Decolonizing from Within: Hybridization in Varvara Nedeoglo's Translingual Poetry

The article is devoted to the study of usual affixation word formation as one of the most important operating mechanisms in the Russian derivation system. The goal of the research is to reveal active processes and main trends in usual affixation word formation of the contemporary Russian language. W. Humboldt’s work, where the language is considered not only as a product of human activity, but as the activity itself, as well as E.A. Zemskaya's ideas concerning active and creative nature of the Russian word formation as a subsystem of the general language system. The usual affixation word formation is an actively and dynamically developing aspect of the derivation system existing in the contemporary Russian language. News media language actively uses the resources inherent in the system and the norms of the Russian language: neologisms in newspaper texts are primarily generated through the usual derivation models. It has been revealed that the most productive affixation means of the usual innovations generation comprise the following: suffixation, prefixation, zero-suffixation and affixation-like word formation, wherein the most popular one is suffixation. At the present stage of the Russian language development we witness an increase in adaptive function of word formation types. Joining native Russian affixes to the borrowed stems appears to be one the most productive patterns in the contemporary usual affixation word building, where suffixation is the most demanding one. The research results obtained can contribute to the development of the lexical derivatology, lexical semantics, neology, and language stylistics problems. The promising character of elaborating the declared subject is conditioned by the language processes in mass media activation, which will probably require further study of neologization aspects in mass media texts in the nearest future, making possible to explore the functional and pragmatic potential in word formation resources of the contemporary Russian language.

This article argues that multilingual locales with minority, national and global languages at hand can become a site where meaning of social experience is negotiated and contested, and the role of minority languages can be reconceptualized. More specifically, using the example of Tatar, a minority language in Russia, as well as the framework grounded in the tropes of ‘pride’ and ‘profit, the study reveals that participants’ symbolic connections to language include social categories, sense of belonging, and camaraderie, as well as the indication of symbolic profit in the form of authentic goods and services that generate economic benefits. Despite the lingering nation-state ideologies of language purification and standardization and their role in construction of the “self” and the “other,” the study demonstrates that tourism may serve as a method of authentic differentiation by packaging language-enhanced features to enrich experiences for tourists, and to secure economic profit, create a stronger sense of pride, identity, and empowerment for producers of the language.

The article focuses on the words that designate the Internet and its segments and discusses such problems as the process of assimilation of lexeme "интернет" in contemporary Russian language and its spelling variants, the reasons and mechanisms of appearance of its synonyms. Formal and cognitive adaptation of the anglicisms "internet", "web", "net" and stylistic peculiarities of word-formative and semantic derivatives that appeared on the base of Russian language are also discussed. Particular attention is paid to the tendency for some English-language stems to become affixoids in contemporary Russian. Modern explanatory dictionaries and corpus data were used as sources of linguistic information about the functioning of investigated lexemes ([https://ruscorpora.ru/], [http://www.webcorpora.ru]), data obtained by search by keywords was also analyzed. Descriptive method was used in the research. Identified designations of the Internet, as well as its segments, are analyzed in terms of their origin and semantics. Their stylistic features are also explained. The research’s scientific novelty lies in identifying for the first time a variety of lexemes designating the Internet and its segments. The article considers the process of adaptation of lexical units denoting the concept of "Internet", as well as the peculiarities of their functioning in contemporary Russian language. The reasons for the emergence of synonymic designations of the word "Internet" and their peculiarities are analysed. A number of studied nominations ("глубокий", "черный" vs. "поверхностный", "белый интернет") are not listed in modern explanatory dictionaries. The conducted analysis allowed us to draw the following conclusion: synonyms of the lexeme "интернет" that appeared in Russian language, on the one hand reflect the denotative significance of the realia called "Internet", its role in modern society, and on the other hand the synonyms demonstrated significant word-formation and cognitive potential of contemporary Russian language.

The article deals with the topic of studying the history of speech etiquette and address in the Russian language. Relevance of the article is caused by necessity of optimizing the process of formation of competence in foreign students in the field of history of addresses and their use in different communicative situations. In the process of communicating the address is a frequency unit of appeal, which determines the contact-establishing function. Addressing is also an important component of communication, as depending on a situation can determine its positive aspects, and may be a cause of communication problems or failure. The purpose of this article is to introduce students to the history of the first behavioral norms, rules of speech etiquette; to tell the students about possible forms of address in the Russian language; to explain to foreign students that the appeal may be considered not only as a communicative tool that serves to attract attention, but as a particularly vivid means of expression showing the attitude of the speaker towards the object of speech. The subject of research is the creation of the language picture of the world with a deep and systematic analysis of the concepts of the Russian language, mentality, traditions, customs, history, philosophy and intercultural communication based on speech etiquette and all possible forms of address. The aim of the article is to conduct a comprehensive analysis and study of the forms and possible types of addresses in the modern Russian language. The results of the study can be used in practical classes with foreign students in teaching the following academic courses: „Contemporary Russian language. Vocabulary, Development of speaking and writing”, „Practice of speech communication”, „Speech etiquette”, etc.

В статье описываются заимствованные слова русского языка, относящиеся к этимологическому гнезду с индоевропейским корнем mag месить, сжимать, намазывать, с точки зрения их этимологии, семантики и словообразовательной структуры. Установлено время заимствования данных слов, рассмотрены особенности их семантической истории, а также указаны проблемы, возникающие при их словообразовательном анализе The article describes the loanwords tracing back to the IndoEuropean root mag to knead, press, spread in the Russian language with relation to etymology, semantics and derivation. The methodological basis of the research is the studies of Russian etymologists (O. N. Trubachev, Zh. Zh. Varbot, to name just a few) and the conception of diachronic approach to wordformation described in the works of A. M. Kamchatnov. The material for the analysis is based on the contexts of the Russian contemporary and historical dictionaries, as well as the Russian National Corpus. The study demonstrates that the word магма in the Russian language was rst recorded in the Azbukovniks in the 17th century with the meaning a plaster. Later it became obsolete. In the second half of the 19th century it was borrowed again from European languages as a medical and chemical, and later as a geological term. In recent years this word has been used in the occasional gurative meaning something very hot, ery. Another derivative the word масса has also been adopted from the European languages (presumably from New High German or French). It has been recorded in all the meanings represented in the contemporary Russian language since the rst third of the 18th century. At the same time, the meaning of the word масса in the expression конкурсная масса (all available sources which must be used to pay the debts of a bankrupt) has been lost in the literary language, remaining only in the professional jargon. One more derivative the word матч was borrowed from English in the late 19th century. It was originally used in relation to chess, and then to any sports event involving two or more participants. The paper describes the history of the word парикмахер, also referring to the etymological family of words with the root mag. This word in its modern form has been xed since 1731. It is a German borrowing noun Perckenmacher (Percke wig macher a person or thing that makes or produces something), in which the rst part either changed under the in uence of the word Parik, which came to the Russian language in the rst decade of the 18th century from the Old Dutch paruike, or under the in uence of the variant form of the German word Percke Parucke. At the same time in Peter the Great period in 1723 we observe an earlier version of the word парикмахер парукмакар (парукмакар), apparently borrowed from the Dutch paruikenmaker (рaruike wig mak(er) a person or thing that makes or produces something). The inner form of borrowing парикмахер the one who makes the wigs, but by the end of the XVIII century, it is used for referring a master that combs ones hair (not only hair of wigs) and serves as a synonym for the nouns волосочес and волосочесатель that is associated with the fading of the fashion for wigs

The authors argue that the model of the language policy of the Russian Federation assumes that a single official language, Russian, functions on the territory of the country, and this is legally enshrined in the law on the official language of the Russian Federation, regulatory legal acts, and state programs. The “de facto” official Russian language is studied in Russian schools, especially in high school, in the format of the unified state examination, which destroys its holistic perception and the possibility of full proficiency. The disciplines “Elective Russian Language Courses”, “Russian Native Language”, which contribute to the in-depth study of the Russian language, often exist only on paper at school, in fact, they turn into rote learning of training materials for the Unified State Exam. The current situation in the world has particularly clearly revealed that the focus on building a consumer society in our country over the past 30 years, globalization processes in the world, the obvious existence of double standards in the behavior of both the whole state and the individual, well-developed methods of fake information etc. entail, perhaps, the most serious danger to the language — the oblivion of the codes of Russian culture. For example, advertising shamelessly exploits the expressive resources of language to increase the demand for its products. As a result of the analysis of the pain points of the existence of the Russian language in contemporary Russia, the following conclusion is made: healing from the moral ailments of modern society is possible only with the understanding that we will save the state if we save our language.

The article is devoted to diachronic methods of research in the con temporary Russian language which the author offers to divide into traditional macrodiachrony that deals with centuries and long periods of time; microdiachro ny that investigates changes over periods of time from 5 to 50 years; and nanodia chrony that analyses linguistic phenomena appearing during a year or even a month. From the standpoint of the diachronic approach, the significance of fixing linguis tic phenomena, contemporary to the researcher, becomes clear, while, in addition to corpus-based statistics, interviewing and questioning methods are important. The author identifies the stages of microdiachrony in the Russian language which are related to extra-linguistic factors. They are conventional, especially their dating, and yet the idea of such division is useful in various studies, particularly related to literary standard. It was convenient to divide the 18th–21st centuries into six stages: (1) from the end of the 18th century to 1765 — the stage fixed in the first systemic codifying grammar of M.V. Lomonosov; (2) from 1766 to 1859 — the stage of aris tocratic culture bearers whose speech is influenced by the French language; (3) from 1860 to 1916 — the stage of formation of raznochintsi culture, both inheriting the nobility culture and repelling from it; (4) from 1917 to 1991 — the stage of the So viet standardizing tradition; (5) from 1992 to 2015 — the stage of partial release of speech from the pressure of codification and the formation of the “spoken-written” language of the Runet; (6) from 2016 to the present day — the stage of adaptation of speech to realization of its meaningful part through digital technologies. Then the author analyses the diachrony of three phenomena to illustrate these ideas. Firstly, it is an attempt of the pronoun ikhnii to enter the Russian language 135 which ended up with it becoming a marker of substandard speech and at the same time developing the relative meanings “foreign” and “alien”, which gradually became normative. Secondly, it is a description of the history of the word tolika, released from the phraseology and used as a quantifier with the meaning of “small fraction”, and further loosing quantitative definiteness and moving towards the meaning of “fraction”, “part”. Finally, in order to demonstrate the work of nanodiachronic methods, the author describes the word rybova which emerged in the speech of the Runet in the last two years as a result of a language game with the case ending -ov and filled up certain semantic lacuna.

The article is an attempt to answer the question regarding the contemporary language contacts and their role in the modern Russian language, in particular Russian economic terminology, from the point of view of their appearance, formation, and functioning. The contribution presents a short review of modern tendencies in research on languages in terms of language contacts as well as the character and tendencies of the development of these contacts in the context of research on economic terms in contemporary Russian language.

The article addresses the aims of the legal recognition of a language as the national (“state”) language, the legal regulations concerning observance of the standards of the contemporary Russian (“literary”) language as national (“state”) language of the Russian Federation, as well as the problems of implemen­tation of these regulations in the oral public speech. The authors emphasize the role of dictionaries and grammar books approved by the Ministry of Education and Science to provide the implementation of the language legislation and the official codification of the norms of the contemporary Russian standard (“literary”) language as the national (“state”) language of the Russian Federation. The article puts for­ward a number of suggestions for improving the current legal mechanism of codification of language norms for the oral speech with regard to the use of language as a national (“state”) language.

Changes in socio-political lexis of the contemporary Russian language – borrowings The article presents changes within socio-political lexis of the contemporary Russian language in the context of borrowings. The text characterizes the linguistic situation in Russia at the turn of the 21st century and presents causes of language borrowings. Among them general causes, common in different languages, were distinguished, and also characteristics specific for Russia only were included. The text also embraces the classification of socio-political lexis on the basis of spheres of application, which was illustrated with numerous examples. The examples are divided into the so-called old borrowings and new borrowings. The first group embraces the lexemes which were included into the language long time ago and today are not recognized as foreign elements. The other group includes the words which have appeared relatively recently.

The article observes stylistic features and genre representations of religious vocabulary in contemporary Russian language. The study of the development of terminological systems in certain areas of knowledge and their role in the development of a language is one of the most important problems in modern linguistics. The solution to this problem is to study the great variety of sources of spiritual, academic, business, journalistic and other areas of human activity. Religious vocabulary is the richest layer of the Russian language. The study of the use of religious terminology in the functional styles of Russian makes it possible to clearly identify the psychological, categorical and subject meanings of this type of vocabulary in the system of indigenous language of Russians. The aim of this research is to study styles and genres in which religious lexemes are found in modern Russian. This is explained by the fact that language and religion are closely related. The influence of religion on language is an indisputable fact, because in every religion there is a number of lexemes that relate only to a particular faith. At the same time, some religious lexemes have become common and formed a part of the active vocabulary of Russians. That is why we observe the following situation in the Russian language: religious terms appear in all styles of speech.

The aim of the article is to retrace the causes responsible for the development of denominations of psychological abuse in the Russian language, and to describe the peculiarities of their implementation into the language system. The concept of isomorphism of the fundamental structure of the world, as well as human mind and natural language, is confirmed on the basis of the material of сustomary functioning of the denominations of psychological abuse. Contemporary customary usage reflects the phenomena of psychological and emotional pressure on a person, which have lately spread in the living space. The media sphere has become one of the important sources of observation of evolutionary processes in language during recent decades. The media provide numerous examples of the functioning of new words that are not recorded even by the most modern dictionaries, including electronic ones. Emerging lexical tokens either fill in the gaps of particular area of modern Russian that serves the psychological discourse, or can be applied to clarify new or updated concepts. Social awareness of the indiscriminate character of psychological abuse has triggered new legislation aimed to protect against these forms of violence. The penetration of the borrowed terms from psychological sphere into modern language is determined both by extralinguistic and intralinguistic reasons, such as dehumanization of society, globalization; tendencies to the semantic accuracy of utterance, speech-saving efforts, etc. A steep increase in the frequency of use of the borrowed psychological terms in the media discourse accelerates the process of their adaptation in the contemporary Russian language. The removal of ideological marking of existing in the language lexical units, the clarification of semantic content of terms, various types of borrowing, naming forms of latent violence common in the globalized world, the attachment of actual lexemes to taxonomic relations innate to language system, demonstrate the aptitude of the Russian language for plasticity. The problem outlined is multifaceted, interdisciplinary and needs further elaboration.

The article is devoted to the study of usual affixation word formation as one of the most important operating mechanisms in the Russian derivation system. The goal of the research is to reveal active processes and main trends in usual affixation word formation of the contemporary Russian language.W. Humboldt’s work, where the language is considered not only as a product of human activity, but as the activity itself, as well as E.A. Zemskaya's ideas concerning active and creative nature of the Russian word formation as a subsystem of the general language system.The usual affixation word formation is an actively and dynamically developing aspect of the derivation system existing in the contemporary Russian language. News media language actively uses the resources inherent in the system and the norms of the Russian language: neologisms in newspaper texts are primarily generated through the usual derivation models. It has been revealed that the most productive affixation means of the usual innovations generation comprise the following: suffixation, prefixation, zero-suffixation and affixation-like word formation, wherein the most popular one is suffixation. At the present stage of the Russian language development we witness an increase in adaptive function of word formation types. Joining native Russian affixes to the borrowed stems appears to be one the most productive patterns in the contemporary usual affixation word building, where suffixation is the most demanding one. The research results obtained can contribute to the development of the lexical derivatology, lexical semantics, neology, and language stylistics problems. The promising character of elaborating the declared subject is conditioned by the language processes in mass media activation, which will probably require further study of neologization aspects in mass media texts in the nearest future, making possible to explore the functional and pragmatic potential in word formation resources of the contemporary Russian language.

The purpose of this article is to assess the nature of the presence of Russian minority languages (primarily of the Buryat language) on the Internet: is this presence symbolic or is it a real instrument for revitalization? The author considers the main publications on this issue, briefly characterizes the current situation with the Buryat language and analyzes the nature of the presence and the functioning of the Buryat language on the Internet in comparison with other minority languages of the Russian Federation. The material is constituted by the statistical data of the Higher School of Economics’ project on Russian minority languages and online resources on the Buryat language (websites, social network VKontakte, video hosting site YouTube and Instagram application). As a result of the comparative analysis, the conclusion is made about the moderate language activism of the Buryats on the Internet and the mixed language code and translingual practices that have now become the norm for minority language speakers both on the Internet and beyond. The author also notes the emergence of new actors and the effect of globalization which is visible in the fact that most Internet projects are initiated by young people driven by the need for identity in a globalized world. Finally, the author concludes that the presence of the Buryat language (and of many other minority languages in Russia) on the Internet is mainly symbolic and that there is a great variability in the degree of Internet activism of their speakers. As a result, it can be argued that the Internet does not create a new reality, it only reflects the current linguistic situation with minority languages in Russia.

The article is devoted to an analysis and interpretation of modern Ukrainian legislature and policy in the sphere of language usage. The author quotes several articles of the Constitution of Ukraine and tries to provide a critical analysis of them with regards to local language usage in educational establishments as a language of instruction. The analysis shows that the right to get instruction in a minority language is proclaimed in all the government documents. There is a list of languages which are given the status of a local (minority) language. The author tries to analyze how the proclaimed freedom of choice of a language of instruction in an educational establishment is implemented in practice and finds that universities which are situated on territories of residence of national minorities do not provide instruction in a minority language though it is used in junior schools and pre-school educational establishments. The author presents the results of a field survey fulfilled in the East of Ukraine where most of Russian-speaking population lives. The results demonstrate that the majority of the population is Ukrainians by origin and nationality though they tend to use the Russian language in everyday life communication. The language of instruction in higher educational establishments is Russian. So, the results of the research prove that there is a discrepancy between the proclaimed freedom of choice of a language of instruction and the real possibilities to choose the language of instruction in a higher education institution