On the Reasons for the Growth of Analyticism and Productivity of Non-Idiomatic Nominations in the Russian Language of our Days

Abstract

The article is aimed at finding ways for a systematically grounded determination of the causes of diachronic changes in any language, i.e. at the creation a way to explain any linguistic changes not by arbitrarily chosen single causes, but as a result of the interaction of social factors and intralinguistic factors caused by them. The article focuses on two processes taking place in the modern Russian language: the loss of declension by toponyms ending in -in(o), -ov(o) (for example, Ya zhivu v Pushkino / Butovo instead of Ya zhivu v Pushkine / Butove) and the replacement of the toponymic model Pushkinskaya ulitsa (ʻPushkin streetʼ) with the model ulitsa Pushkina (ʻthe street of Pushkinʼ). It is shown that the initial cause of both phenomena is social. It consists in strengthening the internal migration of the Russian population, as well as in the widespread dissemination of the media. As a result, the language community begins to consist of such native speakers who previously lived in different regions of the country or belonged to different social groups and therefore have mismatched background knowledge. The inability to rely on the knowledge of the recipients forces senders of messages, firstly, to avoid using am- biguous case forms (for example, when following the old norm in the sentence Ya zhivu v Pushkine, it remains unclear what the initial form of the toponym is: Pushkin or Pushkino), and secondly, to avoid using idiomatic toponymic models, since they do not make it possible to determine from which word the toponym is derived (the modern non-idiomatic toponym ulitsa Akademika Komarova (ʻStreet of Academician Komarovʼ) is much more unambiguous than the toponyms Komarovskaya ulitsa (ʻKomarovskaya Streetʼ) or ulitsa Komarovka (ʻKomarovka Streetʼ) built according to the old model).

References

1. Baranov A.N., Dobrovol’skii D.O. 2020. Idiomatichnost’ [Idiomaticity]. In Moldovan A.M. (ed.) Russkii yazyk: Entsiklopediya [Russian Language: Encyclopedia]. Moscow, “AST-PRESS ShKOLA Publ”. (In Russ.)

2. Valgina N.S. 2003. Aktivnye protsessy v sovremennom russkom yazyke [Active Processes in Modern Russian]. Moscow, “Logos Publ”. (In Russ.)

3. Gak V.G. 1990. Analitizm [Analyticism]. In Yartseva V.N. (ed.) Lingvisticheskii entsiklopedicheskii slovar’ [Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary]. Moscow, “Sovetskaya entsiklopediya Publ”. (In Russ.)

4. Graudina L.K., Itskovich V.A., Katlinskaya L.P. 1976. Grammaticheskaya pravil’nost’ russkoi rechi: Opyt chastotno-stilisticheskogo slovarya variantov. [Grammatical Correctness of Russian Speech: An Experience of the Frequency-stylistic Dictionary of Variants]. Moscow, “Nauka Publ”. (In Russ.)

5. Il’ina N.E. 1996. Rost analitizma v morfologii [The Growth of Analyticism in Morphology]. In Zemskaya E.A. (ed.) Russkii yazyk kontsa XX stoletiya [Russian Language of the End of the Twentieth Century (1985–1995)]. Moscow, “Yazyki russkoi kul’tury Publ”. (In Russ.)

6. Mel’nikov G.P. 2003. Sistemnaya tipologiya yazykov: Printsipy, metody, modeli [System Typology of Languages: Principles, Methods, Models]. Moscow, “Nauka Publ”. (In Russ.)

7. Narochnitskii A.L. (ed.) 1980. Moskva. Entsiklopediya [Moscow: Encyclopedia]. Moscow, “Sovetskaya entsiklopediya Publ”. (In Russ.)

8. Polikarpov A.A. 1979. Elementy teoreticheskoi sotsiolingvistiki [Elements of Theoretical Sociolinguistics]. Moscow, “Publishing House of Moscow University”. (In Russ.)

9. Rask Р. 1964. Issledovaniya v oblasti drevnesevernogo yazyka, ili Proiskhozhdenie islandskogo yazyka [Studies in the Old Norse Language, or the Origin of the Icelan- dic Language]. In Zvegintsev V.A. Istoriya yazykoznaniya XIX–XX vekov v ocherkakh i izvlecheniyakh [History of Linguistics of the XIX–XX Centuries in Tssays and Extracts]. Part I. Moscow, “Prosveshchenie Publ”. (In Russ.)

10. Panov M.V. (ed.) 1968. Russkii yazyk i sovetskoe obshchestvo: Sotsiologo-lingvisticheskoe issledovanie. Morfologiya i sintaksis sovremennogo russkogo yazyka [Russian Language and Soviet Society: Sociological and Linguistic Research. Morphology and Syntax of the Modern Russian Language]. Moscow, “Nauka Publ”. (In Russ.)

11. Selishchev A.M. 2017. Yazyk revolyutsionnoi epokhi. Iz nablyudenii nad russkim yazykom (1917–1926) [Revolutionary Language. From Observations on the Russian Language (1917–1926)]. Moscow, “Editorial URSS, Librokom”. (In Russ.)

12. Sytin P.V. 1959. Otkuda proizoshli nazvaniya ulits Moskvy [Where Did the Names of the Streets of Moscow Came From?]. Moscow, “Moskovskii rabochii, Publ”. (In Russ.)

13. Fedosyuk M.Yu. 2019. “Nedarom pomnit vsya Rossiya pro den’ …Borodino”, ili Pochemu perestayut sklonyat’sya toponimy na -ino, -ovo [“It’s not Without Reason that all of Russia Remembers about the day Borodino”, or Why Toponyms Ending in -ino, -ovo Cease to Decline]. Bulletin of the Moscow Region State University. Series: Russian Philology, no 5, pp. 333–341. (In Russ.)

14. Fedosyuk M.Yu., Baklanova I.I. 2021. Teatral’nyj proezd ili proezd Teatra? (Soglasovannye i nesoglasovannye opredeleniya vo vnutrigorodskoj toponimii) [Teatral’nyj Proezd or Proezd Teatra? (Concorded and Unconcorded Attributes in Russian Street Names)]. Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Studies in Literature and Language, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 88–98. (In Russ.)

15. Shmeleva T.V. 2016. Novgorodskaya slovesnost’ [Novgorod Philology]. Veliky Novgorod, NovGU im. Yaroslava Mudrogo Publ. (In Russ.).