ACNews #15 21 марта 2003

Thoughts - Lunohod1: ... the rules of the Russian language on TV and radio.

--- Yamail [http://yandex.ru]



   ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Lunohod1:

   ... The rules of the Russian language on TV and radio.

   You know, I'll probably cool fall in your eyes
but the transfer of the right speech on the radio I listen with 
great pleasure. The most popular is not always correct. 

   Now a little rehabilitated.

   "New Russian spelling" I think the machinations of the world 
(ie, American) imperialism, in order to undermine our culture,

that it was easier to have three skins tear (in the form of raw 
materials). 

   And the radio broadcasts done by those who for their country 
radeet. In narrow-minded understanding of such people, alas, 
are called fools. 

   <...>

   P. $. More about the literacy of speech. You're talking 
about the rules of the native language, as the whim of some fat 
with bindaskapil uncle who absolutely nothing to do. 
Navydumyvali, they say, every hemorrhoids. Loaded honest boys 
... 

   Did you know that on the literacy of speech depends on our 
thinking. If it is correct, and thoughts ... clear. And if not 
- confusion in the head. And if the confusion in the head, then 
hands suchat to no avail. In short, how to think and live. 

   Your life depends on your thoughts and those of speech, of 
words! 

Alone Coder:

   I agree, that is, do not rule out that the authors of 
transmission of correct speech are guided by the best 
intentions. But this scary - gave his opinion why.


   People by and large, all try to act in their own 
understanding of how best. For example, Jack the Ripper 
believes that makes the world a cleaner, a sadist - he may be 
teaching someone to live. Those Patriots are different: some of 
the best intentions decide that children should definitely 
drive systems, and then put under the gun. Others, however, 
guided by the same spirit, consider it necessary to perform a 
recovery home economy based on the Argentine model. Still 
others - prefer to save Russia by the "Smite HHHov" where XXX 
is chosen instead of taste-Russian nationalities.


   So just can not justify unprofessional (even shameful in 
this case) work radeniem for the country. The mother tongue 
should be treated more carefully. 

   Language is complex, it determines the complexity of our 
thinking. In this you're right.


   Each word needs approach. NOT enjoin people (among other 
things, out of ignorance credulous) to use the only option 
lexical unit only because it seemed more true authors of the 
transfer. Language is not formed in a separate head in his 
uncle's hat. Literary language - is the result of 
generalization of literary texts. Spoken Language - is the 
result of finding the optimal way to transfer information from 
person to person. And in fact, and in another case study of the 
language is accompanied by WRAP within the rules. Having a 
system of rules to any person who knowingly working with text. 

   In 1956, it seems, were adopted rules of spelling
Russian language. They came out so successful that did not 
change in 1947 years - much longer than previously established. 
Rights were available to explain to children in school, 
language was not devoid of flexibility and is easily absorbed 
as (and to this day successfully absorb) new words that reflect 
a modern view of the world, and not rejects the new forms of 
old words. 

   It was in that spelling there is a big part of Monuments
Russian-language text, including many dictionaries and 
reference books, which I use constantly, and I recommend to 
others. 

   Specified argument, perhaps, quite enough against the 
reformers' paraShUTnikov "(or perhaps" PARAShUtistov ") if 
ktolibo readers still have doubts about them. 

   With respect to myself, I venture to say that through my 
hands since 1998 years have passed about 7 M texts (about 10 
volumes), which I immediately typed and corrected. I personally 
this number enough to have opinions about their own language 
and at the same time domestic law to criticize the respected 
authors of cognitive (and rather entertaining) programs. 
However, I'm afraid I have one, they will not listen.


   And what kind of gentlemen? One can argue that it is unlikely
have any significant weight in the literary circles of writers, 
as well as the speakers are not brilliant and certainly not 
fair philologists.


   Why not first? Because of their major publications is not
say, however, as not necessary to see the discharge the same.

   Why not the second? Because in their arsenal contains the 
following sloppy phrase :"... recently sent a letter to our 
listener Takovskaya Imyarek Batkovna, and that's what she wrote 
... " 

   Why not the third? I managed to hint above, in its 
recommendations, they do not always adhere to the rules of word 
formation And absolutely never condescend to distinct 
explanations of his views. An example from the same 
transmission (I think their corona) - pronunciation of 
word-form "call". Option writers - the emphasis on the second 
syllable. Indeed, this pronunciation can be in a number of 
dialektov.Tem Still, it's unprovable, but refuted instructive 
(even symbolic) example: similar changes words. "Call" and, 
sorry, "drive". In most forms, they are the same way. Not 
satisfied? Take then the other examples: "Led", "salt", 
"wander." 


   Do not Believe the uncles. Read books.