Active and passive composition of vocabulary.
Changes in the life of society (political, social, economic, cultural) are reflected in the language, primarily in its vocabulary
In the process of historical development, a language undergoes semantic transformations of words: the emergence of new meanings for a word and the loss of old ones (changes in meanings).
Thus, there are two layers of words in the language:
1.Active vocabulary. This includes popular and commonly used words that do not have (regardless of the time of their appearance) a connotation of obsolescence or novelty.
To vocabulary active composition belong to the words:
A) neutral, common : table, chair, new, good, I, he, five, ten, write, work, tomorrow, in, on;
b) book words : coming, dominance, inexhaustible, test, extreme;
V ) terms : subject, predicate, molecule, proportion, hypotenuse;
G) words with emotional and expressive connotations : buddy, dear, little house, little boy;
d) words expressing response concepts : research, movement, honesty, Oblomovism, brotherhood;
e) professionalism : scalpel, veneer, block, lattice (in the speech of lumberjacks).
2. Passive vocabulary. This includes words that are rarely used, which either recently entered the vocabulary and have not yet become part of the general literary language, or denote objects or phenomena of reality that are gone or passing away.
Words drop out of the active stock by various reasons. The main ones:
1. Disappearance of objects and phenomena that these words previously designated. So at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, before the advent of the tram, there was a city Railway with horse traction. It was called a horse-drawn horse. With the advent of the tram, this road disappeared, and the word horse-drawn was forgotten.
Military historicisms have long gone out of use: chain mail, arquebus; social: smerd, boyar, oprichnik.
2.Replacement of some words with others (synonyms).
semo – “here”, ovamo – “there”, izhe – “which”, in order – so that.
Depending on the reasons why a particular word is classified as obsolete, historicisms and archaisms are distinguished.
Historicisms - these are words that have fallen out of active use in our speech due to the disappearance of objects and phenomena that were previously designated by them.
The process of obsolescence of certain words can be very fast. For example, many words that arose in the Soviet era have become historicisms: kombed (committee of the poor), tax in kind, NEP, this is evidenced by the book of N.M. Shansky "Words born in October."
V.V. Mayakovsky perfectly notes the transition of words from active, living vocabulary to the category of historicism due to changing social conditions:
Grandchildren will ask: - What is a capitalist?
Like the children now: - What is this policeman?
Historicisms are quite diverse thematic groups:
1.names of ancient clothing: zipun, camisole, caftan, kokoshnik;
2. names of monetary units: altyn, penny;
3.names of titles: boyar, count, prince;
4. names of officials: policeman, landowner, clerk;
5.names of the weapon: arquebus, pistol;
6.administrative names: volost, province, district.
The second group of obsolete words is represented by archaisms.
Archaisms name words that have fallen out of active use due to the fact that they have been replaced by synonymous words: in other words archaisms - these are outdated words and phrases (from the Greek archaios - ancient).
Unlike historicisms, archaisms denote objects and phenomena that exist in modern life, have not left it, but have modern name(mouth, axe, etc.).
Archaisms always have synonymous correspondences in modern language.
Let us give examples of archaisms from different categories of significant and auxiliary words:
A) nouns: shepherd - shepherd, finger - finger, forehead - forehead;
b) adjectives: prophetic - foreseeing, pitch - external;
V) pronouns: this – this, this – that;
G) numerals: twelve - 20, distant - 27;
d ) Verbs: to advocate - to achieve;
e ) adverbs: day, night
conjunctions: for, in order to; prepositions: after – through.
Depending on whether the entire word, the meaning of the word, the phonetic design of the word, or a separate word-forming morpheme becomes obsolete, archaisms are divided into several groups:
1.Actually lexical archaisms - these are words that have completely fallen out of use and have passed into the passive vocabulary:
aki - like piit - poet
eye - eye thief - thief
scoundrel - accuser, doubter - dreamer
2.Lexico-semantic archaisms – these are words for which one or more meanings have become obsolete:
belly - life scoundrel - unfit for military service
idol - statue shelter - port, pier
verb – word
3.Lexico-phonetic archaisms - these are words whose sound design has changed as a result of historical development, but the meaning of the word has been fully preserved:
seducer - seducer creator - creator
mirror - mirror ironism - heroism
eighteen - eighteen passport - passport
4. Lexico-word-formative archaisms – these are words in which individual morphemes or word-formation patterns are outdated:
dol - valley friendship - friendship
fisherman - fisherman phantasm - fantasy
whitewash - protein rottenness - rottenness
Special group make up accentological archaisms – words whose emphasis has changed: music, suffix, philosopher.
The archaization of words is not related to their origin. The following may become obsolete:
1) original Russian words: in order, lzya, outcast;
2) Old Slavonicisms: hunger, one, zelo, child;
3) borrowed: natura - nature, satisfaction - satisfaction, sicurs - help.
There is some differentiation of words as they are used: words that name vital, necessary concepts do not age for centuries; others become archaic quite quickly. We stop using them due to the disappearance of the very concepts that these words denote, or because they are transformed into others, more modern and acceptable for a given era. The education system in Russia has changed - the words institute of noble maidens, classy lady, realist (student) have disappeared from our speech real school), college student.
Words that served as names for disappeared objects, concepts, and phenomena are called historicisms. They occupy a completely special position in the language, being the only names for objects that have long disappeared from our everyday life. Therefore, historicisms do not and cannot have synonyms.
“Tiun” (tax collector), “bortnichat” (collecting honey from wild bees), etc. have now fallen out of common use, but when describing Ancient Rus' they act as Historicisms (in relation to modernity). The age of Historicisms can be calculated in centuries ("smerd", "boyar", "brother"), and decades ("NEPMAN", "educational program", "tax in kind"). In contrast to archaisms, Historicisms do not have their semantic equivalents in the lexical system of the modern language.
Now we don’t measure arshins, don’t bow to volost elders and clerks, and are happy to forget all the “unnecessary” words, as it seems to us. But in historical literature, in works of art, telling about the past of our people, one cannot help but use historicisms. They help to recreate the flavor of the era and give the description of the past a touch of historical authenticity. Historicisms are usually used in the language of works of art on historical themes during stylization, for example, “The princes rode around on horses in patterned cones, and the sweepers in bast shoes repelled the enemies in those stubborn battles!” (N. Aseev). : bursa, caftan, posadnik. Historicisms are found mainly in texts about the past (both scientific and artistic).
In addition to historicisms, other types of obsolete words are distinguished in our language. Have you ever observed how this or that word for some reason “falls into disgrace”? We use it less and less in speech, replacing it with another, and so it is gradually forgotten. For example, an actor was once called a performer, a comedian; they spoke not of a journey, but of a voyage, not of fingers, but of fingers, not of a forehead, but of a forehead. Such outdated words name completely modern objects, concepts that are now usually called differently.
New names have replaced the old ones, and they are gradually forgotten. Obsolete words that have modern synonyms that have replaced them in the language are called archaisms.
Archaisms are fundamentally different from historicisms. If historicisms are the names of outdated objects, then archaisms are outdated names of quite ordinary objects and concepts that we constantly encounter in life. These are words that have passed into passive stock due to the fact that the objects, phenomena, and concepts they denote - and exist to this day - have acquired other names.
Archaisms, and especially Old Slavonicisms, which have replenished the passive composition of the vocabulary, give the speech a sublime, solemn sound: Arise, prophet, and see, and listen, be fulfilled by my will, and, going around the seas and lands, burn the hearts of people with the verb! (P.).
Old Church Slavonic vocabulary was used in this function even in ancient Russian literature. In the poetry of classicism, acting as the main component Odic dictionary, Old Slavonicisms defined the solemn style of “high poetry”. In poetic speech of the 19th century. With the archaizing Old Church Slavonic vocabulary, the outdated vocabulary of other sources, and above all Old Russianisms, was stylistically equalized: Alas! Wherever I look, there are whips everywhere, glands everywhere, disastrous shame of laws, feeble tears of captivity (P.). Archaisms were the source of the national-patriotic sound of Pushkin’s freedom-loving lyrics and the poetry of the Decembrists. The tradition of writers turning to outdated high vocabulary in works of civil and patriotic themes is maintained in the Russian literary language in our time.
Archaisms and historicisms are used in works of art about the historical past of our country to recreate the flavor of the era; cf.: How is it collected now? prophetic Oleg, to take revenge on the foolish Khazars, he doomed their villages and fields for the violent raid to swords and fires; with his retinue, in Constantinople armor, the prince rides across the field on a faithful horse (P.). In the same stylistic function, outdated words are used in A. S. Pushkin’s tragedy “Boris Godunov”, in the novels of A. N. Tolstoy “Peter I”, A.P. Chapygin “Razin Stepan”, V. Ya. Shishkov “Emelyan Pugachev”, etc.
Obsolete words can be a means of speech characteristics of characters, for example, clergy, monarchs. Wed. Pushkin’s stylization of the Tsar’s speech:
I [Boris Godunov] reached the highest power;
I have been reigning peacefully for six years now.
But there is no happiness for my soul. Is not it
We fall in love and hunger from a young age
The joys of love, but only to quench
Heartfelt pleasure of instant possession,
Are we already bored and languishing, having cooled down?
Archaisms, and especially Old Church Slavonicisms, are used to recreate the ancient oriental flavor, which is explained by the proximity of Old Church Slavonic speech culture to biblical imagery. Examples are also easy to find in the poetry of Pushkin ("Imitations of the Koran", "Gabriiliad") and other writers ("Shulamith" by A.I. Kuprin).
Highly outdated vocabulary can be subject to ironic rethinking and act as a means of humor and satire. The comical sound of outdated words is noted in everyday stories and satire of the 17th century, and later in epigrams, jokes, and parodies written by participants in linguistic polemics of the early 19th century. (members of the Arzamas society), who opposed the archaization of the Russian literary language.
In modern humorous and satirical poetry, outdated words are also often used as a means of creating an ironic coloring of speech: A worm, skillfully placed on a hook, enthusiastically said: - How favorably providence has been towards me, I am finally completely independent (N. Mizin).
Analyzing stylistic functions obsolete words in artistic speech, one cannot help but take into account the fact that their use in some cases (as well as referring to other lexical means) may not be related to a specific stylistic task, but is determined by the peculiarities of the author’s style and the individual preferences of the writer. Thus, for M. Gorky, many outdated words were stylistically neutral, and he used them without any special stylistic direction: People walked slowly past us, dragging long shadows behind them; [Pavel Odintsov] philosophized... that all work disappears, some do something, while others destroy what was created, without appreciating or understanding it.
In the poetic speech of Pushkin’s time, the appeal to incomplete words and other Old Slavonic expressions that have consonant Russian equivalents was often due to versification: in accordance with the requirement of rhythm and rhyme, the poet gave preference to one or another option (as “poetic liberties”): I will sigh, and my languid voice, like a harp’s voice, will die quietly in the air (Bat.); Onegin, my good friend, was born on the banks of the Neva... - Go to the Neva banks, newborn creation... (P.) By the end of the 19th century. poetic liberties were eliminated and the amount of outdated vocabulary in the poetic language sharply decreased. However, also Blok, and Yesenin, and Mayakovsky, and Bryusov, and other poets of the early 20th century. they paid tribute to outdated words traditionally assigned to poetic speech (though Mayakovsky had already turned to archaisms primarily as a means of irony and satire). Echoes of this tradition are still found today; cf.: Winter is a solid regional city, but not a village at all (Euth.).
In addition, it is important to emphasize that when analyzing the stylistic functions of obsolete words in a particular work of art, one should take into account the time of its writing and know the general linguistic norms that were in force in that era. After all, for a writer who lived a hundred or two hundred years ago, many words could have been completely modern, commonly used units that had not yet become a passive part of the vocabulary.
The need to turn to an outdated dictionary also arises for authors of scientific and historical works. To describe the past of Russia, its realities that have gone into oblivion, historicisms are used, which in such cases act in their own nominative function. Yes, academician D. S. Likhachev in his works “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”, “The Culture of Rus' in the Time of Andrei Rublev and Epiphanius the Wise” uses many words unknown to a modern speaker of the language, mainly historicisms, explaining their meaning.
Sometimes the opinion is expressed that outdated words are also used in official business speech. Indeed, in legal documents there are sometimes words that in other conditions we have the right to attribute to archaisms: deed, punishment, retribution, deed. In business papers they write: herewith attached, this year, the undersigned, the above-named. Such words should be considered special. They are fixed in formal business style and do not carry any expressive-stylistic load in the context. However, the use of outdated words that do not have a strict terminological meaning can cause unjustified archaization of business language.
Depending on which aspect of the word is obsolete, they distinguish different types archaisms: -- lexical-- the word itself has become obsolete, its sound-letter complex is no longer used, and the meaning is expressed by another lexical unit:
eye - eye, mouth - lips, cheeks - cheeks, right hand - right hand, shuitsa - left hand
phonetic- the sound appearance of the word has changed, which is reflected in its spelling. These include those found in writers of the 19th century century, the words klob (modern. Club), numer (modern. number), stora (modern. curtain), goshpital (modern. hospital) and the like. They differ from their “rivals” often by only one sound, less often by several sounds or an outdated accent. (mladoy - young, zlato - gold, breg - shore, hail - city, vran - raven; the first words in these pairs sound archaic).
“He sang the faded color of life / At almost eighteen years old” (Pushk.).
Also, phonetic archaisms include words that retain the sound [e] before a hard consonant, while in their modern versions they sound [o] (written ё) - red-hot (red-hot), enlightened (enlightened), doomed (doomed).
Another group of archaisms combines words with outdated suffixes; the word-formation structure of the word is outdated in them: Poison drips through its bark, / By noon, melting from the heat, / And hardens in the evening / With thick, cool resin (Pushk.); The madman cries only because of misfortune, / And the wise man seeks a means, / How to help his grief with deeds (Wing.). And our forester was Fedos Ivanov, a great scholar and knew how to sort things out well (Lesk.). What did Famusov say at Griboyedov’s? - Transferred to Moscow through my assistance (not assistance). Such archaisms are called word-forming. And we come across quite a few of them in the works of our favorite poets - fisherman, flirt, in vain, muzeum (modern museum). ...
semantic - the word exists in the modern Russian language, but has lost one or more meanings: And so that in the future he will not dare to perform miracles, / Having caught one, he will truly hang / And completely deprive his belly (Pushk.). Have you read the article in the Petersburg Gazette? (S.-Shch.) Arkady noticed all this, but kept his comments to himself (Turg.).
grammatical - certain grammatical forms of the word are outdated: The farmer breathes with joy / With full granaries he rejoices (Zhuk.)
As can be seen from the examples, obsolete words differ from each other in the degree of archaism: some are still found in speech, especially among poets, others are known only from the works of writers of the last century, and there are others that are completely forgotten.
The archaization of one of the meanings of a word is a very interesting phenomenon. The result of this process is the emergence of semantic, or semantic, archaisms, that is, words used in an unusual, outdated meaning for us. Knowledge of semantic archaisms helps to correctly understand the language of classical writers. And sometimes their use of words cannot but make us think seriously...
One should not neglect archaisms: they say, they disappear from the language, well, let’s forget them! There is no need to judge outdated words. There are cases when they return to the language and become part of the active vocabulary again. This was the case, for example, with the words soldier, officer, warrant officer, minister, adviser, which received in modern Russian new life. In the first years of the revolution, they managed to become archaic, but then returned, acquiring a new meaning.
Archaisms, like historicisms, are necessary for verbal artists to create the flavor of antiquity when depicting antiquity.
Decembrist poets, contemporaries and friends of A.S. Pushkin, used Old Slavonic vocabulary to create civil-patriotic pathos in speech. There was great interest in outdated words distinctive feature their poetry. The Decembrists were able to identify a layer in the archaizing vocabulary that could be adapted to express freedom-loving ideas.
Having appreciated the expressive capabilities of high archaic vocabulary, A.S. Pushkin, even in the late period of his creativity, turned to it as an irreplaceable source of the sublime sound of speech. Who will be left indifferent, for example, by the lines from Pushkin’s “Prophet” imbued with Slavicisms?
Arise, prophet, and see and listen,
Be fulfilled by my will
And, bypassing the seas and lands,
Burn the hearts of people with the verb.
Not only A.S. Pushkin and his contemporaries, but also poets of later times found in archaisms a means of sublime sounding of speech. Throughout the 19th and even at the beginning of the 20th century, obsolete words were perceived as poetic and did not seem as archaic as they do now.
We try to learn good things from writers literary language. Analyzing their use of archaisms and historicisms, we have the right to ask ourselves the question: “Can we ourselves decorate our speech with these expressive words?” This is not an idle question...
The obsolescence of words is a process, and different words may be at different stages. Those of them that have not yet gone out of active use, but are already used less frequently than before, are called obsolete.
Outdated words are used in different functions. For example, when used to name objects and phenomena, they perform a nominative function (in scientific and historical works, etc.). In works of art on historical themes, this vocabulary already performs a nominative-stylistic function - it not only denotes realities, but also creates a certain flavor of the era. Obsolete words can be used in literary text to indicate the time in which the action takes place. Obsolete words (mostly archaisms) can also perform stylistic functions and be expressive means, giving the text a special solemnity.
I want to hope that we will master the art of using historicisms and archaisms and not allow lapses that make an intelligent interlocutor or listener smile.
Bibliography
To prepare this work, materials from the site http://www. bolshe.ru/
Would you please, sirs and madams, to taste the fruits of knowledge? native language? This arrangement of words in a sentence is unusual and attracts attention with its originality, doesn’t it? But in the past, such a statement was common and did not surprise anyone. In this article we will talk about lexical units that have lost their relevance.
The concept of archaism
The Russian language has an “outdated stock” of words - veterans who have served their time and out of use, these are archaisms. But they did not disappear, but became a passive language stock. You can use such words if you understand their meaning.
Something new always appears in place of the old, and so it is in this case. Lexical elements that have gone out of use have been replaced by new words-synonyms (equivalents) that have the same meaning.
Examples of archaisms should be given to make the conversation more substantive: cheeks(cheeks), neck(neck), hand(palm), listen(listen). We see that some of them would not be clear on their own without explanation. There are archaisms that are understandable, their meaning is more open and lies in the associative connection with modern languages, for example, eyes(eyes), hope(hope), etc.
Dictionaries
Not only the word can be considered archaic. Explanatory dictionaries provide several definitions for this phenomenon. In Ushakov's dictionary it is a word or concept that has fallen out of use. The dictionary of linguistic terms talks about the archaic, which has acquired a new, modern meaning. The dictionary of antonyms of the Russian language calls outdated expressions - archaisms - neologisms. Ozhegov also talks about “relics of the past” and the obsolescence of a word or lexical form.
Types of archaisms
There is a division of archaisms into the following types:
- lexical;
- grammatical;
- lexico-word formation;
- lexical-semantic;
- lexical-phonetic.
Lexical those that have an obsolete root are considered ( in vain- in vain). They are completely outdated and modern speech no longer found (only in the literature): so that, hope, fasting, fasting.
Grammar can be considered one of the most ancient. These are words that were previously used in the vocative case (the seventh case of the Russian language, abolished): father, maiden, man! This also includes forms of speech that were formed differently. Example: at the ball(at the ball).
Derivational archaisms are distinguished by the fact that they contain parts of the word: suffixes, prefixes, endings that are involved in the creation new form words. Examples: coffee- coffee, assistance- assistance.
In lexical-semantic old meanings of words have disappeared ( guest- overseas merchant thief- state traitor, stomach- life, sail- sail), new ones came instead. “Not sparing your belly” - this is how they swore to faithful service to the Tsar and the Fatherland. The word “people” has now lost some of its old meanings (house servants, workers).
Religious texts almost entirely consist of semantic archaisms. They are difficult to hear. Moreover, many words that have fallen out of use initially have a different meaning than in our time. Enemy- devil (demon), sly- the same thing: devil or demon, lovely - temptation (demonic charm), etc.
Lexico-phonetic have undergone replacement of letters within the word: numbers- numbers, just- only, mirror- mirror, project- project, string- lace. This also includes words in which the sound “е” is changed to “e” when pronounced: confused, upo new, distant, kneeling (kneeling). Poets are very fond of phonetic archaisms, since they (archaisms) contain a certain musicality and rhythmic pattern.
World of Art
The world of art, and in particular literature, is archaic in many ways. This is especially true for poetry and Russian classics. Historical works They also convey well the linguistic atmosphere of the past. You can imagine how people spoke, how sublime, pathetic and somewhat florid the language was. But it sounded very nice!
Archaisms were used by writers and poets, to give meaning to the text, embedded in the work itself, conveys the character of the heroes. A.P. Chekhov used them for a special comic shade characteristic of many of his works. M. E. SALTYKOV-SHCHEDRIN used archaisms in satirical works. There are many examples of classics.
A. S. Pushkin, V. A. Zhukovsky and other poets of the late 18th - early 19th centuries used words - archaisms to embody rhythmic meter. Especially for poetic works, abbreviated (outdated, incomplete) forms of some words are “convenient” - breg, hail, gold etc.
Archaisms were also used earlier and are now used to add sublimity to poetry and festivity. This is how odes, epigrams, poems, sonnets were (and are) written.
Historicisms
A type of archaism is a group of words and lexical constructions of the language that denote those objects or phenomena that do not exist or are no longer used, have fallen out of use. This occurs in the process of development of human society and linguistic transformations; these phenomena exist historically in parallel.
Here are examples of historicisms:
- cloth: zipun, shushun, kokoshnik, caftan, onuchi etc.;
- titles: boyar, prince, king;
- positions: constable, mayor, mayor, canteen, clerk, solicitor, etc..;
- weapon: mortar, arquebus, club, whip;
- territories: volost, district, county, district.
The use of archaisms in the speech of our contemporaries is a frequent occurrence. Many people try to insert something like “for”, “sir”, “very grateful” into the story for the sake of saying “a catchy word”. This technique makes speech more colorful and emotional, encourages the listener to communicate.
You can also often find archaism; it is not necessary to know the meaning of the word; it sometimes becomes clear from the context of the phrase. For example: “I’m spinning aki bee". The word "aki" means "like".
The Russian language is colorful and many-sided. The word formation process goes on in it tirelessly, and the old is not forgotten.
Historicisms and archaisms
Historicisms are outdated words that have left the active vocabulary, since the objects and phenomena that they denoted have disappeared from the life of society [Kasatkin 2001: 206]. For example, the word “gridnitsa” (from “Ruslan and Lyudmila” by A. Pushkin) meant “a room where the prince and his squad held receptions and ceremonies.” It fell out of use along with the disappearance of such buildings in Rus'. The obsolete words “bursa, caftan, okolotochny, solicitor, constable, plow” and many others have also become historicisms, because the corresponding educational establishments, clothing, tools, etc. Some words that appeared in the early years are also historicisms. Soviet power, for example: “Kombedy, NEPman, Revkom, educational program”, etc.
For many polysemantic words One of the meanings can become historicism, for example, the word “people” has the following meanings: 1) the plural of the word “man”; 2) other, unauthorized persons; 3) persons used in some business, personnel; 4) in a noble, rich house: servants [Ozhegov 2002; 336].
The word "people" in first three meanings is included in the active dictionary, the fourth meaning of this word is outdated.
Historicisms have no synonyms in modern Russian. Their meaning can only be explained by resorting to an encyclopedic description.
Sometimes words that have become historicisms return to active use. The condition for this is the revival of the realities themselves, which are designated by these words. This happened, for example, with the words “gymnasium, lyceum,” which are now used to name varieties of modern educational institutions.
Archaisms are outdated words that have left the active dictionary, unable to withstand competition with more commonly used words denoting the same objects, actions, signs [Kasatkin 2001; 207]. For example: “Let him know,” he said, still sternly, “that sovereigns not only live happily, but also have a hard time. - But sensing sadness and dissatisfaction in the ensuing silence, he added softly: “Let’s go, Ivan.” I’ll let you go and play games” (V. Yazvitsky. Ivan III - Sovereign of All Rus') [Kasatkin 2001; 208].
Archaisms have synonyms in modern Russian, with the help of which explanatory dictionaries explain their meaning, accompanied by the mark “obsolete.”
The words “knows, tokmo, vborze” (as well as the forms “Ivane, igati”) are perceived by the modern reader as outdated, and the concepts that they denoted exist and are called by the modern words “knows, only, soon.”
Thus, archaisms in modern language certainly have synonyms: “sneezing - sneezing, velmi - very” and many others.
Often words, being outdated in their literal meaning, continue to live in the language as general linguistic metaphors. So, “master” we call a person who does not like to work himself, “lackey” - a sycophant, “servant” - a servant, henchman. The noun “hanger-on” (hunger), which in its literal meaning is historicism (“an impoverished nobleman, a merchant, an intellectual, living out of mercy in a rich house, entertaining the owners”” [MAS vol. 3: 408], is used in modern speech as a disapproving characteristic a person who lives at someone else’s expense and panders to patrons. The noun “tavern” (in Tsarist Russia- “drinking establishment of the lowest category”) [MAS T.2: 10] is widely used in youth slang to refer to a restaurant, cafe, where you can have a drink
In such metaphorical meanings, words are not perceived by speakers as outdated; there is no mark “outdated.” to the indicated meanings of these words and in dictionaries. However, we intuitively sense the opposition of this group of words to modern words, making metaphors of this kind very vivid characteristics of persons and objects, expressing all sorts of emotional and evaluative nuances.
Often, outdated words, under the influence of a variety of linguistic (most often social) factors, can acquire a “second life”, returning again to active word usage. Most often, this process is experienced by historicisms. So, the word "bard" for a long time which was literally obsolete (bard - “poet, singer among the ancient Celts”) [MAS T.1: 61], and in figurative meaning used only in poetry as a traditionally poetic high synonym for the word “poet”, in the 60s of the 20th century it again became widely used to refer to singers performing their own songs with a guitar, such as Yu. Vizbor, Yu. Kim, V. Vysotsky , A. Galich et al.
The noun “ensign” (“the most junior officer rank in the pre-revolutionary army, as well as a person in this rank”) [MAS T.3: 358-359], having been historicized for almost sixty years, returned to speech use in the 70s of the 20th century after resuming this military rank already in the modern army.
The fads of fashion returned several years ago to our lexicon the noun “leggings” - a former historicism that previously meant “tight-fitting trousers made of rough suede - part of the military uniform of some regiments in Tsarist Russia” [MAS T.2: 201], and now - an item of clothing modern fashionistas. Words such as “governor”, “Duma”, “gymnasium”, “lyceum”, “cadet corps”, “Cossack circle”, “entrepreneur”, “share”, “stock exchange” have also been revived; in Moscow again there is a “Noble Assembly” and “Gostiny Dvor”, etc.
In modern lexicology, there is a traditional classification of the main types of obsolete words. N.M. Shansky was the first lexicologist to develop and publish a typology of obsolete vocabulary, according to which for the first time obsolete words are classified according to the degree and nature of obsolescence (historicisms are words that served as names of disappeared objects, concepts, phenomena; archaisms are obsolete words, names not obsolete, modern things, signs, phenomena for which there are later names). These are the types of archaisms that N.M. Shansky identifies: lexical-phonetic - words in which the sound form of the word is obsolete (mirror - mirror); lexical-word-formative - words in which only some morphological part is outdated (rubber - rubber); proper lexical - words that are completely obsolete (apple - eyelids); semantic archaisms - words used in an outdated meaning (presence - institution); phraseological - outdated stable combinations of words, idioms, sayings (a lamb in a piece of paper - a bribe); lexical-syntactic - outdated connections of a given word with others (glorious misfortunes, safe robbers) [Shansky 1987].
The valuable contributions of other lexicologists on this subject should not be overlooked, since their additions make the typology of obsolete words much more impressive and complete and therefore deserve our attention. This issue was investigated, thereby supplementing the typology of outdated vocabulary with new concepts by O.E. Voronichev, D.N. Shmelev, L.P. Krysin and T.G. Terekhova, L.L. Kasatkin, M.N. Nesterov and others.
Thus, O.E. Voronichev supplements the typology of historicisms with lexical and lexical-semantic historicisms themselves [Voronichev 2000]. D.M. Shmelev distinguishes partial historicism and exoticism [Shmelev 1960]. L.P. Krysin and T.G. Terekhova complement the typology of archaisms with accentual archaisms [Krysin 2001]. L.L. Kasatkin identifies lexico-grammatical archaisms and spelling archaisms [Kasatkin 2004]. M.N. Nesterov gives the following typology of outdated vocabulary: semantic-expressive archaisms, semantic-word-forming archaisms, semantic-morphological archaisms, semantic-syntactic archaisms [Nesterov 1994]. E.I. Dibrova distinguishes between multi-root and single-root archaisms. Different-rooted ones include actual lexical archaisms that have an obsolete root (hand - palm). The composition of single-root archaisms includes: 1) lexical-semantic archaisms - meanings of a polysemantic word that have disappeared from their use, having a different, modern name; 2) lexical-phonetic archaisms - differing from the modern version of the word in sounds (phonemes) or place of stress (accentual archaisms); 3) lexical and word-formative archaisms - differing from a modern single-root word by suffixes and / or prefixes; 4) lexico-morphological archaisms - grammatical variants that differ from modern words outdated morphological categories and word forms [Dibrova 2001].
O.S. Akhmanova gives the following definition of archaism: “1. A word or expression that has fallen out of everyday use and is therefore perceived as outdated: Russian sculptor, widow, widow, healing, in vain, giving, from ancient times, covetousness, slander, instigation. 2. A trope consisting in the use of an old (antique) word or expression for the purpose of historical stylization, giving speech a sublime stylistic coloring, achieving a comic effect, etc.” [Akhmanova 1966: 6]
In our study, we will take as a basis the typology of archaisms by L.I. Rakhmanova and V.N. Suzdaltseva:
1) lexical-phonetic, accentological;
2) lexical and word-formative;
3) actual lexical ones;
4) grammatical;
5) semantic [Rakhmanova, Suzdaltseva 2003].
In D.M. Balashov’s novel “Mr. Veliky Novgorod” we read: “I’ll send my boats to Stockholm! ... The thief stepped up, Oleksa did not move from his place ... ... so much to talk about unnecessarily ... about that now ... he poked with a dry finger, like a spear, from afar ... " [Balashov 2007; 62].
The highlighted words are archaisms that have corresponding non-obsolete equivalents in modern Russian. Now we say: boats, thief, talk, now, finger. At the same time, it is obvious that archaism may differ from a modern synonymous word in various ways: different grammatical design, different meaning, different morphemic composition, etc. Depending on what feature distinguishes an obsolete word from its modern synonym, the following groups of archaisms are distinguished:
Lexico-phonetic archaisms are words that have in their phonetic appearance a sound or combination of sounds unusual for modern pronunciation: tie (tie), gishpansky (Spanish), zertsalo (mirror), project (project), vlasy (hair), etc. A variety of lexical-phonetic archaisms are accentological archaisms, i.e. words different from modern place stress: symbol/l, epigra/f, etc. [Rakhmanova, Suzdaltseva 2003: 145].
Lexico-word-formation archaisms that differ from the modern equivalent by some word-formation affix (most often a suffix): Asians (Asians), druzhestvo (friendship), ryber (fisherman), etc. [Rakhmanova, Suzdaltseva 2003: 145-146].
Actually, lexical archaisms are words that are completely outdated: so that - so that, shelter - roof, destruction - death, paradise - paradise, hope - hope and firmly believe, this one - that one, this one - this one. [Rakhmanova, Suzdaltseva 2003: 146].
Grammatical archaisms are obsolete forms of words that do not exist in the modern language, for example, forms of the vocative (seventh in the system of cases of the Old Russian language) case of nouns: father, king, man, virgin; as well as grammatical forms that are formed differently in the modern language: at the ball - at the ball, perform - perform, Russian - Russian. [Rakhmanova, Suzdaltseva 2003: 146].
Semantic archaisms are outdated meanings of words that exist in the modern Russian language, but name another phenomenon or object. For example, previously the word “thief” was used to describe any state criminal, traitor, or villain; the words “shame, disgrace” meant “a spectacle, usually shameful”; “belly” meaning “life”; "language" in the meaning of "people". [Rakhmanova, Suzdaltseva 2003: 146-147.]
In the composition of obsolete words, a distinction is made between historicisms proper and semantic historicisms.
Actually, historicisms are words denoting objects, phenomena, professions that have emerged from modern life: corvée, plow, frock coat, zipun, boyar, etc.
Semantic historicisms - meanings of polysemantic words that have fallen out of use, naming disappeared objects, phenomena: “cartel” - a written challenge to a duel; "fortress" - serfdom; “subscriber” is an artist who paints buildings, walls, ceilings [Dibrova 2001; 328].
Historicisms reflect the social system, production activity, life, morals, fashion, etc. of one time or another. Each time is characterized by its own thematic paradigms that fix the foundations of a certain era. A system of concepts arises that coexist and are interconnected objectively, intellectually, and professionally. Individual members of the paradigm, the entire paradigm (for example, the names of the primitive communal, slaveholding, feudal system) can emerge from living speech, but in paradigms associated with the life of the nation (management, production activity, family) there is only a replacement and replenishment in the system of concepts corresponding to the content and the style of thinking of the era.
Now we don’t measure arshins, we don’t bow to volost elders and clerks, and we’re happy to forget all the “unnecessary” words. But what should writers and historians do if they want to describe a bygone era? In historical literature, in works of art telling about the past of our people, one cannot help but use historicisms and archaisms. They help to recreate the flavor of the era and give the description of the past a touch of historical authenticity.
Average student high school often gets confused in terminology, trying to answer the question of how archaisms differ from historicisms. These groups of words are obsolete and belong to the passive vocabulary. However, archaisms and historicisms can still be found in fiction and cinema, so it would be useful to find out the difference between them.
Features and examples of archaisms
Depending on why a particular lexeme has become obsolete, they are divided into archaisms and historicisms. The difference is that the former include words denoting objects, phenomena, processes and concepts, existing and currently. For some reasons, most often not related to the language itself, they are replaced by more modern analogues. The process of the emergence of archaisms is called archaization. In art, archaism is the imitation of the style of antiquity.
Consequently, any archaism has a synonym in modern Russian. For example: instead of the old Russian “sail”, “sail” is currently used, instead of “memoria” - “memory”, instead of the conjunction “kol” - the conjunction “if”.
Depending on what exactly is outdated in what constitutes a word: the whole word, a separate word-forming morpheme, meaning or sound - archaisms are divided into several groups:
Characteristics and originality of historicisms
Historicisms are speech units that denote phenomena that have completely disappeared from our lives. Usually, they are an attribute of a certain era and die with her. No phenomenon - no concept. This is how historicisms can be characterized.
When studying historicisms, it is no coincidence that they speak specifically about concepts, and not about words. After all, they were preserved in historical sources, archives, letters. Some of them can mimic. Thus, “cubit”, which was a measure of length, began to designate a part of the body. Government agency“order” died along with the institution, but the lexeme “order” exists in modern Russian in the meaning of “order, order.” The word “throw away” has lost its meaning of “putting up for sale a product that is in short supply.”
Historicisms have been preserved in the language as a tribute to the era. For historicisms and archaisms, the difference lies precisely in the presence or absence of synonyms. Thus, historicisms do not and cannot have synonyms, because the phenomena, concepts, processes and objects that they denoted cannot be returned to life. This is the main difference between archaisms and historicisms.
Historicisms can also be divided into several groups:
For polysemic words, one or more meanings can become historicized. For example, “people” in the meaning of “servants” are obsolete and are not used, while to denote plural for the lexeme “person” it is quite suitable.
The role of obsolete words in modern language
Obsolete words are present in the passive vocabulary of any language, no matter Russian, English or Portuguese. Archaisms are often used in works of art, poetry and prose. Such words fill text with a certain coloring, convey the characteristic features of the era, serve as a means of enhancing artistry. They add solemnity.
Historicisms are also used in works fiction. They are used to realistically recreate the era in which the work takes place, and are introduced both into the description of surrounding phenomena and into the dialogues of the characters.
A broader interpretation of the word “historicism” itself is also acceptable. It can denote the principle of accurately reflecting the reality of a certain historical era without the subjectivity of descendants and contemporaries in order to objectively convey reality. There is also such a thing as “historicism of the word.”
You can create a separate dictionary from outdated words. Even though they belong to the inactive vocabulary of our, and indeed any language, archaisms and historicisms still make up its flavor, giving the language unique features.
Loading...