Носитель языка vs носитель просторечия: оценка языковой компетенции иностранцев

Abstract

This article deals with an important issue in the field of language policy, i.e. determining the status of a “non-ideal” language user as a native speaker. The material includes: a) records of the speech of people participating in an official interview to confirm their status as a native speaker; b) regulatory framework that defines the content of the “native speaker” term. The authors focus on vernacular and dialect speakers for whom Russian is the only or main system of verbal communication. The article proves the linguodidactic criteria listed in the normative documents to be invalid. The authors identify speech facts that formally prevent a person from qualifying as a native speaker but, within the sociolinguistic approach, do not exclude him/her as a linguistic personality from the circle of Russian native speakers. Further, a standard methodological prototype of speech personality “native speaker” appropriate for linguodidactic testing is modelled. The authors describe the experience of evaluating language (speech) competence using criteria scales within the framework of the level approach. Based on the material of one script, features of the speech of the “non-ideal” language user are singled out and a model of competence assessment by correlation with the “native speaker” prototype is presented. This technology includes two stages: 1) identification of speech facts that lie outside the scope of the literary norm; 2) identification of the basic characteristics of a native speaker within the framework of the sociolinguistic and functional approaches. The authors consider knowledge of precedent texts (on the social and national levels), proficiency in the language system, including its sub-standard forms (vernacular and dialect) and knowledge of the usage to be the main characteristics of a native speaker. In addition, the authors list accentuating discursive means that are typical of the speech of native speakers: rhetorical questions, metatextual reflexive questions, synonymic correction of naming units, etiquette correction of appellatives, language-game, etc. The results can be used to develop uniform criteria for evaluating language (speech) competencies during interviews with foreign citizens and stateless persons.