CC BY
49
8. Devyat' dushevnyh 'epizodov obscheniya predsedatelya KNR Si Czin'pina s det'mi. CRLonlain. Mezhdunarodnoe radio Kitaya. Available at: http:\\www.rassian.cri.cn/ 2018.06.01
9. Antipov A.G. Transformacionnaya dinamika sovremennoj russkoj rechi. Lingvistika kak forma zhizni. 2015; Vyp. 4: 2 - 24.
10. Shunkov A.V. «Perehodnyj tekst» russkoj literatury vtoroj poloviny XVII - nachala HVIII veka: problemy po'etiki. Avtoreferat dissertacii ... doktora filologicheskih nauk. Tomsk, 2015.
Статья поступила в редакцию 17.10.18
УДК 81-26
Antropova L.I., Doctor of Sciences (Philology), Professor, Nosov Magnitogorsk State Technical University (Magnitogorsk, Russia), E-mail: alitier@mail.ru Polyakova L.S., Cand. of Sciences (Philology), senior teacher, Nosov Magnitogorsk State Technical University (Magnitogorsk, Russia), E-mail: lilitmgn@mail.ru Zalavina T.Yu, Cand. of Sciences (Philology), Nosov Magnitogorsk State Technical University (Magnitogorsk, Russia), E-mail: tania_mgn@rambler.ru Yuzhakova Yu.V., Cand. of Sciences (Philology), Nosov Magnitogorsk State Technical University (Magnitogorsk, Russia), E-mail: julia_south@mail.ru
SOCIOCULTURAL CONDITIONS OF LANGUAGE VARIATION IN NATIONAL LANGUAGES. The article deals with a problem of social differentiation of the language. In particular, the authors consider theoretical problems of the specifics of language use in different socially motivated situations of communication, the conditions of language variability, the speaker of coded standard language is characterized, having the ability to switch from one language to another one during official/ unofficial communication. The authors of the article analyze various socially-structured informal language situations related to the unprepared areas of communication, the sociolinguistic foundations of private conversations are verified too. The authors conclude that when changing a language situation, the speaker of codified language changes his/her speech to the regional colloquial language.
Key words: sociolinguistic differences, language variation, the speaker of coded standard language, language situation.
Л.И. Антропова, д-р филол. наук, проф., Магнитогорский государственный технический университет им. Г.И. Носова, г. Магнитогорск, E-mail: alitier@mail.ru
Л.С. Полякова, канд. филол. наук, доц., Магнитогорский государственный технический университет им. Г.И. Носова, E-mail: lilitmgn@mail.ru Т.Ю. Залавина, канд. филол. наук, доц., Магнитогорский государственный технический университет им. Г.И. Носова, E-mail: tania_mgn@rambler.ru Ю.В. Южакова, канд. филол. наук, доц., Магнитогорский государственный технический университет им. Г.И. Носова, E-mail: julia_south@mail.ru
СОЦИОКУЛЬТУРНЫЕ УСЛОВИЯ ЯЗЫКОВОЙ ВАРИАТИВНОСТИ НАЦИОНАЛЬНЫХ ЯЗЫКОВ
Статья посвящена проблеме социальной дифференциации языка. В частности, авторами рассматриваются теоретические проблемы специфики употребления языка в разных социально мотивированных ситуациях общения, условия языковой вариативности, характеризуется носитель кодифицированного литературного языка, обладающий способностью переключаться с одного социокультурного языка на другой в официальной/неофициальной коммуникации. Авторами статьи были проанализированы различные социально структурированные неофициальные языковые ситуации, относящиеся к неподготовленным сферам общения, также были выявлены социолингвистические основы частных бесед. Авторы пришли к выводу, что при смене языковой ситуации, носитель кодифицированного литературного языка переключается на региональный разговорный язык.
Ключевые слова: социолингвистическая дифференциация, языковая вариативность, носитель кодифицированного литературного языка, языковая ситуация.
Scientific development of the issue of socio-cultural variability of national languages in American, German, French, Czech and Russian Sociolinguistics is directly related to the problem of the study of social differentiation of a language, which although being studied in linguistics, still arouses interest among linguists. It is especially associated with the specificity of the social motivation of the language depending on the changes taking place in the society, i.e. depending on extralinguistic factors. Constantly changing extralinguistic factors cause functioning of different language versions, which can be chosen and used by the speakers of standard language in their everyday life [1; 2]. We may find the issues related to the nature of the use of this or that form of language existence in other linguistic works, whose main objective is traditionally the study of the national language situation and a closely related to it problem of social differentiation of a language, determined by the presence of various social strata and groups [3, p. 971-973].
In this paper language situation is understood as socially motivated model of a native speaker's speech behaviour in socio-linguistic space. From this perspective, the concept of linguistic situation is defined as the interaction of extralinguistic and intratextual, basic changes. Colloquial forms of languages vary in individual linguistic levels: phonetics, grammar, vocabulary. Since any language exists because of a society, these levels depend on socio-communicative situations and social conditions, where native speakers are situated.
Nowadays in linguistics there is no unified definition for such terms as "sociolinguistic variants", "sociolinguistic subsystem", "social linguistic variants", "language variation", "variant". Some scholars, like A.D. Schweitzer, V.M. Alpatov, L.P. Krysin, R. Fasold, P. Trudgill and others, use the terms "variance" and "variability" as synonyms, and other scientists consider them as separate terms. As we are interested in the social nature of linguistic changes, we adhere to the definition of sociolinguistic subsystems of a language as the continuum forms of its existence. We refer to the forms of existence of a language (Language Variety, Existenzformen der Sprache, Formes de l'existence du language) as socially and communicatively differentiated, relatively autonomous language systems with their own set of linguistic signs and with their specific features of functioning in modern communication. First of all, we are talking here about social variance of any national language, which is determined by linguistic stratification, social status of speakers and their social-speaking roles in given speech situations. As it is known, in formal situations a coded language is used, e.g.: American English (Standard American English), Standard language in the UK;
deutsche Literatursprache or Standartsprache (standard German) in Germany; the official standard-written language of France (le français littéraire) or standard general French language (la langue française standartisée générale), le littéraire français, etc. Typological overview of modern language situations in America, Germany, France, and Russia allowed as identify literary, as well as extra literary forms of existence of national languages.
With regard to the functioning of the dialects in Western European countries, they are considered to be reasonably well investigated. However, linguists' interest to the study of different types of dialects, which had equal historical conditions for their development, still remains rather high, both in terms of identifying language similarities and differences, and building the typology of the forms of existence of European languages, including English, French, German and Czech.
However, foreign and Russian sociolinguists, dealing with the problem of social differentiation in languages, rather note different forms of existence of languages than describe them in detail. Moreover, their primary attention is paid to the use of language by different social groups regardless of the "social role" of the same speaker. A number of sociolinguistic studies give scientists the opportunity to present language as a set of various differential forms and to assert that the existence of different forms of any national language is rather a rule than an exception, and they (forms) are determined by social conditions and the objectives of native speakers [3]. It should be noted that the concept of sociolinguistic differentiation is related to the functioning of the national language in different socio-communicative and territorial conditions. That is why languages have been explored in different regions of Germany, France, the Czech Republic, and Russia. Comparative studies, however, were mostly done on small fragments of language material and on separate linguistic levels. In special literature on linguistics there is still no systematic comparative study of European and Russian languages in terms of their linguistic conformity by forms of linguistic entities. Moreover, in sociolinguistic studies, so far, the mechanism of affecting social factors on language has been little investigated, and the system and the peculiarities of targeted influence of a society on a language remain unexplored. In this respect, when building the typology of forms of existence of the language, promising proved to be the method proposed by L.P. Krysin when researching sociolinguistic subsystems of Russian language [4]. It is this approach that allows you to identify communication situations, where the speakers of coded standard language may occur during the day, and which may be used for building a typology of forms of existence of other national languages.
For scientists one of the burning issues in the phenomenon of the forms of existence of national language remains the question of what level should be considered appropriate when looking for these differentiations. As we see it, they may be found in speakers' various socio-linguistic behaviours, as the speech of every native speaker does not only reflect his/her public relations, but also the conceptual and linguistic picture of the world.
The analysis of the current linguistic situation in different countries allowed us to distinguish literary forms and extraliterary sub-systems of national languages, or the forms of their existence. The paradigm of socio-linguistic space constitute the coded standard language, standard-colloquial, regional colloquial language, urban and regional dialects. It should be noted that, although territorial dialects have undergone significant changes as compared to the period of their development, they still continue to play a significant role in the process of oral communication both among the villagers, or educated and intelligent people.
Let us consider local dialects, which being the variants of national languages, function within a limited region. They also remain a favourite topic for the researchers of modern languages. A number of researchers continue to explore modern dialects, their speakers, and the role of dialects in the paradigm of unilingual linguistic situations. They compare the linguistic characteristics of dialects and a coded standard language (CSL), explore the use of dialects in different communicative situations. The speakers of the coded language continue to find in the dialects "trust, intimacy with colleagues". Among the scientists, the terms Dialekt/Mundart are used as synonyms [5, p. 207-208].
New data on the changing social role of dialects in everyday life of various Western European countries, maintaining dialects' independence, have enabled scientists to consider dialects one of the ways of leaning the national language picture and carry out a comparative analysis of modern language situations in America, France, and Germany [6, p. 267-268].
They point to the fact that territorial dialects are still an important means of informal communication, as they are motivated by social situations and are determined by the changes going in today's national society. The authors show that territorial dialects are contrasted with the standard language in different options and characteristics. For example, according to lexical-morphological markers we can identify: a) Plattdeutsch and the coded standard language (De kinners maket em hus klamauk, Die Kinder machen im Haus Krach The kids are being noisy at home'; Guten Tag/Grüß Got 'Good afternoon', Brotchen / Schrippe 'a bun'; the pronunciation of [g] as [h]); b) Russian regional colloquial language Ruhrdeutsch (Aus'n Konsum/anne Ecke/ Aus dem Kon-
Библиографический список
sum/an der Ecke'From the shop/at the corner'; assimilation of verbs with personal pronouns: «Was frachse?» «Was fragst du? 'What are you asking about?') [7, p. 170]. The analyzed range of dialects allowed the scientists to establish and form different types of dialect speakers and explore the dynamic innovation processes that take place in colloquial speech and affect national standard language.
In conclusion, it should be noted that each of these approaches to scientific problems of forms of existence and functioning of different sociolinguistic variants (subsystems) of national languages has a different value for the creation a typology of forms of existence of national languages. The opposition comparison method allows identifying the differences in linguistic and communicative rules of coded standard (CSL) and colloquial languages, operating in different territorial and social conditions. This enables us to conclude that spoken languages, due to the change of communicative situations, have their own linguistic and communicative norms, both in the regions, and within the cities.
In this regard, various socially-structured informal situations, related to different unprepared fields of communication, can be explored. Sociolinguistic basis of such private interviews, where the speakers of a coded standard language are situated, can be, e.g.: discussion of novelties in music and literature, hosting guests, celebration of someone's birthday, the anniversary of a firm, an enterprise, a city; sharing the impressions on a holiday, purchases. When changing the situation, the speaker of the coded standard language switches to the regional colloquial language: "bank', " savings banks", "canteen and cafes", "doctor's appointment", "road accident", "State Road Police", "shopping in a foreign city", "house rent", etc. Sociolinguistic factor for the transition to the urban colloquial language/urban dialect is explained by both the changing situations, and the changing socio-communicative roles of the coded standard language speakers. At the root of all these speech situations lies speakers' communicative experience, their common communicative background, and, therefore, the speakers of coded standard language, owing to their intelligence, can switch from one sociocultural language to another one, making their statements at speech guess and using topical conversational vocabulary for particular situations.
The analysis does not aim at being exhaustive to make a complete typology of forms of existence of a language and to describe the mechanisms of social and situation-dependent use of this or that language. The paper considers the main sociolin-guistic criterion of functioning of different languages: the type of one speaker of coded standard language, who, depending on various communicative contexts, is able to switch from one language to another one. This criterion is one of the main cross-lingual universals of national languages.
1. Антропова Л.И. Формы существования языка: социокультурно-коммуникативный подход. Диссертация ... доктора филологических наук. Челябинск, 2005.
2. Залавина Т.Ю., Антропова Л.И. Вариантность глагольных фразеологизмов-репрезентантов концепта «порицание» в национальных языках. Гуманитарно-педагогические исследования. 2018; 2: 54 - 61.
3. Dittmar N. Text- and Geshprachslinguistic: ein internationals Handbuch zeitgenos- sischer Forshung = Linguistics of Text and Conversation. Handbucher zur Schpar-und Kommuni- kationswissenschaft. Bd.16 Halbbd.: 2001; 2: 971 - 973.
4. Крысин Л.П. О перспективах социолингвистических исследованиях в русистике Русистика. 1992; 2: 96-106. Available at: http://www.philology.ru/linguistics2/krysin-92.htm
5. Schönfeld H. Varianten, Varietaten und Sprachvariation. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung. 1985,38 (1): 207 - 208.
6. Гроссе Р Диалекты и письменный язык на территории Верхней Саксонии. Вопросы германского языкознания. 1961: 267 - 268.
7. Bausinger H. Dialekte, Sprachbarrieren, Sondersprachen. Deutsch fur Deutsche. Frankfurt am Main: Bd.2. 1979.
References
1. Antropova L.I. Formy suschestvovaniya yazyka: sociokul'turno-kommunikativnyjpodhod. Dissertaciya ... doktora filologicheskih nauk. Chelyabinsk, 2005.
2. Zalavina T.Yu., Antropova L.I. Variantnost' glagol'nyh frazeologizmov-reprezentantov koncepta «poricanie» v nacional'nyh yazykah. Gumanitarno-pedagogicheskieissledovaniya. 2018; 2: 54 - 61.
3. Dittmar N. Text- and Geshprachslinguistic: ein internationals Handbuch zeitgenos- sischer Forshung = Linguistics of Text and Conversation. Handbucher zur Schpar-und Kommuni- kationswissenschaft. Bd.16 Halbbd.: 2001; 2: 971 - 973.
4. Krysin L.P. O perspektivah sociolingvisticheskih issledovaniyah v rusistike Rusistika. 1992; 2: 96-106. Available at: http://www.philology.ru/linguistics2/krysin-92.htm
5. Schönfeld H. Varianten, Varietaten und Sprachvariation. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung. 1985,38 (1): 207 - 208.
6. Grosse R. Dialekty i pis'mennyj yazyk na territorii Verhnej Saksonii. Voprosygermanskogoyazykoznaniya. 1961: 267 - 268.
7. Bausinger H. Dialekte, Sprachbarrieren, Sondersprachen. Deutsch fur Deutsche. Frankfurt am Main: Bd.2. 1979.
Статья поступила в редакцию 29.10.18
УДК 801.8
Bagandova I.M., Cand. of Sciences (Philology), Dagestan Pedagogical State Unievrsity (Makhachkala, Russia), E-mail: rustam.bagandov.2015@mail.ru
SYNTACTIC ORGANIZATION OF PROVERBS AND SAYINGS OF THE DARGIN LANGUAGE. The article is dedicated to the need to identify specific features of proverbs and sayings of the Dargin language, and their theoretical understanding in the aspect of the problem of the relationship between language and culture, which would contribute to a further broader understanding of the national world view, reflected in the Dargin language world picture. The author points to a significant difference between the syntactic relations of the three-term and two-term sentences in the Dargin language. The author explains the differences between these types of sentences by the fact that in a two-term sentence the subject concentrates both the person category and the class category in itself, and in the three-term sentence one of these categories belongs to the subject and the other object. The syntactic organization of the proverbs and sayings of the Dargin language, their metaphor, conciseness and accuracy are largely achieved by their syntactic structure, as the proverbs and sayings of the Dargin people cited prove.
Key words: proverbs, sayings, structural and grammatical features, syntactic structure, subject, predicate, object, class-personal coordination, two-component, multicomponent.
И.М. Багандова, канд. филол. наук, Дагестанский педагогический государственный университет, г. Махачкала,
E-mail: rustam.bagandov.2015@mail.ru
