in office work
household sphere
in non-verbal communication
in oral speech
Functional style is not
official business language
colloquial
literary language
The choice of functional style is determined
sphere of communication
number of participants
the nature of the transmitted information
language means
Emotionally expressive vocabulary is inappropriate
in a conversational style
in a journalistic style
scientific style
in formal business style
Abstract vocabulary is a hallmark of the style
artistic
scientific
colloquial
journalistic
The use of clichés in
colloquial style
journalistic style
formal business style
art style
Which of the following characteristics are mandatory for business communication?
friendliness
officiality
expediency
relevance
Indicate terminological combinations that do NOT characterize the mandatory components of business communication.
psychological aspect
communicative aspect
ethical aspect
aesthetic aspect
9. The quality of speech, which is characterized by compliance with not only linguistic, but also ethical standards:
Accuracy
Right
wealth
The hidden context of communication implies
expression of dissatisfaction with the conversation
degree of acquaintance of communicants
speaker's intentions
Compliance with the rules of speech etiquette is determined
rules of conduct in public places
using typical language constructions in typical situations
availability of information
taking into account the degree of acquaintance of the communicants
Mark the required characteristics of oral speech.
use of non-verbal means
possibility of correction
strict adherence to style
Oral business speech involves
use of cliches
imagery
standard form
officiality
What is the style of the oratory?
journalistic
artistic
official business
Note the salient features writing.
use of non-verbal means
spelling compliance
spontaneity
strict adherence to style
following phonetic norms
Written business speech does not involve
use of cliches
stereotype
officiality
evaluation of information
Define the meaning of the word "exclusive".
luxurious
exceptional
detailed
Define the meaning of the word "excess".
disappointment
bad joke
inflammation
collision
19. Non-verbal means of communication include:
intonation
rate of speech
Check the excess
identification
reflection
What speech stamps are NOT related to the beginning of a conversation
I think the best place to start our conversation is with a discussion of...
At the end of the conversation, I would like to...
Today I propose to discuss...
I would like to start our conversation with...
Let's sum up our agreements.
I think we should first discuss...
I think we'll start our conversation with...
So we come to the end of our conversation.
I believe that today we have discussed all our issues.
Stages of a business conversation are NOT
start a conversation
informing partners
argumentation of the put forward provisions
making decisions
end of conversation
23. A set of communication effects are:
visual image effect
the effect of the first phrases
argumentation effect
quantum burst effect
questionnaire effect
effect of intonation and pauses
artistic expressiveness
relaxation.
Answer card for the test by discipline
"Business conversation"
| ? | Correct answer | |||||||||
| BUT | B | AT | G | D | E | F | W | And | To | |
Educational and methodological support
disciplines
10.1 Main literature
1. Koshevaya I.P. Professional ethics and psychology of business communication: Textbook / I.P. Koshevaya, A.A. Kanke. - M.: Forum: Infra-M, 2011.-304 p. - (Professional education).
2. Silant'eva M.V. Business Communication: Lecture Notes. File DelOb_lek.pdf/ Department of Psychology and Pedagogy. - SPb: SPbGIEU, 2009.
3. Struzhinskaya N.N. Communication Management: Lecture Notes. The file KomMen_lek. pdf/ Department of Public Relations and Mass Communications. - SPb: SPbGIEU, 2010.
10.2 Further reading
4. Vasilenko I.A. The art of international negotiations. – Economics, 2011.
5. Izmailova M.A. Business Communication: Textbook. - 2nd edition. - M.: Dashkov i K, 2009. - 252 p.
6. Sharkov F.I. Communicology. Fundamentals of communication theory. – Dashkov & Co, 2011.
LOGISTICS
EDUCATIONAL PROCESS
For conducting classes, a personal computer, a multimedia projector, a projection screen are used.
STUDENT KNOWLEDGE CONTROL
Forms of current control
The current control of mastering the discipline is carried out in the form of checking independent work according to the point-rating system.
12.2 Form of intermediate control by discipline
Assessment report.
During the semester, the student must score 60 points.
On the test, a student can score 40 points.
To convert the score to the traditional one, the following scale is used:
0-60 points - fail;
61-70 points - satisfactory;
71-85 points - good;
86-100 points - excellent.
An approximate distribution of points by types of student work and forms of current control is shown in Table 4.
After summing up the points obtained during the study of the discipline and on the offset, the student's rating in the discipline is determined.
Table 4
Distribution of points by types of student work and forms of current control
| Subject | Type of occupation | Estimated time for one lesson, h | the date | Grade in points for the type of lesson | Maximum points per topic | |
| Topic 1. Business communications as a socio-psychological mechanism | AR | Lecture | ||||
| Practice | ||||||
| Practice | ||||||
| SR | Abstract preparation | |||||
| Preparation for the test | ||||||
| Topic 2. Business communication tools | AR | Lecture | ||||
| Lecture | ||||||
| Practice | ||||||
| Practice | ||||||
| Practice (testing on the topic) | ||||||
| SR | Abstract preparation | |||||
| Case Solution 1 | ||||||
| Preparation for the test | ||||||
| Topic 3. Psychological impacts in communications | AR | Lecture | ||||
| Lecture | ||||||
| Practice | ||||||
| Practice | ||||||
| Practice (testing on the topic) | ||||||
| SR | Abstract preparation | |||||
| Case 2 solution | ||||||
| Preparation for the test | ||||||
| Topic 4. Forms of business communication. | AR | Lecture | ||||
| Lecture | ||||||
| Practice | ||||||
| Practice | ||||||
| Practice | ||||||
| Practice (testing on the topic) | ||||||
| SR | Abstract preparation | |||||
| Case Solution 3 | ||||||
| Preparation for the test | ||||||
| Topic.5 Ethics and etiquette of business communication | AR | Lecture | ||||
| Lecture | ||||||
| Practice | ||||||
| Practice | ||||||
| Practice | ||||||
| Practice (testing on the topic) | ||||||
| SR | Abstract preparation | |||||
| Case 4 solution | ||||||
| Preparation for the test | ||||||
| Presentation of a report | ||||||
| Report opposition | ||||||
| Points for classroom work | ||||||
| Points for independent work | ||||||
| AR | offset | |||||
| SR | Preparation for the test | |||||
| Active class attendance | ||||||
| Active work in the classroom | ||||||
| no more than 10 points | ||||||
As a result of studying the material in this chapter, the student should:
know
- the main mechanisms of functioning and development trends of the modern Russian language;
- norms of modern literary language;
- conditions for the existence of linguistic variability;
- criteria for stylistic differentiation language features functional styles;
- logical foundations for the preparation and editorial editing of texts of professional and socially significant content;
be able to
- to differentiate normative and non-normative linguistic facts at all levels of the language;
- compose and edit texts of various functional styles;
- evaluate the dynamic phenomena of the functioning of the system of the modern Russian language;
- identify and analyze units of different levels of the language system;
- determine the functions of language and related phenomena;
own
- various ways of verbal and non-verbal communication, communication skills;
- criteria for differentiating linguistic units in the context of style;
- various stylistic means of communication in professional pedagogical activity;
- methods and ways of preparing and editing the text;
- the skills of analyzing the linguistic phenomena of the modern Russian language from the synchronous and diachronic points of view.
Russian literary language as the highest form of the national language. Signs of the literary language. Oral and written forms of the national language
Modern Russian is one of the richest languages in the world. The high merits of the Russian language are created by its enormous vocabulary, wide polysemy of words, a wealth of synonyms, an inexhaustible treasury of word formation, a large number of word forms, peculiarities of sounds, stress mobility, clear and harmonious syntax, a variety of stylistic resources.
It is necessary to distinguish between concepts Russian national language and literary Russian.
National language- the language of the Russian people - covers all spheres of speech activity, regardless of education, upbringing, place of residence, profession of people speaking it; includes dialects, jargons, i.e. The Russian national language is heterogeneous: it contains special varieties of the language. So, an intelligent, educated person uses words and expressions familiar to him, and an uneducated and rude person uses a set of other speech means. The speech of an academician or a journalist is not like the speech of a village old woman who speaks the local dialect. A tender mother chooses the most affectionate, sincere words for her baby, and an irritated teacher in kindergarten or an angry father speaks to a mischievous person in a different way... They all use one common Russian language. In contrast, literary language is a narrower concept; it is a language processed by masters of the word, scientists, public figures.
Concept definition
The most striking, in our opinion, detailed definition of the literary language is given by K. S. Gorbachevich in his textbook for teachers "Norms of the modern Russian literary language", which has gone through more than one edition: "Literary language is called the historically established highest (exemplary, processed) form of the national language, which has a rich lexical fund, an ordered grammatical structure and a developed system of styles.
The basic properties of the modern Russian literary language are:
- 1) the ability to express all the knowledge accumulated by mankind in all fields of activity; the semantic universality of the language, which determines its polyvalence, i.e. use in all speech areas;
- 2) its general obligatoriness norms as exemplary for everyone who owns and uses it, regardless of social, professional and territorial affiliation;
- 3) stylistic richness based on the presence of various options for designating the same semantic units (with or without additional shades) and means for special meanings appropriate only in certain speech situations.
Literary norm called the set of rules governing the use of words, pronunciation, spelling, the formation of words and their grammatical forms, the combination of words and the construction of sentences. In the literary language, all aspects of the national language are processed and normalized: vocabulary, pronunciation, writing, word formation, grammar. Accordingly, there are lexical, pronunciation, spelling, word-formation and grammatical norms.
Literary norms are formed over the long history of the language: the most commonly used ones are selected from the national language means, which in the minds of the speakers are evaluated as the most correct and obligatory for all. Literary and linguistic norms are enshrined in dictionaries, reference and educational literature. They are mandatory for radio and television, mass media, entertainment and public events. Literary and linguistic norms are the subject and purpose schooling Russian language, as well as teaching linguistic disciplines in universities.
The norm is one of the most important conditions for stability, unity and originality of the national language. However, it would be wrong to think that the literary norm is immovable: it develops and changes over time, and the degree mobility norms are not the same at different language levels. Orthoepic norms (literary pronunciation and stress) have undergone significant changes throughout the 20th century. Grammar norms (rules for the formation of words, phrases and sentences) turned out to be more stable. Their fluctuations are manifested in the occurrence options, some of which reflect the norm, while others are perceived as colloquial (or in other cases as colloquial, roughly colloquial). For example, in the plural forms of nouns are used: tractors - tractors, contracts are contracts. Such variants indicate fluctuations in the norm and are often transitional from an obsolete norm to a new one.
The development of literary language norms engaged in many generations of Russian educated people. MV Lomonosov, Η. M. Karamzin, A. S. Pushkin and other classics of Russian literature of the 19th–20th centuries. The norm is not a figment of the imagination of linguists, it is not created in the offices of dictionary compilers. The rules that determine the exemplary use of linguistic means are derived from linguistic practice: “Creating a language,” wrote V. G. Belinsky, “is impossible, because it is created by the people; philologists only discover its laws and bring them into a system, and writers only create on it according to these laws."
The literary norm has the most important social significance, protecting the national language from introducing everything accidental, private into it. Without firmly established language norms, people would not understand each other well. Thus, the modern Russian literary language is opposed to non-standardized linguistic facts, which currently include:
- 1) phenomena of a dialectal nature: "Poluzhie, cf. Meadow along the river. Det ordered me to go kasit on paluzha. Brother Karova walked on paluzha, they found Tom. Bras."; " Slime and slime. Glaze, w. Code sklizota, children roll on the streets. N-z. Wablivahu used to have strong mucus. Klim."; "She worked, w. Lifting lid, barrier that closes the cellar. She was such a heavy creature, no matter what she lifted, but she had a flu. Klim." ;
- 2) obsolete words - historicisms as the names of pre-existing objects and phenomena, archaisms as the former names of existing objects and phenomena. See, for example, in the work of D. M. Balashov "Mr. Velikiy Novgorod":" The boar was dumped after Mshagoya: he foolishly stuck his head in the convoy, barked survive"("Vyzhli, vyzhlitsa, vyzhlovka - a search, hound dog; a dog leading a pack is called a vyzhlovka, they run to her voice");
- 3) vocabulary for special purposes: "Seaside,-th, -os (special). Remote from the coast towards the open sea"; "Foraging,-a. m. 2. The degree of fattening of livestock (special) ";
- 4) slang words (army, journalistic, youth, criminal jargon). See, for example, "Dictionary of computer slang": " glitch – program crash. Coffin – The computer case. Victim – the computer is in the hands of the “teapot”. Carlson – fan, computer cooler. Paskudnik A person who programs in Pascal. plastosui – drive. nourished – power unit. Armpit- mouse pad. give a fuck- make a photocopy. Program- a state of higher satisfaction from doing programming";
- 5) vernacular as a kind of irregular speech that does not have a local characteristic (unlike dialects), but has specific features in the area:
- a) phonetics (contraction of vowels, increased volume, stretching intonation, simplification of the syllabic structure, reduction of consonant combinations, etc.);
- 6) morphology and word formation (alignment of a group of cases or conjugation system by analogy; grammatical meaning of the gender of nouns different from the literary language; declension of indeclinable nouns);
- c) vocabulary and lexical semantics (the presence of nominations that are absent in the literary language; the use of words in a meaning that is not characteristic of the literary language);
- d) syntax (special syntactic constructions).
For example, the token creature in the meaning of "2. An unworthy, vile person. (simple, contempt.)" is recorded in a modern lexicographic source. The stylistic marks indicated in parentheses indicate, firstly, that this unit belongs to the vernacular, which is not included in the literary language; secondly, that she has the status of contemptuous. lexeme mare in the same source it has an obnoxious meaning: "2. trans. About a tall, clumsy woman (simple. neglected)" . In the named meaning, this word is negatively evaluative, ns is not part of the literary language, it is dismissive. Nomination bitch (= "bitch") in the meaning "2. Scoundrel, scoundrel (simple, swearing)" includes a negative evaluative component; from a stylistic point of view, the word is not part of the literary language, it is abusive.
Terminology issues
It should be borne in mind that vernacular in this sense does not coincide with the term "literary vernacular" widely used in linguistics, which "is included in colloquial literary speech, constitutes the" lower "part, directly connected with the entire" ocean "of non-literary speech elements." At the same time, vernacular "asserts the most important function of literary vernacular in the structure of the literary language - the implementation and maintenance of vital for the latest connections with folk colloquial speech ".
The Russian literary language functions in the forms oral and written speech. Both of these speech forms use the same language units, but in different ways. Since oral speech and written speech are designed for different perceptions, they differ in lexical composition and syntactic constructions.
Target oral speech- the speed of transmission and perception of certain content. This speech is addressed directly to the interlocutor and is designed for auditory perception. She uses colloquial everyday, colloquial, sometimes dialectal vocabulary and phraseology. Its syntax is characterized by the frequent use of simple and incomplete sentences; word order is not always normal. In oral speech, compound constructions are more often used than complex subordinate constructions; participial and participle phrases are rarely used.
Most often, oral speech is dialogic, but it is also used in lectures, reports, speeches; then it has a monologic character, and in terms of vocabulary and syntax it approaches written speech. At the disposal of oral speech, in addition to lexical and grammatical means, there are also auxiliary means of conveying thoughts: facial expressions, gestures, intonation, pauses, and the possibility of repetition.
Written speech differs from the oral language primarily by a complex system of graphics and spelling, through which this or that content is transmitted. In lexical and grammatical terms, it is characterized by strict adherence to the literary norms of the language - a special selection of vocabulary and phraseology, a well-developed syntax. Book vocabulary is widely used in written speech: official business, scientific, public and journalistic. The syntax of written speech is characterized by complex and complicated constructions; word order, strict sequence, harmony in the presentation of thoughts are of great importance. The written form of speech is distinguished by preliminary reflection of statements, editorial processing of the text, which can be performed by the author himself. This determines the accuracy and correctness of the written form of speech.
The content of the article
LITERARY LANGUAGE, supra-dialect subsystem (form of existence) of the national language, which is characterized by such features as normativity, codification, polyfunctionality, stylistic differentiation, high social prestige among native speakers of this national language. The literary language is the main means of serving the communicative needs of society; it is opposed to non-codified subsystems of the national language - territorial dialects, urban koine (urban vernacular), professional and social jargons.
The concept of a literary language can be defined both on the basis of the linguistic properties inherent in a given subsystem of the national language, and by delimiting the totality of carriers of this subsystem, separating it from the general composition of people who speak this language. The first way of definition is linguistic, the second is sociological.
An example of a linguistic approach to elucidating the essence of a literary language is the definition given by M.V. Panov: “If in one of the synchronous varieties of the language of a given people a non-functional variety of units is overcome (it is less than in other varieties), then this variety serves as a literary language according to towards others."
This definition reflects such important properties of the literary language as its consistent normalization (not only the presence of a single norm, but also its conscious cultivation), the general obligatory nature of its norms for all speakers of a given literary language, the communicatively expedient use of means (it follows from the tendency to their functional differentiation) and some others. The definition has a differentiating power: it delimits the literary language from other social and functional subsystems of the national language.
However, for solving some problems in the study of language, a proper linguistic approach to the definition of a literary language is not enough. For example, it does not give an answer to the question of which segments of the population should be considered the bearers of a given subsystem, and in this sense a definition based on purely linguistic considerations is non-operational. In this case, there is a different, "external" principle for defining the concept of "literary language" - through the totality of its speakers.
In accordance with this principle, the literary language is that subsystem of the national language, which is spoken by persons with the following three features: (1) this language is their native language; (2) they were born and/or long time(all life or most of it) live in the city; (3) they have a higher or secondary education obtained in educational institutions where all subjects are taught in that language. Such a definition corresponds to the traditional idea of the literary language as the language of the educated, cultural part of the people. Let us show, using the example of the modern Russian literary language, how significant indicated signs to identify the totality of carriers of the literary form of the national language.
Firstly, persons for whom Russian is not their native language, even when the speaker speaks it fluently, reveal features in their speech that are to some extent due to the influence of their native language. This deprives the researcher of the opportunity to consider such people linguistically homogeneous with persons for whom Russian is their native language.
Secondly, it is quite obvious that the city contributes to the collision and mutual influence of speech elements of different dialects, the mixing of dialects. The influence of the language of radio, television, the press, and the speech of the educated sections of the population is much more intense in the city than in the countryside. In addition, in the countryside, the literary language is opposed by an organized system of one dialect (although - in modern conditions- significantly shaken by the influence of literary speech), and in the city - a kind of interdialect, the components of which are among themselves in unstable, changing relationships. This leads to the leveling of dialectal speech features or to their localization (cf. "family languages") or to their complete displacement under the pressure of literary speech. Therefore, people, although born in the countryside, but living in cities all their conscious lives, should also be included, along with the native townspeople, in the concept of "city dwellers" and, ceteris paribus, in the concept of "native speakers of the literary language".
Thirdly, the criterion of “higher or secondary education” is important because the years of study at school and university contribute to a more complete, more perfect mastery of the norms of the literary language, the elimination from a person’s speech of features that contradict these norms, reflecting a dialect or colloquial usage.
If the need for the above three features as an aggregate criterion for distinguishing the commonality of speakers of a literary language seems to be beyond doubt, then their sufficiency requires more detailed justifications. And that's why.
Intuitively, it is quite clear that within the community thus distinguished, there are quite large differences in the degree of mastery of the literary norm. Indeed, a university professor - and a worker with a secondary education, a journalist or writer who professionally deals with the word - and a factory engineer or geologist, whose professions are not based on the use of language, a language teacher - and a taxi driver, a native Muscovite - and a native of the Kostroma village, who has lived in the capital since childhood - all these and other representatives of heterogeneous social, professional and territorial groups turn out to be united in one set of “native speakers of the literary language”. Meanwhile, it is obvious that they speak this language in different ways and the degree of approximation of their speech to the ideal literary one is very different. They are located, as it were, at different distances from the “normative core” of the literary language: the deeper the linguistic culture of a person, the stronger his professional connection with the word, the closer his speech to this core, the more perfect the mastery of the literary norm and, on the other hand, the more justified conscious deviations from it in practical speech activity.
What unites such socially, professionally and culturally heterogeneous groups of people, in addition to the three signs we have put forward? All of them in their speech practice follow the literary language tradition (and not, say, dialectal or vernacular), are guided by the literary norm.
Researchers note one important property of the Russian literary language of our days: in contrast to such languages as, for example, Latin, which was used as a literary language in a number of countries of medieval Europe, as well as from artificial languages such as Esperanto, which are originally literary and do not branch into functional or social subsystems, the Russian literary language is heterogeneous (this property is also inherent in many other modern literary languages). It seems that this conclusion contradicts the main axiom associated with the status of the literary language - the axiom about the unity and universal validity of the norm for all speakers of the literary language, about its codification as one of the main properties. However, in reality, both the named axiom and the property of heterogeneity not only coexist together, but also complement and support each other. Indeed, considered from the proper linguistic, communicative and social points of view, the property of heterogeneity of the literary language turns into such phenomena characteristic of it as variable ways of expressing the same meaning (this is the basis of the system of paraphrasing, without which true mastery of any natural language is unthinkable). ), the plurality of the implementation of systemic potentialities, the stylistic and communicative gradation of the means of the literary language, the use of certain categories of linguistic units as a means of social symbolism (cf. social differences in the ways of parting, provided for by the norm of the modern Russian literary language: from socially goodbye to colloquial Bye and jargon hop and Chao) etc. The norm of the literary language, having the property of unity and universality, does not prohibit, but suggests various, variable ways of speech. And from this point of view, variability, as one of the manifestations of more common property heterogeneity is a natural, normal phenomenon in the literary language.
The heterogeneity of the literary language is also manifested in its locally and socially determined variability: with a common and unified set of means of the literary language (phonetic, lexical, grammatical) and the rules for their use, these means differ in the frequency of their use by different groups of speakers.
The heterogeneity of the literary language has both social and linguistic manifestations; it is reflected in three main forms: 1) in the heterogeneity of the composition of carriers - substrate heterogeneity; 2) in the variation of linguistic means depending on the social characteristics of the speakers (age, social affiliation, profession, level of education, territorial characteristics, etc.) - social, or stratification, heterogeneity; 3) in the variation of language means depending on communicative and stylistic factors - functional heterogeneity.
The division of the literary language in functional and stylistic terms
“gradually”: the first, most obvious, is the dichotomy of book-written and spoken languages. Calling this division of the literary language into two functional varieties “the most general and most indisputable,” D.N. Shmelev wrote about this: “At all stages of the development of the literary language, even when literacy and proficiency in a particular bookish language, speakers in general never lose the sense of the difference between "how one can say" and "how one should write".
book language
- the achievement and heritage of culture. It is the main carrier and transmitter of cultural information. All types of indirect, distant communication are carried out by means of the book language. Scientific works, fiction, business correspondence, legislation, newspaper and magazine products, and even such oral in form, but in general, strictly codified areas of the use of the literary language, such as radio and television, cannot be imagined without the bookish language.
Modern literary language is a powerful means of communication. Unlike another variety - the colloquial literary language (and even more so unlike such subsystems of the national language as dialects and vernacular), it is multifunctional: it is suitable for use in various areas of communication, for various purposes and for expressing the most diverse content. The written form, as the main form of realization of the bookish language, determines another important property of it: writing “lengthens the lifetime of each text (oral tradition gradually changes the text); thus it enhances the ability of the literary language to be a link between generations. Writing stabilizes the language, slows down its development, and thereby improves it: for a literary language, slow development is good” (M.V. Panov).
Spoken variety of the literary language
is an independent and self-sufficient system inside common system literary language, with its own set of units and rules for their combination with each other, used by native speakers of the literary language in conditions of direct, not prepared in advance communication in informal relations between speakers.
The spoken literary language is not codified: certain norms certainly apply in it (due to which, for example, it is easy to distinguish the oral speech of a native speaker from the oral speech of a native speaker of a dialect or vernacular), but these norms have developed historically and are not consciously regulated by anyone and are not fixed in the form of any rules and recommendations. Thus, codification / non-codification is another, and very significant, feature that distinguishes the bookish and colloquial varieties of the literary language.
functional styles.
The next step in the division of the literary language is the division of each of its varieties - book and spoken languages - into functional styles. According to the definition of V.V. Vinogradov, functional style is “a socially conscious and functionally conditioned, internally integrated set of methods of using, selecting and combining means of speech communication in the sphere of one or another nationwide, nationwide language, correlative with other similar ways of expression that serve for other purposes, perform other functions in the speech social practice of a given people. In short, the variants of the literary language, due to various areas of communication, are functional styles.
In the modern Russian book literary language, the following functional styles are distinguished: scientific, official business, journalistic, religious and preaching. Sometimes the language of fiction is also referred to as functional styles. But this is not true: in a prose or poetic text, both elements of all the indicated styles of the literary language, as well as units of non-codified subsystems - dialects, vernacular, jargons (compare, for example, the prose of I.E. Babel, M.M. Zoshchenko, V .P. Astafiev, V.P. Aksenov, some poems by E.A. Evtushenko, A.A. Voznesensky and others). The writer subordinates the selection and use of these means to the artistic and aesthetic goals that he seeks to achieve in his work.
The spoken language is not divided so clearly into functional styles, which is quite understandable: the bookish language is consciously cultivated, society as a whole and its various groups and institutions are interested in the functional flexibility of the bookish language (without this, the effective development of such areas of public life as science, lawmaking is impossible). , office work, mass communication, etc.); the spoken language develops spontaneously, without guiding efforts on the part of society. However, here, too, some differences can be observed, determined by (a) the scope of the spoken language, (b) the communicative goals of speech, (c) the social characteristics of the speaker and the listener and the psychological relationship between them, as well as some other variables.
So, family conversations and dialogues of colleagues differ; conversation with the child and communication of adults; speech acts of condemnation or reproach and speech acts of request or exhortation, etc.
speech genres.
Functional styles are divided into speech genres. A speech genre is a collection of speech works (texts or utterances), which, on the one hand, has specific features that distinguish this genre from the others, and on the other hand, a certain commonality, which is due to the belonging of a certain group of genres to one functional style.
So, within the scientific style, such speech genres as an article, monograph, textbook, review, review, annotation, abstract, scientific text commentary, lecture, report on a special topic, etc. are distinguished. The official business style is implemented in the texts of such speech genres, as a law, a decree, a decree, a resolution, a diplomatic note, a communiqué, various types of legal documentation: a statement of claim, an interrogation protocol, an indictment, an examination report, a cassation complaint, etc.; such genres of official business style as a statement, certificate, explanatory note, report, announcement, etc. are widely used. The journalistic style includes such speech genres as correspondence in a newspaper, essay, reportage, review on international topics, interviews, sports commentary, speech at a meeting, etc.
In the functional-stylistic varieties of the spoken language, speech genres are not as clearly opposed to each other as the speech genres of the bookish language. In addition, the genre and stylistic diversity of colloquial speech has not yet been sufficiently studied. The results available in this area of research make it possible to single out the following speech genres of the spoken language. According to the number of speakers and the nature of their participation in communication, a story, a dialogue and a polylogue are distinguished (i.e., “a conversation of several persons”: this term arose on the basis of an erroneous isolation in the borrowed from the Greek word “dialogue” of a part with the meaning “two” and, accordingly , understanding it as a "conversation of two persons"). According to the target orientation, the nature of the situation and social roles participants in communication can be distinguished such varieties as a family conversation at the dinner table, a dialogue of colleagues on everyday and professional topics, a reprimand from an adult to a child, a conversation between a person and an animal (for example, with a dog), squabbles, various genres of speech invective and some others.
Characteristic properties of the literary language.
So, the literary language is characterized by the following properties that distinguish it from other subsystems of the national language:
1) normalization; at the same time, the literary norm is the result of not only a linguistic tradition, but also a purposeful codification, fixed in grammars and dictionaries;
2) the consistent functional differentiation of means and the associated permanent tendency towards the functional differentiation of options;
3) polyfunctionality: the literary language is able to serve the communicative needs of any field of activity;
4) communicative expediency; this property naturally follows from the division of the literary language into functional styles and speech genres;
5) the stability and well-known conservatism of the literary language, its slow changeability: the literary norm should lag behind the development of lively speech (cf. the well-known aphorism of A.M. what will be"). This property of the literary language is of exceptional cultural significance: it provides a connection between successive generations of speakers of a given national language, their mutual understanding.
In social and communicative relations, one of the most important properties
literary language is its high social prestige: being a component of culture, the literary language is such a communicative subsystem of the national language that all speakers are guided by, regardless of whether they own this subsystem or any other.
Table of contents
Introduction………………………………………………………………………….1
Literary language…………………………………………………………….2
Dialect, jargon, argotism……………………………………………………….4
Book and literary colloquial language………………………………...6
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….8
References………………………………………………………………...9
Introduction
“Language is created by the people,” said A.M. Gorky. - The division of the language into literary and folk only means that we have, so to speak, a "raw" language and processed by masters. The first who perfectly understood this was Pushkin, he was the first to show how to use the speech material of the people, how to process it.
So what is literary language? There is a clear definition of this phrase.
The literary language is basically a national language, processed and creatively enriched by the masters of the word, therefore it must be considered as the highest achievement of the speech culture of the people. This is the highest form of the national language, the result of the speech creativity of the whole people, led by its outstanding masters of the word. The means and norms of literary expression are not only created by all native speakers, but - which is very important - are carefully and carefully protected by society as a great cultural value. The activity of the masters of the word, as it were, leads and crowns this entire creative process.
But such rigor in the definition of the greatest Russian language is unthinkable. For many centuries, the great Russian poets tried to give the everyday Russian language a literary touch.
In our work, the goal is to consider the emergence of the term "literary language", its changes over time and its varieties.
Literary language
Literary language - mutual language the writing of one or another people, and sometimes several peoples - the language of official business documents, school education, written and everyday communication, science, journalism, fiction, all manifestations of culture, expressed in verbal form, more often written, but sometimes oral. That is why the written and bookish and oral and colloquial forms of the literary language differ, the emergence, correlation and interaction of which are subject to certain historical patterns.
It is difficult to point to another linguistic phenomenon that would be understood in such a different way as the literary language. Some are convinced that the literary language is the same national language, only "polished" by the masters of the language, i.e. writers, artists of the word; supporters of this view, first of all, have in mind the literary language of modern times, and, moreover, among peoples with a rich artistic literature. Others believe that the literary language is the language of writing, the language of the book, opposed to living speech, the language of conversation. Still others believe that the literary language is a language that is generally significant for a given people, in contrast to the dialect and jargon, which do not have signs of such general significance. Supporters of this view sometimes argue that the literary language can exist in the pre-literate period as the language of folk verbal and poetic creativity or customary law.
The presence of different understandings of the phenomenon denoted by the term "literary language" testifies to the insufficient disclosure by science of the specifics of this phenomenon, its place in the general system of language, its function, its social role. Meanwhile, with all the differences in the understanding of this phenomenon, the literary language is a linguistic reality that cannot be doubted. The literary language is a means of developing social life, the material and spiritual progress of a given people, an instrument of social struggle, as well as a means of educating the masses and familiarizing them with the achievements of national culture, science and technology. Literary language is always the result of collective creative activity.
The study of a literary language, no matter how it is understood, entails the study of such phenomena as "dialects", "jargons", on the one hand, "spoken language", "written language" - on the other, linguistic, speech and literary "style - from the third. The study of the literary language is closely connected with the study of literature, the history of the language, and the history of the culture of a given people. With some historical uncertainty in understanding the essence of the literary language, it is one of the most effective tools of education and comes into contact with the tasks of education and schools. All this testifies to the paramount scientific and practical significance of the problem of the literary language. one
Literary language can be divided into territorial language (dialects), social language (jargon, vernacular), professional language (argotism). It is also necessary to highlight the division of the literary language into varieties; book literary language and colloquial literary language.
Dialect, jargon and argotism
Dialect - (from the Greek. "to speak, to speak") a kind of language that is used as a means of communication between people connected by one territory. A dialect is a complete system of speech communication (oral or signed, but not necessarily written) with its own vocabulary and grammar. Traditionally, dialects were understood, first of all, as rural territorial dialects.
In sociolinguistics and at the everyday level, dialects are opposed to the standard, or literary language. From this point of view, the dialect is characterized by the following features:
- social, age and, to some extent, gender limitations on the circle of dialect speakers (in Russia, these are mainly rural residents of the older generation);
limiting the scope of the use of the dialect to family and everyday situations;
the formation of semi-dialects as a result of the interaction and mutual influence of various dialects and the related restructuring of relations between the elements of dialect systems;
leveling the originality of dialect speech under the influence of the literary language (through the media, books, the education system, etc.) and the emergence of intermediate forms - for example, dialect-colored literary speech.
Jargon is a social dialect; differs from the common language in specific vocabulary and phraseology, expressiveness of phrases and the special use of word-formation means, but does not have its own phonetic and grammatical system. Part of the slang vocabulary belongs not to one, but to many (including those that have already disappeared) social groups. Passing from one jargon to another, the words of their “general fund” can change their form and meaning: “dark” in slang - “hide prey”, then - “cunning (during interrogation)”, in modern youth jargon - “speak unclear, evade from the answer."
The main function of jargon is to express belonging to a relatively autonomous social group through the use of specific words, forms and phrases. Sometimes the term jargon is used to refer to distorted, bad speech. The vocabulary of jargon is built on the basis of the literary language through rethinking, metaphorization, reformulation, sound truncation, etc., as well as active assimilation of foreign words and morphemes. For example: cool - “fashionable”, “business”, hut - “apartment”, bucks - “dollars”, car - “car”, jerk - “go”, basketball - “basketball”, dude - “guy” from the gypsy language . In the modern language, jargon has become widespread, especially in the language of youth (youth slang). Social jargon first arose in the 18th century among the nobles ("salon" jargon) (example: "plaisir" - pleasure).
Argotisms (French, singular argotisme), words and expressions of colloquial speech, borrowed from various social, professional dialects. In a semantically transformed form, they are used in vernacular and slang, retaining their bright expressive coloring. In the language of fiction, argotisms are used as a means of stylistic characteristics, mainly in the speech of characters, as well as in the author's speech in the "skazka" manner of narration.
Book and colloquial literary language
Book language is an achievement and heritage of culture. He is the main custodian and transmitter of cultural information. All types of indirect (distant) communication are carried out by means of the book language. Scientific works, fiction and educational literature, diplomatic and business correspondence, newspaper and magazine products and much more cannot be imagined without the literary language. Its functions are enormous and with the development of civilization they become even more complicated. The modern Russian literary language is a powerful communication tool. It has all the means necessary for the various purposes of communication, and, above all, for the expression of abstract concepts and relations.
The complex connections traced by scientists and writers in the material and spiritual world are described in scientific language. Oral, colloquial speech is not suitable for this: it is impossible to pass from mouth to mouth syntactically cumbersome texts, saturated with special terminology and complex in meaning. The property of book and written speech to preserve the text and thereby enhance the ability of the literary language to be a link between generations is one of the main properties of the book language.
A colloquial variety of the literary language, used in various types of everyday relations of people, provided that communication is easy. Conversational speech is distinguished from written and written speech not only by the form (this is oral and, moreover, predominantly dialogic speech), but also by such features as unpreparedness, unplannedness, spontaneity (compare, for example, with reading a report, the text of which is written in advance), the immediacy of I contact between participants in the conversation.
The colloquial variety of the literary language, unlike the written one, is not subject to purposeful normalization, but it has certain norms as a result of the speech tradition. This kind of literary language is not so clearly divided into speech genres. However, here, too, various speech features can be distinguished - depending on the conditions in which communication takes place, on the relationship of the participants in the conversation, etc. compare, for example, the conversation of friends, colleagues, a conversation at the table, a conversation between an adult and a child, a dialogue between a seller and a buyer and etc.
Conclusion
The splendor of the Russian language is famous for all nations. As for the term "literary language", some of its shortcomings are the well-known ambiguity - the ability to use it in two meanings: as a designation of the language of fiction and as a designation of a processed form of language.
On the other hand, the invariable and constant quality of the literary language, which always distinguishes it from other forms of existence of the language and most fully expresses its specificity, is the processing of the language and the selection and relative regulation associated with it.
We have introduced several varieties of the literary language:
- Dialect,
Jargon,
argotism,
Book literary language,
Spoken literary language.
Bibliography
1.
Vinogradov V. V. “Selected Works. History of the Russian literary language "- M., 1978. - S. 288-297
2.
Shakhmatov A. A. "Essay on the modern Russian literary language" - M., 1941.
The deeper we go into history, the less indisputable facts and reliable information we have, especially if we are interested in non-material problems, for example: linguistic consciousness, mentality, attitude towards linguistic phenomena and the status of linguistic units. You can ask eyewitnesses about the events of the recent past, find written evidence, maybe even photo and video materials. And what to do if none of this exists: native speakers have long been dead, material evidence of their speech is fragmentary or absent at all, much has been lost or has undergone later editing?
It is impossible to hear how the ancient Vyatichi spoke, which means it is impossible to understand how much different written language Slavs from oral tradition. There is no evidence of how Novgorodians perceived the speech of the people of Kiev or the language of Metropolitan Hilarion's sermons, which means that the question of the dialect division of the Old Russian language remains without an unambiguous answer. It is impossible to determine the actual degree of proximity of the languages of the Slavs at the end of the 1st millennium AD, and therefore, to accurately answer the question of whether the artificial Old Slavonic language created on South Slavic soil was perceived equally by the Bulgarians and the Russians.
Of course, the painstaking work of language historians bears fruit: the study and comparison of texts from different genres, styles, eras and territories; data of comparative linguistics and dialectology, indirect evidence of archeology, history, ethnography allow us to recreate a picture of the distant past. However, one must understand that the analogy with the picture here is much deeper than it seems at first glance: reliable data obtained in the process of studying the ancient states of the language are only separate fragments of a single canvas, between which there are white spots (than ancient period, the more there are) missing data. Thus, a complete picture is created, completed by the researcher on the basis of indirect data, fragments surrounding the white spot, known principles and the most probable possibilities. This means that errors and different interpretations of the same facts and events are possible.
At the same time, even in distant history there are indisputable facts, one of which is the Baptism of Russia. The nature of this process, the role of certain actors, the dating of specific events remain the subjects of scientific and pseudo-scientific discussions, however, it is known without any doubt that at the end of the 1st millennium AD. state Eastern Slavs, designated in modern historiography as Kievan Rus, adopts Byzantine Christianity as the state religion and officially switches to Cyrillic writing. Whatever views the researcher holds, whatever data he uses, it is impossible to bypass these two facts. Everything else about this period, even the sequence of these events and the causal relationships between them, is constantly becoming a subject of dispute. Chronicles adhere to the version: Christianity brought culture to Russia and gave writing, while at the same time retaining references to agreements concluded and signed in two languages between Byzantium and still pagan Russians. There are also references to the presence in Russia of pre-Christian writing, for example, among Arab travelers.
But at the moment, something else is important for us: at the end of the 1st millennium AD. language situation Ancient Russia undergoes significant changes caused by a change in the state religion. Whatever the situation before this, the new religion brought with it a special linguistic layer, canonically fixed in writing - the Old Slavonic language, which (in the form of the Russian national variant - the edition - the Church Slavonic language) from that moment became an integral element of Russian culture and Russian linguistic mentality. In the history of the Russian language, this phenomenon has been called "the first South Slavic influence."
The scheme of the formation of the Russian language
We will return to this scheme. In the meantime, we need to understand what elements the new linguistic situation in Ancient Russia began to take shape after the adoption of Christianity, and what in this new situation can be identified with the concept of "literary language".
First of all, there was an oral Old Russian language, represented by very different, capable of eventually reaching the level of closely related languages, and almost no different dialects ( Slavic languages by this time they had not yet completely overcome the stage of dialects of a single Proto-Slavic language). In any case, it had a certain history and was developed enough to serve all walks of life. ancient Russian state, i.e. had sufficient linguistic means not only to be used in everyday communication, but also to serve the diplomatic, legal, commercial, religious and cultural (oral folk art) spheres.
Secondly, the Old Slavonic written language appeared, introduced by Christianity to serve religious needs and gradually spread to the sphere of culture and literature.
Thirdly, there had to be a state-business written language for conducting diplomatic, legal and trade correspondence and documentation, as well as for household needs.
It is here that the question of the closeness of the Slavic languages to each other and the perception of Church Slavonic by the speakers of the Old Russian language turns out to be extremely relevant. If the Slavic languages were still very close to each other, then it is likely that, while learning to write according to Church Slavonic patterns, the Russians perceived the differences between languages as the difference between oral and written speech (we say “karova” - we write “cow”). Consequently, at the initial stage, the entire sphere of written speech was given to the Church Slavonic language, and only with the passage of time, in conditions of increasing divergence, Old Russian elements began to penetrate into it, primarily into non-spiritual texts, moreover, in the status of colloquial ones. Which ultimately led to the marking of the Old Russian elements as simple, “low”, and the surviving Old Slavonic elements as “high” (for example, turn - rotate, milk - the Milky Way, freak - holy fool).
If the differences were already significant, noticeable to speakers, then the language that came with Christianity became associated with religion, philosophy, education (since education was carried out by copying the texts of Holy Scripture). The solution of domestic, legal, and other material issues, as in the pre-Christian period, continued to be carried out with the help of the Old Russian language, both in oral and written spheres. Which would lead to the same consequences, but with different initial data.
An unequivocal answer here is practically impossible, since at the moment there is simply not enough initial data: very few texts have come down to us from the early period of Kievan Rus, most of them are religious monuments. The rest was preserved in later lists, where the differences between Church Slavonic and Old Russian can be both original and appeared later. Now let's return to the question of the literary language. It is clear that in order to use this term in the conditions of the Old Russian language space, it is necessary to correct the meaning of the term in relation to the situation of the absence of both the very idea of the language norm and the means of state and public control of the state of the language (dictionaries, reference books, grammars, laws, etc.).
So, what is the literary language in modern world? There are many definitions of this term, but in fact it is a stable version of the language that meets the needs of the state and society and ensures the continuity of the transmission of information and the preservation of the national worldview. It cuts off everything that is actually or declaratively unacceptable for society and the state at this stage: it supports linguistic censorship, stylistic differentiation; ensures the preservation of the riches of the language (even those unclaimed by the language situation of the era, for example: charming, young lady, many-sided) and the prevention of the language that has not passed the test of time (new formations, borrowings, etc.).
What ensures the stability of the language variant? Due to the existence of fixed language norms, which are marked as an ideal version of a given language and are passed on to the next generations, which ensures the continuity of linguistic consciousness, preventing linguistic changes.
Obviously, with any use of the same term, in this case it is “literary language”, the essence and main functions of the phenomenon described by the term must remain unchanged, otherwise the principle of unambiguity of the terminological unit is violated. What is changing? After all, it is no less obvious that the literary language of the XXI century. and the literary language of Kievan Rus differ significantly from each other.
The main changes occur in the ways of maintaining the stability of the language variant and the principles of interaction between the subjects of the linguistic process. In modern Russian, the means of maintaining stability are:
- language dictionaries (explanatory, spelling, orthoepic, phraseological, grammatical, etc.), grammars and grammar reference books, Russian language textbooks for schools and universities, programs for teaching the Russian language at school, Russian language and culture of speech at a university, laws and legislative acts of state language- means of fixing the norm and informing about the norm of society;
- teaching in high school Russian language and Russian literature, publication of works by Russian classics and classical folklore for children, proofreading and editorial work in publishing houses; compulsory Russian language exams for school graduates, emigrants and migrants, compulsory course of the Russian language and culture of speech at the university, state programs to support the Russian language: for example, the “Year of the Russian Language”, programs to support the status of the Russian language in the world, targeted festive events (their funding and publicity): Day Slavic writing and culture, the Day of the Russian Language - means of forming the bearers of the norm and maintaining the status of the norm in society.
The system of relations between the subjects of the literary language process
We return to the past. It is clear that there was no complex and multi-level system for maintaining the stability of the language in Kievan Rus, as well as the very concept of "norm" in the absence of scientific description language, full-fledged language education and a system of language censorship that allows you to identify and correct errors and prevent their further spread. Actually, there was no concept of "error" in its modern sense.
However, there was already (and there is enough indirect evidence of this) the rulers of Russia realized the possibilities of a single literary language in strengthening the state and forming the nation. Strange as it may sound, Christianity, as described in The Tale of Bygone Years, most likely, indeed, was chosen from several options. Chosen as a national idea. Obviously, the development of the East Slavic state at some point faced the need to strengthen statehood and unite the tribes into a single people. This explains why the process of converting to another religion, which usually occurs either for deep personal reasons or for political reasons, is presented in the annals as a free, conscious choice from all the options available at that time. A strong unifying idea was needed, not contradicting the key, fundamental for the worldview ideas of the tribes from which the nation was formed. After the choice was made, to use modern terminology, a broad campaign was launched to implement the national idea, which included:
- bright mass actions (for example, the famous baptism of Kyivans in the Dnieper);
- historical justification (chronicles);
- publicistic support (for example, Metropolitan Hilarion's "Sermon on Law and Grace", where not only the differences between the Old and New Testaments are analyzed and the principles of the Christian worldview are explained, but a parallel is drawn between the correct arrangement of the inner world of a person, which Christianity gives, and the correct arrangement of the state which is provided by a peaceful Christian consciousness and autocracy, protecting from internal strife and allowing the state to become strong and stable);
- means of disseminating and maintaining the national idea: translation activities (actively started already under Yaroslav the Wise), the creation of their own book tradition, schooling3;
- the formation of an intelligentsia - an educated social stratum - a carrier and, more importantly, a repeater of the national idea (Vladimir purposefully teaches children to know, forms the priesthood; Yaroslav gathers scribes and translators, seeks permission from Byzantium to form a national higher clergy, etc.).
The successful implementation of the “state program” required a socially significant, common language (language variant) for the whole people, having a high status and a developed written tradition. In the modern understanding of the main linguistic terms, these are signs of the literary language, and in the linguistic situation of Ancient Russia in the 11th century. - Church Slavonic
Functions and features of the literary and Church Slavonic language
Thus, it turns out that after Baptism, the national variant of Old Church Slavonic, Church Slavonic, becomes the literary language of Ancient Russia. However, the development of the Old Russian language does not stand still, and, despite the adaptation of the Church Slavonic language to the needs of the East Slavic tradition in the process of forming a national recension, the gap between Old Russian and Church Slavonic begins to grow. The situation is worsened by several factors.
1. The already mentioned evolution of the living Old Russian language against the background of the stability of the literary Church Slavonic, which weakly and inconsistently reflects even processes common to all Slavs (for example, the fall of the reduced ones: weak reduced ones continue, albeit not everywhere, to be recorded in the monuments of both the 12th and 13th centuries. ).
2. Using a sample as a norm that maintains stability (i.e. learning to write goes by repeatedly copying the model form, it also acts as the only measure of the correctness of the text: if I don’t know how to write it, I have to look at the sample or remember it ). Let's consider this factor in more detail.
We have already said that for the normal existence of the literary language, special means are needed to protect it from the influence of the national language. They ensure the preservation of a stable and unchanged state of the literary language for the maximum possible period of time. Such means are called the norms of the literary language and are recorded in dictionaries, grammars, collections of rules, textbooks. This allows the literary language to ignore living processes as long as it does not begin to contradict the national linguistic consciousness. In the pre-scientific period, when there is no description of language units, tradition, a model, becomes a means of using a model to maintain the stability of the literary language: instead of the principle “I write this way because it is right”, the principle “I write this way because I see (or remember ) how to write it. This is quite reasonable and convenient when the main activity of the bearer of the book tradition becomes the rewriting of books (that is, replicating texts by manual copying). The main task of the scribe in this case is precisely to strictly observe the presented pattern. This approach determines many features of the ancient Russian cultural tradition:
- a small number of texts in culture;
- anonymity;
- canonicity;
- a small number of genres;
- stability of turns and verbal constructions;
- traditional figurative and expressive means.
If modern literature does not accept worn out metaphors, unoriginal comparisons, hackneyed phrases and strives for maximum uniqueness of the text, then ancient Russian literature and, by the way, oral folk art, on the contrary, tried to use proven, recognized linguistic means; to express a certain type of thought, they tried to use the traditional method of registration accepted by society. Hence the absolutely conscious anonymity: “I, by God’s command, put information into tradition” - this is the canon of life, this is the life of a saint - “I just put the events that were in the traditional form in which they should be stored.” And if a modern author writes in order to be seen or heard, then the Old Russian wrote because he had to convey this information. Therefore, the number of original books turned out to be small.
However, over time, the situation began to change, and the sample, as the custodian of the stability of the literary language, showed a significant drawback: it was neither universal nor mobile. The higher the originality of the text, the more difficult it was for the scribe to rely on memory, which means that he had to write not “as it is written in the sample”, but “as I think it should be written”. The application of this principle brought into the text elements of a living language that conflicted with tradition and provoked doubts in the scribe: “I see (or I remember) different spellings of the same word, which means there is a mistake somewhere, but where”? Either statistics helped (“I saw this option more often”), or living language (“how do I say it”?). Sometimes, however, hyper-correction worked: “I say this, but I usually write not the way I speak, so I’ll write it the way they don’t say it.” Thus, the sample as a means of maintaining stability under the influence of several factors began to gradually lose its effectiveness.
3. The existence of writing not only in Church Slavonic, but also in Old Russian(legal, business, diplomatic writing).
4. The limited scope of the use of the Church Slavonic language (it was perceived as the language of faith, religion, Holy Scripture, therefore, native speakers had the feeling that it was wrong to use it for something less high, more mundane).
All these factors, under the influence of the catastrophic weakening of centralized state power, the weakening of educational activities, led to the fact that the literary language entered a phase of a protracted crisis, culminating in the formation of Muscovite Rus.