The main trends in the development of the Russian literary language. The meaning of the concept of "modern" Russian literary language. Trends in the development of the modern Russian literary language. Homonyms and paronyms

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Development of modern Russian language

Plan

1. Social factors influencing the development of the modern Russian language.

2. Trends in the development of the modern Russian language.

3. Borrowings in modern Russian.

3.1. Features of the functioning of foreign vocabulary in modern Russian speech

Introduction

Every language is constantly changing. Attention has already been drawn to the replenishment of the vocabulary of the Russian language, which is primarily felt in journalistic texts: anglicisms, including the formation of Russian words according to the English model (I am fond of yachting), slang vocabulary in its origin (cool, cool), the revival of old words, the expansion word meanings, etc.

Many scientists have been and are studying the development of the modern Russian language. Among them are E. A. Zemskaya, L. P. Krysin, I. A. Sternin, M. V. Panov and many others.

There are different points of view on the modern development of the Russian language. Many believe that the peak of its development has already passed, and now it is in decline. Others believe that the processes taking place today in the Russian language are quite natural, and there can be no talk of any decline.

In this work, I tried to summarize the observations of Russian linguists on the modern Russian language.

1. Social factors influencing the development of the modern Russian language

The stormy socio-political shifts in Russia in the last decade have led to a radical change in the social structure of Russian society, which, of course, could not but affect the development and functioning of the Russian language.

The specificity of the current state of the language situation in Russia is that the vast majority of changes in the language are associated with changes in society, more precisely, the main changes in language and communication are a direct consequence of social changes.

The main social factors that currently determine the development and changes in the Russian language:

Modern Russian society is a society in which the principles of political freedom. This is manifested in the activation of political discourse, the development of polemical forms of dialogue, the pluralization of people's communicative behavior, the growing role of public and oral speech in general, significant changes in the language of journalism, and much more.

On the other hand, the activity of the majority of members of society, previously suppressed by the totalitarian state, found an explosive outlet, which led to the release of not only activity, but also aggressiveness and rudeness. In the sphere of language, this is manifested in the growth of the aggressiveness of the dialogue, the increase in the share of evaluative vocabulary in speech, the growth of vulgar and obscene word usage, the jargonization of the speech of certain segments of the population, etc.

- freedom of speech has become the most visible political reality in contemporary Russian society. In terms of language, this leads to a significant expansion of the topics of oral communication, an expansion of the active vocabulary of a significant circle of people, an improvement in the skills of unprepared oral speech, an accelerated development of the oral form of the existence of a language, and an expansion of the functions of oral and colloquial speech. The attention of people to the oral word, the skills of oral public speech is growing.

The changes also affect written journalism - it becomes more colloquial, emotional, relaxed. The volume of written interpersonal communication is reduced, preference is given to oral forms. This leads to a decrease in the level of people's proficiency in monologue speech - despite the fact that the need for proficiency in a monologue, especially in public, increases.

- Abolition of political censorship led to the disappearance of language censorship, which led to the penetration of a large amount of reduced, slang, vulgar and even obscene language into the media, cinema and literature.

- Political pluralism in society leads to a significant renewal, replenishment and restructuring of the political lexicon, and ultimately to the formation of a special sublanguage - the sublanguage of political activity. There is also political jargon.

Development in the country market economy leads to the emergence of concepts that characterize various aspects of market relations, which leads to the active borrowing of modern market terminology, the activation of historicisms, and active semantic processes in the vocabulary.

The openness of society leads to a significant expansion of the horizons and scope of knowledge of Russians, including the improvement of knowledge in the field of foreign languages. The number of foreign borrowings in Russian, especially from English, has sharply increased. This is explained, on the one hand, by the action of the global trend towards the internationalization of the lexical fund of developed languages, and on the other hand, by the need for the nomination of new objects and concepts that entered Russian life during the transition to the market.

- instability in the political and economic situation of the country, the low standard of living of a significant part of the population, inflation, unemployment and the high cost of Russia in transition are the causes of the stress in which many live today. Speech aggressiveness is manifested in an increase in the volume and emotionality of the dialogue, an increase in the number of evaluative words in the dialogue, the number of rude and obscene expressions, in an increase in the proportion of conflict communication in many groups; in the neglect of the norms of speech etiquette and culture of communication, in the growth of familiarity in the appeal of unfamiliar citizens to each other.

Social, political and property polarization of society also leads to an increase in the aggressiveness of communication. The polarization of society leads to an increase in the share of evaluative vocabulary in the speech flow, and intralinguistic evaluative antonymy arises - when the same concepts are evaluated diametrically opposite in different ideologies.

intensive technical re-equipment of life contributes to the emergence in the Russian language of many new concepts and words, mostly borrowed.

High-quality modern communication leads to a reduction in the traditional written form of communication, an increase in the proportion of telephone communication and communication using technical means.

2. Trends in the development of the modern Russian language

E.A. Zemskaya points out the following trends in the development of the modern Russian language:

The number of participants in mass and collective communication is expanding sharply.

Censorship and auto-censorship are sharply weakened, one might even say collapsing.

The personal beginning in speech increases, the dialogical nature of communication, both oral and written.

The sphere of spontaneous communication is expanding, not only personal, but also oral public.

Important parameters of the flow of oral forms of mass communication are changing: the possibility of a direct appeal of the speaker to the listeners and feedback from the listeners to the speakers is created.

Situations and genres of communication are changing both in the field of public and in the field of personal communication. Rigid limits of official public communication are weakened. Many new genres of oral public speech are born in the field of mass communication (various conversations, discussions, round tables, new types of interviews, etc.).

There is a lot of new and in the field of personal communication between strangers. Relations between speaking subjects change.

The psychological rejection of the bureaucratic language of the past (Newspeak) is growing sharply.

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

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

The syntactic construction of speech is changing, especially sharply in the field of management and some types of coordination.

The unpreparedness of public speech often leads to the loosening of old norms, contributes to the manifestation of development trends embedded in the language system. The intonation of oral public speech is changing.

Summarizing the main trends in the development of the modern Russian language, we can note the following:

In modern Russian society, there is change of socio-political paradigm, that is, a system of concepts that define the dominant system of political values in society.

In Russian society, there was change of communication paradigm, that is, the type of communication that dominates in social practice. The most noticeable consequences of the change in the communicative paradigm in society are several interconnected processes that have arisen in the Russian language. These processes are: oralization of communication; dialogization of communication; pluralization of communication; personification of communication.

The oralization of communication is manifested in a significant increase in the role of oral speech, the expansion of its functions, and an increase in its share in communication.

Dialogization of communication is manifested in an increase in the share of dialogue in communication, an increase in the role of dialogue in the communication process, an expansion of the functions of dialogic speech in the structure of communication, the development of new types and forms of dialogue, the formation of new rules for dialogic communication, and an increase in the social effectiveness of dialogic communication in comparison with monologue.

The pluralization of communication is manifested in the formation of a tradition of coexistence of different points of view when discussing a particular problem.

The personification of communication lies in the growth of individual uniqueness of personal discourse.

These processes have a decisive influence on the development of the Russian language and lead to numerous particular consequences and changes. Characterizing the system of the Russian language as a whole from this point of view, it can be stated that in a number of aspects it is undergoing significant quantitative, qualitative and functional changes, but it does not undergo any revolutionary changes (especially leading to its destruction or disintegration), while maintaining the systemic and structural integrity, sustainable functioning and internal identity.

3. Borrowings in modern Russian

One of the most lively and socially significant processes taking place in modern Russian speech is the process of activating the use of foreign words. Along with the emergence of neologism borrowings, there is an expansion of the use of special foreign terminology related to economics, finance, commercial activities and some other areas.

Traditionally, the main condition for borrowing foreign words is the presence of contact between the recipient language and the source language and, as a result, the bilingualism of the speakers. However, bilingualism should not be understood only as the result of territorial contact between two neighboring (or mixed) peoples. Such types of speech activities as reading, translating and commenting on foreign press, literature, participating in international conferences, developing joint international technical and scientific projects, etc., create favorable conditions for borrowing foreign vocabulary and terminology.

But this is only one side of the matter. The other is that a society served by a borrowing language should be disposed to accept foreign words. If this condition is absent, then a foreign word - a potential borrowing - may for a long time remain the lot of a narrow circle of people (diplomats, scientists, translators, etc.). Moreover, society, represented by its most influential strata, due to various social, political, ideological, etc. reasons, may react sharply negatively to acts of borrowing and, through conscious, purposeful efforts, try to free speech practice from certain foreign words.

The general reasons for borrowing foreign vocabulary are well known. This:

The need for a name (a new thing, a new phenomenon, etc.);

The need to distinguish between meaningfully close, but still different concepts;

The need for specialization of concepts - in a particular area, for certain purposes;

The tendency to match the indivisibility, the integrity of the designated concept with the indivisibility of the signifier;

The presence in the borrowing language of established systems of terms serving a particular subject area, professional environment, etc., and more or less uniform in terms of the source of borrowing of these terms;

Socio-psychological reasons and factors of borrowing: perception - by the whole group of speakers or part of it - of a foreign word as more prestigious, "nice-sounding", etc.

Another, also socio-psychological in nature, factor in the borrowing and active entry of a foreign word into speech is the communicative relevance of the concept it denotes.

3.1 Features of the functioning of foreign vocabulary in modern Russian speech

For the use of foreign words on the pages of the press, in oral public speech, two opposite tendencies are characteristic: on the one hand, a new borrowing or term is used without any “translations” into Russian, comments, etc., as if in a calculation on sufficient awareness and qualification of the audience, and on the other hand, the same words and even borrowings that have been functioning in the Russian language for a long time can become the object of comments and author's reasoning.

In fact, we must talk about a certain distribution of foreign words - according to functional styles and speech genres. To the greatest extent they are saturated with newspaper and magazine texts, especially those related to economics, politics, sports, art, fashion. In oral public speech, the use of foreign words-neologisms more often than in written texts is accompanied by reservations like: the so-called monetarism.

There are different social assessments of both the process of borrowing and specific borrowed words. Here, such characteristics of the speakers as age, level of education, type of professional occupation are important. Observations show that there is some relationship between different values of these characteristics and assessments of foreign vocabulary; 2) with an increase in the level of education, speech adaptation of new borrowings is easier; 3) representatives of the humanitarian professions are generally more tolerant of foreign language vocabulary than people who are not professionally connected with the language and culture.

Conclusion

Changes in the language are manifested in its development and evolution. Evolution reflects the changes taking place within the language according to its own laws; development reflects the adaptation of the language to the changing conditions of its functioning.

An analysis of the current state of the Russian language from the point of view of the correlation between the processes of evolution and development shows that the main changes taking place in it can be classified as development. Apparently, the formation of slang as a filling of gaps in the stylistic paradigms of the language can be attributed to the phenomenon of evolution to some extent; other changes at the present stage fall under the definition of `development'.

It is possible to single out some `growth points' of the modern Russian language, in which the most noticeable and intensive changes are observed. This is, first of all, the area of vocabulary and phraseology; household appliances The main changes occur in these thematic areas, and these changes are due mainly to extralinguistic factors that reflect social changes in Russian society.

The communicative core of the Russian lexicon has changed. The communicative core of the lexicon is understood as a set of the most frequent and communicatively significant lexical and phraseological units used in all communicative spheres, denotatively significant for the speaking group and reflecting the actual reality.

The permeability of the lexical and phraseological system of the Russian language for borrowings has increased. The process of borrowing is complemented by an intensive process of tracing, through which numerous new meanings of Russian words, as well as new phrases and phraseological units, are formed. The bulk of borrowings and cripples goes back to the English language.

In the public mind, there was a liberalization of the concept of a language norm, the norms of a culture of speech, as a result of which the range of deviations from linguistic norms allowed by public opinion has significantly expanded.

In the stylistic system of the Russian language, a new functional and stylistic subsystem is being formed - national slang, which occupies a place between colloquial and reduced vocabulary. The layer of interstyle vocabulary is expanding.

An analysis of the state of the Russian language in 2000 shows that the period of intensive development has now passed its peak and is gradually on the wane. There is a decrease in the aggressiveness of the dialogue, clear signs of stabilization of the stylistic norm, a decrease in the volume of borrowings and an active development of borrowed vocabulary. It can be assumed that within the next two or three years, the Russian language will experience a period of stabilization.

Bibliography

1. E. A. Zemskaya « Russian language of the end of the 20th century (1985-1995)"

1. L. P. Krysin « Foreign word in the context of modern social life»

2. I. A. Sternin"Social Factors and the Development of the Modern Russian Language"

Similar Documents

Stylistic diversity of the Russian language. Genres of functional speech styles of the modern Russian language. The main types of vocabulary: book, colloquial and colloquial. General characteristics of functional speech styles. Attachment of vocabulary to speech styles.

test, added 02/17/2013

Russian language in modern society. Origin and development of the Russian language. Distinctive features of the Russian language. The ordering of linguistic phenomena into a single set of rules. The main problems of the functioning of the Russian language and the support of Russian culture.

abstract, added 04/09/2015

The entry of borrowed words into the vocabulary of the Russian language. Stages of getting from the source language to the borrowing one. Telescopic method of word formation. Borrowings in the socio-political life of the country. Processes associated with the development of borrowings.

lecture, added 12/18/2011

The history of the emergence of the Russian language. Specific features of the Cyrillic alphabet. Stages of the formation of the alphabet in the process of the formation of the Russian nation. Common features characteristic of the language of mass communication in the modern society of the Russian Federation. The problem of the barbarization of the Russian language.

abstract, added 01/30/2012

Brief information from the history of Russian writing. The concept of the vocabulary of the modern Russian language. Figurative and expressive means of language. Vocabulary of the Russian language. Phraseology of the modern Russian language. Speech etiquette. Types of word formation.

cheat sheet, added 03/20/2007

Acquaintance with the process of speech development of younger students. Characteristics of the main linguistic dictionaries of the Russian language. Normalization of speech as its correspondence to the literary and linguistic ideal. Analysis of the types of norms of the modern Russian literary language.

thesis, added 02/11/2014

The subject and tasks of the culture of speech. Language norm, its role in the formation and functioning of the literary language. Norms of the modern Russian literary language, speech errors. Functional styles of the modern Russian literary language. Fundamentals of rhetoric.

course of lectures, added 12/21/2009

Replenishment of the socio-political vocabulary of the Persian language at the expense of Europeanisms. The main functions of lexical borrowings. Participation of French lexical bases in Persian word formation. Borrowings from Arabic, Russian and English.

abstract, added 02/09/2017

The vocabulary of the modern Russian language. Reflection of the processes taking place in society in the vocabulary of the language. The use of author's neologisms: semantic, lexical and occasionalisms. Roman T.N. Tolstoy "Kys" as an "encyclopedia of Russian life".

term paper, added 09/03/2013

Styles of the modern Russian language, their characteristics. Principles and originality of popular presentation. Advertising text from the standpoint of modern linguistics. Semantic categories of student slang. Modern popular expressions, phrases and aphorisms.

The characteristic features of the Russian language of modern times, the most important trends in its development are the following:

1) convergence of the literary language with the folk language;

2) interaction of literary language styles;

3) the tendency to "economy" of language means in speech;

4) a tendency towards uniformity and simplification of individual forms and structures;

5) strengthening of analytical elements in the language system.

There are noticeable shifts in the ratio of styles of the Russian literary language of our time (speech means are moving in the system of styles, the strong influence of social and journalistic styles is affecting, a new production and technical style is being formed, etc.).

But of particular importance for the development of the literary language is the influence of the spoken language on it.

What features characterize the functioning of the literary language at the end of the 20th century?

First, the composition of participants in mass communication has never been so numerous and diverse (by age, education, official position, political, religious, social views, party orientation).

Secondly, official censorship has almost disappeared, so people express their thoughts more freely, their speech becomes more open, confidential, and relaxed.

Thirdly, speech begins to dominate spontaneous, spontaneous, not prepared in advance.

Fourth, the diversity of communication situations leads to a change in the nature of communication. It is freed from rigid formality, it becomes more relaxed.

New conditions for the functioning of the language, the emergence of a large number of unprepared public speeches lead not only to the democratization of speech, but also to a sharp decline in its culture. How is it shown?

Firstly, in violation of the orthoepic (pronunciation), grammatical norms of the Russian language. Scientists, journalists, poets, ordinary citizens write about it. Especially a lot of criticism is caused by the speech of deputies, television and radio workers.

Secondly, at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, the democratization of the language reached such proportions that it would be more correct to call the process liberalization, or, more precisely, vulgarization.

On the pages of the periodical press, in the speech of educated people, jargon, colloquial elements and other non-literary means poured in: grandmas, piece, piece, stolnik, baldness, pump out, launder, unfasten, scroll and many more. etc. Common, even in official speech, became the words tusovka, disassembly, lawlessness, the last word in the meaning of "unlimited lawlessness" has gained particular popularity.

For speakers, public speakers, the measure of admissibility has changed, if not completely absent. Cursing, "obscene language", "unprintable word" today can be found on the pages of independent newspapers, free publications, in the texts of works of art. Dictionaries are sold in shops and book markets, containing not only jargon, thieves, but also obscene words.

There are quite a few people who say that swearing and swearing are considered a characteristic, distinctive feature of the Russian people. If we turn to oral folk art, proverbs and sayings, it turns out that it is not entirely legitimate to say that the Russian people consider swearing an integral part of their lives. Yes, people are trying to somehow justify it, to emphasize that scolding is a common thing: Scolding is not a reserve, and without it not for an hour; Swearing is not smoke - the eye will not eat out; Hard words break no bones. It seems to even help in the work, you can’t do without it: You won’t swear, you won’t do the job; Without swearing, you can't unlock the lock in the cage.

The main changes in the Russian language at the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st centuries occur in three main areas:

2. in the lexical-phraseological system;

3. the sphere of functioning of language units.

In speech: Political and journalistic speech undergoes the greatest changes at the present stage of development of the Russian language. Both political and journalistic speech demonstrate tendencies of pluralization and personification. At the same time, new aspects of speech are being actively formed in the Russian language - advertising and commercial (business). The totalitarian language of the Soviet era has ceased to coexist. Changes in the everyday sphere of speech are associated with an emotional reaction to the difficulties of this period. Everyday speech changes in the direction of even greater colloquialism and dialogization.

In the lexico-phraseological system: Now there is a very active process of borrowing foreign vocabulary by the Russian language. The main areas of borrowing are the following thematic areas:

1) market economy;

2) politics;

3) mass culture.

Vocabulary recently borrowed can be subdivided into the following groups:

1) vocabulary that names realities that were previously absent in Russian reality: broker, dealer, voucher, holding, supermarket, ATM, impeachment, grant, showman and much more.

2) vocabulary that names realities that previously had a name in Russian, but these realities have changed under the new conditions, which led to their renaming by foreign words and, which designate these realities more adequately: “management” instead of “management”, “marketing” instead of "planning of demand and advice", "speaker" - "instead of the head of the House of Parliament", etc.

3) vocabulary naming realities that have not changed in Russian reality, but which had complex compound names in Russian (the result of the operation of the law - saving speech efforts): "shopping" - shopping for shopping; "second hand" - second-hand clothing store, etc.

The development of the phraseological composition of the Russian language.

The development of the phraseological composition of the language has increased markedly in recent decades. There was a so-called tracing of phraseological units, i.e. the transition of a foreign language turnover in parts (shock therapy, the ruling party, the pirate business, high fashion, a hotline). Youth jargon also becomes a source of replenishment of the phraseological fund of the Russian language. We can note some new phraseological models that have emerged in recent years: "black Tuesday", "play the card", "new Russian".

Thus, the Russian language is not in a deplorable state. It should be noted that in different periods of the Russian language its development was different, depending on the intensity of social changes.

1) Weak development. The period of stable socio-economic development of society (50-70 years of the XX century)

2) Intensive development. During the period of major socio-political and economic changes, during the period of intensive cultural development (the era of Peter I, the era of Lomonosov, the era of Pushkin.)

3) Rapid development. In the era of changing socio-economic formations (20-30 years, 80-90 years of the XX century).

Under the influence of social factors, there are changes in the vocabulary of the Russian literary language:

new words appear, formed by traditional word-building methods (affixation, compounding);

abbreviation formation of new words is activated; borrowing of foreign words continues;

the vocabulary of the literary language is replenished with colloquial, dialect, professional vocabulary;

the stylistic and emotionally expressive coloring of many words changes; words associated with the old way of life are leaving the language.

In modern society, there is not a crisis of language, but a crisis of language use. The crisis of mastering the language by a native speaker, changes in it: inability to use neologisms, lack of understanding of new words, neglect of the norms of speech culture (lagging behind the "native speakers" of the language from its development). This is always the case in the period of rapid development of the language. Language as a system does not experience a crisis, we can talk about the presence of crisis phenomena in society in relation to the development and use of the language and the observance of language norms, that is, the crisis of speech culture.

The state of speech culture of society at the present stage

After 1991, in the speech practice of society, some positive trends:

expansion of the vocabulary of the language in the field of economic, political and legal vocabulary;

approximation of the language of the media to the needs of reliable coverage of reality;

the convergence of the language of notes and correspondence with literary colloquial speech, the rejection of the clerical style in journalism;

de-ideologization of some layers of vocabulary;

the disuse of many newspaper stamps of the Soviet era;

return to some cities and streets of historical names.

A positive impact on the development of the language has a change in the conditions of public communication: the abolition of censorship, the opportunity to express personal opinion, the opportunity for listeners to evaluate the oratorical talents of prominent politicians.

Along with the positive in modern speech, mass distribution has received negative trends:

fixing grammatical errors as samples of sentence construction;

inaccurate use of vocabulary, distortion of the meanings of words;

stylistic speech disorders.

The grammatical flaws of modern speech are:

replacement of personal forms of verbs with verbal nouns with suffixes -ation, -enie, -anie (regionalization, farming, criminalization, sponsoring, lobbying, investing);

loss of a certain meaning by words (progress, panacea, momentum, stabilization, exclusive);

heaps of case forms (during the operation to detain an armed criminal, course correction will be carried out in the direction of tightening reforms, about the plan of events held in connection with the celebration ...);

replacement of case control by prepositional (the conference showed that ...);

replacement of the indirect case with a combination with how (sometimes this is as a concession, he is named as the best player);

wrong choice of case (based on some materials).

Lexical shortcomings of speech are:

distribution of words with a narrow (situational) meaning (state employee, contract worker, beneficiary, industry worker, security official);

the use of borrowings that are incomprehensible to many, sometimes even to the speaker himself (briefing, distributor, kidnapping);

the use of abbreviations (UIN, OBEP, OODUUM and PDN ATC, civil defense and emergency situations);

the ideologization of certain layers of vocabulary, the invention of new labels (group egoism [about the demands of people to respect their rights when building territories, to pay salaries on time], consumer extremism [about the desire of citizens to receive quality services]).

The style of speech (in almost all functional styles) today is characterized by such negative features:

transformation of metaphors into new patterns (vertical of power, recovery of the economy), sometimes meaningless (biased barriers, Russia today is sick with people’s health, Russia is the main person here, local authorities are struggling with a lack of funds [I would like to add here: the lack is still winning in this unequal struggle] );

the use of words that hide the essence of phenomena (social insecurity [poverty], involvement of firms in charitable activities [illegal extortions from entrepreneurs]);

the penetration of jargon into journalistic and oral official speech;

abuse of emotionally colored vocabulary in official public speech.

Culture of speech: subject and tasks

The subject and tasks of the culture of speech
The term "culture of speech" is ambiguous.

L.I. Skvortsov gives the following definition: "Culture of speech, possession of the norms of oral and written literary language (rules of pronunciation, stress, grammar, word usage, etc.), as well as the ability to use expressive language means in different communication conditions in accordance with the goals and content of speech" . In linguistic literature, it is traditionally customary to talk about two stages of mastering a literary language: 1) the correctness of speech and 2) speech skill. The culture of speech implies a fairly high level of the general culture of a person, the culture of his thinking, knowledge of the language.
The culture of speech as a linguistic science studies the totality and system of communicative qualities. The subject of her study is a theoretical justification and description of speech culture in its entirety and the system of its communicative qualities. The concept of "communicative quality" is the main theoretical concept of the doctrine of the culture of speech. The communicative qualities of speech are understood as its features, objective properties that optimally meet the needs of communication and testify to a high speech culture, its perfection.

Thus, culture of speech solves many interesting problems theoretical nature: normalization and codification (at all levels of the literary language), stylistic differentiation of the language of speech; language policy and culture of speech, culture of speech and bilingualism, national and individual in speech, the interaction of literary and non-literary elements (colloquial, dialect, jargon), etc.
However, the culture of speech is not only a theoretical, but also a practical discipline. Its practical aspect is related to the methodology of teaching a language at a university and secondary school, the creation of various orthological dictionaries, reference books, manuals on the culture of speech, the promotion of literary speech norms, taking into account the functional aspect, etc.
Cultural and speech research is carried out using certain methods that are widely used in linguistics. This is, first of all, a method of direct observation of speech and language facts: researchers collect and process language material, then draw theoretical and practical conclusions based on the data obtained. Another method often used in research on the culture of speech is the method of questionnaire survey (or questioning), which allows for mass research.
24 Accuracy and consistency of speech

(well written in notebook Lecture 2)

Homonyms and paronyms.

Paronyms(from Greek para - next to, near and onoma - name) - these are the same root words of one part of speech, similar in sound, but having different lexical meanings, for example: progressive - progressive, evil - malicious, water - water, etc.

In oral and written speech, one should especially carefully monitor the correct use of paronyms, since their close structure (one root, one part of speech, similar composition of the word) and often quite close meaning create prerequisites for errors: one paronym, incorrect, is used instead of another , correct. For example, in the statement I work every weekday, the word weekday is mistakenly used with the meaning "ordinary, ordinary, everyday" instead of its paronym weekday with the meaning "working day of the week".

Homonyms(ancient Greek ὁμός - the same + ὄνομα - name) - different in meaning, but identical in sound and spelling units of the language (words, morphemes, etc.). The term was introduced by Aristotle.

Classification

Full (absolute) homonyms - homonyms that have the same entire system of forms. For example, attire (clothes) - outfit (order), forge (forge) - bugle (wind instrument).

Partial homonyms - homonyms that do not have the same form. For example, weasel (animal) And affection (show of tenderness) diverge in the genitive plural form ( weasels - caresses).

· Grammar homonyms, or homoforms - words that coincide only in separate forms (of the same part of speech or different parts of speech). For example, the numeral three and verb three coincide only in two forms (to three - we are three, three apples - three are stronger!).

Purity, clarity and accessibility of speech.

( is in lecture 2)

27. Expressiveness of speech. Phraseologisms. Synonyms.

(see Lecture 3)

The article is devoted to the analysis of the modern language situation. The main factors influencing the development of the modern literary language are determined, among which the central place belongs to the language of the media. The prospects and nature of the development of the modern Russian literary language are characterized.

Keywords: language situation, mass media language, mass culture, postmodernism, literary language, national language

In works devoted to the state of the modern Russian literary language, in reports and speeches by Russian linguists, the intonation is alarming. The Russian language is being invaded by foreign borrowings (primarily Americanisms). A stream of jargon, vernacular, even obscene vocabulary has poured into literary speech. Under the influence of these negative factors, our speech loses the quality of literature, needs urgent measures of salvation. The topic of discussion in the program of V. Tretyakov “What is to be done?” is typical. (Culture channel, February 21, 2010): “The Russian language is still great, but no longer powerful?”

Is the diagnosis correct and are fears about the state and fate of native speech justified?

Of course, the observations are correct, but it seems premature and unjustified to draw pessimistic conclusions from the observed processes. It is important to proceed from the peculiarities of the modern language situation and take into account the trends arising from it.

Let us turn from this point of view to foreign borrowings. Indeed, their number, as it seems to a superficial glance, exceeds the critical mass. But how to determine this mass, an acceptable measure of borrowing, after which satiety sets in, the abuse of foreign vocabulary? For example, according to French linguists, more than 20,000 foreign words are poured into the French language every year, which causes public concern, concerned that French may eventually turn into “French” 1 .

As for the Russian language, two reference dictionaries “New Words and Meanings” were published based on the materials of the press and literature of the 60s. (M., 1971) and the 70s. (M., 1984). They also recorded English-language borrowings, which were more or less widespread. However, their number was not counted, and borrowings not recommended for use were not given, which seems to be especially important. After all, borrowings turn out to be ballast only when they do not denote new realities, do not express new meanings or their shades, do not differ stylistically from Russian equivalents (if any).

Therefore, the point is not even in the number of borrowings, but in their quality. When looking at the problem not in a normative, but in a functional sense, foreign borrowings will appear in a different light - as one of the leading trends in the development of the modern Russian literary language. At the same time, a feature of its current state is a sharp increase in the number of borrowings. With the development of science, economics, in connection with the course towards modernization, the Russian language is literally “doomed” to borrowings. Terms and concepts of computer science, economics, politics, etc. are poured into the Russian lexicon in a wide stream as the named industries form and develop on domestic soil (cf.: leasing, merchandising, nanotechnologies, innovations, innovation city, website, portal, web designer, user, hacker, marketing, etc.). They enter the language along with the development of the relevant branches of science and technology, which is promptly reflected in new dictionaries 2 . New trends in popular culture, postmodernism are also accompanied by vocabulary replenishment (tribute, single, sequel, prequel, suspense, etc.).

The Russian lexicon is expanding quite significantly. This process is actively ongoing. And it would be wrong to complain about this, or even more so to try to look for Russian equivalents of new words. We are witnessing a powerful productive process of enrichment of the Russian vocabulary 3 .

Foreign borrowings not only significantly expand the vocabulary, increasing the possibilities of nomination, expanding the national linguistic picture of the world. They also have a significant impact on the internal language development - on the enrichment of the semantics of many Russian words. So, under the influence of foreign words (semantic tracing), words such as a nail (season), challenge (to humanity), successful (man), etc. acquired new shades of meaning. Thus, borrowing foreign words is a very productive and progressive process. The activation of this process is one of the features of the modern language situation. Borrowings contribute to the expansion of verbal resources, the development of semantics, the intellectualization of the language (the number of concepts increases), the laconicism of speech (Russian equivalents, if possible, are, as a rule, longer than foreign neologisms).

Jargon and vernacular also have a generally positive effect on the literary language. They bring expression, evaluativeness into it, liberate official speech, saving it from excessive pathos, solemnity, bookishness. It is far from accidental that many jargons have entered the literary language (for example, partying, lawlessness, scumbags), while others are on the way to entering it (collision, roof, racketeering, arrow, throw). In any case, this source of enrichment of the literary language remains open. Of course, here there is a danger of oversaturation, so the linguistic taste of the writer (speaker), the assessment of specific texts, is very important. In the process of development of the literary language, the selection of the most relevant lexical units that meet social needs takes place.

If we evaluate the effect of all the named sources of replenishment of the dictionary (foreign vocabulary, jargon, vernacular), then the main and unifying function of them is that they contribute to the democratization of the literary language. L.V. wrote about this deeply and accurately. Shcherba:

“Before the revolution, technical words were almost not included in the literary language at all.<...>and did not even get into the pages of the daily press. This is an old European tradition of literary languages<...>. This was quite understandable: the literary language in the first place was then the language of the salon, the language of high society, which stood very far from any kind of production.<...>. In the future, there is a process of gradual democratization of the literary language, served by the literary language of significant sections of business people. In this regard, in each new edition of the Dictionary of the French Academy, a new and new number of production terms appears. The same process, but not in such a clear form, took place with us. The revolution dramatically changed the state of things - and in the sense that real people from production themselves constituted that “society”, the function of which is the literary language, and the ideology of society changed. Non-working elements have lost weight in society. And the questions of production and its organization became the center of attention” (Shcherba, 1957: 137-138).

Democratization continues into the modern era. This is the main path of development of the literary language from its classical state (XX century) to the modern one. This is the path from its literaturocentric quality, when the literary language was the flesh and blood of the language of fiction, to its modern state, when its main features are determined by the language of the media (more details below). And for the first time in the entire history of its existence, the literary language becomes the property of not the elite, not an insignificant part of its speakers, but the property of the people, the masses. This is one of the main features of the modern language situation, which determines the direction of development of the literary language.

The nature of culture (cf. noble, raznochinskaya, peasant, proletarian) is determined by its bearers. The homogeneous language environment determines the conservative nature of the development of the language, the weak role of borrowings from various sources. Changing the composition of native speakers leads to dramatic shifts in the standard language. New groups, layers of native speakers introduce their language skills, favorite means into literary speech, which affects the qualities of the entire literary language. A period of stability gives way to a period of more or less dramatic changes.

The period we are experiencing (the end of the 20th - the beginning of the 21st century) is characterized by a serious change in the composition of native speakers. So, with the spread of the Internet, the rapid development of mass communication, the base of the literary language is expanding dramatically. Native speakers get the word and begin to actively express themselves, not constrained by the norms of the former speech culture, and often opposing themselves to culture. These are, as a rule, carriers of urban vernacular, slang. There is a further democratization of the literary language, stimulated by social changes (“perestroika”, political and economic reforms, the formation of a middle class).

Factors that have a strong influence on the development of the literary language, on the process of its democratization, also include such phenomena as mass culture, postmodernism (modernism), and the language of the media.

In linguistic reality, everything is interconnected: poetry, prose, art, media, science, folk culture, mass culture, the Internet. But far from all these factors are equivalent, and their mutual influence does not always proceed clearly, openly. It is often done implicitly. The principle operates, and its implementation takes different forms in different areas. It is necessary to distinguish between the direct external and open influence of extralinguistic factors and their internal influence.

A feature of the modern cultural situation is a radical change in the very system of culture. “Mass culture is becoming its main, dominant element. Elite (the former cultural dominant) and folk culture are pushed to the periphery, and turn out to be secondary in the new system of culture” (Romanenko, 2009: 265).

Mass culture is one of the factors of strong influence on the literary language. Powerful criticism that falls on mass culture is conducted from the standpoint of the educational role of art and literature, while mass culture is opposed to the elite, mass literature is classical 4 . But in linguistic terms - from the point of view of the development of the literary language, the formation of the norm - the very fact of the existence of mass culture (primarily literature) is important. And no matter how subjectively we treat this phenomenon, such is the linguistic reality. Mass culture has an impact on the literary language already by virtue of its mass character. Classical literature and modern literature close to it in terms of prevalence are much inferior to mass literature, and therefore the impact of serious literature on the literary language is much weaker.

Mass culture changes and complicates the linguistic reality. And the analysis of the modern language situation is impossible without taking into account mass culture (literature). The prevailing negative assessment of mass culture simplifies and eliminates its role in the public consciousness and in the development of the literary language. The time has come for a deeper and more realistic analysis of mass culture (literature). Unfortunately, there are no works investigating the influence of mass culture on the literary language. It is not uncommon for those who write about popular literature to be carried away by examples of stylistic errors. However, the issue is not limited to errors. There is, if not competition, then interaction between mass literature and literature that inherits the traditions of the classics. And this interaction requires deep reflection.

It can be assumed that mass literature, designed for significant layers of native speakers, contributes to the development and introduction into the literary language of a wide range of colloquial means, urban vernacular. Of course, negative trends are also noticeable in popular literature (decrease in linguistic taste, frequent glamour, etc.). However, it is not always correct to evaluate mass literature by the standards of classical literature. Mass literature has other tasks, a different aesthetic ideal. And the characterization of the modern language situation, the current state of the literary language will be incomplete without taking into account the language of mass literature.

“Mass literature (mass art in general) acts as one of the forces that unite society. Through mass culture, its symbols and signs, the individual has the opportunity to adequately, as it seems to him, evaluate himself and correctly identify himself. It does this by reinforcing the figurative system of national identity, the corpus of national traditions, through the constant transmission of existing stereotypes and the introduction of new ones, intelligible for an unprepared “consumer”. In many ways, it is thanks to mass literature that a single system of ideas, images and ideas is being formed in society” (Kupina et al., 2010: 57).

The impact of mass culture on the literary language is not least connected with the general postmodern situation in culture. Having emerged as a phenomenon of art (postmodernism covers the second half of the 20th century and is relevant for the beginning of the 21st century), postmodernism has penetrated into all spheres of human activity and has become a sign of the era (Kaminskaya, 2008: 94). S.I. Smetanina, who considers the media text in the system of culture, sees the specifics of Russian postmodernism “in experiencing the monstrous impasse of Soviet civilization”, and the features of the new journalistic text “in mixing documentary and artistic discourse”, “including it in a conditional context that is much more interesting than the actual information” (Mediatext , 2002: 79). The text, therefore, does not so much tell about reality as it creates it. And the authors of not only literary texts, but also texts of mass communication turn to the postmodernist style of writing.

Characteristic signs of such a manner are the spread of the technique of “quoting writing”, the game element, intertextuality, the combination of the voices of the author, character and narrator. “The dominance of the author of the text of mass communication over the “foreign word” and even over the “cultural background of the era” allows linguists to imagine the period we are considering as the “era of cultural interpretation of the finished word”, in which there are entire interpretative models of the most important national and cultural stereotypes” (Annenkova, 2006: 69-78).

So, the modern language situation is very complicated. The literary language is influenced by such heterogeneous factors as social changes (“perestroika”, reforms), mass culture, postmodernism, the Internet, etc. As a result, means of different, often opposite stylistic coloring are poured into the literary language. This leads, as many researchers rightly write, to the democratization of the literary language. But the question arises: how are such heterogeneous stylistic streams united in the literary language? And here we come to the main, central feature of the modern language situation.

Under the conditions of functional-style stratification, each functional style manifests a literary language. In each of them, with greater or lesser relief, certain features of the literary language are found. However, the linguistic consciousness of society needs a visual model of the literary language, which implements unity in diversity on the basis of any one style, acting as a kind of ideal representative of the literary language. Multi-style to one degree or another weakens the idea of the unity of the literary language, therefore, in each of the periods of development, society needs a style that would model, represent the literary language in its integrity and unity. This situation is especially acutely felt in our days, when heterogeneous stylistic streams that have poured into the literary language literally “blur” literary speech.

If in the 19th, partly in the 20th century, the concept of literary language was associated primarily with the language of fiction, then in our time the language of the media claims this role, which is associated both with its polythematic nature and with the changed conditions for its functioning. Television, radio, newspapers, magazines, movies have penetrated into all “pores” of human life. In terms of the strength of its influence on society, on the formation of linguistic tastes, linguistic behavior, and literary norms, the language of the media cannot be compared with the language of fiction, or with any other style. It is no accident that back in the 50s of the twentieth century. Academician N.I. Konrad called the language of the media the general, average language of the nation (Konrad, 1959: 12).

“Media language today,” writes Yu.N. Karaulov, - gained a dominant position among all functional varieties, absorbing, absorbing, assimilating the resources of all functional styles. In other words, the language of the media today is, whether we like it or not, a generalized model, an aggregate image of the national language, the collective user of which is all Russians” (Karaulov, 2001: 12).

The language of the media, by its very nature and functions, is intended to be a model of the national language. Journalism does not consciously seek to become such a model. Journalists did not and should not have such a goal. Journalism becomes a model of the national language spontaneously. Like the national language, journalism covers all spheres of life. And in this regard, it is commensurable, comparable to the national language. The language of the media reflects, analyzes, evaluates all spheres and phenomena of life, but from a special angle. The journalist “deals with mass consciousness (for him it is both a product and material) and, according to the same logic, he must probably transform this mass consciousness from its previous state into some new one. And in this way justify the necessity of one's profession” (Muratov, 2009: 207).

No other kind of national language has such a power of mass influence and such an important role in society as the language of the media. Therefore, by its very nature, functions and qualities, the language of the media acts as a factor that unites all layers, groups of native speakers.

For the linguistic consciousness of society, it is the language of the media that embodies ideas about the national language. Intelligentsia, urban, rural population, speakers of dialects and jargons - the speech of all these groups proceeds to a certain extent in isolation. And only in the language of the media, all these stylistic streams are combined, forming a new functional and stylistic unity, representing the national language - the language of the media.

Being polythematic, spreading to all spheres of life, the language of the media, unlike any other kind of language, is able to include almost all linguistic means. However, this process does not have the character of a simple transfer from one language sphere to another. The language of the media masters, processes, and literalizes the means of various functional areas, changing their stylistic quality, giving them a uniform average coloring within the language of the media. This is what happens with foreign borrowings, which, due to repeated repetition in the media, lose to a large extent the coloring of bookishness, special speech, which contributes to their adaptation, development and significantly expands the lexicon, the scope of book-neutral means.

Jargon and vernacular undergo a similar process. Widely using them, the language of the media neutralizes their non-literary status, but emphasizes their appraisal, enhancing the pragmatic potential of the word, enriching its semantic structure.

Thus, the language of the media becomes “a source for the development and testing of new language tools, both informative and expressive (flash drive, online trading, ecotour, google, digitize, protest voting). Introducing them into a journalistic dialogue and reinforcing them with repeated repetition, the language of the media “patches holes” in the Russian language picture of the world” (Trofimova, Kuznetsova, 2010: 188).

Absorbing various stylistic streams, averaging and unifying them, the language of the media acts as a kind of laboratory in which new linguistic means are mastered, as the main language creator, shaping and fixing literary norms, as a means of maintaining the unity of the literary language. The role of the mass media language in modern language processes is exceptionally large and multifaceted. This is the main feature of the modern language situation. The development of the language takes place in the depths of functional styles and other areas of the national language. But the results of these processes are finally fixed in the language of the media.

If earlier the processes of language development were determined by the ratio “national language - literary language” (the latter was actually equated with the language of fiction), then in our time these processes are powerfully invaded by the language of the media and language development is determined by the triad “national language - language of the media - literary language". The language of the media is a kind of bridge between the national and literary language. Before becoming the property of the literary language, the means of the national language are processed in the language of the media. Ultimately, the language of the media becomes the main factor in the development of both the national and the literary language.

There was a time when the language of the newspaper was classified as a “lower literary formation” (A.M. Peshkovsky), and artistic speech occupied the top of the stylistic pyramid. But those times are gone. In the modern era, the language of the media has come to the forefront of language development. And it remains for us to study the incalculable consequences of the new linguistic situation. In our time, the source of literary norms lies in the media. It is here that new words, usages, turns of phrase, etc. are tested and approved. The role of fiction and authoritative writers in these processes tends to zero. And no matter how subjectively we may relate to such a situation, such is the linguistic reality, a sign of the times. Being literary at its core, the language of the media pushes, expands the boundaries of literature, mastering dialects, jargons, and vernacular.

Of course, it would be an oversimplification to reduce all development processes to the functioning of the media language. Literary language is a multidimensional formation. The complexity of the modern language situation lies in the action of many factors, such as functional styles, areas of the national language, genres. They continue to act, influencing the literary language, making it multi-register, polyphonic. However, all these processes are combined, acquire a common vector due to the language of the media, which implements unity in diversity.

“The language of the media is not one of the varieties of the national language, but is an independent full-fledged model of the national language. To describe and study the language of the media means to analyze and evaluate the degree of use of resources and satisfaction of the basic needs of this phenomenon, to assess the degree of objectivity and completeness of the picture of the world reproduced in it, the nature and degree of compliance with the national ideals of those possible worlds that are constructed in the language of the media” (Karaulov , 2007: 138).

Each of the spheres of the national language develops and functions relatively independently, which determines the linguistic (stylistic) status of these spheres. But only in the language of the media all these areas appear interconnected, transformed, manifesting the national language as its model.

This, in particular, explains the high prestige of the mass media language, which performs the function of a reference language in public practice, influencing politics, literature, and culture in general. The prominent role of the language of the media is increasingly beginning to be realized by researchers. “Today, the media are the main tool of political influence in modern society. They can be an effective means of influencing the social climate” 5 . “Today, in almost all Slavic languages, the language of the mass media, journalism is being approved as a “reference speech” (Nemishchenko, 2004: 107).

Acquiring aesthetic qualities, aesthetic originality, the language of the media begins to influence the language of fiction, even the language of lyric poetry. One of the striking examples is the work of Blaise Cendrars, which Soviet literary criticism attributed to the direction of poetic realism.

“Approximately around 1910, several lyric poets, primarily in France, as if undertaking to compete not only with the objectivity of painting, but with a newspaper, announcement, poster, advertisement, poster, strive to include maximum visual information in poetry. They are ready to present it in a catchy, undivided, direct way, without generalizing typification. As if to give it just the way life breaks into their work. Often - in the form of chains or clusters of facts, events, experiences and their metaphorical reflections” (Balashov, 1971: 191). Entire newspaper genres are often borrowed. The use of the reporting form in literature has become a stable tradition.

Thus, the language of the media becomes a powerful aesthetic factor and changes the overall linguistic picture of culture.

So, the modern language situation is complex, multidimensional and multifactorial. All spheres and varieties included in the national and literary language retain their significance and continue to operate. However, this does not lead to the emergence of many independent "languages". And the main unifying factor is the language of the media. The unifying function of the language of the media reflects the situation that exists in modern society, in which the middle class is being formed, the role of which, according to sociologists, will increase. If in the previous era the literary language was associated primarily with the elite, then at the present stage the literary language is the average speech of the whole society, especially its middle class.

The leading role of the media language in the development of the literary language does not mean a complete cessation of other factors (mass culture, classical and modern serious literature, the Internet, etc.). All these factors continue to operate, but act indirectly, indirectly. In this case, the language of the media acts as an intermediary, a filter. So, fiction (not mass) literature, if it continues to influence the literary language, then mainly through the language of the media. Before becoming the property of the literary language, diverse means of various stylistic affiliations must pass through the language of the media. The language of the media becomes a standard, a kind of legislator of literature.

What are the consequences and prospects of the described modern language situation?

If we try to generalize the effect of the factors mentioned above and outline the trends in the development of the literary language, then we can say that modern literary speech is moving towards neutralization, averaging, intellectualization (cf. the massive influx of foreign borrowings, the entry and partial neutralization of jargon and vernacular). And this is primarily due to the unusually increased role of the language of the media. At the present stage, the media form not only public opinion, but also in many respects the literary language. The democratization of the literary language noted by many researchers is nothing more than the assimilation by the literary language of spheres that previously did not have such an important meaning and were outside the literary language 6 .

In the “cauldron” of the language of mass communication, these means are processed, assimilated and begin to be used on a par with traditionally neutral and bookish ones. At the same time, the vector of development is shifting from bookiness to neutrality. If we use the old Lomonosov terms, then we can say that the “middle” style comes to the fore. "High" is losing its positions, "low" is approaching the middle, providing the means for the "medium" style. The aesthetic ideal of literary speech as a whole is difficult to formulate - it changes in relation to certain varieties of literary language, genres, etc. However, for all spheres of literary speech, there is a tendency to reduce or eliminate pathos, to adequately convey information using minimal linguistic means.

The modern period of development of the literary language is characterized by the influence of many factors. The field of action of the literary language is expanding, capturing almost the entire national language. The development of the literary language takes place under the sign and under the decisive influence of the language of the media. This is the main feature of the modern language situation. And no matter how one treats it - for example, to regret the sharp decline in the role of classical and modern serious (not mass) literature in the formation of literary norms, such is the objective reality. And it does not give grounds for subjective conclusions about the deterioration of the literary language, even about its death.

We are experiencing a new period in the development of the literary language. And what is often regarded as a corruption, in fact, these are new qualities of the literary language, due to new social conditions and a new language situation. Boris Strugatsky answered very well to those who are preparing for a memorial service in their native language: “Anything can happen to the Russian language: perestroika, transformation, transformation - but not extinction. It is too big, powerful, flexible, dynamic and unpredictable to take and suddenly disappear. Unless - together with us” 7 .

Notes

1 Wed. a similar neologism is Denglish (Deutch + English).

2 Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language XX! century. Current vocabulary / Ed. G.N. Sklyarevskaya. M., 2008; Krysin L.P. Explanatory dictionary of foreign words. 3rd ed. M., 2001.

3 Of course, this process may have costs. Not all new words will receive citizenship rights. The borrowing of some words is dictated by fashion (cf. the widespread use of the word trends instead of trends, approaches: “new trends in teaching literature.” Often, foreign words are used for the sake of a falsely understood prestige, although Russian words could well be dispensed with. The Russian language, like any other , needs to be protected for its purity.As an example, we can cite the "Official Dictionary of Neologisms" periodically reprinted in France, containing more than 2,500 foreign words that are not recommended for use. Unfortunately, we do not have such lexicographic publications.

4 Here is a typical example: "...High art educates, but mass culture corrupts and gradually removes the problem of humanism in principle? .2010).

5 Vartanova E.L. Terrorism is not a sensation // Media Trends. 2010. No. 4.

6 A strong impetus to democratization was also the push away from the odious language of the stagnant period, sinning with bookishness, burdened with clichés, and extremely ideological (see the works of N.A. Kupina).

7 News. 04/26/2010.

Bibliography

Annenkova I.V. The language of modern media in the context of Russian culture // Russian speech. 2006.

Balashov N.I. Cendrars and poetic realism of the twentieth century. // Blaise Cendrars. Around the world and deep into the world. M., 1971.

Kaminskaya T.L. Addressee in mass communication. Veliky Novgorod, 2008.

Karaulov Yu.N. Media language as a model of a national language // Media language as an object of interdisciplinary research. Abstracts of reports of the international scientific conference. M., 2001.

Karaulov Yu.N. Russian language and linguistic personality. M., 2007.

Konrad N.I. About “linguistic existence” // Japanese Linguistic Collection. M., 1959.

Kupina N.A., Litovskaya M.A., Nikolina N.A. Mass Literature Today. M., 2010.

Media text in the system of culture: dynamic processes in the language and style of journalism at the end of the 20th century. St. Petersburg, 2002.

Muratov S. Television in search of television. Chronicle of author's observations. M., 2009.

Neshimenko G.P. Language and culture in the history of the ethnos // Language. Ethnos. Culture. M., 1994.

Romanenko A.P. Soviet and post-Soviet mass verbal culture: common and different // Soviet past and present culture. T. 2. Ekaterinburg, 2009.

Trofimova O.V., Kuznetsova N.V. Journalistic text: linguistic analysis: Proc. allowance. M., 2010.

Shcherba L.V. Literary language and ways of its development (in relation to the Russian language) // Shcherba L.V. Selected works on the Russian language. M., 1957.