Please understand that now is not the time to make such a request.

Sorry, but we (I) cannot fulfill your request.

I am forced to refuse (prohibit, not allow).

Compliments. Culture of criticism in verbal communication

An important advantage of a person in communication is the ability to make beautiful and appropriate compliments. When said tactfully and at the right time, a compliment lifts the mood of the recipient, setting him up for a positive attitude towards the interlocutor, towards his proposals, towards the common cause.

A compliment is said at the beginning of a conversation, during a meeting, acquaintance, parting, or during a conversation. A compliment is always nice. Only an insincere or overly enthusiastic compliment is dangerous.

A compliment can relate to appearance, excellent professional abilities, high morality, communication skills, and contain a general positive assessment:

You look good (excellent, wonderful, excellent, magnificent).

You are so (very) charming (smart, resourceful, reasonable, practical).

You are a good (excellent, excellent, excellent) specialist (economist, manager, entrepreneur).

You run (your) business (business, trade, construction) well (excellent, excellent, excellent).

You know how to lead (manage) people well (excellently) and organize them.

It’s a pleasure (good, excellent) to do business (work, cooperate) with you.

A culture of criticism is needed so that critical statements do not spoil the relationship with the interlocutor and allow him to explain his mistake.

To do this, one should criticize not the personality and qualities of the interlocutor, but specific errors in his work, shortcomings of his proposals, and inaccuracy of conclusions.

To ensure that criticism does not affect the feelings of the interlocutor, it is advisable to formulate comments in the form of reasoning, drawing attention to the discrepancy between the tasks of the work and the results obtained. It is useful to frame critical discussions of work as a joint search for solutions to complex problems.

Criticism of an opponent’s arguments in a dispute should be a comparison of these arguments with general provisions that do not raise doubts among the interlocutor, reliable facts, experimentally verified conclusions, and reliable statistical data.

Criticism of an opponent’s statements should not concern his personal qualities, abilities, or character.

Criticism of joint work by one of its participants should contain constructive proposals, criticism of the same work by an outsider can be reduced to pointing out shortcomings, since the development of solutions is the work of specialists, and assessing the state of affairs and the effectiveness of the organization is the right of any citizen.

4.2.4. Speech distances and taboos

Distance in verbal communication is determined by age and social status. It is expressed in speech by using the pronouns you and you. Speech etiquette determines the rules for choosing one of these forms.

In general, the choice is dictated by a complex combination of external circumstances of communication and individual reactions of the interlocutors:

· the degree of acquaintance of the partners (you - to an acquaintance, you - to a stranger);

· the formality of the communication environment (you are informal, you are official);

· the nature of the relationship (you are friendly, “warm”, you are emphatically polite or tense, aloof, “cold”);

· equality or inequality of role relationships (by age, position: you are equal and inferior, you are equal and superior).

The choice of one of the forms of address depends not only on the formal position and age, but also on the nature of the relationship of the interlocutors, their disposition towards a certain degree of formality of the conversation, linguistic taste and habits.

In Russian, YOU-communication in informal speech is widespread. Superficial acquaintance in some cases and distant long-term relationships of old acquaintances in others are shown by the use of the polite “You”. You-communication demonstrates respect for the participants in the dialogue. You-communication is always a manifestation of spiritual harmony and spiritual intimacy; the transition to You-communication is an attempt to intimate relationships. The possibility of choosing You-communication and You-communication depends on social roles and psychological distances (Culture of Russian speech. Textbook for universities. Edited by Prof. L.K. Graudina and Prof. E.N. Shiryaev. M.: NORMA Publishing Group – INFRA. 1998)

Thus, the you is related, friendly, informal, intimate, trusting, familiar; You are polite, respectful, formal, aloof.

Depending on the form of address to you or you, there are grammatical forms of verbs, as well as speech formulas for greetings, farewells, congratulations, and expressions of gratitude.

A taboo is a prohibition on the use of certain words due to historical, cultural, ethical, socio-political or emotional factors.

Socio-political taboos are characteristic of speech practice in societies with an authoritarian regime. They may concern the names of certain organizations, mentions of certain persons disliked by the ruling regime (for example, opposition politicians, writers, scientists), certain phenomena of social life that are officially recognized as non-existent in a given society.

Cultural and ethical taboos exist in every society. It is clear that obscene language and mention of certain physiological phenomena and body parts are prohibited.

Neglect of ethical speech prohibitions is not only a gross violation of etiquette, but also a violation of the law.

Insult, that is, humiliation of the honor and dignity of another person, expressed in an indecent form, is considered by criminal law as a crime (Article 130 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).