Review Review (German rezension, Latin recensio, English review - review, assessment, consideration) - analysis, analysis, evaluation of a publication, work or product. Dividing all journalistic genres into groups, we have identified three types of genres: informational, analytical, artistic and journalistic. Each of these genera is divided into species. All species, as we have already noted, are now diffused, that is, they penetrate each other, intersect and/or unite. This is clearly seen in the example of modern reviews. A review, usually classified as an analytical genre, may well receive all the signs of an artistic-journalistic genre: for this, the author just needs to shift the emphasis from the work being reviewed to his opinion about it, add discussions about related phenomena and problems, writing all this in a bright journalistic style , and the review will move from one classification group to another. Why is this happening? The fact is that classifications can be natural and artificial. All artificial classifications applied by a person according to some arbitrarily chosen characteristic (alphabetical order, age, place of residence, etc.) are easy to understand and easy to change. All natural classifications cause problems for researchers - due to the complexity of the world around us and the universal variability of things101. And when creating an artificial classification, disputes are inevitable. Difficulties in the modern classification of genres arose, as we have already noted, when the emphasis in the “fact-author” relationship was shifted from fact to author, which occurred in the early 90s. XX century The review, once an extremely popular genre with clear specific characteristics, slid freely across the surface of any classifications precisely because the role of the author was previously significant in reviews, but has now become enormous. The author can act as a reviewer-informant, a reviewer-researcher, a reviewer-essayist - in a word, create any genre hybrid and at the same time not distort the intent of the works being reviewed and not undermine himself. Why is review so convenient? In all its types there must be a characteristic and assessment of the phenomenon. For a journalist-reviewer who wants to express his vision of the world, both of these components are extremely attractive: after all, before characterizing a phenomenon, it must be selected from many related ones, and when giving an assessment, one must select arguments, draw conclusions, and one can speculate about the prospects of the phenomenon being assessed. It turns out that reviewing is creativity, individualized to a slightly greater extent than in other genres. Of course, each reviewer should theoretically strive for an objective description and balanced assessment of a phenomenon (book, play, film, program, picture, etc.), but even in these matters, objectivity is a conditional thing. Regardless of the degree of proximity to the original, the mirror will only be a mirror. Reflection of already reflected reality - this applies to a review, and to an artistic-critical review of any works, and to any subtype of these genres, if the journalistic material is not about the phenomena of life directly, but about the depiction of reality by other authors. The reviewer is obliged to determine the genre-specific affiliation of the work he is considering, its place in the flow of similar ones, note the characteristic features of this particular work, and express his opinion on the basis of ideas and norms adopted for evaluating works of this type in the cultural and professional community. Remember this. It is understood that the reviewer is familiar with many other similar works, has analyzed them publicly, and has the right to express his or her assessments. A reviewer is a respected figure with authority in his professional community, an expert, an erudite, a specialist who is known to really understand the topic. We have described the ideal situation. What is its difference from the real one? Mainly, not all modern reviews are written by professionals who have distinguished themselves in their field. Quite often, a review of a book, for example, is written not by a literary critic, but by an editorial worker who liked this genre for some valid reason. Quite often, book and literary criticism in glossy mass magazines is carried out not by critics, not by bibliographers, and not even by bibliophiles, but simply by those journalists who, from the point of view of the editor-in-chief, do it smartly, bitingly, etc. It’s not without reason that in Literaturnaya Gazeta in In 2003, there was a long discussion, from issue to issue, with the participation of critics and literary scholars: why do we have little criticism? Why is there a crisis of criticism? At first glance, this is strange: critics argue about why there is no criticism. In fact, there is no particular paradox, since two other factors temporarily supplanted the possibility of the flourishing of art criticism: the lack of generally understood criteria of truth and beauty, coupled with the increased role of advertising. All critics, starting from the same nineties, began to be suspected of creating hidden advertising (under the guise of reviewing) or of defending purely group interests. The criteria have been shaken and revised for almost a quarter of a century in connection with total changes in ideology, the structure of society and social thought, as well as in artistic styles and movements. The rise of Internet technologies has made its own changes to the dissemination of any opinions. Anyone can say anything. Finding a truly professional opinion about new products is not easy. The ubiquity of advertising involuntarily makes readers suspicious of all reviews in general - in the sense that a reviewer who writes something laudatory about a work may be suspected of self-interest. Reading a review of a book in the mass press, we increasingly encounter a style of presentation that is close to colloquial and even sometimes colloquial. Such reviews tell us quite a lot about the reviewer's vocabulary, but not much about whether the book under review is good or why. Not all the reasons for the crisis of this wonderful genre are listed here. This genre is very important, and we warmly advise aspiring journalists to learn how to write quality reviews. The craft of acting teaches you how to go on stage and act. And true art must teach how to consciously awaken the unconscious creative nature in oneself for super-conscious organic creativity, said the great reformer of the Russian theater K.S. Stanislavsky. The craft of a reviewer must begin with the difficult ability to hide (better - remove altogether) one’s own ambitions. Let us emphasize once again that self-expression and the creative activity of a journalist are incompatible. At first, many students think that journalism was created to express the aspirations of a journalist, but as they approach mastery, this delusion must go away. The art of a reviewer begins with demonstrating such a close, qualified and interested look at the work in question, which promotes this entire sphere of artistic activity to new frontiers, encourages further development, creativity, not only of the author under review, but also of many of his colleagues. This really requires a lot of knowledge and skills, and not just agility of the pen. Let's remember an interesting historical story. About a hundred years ago, when the Moscow Art Theater first went on tour abroad, to Germany, the entire troupe was very worried. The first press, which decided the fate of the theater abroad, was naturally awaited with great trepidation and impatience. What happened next was this: in the morning, the artists, still in their pajamas, burst into Stanislavsky’s with triumphant faces. The wife of one artist, who knew German, translated the review: it was written approvingly and with exceptional knowledge of the matter. All the artists rejoiced, and not only because they were praised, but because it was done with high skill. Later, Stanislavsky asked knowledgeable people how the Germans “develop such theater experts” for newspapers? (Indeed, a qualified newspaper theater critic is still a rarity today.) They revealed a secret to him: “We instruct a novice critic to write not a scolding, but a laudatory article: anyone can scold, even someone who doesn’t understand the matter, but only an expert can properly praise.” Significant words! This is, perhaps, a universal recipe for how to raise a great critic: first, let a young reviewer praise someone with knowledge of the matter, without flattery, without intrusiveness, without intoxication with his own style and capabilities, but with an analysis of the real merits of the work being reviewed. Here is a fragment of a review posted in the “Books” section of a mass glossy magazine. As an example of the current state of the genre, this is interesting. Those who are lazy and inattentive, accustomed to beach novels and newspaper articles, should not read Banville. He writes amazingly long, incredibly intricately, really well. But true connoisseurs will receive true physical pleasure - comparable only to what only Nabokov, the great and beautiful, could deliver to his readers. In a nutshell, and to show off in small talk, this is a novel about an actor. Just about a retired actor. Who lived. I loved. And, of course, he suffered. What did you think? The following is a six-line quotation from the novel “Eclipse” under review, which does not support these assessments. Perhaps the reviewer did not strive to create informational unity in his text. It may be difficult for him to do this. But the quote from the quote: “I pass her around like an explosive,” which characterizes the relationship between the hero and heroine, does not seem long, or complicated, or really good. This review has nothing to do with literature in general, with the work of the writer under review in particular, or with the evaluation of the specific novel “Eclipse.” Experts peacefully talk about this type of “literary criticism” like this: well, this is glossy criticism, so be it. And yet, this is a review in essence, since it reflects an artistically reflected reality: a novelist reflected the life of a retired actor, a journalist reflected the work of a novelist. Readers of the magazine learned that there is such a novel, that it is about love and it can be mentioned in the same breath as Nabokov. This, of course, is the most risky part of both the review and the prospects of small talk, because Nabokov is a recognized master of words, and the reader knows about the novel “Eclipse” only what is published in this magazine. Relying on such a reviewer’s assessment, you can get into trouble, especially if a truly well-read person suddenly turns up in “secular society.” You can now get acquainted with reviews written more or less in the traditions of this genre in thick literary magazines - “New World”, “Friendship of Peoples”, “October”, “Moscow”, etc. Their circulation has decreased to several thousand copies, but the magazines Still, they survived the market environment, they go out into the world, and have their own websites. In Soviet times, when these magazines had millions of copies and it was difficult to subscribe to them, even one small review in such a publication could attract the attention of the audience to a work. Now the situation has changed radically: high-quality culture has marginal representation in the press, while mass culture is still in the lead by an insurmountable margin. Since this situation is unlikely to be stable and long-lasting in Russia, we recommend that young journalists learn to write classic reviews: an accurate description plus adequate analysis. Having mastered the classical approaches, you will notice that, if necessary, you can produce a review in a simplified, conversational, glossy version without much effort. Speaking of artistic criticism, we should mention another genre extremely rich in its history and names: the literary critical article. In the history of Russian literature of the 19th century. Critics left their mark, influencing with their articles not only literature, but also the course of socio-political processes in the country. Magazine journalism, and within it literary criticism, developed rapidly. This was due to a whole range of reasons: a) the development of the press and literature in general occurred, of course, in the absence of electronic media; b) artistic verbal creativity was not widespread in the understanding and volume in which it appears now: it was the lot of predominantly educated people; c) many journalistic genres (among those now widespread) had not yet developed (for example, interviews); d) the attitude of the reading public to the printed word was attentive and deep, the public was interested in the development of national culture; e) the dissemination of information of any type occurred under conditions of censorship, that is, each printed statement was represented not only by the author and the editors, but also, as it were, by the state, which influenced both the ratings given and the social weight of the reviewers; f) the state itself was structured much more clearly than it is now, as a result of which the reader almost always felt from which social floor the written word was addressed to him. Of course, one should not assume that high-quality art criticism has now ceased to exist. It is alive, in particular in foreign Russian-language publications, in emigrant literature, although it is highly politicized; in the thick literary magazines mentioned above, in research papers on art. A galaxy of young literary critics has grown, which can be seen, for example, in the Debut literary prize. Such criticism is, of course, a specialized type of creativity and requires enormous knowledge and skills. At the Literary Institute named after. M. Gorky has a corresponding department, small in number of students, but still regularly graduating specialists. It is difficult to predict the development of these genres in this century, but we consider it necessary to encourage students of the Faculty of Journalism to study the rich national heritage, since professionals will always be in demand one way or another. The main thing for a journalist leaning towards art criticism now is a love of reading and studying works of literature. Then skills will come, and maybe even mastery, but the first thing such a journalist requires is the ability to constantly be interested in what others are doing in artistic creativity. It is very important to distinguish between what others can do and what you yourself cannot do, but you want to understand others and explain to the public what kind of work of literature was published, what its role and weight, context are, and how you understand it. A true critic of this very path is literally required to be a fan of other people's work. This is not easy psychologically, which is why there are never too many good reviewers, and especially first-class critics. The image of the famous Russian critic of the 19th century is typical. Vissarion Belinsky, recreated by a contemporary: Belinsky fell into the same “fever” when he struggled “day and night” to solve some damned issue. “It was his doubts that tormented him,” recalls Turgenev, “they deprived him of sleep, food, and relentlessly gnawed and burned him; he did not allow himself to forget himself and did not know fatigue... I was weakening... I wanted to rest, I was thinking about a walk, about dinner, Belinsky’s wife herself begged both her husband and me to wait a little, although to interrupt this debate for a while, she reminded him doctor's orders... but it was not easy to get along with Belinsky. “We have not yet resolved the question of the existence of God,” he once told me with a bitter reproach, “and you are hungry! creativity can only be achieved by people who are completely immersed in their calling.
Read a fragment of a review based on the text you analyzed , completing tasks 21-24..
This fragment examines the linguistic features of the text. Some terms used in the review are missing. Paste into the blanks (A B C D) numbers corresponding to the number am term ov from the list. Write down the corresponding number in the table under each letter. .
Sequence of numbers write in ANSWER FORM No. 1 to the right of task number 25, starting from the first cell, no spaces, commas or other additional characters.
Write each number in accordance with the samples given in the form.
25. “The narrator’s use of such a lexical means of expressiveness to describe the blizzard as (A) _____ (“terrible blizzard", " impenetrable darkness”), gives the depicted picture expressive power, and such tropes as (B) _____ (“pain circled me” in sentence 20) and (IN) _____ (“the driver shrilly, like a wife shina, began to scream” in sentence 15), convey drama the situation described in the text. A technique like (G) ____________ (in sentence 34), enhances the emotional impact on the reader."
List of terms:
1) contextual antonyms;
2) metaphor;
3) syntactic parallelism;
4) comparison;
5) epithet;
6) phraseology;
7) contextual synonyms;
8) metonymy;
9) antithesis.
Answer:
AB
IN
G
(1) As a child, I hated matinees because weFather came to kindergarten. (2) He sat on a chair near the Christmas tree, played his button accordion for a long time, trying to find the right melody, and our teacher sternly told him: “Valery Petrovich, go higher!” (3) All the guys looked at my father and choked with laughter. (4) He was small, plump, began to go bald early, and although he never drank, for some reason his nose was always beet red, like a clown’s. (5) Children, when they wanted to say about someone that he was funny and ugly, said this: “He looks like Ksyusha’s dad!”
(6) And I, first in kindergarten and then at school, bore the heavy cross of my father’s absurdity. (7) Everything would be fine (you never know what kind of fathers anyone has!), but I didn’t understand why he, an ordinary mechanic, came to our matinees with his stupid accordion. (8) I would play at home and not disgrace either myself or my daughter! (9) Often getting confused, he groaned thinly, like a woman, and a guilty smile appeared on his round face. (10) I was ready to fall through the ground from shame and behaved emphatically coldly, showing with my appearance that this ridiculous man with a red nose had nothing to do with me.
(11) I was in third grade when I caught a bad cold. (12) I started getting otitis media. (13) I screamed in pain and hit my head with my palms. (14) Mom called an ambulance, and at nightwe went to the regional hospital. (15) On the way we hitin a terrible snowstorm, the car got stuck, and the driver, shrilly, like a woman, began to shout that now we would all freeze. (16) He screamed shrilly, almost cried, and I thought that his ears also hurt. (17) The father asked how much was left until the raizentra. (18) But the driver, covering his face with his hands, repeated: “WhatI'm a fool!" (19) Father thought and quietly said to mother: “We will need all the courage!” (20) I remembered these words for the rest of my life, although wild pain swirled around me like a snowflake in a snowstorm. (21) He opened the car door and went out into the roaring night. (22) The door slammed behind him, and it seemed to me like a huge miracleThe creature, clanging its jaws, swallowed my father. (23) CarIt was swayed by gusts of wind, snow fell with a rustling sound on the frost-covered windows. (24) I cried, my mother kissed me coldlylips, the young nurse looked doomedlyinto pitch darkness, and the driver shook his head in exhaustion.
(25) I don’t know how much time has passed, but suddenly it’s nightI was illuminated by the bright light of the headlights, and the long shadow of some giant fell on my face. (26) I closed my eyes and saw through my eyelashesla his father. (27) He took me in his arms and pressed me to him. (28)In a whisper, he told his mother that he had reached the regional center, raised everyone to their feet and returned with an all-terrain vehicle.
(29) I dozed in his arms and through my sleep I heard him coughing. (30) Then no one attached any importance to this. (31) And for a long time afterwards he suffered from double pneumonia.
(32) ...My children wonder why, while decorating the Christmas tree, I keepwhere I cry. (33) From the darkness of the past my father comes to me,he sits under the tree and puts his head on the button accordion, as if he secretly wants to see his daughter among the dressed-up crowd of children and smile cheerfully at her. (34) I look at his face shining with happiness and also want to smile at him, but instead I start crying.
According to N. Aksyonova
Answer: 5, 2, 4, 9.
“K.G. Paustovsky does not lecture his readers, he only strives to be understood. Already in the second sentence ___ is used. This is of great importance for the characterization of the heroine. Features of Katerina Ivanovna’s speech: appeals, ___, ___ - also emphasize the author’s intent.
Sickle of the month” creates a bright image. The description of an autumn evening enhances the special intonation of the text.”
List of terms:
1) comparative turnover
3) phraseology
5) metaphor
6) parcellation
7) question-and-answer form of presentation
8) expressive repetition
9) exclamatory sentences
Part 3
To answer the task in this part, use answer form No. 2. First write down the number of task C1, and then write an essay.
| C1 |
Write an essay based on the text you read.
Formulate and comment on one of the problems posed by the author of the text (avoid excessive quoting).
Formulate author's position. Write whether you agree or disagree with the point of view of the author of the text you read. Explain why. Justify your answer based on knowledge, life or reading experience (the first two arguments are taken into account).
The volume of the essay is at least 150 words.
Work written without reference to the text read (not based on this text) is not graded.
If the essay is a retelling or completely rewritten of the original text without any comments, then such work is scored zero points.
Write an essay carefully, legible handwriting.
Instructions for checking and assessing student work in the Russian language
PART 1
| Job No. | Answer | Job No. | Answer |
| A1 | A17 | ||
| A2 | A18 | ||
| A3 | A19 | ||
| A4 | A20 | ||
| A5 | A21 | ||
| A6 | A22 | ||
| A7 | A23 | ||
| A8 | A24 | ||
| A9 | A25 | ||
| A10 | A26 | ||
| A11 | A27 | ||
| A12 | A28 | ||
| A13 | A29 | ||
| A14 | A30 | ||
| A15 | A31 | ||
| A16 |
PART 2
PART 3
CRITERIA FOR VERIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE
TASKS WITH DETAILED ANSWER
Attention! When assigning points for completing a task in the “Protocol for checking answers to tasks of form No. 2”, you should keep in mind that if there is no answer (there are no records indicating that the examinee started completing the task), then “ X" and not "0".
| № | Criteria for assessing the answer to task C1 | Points |
| I | Contents of the essay | |
| K 1 | Formulation of source text problems | |
| The examinee (in one form or another) correctly formulated one of the problems of the source text. There are no factual errors related to the understanding and formulation of the problem. | ||
| The examinee was unable to correctly formulate any of the problems in the source text. | ||
| K 2 | Commentary on the formulated problem of the source text | |
| The problem formulated by the examinee is commented on. There are no factual errors related to understanding the source text in the comments. | ||
| The problem formulated by the examinee was commented on, but no more than 1 factual error was made in the comments related to understanding the source text. | ||
| The problem formulated by the examinee is not commented on, or more than 1 factual error is made in the comments related to the understanding of the source text, or another problem not formulated by the examinee is commented on, or a simple retelling of the text or its fragment is given as comments, or a large fragment of the source text is quoted as comments text. |
| K 3 | Reflection of the position of the author of the source text | |
| The examinee correctly formulated the position of the author of the original text on the commented problem. There are no factual errors related to understanding the position of the author of the source text. | ||
| The position of the author of the source text is formulated incorrectly by the examinee, or the position of the author of the source text is not formulated. | ||
| K 4 | Argumentation by the examinee of his own opinion on the problem | |
| The examinee expressed his opinion on the problem formulated by him, posed by the author of the text (agreeing or disagreeing with the position of the author), argued it (gave at least 2 arguments), relying on knowledge, life or reading experience. | ||
| The examinee expressed his opinion on the problem formulated by him, posed by the author of the text (agreeing or disagreeing with the position of the author), argued it (gave 1 argument), relying on knowledge, life or reading experience. | ||
| The examinee formulated his opinion about the problem posed by the author of the text (agreeing or disagreeing with the author’s position), but did not provide arguments, or the examinee’s opinion was only formally stated (for example: “I agree / disagree with the author”), or is not reflected at all in work. | ||
| II | Speech design of the essay | |
| K 5 | Semantic integrity, speech coherence and consistency of presentation | |
| The work of the examinee is characterized by semantic integrity, verbal coherence and consistency of presentation: - there are no logical errors, the sequence of presentation is not broken; - there are no violations of paragraph division of the text in the work. | ||
| The examinee’s work is characterized by semantic integrity, coherence and consistency of presentation, but 1 logical error was made, and/or there is 1 violation of paragraph division of the text in the work. | ||
| The examinee’s work shows a communicative intent, but more than 1 logical error was made, and/or there are 2 cases of violation of paragraph division of the text. | ||
| K 6 | Accuracy and expressiveness of speech | |
| The work of the examinee is characterized by accuracy of expression of thoughts and a variety of grammatical forms. | ||
| The work of the examinee is characterized by the accuracy of expression of thought, but the monotony of the grammatical structure of speech can be traced. | ||
| The work of the examinee is characterized by a poor vocabulary and monotony of the grammatical structure of speech. | ||
| III | Literacy | |
| K 7 | Compliance with spelling standards | |
| no spelling errors (or 1 minor error) | ||
| 1 mistake made | ||
| more than 1 mistake made | ||
| K 8 | Compliance with punctuation standards | |
| no punctuation errors (or 1 minor error) | ||
| 1 – 2 mistakes were made | ||
| more than 2 mistakes were made | ||
| K 9 | Compliance with language norms | |
| no grammatical errors | ||
| 1 – 2 mistakes were made | ||
| more than 2 mistakes were made | ||
| K 10 | Compliance with speech norms | |
| no more than 1 speech error was made | ||
| 2–3 mistakes were made | ||
| more than 3 mistakes were made | ||
| K 11 | Compliance with ethical standards | |
| there are no ethical errors in the work | ||
| ethical mistakes were made (1 or more) | ||
| K 12 | Maintain factual accuracy in background material | |
| there are no factual errors in the background material | ||
| there were factual errors (1 or more) in the background material | ||
| Maximum number of points for all written work (K1 – K12) |
When assessing literacy (K7 - K10), the length of the essay should be taken into account. The assessment standards indicated in the table are developed for essays of 150–300 words.
If the essay contains less than 70 words, then such work is not counted at all (scored with zero points), the assignment is considered unfulfilled.
When evaluating an essay ranging from 70 to 150 words, the number of acceptable errors of four types (K7 - K10) decreases. 1 point according to these criteria is given in the following cases:
K7 – no spelling errors (or 1 minor error was made);
K8 – no punctuation errors (or 1 minor error);
K9 – no grammatical errors;
K10 – no more than 1 speech error was made.
2 points according to criteria K7 – K10 are not given at all for work ranging from 70 to 150 words.
If the essay is a retelling or a complete rewrite of the original text without any comments, then such work in all aspects of the test (K1 - K12) is scored zero points.
*Task B8 is graded on a scale from 0 to 2 points: 2 points: no mistakes; 1 point: 1 mistake made; 0 points: 2 or more errors were made (a completely incorrect answer (wrong set of numbers) or no answer).
Lexical means (tropes)
Trails - words or figures of speech used in a figurative, allegorical meaning.
1. Epithet - an adjective that has a figurative and emotional meaning (can be a noun, adverb, verb).
Golden Grove. Cheerful birds began to sing. The azure of heaven laughs. The petrel soars proudly. The poet is the echo of the world.
2. Metaphor - one thing is replaced by another in a figurative meaning (hidden comparison).
Burn on the ground. The chintz of the sky is blue.
3. Personification - phenomena or objects endowed with the properties of living beings.
Time is running out. Gloomy forest.
4. Metonymy - replacing the containing with the content; thing - material.
I ate three plates. Crystal and bronze on the table.
5. Synecdoche - replacing the plural with a singular, using the whole instead of a part (and vice versa).
All flags will visit us (meaning: states).
6. Allegory - allegory, depiction of a specific concept in artistic images (in fairy tales, fables, proverbs, epics).
Cunning is in the image of a fox, courage and strength are in the image of Ilya Muromets, beauty is in the image of Apollo.
7. Hyperbole - exaggeration of properties, qualities.
I've said it a hundred times. My love, wide as the sea, cannot be contained by the shores of life.
8. Litota - understatement of properties, qualities.
Two steps from here.
9. Paraphrase - a retelling, a descriptive phrase containing an assessment (the object is not directly named, properties or similar values indicating the object are called).
White Stone Capital (Moscow). It's a sad time! The charm of the eyes, (autumn).
10. Pun - a play on words, a humorous use of multiple meanings of words or homonymy.
Spring will drive anyone crazy. The ice - and it began to move; The director held a conference... And journalists...
11. Irony - the use of a word in a sense opposite to the literal one; the goal is subtle or hidden ridicule; the highest degree of irony - sarcasm.
We are minds, and you are alas; between you and me, this engineer of human souls turned out to be an extremely insolvent and limited subject.
12. Paradox - an unexpected conclusion that diverges from logic or conventional opinion.
13. Comparison - comparison of similar elements in the text + comparative conjunctions (as if, as if, exactly, as, etc.).
...like gold, ...as if cut out with a jigsaw.
Lexical means (not tropes)
Lexical means based on the meaning of words.
1.Phraseologism - a stable expression used figuratively.
Jump on your hind legs.
2. Lexical repetition - repetition of a word, phrase in a sentence or text.
Wind, wind all over the world.
3. Synonyms - words of the same part of speech, identical or similar in their lexical meaning
Guess, conjecture, hypothesis.
4. Contextual (or contextual) synonyms - words that are synonyms only in this text.
Lomonosov is a genius - the beloved child of nature. (V. Belinsky)
5. Antonyms - words of the same part of speech that are opposite in their lexical meaning
Black - white, hot - cold, high - low.
6. Homonyms - words that sound the same but have different lexical meanings
Club(smoke), club (hunters and fishermen), club (night).
7. Professional vocabulary - words characteristic of professional dialects; professional words used by groups of people united by common occupations or occupations
Where is the compass? architect, palette And cutter
Your learned whim was obeyed
Syntactic means
Syntactic means - figures of speech used to enhance the expressiveness (expressiveness) of a statement (not based on a figurative meaning)
1. Comparative turnover - there is something that is compared, something with which it is compared + comparative conjunctions (as if, as if, exactly, as, etc.).
He's like a bull in a china shop.
2. Ellipsis - omission of one of the members of a sentence that is easily restored in meaning (most often a predicate). This achieves dynamism and conciseness of speech and conveys a tense change of action.
We sat down in ashes, cities in dust,
Swords include sickles and plows.
3. Oxymoron - a combination of logically incompatible concepts.
Sounding silence, hot snow, terribly funny, terribly fun.
4. Question-and-answer form of presentation - the text is presented in the form of rhetorical questions and answers to them.
And again a metaphor: “Live under minute houses...”. What does this mean? Nothing lasts forever, everything is subject to decay and destruction
5. Rows of homogeneous members of a sentence - enumeration of homogeneous concepts.
A long, serious illness and retirement from sports awaited him.
6. Quoting - transmission in the text of other people's thoughts and statements indicating the author of these words.
As it is said in the poem by N. Nekrasov: “You have to bow your head below a thin epic…”
7. Anaphora - repetition of the initial words.
I swear by the first day of creation, I swear by its last day
8. Epiphora - repetition of final words.
9. Antithesis - comparison of opposite concepts in meaning in a sentence or text.
A stupid person will judge, but a smart person will judge.
10. Inversion - changing the correct word order to enhance expressiveness.
The horses were brought out. I didn't like them. Nature was waiting for winter.
11. Parallelisms - similar arrangement of elements, same type of construction.
The coachman whistled, the horses galloped, and the bell rang.
12. Gradation - “ladder” of words that are close in meaning with an increase or decrease in their semantic significance.
Women cry: streams, lakes, oceans of tears!
13. Parcellation - splitting a sentence into several.
Night. Street. Flashlight