Mikhail Vasilievich Lomonosov. Russian grammar

ї Alexander Zholkovsky, 2009

Alexander Zholkovsky

In memory of Yuri Konstantinovich Shcheglov

Text familiar from the school bench:

“Charles the Fifth, the Roman emperor, used to say that it was decent to speak the Spanish language with God, French with friends, German with enemies, Italian with the female sex. But if he were skilled in the Russian language, then , of course, I would add to this that it is proper for them to speak with all of them, for I would find in him the splendor of the Spanish, the liveliness of the French, the strength of the German, the tenderness of the Italian, and, moreover, the wealth

and the strong brevity of the Greek and Latin languages \u200b\u200bin the images.

This Lomonosov miniature is an example of a successful rhetorical construction. It consists of two sentences, which, modulating one into the other, convincingly expand the author's thought.

The first sentence is relatively short, but immediately sets the main format of the argument: variations on the theme of the properties of different languages.

Leading a theme through a series of examples is a classic technique, and the more varied the examples, the clearer the proof of the universality of the thought being developed. In the textbook stanza from "A Feast in the Time of Plague":

Pushkin draws pictures of natural and social disasters, the former including sea and land, depth and surface, the movement of water and air, and the latter war and epidemic. And all of them are united by the theme of "mortal, but exciting danger", which is directly formulated in the following stanza:

Thanks to sophisticated rhetoric, the paradoxical idea appears almost self-evident.

Lomonosov's first sentence is constructed in a similar way. Unity is ensured by the commonality of the scheme: “language X is ideal for communicating with addressee Y”, and diversity is provided by a list of languages and addressees. The languages are simply different, while the addressees form an eloquent spread, covering such extremes as God/man, friend/enemy and man/woman, and, therefore, heaven and earth, church and secular spheres, peace, war, love, marriage. This construction is clearly framed (and thus additionally cohesive): at the beginning it is reported that so used to say the author of the saying, and at the end the same verbumdicendi is attributed to all four pairs of characters at once: speak decently.

The syntactic scheme and the verbal frame are common, but what exactly is the single thought that is expressed here? What shock maxim are intended to illustrate the communicative features of different languages? After all, the whole trick of such constructions is to make the contradictory material of everyday life fit under the disciplinary central thesis.

It could be the value hierarchy of languages, and the corresponding gradations are found in the text. Spanish appears the most majestic, German the lowest, the other two are in the middle. But the final position given to German (rather than Spanish) makes doubtful the adequacy of such a reading: the speech does not tend to elementary defamation of the German language!

In this regard, the editing that Lomonosov subjected to the variant of the saying known to him is interesting. According to commentators,

The source of this message is the following phrase from a very popular in the XVIII century. French writer of the 17th century Dominique Bugur (Bouhours) Lesentretiensd "Aristeetd" Eugene [Conversations of Arist and Ezhen], published anonymously in 1671 and reprinted more than once:

"Charles-Quint revenoit au monde, il ne trouveroit pas bon que vous missiez le françois au dessus du castillan, lui qui disoit, que s" il vouloit parler aux dames, il parleroit italien; que s "il vouloit parler aux hommes, il parleroit françois; que s" il vouloit parler a son cheval, il parleroit allemande; mais que s "il vouloit parler a Dieu, il parleroit espagnol" [If Charles V had risen from the dead, he would not have approved that you put French above Castilian, he, who said that if he wanted to talk with ladies, he would speak in Italian; if I wanted to talk to men, I would speak in French; if I wanted to talk to my horse, I would speak in German; but if I wanted to talk to God, I would speak in Spanish].

This text, quoted from the Paris edition of 1737 (p. 95), Lomonosov could also read (in a not entirely accurate transmission) in Pierre Bel's Historical and Critical Dictionary (Dictionnaire historique et critique par M. Pierre Bayle. Amsterdam, 1734, vol. II, p. 408).

First of all, it is striking that the derogatory horse Lomonosov replaced more worthy enemies, which weakened the anti-German pathos of the quote. The deliberate undermining of the greatness of Spanish, expressed in its translation from the final position (which Castilian borrowed from Bugur / Bayle) in a less winning initial.

In the Bugur/Bayle variant, Charles's phrase was constructed as an argument in favor of Castilian as opposed to French, and could be understood as a praise for the language of the main component of his empire. But his native language was French, while he was far from fluent in Spanish, learning it only at the request of the Cortes in order to qualify for the Spanish throne. Therefore, the hidden irony of the words about the suitability of Spanish for conversations with God, that is, for prayers, and not, say, for earthly, political affairs, is not excluded. By the way, Karl spoke German even worse, so the horse component of his aphorism can also be interpreted as a figure of modesty.

One way or another, in the Lomonosov version, there is rather no clear hierarchy, and as a general thought something like the fact that each language has its own characteristics, all languages are different and equal, so to speak, suumquique, to each his own. But this means that the method of Conducting through the different is not used here for its intended purpose - not as a powerful amplifier of a certain single thesis, but as an involuntary projection of a pluralistic observation about the diversity of languages. It's not that the first sentence is completely devoid of an integrating imperious beginning - it is present in it, but not so much in the text as behind the text. This off-stage singer's voice belongs, of course, to the author of the quoted saying. His status as the head of the multinational Holy Roman Empire, whose main languages are listed by him and subject to him, undoubtedly radiates an aura of authoritative power. But the matter is limited to radiation, Karl does not come to the fore - this is not about him, but about the properties of languages.

Let's move on to the second, twice as long sentence. It repeats, develops and transforms the semantic structure of the first, gently but decisively subordinating it to itself. Repetition consists in picking up a common discursive format ( used to say ... speak decently - I would add ... to speak decently) and in following the characteristics of the four languages. But even here there are noticeable deviations.

First of all, the original scheme (“language X is suitable for communication with addressee Y”) is reformulated - translated into a higher case (“language X has a valuable property Z”). The increase in rank is achieved by replacing direct human relationships ( talk decently to women etc.) abstract categories ( splendor, tenderness, liveliness, strength), varying raised and dried "valuable property". Especially indicative is the next ennoblement of the German language - to the level of an unconditionally positive fortresses. Actually, the first step towards dry abstractions was made by Lomonosov in the first sentence. where the relaxed narration of the Bugur/Bayle variant ( if he wanted to talk to the ladies, he would speak in Italian ...) was clothed by him in indefinite and impersonal forms ( speak decently). On the whole, a characteristic rhetorical move is made: starting with an anecdote about Karl, borrowed from Bugur/Bayle/Peplier, Lomonosov combines it with another ready-made motif - abstract arguments about the properties of different languages (see note 4).

Further, the transition to abstract nouns makes it possible to attach already purely declarative wealthand strong in images brevity, not tied to any characters. The expansion of the list of languages thus produced follows again the principle of variation: two ancient ones are added to the living ones, and the language of the author of the statement is added to the main European ones, Russian, which now takes center stage. Let's see how this major shift is orchestrated.

Until now, the possibilities of different languages have been carriers of diversity, and the figure of the emperor, an aphorist and a polyglot, has served as a single core. Now this structural function is exposed and strengthened, and as its carrier, the Russian language. Having accumulated various properties of the remaining six, it turns out to be a kind of super language, the autocratic ruler of the linguistic empire of all times and peoples.

The usurpation is carried out very diplomatically, the two parts of the commendable word do not come into conflict, the first is simply gradually placed at the service of the second. Karl is not removed from the discussion, but turns into a mouthpiece for the ideas of the author hiding behind him - a graduate of the Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy, a patriot of the language he glorifies. By ventriloquizing for Karl, Lomonosov does not undermine either his authority or the greatness of the Spanish language, which is not necessary, since, as we have seen, already in the first sentence he prudently deprived them of their pedestal.

The subjunctive frame (... if.., then, of course, .. I would add .., because I would find ...), which allows you to unobtrusively put the necessary statements into Karl's mouth. Lomonosov also borrows it from Bugur / Bayle ( If CarlVback from the dead, he wouldn't approve...), but deliberately omits it in his first sentence (which simply states that Charles... used to say) in order to present it more effectively in the second. True, in Bugur/Bayle, Carl utters his real statement (repeatedly attested), and the subjunctive is used only to link to the case (discussion of the comparative merits of French and Spanish). Lomonosov, under the banner of this borrowed subjunctiveness, is pushing in completely arbitrary statements (what is it worth certainly!).

Carrying out to the final position Latin language gracefully closes the miniature, which began with the words about Roman emperor. It is not said directly, but the whole structure of the text suggests the idea of a natural transfer of power, at least linguistic power, to Russia as the successor to European greatness in all its geographical, cultural and historical scope. And this is done based on the properties not so much of the Russian language as of the applied rhetorical device, which by its very nature predisposes to the urgent implementation of a single central thesis, and not to a simple translation of the existing diversity.

NOTES

M. V. Lomonosov. Russian Grammar // He. Full coll. op. T. 7. Works on philology. 1739-1758 / Ed. V. V. Vinogradova and others. M.-L.: AN SSSR, 1952. S. 389-578 (see p. 391).

However, in the original it is in no way isolated from the text of the dedication to the future emperor Pavel Petrovich (1755), - there it is the fourth and fifth phrases.

In the second third of the XVIII century. happened

the transfer to Russian soil of a topos common to European philological thought: various perfections are attributed to different newly built languages, and the list of these languages ends with praise of their own, which unites or should unite all the listed advantages. If in the “Speech to the Russian Assembly” of 1735 Trediakovsky speaks of the European language building as a glorious example that Russia has yet to follow, then in the “Sermon on Vitiystvo” of 1745 ... he speaks of equality with Latin, which he achieved French, and then it is indicated that “other ... the most enlightened peoples in Europe, like the most insightful Englishmen, the most prudent Dutch, the deepest Gishpans, the sharpest Italians, the most ornate Poles, the most thorough Swedes, the most important Germans .... the example and glory of the French are now imitating ... "... The [R]usian text of the Lay was given in parallel with the Latin, and... the parallel Russian text showed that the same perfection and the same sophistication are available to the Russian language...

The same scheme for improving the Russian language is given by Sumarokov in his Epistle on the Russian language of 1747:

In the 1750s, the idea of the equal rights of the Russian language with other European languages or even of its superiority was developed by Lomonosov... Even earlier, in the preface [of Lomonosov to his] Rhetoric of 1748... the improvement of the language is associated with polyfunctionality... [different] roles the Russian language must take its place in the choir of European languages; the very idea of European polyphony, repeatedly repeated in Europe, seems to complete its journey in Russia, faced with a language that combines the perfections of all the others (V. M. Zhivov. Language and culture in Russia in the 18th century. M .: School "Russian Languages" culture”, 1996, pp. 270-273).

Description of the technique Variation, or Conducting through different things, was first outlined by Yu. K. Shcheglov in the article: To some texts of Ovid / / Works on sign systems. 3 (Tartu TGU, 1967, pp. 172-179), and then developed by: A. K. Zholkovsky, Yu. K. Shcheglov. To the description of the method of expressiveness VARIATION// Semiotics and Informatics. The ninth issue (M.: VINITI, 1977. S. 106-150). As one of the examples in both articles, the then studied by Yu. K. Shcheglov

Ovid's poems from the Tristia cycle, the theme of which is ...: "time smooths and normalizes everything sharp, sharp, wild." This theme is developed on the material of four spheres of reality, in some way exhausting the whole earth (animals - plants - inanimate nature - man). Inside the sphere, objects are selected according to the principle ... they are opposed to each other at once in many ways, for example, in the “animals” sphere, a construction is created ... “the bull gets used to the yoke - the horse to the bridle - the lion loses its rage - the elephant gets used to listening to the owner ". The differences between the four animals are in many ways... In the remaining three spheres, objects are also selected with the maximum differences in different dimensions, while being similar in one thing - obeying the law of time ”(Zholkovsky, Shcheglov. To the description ... P. 141-142 ).

A series of images works for the "exciting excitement" ( ecstasy - gloomy - furious - formidable - waves - stormy - whiff), one way or another combining the properties of the elements and man.

Ibid, p. 862. The adequacy of this comment was later questioned, see V. D. Rak. A possible source of the poem by M. V. Lomonosov “Two Astronomers Happened Together at a Feast” // XVIII century. Sat. 10 (L.: Nauka, 1975, pp. 217–219; http://lib.pushkinskijdom.ru/Default.aspx?tabid=7066). Rak pointed to another source - repeatedly reprinted in the 18th century. (and cited by Lomonosov) textbook of French grammar by Jean Robert de Peplier (Pêplier), in different editions of which Karl's saying looked, in particular, like this (translated by me - A. J.):

Charles V said that he would like to speak: in Spanish with God, in Italian with his friends, in German with his enemy, in French with a woman (Frauenzimmer).

Charles V said that he would like to speak German with a warrior (Kriegsmann), French with a good friend, Italian with his beloved, Spanish with God.

Cancer wrote:

In all likelihood, it is this one that is reproduced in the preface to the Russian Grammar [the first of two - A.Zh.] variant of the saying, since Lomonosov's phrase corresponds to it more accurately than to the variant of D. Bugur and P. Bayle ... A slight discrepancy could be the result of either a conscious change made by Lomonosov himself, or contamination with one of the many variants of this saying (p. 219; Cancer names a number of other possible sources and variants, including poetic ones. -- A. J.).

V. M. Zhivov also agrees with Cancer (op. cit., p. 272). As will be seen from my analysis, reliance on the Bugur/Bayle variant is still not excluded, and I will focus mainly on the relationship of Lomonosov's text with him. In principle, the rhetorical effects of Lomonosov's praise can just as well be demonstrated by taking one or another of Peplier's options as a starting point. It is worth emphasizing that in any case, we are talking about anecdotes, because there is no documented attribution of any of the versions of the saying to Charles V.

The master of many languages, the Russian language, not only by the vastness of the places where it dominates, but also by its own space and contentment is great before everyone in Europe (p. 391).

However, such claims are by no means a specifically Russian disease. According to Renate von Meidel,

the apologia for one's native language -- "languagepride," as Paul Garvin called it in The Standard Language Problem -- Concepts and Methods ("Anthropological Linguistics" 1, 3. P. 28-31) -- is almost an indispensable stage in history of each European language is a picture well known to the historian of the ideologies of national exclusivity (see RenatavonMaydell. The Russian language and the Russian fist (report at the section "The Ideology of Violence: The Russian Style" / / VII World Congress of the International Council for Central and East European Studies in Berlin

. July 2005).

In connection with the "famous Lomonosov's hymn to the Russian language as a universal language" the author refers to the work of Rak and the sources he discovered, to the book: I. R. Kusova. . Johann Boediker and the German Grammar Tradition of the 17th-18th Centuries (Ordzhonikidze, 1975), wife of Boediker's "Grund-Sätze der deutschen Sprache...". For a discussion of "linguistic pride" see: Joshua A. Fishman: In Praise of the Beloved Language. A Comparative View of Positive Ethnolinguistic Consciousness (Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1997).

This topos is not limited to Europe either. Thus, there is a Persian “witty fiction” about the three “main languages of the East”, which the Frenchman A. Jourdain cites in his review of Persian literature (see the Russian translation in Vestnik Evropy, 1815, 10. p. 29), perhaps in part stylized retelling and under the famous story about Karl:

The serpent, wishing to seduce Eve, used the Arabic language, strong and convincing. Eve spoke to Adam in Persian, full of charms, tenderness, the language of love itself. Archangel Gabriel, having a sad order to expel them from paradise, used Persian and Arabic in vain. Then he began to speak in Turkish, terrible and thundering like thunder. As soon as he began to speak it, fear seized our forefathers, and they immediately left the blissful monastery.

See N. Yu. Chalisova, A. V. Smirnov . Imitation of Eastern poets: the meeting of Russian poetry and Arab-Persian poetics // Comparative Philosophy. M. : Eastern literature , RAN, 2000 . pp. 245-344 (see p. 253).

Which is a strong, although certainly not absolutely conclusive, argument in favor of Lomonosov's reliance on Bugur/Bayle.

This subjunctive amendment to the categoricalness of global claims is also evident in the Soviet variation on the Lomonosov theme - Mayakovsky's poem "Our Youth" (1927): Yes, if I were / and a Negro / of advanced years, / and then, / without despondency and laziness, / I would have learned Russian / only for what / Lenin spoke to him.

To be continued.

Here are some statements about the Russian language by Mikhail Vasilievich Lomonosov, a Russian genius who is an undeniable authority in this area:

“Charles the Fifth, the Roman emperor, used to say that it was decent to speak Spanish with God, French with friends, German with the enemy, Italian with the female sex. But if he were skilled in the Russian language, then of course he would add to that that it was decent for them to speak with all of them, for he would find in it the splendor of Spanish, the liveliness of French, the strength of German, the tenderness of Italian, moreover, the richness and brevity of Greek strong in images. and Latin."
Mikhailo Vasilievich Lomonosov

The language, which the Russian power of a great part of the world commands, in its power has a natural abundance, beauty and strength, which is not inferior to any European language. And for that there is no doubt that the Russian word could not be brought to such perfection, which we are surprised at in others.

M. V. Lomonosov

The master of many languages, the Russian language, not only by the vastness of the places where it dominates, but by its own space and contentment, is great before everyone in Europe.
Lomonosov M.V.
The beauty, grandeur, strength and richness of the Russian language is quite clear from books written in past centuries, when our ancestors did not know any rules for compositions, but they hardly thought that they exist or can be.
Lomonosov M.V.

Here is a statement by Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. in which he calls the language Slavic-Russian:
As a material of literature, the Slavic-Russian language has an undeniable superiority over all European ones.
Pushkin A. S.

Why not Russian, but Slavic-Russian? Pushkin, who knew about the original Russian language and its fate, could not write otherwise. Yes, we speak Russian, just like Alexander Sergeevich himself. However, just like him, we must understand that our Russian language has a great ancestor who, despite everything, managed to overcome millennia of history, preserving the ancient roots of human speech and images of unimaginable antiquity, which I call Outland.

Pushkin depicts the magnificent power of this language allegorically: the child Gvidon, sailing with his mother in a barrel on the sea, controls the waves with the help of words.

This child, an inexhaustible source of magical power and inspiration, is the Russian language.

The stars are shining in the blue sky
In the blue sea the waves are whipping;
A cloud is moving across the sky
The barrel floats on the sea.
Like a bitter widow
Cries, the queen beats in her;
And a child grows there
Not by days, but by hours.
The day has passed - the queen cries ...
And the child hurries the wave:
"You, my wave, wave?
You are playful and free;
You splash wherever you want
You sharpen sea stones
You drown the shore of the earth,
Raise the ships
Do not destroy our soul:
Throw us out on land!"
And the wave listened:
Right there on the shore
The barrel was taken out lightly
And she stepped back slowly.
The mother with the baby is saved;
She feels the earth.
But who will take them out of the barrel?
Will God leave them?
The son rose to his feet
He rested his head on the bottom,
Struggled a little:
"Like a window in the yard
Shall we do it?" he said.
Kick the bottom out and get out.
to be continued

Reviews

The daily audience of the Proza.ru portal is about 100 thousand visitors, who in total view more than half a million pages according to the traffic counter, which is located to the right of this text. Each column contains two numbers: the number of views and the number of visitors.

Most Serene Sovereign, Grand Duke,

most merciful sovereign!

The master of many languages, the Russian language, not only by the vastness of the places where it dominates, but also by its own space and contentment is great before everyone in Europe. Incredibly, this will seem foreign and to some natural Russians, who applied more to foreign languages than to their own works. But whoever is not preempted by great opinions about others, will stretch his mind into it and delve into it with diligence, will agree with me. Charles the Fifth, the Roman emperor, used to say that it was decent to speak Spanish with God, French with friends, German with enemies, Italian with women. But if he were skilled in the Russian language, then, of course, he would add to that that it is decent for them to speak with all of them, for he would find in it the splendor of Spanish, the liveliness of French, the strength of German, the tenderness of Italian, moreover, richness and strength in images brevity of Greek and Latin. A detailed proof of all this requires another place in the case. The long-term exercise in the Russian word completely assures me of this. The strong eloquence of Ciceron, the magnificent Virgilian importance, Ovid's pleasant ornateness do not lose their dignity in the Russian language. The finest philosophic imaginations and reasonings, the various natural properties and changes that take place in this visible structure of the world and in human conversations, have with us decent and expressive speeches. And if we cannot accurately depict something, we must attribute it not to our language, but to our dissatisfied art in it. The one who sometimes goes deeper into it, using the general philosophical concept of the human word as a leader, will see an immensely wide field, or, better, a sea that barely has limits. Having ventured into it, as much as I could measure, I composed this small and general drawing of all vastness - Russian grammar, containing only the main rules in itself. This is a small matter. and. in. I would have been very hesitant to bring it as a gift, if it, apart from my feasible and diligent work for the fatherland, by its very need did not give courage to it. Stupid oratorio, tongue-tied poetry, unfounded philosophy, unpleasant history, dubious jurisprudence without grammar. And although it comes from the general use of language, it nevertheless shows the way to the use itself by rules. So, when in grammar all sciences have such a need, for that sake, desiring that it be radiant, from the bright name of c. and. in. acquired, attracted the Russian youth to its instruction, I most humbly offer it to. and. v., full of true joy about the all-desirable course of your health, full of zealous desire for a long-term continuation of it. Almighty Providence, helping to care for you the great Elizabeth and dearest parents c. in. May it deign to strengthen your infancy, enlighten your adolescence, rejoice your youth, glorify courage and continue your wise old age in vigor. And, when, under the high hand of your summer, prospering together with our common joy, increase, may the Russian word also increase serviceability in wealth, beauty and strength, to describe the glorious deeds of your ancestors, to the glorification of the blessed house of Petrov and the whole fatherland, to the pleasure of. and. in. and your descendants, whose number may the Lord continue uninterrupted forever, from sincere fidelity I wish, Most Serene Sovereign, Grand Duke, c. and. in. the most humble slave

Mikhail Lomonosov.

Charles the Fifth, the Roman emperor, used to say that it was decent to speak Spanish with God, French with friends, German with an enemy, Italian with a female. But if he were skilled in the Russian language, then, of course, he would add to that that it was decent for them to speak with all of them, for he would find in it the splendor of Spanish, the liveliness of French, the strength of German, the tenderness of Italian, moreover, richness and strength in images brevity of Greek and Latin. M. V. Lomonosov. Like any other language, Russian has not been uniform for a long time. The influence of the Pomor speech on the formation of a universal Russian language cannot be ignored just because Mikhail Vasilievich Lomonosov, Pomor, the author of the first scientific Russian grammar, stood at the origins of the reform of the Russian language in the 18th century. It was the Pomeranian origin that played a key role in the development of this Russian genius. When drawing up the rules for a unified official Russian language, Lomonosov for the first time identified three main dialects that make up the Russian language: Moscow, Little Russian and Pomeranian. Lomonosov, who grew up on the White Sea, was fluent in the living folk language. That is why he stood for the development of an understandable, figurative language, for the first time introduced the basics of technical and scientific terminology, replacing awkward and incomprehensible foreign terms with natural Russian words. Lomonosov sought to revive and ennoble the official language with well-aimed folk words, and he succeeded - for example, science today uses many of the sea terms of the Pomors. In his notes, Lomonosov noted that the Pomor dialect is closer to the original Slavic language and occupied most of Russia: Pomor words and expressions are found in Siberia and the Far East, since the Pomors mastered these lands long before the emergence of the Russian state. It turns out that the Pomeranian language itself stands at the origins of the Russian language. Zubkova G. Pomeranian speaking, or Not very hard / G. Zubkova // Fatherland. - 2011. - No. 3. - S. 16-19.

Picture 8 from the presentation "The Great Son of the Fatherland"

Dimensions: 749 x 1007 pixels, format: jpg. To download a picture for a holiday lesson for free, right-click on the image and click "Save Image As ...". To show pictures in the lesson, you can also download the presentation “Great Son of the Fatherland.ppsx” for free with all the pictures in a zip archive. Archive size - 4419 KB.

"Roman law" - Interesting chips: The initial figurative idea of property came from taking possession of a thing, capture. Development. What gave Roman law to the world: Meaning: To the second - all other things. The slave had no guarantees and no rights to protection. Both political and civil rights were the property of men.

"Gods of Egypt" - Isis. Knum. Bird. Api. Re, god of the sun. That. Sobek. Orus. Osiris. The sun god Ryo crosses the sky every day in his boat. Image of the sun god Re in a boat. Selkis. Tueris. Ator. Bes. Bastet, a cat that turns into a lioness. Anyubis. Ancient Egypt: GODS. Set.

"Emperor Bonaparte" - David Jacques Louis Portrait of Napoleon. Loneliness. Napoleon was born on August 15, 1769 in Corsica, in Ajaccio, in a noble family of lawyer Carlo Buonaparte, and Letizia Ramolino, who belonged to an old patrician family. Napoleon Bonaparte. Coronation of Josephine. Aivazovsky. The Patriotic War of 1812 was the beginning of the end of the French Empire.

"Gods of Greece" - Nymphs - deities of nature, its life-giving and fruitful forces. Hades - God in the realm of the dead. Apollo is the god of the sun. Dionysus is the god of the fruitful forces of the earth, vegetation, viticulture, winemaking. Hephaestus is the god of fire and blacksmithing. Poseidon is the god of the sea. Athena is the goddess of wisdom and just war. Hermes is the messenger of the gods.

Text familiar from the school bench:

“Charles the Fifth, the Roman emperor, used to say that it was decent to speak Spanish, whom with God, French with friends, German with enemies, Italian with the female sex. But if he were skilled in the Russian language, then, of course, he would add to that that it is decent for them to speak with all of them, for he would find in it the splendor of Spanish, the liveliness of French, the strength of German, the tenderness of Italian, moreover, richness and strength in images brevity of Greek and Latin, ka.

This Lomonosov miniature is an example of a successful rhetorical construction. The modulation of the first sentence into the second convincingly develops the author's thought.

The first is relatively short, but immediately sets the format of the argument: variations on the theme of the properties of different languages. Leading a topic through a series of examples is a classic technique, and the more varied the examples, the clearer the proof of the thesis being developed. In the textbook stanza from "A Feast in the Time of Plague":

There is rapture in battle And the dark abyss on the edge, And in the angry ocean Amid the stormy waves and stormy darkness, And in the Arabian hurricane And in the breath of the Plague.

Everything, everything that threatens death, For the heart of a mortal conceals Unexplained pleasure...

Thanks to sophisticated rhetoric, the paradoxical idea appears almost self-evident.

Lomonosov's first sentence is constructed in a similar way. Unity is ensured by the commonality of the scheme: “language X is ideal for communicating with addressee Y”, and diversity is provided by a set of languages and addressees. The latter form an eloquent spread covering such extremes as God/man, friend/foe, and man/woman. This multi-figure design is cohesive and a single frame: used to say... speak decently.

The syntactic scheme and the verbal frame are common, but what exactly is the single thought that is expressed here? A statement about the value hierarchy of languages? After all, the whole trick of such constructions is to fit the contradictory everyday material under the disciplinary central thesis. Indeed, Spanish appears to be the most majestic, German - the basest, the other two are located in the middle. However, the final position given to German makes doubtful the adequacy of such a reading: the speech does not tend to elementary defamation of the German language!

In this regard, the editing that Lomonosov subjected to Karl's dictum is interesting. According to some commentators, it “The source was a phrase popular in the 18th century. Books “Conversations of Arista and Ezhen”:

“If Charles V had risen from the dead, he would not have approved that you put French above Castilian,” he, who said that if he wanted to talk to the ladies, he would speak in Italian; if I wanted to talk to men, I would speak in French; if I wanted to talk to my horse, I would speak in German; but if I wanted to talk to God, I would speak in Spanish.” [ There are other assumptions about the source of the Lomonosov quote from Karl, but here, for simplicity, we will limit ourselves to this. - A. Zh.]

First of all, it is striking that the derogatory horse Lomonosov replaced more worthy enemies, which weakened the anti-German pathos of the quote. He deliberately undermined the greatness of Spanish, translating Castilian from the final position to a less advantageous initial one.

In the source, Charles' phrase was built as an argument in favor of Castilian as opposed to French, and it could be interpreted as a praise for the language of the main part of his empire. But Charles's native language was French, while he was far from fluent in Spanish, having learned it only for the right to the Spanish throne. Therefore, the irony of the words about the suitability of Spanish for conversations with God, and not, read, for earthly, political affairs, is not excluded. By the way, Karl spoke German even worse, so the “horse” component of his aphorism can also be understood as a figure of modesty.

One way or another, there is no clear hierarchy in Lomonosov's recension, and as a general thought something is read like that to each his own, each language has its own characteristics, all languages are different and equal. But this means that the figure “leading through different things” is not used here for its intended purpose - not as a powerful amplifier of a certain single thesis, but as an involuntary projection of a pluralistic observation about the diversity of languages. It's not that the first phrase is completely devoid of an integrating imperious beginning - it is present in it, but not so much in the text as around it. The voice of the singer behind the scenes belongs, of course, to the author of the quoted saying. His status as the head of the multinational Holy Roman Empire, whose main languages are the languages listed by him and subject to him, undoubtedly radiates an aura of authoritative power. But the matter is limited to radiation, Karl does not come to the fore, it is not about him, but about the peculiarities of languages.

The second sentence is twice as long; it repeats, develops and transforms the structure of the former, gently but decisively subordinating it to itself.

Repetition consists in picking up a common discursive format ( used to say ... speak decently - I would add ... to speak decently) and following the characteristics of the four languages. But even here there are noticeable deviations.

First of all, the original scheme (“language X is suitable for communication with addressee Y”) is translated into a higher case (“language X has a valuable property Z”). direct human relationships talk decently to women etc.) are replaced by abstractions ( splendor etc.), varying elevated and dried "valuable property"; very indicative is the next ennoblement of the German language - to the level of an unconditionally positive fortresses. The first step in this direction was taken by Lomonosov as early as the first sentence, where the informal narrative of the source ( if he wanted to talk to the ladies, he would speak in Italian... ) took on indefinite and impersonal forms ( speak decently).

The transition to abstract nouns facilitates the addition of already purely declarative ones. wealth and strong in brevity images, not tied to any characters. The expansion of the list of languages thus produced follows again the principle of variation: two ancient ones are added to the living ones, and the language of the author of the statement is added to the main European ones, Russian, which takes center stage.

Let's see how this major shift is orchestrated.

Until now, the possibilities of different languages have been carriers of diversity, and the figure of the emperor, an aphorist and a polyglot, has served as a single core. Now this structural function is exposed and strengthened, and as its carrier, the Russian language. Having accumulated various properties of the remaining six, it turns out to be a kind of super language, the only and autocratic ruler of the linguistic empire of all times and peoples.

The usurpation is carried out very diplomatically: the two parts of the commendable word do not come into conflict, the first is simply gradually placed at the service of the second. Karl is not eliminated from the discussion, but turns into a mouthpiece for the ideas of the author hiding behind him - a graduate of the Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy, a patriot of the language he glorifies. By ventriloquizing for Karl, Lomonosov does not undermine either his authority or the virtues of the Spanish language, which is not necessary, since, as we remember, already in the first sentence he prudently deprived them of their pedestal.

The most important tool of the rhetorical turn is the subjunctive frame (... if… then, of course ... I would add ... for I would find ...), which allows us to put the necessary statement into Karl's mouth. Lomonosov also borrows it from a French source ( If CarlVback from the dead, he wouldn't approve...), but deliberately omits it in his first sentence (simply saying that Charles... used to say) in order to present it more effectively in the second. True, in the source, Karl utters his real statement, and the subjunctive is used only to link to the case (comparison of French and Spanish). Lomonosov, on the other hand, under the banner of subjunctiveness, drags in completely arbitrary statements. This subjunctive amendment to the claims to world domination will respond later in the lines of Mayakovsky: Yes, if I were a Negro of advanced years, / even then, without despondency and laziness, I would have learned Russian only for what / Lenin spoke to him. However, there is nothing specifically Russian here. The apology of the native language is almost an obligatory stage in the history of European countries, well known to researchers of the ideologies of national exclusivity.

Removal to the final position exactly Latin language gracefully closes the miniature, which opens with the words about Roman emperor. It is not said directly, but the whole structure of the text suggests the idea of a natural transfer of power, at least linguistic power, into the hands of the Third Rome. And this is done based on the properties not so much of the Russian language as of the applied rhetorical figure, by its very nature predisposed to the insistence of a single central thesis, and not to the obedient translation of unorganized diversity.