Modern problems of science and education. Examples of vernacular in Russian

a variety of the Russian national language, the speaker of which is the uneducated and semi-educated urban population. This is the most unique subsystem of the Russian language, which has no direct analogues in other national languages. Vernacular speech differs from territorial dialects in that it is not localized within a particular geographical framework, and from the literary language (including colloquial speech, which is its variety) in its non-codification, anomorativity, and the mixed nature of the linguistic means used.

Vernacular speech is realized in the oral form of speech; at the same time, naturally, it can be reflected in fiction and in the private correspondence of people who speak the vernacular. The most typical places for the implementation of vernacular: family (communication within the family and with relatives), “gatherings” in the courtyard of communal houses, court (witness testimony, reception with a judge), doctor’s office (patient’s story about an illness) and a few others. In general, the scope of functioning of vernacular is very narrow and limited to everyday and family communicative situations.

In modern vernacular, two temporary layers are distinguished: a layer of old, traditional means that clearly reveal their dialectal origin, and a layer of relatively new means that came into common parlance mainly from social jargons. In accordance with this, they distinguish between vernacular-1 and vernacular-2.

The speakers of vernacular-1 are elderly city dwellers with a low educational and cultural level; Among the speakers of vernacular-2, representatives of the middle and younger generations predominate, also without sufficient education and characterized by a relatively low cultural level. The age differentiation of vernacular speakers is complemented by differences by gender: those who speak vernacular-1 are predominantly older women, and among those who use vernacular-2, a significant (if not predominant) part are men. Linguistically, the differences between these two layers of vernacular appear at all levels, from phonetics to syntax.

In the field of phonetics, the specificity of vernacular-1 lies not in the set of phonemes it is basically the same as in the literary language, but in their speech implementation and especially in their compatibility with each other. In particular, the following phenomena attract attention:

eliminating the so-called gap by inserting between two adjacent vowels [j] or [ V ]: [ p"ijan" ina ] piano , [ kakava ] cocoa , [ glad"willow ] radio and under.;

contraction of vowels (this phenomenon is also characteristic of the colloquial variety of the literary language, but in common speech-1 it is represented much more widely and consistently): [pr "ibr"ila ] acquired , [ n"ukavo ] no one has , [ by law ] outside the window , [ aradrome ] aerodrome and under.;

assimilation of vowels of neighboring syllables: [karas"in ] kerosene , [ p"ir" to them" Ida ] pyramid , [ v"il"idol ] validol and under.;

simplification of consonant groups by inserting a vowel: [zhyz"in" ] life , [ rub "ate" ] ruble , [ smarod"ina ] currant and under.;

simplification of the syllabic structure of words, especially foreign words: [in"it"inar ] vet , [ mobile phone ] record player , [ m "in" istratar ] administrator and under.;

cutting off part of consonantal combinations at the end of a word: [heart attack ] heart attack , [ sp"ictak ] play , [ nipachtam"e ] at the post office and under.;

dissimilation of consonants by place and method of formation: [kal"idor ] corridor , [ s"kl"itar" ] secretary , [ tranways ] tram , [ kanb "ikorm ] compound feed and under.;

assimilation of consonants by place and method of formation, mainly in the endings of verb forms of 2 l. units h., accompanied by intersyllabic assimilation of vowels: [bais" and ] you're afraid , [ Voz "is" and ] fiddling around , [ cat "is" and ] you're rolling and under.;

preservation of some types of assimilative softening of consonants, which are non-normative for the modern literary language:co [ n"f" ] eta , co [ n"v" ] ert , O [ T" V" ] fuck , la [ PC" ] And , ka [ R" T" ] ina and under.

In the field of morphology and word formation, vernacular-1 is distinguished by the following features:

for the morphemic and morphonological structure of a word when it changes according to cases or persons, an analogical alignment of stems is extremely characteristic:mouth to mouth (in the company ), mouth ; I want we want , do you want , want or: we want , want to , want do you want , wants ; bake bake , bake , bake ; ride ride , you drive , we go , ride ; demand demand , you demand , demands and so on.;

the meaning of the category of gender of some nouns is different from that in the literary language:thick jam , fresh meat , sour apples , this towel or another type of declension:church , sheet , thinking , illness and so on;

wider, in comparison with the literary language, distribution of local case forms in -at for masculine nouns with a base on a solid consonant:on gas , in the warehouse , on the beach and under . , forms of the genitive partitive (little rain , no bread ), nominative plural forms in - /I : cake , chauffeur , engineer And under . , including from a number of feminine nouns:area , queue , mother , tablecloth , terrain and etc . ;

mixing of genitive and dative forms in feminine nouns:at sister to sister , from mom to mom and under . ;

inflection - ov (- ev ) in the genitive plural of neuter and masculine nouns:the thing is , place in , from neighbors , five rubles and under.;

Declension of indeclinable foreign nouns:without coat , ride the meter , were coming from the cinema , two bottles of sitr and under.;

tendency towards “transparency” of the word-formation structure of a word:return , ob-fence , about-fool and under. (cf. literarywrap , fence off , to fool );

a different, in comparison with the literary language, word-formation structure of the word in its final (suffix + inflection) part:feeling (fell unconscious ), inheritance (They say , this disease is inherited ), teacher , misbehave and under. (by analogy with related words, cf.sympathy , consequence ).

In the field of vocabulary and lexical semantics, it is characteristic that there is a fairly significant number of words, mainly to denote everyday realities and actions that are absent in the literary language, typebe angry , let him go , turn (= queue ), exactly (= exactly ), awesome , the other day , shitvo , grub , just now and so on, many of which are historically dialectic. On the other hand, in vernacular-1 there are no many categories of abstract vocabulary describing abstract concepts and relationships.

In addition to this rather obvious, external originality, vernacular-1 is distinguished by a number of specific features in the use of vocabulary. For example:

use of a word in a meaning not characteristic of the literary language:walk meaning "to have intimate relations":She walked with him for two months ; respect in the meaning of “to love” (about food):I don't respect cucumbers ; hang up meaning "to weigh";admit meaning "to find out":And I didn’t recognize you , I thought , who is a stranger ; color meaning "flower";spacing meaning "tray";furnish "get furniture";freaky in function of the abusive epithet “crazy, eccentric”:That's crazy ! Where did you run off to? ? and so on.;

blurring of the categorical meaning of the word:atom (They endlessly rush around with this atom may refer to research in the field of atomic energy, and testing of atomic weapons, and the threat of atomic war, etc.),space (No winter , there is no good summer now and everything is space ! this means space research, satellite launches, etc.).

In common parlance-1 there is a specific type of transfer of a name from an abstract concept to a person. For example, the termdiabetes In addition to its main meaning, it is also used to name a person suffering from diabetes:It's all diabetes that's coming out of line (replica at the door of the treatment room).X-ray colloquially means not only “X-ray machine” (They x-rayed my chest ) and "fluoroscopy" (Have you already had an x-ray? ?), but also “radiologist”:She works as an x-ray ; Daughter, who is this no x-ray went ?

Terms that in literary use denote only sets or aggregates and do not have the meaning “one element of a set, aggregate” can be subject to metonymic transfer in common parlance. Wed:She married a contingent (in the speech of a nurse) a phrase that is understandable only when describing the corresponding situation: the totality of patients served by a special clinic is called in “administrative and medical” languagecontingent , compare: This patient belongs to the group of people , served by our clinic. Naturally, having acquired the meaning “one of many persons,” the wordcontingent fell into the category of animate nouns (married contingent ). Wed. in the speech of Zoshchenko’s character:And who is this , Not presidium came to the podium ?

Researchers note another feature characteristic of colloquial word usage, the semantic inferiority of the word: the absence of many meanings inherent in this word in the literary language. Yes, wordmotive , while maintaining the meaning of “melody”, is not used in the sense of “reason, reason for something” (incentives ); the consignment does not have the meaning “one game (chess, etc.)”, “a certain amount of goods”; at the worddiscipline there is no meaning “academic subject”, etc. A special case of semantic shifts in a word is its specific use due to the tendency towards euphemization of speech, which is extremely characteristic of vernacular-1: cf.rest meaning "to sleep"eat meaning "there is"spouse in relation to the speaker’s wife, etc., as well as the older, but recurrent use of the pronoun in modern vernacularThey and the corresponding plural verbal forms in relation to one person, which the speaker perceives as a representative of a different, higher social status:Where is the doctor ? They left for lunch ; I'm for them I'm standing , who is wearing a hat.

In the area of syntax, vernacular-1 is characterized by the following features:

use of the full form of passive participles with a perfect meaning and full adjectives in the nominal part of the predicate:Lunch is already prepared ; The floor has been washed : The door was closed ; I agree ; Why is she sick? ?

use of gerunds in the same function -lice And - moss (the last specifically colloquial form):I haven't washed(i.e. did not wash) second week ; All the flowers fell down (i.e. fell down, were knocked down);He was drunk and so on.;

use of construction withnobody (with a pronoun there can also be a noun, but not necessarily), in which the predicate has a plural form, a kind of agreement in meaning:No guests arrived ; And no one from her workshop was there ?

the use of the instrumental case of some nouns to indicate cause:starved to death (= from hunger), blinded by cataracts (= from cataracts);

specific control for words that coincide (formally and in meaning) with literary ones:don't need anyone (cf. normativedon't need anyone ); What hurts you ? (instead of: at your place ); To me(or to me ) this doesn't concern (instead of: me ); She wants to be a doctor (instead of: doctor) and so on.;

use of prepositionWith instead of from : came from the store , returned from vacation , shoot with machine guns and so on.

Vernacular-2 is a subsystem that is less vibrant and less defined by the set of linguistic features typical for it. This is largely explained by the fact that vernacular-2 as a unique type of urban speech is relatively young. Moreover, it occupies an intermediate position not so much between the literary language and territorial dialects (this is typical for vernacular-1), but between social and professional jargons, on the one hand, and the literary language on the other.

Occupying this position, vernacular-2 plays the role of a conductor through which various foreign system elements enter literary speech - professional, slang, argot. Such mediation is quite understandable for both linguistic and social reasons. Socially, the population of vernacular-2 speakers is extremely heterogeneous and fluid over time: here are people from rural areas who came to the city to study and work and settled in the city; and natives of cities located in a close dialect environment; and residents of large cities who do not have a secondary education and are engaged in manual labor; There are many speakers of vernacular-2 among representatives of such dissimilar professions as sellers, loaders, tailors, hairdressers, waiters, railway conductors, shoemakers, cleaners, etc.

Since, as mentioned above, vernacular speech as a whole is ananormative and, therefore, there is no filter in it, similar to the literary norm, which would selectively allow into colloquial use means belonging to other linguistic subsystems, to the extent that linguistic features inherent in natives of certain places, representatives certain professions or socially specific environments may become common parlance.

Indeed, many linguistic elements that previously belonged to socially or professionally limited word usage are borrowed by the literary language not directly from group or professional jargon, but through vernacular-2. These are, for example, words of slang origin that are actively used in modern speech.chaos "actions that go far beyond what is acceptable"arise "express your opinion when no one asks for it"scumbag "a person who does not take into account either the law or any norms of human relations"have fun "to get pleasure from something"jerk “stupid, stupid person” (in criminal jargon “a prisoner who has an easier job than others”),puncture "mistake, failure" (All ) by "correctly, as it should"disassembly "showdown, usually with the use of force and even weapons,"thing “a thousand monetary units”, etc.

In the field of phonetics and morphology, vernacular-2 is less specific than vernacular-1: phonetic and morphological features are sporadic, random in nature and are often localized in individual words and word forms. Thus, if vernacular-1 is characterized by a certain consistency in the implementation of the above phonetic and morpho-phonetic phenomena (assimilation and dissimilation of sounds within a word, simplification of its syllabic structure, metathesis, etc.), then in vernacular-2 these phenomena are presented inconsistently , with lexical restrictions, and some are completely absent. This is due to the general tendency, characteristic of vernacular-2 as a younger variety of urban speech, to reduce the contrast of means of expression (compared to the literary language), to bring them closer, at least in a formal sense, to the means of expression inherent in socially prestigious forms of national language colloquial speech and a codified variety of literary speech.

For example, the dissimilation of consonants by place and method of formation is represented in common parlance by facts liketranway ; in words likedirector , corridor , where the dissimilarity of consonants is more pronounced, more noticeable, it does not occur. Metathetic forms like [sachet] instead of [ shase ] / [ shose ] are also not typical for vernacular-2. Elimination of gaping (type [kakava] or [ p"ijan"ina ]), the most striking feature of vernacular-1, is almost never found in vernacular-2. Differences from the literary language in the meaning of the category of gender of some nouns are observed, but in a much smaller range of words and in less “conspicuous” cases: for example,tulle , roofing felt , shampoo are declined as feminine nouns, andcorn , on the contrary, as a masculine noun (stood in line for tulle , covered the roof with felt , washed my hair with new shampoo , I'm tormented with this callus ). However, neuter wordsvillage , movie , meat and under. are not used as feminine nouns (which is typical of vernacular-1).

Declined forms of foreign nouns likemetro are formed very selectively: they appear mainly in those parts of the speech chain where an ambiguous understanding of the indeclinable form by the listener is possible (rode by meter , But left the subway , but not from a meter ).

Vernacular-2 is characterized by the use of diminutives (i.e. words with diminutive suffixes) such ascucumber , number , documents as an expression of a peculiarly understood politeness. Among such diminutives there are forms formed according to a specific model that is not widespread in the literary language (cf.meaty in colloquial and literarycaruncle ).

In vernacular-2, some phraseological units are used, which serve as a kind of “litmus tests” indicating the speaker’s colloquialism (some of them gradually seep into colloquial speech, partly losing their colloquial character). This is, for example, the expression Wow!, used as an exclamation that conveys surprise ( We have had no water for two weeks now. Wow!), comparative turnover like this (this,these), with an empty semantic valency of the pronoun: Come forward!became,like this(in a trolleybus); I tell him:go out for a walk. No,sits all day,like this; rpm doesn't matter (It doesn't matter to me),impudently meaning "impudently" ( They got in on the impudence about uninvited guests); something like that :And she's like that to me,what am I,they say,and have never been there; and some others.

Among the forms of speech etiquette inherent in vernacular-2, various types of personal addresses are distinguished, the functions of which are based on kinship terms and the names of certain social roles:dad , mother , father , mother , grandfather , grandpa , granny , Friend , boy , man , boss , boss , master , commander , recentlywoman , lady , man. These forms of address are distributed according to the gender and age of the speakers; some of them have restrictions in use due to the profession of both the speaker and the addressee. Yes, appealsdad , mother , mother , father , grandfather , Friend , boy , man , boss , boss the speech of young and middle-aged men is more typical; appealsgrandpa , granny , and woman , lady , man more typical for the speech of young women; appealsmaster , mistress appear in the speech of men (young and middle-aged) in a situation of serving someone they are addressing, for example, in the speech of plumbers, mechanics, loaders, floor polishers, etc.

Since vernacular (in both its varieties) serves narrow everyday spheres of communication, it is obvious that it is most clearly realized in speech acts that have the illocutionary function of censure, accusation, request, assurance, suggestion, etc. (cf. such speech acts as quarrel, squabble, bad faith, name-calling, “scolding” of the younger by the elder, etc.). However, in other types of communication, speakers of vernacular usually use this particular variety of the Russian language, since their speech behavior is characterized by “monolingualism” inability to switch to other, non-vernacular means and methods of communication.

LITERATURE

Barannikova L.I. Vernacular as a special social component of language . In the book: Language and Society, vol. 3. Saratov, 1974
Urban vernacular. Study problems . Rep. ed. E.A.Zemskaya and D.N.Shmelev. M., 1984
Varieties of urban oral speech . Rep. ed. D.N. Shmelev and E.A. Zemskaya. M., 1988
Krysin L.P. Vernacular . In the book: L.P. Krysin. Sociolinguistic aspects of studying the modern Russian language. M., 1989
Live speech of the Ural city . Texts. Rep. ed. T.V.Matveeva. Ekaterinburg, 1995
Köster-Thoma Z. Russian vernacular as an object of lexicography . Russian Studies, 1996, No. 12

Izhevsk 2010

Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation

State educational institution, higher professional education "Izhevsk State Technical University"

Faculty of IVT

Department of Automated Information Processing Systems and Management

Essay

on the topic "»

in the discipline "Russian language and culture of speech"

1. The concept of vernacular

2. Vernacular as a form of the Russian language

3. Vernacular-1

4. Vernacular-2

INTRODUCTION

Vernacular speech is a specific phenomenon of the Russian language, widespread throughout it. But, nevertheless, there is no strict definition of this phenomenon at the moment. Recently, its elements have found their way into the speech of various strata of society. There is a need to more clearly formulate the idea of vernacular. A full perception of it can be achieved by considering it not as an anormative fact or a violation of general norms, but from the point of view of a structural-functional approach. In this work, an attempt was made to give an objective description of vernacular speech, to identify what its role is in Russian speech.

1. The concept of vernacular

What is vernacular? According to most researchers, colloquial speech is usually called oral speech, which is characteristic of the poorly educated urban population. This phenomenon is quite specific in our language. It is difficult to find anything similar to Russian vernacular in any other national language. It is not limited to a specific area, which characterizes the difference between vernacular and territorial dialects. The difference with the literary language basically lies in the vague nature of the linguistic means used, non-codification, and non-compliance with normativity.

The field of implementation of vernacular speech is oral speech. In fiction it is reflected in the form of private correspondence between speakers of vernacular. In general, use is limited to domestic and family situations. [cm. Lukyanova N. A. “Problems of semantics”]

2 . Vernacular as a form of the Russian language

Today, vernacular speech is considered to be specific Russian speech, which is used by the poorly educated public masses. This definition is too brief and does not sufficiently deeply characterize people who are speakers of vernacular. A more complete description of the term “vernacular” can be given by more accurately defining the categories of the population that use this form of oral speech.

In sociology, at the end of the twentieth century, the term “common man” was used to characterize the public masses with a low level of education and engaged in low-skilled, low-professional labor. Such people, first of all, are carriers of vernacular and actively use it in their everyday speech. Most of the professions of this population group are: driver, laborer, trader, builder, low-level manager, etc. Police officers and other law enforcement agencies are also mostly native speakers of this form of the language. In the army, the vernacular is widespread, and the number of speakers varies inversely with the honor of the rank. As a note, it is worth noting that in everyday communication in the army, the so-called soldier’s argot is used, which is nothing more than colloquialism using a small amount of vocabulary of an argotic nature. [See. Voilova I.K. “Living forms of language as a style-forming factor in a literary text”]

The phonetic system of vernacular, as such, for the most part coincides with the phonetic system of the literary language. The differences will lie in accentuation norms (beetroot, agreement, etc.). There is no point in looking for inconsistencies; otherwise, the system of phonemes in both cases will be the same. But if we consider the intonation and acoustic characteristics of vernacular, the matter takes a different turn, and the phonetic uniqueness of this form of language is manifested in them. Often, these features are used by various theatrical figures when depicting a standard “common man.”

Today, many researchers divide vernacular speech into two temporary subtypes - one that uses standard, traditional means, the origin of which is associated with dialects, and the second, which uses new means, the source of which is social jargon. These subspecies are referred to respectively as vernacular-1 and vernacular-2.[See. L.I. Skvortsov “Literary norm and vernacular”]

3 . Vernacular-1

As many researchers believe, for example L.I. Skvortsov, for vernacular-1 speakers are characterized by: belonging to the urban population, old age, lack of education, low cultural level. The speakers of vernacular-2 are the younger generation and middle-aged people, with a low level of education and the same cultural level. Speakers of vernacular are also divided by gender: vernacular-1 is typical mostly for older women, and vernacular-2 is used mainly by men. The differences between these subspecies can be traced throughout. [See. L.I. Skvortsov “Literary norm and vernacular”]

The set of phonemes for vernacular-1 is generally the same as in the literary language. But the way they are implemented in speech and combined with each other creates a certain phonetic specificity for this phenomenon. Consider the following examples:

Inappropriate softening of consonants: ko[n`f`]eta instead of ko[nf`]eta, ko[n`v`]ert instead of ko[nv`]ert, o[t`v`]etit instead of o[tv`] etit, la[p`k`]i instead of la[pk`]i.

Omission of vowels: [zaknom] outside the window, [aradrom] airfield, [pr`ibr`ila] acquired, [n`ukavo] from no one.

Sounds [j] or [v] between vowels: [rad`iva] - radio, [p`ijan`ina] - piano, [kakava] - cocoa.

Insertion of a vowel: [ruble"] ruble, [zhyz'in'] life, [smarod'ina] currant.

Simplification of the structure of words, often in foreign languages: [m`in`istratar] administrator, [v`it`inar] veterinarian, [matafon] tape recorder.

Non-pronunciation of consonants at the end of a word: [n'pachtam'e] at the post office, [infark] heart attack, [sp'iktak] performance.

Use of vowels of adjacent syllables: [v`il`idol] validol, [karas`in] kerosene, [p`ir`im`ida] pyramid.

Dissimilation of consonants: [s"kl"itar"] secretary, [k'nb"ikorm] compound feed, [tranways] tram, [k'l"idor] corridor.

Assimilation of consonants: [kot"is"and] you're rolling, [bais"and] you're afraid, [you're"is"and] you're fiddling around.

Let's move on to morphology. Vernacular-1 has the following set of characteristic features:

When a word is changed by cases or persons, an alignment of words occurs: I want - I want, I want, I want; demand - demand, demand, demand; want, want - want, wants; bake - bake, bake, bake; mouth - into the company, mouth; ride - ride, ride, ride, ride, etc.

Inconsistency of gender in predicates or incorrect declension: this towel, sour apple, fresh meat, thick jam or illness, thought, church, sheet, etc.

The use of the locative form with “-u” for masculine nouns with a stem ending in a consonant: on the gas, on the beach, in the warehouse, etc.

The use of nominative plural forms with “-ы/я”: cakes, drivers, engineers, including from a number of feminine nouns: square, queue, mother, tablecloth, locality, etc.

Use instead of the genitive dative case and vice versa in feminine nouns: from mother - to mother, from sister - to sister, etc.

Inflection of “-ov, -ev” in nouns in the genitive plural of the neuter and masculine gender: places, delov, five rubles, from neighbors, etc.

Declension of indeclinable nouns: ride on the meter, walked from the kin, without a coat, etc.

Non-literary word-formation structure at the end of a word (suffix + inflection): hooligan, teacher, inheritance (this disease is inherited), feeling (without feelings), etc.

A lexical feature is the presence of a significant number of words, mostly intended for everyday situations, and which are not literary words: shitvo, angry, let, shibko, nanedni, grub, turn, akurat, davecha, etc. Many of them are dialectic in origin .

Using a word with a meaning different from the meaning in the literary language:

Respect in the meaning of “to love”: “I don’t respect cucumbers.”

Recognize in the meaning of “recognize”: “But I didn’t recognize you, I thought you were a stranger.”

Plague in the sense of crazy, unbalanced: “Here is the plague! Where did you run off to?"

Furnish - “to acquire furniture.”

Walk in the meaning of “have a close relationship”: “She walked with him for six months.”

In common parlance-1 there is a specificity of transferring the name of something from a general concept to a specific object. For example, calling a person with diabetes the word “diabetes”: “It’s all diabetes that comes out of the blue.” Similarly, x-ray does not mean a device, but fluoroscopy: “I had an x-ray today.”

Metonymic transfer for vernacular-1 can also extend to words used in a literary language only in the meaning of a certain aggregate, a certain set, and not used in the meaning of an element of this set. For example:

“She married a contingent” - this can be heard in the speech of a nurse; to understand it is necessary to be aware of the current situation. People served by a special medical institution are referred to as “contingent” among its staff. That is, a person belongs to the contingent of patients. This word, as a result of metonymic transfer, acquired the meaning one of many, and thus found itself in the category of animate nouns.

A feature characteristic of vernacular speech is noted, such as the absence of different meanings of a word that it has in literary speech. The word “party” loses the meaning of “quantity of goods”, “one round of the game”, and means only “political organization”; “discipline” is not used in the meaning of “academic subject”, it is used in the meaning of “order”; “motive” retains only the meaning of “melody” and is not used in the meaning of “reason”.

Vernacular-1 is characterized by a tendency to replace some words with others that are similar in meaning. As a result, words acquire specific meanings: “eat” instead of the word “eat”, “rest” instead of “sleep”, “wife” in the meaning of the speaker’s wife. Also, such an already outdated phenomenon as the use of the pronoun “they” and verbs in appropriate forms regarding a single object still appears. In this case, the object is perceived as having a higher social status. For example: “Where is the doctor? “They left for lunch.”

Let us note the syntactic features that characterize the specifics of vernacular-1:

The use of passive participles and short adjectives in full form: “The door was closed”; “Lunch is already prepared”; “The floor has been washed”; “What is she sick with?”; "I agree".

The use of gerunds ending in “-lice” or “-mshi” (the latter being an exclusively colloquial form): “All the flowers have fallen” (all the flowers have fallen); “I haven’t washed for two weeks” (I haven’t washed for more than a week); “He was drunk” (drunk), etc.

The use of the pronoun no one, with the predicate in the plural form (with the pronoun there may not be a noun): “The guests no one arrived.” “Didn’t anyone come from her workshop?”

The use of nouns in the instrumental case in order to express in this way the reason for something: “blind by cataracts” (i.e. from cataracts), “died of hunger.”

Non-standard control with words that coincide in meaning with the words of literary speech: “what hurts you?” (Where are you hurting); “this doesn’t concern me” (it doesn’t concern me); not need anyone (not need anyone); “she wants to be a doctor” (she wants to be a doctor), etc.

Inappropriate use of prepositions: “they are shooting with machine guns”, “came from the store”, “returned from vacation”, etc.

4 . Vernacular-2

Researchers do not identify as many specific linguistic characteristics in vernacular-2 as in vernacular-1. The reason for this is the youth of vernacular-2 as a special subtype of vernacular. Unlike vernacular-1, which is intermediate between the literary language and territorial dialects, vernacular-2 is more inclined towards jargon (social and professional) and literary speech, occupying an intermediate position between them. [Cm. L.I. Skvortsov “Literary norm and vernacular”]

Thus, vernacular-2 is the connecting link that allows various extra-systemic elements (professionalism, jargon, argot) to enter the literary language. The reason for this interaction can be found both in the structure of the language system and in our society. The multitude of speakers of vernacular-2 is characterized by its heterogeneity according to various social criteria: people from rural areas, temporarily or permanently living in the city; urban population, characterized by the dialect environment of the environment; population of large cities, with a low level of education and engaged in unskilled labor. Speakers of vernacular-2 are people of various professions: sellers, cleaners, loaders, railway conductors, hairdressers, waiters, etc. [See. L.I. Skvortsov “Literary norm and vernacular”]

Since vernacular speech, as already noted, is not distinguished by any normativity and, therefore, does not have normative means, like literary speech, that would limit the use of means and other linguistic subsystems in the vernacular. As a result, various features of the language characteristic of residents of a certain area or people of certain professions, of any environment, distinguished by its specific language, can easily migrate into the vernacular.

And in fact, it is not difficult to see that many elements of language that at a certain time belonged to word usage limited by a social or professional nature, fall into literary speech not directly, but through vernacular-2. So, for example, the words that are part of the actively used vocabulary today, coming from a slang environment: “puncture” - failure to “emerge” - to declare one’s opinion, if others are unwilling; “have fun” - relax, have fun; “lawlessness” - unacceptable actions that go beyond what is permitted; “scumbag” - a person who does not recognize any normativity in his actions; etc. [See Voilova I.K. “Living forms of language as a style-forming factor in a literary text”]

The phonetic and morphological features of vernacular-2 do not have the same specificity as vernacular-1: they are of an uncertain nature and are often implemented in separate linguistic means. For vernacular-1, the implementation of the phonetic and morphological properties discussed above occurs in a certain way, but in vernacular-2, on the contrary, they are presented without any regularity, with restrictions, and some of them are absent altogether. The reason for this is the desire of vernacular-2 as a developing subspecies of urban speech to reduce the brightness of the set of linguistic means of expression, to combine them with the linguistic means characteristic of colloquial speech and codified literary speech.

For clarity, dissimilation of consonants in vernacular-2 is implemented by word forms like “tranvay”. On the contrary, in words like “director”, “corridor”, where the division of consonants is expressed in a more vivid, noticeable form, this does not happen. Word forms like [sache] instead of [shase] or [shose] are also not characteristic of vernacular-2. The insertion of sounds [j] or [v] ([kakava], [p`ijan`ina]), one of the most expressive phenomena of vernacular-1, is practically not used in vernacular-2. The discrepancies with literary speech in the gender meanings of certain nouns are less pronounced; in words like: roofing felt, shampoo, tulle, they are declined as nouns in the feminine form; and corn, on the contrary, is a masculine noun. For example: “I was tormented with this callus”, “they covered the roof with roofing felt”, “I washed my hair with new shampoo”, “we stood in line for tulle”). Unlike vernacular-1, the neuter words cinema, meat and the like are not used as nouns in the feminine form.

The declension of foreign language nouns occurs, as a rule, when an uncertain understanding of the indeclinable form is possible. For example: “we were traveling by subway,” but “came out of the subway.” [cm. Lukyanova N. A. “Problems of semantics”]

Vernacular-2 is also characterized by the use of diminutive suffixes in words. For example: “number”, “documents”, “cucumber” There are forms that are formed in an unusual way and are not common in literary speech. For example: “meat”.

Vernacular-2 is characterized by the use of phraseological units specific to it, which when used indicate the colloquial nature of the conversation. Gradually they find their way into colloquial speech. For clarity:

Using the expression “impudently”: “We came here impudently.”

Comparison, when using the expression “like this”: “Come on ahead! stood up like this one.” "Come to us. No, he sits like this one.”

“Wow!” is used to express exclamation or surprise. “We have had no heating for three months now. - Wow!".

Using the expression “it doesn’t matter”: “It doesn’t matter to me.”

Among the varieties of speech etiquette that are characteristic of vernacular-2, it is necessary to highlight the types of addresses that denote family relationships or position in society: “man”, “boss”, “guy”, “boss”, “friend”, “commander”, “master”, “father”, “mother”, “father”, “mother”, “grandfather”, “grandfather”, “grandmother”. Such methods of address are divided according to the age and gender of the speakers; In certain cases, a profession imposes certain restrictions on use in relation to the speaker and the recipient of information. Thus, addresses such as “grandfather”, “grandmother” or “woman”, “lady”, “man” are inherent in the speech of young women; the addresses “friend”, “man”, “guy”, “boss”, “boss”, “grandfather”, “father”, “dad”, “mother”, “mother” are typical for middle-aged or young men; “master”, “hostess” - this is how they address the employer or any other person for whom the speaker provides service.

As a result of the spread of vernacular at the everyday level of communicative interaction, it is most often used and best of all it comes out in a conversation aimed at reassurance, instilling censure, accusation, request, etc. Although often speakers of vernacular use it due to their lack of education and inability to fully use others forms of speech.

Conclusion

Vernacular speech is characteristic of urban speech and is often used to give speech a specific flavor. The use of vernacular can also be done with the awareness of its ananormativity to express a deeper emotional coloring of the speaker’s speech. In this case, its use does not entail anything negative. But when used by a poorly educated population as standardized speech, as a result of the inability to use stylized speech, it leads to the stratification of the national language and its degradation. Vernacular speech may be appropriate in certain cases, but it is more than a stylistic device; using it as everyday speech can only have a negative assessment.

1. Voilova I.K. Living forms of language as a style-forming factor in a literary text.//Language as a system. - Ekaterinburg. 1998. pp. 134-142.

2. Lukyanova N.A. Problems of semantics.//Expressive vocabulary of colloquial use. - Novosibirsk. 1986. pp. 253-257.

3. Skvortsov L.I. Literary norm and vernacular. // Literary language and vernacular. - M.: Science. 1977.

Writing a bright, memorable book is difficult. But some authors know how to win the attention of an impressive readership with their works. What is the secret of their success? We will try to find out in this article how they achieve universal recognition.

Common language

Colloquial vocabulary - words with a rude, stylistically reduced and even vulgar connotation, which are located beyond the boundaries of the literary syllable. They are not characteristic of the exemplary, bookish style, but are familiar to various groups of society and are a cultural and social characteristic of those people who do not speak a written language. Such words are used in certain types of conversation: in humorous or familiar speech, in verbal skirmishes, and the like.

In general, colloquial vocabulary refers to non-literary vocabulary that is used in people’s conversations. At the same time, she cannot be rude and have special expression. It includes, for example, the following words: “inside”, “enough”, “for free”, “theirs”, “the other day”, “for the time being”, “unlikely”, “in bulk”, “to wear out”, “nonsense”, “blurt out”, “hard worker”, “fight back”, “brainy”.

Notes in dictionaries indicating a reduced style of words and their meanings, giving them a negative rating, are countless. Colloquial vocabulary most often contains an evaluative-expressive tone.

In it you can also find generally accepted sayings, differing only in their accentology and phonetics (“tabatorka” instead of “snuffbox”, “serious” instead of “serious”).

Reasons for use

Colloquial vocabulary in different types of dialect is used for different reasons: the author's direct attitude to what is being described, pragmatic motives (journalistic phrases), expressive themes and outrageousness (colloquial words), characterological motives (artistic phrases). In official business and scientific conversations, colloquial vocabulary is perceived as a foreign style element.

Indelicate style

Rough colloquial vocabulary has a weakened, expressive, impolite connotation. It consists, for example, of the following words: “riffraff”, “big guy”, “stupid”, “face”, “pot-bellied”, “talker”, “muzzle”, “grunt”, “bast shoe”, “bitch”, “ to kill", "slam", "bastard", "rude". It includes extreme vulgarisms, that is, (indecent language). In this style you can find words with exceptional colloquial meanings (most often metamorphic) - “to whistle” (“to steal”), “so it cuts” (“speaks smartly”), “to dash off” (“to write”), “to weave” ( “talk nonsense”), “hat” (“bungler”), “vinaigrette” (“mash”).

Everyday style

It is one of the basic categories of the vocabulary of the writing language, along with the neutral and book genre. It forms words known mainly in dialogical phrases. This style is focused on informal conversations in an atmosphere of interpersonal communication (relaxed communication and expression of attitudes, thoughts, feelings towards the subject of conversation), like units of other tiers of language, operating mainly in colloquial phrases. Therefore, everyday expressions are characterized by an expressive, diminished coloring.

The spoken genre is divided into two basic layers of unequal capacity: written vernacular and everyday vocabulary.

Vocabulary of oral speech

What is colloquial and vernacular vocabulary? Everyday vocabulary consists of words characteristic of oral types of communicative practice. Conversational phrases are heterogeneous. They are located below neutral sayings, but depending on the degree of literature, this vocabulary is divided into two significant groups: colloquial and vernacular lexicons.

Everyday includes terms that give the conversation a touch of informality and spontaneity (but not crudely colloquial words). From the point of view of the attribute of parts of speech, dialogue vocabulary, like neutral vocabulary, is diverse.

These include:

nouns: “witty”, “big guy”, “nonsense”;
adjectives: “sloppy”, “careless”;
adverbs: “in one’s own way”, “at random”;
interjections: “oh”, “bai”, “lies”.

The everyday vocabulary, despite its subdued nature, does not go beyond the boundaries of the literary Russian language.

Colloquial vocabulary is lower in style than everyday vocabulary, therefore it is placed outside the standardized literary Russian speech. It is divided into three categories:

grammatically shown by adjectives (“dragged”, “pot-bellied”), verbs (“drowsy”, “lost”), nouns (“big”, “stupid”), adverbs (“lousy”, “foolishly”). These words are heard most often in conversations of poorly educated individuals, determining their cultural level. Sometimes they are found in conversations of intelligent people. The expressiveness of these words, their semantic and emotional capacity sometimes make it possible to expressively and briefly show an attitude (usually negative) towards an object, phenomenon or person.
The rudely colloquial vocabulary differs from the rudely expressive one by its high level of swagger. These are, for example, the following words: “hailo”, “harya”, “murlo”, “turnip”, “grunt”, “rylnik”. These sayings are eloquent; they are capable of conveying the negative attitude of the speaker to some episodes. Due to excessive savagery, it is unacceptable in the conversations of cultured people.
Actually a colloquial lexicon. It includes a small number of words that are unliterary not because they are clumsy (they are not rude in expressive coloring and meaning) or have an abusive character (they do not have abusive semantics), but because they are not advised to be used by educated people in conversations. These are words such as “ahead of time”, “just now”, “dear”, “I suppose”, “born”. This type of vocabulary is also called vernacular and differs from dialect only in that it is used both in the city and in the countryside.

Synonyms

Synonyms in colloquial and literary vocabulary very often simultaneously differ in the degree of expressiveness and expressiveness:

head - galangal, noggin;
face - image, muzzle;
legs are kags.

Often in conversations one encounters not only synonyms as such, but also colloquial variants of literary words, including grammatical ones:

to her - to her;
always - always;
he ate - he ate;
theirs - theirs;
from there - from there, fromtedova;
goodbye - goodbye.

Creativity of M. Zoshchenko

Many people believe that the means is colloquial vocabulary. Indeed, in the hands of a skilled writer, non-literary words can serve not only as a means of psychological description of characters, but also give rise to a stylistically recognizable specific setting. The prototype for this is the creative works of M. Zoshchenko, who skillfully parodied bourgeois psychology and everyday life, “interspersing” uncomfortable common expressions into the characters’ conversations.

What does colloquial vocabulary look like in his books? M. Zoshchenko is impressive. This talented writer wrote the following:

"I speak:

Isn't it time for us to go to the theater? They called, maybe.

And she says:

And he takes the third cake.

I speak:

On an empty stomach - isn't it a lot? Might make you sick.

No, he says, we’re used to it.

And he takes the fourth.

Then the blood rushed to my head.

Lay down, I say, back!

And she was scared. She opened her mouth, and a tooth glistened in her mouth.

And it was as if the reins had gotten under my tail. Anyway, I don’t think I should go out with her now.

Lie down, I say, to hell with it!” (Story “Aristocrat”).

In this work, the comic effect is achieved not only due to the many common expressions and forms, but also due to the fact that these statements stand out against the background of “refined” literary cliches: “eaten cakes” and so on. As a result, a psychological portrait of a poorly educated, narrow-minded person is created, striving to appear intelligent. He is the classic hero of Zoshchenko.

Dialectal vocabulary

What is dialect-vernacular vocabulary? Studying the urban vernacular language, many ask the pressing question about its local flavor associated with the influence of dialects: emphasizing limited parameters in accordance with the data of an individual metropolis makes it possible to compare them with materials from other cities, for example, Tambov, Omsk, Voronezh, Elista, Krasnoyarsk and etc.

The conventionality of the border between vernacular and dialect vocabulary is very often explained by the historical connections of the folk dialect with jargon, genetic reasons, which are sometimes not entirely legitimately analyzed as the basic source of enlightenment of this impoverished layer of the popular language.

The mastery of A. I. Solzhenitsyn

Agree, sometimes the use of colloquial vocabulary gives the work some uniqueness. The linguistic and stylistic skill of A. I. Solzhenitsyn, marked by extraordinary originality, attracts many linguists. And the paradoxical nature of the negative attitude towards him obliges some readers to study the language and style of this author’s works. For example, his story “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” shows the internal unity and consistent, precise motivation of its figurative and verbal composition, in which, as L.N. Tolstoy argued, “a unique order of the only possible words” appears, which is a sign of true artistry.

Important nuance

Dialectal vocabulary is very important for Solzhenitsyn. Having “transferred” the author’s function to the peasant, making him the main character of his story, the writer was able to create an extremely unconventional and expressive dialectal assessment of his expressions, which decisively excluded for all modern writing the effectiveness of returning to the hackneyed stock of “folk” speech signs that migrate from book to book ( such as “nadys”, “aposlya”, “darling”, “look at the side” and the like).

For the most part, this description of the dialect is developed not even thanks to vocabulary (“uhaydakatsya”, “naled”, “halabuda”, “gunyavy”), but due to word formation: “obsessed”, “shortcoming”, “shelter”, “satisfied” , "hurriedly". This method of adding dialectisms to the speech artistic sphere, as a rule, evokes an approving assessment from critics, since it revives the familiar associative connections between image and word.

Folk speech

How is colloquial vocabulary used in speech? In the conversations of the modern peasantry, dialect and vernacular vocabulary are practically inseparable from each other. And do such words as “shitty”, “self-thinking”, “spiritual”, “pick up” go back to any specific dialect and are perceived precisely because of this, or are they used in their general non-literary properties - for the speech assessment of Ivan Denisovich does not matter. The important thing is that with the help of both the first and second, the hero’s conversation receives the necessary stylistic and emotional coloring.

We hear generous in humor, lively, free from the standards that have been easily borrowed recently in various controversial fields, insightful folk speech. Solzhenitsyn knows it very well and sensitively detects new insignificant shades in it.

How else is colloquial vocabulary characterized? Examples of its application can be given endlessly. It is interesting that Shukhov uses the verb “insure” in one of the fresh “sports-industrial” meanings - to ensure the reliability of an action, to protect: “Shukhov... with one hand gratefully, hastily took the half-smoke, and with the second from below he insured so as not to drop it.”

Or the contracted use of one of the meanings of the verb “to consist”, which could appear in folk sayings only at the present time: “Someone brought stencils from the war, and since then it’s gone, and more and more dyes like this are being collected: they don’t consist anywhere, nowhere does not work…".

Knowledge of folk expressions was given to Solzhenitsyn by both difficult life experience and, of course, the active interest of the master, which prompted him not only to consider, but also to specifically study the Russian language.

Conversational speech is characterized by non-normativity at the phonetic level: it is characterized by an acceleration of the rate of speech, leading to increased reduction of vowels, assimilation of consonants, and generally incomplete pronunciation of sounds and syllables. Characteristic, for example, is a change in the orthoepic norm of oral speech.

All these levels should be considered in more detail. The first and most obvious manifestation of the phonetics of conversational style is the acceleration of speech. This usually happens because in the hustle and bustle people are trying not only to convey information to each other, but to do it quickly. In addition, dialects have a great influence on spoken language, and most of them are distinguished by a fast pace of speech (especially in the southern regions). As a consequence, reduction of vowel sounds, assimilation of consonants and incomplete pronunciation of sounds and whole syllables. But all this happens not only due to the acceleration of the rate of speech, but also due to such a phenomenon as linguistic economy. Moreover, this saving occurs at all levels of the language. Over time, complex etiquette heaps turned into more concise phrases.

The same thing happens at the phonetic level. If sound can be reduced without distorting the meaning, then this is completely unacceptable for language. We, as they say in common parlance, swallow sounds. Some sounds can often merge with those in front (assimilation) or with those that follow (accommodation). For example, we can pronounce. tee instead Alexander Alexandrovich Just San Sanych, or Hello instead of Hello.

In Russian colloquial speech there is such a thing as paired consonant sounds [b] - [p]; [h] – [s]; [g] – [k]. From a phonetic point of view, this is a softening of pronunciation. Apparently, the initial formation of paired sounds also owes its appearance to linguistic economy and the process of merging sounds. Such interesting issues in the phonetics of language include voicing and deafening of sounds. This phenomenon is not simultaneously present in all languages.

The phonetics of spoken language is greatly influenced by vocabulary. For example, if dialect words enter colloquial speech, they bring with them the features of precisely the dialect to which they generally belong. Also, foreign vocabulary brings with it the peculiarities of the phonetic structure of its native language. But usually there are two options for pronunciation of such words. For example, the surname of the famous American businessman Disney can be pronounced softly - Disney and more firmly - Disney.

The phonetic system of any language develops and constantly changes, just like the language itself. As history develops, people, and therefore culture, come into contact with other cultures, which influence primarily life and language, and at all levels. In general, it is now quite difficult to say what the phonetic system of the Russian language was like a thousand years ago. Firstly, at that time there were no methods for recording the features of phonetics. And secondly, the literary language in Russia developed quite late, and there was a whole gulf between the written and spoken spoken language. One thing is certain - the process is not over yet and will last as long as the language develops and changes.

REQUIREMENTS FOR CORRECT SPEECH. INFLUENCE ON THE PUREITY OF SPEECH OF HISTORICISM, ARCHAISMS, JARGONISMS

Correct speech– normative, literary language in action. The requirements for literary language and normative speech are generally the same. You just need to realize that speech and language are not the same thing. We consider written and oral speech. For example, oral speech is considered correct if there are no obvious errors in it. What does this mean? First of all, compliance with grammatical, phonetic rules and laws of style, clear articulation. Speech therapists would also add the absence of a lisp.

The level of grammar proficiency largely determines the correctness of speech. A person will never be considered literate if he incorrectly places stress on words, incorrectly uses a number of nouns, etc. As for phonetics, its norms are based on the Moscow dialect, which was accepted as part of the literary language. Namely: in correct speech there should not be so-called okaniya, stretched vowel sounds or, conversely, too fast pronunciation of these sounds.

Of course, speaking about oral speech, it is difficult to highlight the primacy of any style and the transition of one style to another. Usually oral speech is subsumed under the journalistic style. But one should not judge so generally. After all, a scientific report and a conversation between two neighbors are not the same thing, which should be taken into account, and, for example, not use vernacular in business speech.

Written speech is generally distinguished by being closer to literary speech than oral speech. It can be quite complex, since the fact that the same sentence can be re-read makes it much easier to understand written language. But this also imposes additional requirements on the use of grammatical, syntactic and especially stylistic rules. Questions of stylistics are generally more complex and controversial.

So, for example, a very ambiguous and even debatable question for linguists - what are historicisms and archaisms and how exactly do they differ from each other? Of course, there are words whose relationship to one group or another is unambiguous, but linguists will have to work a lot more on this.

Archaisms and historicisms should be used very carefully in speech. Their appropriate use does not reduce the level of speech, but even makes it more interesting, varied and stylish. However, using such off-topic vocabulary can distort the meaning of the statement and make the speech incomprehensible to others.

What definitely pollutes our speech is jargon. These include a range of words from student jargon and professionalism to the worst version of jargon - obscene words and slang. Jargon enters the literary language in different ways, but the result is the same - it ceases to be normative and neutral and acquires a stylistic connotation. There is a fashion for jargon. Usually it concerns youth slang. Its vocabulary often comes from prison slang and argon. Their motivation and meaning are often quite difficult to explain. These words are not literary because their original meaning and connection with the subject are distorted. They distort the actual state of things.

And to answer the question: do jargons affect the purity of speech? – you can definitely – yes. They reduce its level. And from the literary category it moves into the colloquial category.

ELLIPTICITY

Ellipticity- This is an interesting stylistic device. Ellipsis, or elliptical constructions, also belongs to the group of syntactic figures. These are unfinished sentences, omissions of words and entire phrases. It is usually assumed that the interlocutors are aware of events and omissions can be easily restored from the context in the monologue, from previous remarks in the dialogue, from people’s previous knowledge.

In situational speech, when people understand each other perfectly, the degree of ellipticality can be very high; gaps are filled in by the situation, the course of the game, and gestures. Such speech provides good material for psychological analysis.

Elliptical speech is laconic and has great internal energy. In poetry and theater, silence is added to ellipsis, usually deliberate. The listener or reader themselves must restore this omission, thus causing the activity of the speech perceiver.

Typically, authors use ellipsis in a work if they want to force the reader to think through the phrase, to work with them. This is a good way for the reader to delve deeper into the text and become, to some extent, a co-author. The so-called silence can be of different types. For example, when in a work, play, etc. they talk about any object, person or event indirectly, that is, everyone understands what is being said, but no one utters this word. Or silence in response to a question or remark. It is implied that everyone already understood the answer, and this makes the pause more meaningful.

As for situational ellipses, they are not present here in their pure form, since the missing phrase is not used before, but is understood from the situation or compensated for by non-verbal means of communication. An example is commentary on football or hockey matches, when emotional announcers say something like: “Dangerous moment, the ball is at the goal, etc. Ay, ay, ay, it didn’t work out, oh well!” If you are not aware of the events, it is generally difficult to understand from the commentator’s speech what he is lamenting. Ellipses have incredible emotional potential, which is reinforced by short exclamations.

Speaking about non-verbal means of communication in ellipsis, it should be noted that this is also a kind of language - sign language. And it conveys unknown information, even if it has not been mentioned before. For example, you can answer a question without explaining that you don’t know the answer, but simply by shrugging your shoulders. Do not explain your reluctance to do anything, but simply wave it off. Also, athletes on the field in team games replace long phrases that represent advice to a teammate on where to run and what to do by calling out their name and pointing to the better side.

It is interesting that ellipticality is a very poetic and psychologically complex technique; it is often used in colloquial speech in the form of omissions and hints.

We can also find this technique when communicating with close people. A conversation between two friends may be completely incomprehensible to a person standing nearby, on the one hand, because they are well aware of the subject of discussion, on the other, because the level of their psychological connection is so complex and close that they understand each other without words.

tions, and some of them are absent altogether. The reason for this is the desire of vernacular-2 as a developing subspecies of urban speech to reduce the brightness of the set of linguistic means of expression, to combine them with the linguistic means characteristic of colloquial speech and codified literary speech.

Vernacular-2 is also characterized by the use of diminutive suffixes in words. For example: “number”, “documentary”, “cucumber” There are forms that are formed in an unusual way and are not common in literary speech. For example: "meat".

Using the expression “insolently”: “We came here insolently.”

Comparison, when using the expression “like this one”: “Come forward! stand up like this one.” "Come to us. No, he sits like this one."

“Wow!”, used to express exclamation, surprise. “We haven’t had heating for three months now. - Wow!”

Using the expression “it doesn’t matter”: “It doesn’t matter to me.”

Among the varieties of speech etiquette that are characteristic of vernacular-2, it is necessary to highlight the types of addresses that denote family relationships or position in society: “man”, “boss”, “guy”, “boss”, “friend”, “commander”, “master”, “daddy”, “mother”, “father”, “mother”, “grandfather”, “grandfather”, “grandmother”. Such methods of address are divided according to the age and gender of the speakers; In certain cases, a profession imposes certain restrictions on use in relation to the speaker and the recipient of information. Thus, addresses such as “grandfather”, “grandmother” or “woman”, “lady”, “man” are inherent in the speech of young women; the addresses “friend”, “man”, “guy”, “boss”, “boss”, “grandfather”, “father”, “dad”, “mother”, “mother” are typical for middle-aged or young men; “master”, “hostess” - this is how they address the employer or any other person for whom the speaker is providing service.

Conclusion

Vernacular speech is characteristic of urban speech and is often used to give speech a specific nuance. The use of vernacular can also be done with the awareness of its ananormativity to express a deeper emotional coloring of the speaker’s speech. In this case, its use does not entail anything negative. But when used by a poorly educated population as standardized speech, as a result of the inability to use stylized speech, it leads to the stratification of the national language and its degradation. Vernacular speech may be appropriate in certain cases, but it is more than a stylistic device; using it as everyday speech can only have a negative assessment.

Bibliography

1. Voilova I.K. Living forms of language as a style-forming factor in a literary text. // Language as a system. - Ekaterinburg. 1998. pp. 134-142.

2. Lukyanova N.A. Problems of semantics. // Expressive vocabulary of colloquial use. - Novosibirsk. 1986. pp.253-257.

3. Skvortsov L.I. Literary norm and vernacular. // Literary language and vernacular. - M.: Science. 1977.