Comparison of Russian and Arabic languages. Runes, Old Slavonic writing, Proto-Slavic and Hyperborean languages, Arabic script, Cyrillic

This work is a linguistic comparative study of the consonantism of Russian and Arabic languages ​​in order to predict the sound interference resulting from the contact of Russian and Arabic languages; the work also establishes and analyzes the causes of accent pronunciation in the Russian speech of the Arabs on the example of consonant sounds.

Over the past three decades, friendly, cultural, economic and political ties between Soviet Union and countries of the Arab East. Huge interest in Arab world to the Russian language is undoubtedly caused by the historical successes Soviet state in the regions material production, in scientific and technological development, in the implementation of the policy of friendship and peace among peoples, gratuitous economic assistance to Arab countries, support for the Arab national liberation movement, support for the forces of freedom and social progress.

The Russian language performs the function of one of the main languages international communication, one of the world languages, one of the official languages ​​of the United Nations. If in late XIX century French, English and German languages were the languages ​​of science and international diplomacy, now the Russian language occupies a leading place among international languages. The Russian language reflected best achievements world science and culture, have found their highest embodiment language norm in the field of the artistic word and received the most accurate designation various concepts socio-economic, socio-political and technical nature. The Russian language is heard at international congresses, conferences, festivals, symposiums. Knowledge of the Russian language allows you to master latest achievements worldly! science, technology, culture, get the maximum possible information about the modern social development. Russian language is included in educational plans schools and universities in many Arab countries, many Arabs study in higher and secondary specialized educational institutions of the Soviet Union. Many Arab workers and professionals are industrial practice at the enterprises of the USSR. A large number of Soviet specialists go to Arab countries In order to help them raise their economy, the exchange of governmental, party, trade union, scientific, cultural, student, sports and other delegations between the Soviet Union and the countries of the Arab East was greatly expanded. All this caused the need to expand, on the one hand, the teaching of the Russian language to Arabs both in the USSR and in the countries of the Arab East, and on the other hand, the study of the Arabic language in the USSR expanded and deepened. Relations between states inevitably lead to contact between them at various levels, including linguistic and cultural.

When two languages ​​come into contact, this means that the speakers have to use two different language structures. This is where bilingualism comes from. The phenomenon of bilingualism is inevitably connected with the phenomenon of dual culture. When studying bilingualism, it should be borne in mind that a bilingual individual not only acquires a second language, but at the same time joins a new culture. Persons assimilating a culture that is new to them discover a kind of "accent of culture", similar in nature to a linguistic accent*. "Just as there are linguistic accents, - pi

Zhluktenko Yu.A. Linguistic aspects of the bilingualism of E. Haugen, - there are also accents in relation to: cultures, which are the result of the interference of colliding behavior patterns "and it can be as difficult to get rid of them as well as language accents" 1. U. Weinreich considers this issue more widely and writes, that “some anthropologists consider language contact only as one of the aspects of the contact of cultures, and language interference as one of the manifestations of the interpenetration of cultures. not included in our study.

The study of issues related to the interference of different languages ​​is one of the critical tasks comparative phonetics.

In theoretical terms, they are especially important for further comparative study of contacting language systems for the purpose of general linguistic training of future teachers of Russian as a foreign language.

AT in practical terms they are necessary for the linguistic substantiation of the method of teaching the Russian language to the Arabs. Improving the methods of teaching Arabs Russian pronunciation is impossible without comparing the phonological systems of the two languages. Comparative phonetics helps the teacher in the shortest way to teach students the correct Russian pronunciation, since the accent errors of the Arabs are mainly the result of sound interference, i.e. interaction of two sound systems: Russian and Arabic. In addition, the study of accent helps chia. Kyiv, 1974, p.54.

Chauger Einar. Language contact. - New in Linguistics, issue 71* 1972, pp. 63~64. about

Weinreich U. Language contacts. Kyiv, 1979, p.28. identify typical mistakes, recommend methods for their elimination” to determine and argue the sequence of presentation of phonetic material to Arab students.

G. Gleason believes that for practical knowledge of the language it is necessary to know almost 100/? phonological means, $50-90 grammatical means and 1% of the dictionary*. The fact that it is phonetics that presents a certain difficulty in mastering desired language, writes r and R.Y. Avanesov. Therefore, many serious studies have been devoted to phonetic phenomena in mastering a non-native language (see bibliography), in which the fundamental, undeniable fact is that difficulties in mastering the pronunciation of a foreign language are mainly associated with the influence of well-established pronunciation skills determined by the system mother tongue. According to E. Sapir, "phonetically, every language values ​​not so much its own sounds, as such, but their modeling system"4. S.I. Burngein wrote that there is not a single language in the world whose systems would completely coincide4. “To master a language,” writes A. Martinet, “means to learn to analyze in a different way what constitutes linguistic communication”5.

The study was based on the principle systems approach G l and s about n G. Introduction to descriptive linguistics. M., 1959, p.339.

Ovanesov R.I. Russian literary pronunciation * M., 1972, p.72.

3 Sep and r E. Language. Introduction to speech analysis. M.-L., Sots-egiz, 1933, p.36.

4Bernstein S.I. Issues of teaching pronunciation (in relation to teaching the Russian language to foreigners). M., 1937, sLZ*

5 March I and ne A. Fundamentals of General Linguistics. - New in linguistics, issue 3, p.375. to the facts of language, which in our work can be realized in an attempt to analyze paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations to the analysis of interference and accent.

By paradigmatic relations we understand the possible opposition of phonemes to each other.

By syntagmatic relations we understand the relations of possible combinations of various phonemes with each other, their sequence and arrangement.

Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations are closely interconnected and interdependent, since the description of any language can be considered complete if you indicate not only the opposition of phonemes (the system of oppositions of phonemes), but also the main patterns of their combination.

The paradigmatic analysis of consonantal systems must precede the syntagmatic analysis. Studying the compatibility of phonemes on the syntagmatic axis is impossible without analyzing the phonetic and phonological features of these phonemes in the paradigmatic plane.

If a phoneme is not determined syntagmatically, but is completely determined by the paradigmatic plan in the language system, then it is in a paradigmatically strong and syntagmatically weak position. Such, for example, are Russian and Arabic paired voiced and voiceless consonant phonemes in a position before vowels relative to the sign of deafness-voicedness. If the phoneme is not paradigmatically conditioned, but is completely determined by the syntagmatic plan, that is, by its context in speech, then it is in a syntagmatically strong and paradigmatically weak position. Such, for example, are Russian consonant phonemes, paired by deafness-voicedness, at the absolute end of a word relative to the sign of deafness-voicedness*. See Panov M.V. On some general trends in the development of the Russian literary language of the 20th century. - VYA, 1963, L X.

In work on phonetics, it is impossible to do without defining the main functional unit- phonemes. This or that understanding of it determines the principle of approach to the analysis of the material itself. We accept as the most consistent definition of the phoneme given by A.A. Reformatsky: "Phonemes are the minimum units of the sound structure of a language, which serve to add up and distinguish between significant units of the language: morphemes, words" *.

The purpose of the dissertation is as follows:

1. Describe and compare the articulation patterns of consonant phonemes in Russian and Arabic based on experimental data.

2. Describe and compare the consonantal systems of the Russian and Arabic languages.

3. Consider questions language contacts and phonetic interference in order to highlight similarities and differences between niches, identify potential interference and describe its types.

4. Consider the general issues of a foreign accent, identify typical errors in the Russian accented speech of the Arabs, determine their causes and thereby confirm the correctness of the theoretically predicted interference iffera.

To solve the problems posed in the work, various methods were used: direct observation, auditory analysis, radiography, oscillography.

Application experimental methods(instrumental and auditory) research in phonetics has made it currently one of the most accurate disciplines in the system language sciences and was one of the "true means of describing the sound composition of the language and studying

Reformed cue A.A. Introduction to linguistics. M., 1967, p.211. the mechanism of phonetic interference and accent. Experimental phonetics makes it possible to compose acoustic and articulation characteristics sound system language, and this is the main material necessary for comparing phonological systems, studying interference and foreign accent, which is necessary, in turn, for correct setting pronunciation of sounds when teaching Russian as a foreign language.

big and important place in our study of the sound composition of the Russian language, we had experimental studies made by the students of I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay on the basis of his theory of the phoneme and the methods indicated by him. These are experimental studies by V.A. Bogoroditsky and L.V. Shcherba. The works of V.A. Bogoroditsky and L.V. Shcherba make it possible to assert that experimental phonetic studies of sounds also include a physical analysis of speech sounds and an anatomical and physiological description of articulation.

When analyzing the consonant system of the Russian language, we relied mainly on the experimental data of L.R. Zinder, M.I. Matusevich, N.A. Lyubimova, L.V. Bondarko, L.V. Verbitskaya. R. Flaufo-shnma, S. S. Vysotsky and others.

We used schemes of radiographs of Russian consonants made by M.I. Matusevich, N.A. Lyubimova, N. Konechnaya, V. Zavodovskaya and L.G. Skalozub.

In the acoustic analysis of Russian consonants, we relied on the experimental data of L.R. Zitsdbra, R.F. Paufopshma and on the research of R. Jacobson, G. Fant and M. Halle.

In the acoustic analysis of Arabic consonants, we mainly relied on experimental data obtained at the University of Baghdad by Dr. Idward Shanna.

Mn took 60 radiographs of Arabic consonants in the pronunciation of 5 speakers. Radiography was carried out in the laboratory of the Department of Human Anatomy of the Medical Faculty of UDI under the guidance of Dr. medical sciences, Professor V.P. Kulik. The images were taken according to the technique developed by G. Ginsburg, Doctor of Medical Sciences, for radiography of the speech organs from the larynx to the lips*.

The pictures were taken with the head turned in profile, specifications: KU - 90, MA - 30-40, time 0.2-0.3 sec., 100 cm.

Radiography was carried out on film 18-24. The film was mounted on a frame behind a translucent screen. A.M. supervised the shooting. Krylov.

To better contrast the contours of the moving parts on the radiograph profiles speech apparatus, they were lubricated with a barium solution. First of all, the speaker swallowed half a spoonful of barium solution, thus smearing the root of the tongue, its deepest parts, then a narrow strip was applied along middle line along the tongue, the midline of the hard and soft palate, the tongue and lips were outlined with barium. The tip of the tongue was especially carefully lubricated. The announcer uttered the word, at the moment of pronunciation of the desired sound, a survey was made.

To take X-rays, we have compiled a special program. The consonant we needed was always in the initial position before the vowels.

In a number of cases, some oscillograms of Arabic consonants were taken to compare them with the corresponding Russian ones. In addition, a comparison of the oscillograms of the pronounced accent sound and its normative equivalent was used.

Oscillograms were taken in the Laboratory of Experimental Phonetics of the Patrice Lumba Peoples' Friendship University under the guidance of Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor V.I. Petryankina. See Zh and n k and n N.I. The mechanism of speech. M., 1958, p.165.

Auditory analysis was carried out according to the methodology developed by A.I. Rabinovich, and was mainly aimed at studying interference and accented pronunciation of Arab students. We recruited more than 50 Syrians (students, graduate students and trainees) as informants. The informants were subjected to a questionnaire, as a result of which the following data were established:

Name and surname of the informant;

The age of the informant;

Year of admission to the university;

University, faculty, year of study;

Year of ending high school“* (if student) and university (if graduate student or trainee);

Foreign languages ​​that the informant speaks and reads fluently;

Other foreign languages that the informant knows;

Syrian province where the informant was stationed;

Level of knowledge of the Russian language;

Level of knowledge of the literary Arabic language.

The following sources served as material for the study:

1. casual conversations recorded on tape;

2. reading passages from fiction;

3. reading specially composed texts in which all the phonemes of the Russian language were presented in different positions and in different distribution;

4. reading individual words.

The texts reproduced by the informants were recorded on a ferromagnetic tape and carefully analyzed. Phonetic errors of any kind were recorded on cards and classified. As a result of the classification, tables and a dictionary of accent errors were compiled.

The scientific novelty of the work is I) in the instrumental analysis of the consonants of the Arabic language on the basis of radiographic data. This work was done in full for the first time. 2) in a comparative description of the features of the articulatory base of Russian and languages, 3) in identifying the nature of Russian-Arabic phonetic interference and predicting accent deviations in the Russian speech of Arabs, 4) in compiling guidelines for work in the field of practical phonetics.

The practical value of the work. The prediction of accent deviations, and especially the analysis of accent errors, the determination of their causes and ways to eliminate them, have direct access to the practice of teaching a foreign (Russian in this case) language to students who speak Arabic. The conclusions of the dissertation can be used to determine the sequence of studying phonetic material, to compose introductory phonetic courses, and also as practical advice phonetic teacher.

Approbation of work. On the topic of the dissertation, reports and reports were made at scientific student circles, at conferences of young scientists and specialists of the UDN (1978-1980), at the MAPRYAL congress (1979), the materials of the dissertation were used at practical exercises in Russian with Arab students, in lectures on the phonetics of the Russian language.

This work consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion and appendices.

The introduction substantiates the choice of topic, indicates the purpose of the work, defines the objectives of the study and the methodology of the experiment.

The first chapter presents the results of an X-ray experiment and compares the articulation patterns of consonant phonemes in Russian and Arabic.

The second chapter describes the consonant phonological systems of the Russian and Arabic languages.

The third chapter deals with the issues of language contacts, bilingualism and interference, determines the similarities and differences between the two consonant systems, highlights the zone of potential interference, considers the accented pronunciation of Arabs and identifies and classifies their errors.

In conclusion, the results of the study are summarized and conclusions are given.

Applications include X-ray diagrams, oscillograms, experimental texts, error classification tables, error dictionary, and bibliography.

Question about transcription. In our work, we used Latin transcription with the following diacretic meanings (it -symbol consonant):

Pharyngeal £ - interdental

Implosive semi-softness ъ" - tension ^ - non-tension t - voiced beginning of semi-voiced \ - voiced end of semi-voiced

The transcription of Arabic consonants is based on the transcription system proposed by J. Cantino 1 (see Table I).

When transmitting accent errors, when not the whole word is transcribed, but part of it, we used Russian transcription so as not to complicate the reading of the word with two sign systems.

I J. Cantineau . Cours de phonetique arabe Paris, I960 p.8

Table I

Arabic consonants

Russian consonants z£uk letter t

VI ± a b a 8 b

G, a2 to t and „

9 b b * G a. and "a * and * O L A o-S e) h with sound ъ" r. r"t sh"

V a a "n p * 1

1 "g" g * 3 g. about 6 k. k "in, V ukva<5 п в Ф с

D n l r c h

Before approaching the issue of comparing two languages ​​(Russian and Arabic), it is necessary to dwell on the issue of phonetic research done in one of these languages ​​(Arabic) in order to determine the place of our research among them.

Phonological systems of languages ​​differ in that consonantism or vocalism plays a decisive role in them. Arabic belongs to the family of Semitic languages, which have a pronounced consonantal character. "For the languages ​​of the Semitic system," says G. P. Melnikov, "the most optimal is a rather specific consonantism with the widespread use of very exotic oppositions in the absence of many consonants common in most languages ​​of other systems"*. Defining the properties of the Semitic languages, G.P. Melnikov emphasizes the poverty of vocalism in this family. All these features of the Semitic languages ​​are clearly reflected in the spelling and morphology of these languages. Orthographically, the alphabet in these languages ​​consists either of consonants alone, or of consonants and long vowels^. Morphologically, the root of a word in these languages ​​consists of only consonants. Most roots consist of three root consonants, some of four ^. The consonant phonemes of Semitic languages, unlike vowels, are the main carriers of semantic meaning, hence the need for clear articulation, clear pronunciation and amazing stability.

Melnikov G.P. Systematic analysis of the reasons for the originality of Semitic consonantism. M., Moscow School of Art named after V.I. Lenin, 1967, p. (Velveneon, Israel. History of Semitic languages. Cairo, 1929, p. 14). ipg^il. ♦ o i Grande B.M. Introduction to the Comparative Study of Semitic Languages” M., 1972, p.17. See also: Starinin V.P. The structure of the Semitic word. M., Eastern literature, 1963, p.20. these consonants. "Within the dialects of one Indo-European language for hundreds of years, - says G.P. Melnikov" - often there were greater discrepancies in the composition of consonants than between different Semitic languages ​​for millennia "-1".

Arab philologists of the Middle Ages - the founders of Arabic linguistics - perfectly described the consonant system of the Arabic language. At the same time, they paid more attention to consonantism than to vocalism.

The first Arabic philologist is Al-Khalil Yin Ahmed (718-791), who compiled the first dictionary of the Arabic language, in which words are arranged according to phonetic-physiological features, i.e. at the place of articulation of the first consonant: first go laryngeal, then posterior lingual, middle lingual whistling and hissing, and finally labial2. In addition, Al-Khalil is the first researcher of the rules of Arabic metrics based on Arabic, Bedouin poetry. Al-Khalil o ibn Ahmed classified Arabic "sounds" according to the place of formation,

Melnikov G.P. Op.cit., p.8.

2 V.I. Zvegintsev and Ya.V. Noah doubt the actual authorship of Al-Khalil and confirm this by the fact that the dictionary has not come down to us. It should be noted here that Al-Khalil's dictionary "Kitab

Al-Ain" was almost completely preserved and was published in Baghdad in 1967 (see:

See: Zvegintsev V.I. History of Arabic Linguistics. M., 1959, p.46; L about I Ya.V. History of linguistic doctrines. M., 1968, p.26.

3 "Arabic grammarians used the same word" Harf ", - writes B. M. Grande, - they denoted both the sound of speech and the letter depicting this sound." “However, it cannot be assumed,” writes G.M. Gabuchan, “that Arab grammarians did not see the difference between the sound unit and its graphic representation. but in the direction from the larynx to the teeth, but there were serious flaws in its phonetic system.

Al-Khalid's phonetic remarks are set forth in a book by his student Sibawayh (died 796), who perfected his teacher's system in Al-Kitai.

Sibawayhi considered not only the main type of Arabic consonants (28 consonants), but also their literary (6 varieties) and dialectal (8 varieties) varieties. He classified consonants according to the place of formation / tahag 1<а| а1-ьйгйе ^^ I ^и, установив 16 мест образованиями по способу образования (смычные, X фрикативные и полнопроточные) /га-\™аЬ,ёа<31ба11,Ъаоп1й¿аЬ з^олг^, по звджости-глухости/та^йш-аь-таьтйзаь) " » по эмфатичности-неэмфатичности/ ти^Ъа(з.аЬ-шшгСа^ЬМ1 а^, и по работе задней части спинки языка на поднятые и неподнятые т^аГранде Е.М. Курс арабской грамматики в сравнительно-историческом освещении. М., 1963, с.П;Габучан Г.М. К вопросу о структуре семитского слова (в связи с проблемой флексии). - В сб.: Семитские языки, вып.11, ч.1, с. 120. См.: c^Jl^UljJ^^jjL^k. i/£. 1 ♦ Л * Met* J^bUJI Мы заимствовали этот термин из работы Мельникова Г.П. "Под полнопроточными мы будем понимать те согласные, при артикуляции которых воздух сравнительно свободно проходит по тому, иле иному органу, например, через нос или через открытые щели вокруг языка",

See* G.P. Melnikov. Systematic analysis of the reasons for the originality of Semitic consonantism. M., MPSH im. V.I. Lenina, 1967, p. a1-*1nb1gae NOSOVI © /brujc a1-£nmab "¿¿Ly^p. sounds /a!~da1da1a]1 I and whistling sounds

brittle as-vartg (See Table 2).

Here we should especially dwell on the phonetic treatise of Avicenna, the author of the "Medical Canon" (980-1037), since he was the first to clearly distinguish between the consonants /büde zam^ab ^u^^ and the vowels/bru? za^ab distinguished between long and short vowels I ^VI BOVI u ^ In addition, Avicenna's work is an acoustic and physiological study, which gives the reasons and methods for the formation of sound in general as a physical phenomenon and the sound of speech as its modification, the process of its perception by organs hearing and describes the anatomy of the organs of speech.

Characterizing and classifying consonant sounds (see Table 3), Avicenna, unlike all other medieval philologists, uses terminology from the field of medicine and physics of that time. We meet with him such terms as "simple" sounds, i.e. "with a full bow"; ^oG^L and "complex" sounds, i.e. "with an incomplete bow" Gb ^^^ . Avicenna understands by these terms also the duration of the sound, since "simple" are instantaneous sounds, and "complex", i.e. fricatives are long sounds. Avicenna's "weak" sounds are not tense, and "strong" are tense. They characterize the empathy /a1->1*b4 as a simultaneous rise of the back of the back of the tongue to the soft palate in combination with the anterior lingual articulation of the bow or gap in the region of the upper teeth or gums, resulting in the formation of an overlapped space that serves as a resonator, forming a specific timbre coloring. emphatic compared to non-empha

I igt ^Lil,^!.

Avicenna. phonetic treatise. Cairo, 1932).

table 2

Arabic no Sibawayh consonants

Place of education

Stopped voiced raised f I s

1 o deaf raised f a>

Full flow 1 che f 8 0

Slotted voiced f a o i ® n raised f 1 a r deaf 3

§ f and raised f I about f. e

I. Upper and lower lips w V

2♦ Lower guda and tips of upper teeth

3 "Tip of tongue and tips of upper and lower incisors

Continuation of table 2

1 I: 2: 3: 4: 5: 6: 7: 8: 9:TO:11:12:X3:X4:15:X6:X7

4. Tip of the tongue and roots of the upper incisors ¿< z 8 8

5. Anterior part and kosha of the upper back of the tongue of the incisors t a t

6. Anterior part of the back of the tongue and upper alviol

7. Anterior part of the back of the tongue and the anterior palate

8. Lateral parts of the tongue and their corresponding upper teeth 1

9 "Anterior lateral parts of the tongue and molars a

10. The middle part with the middle palate kicks the tongue and<32 3

II. The back of the back of the tongue and the back of the palate

12. Back of the back of the tongue and uvula<1

13. Tongue root and uvula 5

14. Upper larynx 9 b "

15. Lower larynx 9 b

Table 3

Arabic consonants according to Avicenna

According to the place of formation With a complete barrier With an incomplete barrier weak: strong weak: strong ♦ neem-:noso~:side-: dro-:neem-:iLa-fat.: howl: howl: stinging: fat. » »< « неэм- |яеэм-фат. : фат. 9 эмфат.

Labiolabials ъ w W ■

Labio-dental g

Interdental a b a PR

Anterior lingual a A 1 g t 2. *

Anterior-lingual-anteropalatal a

Midpalatal az 3 ё

Back palatine to th

Uvular i. X

Pharyngeal n C

guttural? b precision. Avicenna does not classify the sounds of the Arabic language according to the deafness-sonority / ai-<^|ahr,ai-hams , так как он классифицирует их по надря^енности-ненапряженности1.

Avicenna's phonetic treatise, unlike the works of other Arab classical philologists, is the only work in which the issues of phonetics are covered independently, regardless of the issues of grammar.

In addition to the treatise of Avicenna, all the works of the Arab classical philologists who studied the phonetics of the Arabic language after Siba-wayhi (work of ibn-Jini / 942-1002 / sirr dssina9ah itUJIj- * work of al-Zamakhshari / XII century / ai-mufassai jJuji, work of Ibn Yansh / III c. / sarh al-mufassal , work of al-Khaffaji / 1032-1073 / sirr al-fasahah , work of Ibnul-Hajib DSh c. / as-safi^ah »work of ibn al-Jazri DU v. / an-nasr and many others), were directed either to commenting on Sibaveykha, or to compiling new manuals in which the material is presented more consistently. V.G. Akhvlediani believes that strong, according to Avicenna, are deaf consonants, and weak are voiced. On this occasion, he writes: “Comparing the rows of consonants, which are distributed over two signs, we see that voiced ones are “weak”, and “strong<* ными" являются глухие". Однако Авиценна характеризует и как два "сильных" звука, а эти два "сильных" звука противопоставляются по глухости-звонкости. (См.: Ахвледиани В.Г. Фонетический трактат Авиценны. Тбилиси, 1966).

It seems to us that medieval Arabic philologists meant by the terms liar-bain not only deafness-voicedness, as it seems to most modern Arabists, but also tension-non-tension, since the category of deafness-voicedness is inextricably linked with the category of tension-non-tension. This explains, it seems to us, the fact that Arabic philologists, including Avicenna, who carefully and subtly developed the system of consonants, never reminded of the work of the vocal cords. and in a more accessible form, and this direction is developing especially intensively in the 19th-20th centuries. , since the teaching of Sibaveyha was a sacred teaching for the Arab classical philologists. All of them imitated him and repeated what Sibawayhi himself said without serious additions, which became a brake on the development of Arabic linguistics. “We are still teaching Arabic in our schools and institutes,” writes the famous contemporary Arabic writer Taxa ZycetH, “as it was taught by the ancient Arabs in their madrasahs and mosques over a thousand years ago. work and make such efforts in the study of syntax, morphology and vocabulary, as did the ancient Arabs ".

The modern Arabic literary language is the result of a slow and long development of the classical Arabic language. As a result of the expansion of the Arab-Muslim Caliphate, a long process of interaction between the Arabic language and the languages ​​of the peoples of the countries conquered by the Arabs began. This process, on the other hand, contributed to the development of Arabic dialects within each country. “Dialects were developed,” writes G.Sh. Sharbatov, “in the process of long-term interaction and mutual influence of the Arabic language and the local languages ​​of those countries where various Arab tribes settled. Thus, the Coptic language influenced the development of the Egyptian dialect, Aramaic - on Syrian and Iraqi dialects, the Berber languages ​​- into the Maghrib dialects.In addition, the Turkic language, which was

Gubachan G.M. On the issue of Arabic grammatical teachings. - In: Semitic languages, 1963, p.40.

2 1 L-Y") y! oVI ¡1l* ♦ ^»L *OS-"*"

We quote from the article by Belkin V.M. "Discussion of the problems of the national language in the Arabic press". - VYa, X959, No. 2, p.123. about

Sharbatov G.Sh. Modern Arabic. M., 1961, pp. 16-18. the state language of the Ottoman Empire during the period of Turkish domination in the Arab countries (KhUT - the beginning of the 20th century) ”also left its imprint in the Arabic language.

The modern literary Arabic pronunciation in every Arab country is the product of the interference of the sound structures of the classical language and the local dialect1. N.V. Shmanov divides Arabic dialects into five groups: Arabian, Mesopotamian, Syro-Palestinian, Egyptian and Maghreb^. Therefore, five pronunciations can be distinguished in modern Arabic: Arabian, Iraqi, Syro-Lebanese, Egyptian, and Maghreb. Arabic language scholars often fail to distinguish between dialectal and classical elements and are confused by the modern pronunciation of literary Arabic. C. A. Ferguson states that "no one, to my knowledge, has attempted to give a systematic analysis of the various intermediate forms of Arabic that are neither 'purely' classical nor 'purely' colloquial"0. In our present work, we will rely mainly on the Syro-Lebanese pronunciation of the modern Arabic literary language.

At the present stage of the development of science in general and linguistics in particular, phonetics has made significant progress, its problems have expanded significantly, and the experimental base has created fertile ground for more objective solutions to phonetic problems. And in the fifties of this century, new studies of the Arabic language began to appear in Cairo and Beirut. Their authors were graduates

I im. J^ISJI . ^LyijcU^JJI jc.Lljjiy.Jt". d30U*

Fueck, Johann. Arabic. Cairo, 1951, p.14).

Yushmanov N.V. Grammar of Literary Arabic. M., 1928, p.3.~

3 Ferguson CH.A. Foreword in Contribution to Arabic linguistics. Cambride, Ma's. 1966 p«p.3 of Western European universities. In 1950, Ibrahim Anis's book "The Phonetics of the Arabic Language"* appeared, in which he used the works of such modern linguists as Miller, Bloomfield, Jespersen and others, as well as the works of classical Arabic philologists. The value of Anis' work is that it is the first serious modern study of the phonetics of the modern literary Arabic language (Egyptian version), in which phonetics issues are considered in diachronic and synchronic aspects. In this book, for the first time, Arabic philologists touch upon the issues of stress and intonation, consider prosodic units and the structure of the syllable in the phonetics of the Arabic language.

There are some weaknesses in the work of I. Anis, which should be highlighted here. It is noteworthy that in this work some Egyptian dialectal elements of pronunciation are considered as literary elements of pronunciation, for example, I. Anis considers the sound /h/ not uvular, but back-palatal like A /, but A / slightly advanced forward towards the lips . That is, I. Anis describes this sound as the Egyptians pronounce it now (except for the readers of the Koran, who still retain the norms of classical pronunciation). The same can be said about the sound /ag/, which I. Anis characterizes not as an affricate, but as an explosive o sound /ё/, i.e. as it is pronounced in the Egyptian dialect. The author singles out the sounds /з/ and /*/ in a separate group, in the group of semivowels, although from our point of view these sounds are consonants,

2 Avicenna says that the sounds / s > / and / 4| / the same place of formation: "- this, which is formed without an initial barrier, and ^" "as if, starting with a barrier, which is eliminated in the future." Such a pronunciation is still considered normative (Koranic). which in certain positions can be semivowels*« In the work of I. Anis there is no acoustic aspect of phonetic analysis and only articulatory characteristics of sounds are given, which was inherent in traditional Arabic linguistics.

Of the modern Arabic studies, the works of A. Ayyub, T. Khaesan, K. Bishra, and the works of I. Anis, published in the field, stand out. Unfortunately, all these studies were made on the basis of the Egyptian version of the modern literary Arabic language and the influence of the Egyptian dialect is not excluded.

At the beginning of the 11th century, foreign Arabists began to take an interest in Arabic phonetics. Most of their works were written on the material of the Egyptian dialect and the Egyptian version of the literary language (W.V. Gardner, H. Birkelayad, T. Mitchell, R. Harrel, C. Ferguson, etc.). On the basis of the Iraqi version, a study was made by S. al-Ani, and on the basis of the Syro-Lebanese version, a study by R. Naga and J. Cantino.

In 1941, the work of J. Cantinop Cours de phonet^que arabe" was published, in which the main provisions of the Prague Linguistic Circle were reflected, and above all the theoretical provisions on

N.S. Trubetskoy, Before Cantino, phonetic studies in Arabic studies were purely descriptive; functional analysis was completely absent. J. Cantino in this work characterizes the phonemic series, their members and their compatibility in the flow of speech.

Soviet Arabic studies made a significant contribution to the study of the Arabic language, but it paid more attention to grammar than to phonetics. On this issue, we join the opinion of K. Bishra. See: ♦ À G-K1 Ijo ♦ me 5y>UJI fLJi jjlU! jju. J^^JUi oh

See: Ognetova G.P. On the phonological theory in Arabic studies. - In: Arabic Philology. M., 1968, p.III-120.

Most research on phonetics is based on a descriptive method using the works of classical Arabic philologists. Some of the works have the character of a textbook manual (Yushmanov N.V., Baranov Kh.K., Kovalev A.A., Sharbatov G.Sh., Kamensky N.S., Grande B.M. - see bibliography). Of particular interest in the field of Arabic phonetics are the Ph.D. "Issues of verbal stress in the modern Arabic literary language" (M., 1967). These works differ from all previous ones in that they are supported by some experimental data on the issues under consideration.

The majority of modern Arabic and foreign studies of Arabic phonetics are not based on experimental data and are made either on the basis of auditory observations or by commenting on Arabic classical philologists*. Our work should supplement all previous studies of Arabic consonantism with experimental data. %

1 In the work of T.Halan there are some experimental data made with the help of a kymograph and a palatograph.

1. In Russian and Arabic phonological systems, consonantism plays a decisive role.

2. In the consonantism of both compared languages, signs of the place and method of formation, acoustic signs, as well as the nature of additional articulation (for the Russian language - palatalization and velarization, for Arabic - pharyngalization) are phonologically significant.

3. In the category of deafness-voicedness in both languages, neither the number of voiced and deaf phonemes, nor the nature of the opposition on this basis, coincide. The phonological nature of voicedness-deafness also differs. The absence of a double deaf or voiced voice in Arabic and its presence in Russian increases the role of a sign of tension-non-tension and phonologises it. 4. The sign of tension-non-tension in both languages ​​is not phonologically significant, it is an excess, accompanying sign.

5. Comparing the two phonological systems of consonantism in Arabic and Russian, it can be argued that in Arabic there is no palatalization and velarization as differentially significant articulations, and, therefore, there is no phonological opposition in terms of hardness-softness in Arabic. In Russian, however, pharyngealization is not phonologically significant, therefore, in Russian there is no differential feature of emphaticity-emphaticity.

Chapter III

ISSUES OF RUSSIAN-ARAB INTERFERENCE AND FOREIGN ACCENT IN THE RUSSIAN MOUTH OF ARAB

§ I. To the question of language contacts and bilingualism

Language contact is regular verbal communication between speakers of two or more languages1. Language contacts and bilingualism began to be studied as early as the 15th century (see the works of G. Schuchardt, A. Martinet, U. Weinreich, E. Haugen; in Russia, I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay, L.V. Shcherby, V. A. Bogoroditsky, E.A. Polivanova), and in modern linguistics, as V.Yu. . Nowadays, bilingualism is gaining immense popularity. In the new modern life, monolingualism recedes on a broad front before bilingualism. The widest international cultural exchange, diverse and growing ties lead to an ever-increasing spread of bilingualism. Bilingualism can be observed both in teaching foreign languages ​​and in teaching Russian to foreign students who came to the universities of the USSR.

The theory of language contacts is not purely linguistic, since it is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, it reflects not only the facts of the language, but intertwines linguistic, psychological, socio-political and educational and methodological

1Rozentsveig V.Yu. Language contacts. L., 1970, p.Z.

Rozentsveig V.Yu. 0 language contacts. VYA, 1963, No. I, p.66. Aspects* If V.Yu.Rozentsveig and Yu.A.Zhluktenko consider language contacts as a linguistic problem, B.M.Vereshchagin believes that psychology should deal with the problem of bilingualism. We see in bilingualism a multifaceted and multifaceted problem, which is closely related to the problem of teaching a foreign language.

With a psychological approach, questions of the mechanism of generation and perception of speech in a second language, questions about the ways of mastering foreign languages, the place and role of the native language in learning a non-native language, questions about the most optimal age for learning a second language, as well as the influence of intelligence on mastering languages, and vice versa - the impact of learning languages ​​on the development of intelligence.

In the socio-political aspect, researchers are interested in questions of language policy, i.e. questions of the sociological interpretation of bilingualism, the influence of social conditions on the fact of the emergence and functioning of bilingualism, the social role of a second language in different conditions.

In the educational and methodological aspect, issues of organizing the educational process of learning a non-native language, improving the principles of comparative language learning, developing objective linguistic data, on the basis of which a rational methodology for teaching a non-native language can be built, can be considered.

From a linguistic point of view, the theory of language contacts sets the task of describing and comparing contacting language systems, then identifying similarities and differences between them, especially those that make it difficult to master a second (non-native) language, predict interference features of contacting language systems and indicate t deviation from the norms of each from these languages. Osu language contacts

Weinreich U. Monolingualism and multilingualism. - New things appear in the speech of people who are native speakers of the contacting languages; consequently, the place of contact is the individual himself - the bearer of bilingualism1. Bilingualism is the very process of contacting languages, which occurs mainly in cases where a person, or a group of people, faces the task of mastering a non-native language, which they must use alternately with their native language, depending on the requirements of the situation *

In the scientific literature we find different classifications of bilingualism. R

L.V. Shcherba proposed to distinguish between pure and mixed bilingualism. The first, more specific, is characterized by the fact that in the mind of the speaker there are two autonomous and non-interacting systems, so that only a real situation can be an intermediary for translation from one language to another. The second, mixed bilingualism, is characterized by the fact that a complex system is created in the minds of the speakers, in which two forms of expression correspond to a single meaning common to two languages ​​("a language with two terms"). L.V. Shcherba observed such bilingualism when studying Lusatian dialects: "I could state that any word of these bilingual persons contains three images: a semantic image, a sound image of the corresponding German word and. sound:, image", of the corresponding Lusatian word , and all together form the same unity as the word of any other language.

U. Weinreich distinguishes three types of bilingualism: coordinative, corlinguistics, issue UT. 1972, p.27.

Rabinovich A.I. Principles of the study of phonetic interference when contacting different system languages. - Cand. diss. Alma-Ata, 1970, p.12. about

Shcherba L.V., Regular problems of linguistics. - Fav. slave. on linguistics and phonetics, v.1. L., 1958, p.6-8. about

Sh e r b a L.V. On the concept of mixing languages. Ibid., p.48. relative and subordinate. Coordinative bilingualism is characterized by two non-overlapping language systems, i.e., as it seems to us, this type corresponds to the pure type of L.V. Shcherba. The correlative and subordinate types, taken together, correspond to the mixed type in L.V. Shcherba. They differ from each other in that the correlative type arises in conditions of direct contact with a foreign language environment, and the subordinate type is acquired through the native language through "class" teaching1. In the correlative type of bilingualism, two language systems are combined in terms of content and separated in terms of expression. The subordinative type of bilingualism, acquired as a result of training, is characterized by the fact that the meanings of the words of the second language do not correlate with realities, as in the correlative type, but with the words of the native language, which act as the meaning of foreign words. As E. Haugen notes, the subordinate type of bilingualism is an enhanced, brought to the limit, correlative type of bilingualism, when the second language is subordinate to the first, and the word of the first language becomes the meaning of the linguistic sign of the second language.

Other researchers distinguish two types of bilingualism: "complete", which, in our opinion, corresponds to pure bilingualism in L.V. Shcherba, and "incomplete", when the knowledge of the second language lags far behind the knowledge of the native4. With incomplete bilingualism, an individual, according to E. Haugen, may have somewhat less than two systems

^Weinreich W. Language contacts. Kyiv, 1979, p.

2 See Vinogradov V.A. Linguistic aspects of language teaching. Issue I. 1972, pp. 29-30.

3 E. Haugen. Bilingualism in the America t A bibliography and research guide. "PttMcation of the American Dialect.

4Gornung B.V. On the question of the types and forms of interaction between languages. - In the book: Reports and messages of the Institute of Linguistics of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, L 2. 1952, p.5. mi, albeit more than one system1.

Psychologists distinguish two types of bilingualism: combined and correlated. The combined type develops with oral "unteachable" mastery of a second language, in which two combined language systems are developed. This type of bilingualism corresponds to the correlative type of U. Weinreich. When two sets of linguistic features are associated with the same semantic set, we are dealing with a related type. Relative bilingualism develops in the learning process, where translation and comparison are the usual method of mastering a new language. This type of bilingualism corresponds to the subordinate type of U. Weinreich*".

Some researchers distinguish natural and artificial bilingualism. Bilingualism can be natural, when an individual who speaks a second (non-native) language, is directly in a foreign environment, and artificial, when artificial conditions are created to ensure the assimilation of a second language. Thus, "natural bilingualism takes place where the learning of a second language occurs as a result of direct contact with native speakers of another language in the process of joint practice. Artificial bilingualism occurs in the conditions of deliberate learning of a second second language in a setting specially created for this purpose (school, institute , courses.), where the language is studied indirectly, through teachers, using programs, teaching aids and 4 technical means ". Xaugen E. Language contact. - New in linguistics. Issue. U1. 1972, p.62. about

L See Ibragimbekov F.A. On the psychological foundations of teaching the Russian language in the national school. Baku, 1962, p.4. about

Zhluktenko Yu.A. Linguistic aspects of bilingualism. Kyiv, 1974, p.18. -------

4Rozentsveig V.Yu. About language contacts. - VYa, 1963, p.26.

It is generally recognized that in conditions of natural bilingualism, a second language is learned faster and easier. Artificial bilingualism is temporary, while natural bilingualism leaves its traces for a long time. With artificial bilingualism, there is a unilateral influence of the native language on the second language, and with natural bilingualism, there is a mutual influence of two language systems. For bilinguals who have lived in a foreign environment for a long time, the influence of the second language is clearly expressed in native speech in a strong need to resort to the use of the second language at different language levels. Most of all, this is manifested at the level of vocabulary; Thus, Arab specialists - graduates of Soviet universities - for a long time retain the need to use Russian terminology. "We have recorded many such cases; for example, in the speech of Arab doctors, graduates of Soviet universities, words such as" abortion "instead of?izhäd," chamber" instead of qism,(janbar "tuberculus" instead of sill

J~ . In the conversation of a Syrian theater director in Arabic with colleagues - graduates of Soviet universities - we came across such Russian words and expressions as "circumstance, type, character, passion, living people, realists, etc. .." From this short conversation (250 words), we give as an example the following sentence, which consists of 6 words, three of them are Russian:

- "circumstance" tutawwir al "character" wa taz^aluh "multifaceted". ("Circumstances themselves develop characters and> make them multifaceted").

We often meet such "Arabic-Russian dialect" in the speech of students studying at the UDN, where more than $60 of students are foreigners. Students from each region form a language community that is in close linguistic contact with the natural (Russian) environment. Here the question arises, to what type is the bilingualism of these students, artificial or natural? After all, on the one hand, these students learn the Russian language in classroom conditions, where the evaluation criterion is not the communicative value of speech, but its form, i.e. compliance or non-compliance with the norms of a non-native language. Under these conditions, all attention from the very beginning of training is aimed at achieving purity and correctness of speech in the target language, therefore, a rather weak answer in content, but correct in form, in classroom conditions always gets a higher rating than a deep and emotional in content, but imperfect in form. On the other hand, these same bilingual students live in a natural environment and communicate with native speakers of the language being studied in the classroom. Therefore, mastering a second language occurs as a result of direct contact with native speakers of this language and in the process of joint practical activities (in hostels, in construction teams, on vacation). Under these conditions, there is a certain tolerance for errors in the speech of a bilingual individual, especially those that do not interfere with mutual understanding, since attention here is drawn not to the form and structure of the statement, but to its content, i.e. not on how a person speaks, but on what he talks about.

We find it appropriate to call the type of bilingualism, in which mastery of a non-native language occurs in the process of classroom learning, on the one hand, and regular verbal communication in the natural environment, on the other hand, a naturally subordinative type of bilingualism. We can observe this type of bilingualism among foreign students studying at PFU.

So, we will call bilingualism knowledge of two languages ​​to a degree sufficient for understanding by representatives of the second (non-native) language. The degree of understanding can serve as a criterion for the presence of bilingualism.

We tried to summarize the types of classification of bilingualism presented in the scientific literature in Table 9 below.

CONCLUSION

The ever-increasing interest in the Russian language every year, the spread of the Russian language around the world puts forward as one of the urgent tasks the analysis of the phonetic features of a non-native (studied) language in comparison with the native language.

The study of these features for the purposes of teaching must be carried out both in terms of articulation and in terms of phonemic. Such a study makes it possible to predict the zone of potential interference and emphasis.

In this paper, an attempt was made to describe the articulatory base of the Arabic language (consonantism) on the basis of radiographic data. At the same time, the previously known fact was confirmed that the articulation zone of the Arabic language during the pronunciation of consonants is wider than in Russian, since it captures the region of the pharynx and larynx.

The data of our X-ray analysis allow us to state that the ratio of dorsal and apical articulations in Russian and Arabic is not the same. This analysis also shows that paired emphatic and non-emphatic consonants are not exactly identical in terms of the place of formation.

Partial use of electroacoustic (oscillographic) analysis reveals the semivoicing of some Arabic consonants and their spirantization.

In general, the Arabic articulation base is characterized by a back way of the language, in contrast to Russian, which is characterized by a high way of the language.

Differences in the articulatory bases of Russian and Arabic usually lead to accent errors of the articulatory type.

From the phonemic point of view, the studied languages ​​differ both in the inventory of phonemes and in the nature of phonemic oppositions, which makes it possible to predict interference in the categories of voicedness-deafness, hardness-softness. At the same time, the phonemic characteristics of positions change significantly: strong positions of one language turn out to be weak for speakers of another (Arabic) language and vice versa.

Auditory and oscillographic analysis of accent errors in the Russian speech of Arabs confirms the a priori predictions. Accent errors affect the sphere of deaf-voiced (at the same time, semi-evonki are also realized in pronunciation) and hard-soft phonemes of the Russian language (at the same time, pharyngealized ones can appear in place of hard ones, and semi-soft ("medium") in combination with middle-lingual /; ) /). As a result of a thorough auditory analysis, a previously unnoticed accent feature was discovered - the presence of a slotted guttural overtone in Russian words ending in a vowel.

The main reason for the accented pronunciation of Russian consonants should be considered the sound interference of two systems (Russian and Arabic), leading to the phenomena of a foreign accent.

The identification of interference and accent is an important theoretical and practical task designed to solve complex methodological issues of teaching pronunciation.

1. Avanesov R.I.

2. Avanesov R»I.

3. Avanesov R.I., Sidorov V.N.

4. V. A. Artemov,

5. Akhvelidiani V.G.

6. Akhunyazov E.M.,

7. Barannikova L.I.

8. Baranov Kh.K.

9. Baranovskaya S.A.

10. Badger R.Yu.

11. Belkin V.M.

12. Belkin V L.

1. Russian literary pronunciation. M., Education, 1968, 287 p.

2. Essay on the grammar of the Russian literary language. M., Uchpedgiz, 1945, 236 p.

3. Experimental phonetics. M., ed. Lit. to foreign yaz., 1956, 278 p.

4. Phonetic treatise of Avicenna. Tbilisi, Mets-niereba, 1966, 85 + 30 p. 0 on the distinction between interference and transference in the context of language contacts. VYA, 1978, No. 5, pp. 72-81.

5. The essence of interference and the specifics of its manifestation. In: Problems of bilingualism and multilingualism, M., "Nauka", 1972, pp. 88-98.

6. Textbook of the Arabic language. M., MIV, 1947, 162 p.

7. Consonantism of the modern Russian language (deafness-voicedness, hardness-softness). Diss. for the competition scientist Art. cand. Phil. Sciences. M., UDN, 1967, 206 p.

8. Language contacts as a methodological problem in teaching a second non-native language. Psychology and methods of teaching foreign languages ​​at the university, part 1. M., MISHIN, 1976, pp. 30-39.

9. Arabic linguistics of recent years. VYa, 1957, No. 6, pp. 97-100.

10. Discussing the problems of the national language in the Araean countries. VYa, 1959, No. 2, e.122-126.14. Bernstein S.B.15. Bernstein S.N.

11. Benveniet E. Levels of linguistic analysis. In: new in linguistics, issue 1U. M., "Progress", 1965, pp. 434-449.

12. To the problem of language confusions. In: Against Vulgarization and Perversion of Marxism in Linguistics, Ch.P. M., Inst. Linguistics of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1952.

13. Issues of teaching pronunciation (in relation to teaching the Russian language to foreigners). In: Issues of phonetics and teaching pronunciation. M., M1U, 1975, p.5-6.

14. Basic concepts of phonology. VYA, 1962, No. 5, pp. 62-80.

15. Language. M., "Progress", 1968, 607 p.

16. Phonetics of the Russian language in the light of experimental data. Kazan, 1930, 357 p.

17. Baudouin de Courtenay I.A. Introduction to linguistics, 5th ed. Pg., 1917, 223 p.

18. Baudouin de Courtenay I.A. On the mixed nature of all languages.

19. Selected works on general linguistics, v.1. M., USSR Academy of Sciences, 1963, pp. 362-372.16. Bernstein S.I.17. Bloomfield G.18. Bogoroditsky V.A.21. Bondarko L.V.

20. Bondarko L.V., Verbitskaya L.A., Zinder L.R.

21. Bondarko L.V., Zinder L.R.24. Bondarko L.V.25. Boni R.A.

22. The sound structure of the modern Russian language. M., Education, 1977, 175 p.

23. Acoustic characteristics of non-impact. In: Structural typology of languages. M., Nauka, 1966.

24. On some differential features of Russian consonant phonemes. VYa, 1966, No. I, pp. 10-14.

25. Oscillographic analysis of speech. Leningrad, Leningrad State University, 1965, 47 p.

26. Sounds and intonation of Russian speech. M., Russian language, 1977, 279 p.

27. Practical phonetics and intonation of the Russian language. Moscow, Moscow State University, 306 p.

29. Language contacts. Kyiv, Vishcha school, 1979, 263 p.

30. Phonology in the process of teaching Russian to speak foreigners. Russian Language Abroad, 1967, No. 3, pp. 43-48.

31. Notes on the monograph by U. Weinreich "Language Contacts". In: Questions of speech production and language learning. M., Moscow State University, 1967, pp. 118-140.

32. The concept of "interference" in the linguistic and psychological literature. In: Foreign languages ​​in higher education, vol. 4. M., Higher School, 1968, pp. 103-109.

33. Consonantism and vocalism of the Russian language (practical phonology). Moscow, Moscow State University, 1971, 82 p.

34. Linguistic aspects of language teaching, vol. I. M., Moscow State University, 1972, 68 e.; issue 2. M., Moscow State University, 1976, 64 p.

35. Sound changes that do not affect the foundations of modern phonetic processes in Russian dialects. In: Physical foundations of modern phonetic processes in Russian dialects M., Nauka, 1978, pp. 67-130.

36. On the issue of Arabic grammatical teachings In: Semitic languages. M., Nauka, Vost. lit., 1963, pp. 37-55.

37. On the question of the structure of the Semitic word (in connection with the problem of inflection). In: Semitic languages, issue 2, part 1. M., Nauka, Vost. lit. 1965, pp. 114-126.

38. To the problem of mixing languages. New at 39. Gak V.G.40. Genko A.J.41. Girgas V.42. Gleason G.43. Gornung B.V.44. Grande B.M.45. Grande B.M.46. Derkach M.F.

39. Desheriev Yu.D., Protchenko I.F., 48. Dubovtsev V.I.49. Zhinkin N.I.50. Zhluktenko Yu.A.51. Zvegintsev V.A.52. Zinder L, R. linguistics, issue 6. M., 1972, p.94^111.

40. Interlingual comparison and foreign language teaching. IYASH, 1979, No. 3, pp. 3-10.

41. To the question of linguistic confusion. Japhetic collection, No. 2. Pg., USSR Academy of Sciences, 1923, pp. 120-136.

42. Essay on the grammatical system of the Arabs. SPb., 1873, 148 p.

43. Introduction to descriptive linguistics. M., ed. Foreign lit., 1959, 486 p.

44. On the question of the types and forms of interaction between languages. In the book: Reports and messages of the Institute of Linguistics of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, No. 2. M., 1952, pp. 3-16.

45. Introduction to the Comparative Study of the Semitic Languages. M., Nauka, Vost. lit., 1972, 442 p.

46. ​​The course of Arabic grammar in comparative historical coverage. Moscow, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1963, 344 p.

47. On the issue of phonation as a distinctive feature underlying the differential perception of voiced and voiceless consonants. Problems of physiological acoustics. L., 1959, p.I87-I9I.

48. Main aspects of the study of bilingualism and multilingualism. In: Problems of bilingualism and multilingualism. M., Nauka, 1972, pp. 26-42.

49. To the question of predictive modeling of various types of interference. "Methods of teaching foreign languages", issue 4. Minsk, 1974, pp. 166-207.

50. Mechanisms of speech. M., APN, 1958, 370 p.

51. Linguistic aspects of bilingualism. Kyiv, Ed. Kyiv University, 1974, 176 p.

52. History of Arabic linguistics (brief essay). Moscow, Moscow State University, 1958, 80 p.

53. Kovaley A.A., Sharbatov G.Sh.64. Kuznetsova A.M.65. Kuznetsova A.M.

54. General phonetics. L., Higher School, I960, 312 p.

55. Phonetic units of Russian speech. (Experimental studies). Abstract doc. diss. Moscow, Moscow State University, 1970, 29 p.

56. Phonetic realization of consonant oppositions in Russian. M., UDN, 1974, 115 p.

57. On the psychological foundations of teaching the Russian language in the national school. Baku, 1962, 25 p.

58. Syntagmatics and paradigmatics of Russian phonemes. Ryanp, 1972, No. 4, pp. 6-17.

59. Language contacts. M., Nauka, 1970, 205 p.

60. Introductory course of the modern Arabic literary language. M., Voen. in-t foreign yaz., 1952, 278 p.

61. Significance of the theory of language contacts for diachronic phonology. In: Main Problems of Language Evolution. Samarkand, "Fan", 1956, pp. 274-277.

62. On the question of constructing the theory of language contacts. Foreign languages, issue Z. Kazakh un-t. Alma-Ata, 1967, p.5-15.

63. The specifics of natural and artificial bilingualism and the theory of teaching foreign languages. In the book: Foreign Linguistics and Literature, issue 2. Alma-Ata, Kazakhstan University, 1972, p.26-33,

64. Textbooks of the Shcharab language. M., Nauka, 1969, 687 p.

65. Vowel changes under the influence of neighboring soft consonants. M., Nauka, 1965, 80 e.

66. Some issues of phonetic characteristics of hardness-softness of consonants in Russian dialects. In: Experimental phonetic study of Russian dialects. M., Nauka, 1969, pp. 35-137.

67. Kuznetsov P.S. On the basic principles of phonology. VYA, 1959.1. Jfe 2, pp. 28-35.

68. Lebedeva V.G., Introductory course of modern Arabic literature-Yusupov ^? M ^ A "nogo m" "V ™" 19?2, 480

69. Lomtev T.P. General and Russian Linguistics (Selected Works).

70. Section of phonology. M., Nauka, 1976, pp. 74-121.

71. Loya Ya.V. History of linguistic doctrines. M., Higher school, 1968, 259 p.

72. Lyubimova H.A. Acoustic characteristics of Russian sonants (group and individual). Abstract cand. diss. L., Leningrad State University, 1966, 17 p.

73. Lyubimova H.A. Teaching Russian pronunciation. M., Russian language, 1977, 190 p.

74. Lyubimova H.A. Spectral characteristics of Russian sonants. - "Bulletin of the Leningrad University", 1965, No. 2, pp. 159-167.

75. Martine A. Fundamentals of General Linguistics. New in linguistics, vol.Z. M., Progress, 1963, pp. 366-566.

76. Martinet A. Spread of language and structural linguistics. New in linguistics, issue 6. M., 1972, pp. 81-93.

77. Masluh Saad Acoustic characteristics of the Arabic Konsonan-Abd-el-Aziz Tism and vocalism and the norm of poetic rhyme.

78. Cand. diss. Moscow, Moscow State University, 1975, 146 p.

79. Matusevich M.I. Introduction to general phonetics. M., Education, 1959, 135 p.

80. Matusevich M.I. Modern Russian language. Phonetics. M., Education, 1976, 288 p.

81. Matusevich M.I., Album of articulations of the sounds of the Russian language. M., Lyubimova H.A. udn) Ig63> 37

82. Interdependence of the structure of tiers in the languages ​​of the Semitic system. Semitic languages, issue 2, part 2. M., 1965, e.783-816.

83. Systematic analysis of the reasons for the originality of Semitic consonantism. M., MGOI im. V.I. Lenina, 1967, 32 p.

84. The history of the rules for the compatibility of consonants in the Russian language. Abstract cand. diss. Moscow, Moscow State University, 1966, 19 p.

85. Russian phonetics. M., Education, 1967, 438 p.

86. Some issues related to the category of deafness-voicedness of consonants in dialects of the Russian language. In: Experimental phonetic study of Russian dialects. M., Nauka, 1969, pp. 138-215.

87. Phonetic convergences. VYA, 1957, No. 3, pp. 77-83.

88. Principles of studying phonetic interference when contacting languages ​​of different systems. Kand * diss, Alma-Ata, 1968, 547 p.

89. Introduction to linguistics. M., Enlightenment, 1967,543s.

90. Dichotomous classification of differential features and phonemic model of the language. In: Questions of the theory of language in modern foreign linguistics. M., Academy of Sciences of the USSR, I960, pp. 106-122.

91. Reformed A.A. 0 some difficulties in learning pronunciation. In: Russian language for foreign students. M., Higher School, 1961, p.5-12.

92. Reformed A.A. Teaching pronunciation and phonology. "Philological Sciences", 1959, th 2, pp. 145-157.

93. Reformed A.A. About the comparative method. RYANSH, 1962.5, pp. 23-33.

94. Reformed A.A. Consonants opposed by the method and place of formation and their variation in modern Russian. Reports and communications of the Institute of Linguistics of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, U1N. M., 1955, p.3-23.

95. Reformed A.A. Phonological studies. M., 1975, 133 p.

96. Reformed A.A. Phonology in the service of teaching the pronunciation of a non-native language. RYANSH, 1961, No. 6, pp. 67-71.

97. Rodova L.N. On interference in learning a second language. In: Linguistics and methodology in higher education, issue 1U. M., USSR Ministry of Higher Education, 1967, pp. 203-226.

98. Rosenzveig V.Yu. Linguistic approach to the description of cultural contacts. M., Nauka, 1964, 8s.

99. Rosenzweig V.Yu. Basic questions of the theory of language contacts. - New in linguistics, issue 6. M., 1972, p.5-22.

100. Rozentsveig V.Yu., 0 language contacts. VYA, 1963, No. I, pp. 57-66.

101. Rosenzweig V.Yu. Problems of language interference. Dr. diss.1. M., 1975, 479 p.

102. Rosenzweig V.Yu. Language contacts. L., Nauka, 1972, 80 p.

103. Salistra I.D. Essays on methods of teaching a foreign language.

104. M., Higher school, 1966, 252 p.

105. Segal B.C. Some questions of sound composition and orthography106. Serebrennikov B.A., 107. Skalozub L.G.108. Sovsun G.V.109. de Saussure F. PO. Starinin V.P.111. Trubetskoy N.S.112. Haugen E.113. Chernykh P.Ya.114. Chistovich L.A. and others.

106. Chistovich L.A., Bondarko L.V.116. Sharbatov G.Sh.117. Shcherba L.V.118. Shcherba L.V. Epics of the Modern Arabic Literary Language. Cand. diss. M., MSHMO, 1964, 262 p.

107. Is any comparison useful? RYANSH, 1957, Sh 2, pp. 10-15.

108. Palatograms and roentgenograms of consonant phonemes of the Russian literary language. Kyiv, Ed. Kyiv University, 1963, 144 p.

109. Comparative systems of Russian and Arabic phonemes for teaching Arabs Russian pronunciation. In: Theoretical Phonetics and Teaching Pronunciation. M., UDN, 1975, pp. 198-210.

110. Course of general linguistics. Works on linguistics. M., Progress, 1977, pp. 39-269.

111. The structure of the Semitic word. M., Eastern literature, 1963, 115 p.

112. Fundamentals of phonology, M., Foreign Literature, i960, 372 p.

113. Language contacts. New in linguistics, issue 6. M., 1972, pp. 61-80.

114. To the question of "mixing*1 and "purity" of languages. Uchen. zap. Mosk. region. ped. in-ta, 1955, v.32, issue 2, p.Z-P.

115. Speech. Articulation and perception. M.-L., Nauka, 1965, 241 p.

116. On the management of articulatory organs in the process of speech. In: Studies in Structural Typology. M., Institute of Slavic Studies of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1963, pp. 169-182.

117. Modern Arabic. M., Vost. lit., 1961, 112 p.

118. On the concept of mixing languages. In the book: Shcherba L.V. Selected works on linguistics and phonetics. L., Leningrad State University, 1958, pp. 40-53.

119. Next problems of linguistics. Elected119. Shcherba L.V.120. Shcherba L.V.121. Shcherba L.V.122. Shevoroshkin V.V., 123. Shirokova A.V.124. Shuhardt G.125. K) cina L.P.126. Yuimanov N.V.127. Jacobson R., Halle M.

120. Jacobson R., Fant G.M., Halle M.129. Yartseva V.N. works on linguistics and phonetics, v.1. L., Leningrad State University, 1958, p.5-24.

121. The concept of bilingualism. In: Teaching foreign languages ​​in secondary school. M., APN, 1947, pp. 54-59.

122. Teaching foreign languages ​​in secondary school. General questions of methodology. M.-L., ANP, 1947, 96 p.

123. Phonetics of the French language. M., ed. lit. to foreign yaz., 1957, 312 p.

124. Sound chains in the languages ​​of the world. M., Nauka, 1962, 188 p.

125. Lectures on comparative grammar of the Russian language. M., UDN, 1977, 32 p.

126. To the question of linguistic confusion. Selected articles on linguistics. M., ed. foreign lit., 1950, pp.174-184.0 the role of the native language in teaching Russian to foreigners. In: From the experience of teaching the Russian language to foreigners. M., Moscow State University, 1X4, p.6-20.

127. Grammar of the literary Arabic language. L., 1928, 144 p.

128. Phonology and its relation to phonetics. New in Linguistics, vol. II. M., 1962, pp. 231-278.

129. Introduction to speech analysis. New in Linguistics, vol. II. M., 1962, pp. 173-230.

130. The problem of communication between language and society in modern foreign linguistics. In: Language and Society. M., Nauka, 1968, pp. 39-54.

131. Cantineau J. Cours de phonetique arabe. Dans Etnde Unguistique arabe par J. Cantineau. Paris , Klinsieck I960 . 167 p. .

132. Ferguson Ch.A. Foreword in Contridution to Arabie linguistics.

133. Carabride, Mass. 1966 161 p.

134. Ferguson Ch.A" The.Egyptien Emphatic in Arabie. Language,vol. rr.3, 1965. pp.451-452.

135. Ferguson Ch.A. Two problems in Arabic phonology. word. 13.1957. pp.460-478.

136. Gairdner W.H. The phonetics of arabic. London, Oxford,

137. University Press, 192? . 107p.

138 Harrell E.S. A Linguistic analysis of Egyptian Radio Arabic.

139. The Phonology of Egyption Colloguial Arabic", ed., CH. Ferguson, Cambridge, Harverd University I Press, I960. I6p.

140. Koneczna, H. Obrazy rentgenograficzne rasyskich. Warszawa, 1. Zawadowski W Tncc1. X956. I60 p.

141. Yildomes V. Multilingualism. Leyden, By Veroboj Yildomes,1. Sytholf. 1963 357 p.3y»GJW J* *^U>JI ; a^o-.1 *I38

142. Tîôl^ïrYl Â-^aJIv-ÏJlH ^ IJ ♦ T i: r/ : Y/E»j.tnM/c

143. UtçjiJI^I U-Jt ^¿k""- u-I^VI"L®^,1. TTi ♦ IUU1/J»*rr îyblîjl1. AWe J-IiJI zr*r/Js* ll^JI ÎAj.ïll jlj é ¿uJJIi.lyeVl ^YYA a Ml)^ uji j i ^ i f ui i i^jj i ^1. J^f OK1 ♦ 139x" .1401411421431. O^M J15" 4 .144

144. Ijc.l^.UljbüJI ^ ¿LI, j ^-J! .162

145. S I; I J 6 UJI 4 J I jrJ>J J-C ♦ ^I"I^K O>jUJI) o-r-JI1. CONTENTS1.

146. Oscillograms of accent pronunciation.3

147. Schemes of radiographs of Arabic consonants.13

148. Some radiographs of Arabic consonants.47

149. Experimental texts.63

150. Dictionary of accent errors.80

151. Voiced /b/ in place of Russian /p/ in the word "livestock".h

152. Deaf /f"/ in place of Russian /v"/ in the word "sheep"

153. On the oscillogram of the word "in Evpatoria" it is noted: 1. deaf /f/ in place of Russian /v/2. voiced /v/ in place of Russian /f/3. affricated /t /zet t / 1.S

154. On the oscillogram of the word form "newspapers" (r.p.), the pronunciation of the voiceless affricated /k /in place of Russian /r/ is noticeable.

155. On the oscillogram, the words "contribution" are noticeable: 1. pronunciation of voiced /v/ in place of Russian /f/2. epenthetic vowel /ъ/ between two consonants3. voiceless at the end

156. On the oscillogram, the words "factor" are noticeable in place of Russian /f/ and affricated /t ¡

157. On the oscillogram of the word "about this", the pronunciation of the labial-labial voiced with an incomplete bow, turning into a gap * *

158. Ni|ii||||||||||1i1||||||ii||||||||1shi|ii||d11Sh111a|ini|i1Sh1Shii1Shi1|Shii11iii|||1i|1i111iSh1

159. On the oscillogram, the word forms "in deep" ("f'deep") look like: 1. deaf /f/ in place of Russian /v/2. epenthetic vowel /ъ/ between two consonants

160. On the oscillogram, the words "in this" are noticeable: 1. semivoiced labiodental in place of the Russian voiced /v/2. voiced affricated /t / in place of Russian voiceless /t/

161. On the oscillogram of tin "January" there is noticeable avdental extinction of the voiced labial-tooth11! 11 Sh 111 p, d