The Russian language is degrading - everyone is worried about this except linguists, who for some reason are calm and just chuckle. Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences Vladimir Plungyan in the lecture “Is the Russian language deteriorating? "as part of the project "" told what linguists think about language changes and who is actually spoiling it. “Mel” outlined the main points.
For those preparing for the main school exam
At first glance, it seems that there is no subject for conversation - it is clear that the Russian language is deteriorating, and this is an irreparable disaster. Meanwhile, talk about the corruption of language has accompanied humanity throughout history. This applies not only to the Russian language: the Chinese, the Japanese, the ancient Egyptians, and especially the French have always liked to speculate that the language is becoming different from what it used to be. It turns out that as long as humanity exists, language has been deteriorating. So when was he good? It turns out that never. Or that everything is not so clear.
What do we mean when we say “language deteriorates”
Usually, when talking about damage to the tongue, they mean that it used to be better, but now it has become worse. Like, everyone around is starting to say “turn on” instead of the correct “turn on”, drink neuter coffee and live “in Strogino”. Worse yet- people stop using good ones and for all of us famous words and begin to use jargon and borrowings.
Borrowing is the most common complaint. At the same time, they give examples of teenage Internet slang “go”, “gamat” and “sign up”, and they themselves quite calmly talk about how they make investments, conduct monitoring and learn marketing. But all these words are borrowed. Even “market”, “company”, “bank”, which have become familiar in the financial sphere, are also originally foreign words, the oldest of which, “market”, came from Polish and was formed from a German root rinc- square. “Finance” is a borrowing from French, “company” and “bank” are from Italian. Even the word “money”, which appeared in the 13th century, is not ours: the Kazakh “tenge” and the Russian “denga” are descendants of the same Turkic word.
It turns out that previously things were no better with borrowing than they are now. Maybe, after all, what is happening now with the Russian language is not a disaster, but natural process? And linguists take this calmly, not because they don’t care - they just know more. Not only about what is happening to the language now, but also about what happened to the language before, about changes in rules and norms.
What is the norm
To speak a language essentially means to know words and be able to put them next to each other according to certain rules. Native speakers know these rules unconsciously. And these rules, by the way, are very complex.
Vladimir Plungyan:“Everyone knows that the Russian verb has two forms: perfect and imperfect - “do”, “make”. And we use them without thinking, but try to explain this nuance to a foreigner. Hearing “please come in and sit down” (not perfect view) is much nicer than “come and sit” (perfect view). It would seem that let's fix this as a rule. But there is exactly the opposite example: “take a pen and sign” (perfect) sounds more polite than “take a pen and sign” (imperfect).”
We speak differently in different contexts, and there is no explanation why sometimes the perfect form is more polite than the imperfect form. Nevertheless, there are rules in this system.
Moreover, in different territories, in different dialects, different generations, even men and women have different languages - this is called linguistic variability, which exists in any language. This does not mean that there are no rules - there are just a lot of them, and they are different.
Photo: iStockphoto/izold
When one of these rules is chosen and declared a model, this is the norm. Language is a natural phenomenon, and the norm is the work of man. We choose one of many options and accept it as the standard because it is convenient. And then they act social mechanisms. We convince ourselves that the norm is good, and deviation is bad. We reward those who use the norm, that is, speak correctly, and persecute the rest. Perhaps 90% of people living today say “rings” and “turns on,” but we are sure that they are wrong, because the norm dictates saying “rings” and “turns on.”
Vladimir Plungyan:“We often hear the combination “pay for travel.” This is what many people say, for whom Russian is their native language. But the norm is “to pay the fare,” since according to the rules, a transitive verb does not need a preposition. From the point of view of language, these options are equal, and the norm says that the second is better. In fact, the words “better” or “worse” are inappropriate here. There is nothing sacred in the norm. It's just our decision. Because we agreed this way, the other options are still there. The norm does not prohibit anything. Recently, everyone was amused by the idea of a linguistic police, but language is not an area that can be regulated by prohibitions. It's pointless and stupid."
When a language changes, it doesn't deteriorate - it just becomes different
Language changes over time. Vocabulary, grammar, and language rules change. This happens continuously - tomorrow the Russian language will not be the same as it is today. The norm usually lags behind, but sooner or later it also has to be changed - this is what linguists do. Usually people don't like it when the language becomes different from the way they are used to speaking. But when summer gives way to winter, we do not say that summer spoils - just another season comes. Changes lead to the emergence of another language, which is no better and no worse.
Let's look at how the Russian language has changed over the centuries.
XII century. Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh
“And here in Chernigov I acted: a wild horse tied my hands with my hands; I tied 10 and 20 live horses in pushes, and besides, while riding in Russia I had my hands with the same wild horses. Tura threw me 2 at the roses and with the horse, the deer was one big, and 2 elk, one trampled with his feet, and the other was a big horn, the boar on my hip pulled away the sword, the bear bit me at the knee of the lining, the fierce beast jumped on my hips and the horse is more grounded with me; and God has kept me safe.”
This is Russian language. Even just understanding what we are talking about is not easy for today’s reader. It is unlikely that an untrained person will be able to translate word by word. In the 12th century, the Russian language was completely different: it has a different grammar, different forms of pronouns, verbs, numerals, and plural forms.
XV century. “Walking across Three Seas” by Afanasy Nikitin
“And I went to Derbent, crying, two ships: in one ship Ambassador Asanbeg, and the Teziks, and ten of us Rusak heads; and in the other ship there are six Muscovites, and six Tverians, and cows, and our food. And the truck arose on the sea, and the smaller ship crashed on the shore. And we came to Derbent, and Vasily came back in good health, and we were robbed. And you hit Vasily Papin and the Shirvanshin ambassador Asanbeg with your brow, who came with him, so that he would grieve for the people that they were caught near Tarkhi anyway.”
Historians value the notes of Afanasy Nikitin (a merchant of low birth) as a monument simple language that time. The grammar of the 15th century is closer to what we are used to, so this text is clearer than the Instruction, but there are still many differences. Eg, return particle“Xia” is separated from the verb, the old form of the instrumental case is used (“two courts” instead of “two courts”), many outdated words(“I was sad” - “I was concerned”).
17th century "The Life of Archpriest Avvakum"
“He took away my workers and didn’t hire anyone else from me. And the children were small; There are many foodies, but no one to work: one poor unfortunate archpriest. He made the sled and spent the whole winter dragging along the drag. In the spring, we floated down the Ingoda River on rafts. This is my fourth summer of sailing from Tobolsk. The forest was driven away by the mansion and the policeman. There was nothing left to eat: people began to die of hunger and from working in the water.
Grammatically, this language is practically modern Russian. The particle “Xia” has already turned into a suffix, but differences in vocabulary and syntax still remain. On the other hand, speakers of the northern dialects of our country can still say “starve to death.”
XVIII century. Military article of Peter I
“This article should be understood about these regiments and companies that are sent together with others, and without the knowledge of the commander to secretly interpret with the enemy, and what will be agreed upon about the allocation of a place or city, but not about those that are alone in what place they are stationed , and withstood the attack from the enemy, and made extreme resistance. Also, when they no longer had any hope of receiving a decree from the holder, or from the Feltmarashal or the general, they had no more hope of receiving a sikurs, but dealt with the enemy in the proper way.”
It seems that the text of Peter’s article is even more difficult to perceive than “The Life of Archpriest Avvakum,” and the point is not even that it is a document. The Peter the Great era is an era of changes in the Russian language, an era of shake-up, loosening of norms and a sharp influx of borrowings from German, Dutch, and French.
And it is difficult to perceive this text because many of the changes did not take root. Of the same borrowings, few have survived to our time, and this should reassure their opponents: the language takes only what is needed, and the rest gradually becomes a thing of the past.
Vladimir Plungyan:““Article” is a word we know, but we do not use it in the meaning of “decree”. The word “commander” and the “field marshal” and “general” that arose at the same time took root. But the word “sikurs”, which meant “help”, disappeared. The language of Peter the Great’s time was chaotic, unstable, but still much richer.”
XIX century. Bestuzhev-Marlinsky, story “Mulla-nur”, 1836
“The youth, splashing their hands, danced and sang around in a cheerful round dance with the self-confidence of simplicity, and - look! - in fact, the damp clouds extinguished the sun... The sky frowned, like a miser when parting with money, the shadow, like a strange dog, ran away with its tail between its legs; the surroundings faded; but everyone’s eyes sparkled and with tears of joy turned towards the living water...”
Bestuzhev-Marlinsky describes the Dagestan ritual of calling rain. We understand everything, but it is noticeable that the text is outdated.
Vladimir Plungyan:“We can read this, but we ourselves will no longer say “splashing with our hands”, “miser”, “at partings”, “tucked up”. Has the language become worse, in which instead of “parting” they say “parting”? No, it’s just that the language has changed quite a lot since the 19th century.”
XX century Dovlatov, “Reserve”
“While reading, I quietly fell asleep. Woke up at two in the morning. The pre-dawn summer twilight filled the room. It was already possible to count the ficus leaves on the window. I decided to calmly think things over. Try to dispel the feeling of catastrophe, dead end. Life spread out endlessly around minefield. I was in the center. It was necessary to divide this field into sections and get down to business. Break the chain of dramatic circumstances. Analyze the feeling of collapse. Study each factor separately."
Dovlatov - almost modern classic. For us, this is an absolutely correct, smooth, literary modern language. It would seem that here is a sample - what else is needed? The truth is that the language that now seems ideal to us is just a small point in the long evolution of the Russian language. We like it because we grew up with it and we understand it, but it won’t always be like that. Just as the language of Vladimir Monomakh differs from the language of Dovlatov, the language of Dovlatov will differ from the language of our great-grandchildren.
Therefore, evaluating a language from the point of view of “better”, “worse” is pointless, just as it is pointless to compare the language of Monomakh, Nikitin and the military article of Peter I - these are different languages, each of which serves the needs of its time.
Change is normal and we cannot influence it in any way. No one has power over language, language does not belong to anyone, and is not subject to anyone. As for the norm, she must follow him. The emphasis changes, and if everyone says “they’re ringing,” there won’t be anything objectively bad about it. There are no errors in language, there are only deviations, and today's error may well become tomorrow's norm.
Why older generations are annoyed by youth slang
Every new round Language development begins with those who are younger. This is the slang that irritates older generation, because it is different from their language. But there have always been differences in the speech of young people.
Nikolai Ognev, “The Diary of Kostya Ryabtsev”
“Then someone hit me right under the eye with something hard. I screamed because it was very painful, but Vanka and I ran out into the street and there was a fight. They were about to chase us, but soon there was an illuminated street and Milton. They fell behind. My eye was very painful and swollen.”
Andrey Gelasimov, “Tender Age”
“Yesterday we went with our boys to fight in the neighboring yard. They lost to us in basketball and don’t want to give us the money. The deal was for twenty bucks. Our boys spent five days collecting their twenty. They shook punks all over the area. Those who have money. Before, they would have shaken me too. In short, tall Andrei said - we need to punish. Half a tooth was broken. Now you have to insert it. The boys looked into my mouth and patted me on the shoulder. Andrey said - with a baptism of fire. Everything is the same at school. It sucks."
In Ognev’s diary of a teenage boy of the 20s of the 20th century, “dralka”, “melton” (policeman) appear - this is nothing more than youth slang that did not catch on. Usually such words short life- two or three decades. Although some words return: for example, “cool” and “cool” appeared several times.
And the word “kid,” which arose in the 1920s and was recorded by Sholokhov and Makarenko, has almost become established in the language, gradually losing its expressiveness and original meaning of “street child.”
Why are borrowings needed?
There is no language without borrowings. There are more borrowings in English than in any other language in the world, including Russian. Even the word “language” itself - language - is borrowed from French. The same Dovlatov has borrowings “catastrophe”, “factor”, but they do not confuse us. We are only confused by those borrowings that have appeared recently. But every borrowing was once recent, and someone could not get used to it.
The question most often asked is: why does the Russian language borrow words for which it has “its own” analogues?
Vladimir Plungyan:“Language will never borrow what it does not need. Language has its own logic. Another thing is that it may not be clear to us. For example, there is the word “teenager” and suddenly a new one appears - “teenager”. And why are teenagers bad? Why call them incomprehensible word? There is a feeling that the Russian language is missing something in the word teenager. If you look at the context, the word “teenager” is such an official, medical-legal one. “A project aimed at socializing difficult teenagers” - this is what the state says. And when we talk about the modern urban environment, we want more modern word. Nobody has heard the phrase “difficult teenagers.” But there is a “TV show for teenagers”, “SMS addiction of modern teenagers”. The difference between these words is significant!
In a huge number of cases, borrowing cannot be replaced by anything - in our language there are no simple short words for them.
Vladimir Plungyan:““Spoiler” is a very capacious and useful word. In the dictionary, to explain it in Russian, you need a few lines of neat text - “prematurely revealed important information that spoils the impression of watching a movie or reading a book.” Has the language deteriorated because this word appeared? He has become better."
The Russian language does not deteriorate and cannot deteriorate in principle. Because he reacts to all changes in society. And if a language reacts, it means it is alive, it is doing its job, it is developing, it is responding to the challenges of the time (by the way, we didn’t say that 20 years ago). If we continued to use the language of Marlinsky or even Dovlatov, we would simply not be able to describe modern life.
In fact, you can still ruin your language
And yet there are cases that cannot be called anything other than damage to the tongue. And moreover, we can say who is to blame and what to do about it. This applies to such phenomena as, for example, GOBU DOD YAO YARIOTS “New School”.
Vladimir Plungyan:“When they try to pass it off as the Russian language, it’s a corruption of the language. As a consolation, we can only say that piles of abbreviations are not a language, they are a parody of it invented by people. Yes, language is a natural phenomenon, cannot deteriorate, but it must be protected from such deformation.”
There will be no simple solutions here, but there may be correct ones.
“Issues of blood are the most difficult issues in the world,” said Bulgakov’s Koroviev from “The Master and Margarita.” And, perhaps, if he had decided to list them, he would probably have included language ones on the short list of the most complex issues. Too much Long story, too old grievances, too deep wounds, too many interested.
Each country solves language problems in its own way. They divide quotas on television and radio, teaching hours in schools and universities, in what language and in what cases to keep documentation, and think about how to respect everyone’s rights. Russia, here, as in many other things, has a truly “special” path. Russian tsars and Bolshevik leaders uprooted peoples on occupied lands: mentally - depriving them of language, traditions, culture, and physically.
Times change, Russia is still the same.
This has never happened, and here again the Kremlin is trying to destroy the Ukrainians as a nation and Ukraine as an independent state. Be slaves at court - please. Don’t forget to send tons of food to Moscow. Writing, inventing, researching, in order to later be classified as “Russian” - this is always the case. But to be free and independent - the Kremlin did not tolerate this, will not tolerate it and, what is important, will never tolerate it. Therefore, Crimea, Donbass, information war, and diplomatic war. But this time the language is not a post-method, when the main battles are over. Now he is on the front line.
And therefore, our future depends not least on the question of what we should do with the Russian language. And therefore it requires a clear answer. Moreover, when for the first time since 1991 we had the opportunity to actually do something. There is the most important thing: readiness and understanding of society. There is no longer any need to prove that this is necessary, how important it is and why. Russia explained and showed everything more than clearly.
FROM SWITZERLAND AND BELGIUM
Let's start with the fact that Switzerland is in many ways unique country. Just one episode: last year, during the referendum there, it was proposed to pay all adult citizens 2,500 thousand francs , and each child - 625 francs. And pensions, unemployment benefits and social payments, accordingly, were proposed to be abolished. Even this is difficult to imagine, and the Swiss surprised even more by voting against it. That is, they voted against receiving 2,500 thousand francs every month for no reason. Try to imagine similar situation we have. Did not work out? Same thing.
In Switzerland, all laws are published in four languages, and every citizen has the right to contact the central authorities in their native language. The same applies to court proceedings and all other cases of communication with the state. No one is required to know all government and National language, but most Swiss people know at least three. The native language, that is, the language of one's own canton (an administrative unit of Switzerland), often the language of a neighboring canton, German (if it is not the native language or the language of a neighboring canton - it is the most common in the country and the most popular in business) and English. Those who want to feel more confident in the labor market are now learning Spanish, Chinese or Arabic.
Yes, there are constant discussions in the country on the topic, for example, of the number of hours of teaching French, which is increasingly losing its position in the popularity rating. But - attention - not because Germany pays for its lobby and wants to seize Switzerland, but because it is more economically profitable to speak German and English both in Switzerland and abroad.
Another example of such “linguistic well-being” is Canada. A country that historically was partly a colony of France, partly of Great Britain, and where there are now two official languages - English and French. Typically, residents of French-speaking provinces also speak English, but English residents do not speak French. But again, according to economic reasons: English is the world business language.
Typically, residents of French-speaking provinces also speak English, but English residents do not speak French. But again, for economic reasons
Moreover, for about 12% of Canadians both languages are second (according to the 2006 census). Because at home they speak their native languages - Chinese (more than 790 thousand), Punjabi (about 278.5 thousand), Spanish (about 210 thousand), Italian (more than 170 thousand), Ukrainian (more than 148 thousand) . And, most importantly, the situation with knowledge of English-French is not connected with the lobby of the USA or Britain and the plans of one of them to seize Canada, but with historical and economic reasons.
At the same time, passionate advocates of Russian as a second state often suffer from sclerosis regarding Belgium. A country that is permanently under threat of collapse due to the linguistic confrontation between Flanders (Flemish-speaking) and Wallonia (French-speaking), which began in the middle of the 19th century - and there is no end in sight. But again, only the Belgians are in conflict, France is not encroaching on Wallonia, and the Netherlands is not dreaming of capturing Flanders.
This is all to say that - here in syllables - one cannot take such countries as an example for solving the language issue in Ukraine. Firstly, their history is radically different from ours. Secondly, neither the former metropolises nor the current neighbors encroach on their territory, nor on their culture and nations. Language issues there are completely internal in nature, and take their origins from their histories and current problems. And no one is eager to “help” them in their decision.
TO LATVIA AND BELARUS
If we should take someone as an example, then we need to look for “colleagues in misfortune.” We have them, and quite a lot. They are also commonly called countries of the former Soviet Union. Let's take the most striking examples: Latvia and Belarus. These are two countries that, after 1991, unlike Ukraine, gave a fairly clear answer to the question of what to do with the Russian language. And these answers were the opposite.
The official language in Latvia is Latvian. Having gained independence, official Riga began to pursue a rather strict language policy. There were serious reasons for this: during its stay in the USSR, where the free development of all peoples and languages was supposedly guaranteed, Latvian found itself on the verge of extinction.
The use of Latvian in public and official languages is mandatory in the country. municipal government, when writing personal names and geographical names, in certain areas of the economy, in the field of education and culture, in the media. Also in Latvia, the State Language Center (CSL) has been created.
During its stay in the USSR, where the free development of all peoples and languages was supposedly guaranteed, Latvian found itself on the verge of extinction
In 1991, it was decided that not everyone who wanted to receive it would receive citizenship “automatically,” as was the case in Ukraine. And only those who pass the exam on knowledge of the Latvian language. The rest were allowed to live in the country, albeit with the status of “non-citizens.” They have passports, but they - purple, and not burgundy, like the citizens, for which people received the nickname “purple”. The main thing you need to know about non-citizens is that they cannot be deputies, presidents, or even minor clerks in any government agency. And they do not have the right to vote in elections at any level.
But after ten and twenty years, Latvian turned out to be inaccessible for study for representatives of only one ethnic group - Russians. The naturalization procedure - that is, passing a language exam and becoming a citizen - can be completed at any time. But no. Russians continue to stubbornly refuse to study Latvian, depriving themselves not only of their rights as citizens, but also the opportunity to get a well-paid job (without knowledge of Latvian it is impossible to get such a job in any field).
In 2014, among Russian-speaking citizens of Latvia conducted a survey. Among others, there were questions about under what conditions they would begin to use the Latvian language more often. So, most of the answers boil down to the fact that the Russian should become the second state, and they should become citizens. And so that, since this is the case, they don’t have to learn the Latvian language.
Well, the Kremlin, although it receives a loyal enclave of Russian speakers in Latvia, because of this it is deprived of the opportunity to directly, through them, influence the internal and foreign policy countries. Therefore, he is trying to work around it, using a tactic that has already been tested many times: actively supporting the passionate desire of Russian speakers not to learn the state language at all costs (reminds me of something, right?). For example, in Latvia they are very familiar with the Russkiy Mir Foundation, which, by the way, is not alone in its activities there.
And if you read the Russian-language Latvian media, there will be many “arguments” and claims that are painfully familiar to any Ukrainian. “Nazis”, “titular nation”, “injustice”, “infringement of the rights of national minorities” - in general, full set. At the same time, the Kremlin, through Russian-speaking non-citizens of Latvia, is lobbying its “view” on language policy in the institutions of the European Union. And quite effectively - more than once Riga has softened language laws and norms due to comments from Brussels. At the same time, studies show that the language policy of the authorities is effective: since 1989, the number of representatives of national minorities who speak Latvian at least basic level, increased approximately fourfold (from 23% to 91%).
Second shining example- Belarus. Russian is the second state language, officially on a par with Belarusian. In 2015, at a conference in Vilnius, a scientist from the European Center for Minority Languages, Hanna Vasilevich, presented an overview of the linguistic situation in Belarus. According to her, after the 1995 referendum, when Russian was recognized as the second state language, difficult times came for Belarusian.
“If we compare the number of students who studied in the Belarusian language in 1992-1993, we will see that there were 64% of such students, but later this percentage dropped to 20%, and in 2014-2015 only 13.7% studied in the Belarusian language. In schools, this percentage has dropped to 15%," Vasilevich noted.
Not a single university in Belarus taught only in the Belarusian language. According to the 2011 law, the state had to ensure the right to study in both official languages. But in practice, preference was given to the Russian language. If students or their parents chose Belarusian, they had to make a special request. Also, according to her data, if in 1999 74% of respondents called Belarusian their native language, then by 2009 their number had decreased to 53%.
According to the 2011 law, the state had to ensure the right to education in both official languages. But in practice, preference was given to the Russian language
“For example, in Mogilev, which is the second largest city in the country with a population of 350,000 people, at some point only one student studied in the Belarusian language,” said Vasilevich.
However, after Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the invasion of Donbass, Lukashenko’s efforts to “Belarusize” Belarus, which were not quite insignificant before, gained powerful momentum. Obviously, a picture was already looming before his eyes." Polite people protect the Russian-speaking people of Belarus" (especially considering the presence of two military bases of the Russian Federation - in the Minsk and Brest regions).
One way or another, Lukashenko began to extremely actively support the development of the Belarusian language and its popularization. There are courses where you can learn it for free. In addition, public organizations began to be actively sponsored from the state budget. cultural organizations And historical societies, publishing house scientific aids and literature in Belarusian. Belarusian returned to the media, education and science. And over the past two years, it has been confidently strengthening its position among Belarusians.
WHAT TO DO?
We need to understand and accept that obvious fact that the Russian language is the Kremlin’s weapon. And what, if earlier he used it after the capture, replacing the native languages of the captured peoples, now it is a weapon that is permanently used on preparatory stage- to incite conflicts and maintain instability. At the same time, Russian also acts as a means of preparing for the takeover, so that God forbid that the sweet country runs out of Russian-speaking people whom one could come to defend.
Ukrainians on this issue are divided into two main camps, whose representatives hold approximately polar opinions. Representatives of the first believe that it is necessary to make Russian the second state language, so that Russian speakers will be heard and the Kremlin will calm down. The latter advocate the most stringent measures to protect the Ukrainian language: exams for officials, deprivation of citizenship in case of failure, the complete “liquidation” of Russian in the service sector, education, music, cinema, theaters, and book publishing. There are also those who are not even against driving Russian speakers into the ghetto.
At the same time, Russian also acts as a means of preparation for capture, so that the tasty country, God forbid, does not run out of Russian speakers whom one could come to defend
Following Russia's annexation of Crimea and invasion of Donbass, several steps were taken to protect the Ukrainian language. In particular, we are talking about and. They cannot be called global, however, they were able to significantly influence the situation: there were much more Ukrainian-language books, music, and TV programs. It turned out that we have something to show ourselves and about ourselves.
- The Russian language in no way can and should not receive the status of a second state language. Firstly, Russian speakers are fighting not for the right to speak and write in Russian - no one took it away from them - but for not learning Ukrainian. In Ukraine. Where do Ukrainians live? Being citizens of Ukraine. Having received state status for Russians, they will never learn Ukrainian - this has been proven at least by Latvia and Belarus. The right to ignorance cannot be supported, especially when the very existence of the state is at stake.
- The Russian language does not need protection. Nothing threatens him except aggressive policies main country its distribution - Russia. According to a 2016 survey, it is the language of everyday communication for 41% of Ukrainians, Ukrainian for 55%.
- The Ukrainian language needs protection and popularization. But “forcing love” will not help increase the number of Ukrainian-speaking citizens. Violence doesn't work. Inaction is a previous practice, when it seems like you need to know, but it’s quite possible to get by - however, too. However, all this does not apply to officials, doctors, teachers, law enforcement officers, and the military.
- Adopting 100% experience from other countries is not an option. Take into account successes and mistakes - yes, but do not copy. Each country has its own characteristics that must be taken into account. Well, everyone must make their own choice based on the circumstances and the desired result.
So, what should we do?
- Study the experience of other countries, both successful and unsuccessful, look around and set a goal of what we want: to bring the status of the state into actual compliance, to make Ukrainian the most popular language in the country - who we want to hear, who we don’t. For this purpose, a special commission could be created from different people who are respected by the majority of Ukrainians, for example, by voting. But no referendums.
- We need a language inspection similar to the Latvian one, which would work out clear rules for the use of Ukrainian in all spheres of life, except, of course, everyday life. She also coordinated with scientists on the development of dictionaries and spelling. Few people know, but we still have Ukrainian spelling - born in 1960. Changes have been made to it, but the basis is still the same.
- Government program popularization of the Ukrainian language. It should become attractive, fashionable and associated with success. In the end, with a good career and salaries. Here you can use the experience of Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Georgia, and the Czech Republic. There, Russian mainly remained the preserve of the generation that remembers what the Soviet Union was. Young people prefer their native language and English.
In fact, this will be enough. The main thing is not to stop hitting this rock, and do it consistently.
Of course, many will rightly note that the text about how we need to popularize the Ukrainian language was written in Russian. Let me explain. I learned that the Ukrainian language exists in the second grade. That's it, so that it's conscious. It was the mid-90s, and then in the Donbass they just introduced its study in elementary grades. Then - the standard 2 language lessons, 2 literature lessons per week. Only in the 10th grade, and then, at the school where I studied (in other schools, education remained in Russian), we were completely transferred to Ukrainian. By the way, in both cases I don’t remember any scandals about “what for do we need this language for?”
One way or another, the knowledge I gained was enough to enroll in Faculty of Philology, specialty - "Ukrainian language and literature". I don’t experience any difficulties working every day in both Ukrainian and Russian at the same time. I also speak Russian and Ukrainian, depending on what language my interlocutor speaks. And I fully support the measures to protect the Ukrainian language that I myself propose. Because I believe that you cannot fight for darkness and ignorance. But you need to fight for your country.
Mova is the reflection of the very soul of the people, it takes care of its character and meaning. German is curvy and rosary, French is playful and sophisticated, Italian is emotional and bubbly, our native peoples have dozens of words on the various snow conditions, and our language is lagid and Kalinova. There is no other nation that could exist without its own language. And since we have not finished our work, it may be so that if our imagination is gone. And with him and ourselves.
Also join the TSN.Blogs group on
The question of the existence and development of a language is closely related to the existence and development of the ethnic group/ethnic groups that speak it and the territory where it is spoken. We will respond in the expectation that nothing catastrophic will happen to Russians/Russian-speaking people and to the territory of the Russian language.
You can tell right away what to give accurate forecast for 200-500 years is not possible. Perhaps, in 100 years, our descendants will speak with silent electronic signals “from brain to brain”, processing very large messages in a second: even if they are “in Russian”, there will be no need to talk about any phonetics. One can only extrapolate into the future those trends that are obvious now - and on the basis of usage, that is, rather than rules, but mistakes.
Under the influence of traced syntactic models (“You are friends with Ivan Ivanov”, “Moscow Tattoo Convention”) cases will degrade. Most likely, the gender of numerals will disappear (“You have twenty-one minutes left on your account”). At the same time, the abbreviated colloquial address (“Mish”, “Svet”) will become established as a new vocative case, which is actually observed even now.
The forms of the verb that are still rarely used today and denote a continued action in the past will finally disappear: “didil”, “used to say”. On the contrary, most likely, future participles (“doing”, “coming”) will appear - this is convenient.
As already written above, emphasis in verb forms such as “rings” and “languishes” on the root vowel will become the norm. The coffee will become neuter.
Perhaps feminists will become part of everyday life. The “author” and “doctor” that are cutting off many people’s ears will become the norm.
A huge number of dialectisms will die out. On the other hand, dictionaries downloaded directly into the brain will help you instantly recognize their meaning if they appear in the text. A bunch of technical words, familiar to us now, will be forgotten, others will come to take their place. A large number of words will come into the Russian language from those languages with which it will interact for geographical and political reasons - perhaps English, Chinese, Arabic. Tendency towards domestication similar words is now absent, and these words will exist in a form phonetically close to the originals. Barbarisms like “go” and “kamon” are legalized.
Many syntactic features of a language are likely to be retained because of their convenience—for example, free word order in a sentence.
Punctuation will definitely strive to simplify. In many cases participial phrases will no longer be separated by commas. First it will disappear complex rule, according to which in the sentence “I want to buy an umbrella, but I don’t know which one” the last word no need to separate with a comma. Then the comma from there will disappear again, taking with it the comma before the “but”.
It is impossible to predict whether the Cyrillic alphabet will survive: this is largely a political question. Of course, I would like it to survive: it’s a pity, and diversity is always more interesting than uniformity. If the Cyrillic alphabet remains, the letter ё will disappear from it. Will disappear solid sign(will be replaced everywhere by the soft one: “entrance”, “advertisement”). The letter s will disappear in words such as “play along”, “improvise”: there will be and; this may affect your pronunciation). The letter yu will disappear in words such as “parachute” and “julienne”; the rule “zhu/shu write with y” will finally appear in the school curriculum.
Perhaps, with the accumulation of some critical mass changes in the usage, calculated by machine, local language reforms will be carried out - that is, the consolidation of the phenomena of usage as the norm.
May 24, the day when the Church remembers the saints Equal-to-the-Apostles Cyril and Methodius, the whole country celebrates the Day of Slavic Literature and Culture. What is happening to the Russian language today? What dangers threaten him now, and what are possible in the future? Experts comment.
The bond without which everything will fall apart
Lyudmila Saraskina, literary scholar, critic:
Of course, I'm afraid for the future. Blatant illiteracy has already penetrated into the central press, into the journalistic environment. In newspapers, magazines, on radio and television, such mistakes hurt the eyes and ears, for which they previously gave bad grades in the 4th and 5th grades of secondary school. It seems as if proofreaders and editors have ceased to exist en masse.
Illiteracy has become not only tolerable, but also forgivable, attractive, and charming. The ironic “Albanian” language is flourishing, all these “laughing”, “kill yourself”, but other users (schoolchildren, students) believe that “let’s not say anything” is correct. The Russian language as a school subject has been abandoned, the system exempts students from essays and other written work, and they lose their writing skills.
I'm not even talking about oral speech, which is often ugly, clumsy, abrupt, inexpressive, with endless “as if,” “like,” and “in any case.” It seems that no one teaches anyone the culture of speech anymore. What do we want from migrants if we ourselves are ruining our native language? Until we ourselves learn to respect our great heritage - our speech, written and oral - no one from outside will come and teach us this and will not want to learn our language.
Now it is fashionable to talk about “braces”... The Russian language is the main bond of Russia, without which its entire vast space could very soon fall apart into torn pieces.
My sense of my native language is constantly offended by public blunders in the speeches of public figures, and I am sure this is no less meaningful feeling than a religious feeling.
It’s not borrowing that’s scary, it’s the oblivion of classic texts
Alexander Kravetsky, candidate philological sciences senior Researcher Institute of Russian Language named after. V.V. Vinogradov RAS:
It is difficult to answer such a question, since language is a living phenomenon. Therefore, contemporaries usually do not understand what contributes to its destruction and what contributes to its development. More than once, capitals were suddenly filled with speakers of dialects, so that it seemed that literary norm there is danger. And, for example, in the Peter the Great era, when a huge number of borrowings entered the language, this caused a feeling of horror among the then zealots of literature. As a result, 90% of this flow of borrowings disappeared, and the remaining 10% became part of the Russian language.
The same thing happened in the twenties of the twentieth century, then in the nineties. Therefore, talking about the dangers for the language associated with the influx large quantity people who have poor command of the language, or with the advent of fashionable borrowings, does not seem legitimate to me.
What is really frightening is the rapid oblivion of the texts of Russian classics, which play the role of a standard to which we subconsciously focus. Once upon a time, such a cementing function was performed by the Psalter, then by the texts of Russian classical literature, which children, albeit sometimes under pressure, mastered. This gave the language stability.
Any borrowing, any changes, even drastic, even on the verge of parody, as in Internet language - all this can be for the good while maintaining cultural continuity. But now a situation arises where familiarity with the classics is limited to film adaptations and retellings for those preparing for the Unified State Exam. The number of texts that people remember is rapidly declining.
It seems to me that there is some critical point, after which forgetting texts and quotes will lead to irreversible language processes. The too rapid rate of change in the citation fund and, accordingly, the forgetting of a certain general corpus of texts - all this seems to me to be a time bomb. I don’t know what exactly will happen as a result, but I suspect that nothing good will happen.
The rise of Russian newspeak at the beginning of the 21st century
Mikhail Gorbanevsky, Doctor of Philology, Professor, Academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Chairman of the Board of the Guild of Linguistic Experts on Documentary and Information Disputes (GLEDIS):
The wisdom of the Russian people, who have always reverently treated the Word, is contained in many proverbs and sayings. It’s not for nothing that they say: “What is written with a pen cannot be cut out with an ax,” “The word is not a sparrow, if it flies out, you cannot catch it.” Careful and sensitive handling of words rewards with inexhaustible wealth.
In recent years, I have had the opportunity to speak publicly in the media more than once about various problems of society related to the Russian language. For example, about the penetration of words from the everyday life of criminal elements into the speech of the top officials of the Russian Federation.
Or, let me remind you, about the unacceptably weak and slanderous teaching of the Russian language in school, which is now focused on very superficial Unified State Exam technologies: the school produces young citizens of the country who not only do not know the basics practical style Russian speech, but sometimes they do not even know how to compose basic business written texts, for example, write an autobiography.
Now I am finishing the book “The Galley Slave” (it will be published in September-October), which is largely dedicated to that real danger for Russia, which, in my opinion, is experiencing an era of turmoil and a slow but quite noticeable slide towards a neo-totalitarian society, which is represented by another - global and systemic, and therefore more dangerous problem: the tendency of the flourishing of Russian Newspeak at the beginning of the 21st century.
But the daily work of our expert guild convinces us of another problem. IN modern Russia At all levels of the social life of society today there is a growing understanding that one must be responsible for words no less than for deeds. Text and speech works are increasingly used as corpus delicti, since they contain signs of composition - the objective side of a crime committed verbally.
Exactly the result speech activity- speech work in the form oral statement or written text - is the main object of forensic linguistic examination and linguo-forensic research, and is directly subject to legal qualification to establish the fact of an offense and determine the degree of its social danger.
Representatives of the different professions and not only in their narrow professional sphere, but also in the media.
GLADIS experts have always sincerely hoped for those healthy forces of Russian society who are ready to fight honestly and with dignity, not breaking, but fulfilling the Law, the evil that we see in violence against in native speech, in turning individual texts into poisonous mixture anecdote, primitive jargon and obscene language, in turning individual publications and websites into unclean streams of compromising evidence, into an extremely dangerous weapon for inciting hostility between peoples, religious denominations and social groups. And in many ways our hopes were justified.
But now a new stage has come in the history of our Fatherland: xenophobia is increasingly manifested in the political, economic, social, religious and other spheres of the country’s life. Extremism has become one of the main sources of threats national interests in the sphere of public and public safety.
Domestic linguistics must - based not only on professional knowledge, but on the active civic position of scientists and their understanding of their responsibility to society - be able to give a proper response to this challenge of the time and learn to use new modern techniques, which need to be discussed and implemented into practice based on mutual respect and trust of scientists, judges, lawyers, investigators, and human rights activists.
The authors of the GLEDIS project “Linguistics vs. Extremism: New Challenges in Protecting Public Safety” consider this kind of interdisciplinary advanced training of linguo-criminalists to be one of their important landmarks. Indeed, now there are many acute and requiring solution methodological problems of legal, psychological and linguistic qualification of such media publications, slogans, leaflets, posters, election programs, printed political documents, calls and dialogues on social networks, on Internet forums and in other areas of cyberspace, in which law enforcement and judicial authorities see elements of far-right ideology, chauvinism, militant nationalism, propaganda of violence, extreme forms of religious hostility, justification of attacks, vandalism and murders based on ethnic and racial hatred, etc.
We stop being responsible for our lives...
Pavel Basinsky, writer, literary critic:
With regard to language, its development (and any language), I see the problem as two-sided, therefore there can be no unambiguous solution to it. On the one hand, language is a self-developing phenomenon; it is impossible to control it. He absorbs those words that are convenient for people (including from other languages), who will subsequently use these words in their speech.
You can pass laws against foreign words, but this will preserve the language and will not allow it to fully develop. Moreover, the Russian language was formed from many components: including borrowings from Turkic languages, from Anglicisms, from French words and so on. AND Slavic language, which formed the basis of the Russian language, is also very different, heterogeneous.
On the other hand, strange things happen to our language. We thoughtlessly use tracings of foreign words, which clearly does not enrich the language, but brings the opposite result. There are many examples that can be given here. Let's say the word "security". But, thank God, it went away, and the security guards again turned into guards. But the “killer” has not gone anywhere, “killer” sounds proud, even with an aura of romanticism. But in fact, a killer is a hired killer, a hired murderer, to put it more pathetically. You speak Russian - and there is no romanticism.
Or - “challenges of the time”, “challenges of our time” - an amazing construction that all our high politicians, including even the president. Where did this come from? This is a copy of the English challenge. Why the challenges of the time, and not the demands of the time, the demands of the time, the interests of the time? Why are we immediately placed in a situation of war and aggression? Why do we struggle with a time that challenges us and we need to respond to it?
It seems like - what’s wrong with this, some kind of political games with the Russian language, but in fact, such linguistic tracings create an atmosphere of non-Russianness, non-softness, non-humanity that is inherent in us.
We cease to be responsible for our language, for our lives, and all this is confirmed in language.
The Pushkin scholar saw an amazing thing: “We ourselves didn’t notice how the word “difficult” changed to the word “difficult.” Nobody says “it’s hard to live” anymore; everyone says “it’s hard to live.” The first option means that with your work you can still overcome life’s hardships, and the second option speaks of a passive position: it’s difficult, it’s not up to you, you can’t do anything here.
I would, without joking, create at least a recommendation commission under the President or under the Ministry of Culture, which would conduct an audit of all these cripples littering the Russian language, and would make recommendations for teachers, for parents, so that they explain to children the difference between “ difficult" and "difficult", between "killer" and "hired killer", between "challenge of time" and "demand of time".
The French protect their language state level: There are laws against borrowing. We can say that Francophonie is the basis of ideology. We also do not need to be afraid to protect our language, but the degree of protection should be determined by specialists so that, while protecting, we do not suppress the living development of the language...
Disputes over Curd or Curd distract from the main thing
Vladimir Annushkin, Doctor of Philology, Professor, Head. Department of Russian Literature and Intercultural Communication State Institute Russian language named after A.S. Pushkin, member of the Union of Writers of Russia.
Language is an expression of the national spirit, the state of intellect and education, public and personal mood, will, all movements of the soul, and the lifestyle of modern society. We can say with confidence: what are the words that we hear and read around us, so is our internal comfort, a socio-psychological attitude that occupies not the least place in the requirements for the improvement of the life of every person. In a word, as is the language, so is life.
Social welfare, health, prosperity, all forms of life are associated with the device modern language. Language is a tool for managing society and social processes. The economic crisis is a manifestation of a spiritual crisis (and not vice versa!). The economy is managed through culture and education through speech. If speech relations in society are not regulated, the possibility of effective management is lost. Bad language good life you can't build it.
About the language norm
It is impossible to establish a linguistic norm once and for all. It is historically changeable. It is not always possible to establish a “clearly” norm. As a rule, correctness and convenience compete here.
Society lives and develops, transforming existing norm as an established cultural and style standard in order to make life more comfortable and beautiful. However, if you do not know the culture, then the transformation becomes ugly, unaesthetic, anti-cultural. An example is today's style innovations in the media, as well as the philosophy of the media itself: the totalitarianism of vulgarity, bad taste, primitivism has filled youth channels - and this is a consequence of the difficulties that people experience when existing in new types of communication while creating new collegial types of speech.
The norm of language cannot be understood and discussed only in in the narrow sense(agreement, yogurt, coffee...) because then we will remain within the limits of petty squabbles and private issues. It's time to pose the question more broadly: language is the focus and exponent of everything folk life, its spirit and current state.
About foul language
While we are fighting over cottage cheese and agreements, wouldn’t it be better to take care of creating in society an atmosphere of impatience with bad words that are correctly emphasized? Shouldn't we put barriers on the path to false thoughts and tolerant ideology, which allows for all types of “deadly sins” for society? Shouldn't we take care of creating an atmosphere of cheerfulness and optimism in society instead of the states of apathy, skepticism, criticism, and indifference that are created by nightly feature television programs and are always expressed in language, since man is a “verbal” being?
If you use foul language, life becomes bad.
The wretchedness of speech is the wretchedness of life
Culture presupposes the preservation of everything valuable in the moral, educational, aesthetic aspects of our existence, and culture is expressed, of course, by signs, and this main sign, of course, is the word. Tell me the word and I will tell you who you are. How do we preserve and pass on all the best? To do this, just turn on and listen to our popular radio (Chanson, Autoradio and even Russian Radio). You will never hear on Russian Radio either a Russian romance or Russian folk song, not a Russian poem - only the wretchedness of monotonous congratulations and twenty so-called “hits” that shape the consciousness of modern youth and the adult population of Russia. The question is: is it possible to legislatively reverse the situation? Who forces you to primitiveize life so much? Why do our journalists hear “agreement” and “coffee” of the neuter kind and do not hear what wretched thoughts they propose to think and speak on youth television and radio channels? NOT to mention their speech, which both in quantitative composition resembles the speech of Ellochka the cannibal, and in the nature of pronunciation is lowered below any aesthetic requirements for artistic sound.
They deliberately want to tell us: we are the same as in life... There are no high ideals. It is useless to talk about culture. We want one thing: to be listened to. Therefore, we speak as we want, we are free people...
Reasonable prohibitions
Is it possible to talk about normalization activities as legal, legislative? It is both possible and necessary! Many philologists argue that it is impossible to normalize language, that it develops according to its own laws. This false view of language captures our passivity in relation to changing life. We cannot change language as a system, for example, the same cases, genders, numbers and cases will remain in the language, but language as an activity, how its use can undoubtedly be subjected to conscious human influences and transformations.
Our Law “On Language” is imperfect. Apparently, he must boldly assert certain priorities of public morality, the protection of patriotic sentiments, and true cultural taste as a set of aesthetic values. The media will ask the question: who are the judges? The question is false because it wants to lead in the direction of the same tolerance, tolerance for various “false” opinions and irresponsibility in speeches.
Is there a legal aspect to the use of language? Undoubtedly. Culture implies prohibition. If certain actions are prohibited, then how can we not impose prohibitions on verbal actions? Meanwhile, we must understand that it is a reasonable prohibition that allows creative activity to develop to the maximum. Without prohibitions, society does not live or lives poorly. You cannot allow too many prohibitions (then - tyranny), or allow permissiveness (then there is chaos of ideas, words and actions). We see the latter in public morality.
We talk about the norm of literary language as a choice correct option from two or more existing ones. But there is not only a norm of language, there is also a norm of thought, a norm of verbal expression, and finally a norm of behavior, which, being verbal, should not offend users (listeners or readers). Is it possible, while observing the norms of pronunciation or spelling, to violate the norms of verbal behavior in everyday life and in the media?
Today, Russian is the fourth most spoken language in the world after English, Chinese and Spanish. Very soon this place of honor may remain just a memory. There are fewer and fewer native Russian speakers in the world every year. As the rector of Moscow State University said recently. Lomonosov Victor Sadovnichy, in 10 years Russian will remain behind French, Hindi and Arabic. The country's authorities said back in 2007 that all necessary measures would be taken to strengthen the Russian language. The main thing to be decided is to ensure quality language training in schools, as well as to strengthen the shaky position of the Russian language in the national republics that are part of the Russian Federation, as well as in the former Soviet ones. According to experts, this will be quite difficult to do.
The Russian language is losing its position in prevalence in the world and by 2025 may become even less popular than Bengali or Portuguese, according to the center’s data. sociological research Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, obtained by RIA Novosti.
“Today, about 225 thousand schoolchildren study the Russian language in Western European countries (before the early 90s - over 550 thousand). IN higher school In Western European countries, 28.5 thousand students are mastering the Russian language,” says the materials of the Ministry of Education and Science.
The Russian language still ranks fourth in the world in terms of prevalence. Chinese leads with 1.35 billion people, English with more than 650 million, Spanish with more than 330 million.
“It is assumed that in 10 years the number of people who know Russian may be reduced to 212 million people, and will be surpassed by French, Hindi, and Arabic,” the document says.
The main reason, according to experts, is the tough, expansive policy of the Soviet Union towards the Russian language, which tried to suppress the languages of small nationalities. Once the iron grip was loosened, the former union republics an active return to the language of our ancestors began, accompanied by the rejection of the Russian, alluvial language. “The threat to the Russian language emerged at the end Brezhnev era when the old names settlements, accepted in the Russian language, suddenly began to change, approaching to the foreign language original, - writer Mikhail Weller told NI. - Alma-Ata turned into Almaty, in the word “Tallinn” one more n was added at the end. These events reflected centrifugal processes in public consciousness, which preceded the social cataclysm - the collapse of the USSR."
Today this process not only continues. In those few former Soviet republics where Russian is still spoken, it is no longer studied. The number of such schools decreased in Turkmenistan by 71%, in Moldova - by 65%, in Kazakhstan - by 59%, in Uzbekistan - by 47%. According to Latvian legislation, lessons in Russian schools in the native language should not take up more than 40% of teaching time.
The number of ethnic Russians, as the main carriers of the Russian language and culture, who find themselves outside their historical homeland, has decreased over the past 15 years from 25-30 million people to 17 million - not only as a result of leaving for other countries, primarily Russia, but also from -for depopulation and partial assimilation, caused by the need to realize oneself in a new ethnocultural environment - and such a process, while the factors influencing it remain unchanged, will intensify in the coming years.
Russian is considered the native language in the CIS and Baltic countries. total 23.5 million people (mainly living in Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus, as well as in Uzbekistan and Latvia), but this figure has also tended to steadily decline in recent years. For example, in Tajikistan, according to the 1989 census, Russian was named as a native or second language by 36.4% of the population of the republic, and according to the 2000 census - only 20.1%; At the same time, the number of ethnic Russians in Tajikistan has decreased 10 times over the past 15 years - from 500 thousand people in 1989 to 50 thousand in 2005. In addition, it should be borne in mind that approximately a third of the Russian-speaking community in the CIS and Baltic countries consists of representatives of other nationalities (Ukrainians, Tatars, Belarusians, etc.) who also consider Russian their native language.
By 2005, Russian in the CIS and Baltic countries remained the state language only in Belarus. It still dominates the Belarusian media, 75% of children study in Russian-language schools, and in universities the share educational subjects, which are taught in Russian, is at least 90%.
Moreover, these processes have spread to many subjects of the Federation. “Russia is a single state. If you live in Chuvashia, you should know Russian,” says philosopher, professor at the Social Pedagogical University Alexey Nagovitsyn. - Every country in the world is watching this. But not with us. In the Russian republics, they know Russian very poorly at best, and, most likely, they don’t know it at all. In grades 10-11 there is no language teaching at all. This is due to the need national self-determination and the study by peoples of their own culture. But in the form that it exists now, it violates the integrity of Russia and weakens the country in international affairs.”
Interest in the Russian language is also falling in the West. Migrant colonies in Germany and France slightly improve the statistics. But ethnic Germans, French, and English, despite Russia’s active participation in the political life of Europe, have little interest in our language. According to NI’s European correspondents, Russian courses are systematically failing to enroll students. This is understandable. “A language becomes global when it is an important means of communication,” comments Alexey Nagovitsyn. - Communicate in a way that is beneficial and representative real strength in a political and economic sense. When I am forced to ask, I must speak the language of the person I am addressing. And if they ask me, then in my language. It is obvious".
Experts are convinced that the reduction of Russian language speakers will inevitably deal a serious blow to Russian culture as a whole. “We will never know how many languages of small nations disappeared in the process of the emergence of large nations and associations. But we know that neither the great Greek, nor the great Roman, nor the great Anglo-American, nor the great Russian culture could have existed if the people of all the nationalities and provinces dissolved in them continued to speak and think, each in their own language,” - commented Mikhail Weller.
If Russian ceases to be a global language, this will certainly affect our society, historians are convinced. “The status of a language is an indicator of the influence that a particular culture has in the world,” historian and philosopher Sergei Kara-Murza explained to NI. - If a country does not confirm this status with an appropriate level of culture, then the language loses it. This, in turn, has a negative impact psychological impact on society. There is something like a mass depression."
As Vladimir Putin recently stated, next year main task in the decision " political aspect"The Russian language should be strengthened as a national language. This means that small nationalities will have to be taught Russian and national republics Russia. It is also planned to popularize the Russian language in the West.
However, experts are convinced that the government will cope with the task. To change the situation, enormous economic injections are needed, comparable to the costs of national projects. We need large-scale propaganda campaigns, exhibitions, brochures, free courses for studying the Russian language. In addition, laws are needed that can restore the Russian language at least in the constituent entities of the Federation, agreements on the revival of the language in the former Soviet republics. And this is not a matter of one decade.
Moreover, the country faces more acute problems in the cultural sphere. Experts note not only a decrease in the number of native Russian speakers, but also a deterioration in the quality of their knowledge. The process of erosion of the norms of spoken and written speech is in full swing.
“We are now characterized by a situation where poor philologists, in order to receive grants and fees, come up with the release of a new dictionary of accents, which become a mandatory norm for radio and television announcers. And now we hear from the screen collateral instead of collateral. As a result, the ideas about literacy among the current young generation are greatly shaken. There are no ideas at all about the obligatory nature of this literacy. Alas, our prospects do not seem rosy,” commented Mikhail Weller.
Another language problem is the abundance of slangs that fill the speech of a modern young Russian. “They recently wrote that in New Zealand they take the exam in the language of Internet and SMS abbreviations. Maybe that's not a bad thing. But only if the guys, speaking in abbreviations, can easily speak correctly. It is extremely difficult to achieve this,” says Alexey Nagovitsyn.
In this situation great value acquired by the school. Lacking fundamental linguistic knowledge, immersed in an environment of slang and newspeak, young Russians will simply never begin to speak Russian correctly. Alas, there is little hope for the Russian education system. "IN Russian schools Language teaching is far from ideal,” says Nagovitsyn. - Almost all Russian higher education institutions educational institutions In the first year there are Russian language lessons. This means only one thing: people enter universities who do not speak their native language and did not learn it at school. In theory, if an applicant does not know the language, then there is no need to enroll him. He is not fit for higher education.”
Many experts tend to blame the Unified State Exam for this situation. “The Unified State Exam reduces the preparation of schoolchildren in the Russian language to the level of simple training for tests,” Sergei Komkov, president of the All-Russian Education Foundation, told NI. - And in order to assess knowledge of a language, it is necessary for a person to show how he speaks and writes it. If you think about it, the very situation with these tests is absurd. Moreover, even the proposed tests are, to put it mildly, incorrect. As a result, children receive a very low level of knowledge of the Russian language.”
Other the most pressing problem associated with teaching the Russian language - multinational classes in which half of the students are Russians, and the other half are representatives different nationalities. There are no textbooks that would be focused on this situation. There are no solutions to this problem at all. “The educational methodology is common to everyone; no additional time is allocated for working with representatives of national minorities,” the deputy academic director told NI educational institution Yana Erlasheva. - At home, in the family, these children usually speak their native language, but at school they cannot be taught Russian. There is another problem here - the shortage speech therapy rooms and almost complete absence phonetic courses in schools. Regular school can't afford them. And they are necessary to raise the level of pronunciation among those for whom Russian is not their native language.”
Forecast of the dynamics of the number of Russian language speakers in various countries/regions of the world in 2004-2025 (millions of people)
According to criterion (a) in the real world it is a confident leader Chinese(over a billion speakers, including deviations from the standard Beijing/"Mandarin" variety, sometimes considered individual languages). Next come English and Spanish (400 million each), Hindi (330 million), Arabic (270 million), Bengali (220 million), Portuguese (210 million), Russian (150 million), Japanese (120 million), German (100 million). million), French, Punjabi, Javanese, Vietnamese and Indonesian (90 million each), Korean (80 million), Tamil, Marathi, Telugu, Urdu, Turkish and Italian (70 million each). The 21 languages listed are spoken by 4 billion people—64% of the world’s population.
According to criterion (b), Chinese and English are on par (1.1 billion experts each); then Hindi (over half a billion), Spanish (just under 500 million), Arabic (320 million), Russian (260 million), Portuguese (240 million), Indonesian (200 million), French (140 million), Japanese (130 million) , German (120 million), Urdu (110 million), Persian (Farsi) and Punjabi (100 million each), Vietnamese (90 million), Tamil, Javanese, Telugu, Korean and Turkish (80 million each).