About the "supertask" ("sverhzadacha") of K. S. Stanislavsky... (about the history of the word supertask (sverhzadacha) in the Russian language)

2021 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 92-98
Author(s):  
I. I. Krivonosov

The article is devoted to the history of the appearance and functioning of the word supertask (sverhzadacha) in the Russian language. Two lines of the lexeme functioning were distinguished: the first is associated with the etymology of the word, the second – with its use by K. S. Stanislavsky in the terminology system and the further entry of the unit into general use on the basis of determinologization. It is interesting that the second meaning has acquired the most widespread use. Only in the past two decades, the word has begun to lose its connection with the process of artistic creation. The purpose of the study was to briefly review the history of the word: from its first fixation in the Russian language and application by K. S. Stanislavsky (to designate one of the key concepts of Method Acting) up to modern contexts of use. The entry of the lexeme into the language was investigated using structural methods. The methods of contextual and distributive analysis were used to analyse both the contexts in which Stanislavsky used this word and the process of its fixation in the National Corpus of the Russian language. Statistical analysis was used to trace the dynamics of integration of the lexeme into the Russian language and its fixation in various spheres. The methods of component and comparative analysis were used to describe the formation mechanism of the initial term in the historical context. Borrowings of the term supertask (sverhzadacha) were found in other languages, indicating the spread of Stanislavsky’s system. The conclusion is drawn that the word supertask (sverhzadacha) functions in the Russian language mainly as a term from Stanislavsky’s system, gradually becoming determinologized and returning to the meaning conveying the logical sum of its constituent components.

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (4 (202)) ◽  
pp. 293-310
Author(s):  
Valeria S. Kuchko ◽  
◽  

This article studies Russian verbs which name the action of gratuitous material assistance to those in need, i.e. благотворить, благотворительствовать, благодетельствовать, меценатствовать, жертвовать, спонсировать, and their few derivatives. The author focuses on the history of their origin and use in the Russian language, the development of their meanings, semantic features, and functioning in the text. The analysis of these characteristics of the life of the word in the language allows the author to identify and formulate some norms of the use of these verbs in modern charity discourse for those who speak and write about charity. The study is based on historical and modern lexicographic sources, such as explanatory dictionaries of the Old Slavic Language, Old Russian Language, Russian language of different time periods, as well as examples of word usage, retrieved from The National Corpus of the Russian Language. In spite of the fact that the verbs studied realise the predicate of a situation of charity and designate the subject’s action of providing a poor or deprived object with material support, they considerably differ in terms of time of their appearance in the language, periods of usage, and semantic capacity. The analysis demonstrates that there is no verb that could claim the status of a nuclear verbal lexeme of the semantic field of charity: the word with the widest neutral semantics благотворить has almost fallen out of use, the verbs благодетельствовать and меценатствовать have a narrower application, while жертвовать imposes semantic restrictions on the choice of words for the positions of the object and the instrument of charity, and in the case of the verb спонсировать a specific context of “market” charity is important, in which the subject receives a certain benefit from their contribution.


Author(s):  
Gullola F. Nishonova ◽  

This article examines anthroponyms in the history of the Russian language. It is noted that the names of people are diverse in origin and use. Each nation, including the Russian, has its own individual names, which are given in childhood and are usually preserved for life. A large number of Russian people bear the old traditional Russian calendar names included in the past, they were included in church and civil calendars.


2013 ◽  
pp. 203-222
Author(s):  
Jan Bjornflaten

This contribution treats the overall issue of the transformation of the system of past tenses that occurred in the development of Old East Slavic to modern Russian. The divergent opinions concerning the relative as well as the absolute chronology of these changes are discussed briefly. It is argued that the actual recordings of imperfects and aorist in large numbers of texts make it reasonable to assume that the transformation is observable in late mediaeval texts. The attention is directed towards the development of the perfect in terms of the l-participle. It is focused on how the l-participle looses its meaning of current relevance and how it replaces the aorist. In this way several steps in the transformation of the past tenses can be observed, allowing for a detailed interpretation of how this radical change in the history of the Russian language proceeded.


2019 ◽  
Vol 69 ◽  
pp. 00125
Author(s):  
Olga Kondratyeva ◽  
Olga Valko

The article studies theoretical aspects of the image of the region and their realization as exemplified by the image of Siberia. The article treats the structure of the image and mechanisms of its formation from the point of view of the cognitive approach and with the help of frame structures. The cognitive analysis enables to differentiate three levels: frame, subframes, and slots, pertaining to the entity explored. The research allows demonstrating that the stereotypical ideas play an essential role in forming and sustaining the images of regions. Mass media appear to be the main source of the stereotypic image of the region due to highlighting different facts concerning the sterotypicized phenomenon, selecting various linguistic means for featuring it and influencing the emotional and evaluative perception of the image. The study was based on the data of the National Corpus of the Russian Language, which were analyzed with the help of content analysis and frame analysis. The image of the Siberian region actively exploits the frames “Nature and Geography of Siberia”, “History of Siberia”, “Economy of Siberia”. The research found out the dynamic and ambivalent character of the stereotypic image of Siberia.


2020 ◽  
pp. 9-23
Author(s):  
S. A. Anokhina ◽  
N. V. Pozdnyakova

The article is devoted to the analysis of the linguistic and cultural type “Russian bureaucrat”. The compatibility of the adjective bureaucratic is investigated according to the texts of the XIX - XXI centuries included in the National corpus of the Russian language. The novelty of the study is that to describe the character traits of the linguocultural type “Russian bureaucrat”, the authors refer to the compatibility of an adjective derived from the character type. It is noted that the connotative component in the meaning of the adjective determines an almost exclusively negative interpretation of the image: the pejorative component of the value determines the compatibility of the studied adjective with the designations of negative qualities. The authors dwell on the ideas that have developed in the Russian linguistic consciousness about the character of the Russian bureaucrat, and trace their transformations over two centuries. The analysis of the compatibility of the adjective showed that the linguistic and cultural character “Russian bureaucrat” is characterized by indifference, ignorance, cowardice, arrogance, insincerity. The authors of the article conclude that in the Russian language picture of the world indifference and cowardice are attributed to bureaucrats of different periods of Russian history, while ostentatious arrogance is noted mainly in the descriptions of officials of the past, and markers of ignorance and insincerity are more frequent in the characteristics of modern officials.


2021 ◽  
pp. 178-193
Author(s):  
Maria V. Ermolova ◽  

The article analyzes some verbal features in the West Russian Chronicles (XV–XVI cc.). The 1st part examines contexts with the construction “быти + participle in -ъш- / -въш-”. This construction is extremely uncommon for Old Russian texts, nevertheless the very possibility of its use is very indicative and important for understanding the history of the development of the temporal system in the Russian language. The material of the West Russian chronicles allows to widen the list of contexts with this construction with two more examples. The 2nd part discusses the features of the functioning of pluperfect forms. Rare forms of pluperfect with the linking verb in the aorist form were found in the West Russian Chronicles which is quite unexpected for the late texts. The article discusses possible explanations for this phenomenon. As for the semantics of the pluperfect forms, all of the basic pluperfect meanings are presented in the analyzed Chronicles: perfectness in the past, anti-resultative meaning, discontinuous past. The comparison of the number of the contexts with these meanings to the material of the other chronicles allows us to draw a number of conclusions about the history of the pluperfect’s development in the Old Russian language and its dialects.


Author(s):  
З.И. Годизова ◽  
Д.В. Габисова

Актуальность предпринятого исследования обусловлена тем, что причастие в современном осетинском языке не привлекало активного внимания ученых, имеются лишь общие описания причастий, а специальные исследования, посвященные причастиям, практически отсутствуют. Представляется интересным и актуальным сравнение системы причастий и их грамматических особенностей в осетинском и русском языках. Этот интерес обусловлен принадлежностью сопоставляемых языков к общей индоевропейской семье языков, а также тесным их взаимодействием в условиях двуязычия, что, очевидно, может отразиться и на системе причастий. Научная новизна данной статьи заключается в том, что в ней исследуются грамматические особенности всех разрядов причастий в осетинском языке в сопоставлении с русским языком. На основании проведенного анализа установлено, что в современном осетинском языке система причастий включает пять разрядов, разнообразных в своих грамматических проявлениях, в степени регулярности, в склонности переходить в состав других частей речи. Выявлены наиболее значительные отличия осетинских причастий от русских: существование причастий будущего времени в системе осетинского языка, отсутствие у причастий показателей времени и залога, а также именных грамматических категорий (падежа, числа, рода). Установлено также, что в осетинском языке категория вида в большей степени управляет категорией времени, в силу чего несовершенный вид причастий предполагает только настоящее время, а совершенный только прошедшее отсутствует четкая залоговая оппозиция причастий в осетинском языке. Определено также, что осетинские причастия не имеют членных (полных) форм, но функционируют в роли и сказуемого, и определения, хотя в большей степени тяготеют к предикативной роли. В осетинском языке причастия гораздо менее употребительны сравнительно с причастиями в русском языке и чаще вступают в отношения грамматической омонимии с другими частями речи. The relevance of the undertaken study is determined by the fact that participles in the modern Ossetian language are still insufficiently studied. There are only the most general descriptions of grammar features of participles. The comparison of the system of participles and their grammar features seems interesting and actual, especially considering the fact that the Ossetian and Russian languages belong to different groups of the Indo-European language family. Furthermore, in the context of bilingualism the Russian and Ossetian languages interact actively and that can affect the system of participles. The scientific novelty of the article is determined by the fact that it examines the grammatical features of all categories of participles in the Ossetian language in comparison with the Russian language. The conducted research allowed to elicit five categories in the system of participles in the modern Ossetian language. The analysis of the results showed the participles are diverse in their grammatical characteristics, in the degree of regularity, and in the tendency to transition into other parts of speech. The research defined the most significant differences between Ossetian and Russian participles: existence of future participles in the system of the Ossetian language absence of adjectival grammar categories of gender, number and case as well as formal markers of tense and voice in Ossetian participles. The tense category in Ossetian subordinates to the aspect category to a far greater extent therefore the imperfective aspect of participles accepts the present tense forms only, while perfective acts in the past tense forms Ossetian participles lack explicit voice opposition. Ossetian participles do not have full forms, but they can have syntactic functions of both the predicate and the attribute in a sentence, although the predicative function is more typical for them. Participles in the Ossetian language are much less common compared to participles in Russian and are more disposed to conversion (transition to the category of nouns, verbal adverbs, adjectives, words of the state category).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document