Теория языка | Филологический аспект №01 (93) Январь 2023

Phraseological scientific school of V. M. Mokienko

Гулякова Ирина Геннадьевна
кандидат филологических наук, доцент кафедры русского языка как иностранного и методики его преподавания филологического факультета Санкт-Петербургского государственного университета

Gulyakova Irina Gennadevna
Cand. Sci. (Philology), assistant professor of Department of Russian Language for Foreigners, Philological Faculty, Saint-Petersburg State University, Russia, Saint-Peterburg

Abstract: The paper analyzes the scientific research work of the phraseological school of V.M. Mokienko. Attention is drawn to the main achievements of researchers over the past decades, the relevance of the results obtained is emphasized. The role of the considered works in the development of Slavic phraseology and linguistics in general is revealed and analyzed. Scientific links are being established with related research areas. It is concluded that the phraseological dictionaries created by V.M. Mokienko and his followers are a significant contribution to the culture of the Slavic world and world culture in general.
Keywords: phraseological unit, bibleism, dialectism, phraseological dictionary, media speech

Introduction

It is important to point out that a single review of any of the works of V. M. Mokienko cannot give an idea of the nature and scale of his activities. Before us is not just a collection of numerous and diverse works written and compiled both by V. M. Mokienko himself and by his students and colleagues. These works are the results of many years of activity of the fundamental scientific school, a research center in the field of phraseology within the framework of philological science as a social institution. The scientific school owes much of its success to V. M. Mokienko, who is its organizer, long-term leader, who initially gave this school a systemic character and who constantly supports this systematic scientific activity by planning, organizing and direct management of various projects.

Discussion

There are two clear directions in the work of the scientific school. On the one hand, the result is an attempt to stop time and fix on paper stop colloquial language, everyday speech practices in a number of various dictionaries, in particular, three volumes of a dictionary devoted to Russian proverbs, sayings and comparisons [1,2,3]. On the other hand, this creates a theoretical base for vocabulary work, giving valuable raw material for further linguistic analysis. Two recently published monographs are indicative in this respect.

In the monograph by V. M. Mokienko and T. G. Nikitina “Russian Dialect Phraseography: Differential and Complete Dictionaries” [4], the fundamental problems of phraseology are projected into the topic indicated in the title: the concept of a phraseological unit, the boundaries of phraseology, a wide and narrow understanding of phraseological unit, its semantics, interaction of categories of phraseological units - word, grammatical characteristics and functional-stylistic qualification of phraseological units, cultural parameters of phraseology.

The theoretical basis of the scientific school of V. M. Mokienko is based on the ideas of B. A. Larin. The intensive lexicographic work of the scientific school showed that the principles of work in the field of phraseological lexicography by B. A. Larin, which are creatively developed by the authors of dictionaries, have not exhausted their scientific potential: “the principle of accurate certification of the material, the principle of temporal and spatial characteristics of the described units, the principle of retrospective linguoculturological characteristics , the principle of complex description of vocables” [4, p. 28]. The concept of a phraseological dictionary of the full type, substantiated by B. A. Larin, remains fruitful.

The clarity and unambiguity of the definitions of the main theoretical provisions, the consistency of the presentation of the content, the clarity of the author's thought, the reliance in reasoning on rich factual material makes the monograph a model for young researchers. It is necessary to note the highly professional philological analysis of speech material. A good example is the section on dialect phraseography and areal linguistics [4, pp. 63–95].

The authors of the monograph repeatedly emphasize the volume of speech material that phraseological dictionaries contain: “The total volume of proverbs described in the dictionary [meaning the three-volume Big Dictionary of Proverbs, Sayings and Comparisons of the Russian Language”] is 155,000, i.e. more than 7 times more than in the famous repeatedly reprinted paremiological collection of V. I. Dahl "Proverbs of the Russian people", first published in 1861–18622” [4, p. 28]. The variety of sources from which vocabulary units are extracted is repeatedly emphasized: “Firstly, these are extracts from most collections of Russian folklore; secondly, materials from works of classical and modern literature; thirdly, examples of live phraseology from the mass media (journalism, radio, television and the Internet); fourthly, proverbs, sayings and comparisons from literary, phraseological, dialectal and slang dictionaries and lists o; finally, material from our own recordings of modern speech and answers to questionnaires according to a special author's program” [4, pp. 28-29]. At the same time, the authors consider it necessary to emphasize the special significance of such a source as colloquial speech and the media: “The main difference between a large dictionary of Russian sayings is not even in the number of terms described, but the fact that most of them are taken from colloquial every day speech, which is fixed in the dictionary in time and space” [4, p. 41].

The very structure of the speech activity of society changes over time, and these changes are quite intense. The speech practice of Russian society in the second half of the 19th century is fundamentally different from the speech practice of Russian society in the second decade of the 20th century.

The time when V. I. Dahl’s dictionary was published, the language of Russian classical literature was a standard, and it is the literary standard that was primarily reflected in the dictionary.

Dahl's dictionary was largely perceived as a reaction to the dominance of classical written literary speech. The dictionary rehabilitated Russian colloquial speech. In fact, V.I. Dal predicted that colloquial speech is stratified in the same stylistically and broadly communicative terms as written literary speech.

At the end of the second decade of the 20th century, the structure of the speech practice of society became fundamentally different. Literary language standard faded. The Russian language standard is now increasingly associated with media language, with the communicative environment of traditional media and with the communicative environment of the Internet.

The ontology of media speech is characterized by such basic property as utility, by which we mean the direct involvement of media speech in the general practical activity of society [5, p. 58-63]. Media text is closely connected in its existence with the coordinates of social space-time, which determine the time and place of its publication.

From the functional and communicative point of view, media speech directly and directly correlates with colloquial speech, which is also utilitarian, that is, directly and directly inscribed in practical activities. person. Only if colloquial speech is the everyday speech of interpersonal communication, then media speech is the speech of the everyday communication of society.

Both colloquial and media languages, due to their utility, are not subject to mandatory fixation in their original form, as is the case in the field of literary, or scientific language. Meanwhile, studies in media linguistics and media stylistics show that the media environment is the most intensively developing language environment, where everything that is connected with the formation of public consciousness and the impact on it is realized. Utilitarian print and television media speech should be recognized as one of the most significant achievements in the field of speech activity of society.

Here we find ourselves in a situation where only dictionaries, and above all phraseological dictionaries, remain the only place of storage and at the same time a means of initial analysis of media language. The quickly changing language practice of modernity the language of media environment is fixed, stored and analyzed in dictionary of phraseological type.

The foregoing is in good agreement with traditional studies of a purely medialinguistic type. So, V. G. Kostomarov in the monograph “The Russian language on the newspaper page” [6], one of the most famous works devoted to the language of the newspaper, considers the principle of alternating expression and standard as a constructive principle of newspaper speech, which directly refers us to the problem of phraseological type. In one of our works, we showed that a similar principle can be extended to the description of a much wider range of texts that function in the media environment, in particular in urban romance texts [7, p. 49-56], which once again confirms the inexhaustible possibilities of the dictionary as one of the most adequate ways of representing and analysis of speech functioning in the media environment.

Finally, let us pay attention to one more fact, which testifies to the close connection between the scientific school of V. M. Mokienko, on the one hand, with the study, and on the other hand, with the formation of the media environment. We are talking about a dictionary of biblical set expressions and aphorisms "Mite of Biblical Wisdom" [8]. Everyday speech, both media and colloquial, in some of its varieties feels the need to appeal to the world of book knowledge. And vice versa, all the most complex phenomena of human spiritual activity enter the spiritual world of society as a whole only when they descend from the world of book knowledge into the sphere of everyday life: “In this sphere, culture acquires its ontological essence, since it is everyday life that is identical to the most general, maximally expanded typology. "human, just human" [9, p. 6]. Therefore, the actualization of the literary text from the cognitive world is one of the constant concerns of those who work in the field of media language. The biblical texts themselves are complex enough to be used by anyone working in the media. The Dictionary "Mite of Biblical Wisdom" actualizes the linguistic material of the Bible, making it accessible to almost any member of society.

The concept of the Dictionary differs in this regard in practical expediency. The authors selected and described 130 of the most common biblical set expressions and aphorisms. The correspondences found and described in the modern Slavic, Germanic, Romance, Armenian and Georgian languages (18 languages in total) make this dictionary a fact of the lexicographic work of the respective countries.

Conclusion

All of the above allows us to conclude that the role played by the phraseological school of V. M. Mokienko goes far beyond the purely linguistic sphere of activity. The scientific school is a social institution in the field of scientific knowledge, uniting a large number of researchers from differe.nt countries, an institution that has and will have a significant impact on the sphere of teaching the Russian language, on the formation of the “linguistic taste of the era” and, more broadly, on the sphere of the formation of public consciousness.

1. Mokienko V. M., Nikitina T. G. A Large Dictionary of Russian Sayings. - M.: CJSC "OLMA Media Group", 2007. - 784 p.;
2. Mokienko V. M., Nikitina T. G. A Large Dictionary of Russian Folk Comparisons. - M.: CJSC "OLMA Media Group", 2008. - 800 p.;
3. Mokienko V. M., Nikitina T. G., Nikolaeva E. K. A Large Dictionary of Russian Proverbs: about 70,000 proverbs. M.: OLMA Media Group, 2010. - 1023 p.;
4. Mokienko V. M., Nikitina T. G. Russian Dialectal Phraseography: differential and complete dictionaries. Monograph / Ed. H. Walter. St. Petersburg, Greifswald: St. Petersburg State University; Universität Greifswald, 2019. - 310 p.
5. Konkov V. I. Media speech: The content of the concept and principles of analysis // The world of the Russian word. 2016. No. 3. S. 58-63.
6. Kostomarov V. G. Russian language on a newspaper page: some features of the language of modern newspaper journalism. M.: Publishing House of Moscow. un-ta, 1971.
7. Guliakova I. G. The principle of alternation of expression and standard: scope // Medialinguistics. 2017. No. 4. 49–56p.
8. Mite of Biblical Wisdom: Russian-Slavic Dictionary of Biblical Set Expressions and Aphorisms with correspondences in Germanic, Romance, Armenian and Georgian languages: in 2 volumes / ed. E. E. Ivanova, V. M. Mokienko, D. Balakova, H. Walter. Mogilev: Moscow State University named after A. A. Kuleshov, 2019. T. 1: A–O. - 288 p.; T. 2: P-Z. - 308 p.;
9. Koziakova M. I. . History. Culture. Everyday life. Western Europe: from Antiquity to the XX century. M.: Consent, 2013. 6 p.