How to write a speech portrait. Methodical development

Introduction

Analyzing our speech, we must rely on theoretical material. The culture of speech is a concept in itself ambiguous. In fact, the culture of speech is engaged in a qualitative analysis of statements and considers next questions:

How does a person use speech to communicate?

What is his speech (correct, incorrect);

How to improve speech.

In addition, the culture of speech is the ability to use language tools in different situations of communication. The subject of this discipline is the linguistic structure of speech in its communicative impact. This discipline is theoretically applied in nature. The theoretical part studies the structure of the language; practical - based on style and rhetoric. Tasks:

Language protection

To teach native speakers to correctly apply the proposed norms of speech and the rules for its construction. For the culture of speech, the concept of speech culture is important. The main aspect of speech culture is the normative language aspect (knowledge of the norms literary language). The central concept of the culture of speech is the language norm.

Aspects of speech culture:

1. Regulatory

2. Ethical

3. Communicative

The study of the text from the point of view of the correspondence of its language structure to the tasks of communication in the theory of speech culture is called the communicative aspect.

The ethical aspect involves the knowledge and application of the rules of conduct in specific situations. In the 60s of the last century, the linguist Golovin determined the communicative qualities of good speech. These qualities were distinguished on the basis of the correlation of speech with separate, non-verbal situations: language, speech, thinking, consciousness, reality, a person (as the addressee of speech), conditions of speech.

This complex of non-speech structures requires the following qualities from speech:

Correctness (normativity)

frequency

Logic

· Accuracy

· Expressiveness

Imagery

· Availability

Relevance

· Reality

Each sphere of communication, in accordance with the communicative tasks that are set in it, requires the choice of language means in accordance with the situation of communication.

Main part

The correctness of speech, i.e. compliance with the norms of the literary language is one of the main communicative properties, since it is the correctness of speech that determines its intelligibility to the addressee, its unity.

The orthoepic correctness of speech is the observance of the norms of literary pronunciation and stress.

Correct, literary pronunciation is an important indicator of the general cultural level of a person. In order for an oral presentation to be successful, it must be expressive, and expressiveness is achieved by a clear and precise pronunciation, correct intonation. An important role is played by normative pronunciation and stress. Pronunciation errors distract listeners from the content of the speech, thereby making it difficult to communicate, reducing the degree of impact on listeners.

Stress is one of the means of sound organization of words and speech in general. This is a very important phonetic tool, since the word does not exist without stress.

Based on the above, I can analyze my speech. I will not hide it, but I really have problems with the placement of stress in some words. It's really not that easy to follow the norms of stress. It is the speech culture lessons taking place at our academy that help to get rid of this flaw in my speech. The teacher of this discipline gives us special exercises to teach us to place stresses or to remember which syllable is stressed. In fact, such work helps, and I have become more correct in emphasizing pronunciation units.

The pronunciation norms of the Russian language are determined primarily by the following basic phonetic laws:

1. Reduction of unstressed vowels, i.e. quantitative and qualitative changes in sounds as a result of weakening of articulation;

2. Stunning of voiced consonants facing deaf ones (likening them) at the junction of morphemes (assimilation);

3. Loss of some sounds in consonant combinations (diaeresis).

Speaking about this speech norm, I want to note that there are also some difficulties with pronunciation, but over time, when they began to teach the subject of speech culture, my speech became much more correct and more literate: I learned to pronounce correctly foreign words, consonants (stunning , voicing, etc.), use the letters "E" and "Yo" correctly.

Also, I would like to tell you about how my vocabulary. Undoubtedly, it was replenished with a large number of new words. I heard many of these words for the first time, so the tasks we perform in the lessons include an explanation of the lexical meaning of the word. This is done so that we can use these words in our speech. Another way to improve vocabulary is by reading.

It's time to analyze your speech from the point of view of "pollutions" (slang, dialectisms, etc.).

Argot (from French argot) is the language of a socially closed group of people, characterized by the specificity of the vocabulary used, the originality of its use, but not having its own phonetic and grammatical system.

Unfortunately, I sometimes use slang in speech. This is due to the fact that in the collective (in this case, in the group) specific names of ordinary objects appear, but they are understandable only to us. It can be convenient to use slang in some situations, but we must not forget that the speech of the future manager must be literate and understandable to everyone, so I am actively fighting this.

Other pollutants are dialectisms.

Dialectisms, linguistic features characteristic of territorial dialects interspersed in literary speech. They stand out in the flow of literary speech as deviations from the norm. Phonetic dialectisms differ: for example, clatter, that is, the pronunciation of "dotska", "nots"; yakan: "pyatuh", "ryaka", "syastra"; "x" instead of "g" at the end of the word: "sneh", "druh", "vrah"; grammatical ending "t" in 3rd person verbs: "go", "sit", "take"; ending "e" in genitive forms like: "to my wife", "from my sister"; special use of prepositions: "came from Moscow", "left for bread", "go to the hut"; derivational: for example, "on the side" - "on the side", "blueberry" - "blueberry", "especially" - "especially". Lexical dialectisms can be of several types: words that name objects, phenomena that are characteristic of everyday life, the economy of a given area and have no parallels in the literary language: "poneva" - a kind of skirt, "tuyos" - a vessel made of birch bark; synonymous words corresponding to the literary ones: "kochet" - "rooster", "hefty" - "very"; words that have a different meaning than in the literary language: "thin" - "bad", "weather" - "bad weather". They are used in the language of fiction as a means of stylization, the speech characteristics of characters, the creation of local color, and can also be found in the speech of persons who have not fully mastered the norms of the literary language.

There are no dialectisms in the main stream of my speech, but still sometimes words slip through that do not correspond to the norms of the literary language.

Communication skills are an important element in our speech.

Elementary communication is based on the transfer of any information through speech, in order to do this most clearly and understandably, you need to be able to consistently express your thoughts.

The lessons of the culture of speech help me to develop this ability. We perform various kinds of tasks that help to develop the sequence of speech to a greater extent. For example, we compose words of praise for any subject, write essays on unusual topics using specific words - this is directly related to the development of the ability to consistently express our thoughts.

In addition to all this, the discipline of speech culture develops the ability to breathe correctly, which is very important for a person who wants to have the right speech. We memorize poems and tongue twisters, then we answer their teacher with a certain point of breath intake, and he controls the correctness of this action. I find this exercise very useful, because. it improves our speech even more.

Conclusion

After analyzing my speech, I can say that I realize the usefulness of attending my speech culture lessons. The exercises that took place there helped me in many ways: improve my vocabulary, learn the lexical meaning of many words, correctly place stresses, pronounce difficult words correctly, develop correct breathing and, of course, find flaws in your speech.

The subject of speech culture is very useful, and I sincerely regret that it is not taught in educational institutions providing secondary education.

The study of the concept of "speech portrait" historically begins with a phonetic portrait, important methods of describing which are developed in the mid-60s of the twentieth century by M.V. Panov. According to S.V. Leorda, “a speech portrait is a linguistic personality embodied in speech” [Leorda 2006], and the problem of a speech portrait is a particular direction in the study of a linguistic personality. E.V. Osetrova notes the great role of the speech portrait as a component of the appearance of the speaker in the formation of a holistic image of the personality. T.P. Tarasenko defines the concept of a speech portrait as "a set of linguistic and speech characteristics of a communicative personality or a certain society in a particular period of existence" [Tarasenko 2007: 8]. The researcher identifies a number of personality characteristics reflected in the speech portrait: age, gender, psychological, social, ethno-cultural and linguistic. G.G. Matveeva understands speech portrait as “a set of speech preferences of the speaker in specific circumstances to actualize certain intentions and strategies for influencing the listener” [Matveeva 1998: 14]. The researcher notes that with the help of a speech portrait, speech behavior is recorded, which is “automated in the case of a typical repetitive communication situation” [Matveeva 1993: 87]. The object of study can also be the character of a work of art. In literature, a speech portrait is a means of creating an artistic image. M.N. pays attention to the speech characteristics of a civil servant in Russian literature. Panov. The speech structure of the artistic image is considered by L.K. Churilina, E.A. Goncharova, E.A. Ivanova, Yu.N. Kurganov, M.V. Pyanova, A.K. Zhunisbaev. Analysis of the speech portrait is a characteristic of different levels of realization of a linguistic personality. At the same time, it is possible to describe not all layers of the language, since “language paradigms, ranging from phonetic to word-formation, turn out to be quite consistent with general normative parameters” [Nikolaeva 1991: 73]. Researchers talk about the need to “fix bright diagnostic spots” [Nikolaeva 1991:73]. Few adhere to a strict model in describing a speech portrait. Usually, a separate side is considered, most often these are the features of phonetics and word usage. There are several schemes that reveal the structure of the speech portrait and make it possible to describe it. M.V. Kitaygorodskaya and N.N. Rozanova call the speech portrait a “functional model of a linguistic personality” [Kitaigorodskaya, Rozanova 1995:10] and highlight the parameters by which this model is analyzed. One of these parameters is the lexicon of a linguistic personality - a level that reflects the possession of the lexical and grammatical fund of the language. At this level, the stock of words and phrases used by a particular linguistic personality is analyzed. The researchers call the next step the thesaurus, which represents the linguistic picture of the world. When describing a speech portrait, emphasis is placed on the use of colloquial formulas, speech turns, special vocabulary that make a person recognizable. The third level is the pragmaticon, which includes a system of motives, goals, communicative roles that a person adheres to in the process of communication. All three levels of this model correspond to the levels of linguistic personality in Yu.N. Karaulov: verbal-semantic, cognitive and pragmatic. Features of the use of language units

Specific phonetic and lexical units are easy to fix in the speech of speakers of non-literary forms of the language. The existence of a single norm in the literary language reduces, but does not exclude the possibility of the appearance of specific language units in the speech of its speakers.

For example, L.P. Krysin notes the elements of speech of the intelligentsia that distinguish this class from other social strata: specific pronunciation individual sounds, especially in the speech of the older generation, characteristic lexical units, features of word usage. The researcher believes that the conscious or unconscious non-use of any lexical means is no less important, "and this applies not only to words belonging to non-codified subsystems of the language - vernacular, slang or dialect, but to completely literary words" [Krysin 2001: 95].

Many researchers pay attention to only one side of speech. M.V. Kitaygorodskaya and N.N. Rozanov in the phonochrestomathy "Russian Speech Portrait" emphasize the description of pronunciation features. Based on the tape recordings, the researchers identify the characteristic features that reflect the speech individuality. However, the paper stipulates that the description of purely individual features of speech associated with logopedic deviations is not included in the objectives of the study. The speech preferences of the individual are considered in the preference for a certain orthoepic variant, in the phonetic ellipsis, in the choice of methods of accentuation. The nature of the material also makes it possible to judge the dynamics of the orthoepic norm.

Along with phonetic features, the study also examines lexical features: lexical repetitions, the use of diminutives, stylistically reduced, evaluative vocabulary.

In the study "Linguistic Personality" in a literary text "L.N. Churilin, on the example of the character of the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky "Demons", considers the reflection of the verbal-semantic level of a linguistic personality in an individual lexicon. L.N. Churilina reveals the relationship between the concepts of "mental lexicon", "internal lexicon" and "individual lexicon" and presents the character's dictionary - "a list of words that together make up his discourse" [Churilina 2006:21]. The individual lexicon in her work is described as "a system that serves the communicative needs of an individual" [Churilina 2006:22], with the help of which it is possible to reconstruct "fragments of an individual image of the world" [Churilina 2006:22].

The lexical level, more precisely, one part of it - the use of jargon - is described by B. Maksimov. In the article “Speech portrait of youth against the background of our life”, the researcher makes an attempt to determine the moral image of the new generation through youth jargon.

M.N. Panova speaks of the depiction of an official in literature as “a semi-literate tradesman who has learned a few phrases, topical slogans and considers them as a guide to action” [Panova 2004: 103]. In the study "Linguistic personality of a civil servant" M.N. Panova pays attention to vocabulary, noting the presence in speech of expressions characteristic of a certain historical time. As part of the style of business documentation, syntax is affected, for example, the use of complex sentences with separate definitions and turnovers. Thus, the description of the language level of the speech portrait includes the characteristics of units of one or more levels of the language. In many studies, preference is given to the lexical and syntactic levels, there are works devoted to a deep description of one of them. The object of research covering all language levels is often a collective speech portrait. When analyzing the speech of a native speaker, one of the aspects of the analysis is compliance with orthological norms. Features of speech behavior

IN AND. Karasik defines verbal behavior as "a conscious and unconscious system of communicative actions that reveal the character and way of life of a person" [Karasik 2004:84]. According to T.M. Nikolaeva, three stereotypes can be distinguished in speech behavior: speech, which is someone else's speech used by the speaker, communicative - clichéd phrases used in the same situations, and mental, implying habitual reactions in linguistic and non-linguistic forms. In the classification of L.P. Krysina, the use of precedent phenomena corresponds to the speech stereotype, the communication formulas correspond to the communicative one, and the phenomenon language game correlates with speech and mental stereotypes.

Idiolect is a variant of a language used by one person. It is expressed in specific wording patterns and grammatical features, as well as in words, expressions, idioms, or pronunciations that are unique to that person. Each person has their own idiolect. What is unique is the combination of words and sentences in speech, rather than the use of some special words that no one else uses. An idiolect can easily develop into an ecolect - a dialectal variant of a language characteristic of one family.

IDIOSTYLE (INDIVIDUAL STYLE), a system of meaningful and formal linguistic characteristics inherent in the works of a certain author, which makes the author's method of linguistic expression embodied in these works unique. In practice, this term is used in relation to works of art.

The term "idiostyle" is also correlated with the term "idiolect". In the theory of fiction, the difference between them in general terms is as follows. The idiolect of a certain author is understood as the entire set of texts created by him in the original chronological sequence (or the sequence sanctioned by the author himself, if the texts were reworked). Idiostyle is understood as a set of deep text-generating dominants and constants of a certain author, which determined the appearance of these texts in this sequence.

Idiostyle concepts and idiolect, which are defined by researchers in different ways and, accordingly, fall into different series of relationships with the concepts of language, text and "linguistic personality", have recently been at the center of interest in linguistic poetics. This is due to the growing attention paid to the issues of individual linguistic creativity. Of course, the interest in the personality in the language, or in the "linguistic personality" accompanied linguistic creativity throughout most of its history, but it first became dominant in the era of romanticism, when definitions and specific descriptions appeared (for example, Works by Alexander Pushkin V. Belinsky) idiostyles. In Russian studies of the 20th century. the concepts of "individual style" and "linguistic personality" are primarily associated with the name of V.V. Vinogradov.

Currently, views on what idiostyle is vary widely. So, Vyach.Vs.Ivanov expressed the opinion that the 20th century. is characterized by the development of "semiotic games", leading as a result to the appearance of several languages ​​in one creative person. There are other points of view.

Image of the author- this is not a simple subject of speech, most often it is not even named in the structure of a work of art. This is a concentrated embodiment of the essence of the work, uniting the entire system of speech structures of characters in their relationship with the narrator, narrator or narrators and through them being the ideological and stylistic center, the focus of the whole.

Speech portrait - it is the speech preferences of the individual, a set of features that make it recognizable. A single rigorous analysis scheme has not been developed, however, when studying the studies carried out, it is possible to single out the main points that require description: firstly, this is the lexical level, the analysis of which considers the features of word usage; secondly, a level that reflects ideas about the world, contained in the meaning of words and expressions - a picture of the world of the speaker; thirdly, the level of communicative roles, strategies and tactics.

In modern domestic linguistics, there have been three directions for characterizing the speaker's speech: 1) identifying common features of the language in sets of people united by some common characteristics (country, level of education, profession, gender, age, interests, etc.). Thus, a collective speech portrait of people united by a common profession, interests, etc. is obtained. 2) description of the speech of individuals through the study of the features of their speech at all levels of the language, the specifics of their speech behavior, taking into account their personal and professional properties, the features of their biography and the conditions for mastering the Russian language. In this case, we draw an individual speech portrait 3) the study of the fate of individual features of the Russian language in the speech of a person of a certain era. The result of such a study is a collective or individual speech portrait of a person of a particular era.

Lapteva Anna

This work was presented at the regional scientific-practical conference. Written in the form of reflections. Anna showed on the examples of her classmates how they use youth slang, reflected on where obscene language came from in the Russian language, on colloquial expressions, dialect words. The work is interesting and easy to read.

Download:

Preview:

MY SPEECH PORTRAIT

Lapteva Anna Sergeevna

Literature:

1. Vinogradov V.V. History of words. M., 1994.

2. Ozhegov S.I. Dictionary of the Russian language. Yekaterinburg, 1994.

3. Rybakov B.A. Paganism of Ancient Russia. M., 1987.

4. Nikolsky N.M. History of the Russian Church. M., 1985.

5. Gavrilov D.A., Nagovitsyn A.E. Gods of the Slavs. M., 2002.

6. Konovalova N.I. Sacred text as a linguocultural phenomenon. Yekaterinburg, 2007.

9. Stepanov A.M. Dictionary on occultism, esotericism and parapsychology. M., 2004.

10. Alekseev S.T. Sedition: A novel in 2 books. M., 2000.

11. Zelenin D.K. Trinity Chicken (Ethnographic study) // Selected Works. Articles on spiritual culture. M., 1994. S. 105.

12. Fasmer M.R. Etymological dictionary of the Russian language. In 4 volumes. M., 2009.

13. Vladimirsky-Budanov M.F. Review of the history of Russian law. SPb., 1888.

PLAN

1. Language is the most important means of communication.

2. Language and thinking.

3. Linguistic personality.

4. Speech portrait.

5. Speech etiquette.

6. Contamination of the Russian language.

7. My speech portrait in context with the portrait of a modern young man.

8. Communicative functions of the language.

9. Speech aggression.

10.Conclusions.

Language is the most important means of human communication. Without language, human communication is impossible, and without communication there can be no society, and thus no person. Without language, there can be no thinking, that is, a person's understanding of reality and himself in it. But both that, and another is possible only in a human hostel.

Let us recall in Jules Verne's "Mysterious Island" the story of how the colonists found the feral Ayrton, left as a punishment for crimes on a desert island. Cut off from society, Ayrton ceased to live like a human being, lost the ability of human thinking and stopped speaking. When he got into the environment of a small team, entered the lives of people, the ability to think returned to him, and he again began to speak. If the human has not manifested itself and has not been fixed, then the descendants of people who have fallen into the conditions of the life of animals acquire the skills of animal life and irretrievably lose everything human. There are many examples of this in life.

Therefore, for a long time, scientists tried to prove that language is the same organism as animals and plants, that it develops according to the same laws of nature, the same for all languages ​​in any place and at any time: like all organisms, it is born, matures, flourishes, declines, and dies. Is it possible to consider that, along with humans, animals also have the “gift of speech”? No. Even Aristotle spoke about this: “Only a person from all living beings is gifted with speech.”

Language is not a natural phenomenon, its place among social phenomena, occupying its own, special place among social phenomena with their own specific features. Since language, being an instrument of communication, is at the same time a means of exchanging thoughts, the question naturally arises about the relationship between language and thinking. Thinking cannot do without language, and language without thinking is impossible. They form a unity.

Every language, in whatever form it may be expressed, issign system. Along with sound signs, written signs are used, visual images, facial expressions, gestures, drawings, i.e. what the sign consists of. Some groups of people often use tattoos, slang words, abbreviations as signs of communication. In the process of communication, signs perform certain functions. First of all, they indicate the belonging of a person to a particular group, they serve as a means for a person to show who he is. “A sign is a part and a condition of communication processes as one of the parties to the social interaction of people as members of a group or society as a whole,” writes A.A. Leontiev.Language is realized in speech. Speech is an external manifestation of language, i.e. it refers to verbal means of communication. Speech plays an extremely important role in human communication and labor activity. One of the thinkers said: “Take away from me everything that I have, but leave me my speech. And soon I will have everything I had.The most important function of speech as an activity is the function of expressing thoughts. To think means to operate with concepts, therefore it is necessary to know the words denoting these concepts. That is why the mastery of linguistic means is the mastery of the richness of the language, a necessary condition for the development of human thinking and communication.

In the speech organization of a person, according to Professor V.I. Karasika identifies five heterogeneous components:

1) language ability as an organic opportunity to learn how to conduct verbal communication (this includes the mental and somatic abilities of a person);

2) communicative need, that is, addressability, focus on communicative conditions, on the participants in communication, the language community, the bearers of culture;

3) communicative competence as a developed ability to communicate in its various registers for optimal achievement of the goal (a person masters a competence, while abilities can only be developed);

4) linguistic consciousness as an active verbal reflection in the inner world of the outer world;

5) verbal behavior as a conscious and unconscious system of actions that reveal the character and way of life of a person.

To date, linguistics has not formed a unified idea of ​​the linguistic personality. The very concept of "linguistic personality" "is formed by the projection into the field of linguistics of the corresponding interdisciplinary term, in the meaning of which philosophical, sociological and psychological views are refracted on a socially significant set of physical and spiritual properties of a person that make up his qualitative certainty." First of all, a linguistic personality is understood as a person as a native speaker, taken from the side of his ability to speech activity, i.e. speech personality - a complex of psychophysical properties of an individual, allowing him to produce and perceive speech works. A linguistic personality is also understood as a set of features of the verbal behavior of a person using language as a means of communication, i.e. communicative personality. The linguistic personality can be understood as the basic national-cultural prototype of the carrier fixed mainly in the lexical system. specific language, a kind of "semantic identikit", compiled on the basis of worldview attitudes, value priorities and behavioral reactions reflected in the dictionary, i.e. dictionary personality. A linguistic personality is a multi-layered and multi-component paradigm of speech personalities. If a linguistic personality is a paradigm of speech personalities, according to Yu.E. Prokhorov, on the contrary, a speech personality is a linguistic personality in the paradigm of real communication.The development of the theory of linguistic personality in the direction of the correlation in the personality of language and speech made it possible to single out the concept of "speech personality". The distinction between the concepts of "linguistic personality", "speech personality" and "speech portrait" is based, first of all, on the need to distinguish Language and Speech.

The relationship between language and speech develops in such a way that only the most stable and non-random components of speech are included in the language system. Based on this provision, we can argue that for the most complete and accurate description of a linguistic personality (individual or collective), it is necessary, first of all, to reconstruct and analyze its speech portrait.

A holistic speech portrait of a linguistic personality can only give a detailed description of her speech and speech behavior over a significant period of time. This is practically not feasible, therefore, research searches in studying the problem of a linguistic personality and creating its speech portrait are aimed at such moments of speech behavior that carry essential (typical) features that can become parameters for creating a typology of linguistic personalities.

What is speech, because without it it is impossible to imagine a person? Let's look at the Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language by S.I. Ozhegov

SPEECH

1. The ability to speak, speaking. (For example: to speak)
2. Variety or style of language. (For example: oral and written speech)
3. Sounding language. (For example: Russian speech is musical)
4. Conversation, conversation. (For example: Clever speeches are pleasant to listen to)
5. Public speaking. (For example: Give a speech)

External speech can be oral (verbal) and written (non-verbal).

Oral speech - this is a sounding speech in the presence of the interlocutor; it uses a system of sound and intonation means of expression. It is created in the process of speaking and therefore can be perceived only once; depends on the situation of communication, the situation; closely related to non-verbal means of communication; it is characterized by spontaneity, improvisation, freedom in the choice of vocabulary: neutral, colloquial, bookish, slang, vernacular, etc., use simple sentences, repetitions, incomplete expression of thought.

Written speech - this is a graphically fixed speech in the absence of an interlocutor (author artistic text- reader) or with delayed feedback (letter to a friend); it is thought out in advance, structured, also be corrected; designed for visual perception (oral speech is perceived by ear); does not depend on the situation of communication; possesses such linguistic abilities as the predominance of book vocabulary, the presence of complex prepositions, passive constructions, and compliance with language norms.

Three main aspects of speech culture: normative (compliance with speech norms), communicative (the ability to achieve the goal using all language possibilities) and etiquette (the ability to use etiquette forms and means to achieve mutual understanding and harmonize dialogue).

Culture begins with the observance of speech and ethical norms. The requirement to comply with etiquette norms increases in the conditions of officiality. In public speech, even etiquette messages are introduced using permissive etiquette phrases:

Let me congratulate you...

The most important principle of observance of etiquette norms is the principle of politeness, caring for the interlocutor's sense of inner dignity. Therefore, a striking feature of the behavior of civilized managers is increased courtesy in dealing with subordinates, which implies, among other things, the motivation of individual decisions. Unfortunately, we are only getting closer to these basics of corporate culture.

Etiquette is a national and transnational phenomenon at the same time. Russian noble etiquette until 1917 was an integral part of common European etiquette. However, in addition to the nobility in Russia, there were peasant, merchant, military and church-Orthodox etiquette, representing the culture and originality of various social groups of the nation. A huge arsenal of etiquette formulas made it possible to take into account the social status, gender, age, personal merits of the addressee and the characteristics of the speech situation.The level of speech culture and speech competence in Russia did not begin to fall yesterday or five or ten years ago. Back in 1928, this problem was put forward as a top priority by the largest domestic linguists. Today we look back three or four generations as we try to revive the etiquette formulas of business communication. In search of a rhetorical ideal, we are forced to turn to the spiritual fathers of the Russian people - Sergius of Radonezh, Archpriest Avvakum - the classics of Russian literature, who preached catholicity, openness, love of truth.

In oral and written speech, we use words that form a vocabulary that constantly lives, either replenishing or dying. The vocabulary of each person includes an active and a passive vocabulary.

An active vocabulary is those words that a speaker of a given language not only understands, but also uses himself.

Passive vocabulary is those words that the speaker of a given language understands, but does not use himself (such, for example, are many special technical or diplomatic terms, as well as various expressive expressions).

Let us turn again to the Explanatory Dictionary of S.I. Ozhegov.

PORTRAIT

1. The image of a person in a painting, photograph, sculpture (For example: a group portrait, a verbal portrait).
2. Peren. Artistic image, the image of a literary hero (For example: a literary portrait)

SELF-PORTRAIT

A portrait painted from myself. (For example: Self-portrait of the artist)

Of all the dictionary entries, you can make one that fits the definition of the topic of the essay.

PORTRAIT (French portrait), an image or description of a person or group of people; in the visual arts, one of the genres (and a separate work) in which the appearance of any human individuality is recreated. Together with external resemblance, the portrait captures spiritual world depicted person (model), creates a typical image of a representative of the people, class, era.

SO: if you analyze my vocabulary (lexicon), then from all that has been said, we can conclude that I mainly use an active vocabulary when communicating, although sometimes I use expressive vocabulary, of course, understanding with whom I am talking and what.

I understand that compliance with speech norms, literacy of speech is the most important basic requirement of speech communication. Non-observance of speech norms: clumsy, illiterate turns, lexical, grammatical and other errors create a kind of interference in the perception of speech. Such speech (especially oral) is not only poorly absorbed, but also does not characterize its (author) addressee from the best side.

Illiterate spoken and written speech causes shifts in the minds of the recipients (addressees), creating a vicious circle.

In addition to demonstrative words, other words also play the role of "lubrication" for me, ranging from the common "well" and ending with dialectical and specific ones ("duc", etc.), with the help of which writers love to create the flavor of their characters' speech. I understand that such particles are initially devoid of independent meaning, they have it only in relation to other words, giving them various additional shades. Having lost connection with other words, the particles remain only stable combinations of sounds that do not mean anything. To nullify their meaning, as linguists advise, is quite easy, it is enough just to take them out of context. Used as a "lubricant", they carry no value, and they tend to be short in length, reducing wasted energy.

Another "terrible" phenomenon in oral speech. Black curse. This is something I do not suffer, although I live in the village.

It would seem that the Russian people have always cursed. Passed down from father to son, from generation to generation, swear words have come down to the present time despite all attempts to declare them outside the language, to prohibit their use, that is, in other words, to kill them. This path through the centuries, done by swearing, made it something like a covenant - a covenant not to succumb to censorship, to resist any authority and prohibition that it establishes. Swearing captures a person like an element. You can also feel it as an element, and, realizing it is popular, a person, without swearing himself, can almost feel proud that Russian obscenity is the strongest swearing in the world. It would seem ridiculous that what we should be ashamed of is being put on display. However, the fact that almost every Russian knows about the strength of the mat makes one take it seriously. Somewhere in the depths of the Russian soul sits the belief that a truly Russian person should be able to swear on occasion. It is considered normal to swear during difficult work, under swearing - it seems - and things go handy. And yet, despite the high frequency of swear words, swearing has not become a normal use of the language. It hasn't even become the norm for swearing. The people defined swearing as black abuse. And this is not just an epithet, but an interpretation of the mat. Swearing is unnatural. Although it can be considered a kind of application of the language, and quite common (swear words and expressions are present, probably, in all languages ​​of the world), in its essence it contradicts the whole language. Swearing and language solve problems directly opposite. The purpose of language is to bring people together. People talk among themselves to better understand each other. Without this it is impossible to live and act together. Swearing has a different goal: its task is not to bring people together, but, on the contrary, to divide people, to draw a line between them. Scolding, a person shows another that he claims in vain to understand. He must keep his distance, know his place. And this place may turn out to be the most insignificant.

It should be thought that in the first centuries of Christianity, swearing was a rarer phenomenon in Russia, since it was perceived as a crime both by foul language itself and by society. Cursing, man publicly insulted God and received miserable satisfaction from the fact that the creature challenges its Creator.

We can say that swearing is waging a real war against the Russian language. She is able to expand her vocabulary, has her own stable verbal forms and phraseological units. The tip of the mat is aimed at replacing simple, most commonly used words. Ultimately, swearing claims to create its own language, parallel to the Russian language, or to permeate the entire Russian language, merging with it in prodigal ecstasy. It plays into the hands of the mat that he represents a certain style of speech. Distributed among the common people, untouched by education, it has become a kind of symbol of the nationality of the language. And as such, today it looks attractive even to the intelligentsia.

Researchers note that the oral speech of the modern Russian intellectual is also jargonized to a fairly strong degree. This is especially true for the speech of men. Words and phrases of slang origin - typelawlessness, deaf (“They are deaf with this case”), tense (“We were all in such tension!”), cut in (“I can’t get it: what is it about?”), hang noodles on your ears, roll barrel (on someone), that is, it is unreasonable to accuse anyone of anything, and many others come from the lips of an intellectual. But the question is: what and in what situations?

According to my observations, such word usage is more characteristic of the speech of representatives of the technical intelligentsia of young and middle age in situations of familiar or emotional speech communication: in conversations with friends, with colleagues in an informal setting, in speech acts of invective, making claims, resentment, etc. In the speech of the older generation of humanitarians, such vocabulary is almost never found (however, E. A. Zemskaya noted party in a television speech by A. I. Solzhenitsyn [Zemskaya 1997], but one cannot but pay attention to the fact that it was delivered in a negative context: Solzhenitsyn said that he did not participate in any writers' and other get-togethers). Humanitarians of the young and middle generations, if they resort to this kind of expressive means, then in a narrower circle of situations and with greater awareness of the "other-system" nature of such elements. This is expressed in their intonational emphasis, in the "citation" nature of their use, which is served by reservations like "as they say now", "saying modern language"," as the new Russians say, "etc. Therefore, not only specialists, but also people of different social strata are concerned that jargon is becoming a way of our life, pushing the classical literary language to the margins of communication. The market has enriched us in many ways with non-standard vocabulary.

Again I compare my speech portrait with the speech portrait of a young man against the background of the picture of our time. I will not touch on the individual characteristics of speech behavior - this is a topic for a separate reflection.This, of course, is not about the appearance of young people, but about some of their typical spiritual qualities. And again the question is: what in the moral image of the new generation does its dictionary, that is, youth jargon, reveal? It is known that slang units are created as an addition to the dictionary of an exemplary normative language. There is a great reserve in the national language, but for some reason these riches are not enough for young people. The creators and users of jargon are unpredictable, they act contrary to the recommendations of teachers and textbooks, grammars and dictionaries, contrary to calls and spells about the need to preserve native language. They do not want to be like people of previous generations, they strive for independence, develop their own ideas about life guidelines. Young people themselves create words and expressions in order to communicate with each other and talk about themselves in their own words. Of course, in these attempts to be independent, there is much from the game, from a protracted childhood or belated childishness. But the natural talent of the people is also manifested in youth vocabulary innovations. Assessing the vocabulary of youthful jargon, one can single out something positive in common - initiative, vitality, optimism of the young (however, the features of age are manifested here).Unfortunately, many guys and girls have dependency, a sharply critical attitude towards the past and present in the absence of a program of their own actions, a disrespectful attitude towards authorities, political theories, leaders and bosses. For example: my peers call a conscientious workerarap, demon, peasant, flyer, sucker, labor force.To work in good faith meanshunchback, hunch, mumble, puff, die.In these words there is not even a hint of a respectful attitude towards work and the working person. And here is the "decoding" for a bad worker, a loafer, a freeloader:biryulechnik, vampire, gloom, switchman, slug, proletarian, halva, freeloader, seagull, clamp, jackal, teapot, ball, hose, etc.Some condemnation of idlers is noticeable in them, but the main occupation of a significant part of the youth is the killing of time. You can kill time, waste it in vain in different ways: in dance, and in sexual, and in a drunken, and in a drug frenzy. Among my friends there are none and cannot be. In the course of preparing for the essay, I began to pay more attention to the speech of my peers, to notice some roughness. Here is just a very small part of what was found in the speech of modern youth in the meaning of "to mess around":to drive a bulldozer, to smoke bamboo, to spud bamboo, to graze beavers, to hammer with horns, to wet radishes, to sit on a pause, to pull a pacifier, to hang around like cabbage, to freeand much more. The vocabulary of young people reflects the disrespectful attitude towards parents:ancestors, parents, sponsors, scrap raw materials, skulls, bast shoes; to the elderly:mold, bulb, rattletrap, immortelle, flycatcher; to smart people nerd, monster, soaked, weirdo, man with a briefcase (here the emphasis is on the first syllable); to the villagersbull, felt boots, whip, Indian, plow, dill, etc.Young people are not very flattering about our politicians:dumak, deputies; about the State Duma: monkey.

Very sharply and disrespectfully, young people call those who stand out among others in some way: height, physique, mind or lack of it, peculiarities in behavior. This is also a consequence of the loss of moral guidelines, mass bad manners and lack of culture in the conditions of uncertainty and impotence of the highest power.

I'm growing up, so I want to learnexpress their thoughts vividly, figuratively, convincingly, accessible, learn to win over the interlocutor, the audience, competently lead business correspondence, compose texts of documents. I understand that for this you need to study a lot and become a communicative person.

What is included in this concept? This is first of allcommunicative competence as knowledge of the norms and rules of communication, possession of its technology, which are an integral part of the broader concept of "personal communicative potential".

Let us turn again to the dictionary of S.I. Ozhegov

COMMUNICATION

Message, communication (book)Speech as a means of communication. Communicative functions.

It follows that the communicative potential is a characteristic of a person's capabilities, which determine the quality of his communication. It includes, along with competence in communication, two more components: the communicative properties of the individual, which characterize the development of the need for communication, attitude to the method of communication and communication skills - the ability to take initiative in communication, the ability to be active, emotionally respond to the state of communication partners, formulate and to implement their own individual program of communication, the ability to self-stimulation and mutual stimulation in communication.

The experience of communication occupies a special place in the structure of the communicative

personality competence. On the one hand, it is social and includes

internalized norms and values ​​of culture, on the other hand, it is individual, since it is based on individual communicative abilities and psychological events associated with communication in a person's life.

The dynamic aspect of this experience is the processes of socialization and individualization, implemented in communication, ensuring the social development of a person, as well as the adequacy of his reactions to the situation of communication and their originality. In communication, the mastery of social roles plays a special role: organizer, participant, etc. communication. And here the experience of perception of art is very important.

Thus, communicative competence is a necessary condition for the successful realization of personality. The acquisition of communicative experience occurs not only on the basis of direct participation in acts of communicative interaction with other people. There are many ways to obtain information about the nature of communicative situations, the problems of interpersonal interaction and how to solve them.

It is necessary to sum up, that is, based on all theoretical information, I will try to draw a conclusion. I think that important point The process of forming communication skills is the mental reproduction of one's behavior in various situations. Planning one's actions "in the mind" is an integral part of the normal flowing communicative action.

Again we return to the rules of etiquette, which includes communicative competence. Most of these rules and strategies are " unwritten ”: situational grammars have not yet been created that would regulate a person’s speech behavior in accordance with the conditions of a communicative situation. At the same time, the vast majority of native speakers know the rules and strategies of verbal communication in a variety of life circumstances, which ensures their normal and effective interaction with each other.

The basic rules of the literary language are as follows: put the literary language above the dialects; develop national norms for this; to create a developed system of functional varieties of the language, capable of satisfying the demands of society in the development of statehood, production, science, and culture. In accordance with this, the culture of speech is designed to ensure compliance with modern norms of the literary language, which must stand above dialects, above vernacular.

I understand this, but it is still difficult for me to reorganize, because my language has adopted "by inheritance" some dialectal features. For example: my pronunciation of the word good as hell (pronounced A instead of O) is different from my older sister's pronunciation. We have differently there is a stretching of unstressed vowels, especially in the pre-stressed syllable, the duration of vowels, even timbre and rhythm, weakening or amplification of sounds. Sometimes it seems that we are talking through our teeth, as if arrogantly (but in fact with dignity and without unnecessary emotions):ha-ra-sho ga-va-rit mas-quich, kra-si-wa, mind-na ga-va-rit. There are clear lines of transitions, evenness of tone, without rises and falls, the convexity of each vowel, consonants are calmly located around any of them. My vocabulary includes vocabulary belonging to various forms Russian national language. Here we find neutral common words, colloquial vocabulary, dialectisms and argotisms, as well as jargon vocabulary that appears as a result of changing the types of vocabulary at the phonetic, word-formation, accentological and semantic levels. Part of the slang vocabulary is words that differ from the original ones only in the composition of phonemes. Yes, vernacular unhook "stop bothering someone" sounds like uncheap.

Among the word-formation jargons, the most numerous is the group of suffix formations, often with the use of interfixation, truncation of the generating stem. We can distinguish the following productive suffixes in my vocabulary:

An: friend - friendAn;

ar : cleaver - tesAr; oak - oak; deaf - capercaillie;

Yen : leg - leg; head - smut; belly - belly; pillar - pillar;

Yeshnik : eye - eye; forehead - forehead;

He: stick - stick; note - note; music - muzon;

Ak/-yak : good - good; stuffy - stuffy; nothing - nishtYak; piston - piston; turntable - turntable; silencer - Glushak; cat - cat.

A significant layer of my vocabulary is made up of words that, while having common meanings with the literary language, also have meanings that have appeared as a result of semantic processes:

bison - 1) hoofed animal, 2) cat (Won, the bison is running ...);

Botva - 1) stems and leaves of plants, 2) something not worth attention (This song is tops, I’ll sing another one for you);

dust - 1) insecticide, 2) gas (moto) (Give me some dust ... Yes, you are too harsh).

Of particular note is the presence of a significant group of phraseological units,

found in my lexicon:

stand on foot “Ride while standing in transport” (Get in. -Okay, I’d rather stand on foot);

curly hands - “about a man whose hands are falling apart” (Well, Manya, your hands are curly);

to be in flight - “do not get anything” (Give me some seeds. - Are you in flight?);

beat parties - “wait for someone, hang around in one place” (Dimka has been beating at the entrance of the party for half an hour, is he waiting for you?);

phase shift - “the person has gone crazy” (Are you out of phase?);

volts hit ground -“doing something abnormal, you are not right in the head”;

there is - butt, push, eat up, chop, crack, grab, champ;

freeze (of someone)- twitch, choke, stab, ossify, dry out, glaze;

go - bring down, row, ditch, turn over, stoker, wind, steer, heal;

good - good: Bar-Bar;

legal - lawful : zykansko-zykansky - zyko - zykiy; kayfOvo - kafOvy;

cool - cool: cool - cool, crown - crown.

The combination of "very funny" words match:Pitchfork, slaughter, fun, rzhak, rzhAchka, fumes, dried up (When he turned up, he had such a mug - well, fumes!); expression "it's very funny to me» match the expressions: inpresent tense- I fall out, I pass out, I trudge (I trudge, what kind of hat do you have);in the past time- I passed out, I fell off, I fell, I died.

The coexistence of some forms explains the presence of whole synonymous series:faster - stronger, faster, sharper, hornier; company - banda,office, mafia, crowd, bunch; good - lordly, classy, ​​ointment, clear, chinny etc.

Now I try to monitor my speech, because soon I will have to join a new environment, which simply obliges me to adhere to the norms of the literary language, to use various means of expressiveness of speech. Used to use frequently

1. polysemy, ambiguity: braid, bunch, key, goat, etc.;
2. metaphor (meaning transfer) - nest (bird's dwelling and "Noble Nest"), caterpillar (tractor, green caterpillar);
3. synonyms (words that sound differently, but differ in shades of lexical shades) - horse-horse, dog-dog, doctor-doctor, path-road;
4. antonyms (words with opposite meanings) - good - bad, good - evil, beginning-end, breadth-narrowness.

While preparing this essay, I also got acquainted with such a concept as aggression of speech behavior. P. Sanaev's story "Bury Me Behind the Plinth" (1996) presents a vivid model of such behavior.

I can't help but talk about this story, because it touched a nerve. Despite the fact that the book is based on real facts of the author's biography, it embodies artistic image communicative aggressor. The speech portrait of the grandmother of the protagonist was created mainly with the help of conflicting vocabulary:so that you end your life in prison, so that you rot in the hospital alive, so that your liver, kidneys, brain, heart wither; sit down to eat; smelly, stinking, damning, hateful bastardetc. Verbal violence against a small grandson, against all close people (husband, daughter, son-in-law) is the norm of the heroine's verbal behavior. The grandmother’s speech portrait is characterized by vocabulary that pays attention to negative sides surrounding, mostly insults refer to the daughter and grandson. The child is constantly instilled with the idea that he rotting alive Staphylococcus aureus eats his brain and shits there, what he will barely live to be sixteen years old.In the context of the story, constant curses have become clichés:damn you! May you end your life in prison! May you rot alive in the hospital! So that your liver, kidneys, brain, heart wither! May you be devoured by staphylococcus aureus!Under the influence of the grandmother, the child's consciousness perceives such vocabulary as normative, ordinary; the hero says about himself:The thing is, a bastard like me can't do anything on his own. The mother abandoned this bastard, and the bastard also rots constantly, and that's how it happened. Of course, you already guessed that this explanation was compiled from the words of a grandmother". Grandma calls her husband cursed gizel . In the dictionary of V.I. Dalia Gizel is interpreted as a flayer (Dal V.I. Explanatory dictionary of the living Great Russian language. T. 1. M., 1863).Nina Antonovna's speech is marked by an abundance of epithets with negative connotations, swear words:creature; bastard; bloodsucker dwarf; cretin; whore; hateful traitor; scum; cattle; traitor; rotten creature; stinking, stinking, damning, hateful bastard.To create the image of a grandmother in the novel, the following genres are used: insult(Are you going to mock me, you damn bastard?!) threat (I'll take it out and strangle it if you sweat. Got it?) a curse (Damn you by heaven, God, earth, birds, fish, people, seas, air! - It was my grandmother's favorite curse. - So that only misfortunes fall on your head! So that you see nothing but retribution!), scolding (You will eat when they give you! There are no lackeys!).The image of Nina Antonovna is inseparable from aggressive speech behavior, the purpose of which is the desire to offend, humiliate the speech partner, invade the speech space of the addressee, seize the verbal initiative. To achieve these goals, the use of abusive nominations of the addressee is also aimed. The only consolation is that there are very few people like Nina Antonovna, which means that the spread of verbal aggression is very slow, and soon, I hope, it will cease to exist altogether.

I cannot and do not want to be a pessimist. I believe that the future of Russia is great. But it takes a lot of hard work for it. If we choose the right path and work together, we will definitely reach the goal. Here, the proverb comes to mind just right: the tongue will bring you to Kyiv. We can't go anywhere without language! But what about jargon? The creators of non-literary words and expressions act on the principle: what I see, I sing. As our lives and ourselves change, so does our vocabulary. Slang - very fast, literary - very slowly, as always. This is the difference. No need to dramatize. Slang words that are not very pleasant in meaning will definitely be replaced by less rude, less harsh ones. Let's live better - our words will be more cheerful, kinder, more cultured. For now, we have what we have.