CC BY
9
www.volsu.ru
МАТЕРИАЛЫ И СООБЩЕНИЯ
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2022.2.9
UDC 81(091) Submitted: 28.04.2021
LBC 81r Accepted: 20.12.2021
PHONETIC AND PHONEMIC LAWS IN MODERN HISTORICAL AND PHONOLOGICAL STUDIES (LINGUISTIC HISTORIOGRAPHICAL ASPECT)
Vladimir A. Glushchenko
Donbass State Teachers' Training University, Sloviansk, Ukraine
Anna S. Orel
Donbass State Teachers' Training University, Sloviansk, Ukraine
Alexander V. Piskunov
Donbass State Teachers' Training University, Sloviansk, Ukraine
Abstract. The problem of phonetic and phonemic laws reconstruction in the works of linguists of the 19th -21st centuries was investigated. The study demonstrated the significance of the concepts of sound changes based on the postulate of the phonetic law by E.D. Polivanov (convergent-divergent theory of sound changes), R.O. Jacobson (phonological mutations), which became the foundation of historical phonology, due to which V.K. Zhuravlev completed the construction of the paradigm of historical (diachronic) phonology. It was shown that the phonetic variability and variability of the sound system of the language were considered as a consequence of the action of certain linguistic laws. Definitions of the terms "phonetic law" and "phonemic law", the establishment of their main differences proved the thesis about the connection of synchrony and diachrony which allowed us to interpret the phenomena of the history of the sound systems of the Proto-Slavonic and East Slavonic languages. V.K. Zhuravlev and Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich's contribution to the study of these issues in relation to the history of East Slavonic languages were described in detail. The work used an actualistic method which allowed us to g consider a particular linguistic concept from the point of view of contribution and significance for linguistics in ^ comparison with previous achievements. A.S. Orel presented the material on phonemic laws in works on the sound ^ system history; A.V. Piskunov - the material on the role of phonetic law and analogy, linguistic reconstruction in g the works of Kharkiv, Moscow, Kazan schools scientists of; V.A. Glushchenko - the material on understanding the | essence of phonetic law in the works of Kharkiv and Moscow schools scientists.
^ Key words: phonetic law, phonemic law, sound system, synchrony, diachrony, Proto-Slavonic language, East
CL1 Slavonic languages, linguistic studies history.
oq
<i Citation. Glushchenko V. A., Orel A.S., Piskunov A. V Phonetic and Phonemic Laws in Modern Historical and Phonological Studies (Linguistic Historiographical Aspect). Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo - universiteta. Seriya 2. Yazykoznanie [Science Journal of Volgograd State University. Linguistics], 2022, vol. 21, ^ no. 2, pp. 113-122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2022.2.9 o
£ 55
УДК 81(091) ББК 81г
Дата поступления статьи: 28.04.2021 Дата принятия статьи: 20.12.2021
ЗАКОНЫ ФОНЕТИЧЕСКИЕ И ФОНЕМАТИЧЕСКИЕ В СВЕТЕ СОВРЕМЕННЫХ ИСТОРИКО-ФОНОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЙ (ЛИНГВОИСТОРИОГРАФИЧЕСКИЙ АСПЕКТ)
Владимир Андреевич Глущенко
Донбасский государственный педагогический университет, г. Славянск, Украина
Анна Сергеевна Орел
Донбасский государственный педагогический университет, г. Славянск, Украина
Александр Викторович Пискунов
Донбасский государственный педагогический университет, г. Славянск, Украина
Аннотация. Исследована проблема изучения и реконструкции фонетических и фонематических законов в трудах языковедов XIX-XXI веков. Продемонстрирована значимость базирующихся на постулате фонетического закона концепций звуковых изменений Е.Д. Поливанова (конвергентно-дивергентная теория звуковых изменений), Р.О. Якобсона (фонологические мутации), ставших фундаментом исторической фонологии. На их основе В.К. Журавлёв завершил построение парадигмы исторической (диахронической) фонологии. Показано, что фонетическая вариативность и изменяемость звуковой системы языка рассматривалась как следствие действия определенных языковых законов. Дефиниции терминов «фонетический закон» и «фонематический закон», установление их основных отличий стали доказательством тезиса о связи синхронии и диахронии, который позволил истолковать явления истории звуковых систем праславянского и восточнославянских языков. Подробно охарактеризован вклад В.К. Журавлёва и Ю.Я. Бурмистровича в изучение указанных вопросов применительно к истории восточнославянских языков. В работе использован актуалис-тический метод, который позволяет оценить ту или иную лингвистическую концепцию с точки зрения вклада и значимости для языкознания в сравнении с предшествующими достижениями. А.С. Орел представила материал о фонематических законах в трудах по истории звуковой системы; А.В. Пискунов - материал о роли фонетического закона и аналогии, лингвистической реконструкции в работах ученых Харьковской, Московской, Казанской школ; В.А. Глущенко - материал о понимании сущности фонетического закона в трудах ученых Харьковской и Московской школ.
Ключевые слова: фонетический закон, фонематический закон, звуковая система, синхрония, диахрония, праславянский язык, восточнославянские языки, история лингвистических учений.
Цитирование. Глущенко В. А., Орел А. С., Пискунов А. В. Законы фонетические и фонематические в свете современных историко-фонологических исследований (лингвоисториографический аспект) // Вестник Волгоградского государственного университета. Серия 2, Языкознание. - 2022. - Т. 21, № 2. - С. 113-122. -(На англ. яз.). - DOI: https://doi.Org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2022.2.9
In this article, we appeal to the scientific heritage of scientists of the Moscow, Kharkiv, Leipzig, Kazan linguistic schools, as well as to the works of phonologists, phoneticians and language historians of the late 20th - 21st centuries, who made a significant contribution to the study of the issue of phonetic and phonemic laws. The relevance of this study is determined by insufficient attention to the problem mentioned and its certain aspects, as well as the lack of comprehensive linguistic and
Introduction
historical studies on the reconstruction of phonetic and phonemic laws in the linguistic history, including the Eastern Slavonic languages, while the importance of phonetic and phonemic laws in the development of the language system is enormous. One of the reasons for this is a small number of works on the linguistic history, which would present the interdependency of phonetic and phonemic laws, their classification, chronology, etc. A great contribution to the study of these issues in relation to the history of the Eastern Slavonic languages was made by the Russian scholars V.K. Zhuravlev
and Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich, but their studies were not continued, and their discoveries were not taken into account while compiling modern textbooks and methodological manuals [Zhuravlev, 1986a; Burmistrovich, 2002; 2007]. The proposed article is a way to draw attention to this linguistic phenomenon, and we hope to fill this gap.
Material and methods
Exploring the specifics of the phenomenon of the phonetic and phonemic laws in the works of the domestic scientists, the authors will strive to reveal the linguists' views on the following fundamental problems: 1) the concept of phonetic and phonemic laws; 2) features and differences between phonetic and phonemic laws; 3) regularity and phonetic conditions for laws operation.
The importance of the neo-grammarians' sound changes conception for the development of historical (diachronic) phonology is recognized by modern researchers, who consider this concept as one of the integral components of the "pre-phonological foundation of diachronic phonology" [Zhuravlev, 1986a, p. 45; Burmistrovich, 2002, p. 5]. According to V.K. Zhuravlev, one of the fundamental concepts of modern historical (diachronic) phonology is the statement on the non-exclusivity of phonetic laws at the allophone level [Zhuravlev, 1986a, p. 47], and it has gained great importance in the historical phonology of the Eastern Slavonic languages. Attempts to determine the general laws of language development were realized in the postulate of the non-exclusivity of the phonetic laws. The very idea of the non-exclusivity of phonetic laws, developed in the neo-grammarians' historical and phonetic studies, was further refined in the Moscow school scientists' studies and critically judged by representatives of the Kazan and Geneva linguistic schools, and the methodological means based on this were the first steps towards creating an exact linguistic science [Amirova, 1975, p. 419; Zhuravlev, 1986b, p. 27]. According to V.I. Postovalova, the idea of a phonetic law is a significant contribution into the interpretation of the essence and characteristics of linguistic regularities [Postovalova, 1978, p. 128].
The neo-grammarians recognized the fundamental role of phonetic laws and analogy: "The only one who accurately takes into account
the effect of sound laws, on the understanding of which all our science is based, is on solid ground in his research" [Osthoff, Brugman, 1956, p. 187— 198]. Thus, neo-grammarians tried to study the essence of phonetic changes using phonetic laws and analogy. According to J. Schmidt, who analyzed the work of his contemporary A. Schleicher, all sound changes occurred under the influence of the following factors, namely "phonetic laws that acted without exception and cross-made incorrect analogies with them" [Delbrück, 2003, p. 51]. According to B. Delbrück, A. Schleicher referred to as "phonetic laws that operate without exception, but this does not mean that he did not recognize any other laws except those operating without exceptions" [Delbrück, 2003, p. 51].
In accordance with L. Bloomfield and A. Steponavichius's views, the methodological neo-grammarians' error is "the over-categorization of the formulation of laws without exceptions", that is, recognition of the absolute regularity of sound changes, while the neo-grammarians' opponents did not deny the fact of regularity in the language [Steponavichius, 1982, p. 56], however, only on condition of its relativity.
As a result of theoretical and methodological imperfection, the theory of the non-exclusivity of phonetic laws, developed in historical and phonetic studies by the Leipzig school scientists, has not been confirmed in practice [Postovalova, 1978, p.126]. As some linguists noted, the need to explain "exceptions" became the reason for review of the neo-grammarians' views on the causes and essence of phonetic laws [Amirova, 1975, p. 432; Zhuravlev, 1986b, p. 27]. The late period of the neo-grammarians' activity is characterized by the improvement of scientific views, confirmed by the introduction of the progressive idea of the limited effect of the phonetic law (chronological, spatial, positional, as well as the effect of analogy and foreign language loan words) [Paul, 1960, p. 88-89, 140-142]. According to Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich's research, the definition of the phonetic law in the neo-grammarians' conception generally reflects the most important features of this scientific concept, but does not specify them [Burmistrovich, 2002, p. 5]. The problem of the phonetic law reconstruction is highlighted in the practice of historical and phonetic research by the Kharkiv
school scientists. In V.A. Glushchenko's opinion, the need for a concrete historical approach to phonetic laws was upheld in the phonetic studies by A.A. Potebnia [Glushchenko, 1998, p. 59], and it was reflected primarily in an attempt to establish as many successive stages of these laws as possible [Potebnia, 1871].
More detailed theoretical justification of phonetic laws is given in the Moscow school scientists' characteristics, in particular, the ones given by F.F. Fortunatov, A.A. Shakhmatov, N.N. Durnovo [Fortunatov, 1956, p. 203; Shakhmatov, 2002, p. 192-195; Durnovo, 1912, p. 13-14]. Having studied F.F. Fortunatov's master's thesis, F.M. Berezin came to the conclusion that F.F. Fortunatov "used to have a clearer understanding of sound changes before the neo-grammarians" [Berezin, 1976, p. 319], it is consistent with formal approach to the study of linguistic phenomena in general. F.M. Berezin's valuable remark made it possible to say about the originality of theories of sound changes in the concepts of the Moscow and Leipzig schools scientists and they are evidences of the parallel development of linguistic thought in this direction, that is, it reflects a general tendency to formalize linguistics.
Further development of the theory of sound changes in the works of the Moscow school scientists made it possible to clarify both the concept of the phonetic law and the nature of the limitations of its action. So, N.N. Durnovo's definition [Durnovo, 1912, p. 13-14], as noted by Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich, V.A. Glushchenko, is more approximate to the modern interpretation [Burmistrovich, 2002, p. 6; Glushchenko, 1998, p. 153]. The Kharkiv, Moscow, and Leipzig schools scientists sequentially took into account the temporal, spatial and positional parameters of the phonetic law, and all these were reflected primarily in their empirical studies [Potebnia, 1871, p. 14; Shakhmatov, 2002, p. 192-194].
According to the linguists' ideas, the Kazan and Geneva schools scientists' attitude to the interpretation of the phonetic law was controversial. Basically, these schools scientists sought to establish the general laws of language development and denied the existence of exact laws. The influence of the neo-grammarians' conception was reflected in the mechanistic interpretation of the phonetic laws in the early
works by N.V. Krushevskii [Krushevskii, 1883, p. 60], as well as in recognition of the destructive nature of the phonetic law, which was inherent for F. de Saussure's works [Saussure, 1998, p. 150-151].
I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay criticized the neo-grammarians' interpretation of the phonetic law: the linguist generally denied both the existence of sound laws and the neo-grammarians' comparison of language with a body, and linguistics with natural sciences having named that as an "empty phrase" [Baudouin de Courtenay 1963, vol. 1, p. 35-43]. The existence of sound laws would be possible only if "the non-recognition of a large number of individuals, collectivity, social life, the exchange of linguistic thinking between individuals" [Baudouin de Courtenay, 1963, vol. 2, p. 329]. The linguist put forward the following interpretation of the phonetic law, when "the homogeneity and regularity appearing in the narrow sphere of individual cerebration and in speech communication should not be considered as a dependence that the exact formula of the phonetic law covers, but only as a statistical statement of the fact of coincidence in certain conditions existing in parts of social and speech communication" [Baudouin de Courtenay, 1963, vol. 2, p. 202]. The " 'phonetic laws', according to the linguist, are only 'a statement of what is happening on the surface of phenomena', and 'real' laws, laws of causality, are hidden in the depths, in the tangled knot of the varied elements" [Baudouin de Courtenay, 1963, vol. 2, p. 208]. Sometimes, as the linguist noted, even steady coincidence with conditions occurs and this gives rise to a " 'fiction' of the phonetic law" [Baudouin de Courtenay, 1963, vol. 2, p. 208]. Regarding the concept of "non-exclusivity", I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay pointed out the need for a more detailed study of the operation of laws, since "the imaginary exception is only confirmation of the general law" [Baudouin de Courtenay, 1963, vol. 1, p. 57].
N.V. Krushevskii supported the idea of "the existence of general sound or, more precisely, physiological laws, which by their nature are not different from physical or chemical laws" [Krushevskii, 1883, p. 60]. V.A. Bogoroditskii did not compare linguistic phenomena with natural phenomena, since the latter remained unchanged, and linguistic phenomena and sound laws are
constantly evolving, and are based "on the power of memory and habit" [Bogoroditskii, 1913, p. 53]. Both N.V. Krushevskii and V.A. Bogoroditskii supported the idea on the non-exclusivity of phonetic laws. I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay criticized the linguists' view, since "we could consider all sound laws (phonation) attempts as exclusive only if we decided to definitely not recognize the participation of the psychic factor in the process of verbal communication between people" [Baudouin de Courtenay, 1963, vol. 2, p. 39-42]. As for exceptions in general, I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay called them "confirmation of the general law" [Baudouin de Courtenay, 1963, vol. 1, p. 57].
The researchers of I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay's linguistic heritage, in particular V.N. Toporov, F.M. Berezin, and T.S. Sharadzenidze, were convinced that the decisive basis for this rejection is an in-depth interpretation of the essence of sound changes, an approximation to the concept of phonemes, morphologization of phonetic patterns inherent in I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay's early works [Toporov, 1960, p. 28-36; Berezin, 1976, p. 193; Sharadzenidze, 1980, p. 80-84]. However, the negation of phonetic laws did not cause I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay to deny the regular nature of language changes [Sharadzenidze, 1980, p. 83; Baudouin de Courtenay, 1963, vol. 1, p. 57].
The rejection of the neo-grammarian's interpretation of the sound law, on the one hand, the discovery of the morphologization and semasiology of sound units, on the other hand, caused the emergence of the Baudouin's theory of alternations (it was actively developed by N.V. Krushevskii) [Baudouin de Courtenay, 1963, vol. 1, p. 269, 273-346; Krushevskii, 1883, p. 9], and consequently, according to the linguists, the foundations of phonology and morphology were laid [Berezin, 1976, p. 197; Zubkova, 1989, p. 159]. Disputing with the neo-grammarians on the phonetic law interpretation, N.V. Krushevskii also supported the theory of sound alternations, which, in his opinion, was consequence of unknown causes [Krushevskii, 1883, p. 9]. The study of sound alternations was carried out by H. Paul, but, unlike I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay, he considered alternations as the consequences of phonetic laws [Paul, 1960, p. 87]. Alternation theory is a good example of applying the principles
of comparative-historical research to perform practical tasks, including those related to the Slavonic language material. According to L.G. Zubkova, the most detailed consideration of the phonetic alternations types allowed I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay to draw the conclusion about the dynamic character of statics [Zubkova, 1989, p. 159].
N.V. Krushevskii put forward the thesis that there are general sound laws used in modern typological studies [Krushevskii, 1883, p. 42-43]. The conclusions made by F. de Saussure are close to N.V. Krushevskii's views. Attempts to establish certain patterns of linguistic changes caused F. de Saussure to suggest that there were common forces and laws governing historical phenomena [Saussure, 1998, p. 32].
Due to the linguistic-historical analysis of V.A. Bogoroditskii's activity conducted by F.M. Berezin [Berezin, 1976, p. 319], it was concluded that his phonetic studies implicitly presented the opinion that there were synchronistic and diachronic laws, depending on the effect of physiological or phonetic factors. Due to the division of language into statics and dynamics, I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay also singled out the corresponding "laws and conditions" operating in a certain state of the language or in its historical development [Baudouin de Courtenay, 1963, vol. 1, p. 81, 88]. Combining the effect of the phonetic law with a certain temporal aspect of the language synchronism, F. de Saussure rejected the presence of diachronic laws [Saussure, 1998, p. 97]. The idea of phonetic laws division into synchronistic and diachronic is the leading one for modern historical phonology and is associated with the definition of phonetic and phonological changes [Burmistrovich, 2002, p. 5-11; Burmistrovich, 2007, p. 129-141].
Focusing on the synchronism of the phonetic law operating within certain space-time boundaries, F. de Saussure approached to the modern definition of the allophone variation phonetic law (V.K. Zhuravlev's formula), but a significant drawback of the scientist's view is the lack of a clear definition of position as one of the most important factors in sound transformation.
The Moscow school scientists accepted the neo-grammarians' conception of phonetic laws as a whole. As in the neo-grammarians' conception
of phonetic law, the Moscow school scientists focused on the fact that "the effect of such sound laws is clearly clarified by the conditions for their detection, and the well-known era during which the sound law continues to be alive" [Shakhmatov, 1910-1911, p. 11], that is, one can express the opinion that the above mentioned definitions reduce the phonetic law to determining the conditions under which a phonetic change occurs. Thus, the thesis about the importance of the phonetic environment and positional conditions is one of the characteristic features of F.F. Fortunatov's phonetic studies [Fortunatov, 1956, p. 203]. It was perceived and improved in the works of the Moscow school representatives, in particular A.A. Shakhmatov and N.N. Durnovo [Shakhmatov, 2002, p. 192; Durnovo, 1912, p. 13-14]. V.K. Zhuravlev singled out N.N. Durnovo's opinion on the "phonological connection", which formed the basis of the first phonological developments carried out by R.O. Jacobson and N.S. Trubetskoi [Zhuravlev, 1986a, p. 10]. According to V. K. Zhuravlev, the idea of positional study of phonetics is "a serious prerequisite for phonology" [Zhuravlev, 1986a, p. 10]. According to Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich's view, due to the specification of such an item of the phonetic law as a condition, the term "position", which was assigned to it, and interpretation of positional changes as syntagmatic, a modern definition of the phonetic law was formulated, it is available in V.K. Zhuravlev's works [Burmistrovich, 2002, p. 6-7]. The "positional" theory of the Moscow school linguists viewed from the point of view of modern phonological concepts is important at the syntagmatic language level.
The problem of positional study of the language phonetic units, being a leading one for the Moscow school scholars, was not consistently reflected in the works of the Kazan school representatives, but they recognized the importance of taking into account the phonetic environment [Baudouin de Courtenay, 1963, vol. 1, p. 361]. I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay noted that the nature of phonetic alternations in synchronism was determined by the conditions of phonemes compatibility [Zubkova, 1989, p. 163]. It should be noted that the neo-grammarians and representatives of the historical method in the Russian and Ukrainian linguistics paid their
attention to study of the conditions of phonetic laws (A.I. Sobolevskii, N.M. Karinskii, A.E. Krymskii).
In general, the development of the language phonetic system in comparative-historical studies of the second half of the 19th century and the twenties of the 20th century was presented as gradual sound changes in linguistic-historical works [Amirova, 1975, p. 433; Steponavichius, 1982, p. 48-52]. This was reflected in an attempt to establish as many intermediate stages, or phonetic laws as possible, and is a practical embodiment of the principle of graduality. The principle of graduality, implicitly presented in the comparativists' studies, as defined by A. Steponavichius, was fruitfully used in modern studies of paradigmatic changes in the phonological system [Steponavichius, 1982, p. 52].
A study of the regularity of language changes, which is one of the most important in historical linguistics, began in the neo-grammarians' works and is associated with the study of sound correspondences in related languages and the reconstruction of phonetic laws. According to
A. Steponavichius, in the conception of the Leipzig school scientists, regular correspondences were considered "as a consequence of the regularity of the most sound changes" [Steponavichius, 1982, p. 53-54], that is, intra-systemic changes. So,
H. Paul interpreted the law as "the regularity of a certain group of historical phenomena" [Paul, 1969, p. 87]. It is significant that in the studies of
I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay, phonetic laws were considered as regular phonetic correspondences [Baudouin de Courtenay, 1963, vol. 2, p. 194].
The solution to the problem of regularity in the works of the Leipzig school representatives is directly related to the evolution of their views. So, the regularity in the works by H. Osthoff, K. Brugman (early neo-grammarians) is explained by the physical nature of sound laws [Osthoff, 1956, p. 154-155];
B. Delbrück, H. Paul considered regularity as a consequence of the action of psychological, physiological and social factors (in studies of a later period) [Paul, 1969, p. 88-93]. The naturalistic interpretation of the phonetic law provides for absolute regularity. This thesis, as noted above, has been criticized and is a methodological error of the neo-grammarians. Another view on regularity admits its relativity (that is, the phonetic law has exceptions), and is considered to be more acceptable.
According to V.I. Postovalova, the very idea of the phonetic law is the first important stage in interpreting the essence and features of linguistic regularities [Postovalova, 1978, p. 128]. An assessment of the significance of the thesis on the regularity of sound changes for the further development of comparative studies was presented by V.K. Zhuravlev. He believed that the hypothesis on regularity inferred from the neo-grammarians' thesis about the non-exclusivity of phonetic laws, was taken as the main principle in determining the "internal" relative chronology in modern studies [Zhuravlev, 1986b, p. 29]. That led to the conclusion that the development of questions of the relative chronologization of linguistic phenomena was in the scientists' conception of the Leipzig school.
The phonetic variability of the language sound system is a consequence of certain phonetic laws. The importance of the synchronistic laws of allophone variation (non-exclusive phonetic laws, as defined by the neo-grammarians) for the development of historical phonology was advocated by V.K. Zhuravlev, Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich [Zhuravlev, 1986a, p. 4550; 1986b; Burmistrovich, 2002, p. 5-6; 2006, p. 44; 2007, p. 130-135]. According to these researchers, one of the indicators of the phonological change is the termination of the phonetic law, since the phonetic law works only in the synchronistic state of the language, in Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich's opinion, the phonetic law is syntagmatically positional [Zhuravlev, 1986b, p. 29-31; Burmistrovich, 2002, р. 8].
The phonetic law, in the phonologists' interpretation, is a specific link that connects synchronism and diachrony. So, exploring the history of the language sound system, as
E.D. Polivanov believed, one could imagine sound laws in the form of certain sound correspondences [Polivanov, 1991, p. 267]. In this regard, G. Guillaume's theory of the consistent transition of language into speech seems relevant. Based on the F. de Saussure's thesis on the distinction between language (potency) and speech (realization), G. Guillaume introduced the time factor into the sequential process of speech activity (this had not been done by
F. de Saussure), which made it possible to outline a dynamic scheme for the language transition into speech: previous state ^ inevitable change ^
next result [Guillaume, 2004, p. 75-76]. The difficulty, according to G. Guillaume, was the allocation of an intermediate "time interval, the carrier of regular differentiating changes" [Guillaume, 2004, p. 75-76]. The regular differentiating change in G. Guillaume's scheme, in our opinion, correlated with the regular phonetic law. So, the concept of G. Guillaume explained the relationship of synchronistic and diachronic processes in the phonological system, it has become the scheme for the implementation of historical changes in the language sound system (allophone variation). In addition, the application of this method is quite effective for retrospective and prospective reconstruction.
One of the most modern achievements in the field of historical phonology was the discovery on the phonemic law essence and formula and its difference from the phonetic law made by Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich. The merit of the discovery of the phonetic law formula belongs to V.K. Zhuravlev [Zhuravlev, 1986a, p. 45; 1986b, p. 29]. Having based on the results of his research, Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich made valuable remarks about the inaccuracies in establishing the number of phonetic laws for the Proto-Slavonic language, which are mainly characteristic of modern scholars. The author believed that "there were not two, but more phonetic laws in the history of the phonemic system of the Proto-Slavonic language" [Burmistrovich, 2006, p. 44]. In addition, Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich combined a number of phonetic laws of the Proto-Slavonic language into one general law, which he called the phonetic law of the internal group phonemic syngarmonism [Burmistrovich, 2002, p. 8; 2007, p. 135].
Having introduced the concept of phonemic law into linguistic literature, Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich noted that all previous attempts to determine the phonemic (or phonological) law were characterized by inaccuracies and incomplete explanations (see, for example, O.S. Akhmanova [Akhmanova, 1966, p. 152; Burmistrovich, 2002, p. 8; 2007, p. 135]). Thus, according to Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich, "a phonemic law is a rule in a certain language at a certain stage of its development that makes certain phonemes, paradigmatically weaker from other phonemes in the system, which are under pressure on it, move into a new place in it and turn into other phonemes" [Burmistrovich, 2007, p. 136]. In other
words, phonemic laws are paradigmatically non-positional, this is the main difference between them and phonetic laws [Burmistrovich, 2002, p. 8-9; 2007, p. 136].
The discovery of the phonetic law formula (by V.K. Zhuravlev), as well as the introduction of the concept of phonemic law (Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich) let historical (diachronic) phonology to get higher level of explanation. The identification of phonetic and phonemic laws in the history of the development of the phonological system, the establishment of their main differences became a confirmation of the thesis about the close relationship of synchrony and diachrony. The consistent practical implementation of these ideas made it possible to explain in more detail certain phenomena in the history of the phonological systems of the Proto-Slavonic and Eastern Slavonic languages.
E.D. Polivanov's original conception of sound changes (convergent-divergent theory of sound changes), R.O. Jacobson's phonological mutations, based on the postulate of phonetic law, have become the foundation of historical phonology. Taking them into account, V.K. Zhuravlev completed the construction of the paradigm of historical (diachronic) phonology.
A solid theoretical basis has made it possible to improve and generalize previous studies on the history of phonological systems as a chain from the Proto-Indo-European (in the form of its Proto-Slavonic dialect) to modern Eastern Slavonic languages (Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich).
Conclusion
The evolution of the linguists' views included the transition from an attempt to establish a universal cause of linguistic changes to the recognition of a complex of causes and establishment of causal links (I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay, F. de Saussure). The idea of uniqueness of phonetic laws, developed in the historical and phonetic studies by the neo-grammarians, was formulated in the studies by the Moscow school scholars and was critically judged by the representatives of the Kazan and Geneva linguistic schools; being based on this methodological techniques, it became the first step towards phonology and is one of components of the "pre-phonological foundation of diachronic phonology".
Finding out phonetic and phonemic laws in the history of phonological system, the establishment of their main differences confirmed the thesis of the close relationship between synchrony and diachrony, and it became a significant contribution to the development and improvement of theoretical and methodological basis of historical phonology (V.K. Zhuravlev, Yu.Ya. Burmistrovich). Consistent practical implementation of these ideas allowed us to explain in more detail certain phenomena in the history of phonological systems of Proto-Slavonic and East Slavonic languages.
REFERENCES
Akhmanova O.S., 1966. Slovar lingvisticheskikh terminov [Dictionary of Linguistic Terms]. Moscow, Sovetskaya entsiklopediya Publ. 608 p.
Amirova T.A., 1975. Ocherki po istorii lingvistiki [Sketches on the History of Linguistics]. Moscow, Nauka Publ. 559 p. Baudouin de Courtenay I.A., 1963. Izbrannye trudy po obshchemu yazykoznaniyu: v 2 t. [Selected works on General Linguistics. In 2 Vols.]. Moscow, Izd-vo AN SSSR, vol. 1. 384 p.; vol. 2. 391 p.
Berezin F.M., 1976. Russkoe yazykoznanie kontsa XIX - nachala XX vv. [Russian Linguistics of the End of the 19th - the Beginning of the 20th Centuries]. Moscow, Nauka Publ. 366 p. Bogoroditskii V.A., 1913. Obshchiy kurs russkoy grammatiki. Iz universitetskikh chteniy [General Course of Russian Grammar. From University Readings]. Kazan, 6. 553 p. Burmistrovich Yu.Ya. 2002. Zakony foneticheskie i zakony fonematicheskie [Laws Phonetic and Laws Phonemic]. Vestnik Khakasskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. N.F. Kata-nova. Seriya: Yazykoznanie [Herald of Khakass State University Named After N. F. Katanov. Linguistics], no. 3, pp. 5-11. Burmistrovich Yu.Ya., 2006. Nayti propavshiy vek!: Ocherki po istorii slavianskogo istoricheskogo yazykoznaniya [To Find the Lost Century!: Sketches on History of Slavic Historical Linguistics]. Abakan, Izd-vo Khakasskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 59 p. Burmistrovich Yu.Ya., 2007. Zakony foneticheskie i zakony fonematicheskie: sut' tekh i drugikh [Laws Phonetic and Laws Phonemic: Essence of Both Types]. Slavia casopis pro slovanskou filologii, 1950, rocnik 76, pp. 129-141.
Delbrück B. Vvedenie v izuchenie yazyka (iz istorii i metodologii sravnitelnogo yazykoznaniya) [Introduction to Language Study (From History and Methodology of Comparative Linguistics)]. Moscow, Editorial URSS, 2003. 152 p.
Durnovo N.N., 1912. Zapiski iz istorii russkogo yazyka. Fonetika i dialektologiya [Notes from the History of the Russian Language. Phonetics and Dialectology]. Kharkiv, s. n. 1, 2, 211, 44 p.
Fortunatov F.F., 1956. Sravnitelnaya fonetika indoevropeiskikh yazykov: Kratkiy ocherk [Comparative Phonetics of the Indo-European Languages: Short Sketch]. Fortunatov F.F. Izbrannye trudy: v 2 t. [Selected Works. In 2 Vols.]. Moscow, Uchpedgiz Publ., vol. 1, pp. 199-446.
Glushchenko V.A., 1998. Pryntsypy porivnialno-istorychnogo doslidzhennia v ukrainskomu i rosiiskomu movoznavstvi (70-i rr. XIX st. -20 rr. XX st.) [Principles of the Comparative-historic Study in the Ukrainian and Russian Linguistics (The 70s of the 19th Century - the 20s of the 20th Century]. Donetsk. 222 p.
Guillaume G., 2004. Printsipy teoreticheskoy lingvistiki [Principles ofTheoretical Linguistics]. Krasina E.A., ed. Lingvistika XX veka: sistema i struktura yazika: khrestomatiya: v 2 ch. [Linguistics of the 20th Century: System and Structure of Language. Chrestomathy. In 2 Parts]. Moscow, Izd-vo RUDN, part 1, pp. 73-85.
Krushevskiy N.V., 1883. Ocherk nauki o yazyke [Sketches of Linguistic Science]. Kazan, s. n. 148 p.
Osthoff H., 1956. Predislovie k knige «Morfologicheskie issledovaniya v oblasti indoevropeiskikh yazykov» [Preface to the Book "Morphological Studies in the Area of Indo-European Languages"]. Zvegintsev V.A., ed. Khrestomatiya po istorii yazykoznaniia XIX - XX vekov [Chrestomathy on the History of Linguistics of the 19th - 20th Centuries]. Moscow, Gosudarstvennoe uchebno-pedagogicheskoe izdatelstvo Ministerstva prosveshcheniya RSFSR, pp. 187-198.
Paul H., 1960. Printsipy istorii yazyka [Principles of the History of Language]. Moscow, Izd-vo inostrannoy literatury. 500 p.
Polivanov E.D., 1991. Lektsii po vvedeniyu v yazykoznanie i obshchey fonetike [Lectures on Introduction to Linguistics and General Phonetics]. Izbrannye trudy po vostochnomu i obshchemu yazykoznaniyu [Selected Works on Eastern and General Linguistics]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., Glavnaya redaktsiya vostochnoy literatury Publ., pp. 238-270.
Postovalova V.I., 1978. Istoricheskayafonologiya i ee osnovaniya: Opyt logiko-metodologicheskogo
analiza [Historical Phonology and Its Principles: Experience of Logical-Methodological Analysis]. Moscow, Nauka Publ. 203 p.
Potebnia A.A., 1871. Zametki o malorusskom narechii [Notes on Little Russian Dialect]. Voronezh, s. n. 134 p.
Saussure F. de, 1998. Kurs zakhalnoy linkhvistyky [Course on General Linguistics]. Kyiv, Osnovy Publ. 324 p.
Shakhmatov A.A., 1910-1911. Kurs istorii russkogo yazyka (chitan v S.-Peterburgskom un-te v 1908-9 uch. g. Vvedenie [Course on the Russian Language History (Taught at Saint Petersburg University in 1908-1909 Academic year. Introduction]. Saint Petersburg. 407 p.
Shakhmatov A.A., 2002. Ocherk drevneyshego perioda istorii russkogo yazyka [Sketch on the Ancient Period of the Russian Language History]. Moscow, Indrik Publ. 28, 2, 50, 369 p.
Sharadzenidze T.S., 1980. Lingvisticheskaya teoriya I.A. Boduena de Kurtene i ee mesto v yazykoznanii XIX-XX vv. [Linguistic Theory of I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay and Its Place in the Linguistics of the 19th - 20th Centuries]. Moscow, Nauka Publ. 130 p.
Steponavichius A., 1982. Osnovy diakhronicheskoy fonologii. Mekhanizmy zvukovykh izmeneniy [Principles of Diachronic Phonology. Mechanisms of Sound Changes]. Vilnius, Vilnyusskiy GU im. V. Kapsukasa. 84 p.
Toporov VN., 1960. I.A. Boduen de Kurtene i razvitie fonologii [I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay and Development of Phonology]. I.A. Boduen de Kurtene (1845-1929). (K tridtsatiletiyu so dnya smerti) [I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay (1845-1929). (To the 30th Anniversary ofDeath)]. Bernshtein S.B., ed. Doklady nauchnoy sessii [Reports of Scientific Session]. Moscow, Izd-vo AN SSSR, pp. 28-36.
Zhuravlev VK., 1986a. Diakhronicheskaya fonologiya [Diachronic Phonology]. Moscow, Nauka Publ. 232 p.
Zhuravlev V.K., 1986b. Postulat neprelozhnosti foneticheskikh zakonov i sovremennaia komparativistika [Immutability Principle of Phonetic Laws and Modern Comparative Linguistics]. Voprosy yazykoznaniya, no. 4, pp. 27-36.
Zubkova L.G., 1989. Lingvisticheskie ucheniia kontsa XVIII v. - nachala XX v. : Razvitie obshchei teorii iazyka v sistemnykh kontseptsiiakh [Linguistic Studies of the End of the 18th Century - the Beginning of the 20th Century: Development of Language Theory in Systemic Concepts]. Moscow, Izd-vo RUDN. 215 p.
Information About the Authors
Vladimir A. Glushchenko, Doctor of Sciences (Philology), Professor, Head of the Department of Germanic and Slavonic Philology, Donbass State Teachers' Training University, Generala Batyuka St, 19, 84116 Sloviansk, Ukraine, sdpunauka@ukr.net, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2394-4966
Anna S. Orel, Candidate of Sciences (Philology), Associate Professor, Department of Germanic and Slavonic Philology, Donbass State Teachers' Training University, Generala Batyuka St, 19, 84116 Sloviansk, Ukraine, doncaban@gmail.com, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4077-1614
Alexander V. Piskunov, Candidate of Sciences (Philology), Associate Professor, Department of Germanic and Slavonic Philology, Donbass State Teachers' Training University, Generala Batyuka St, 19, 84116 Sloviansk, Ukraine, piskunov.oleksandr@gmail.com, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7176-7423
Информация об авторах
Владимир Андреевич Глущенко, доктор филологических наук, профессор, заведующий кафедрой германской и славянской филологии, Донбасский государственный педагогический университет, ул. Генерала Батюка, 19, 84116 г. Славянск, Украина, sdpunauka@ukr.net, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2394-4966
Анна Сергеевна Орел, кандидат филологических наук, доцент кафедры германской и славянской филологии, Донбасский государственный педагогический университет, ул. Генерала Ба-тюка, 19, 84116 г. Славянск, Украина, doncaban@gmail.com, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4077-1614 Александр Викторович Пискунов, кандидат филологических наук, доцент кафедры германской и славянской филологии, Донбасский государственный педагогический университет, ул. Генерала Батюка, 19, 84116 г. Славянск, Украина, piskunov.oleksandr@gmail.com, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7176-7423
