The Karelian language landscape in the dialectometric paradigm

Introduction. Currently, discursive words in the Karelian language have not been subjected to a comprehensive study, and many questions on the categories of connectors of both closely related and unrelated languages of the world cause controversy and discussion. The solution of these controversial issues is supposed to be possible through the accumulation of a significant amount of linguistic material, as well as data on the pragmatics, evolution, semantics and etymology of discursive words. The purpose of the study is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the official parts of speech (their composition, functions and semantics) in three dialects of the Karelian language (Karelian proper, Livvikov, Ludikov ones) within the framework of the project “Discursive words in the Karelian language: a comparative typological aspect”. Materials and Methods. The study of Karelian syntax was carried out in terms of comparison with the grammatical structure of the Finnish language, which is closely related to Karelian, and the Russian language. The materials for the research were Karelian dictionaries (dialect and new-written) and samples of dialect Karelian speech, which allow to identify the composition and semantics of discursive words, to determine their origin in dialects and dialects of the Karelian language. General scientific and specifically linguistic (comparative-typological, lexicographic, etymological, comparative-historical) methods were applied. Results and Discussion. The most important result of the conducted research is a comprehensive analysis of discursive words in the dialects of the Karelian language with the use of data from related (Finnish, Veps) and unrelated (Russian) languages. Conclusion. The results of the study contribute to the study of pragmatics, evolution, semantics and etymology of discursive words of the Karelian language, and help to clarify the issue of connector categories in closely related and unrelated languages of the world.

The study aims to determine the origin of names designating ‘pain’ and ‘disease’ in the Karelian language. On the one hand, the article analyzes the etymology of dialectisms with the meaning of pain sensations and a state of malaise in the Karelian language in relation to the linguistic and cultural contacts of Karelians and Russians. On the other hand, the semantics of identified lexemes is considered in the process of their adaptation in the Karelian language. The scientific novelty of the research is seen in determining the origin and characteristics of the semantic and motivational principles of nomination of the word family with the meaning of a painful state of the body. As a result of the study, 11 names with the semes ‘pain and/or disease’ were identified. All the analyzed lexemes were borrowed into the Karelian language in this meaning from Russian, which indicates close contact between Karelians and Russians and, accordingly, the mutual influence of the Karelian and Russian languages. The borrowing process led to the phonematic transformation of lexemes, due to the need to adapt to the phonetic and orthoepic norms of the Karelian language.

Introduction: the article presents the results of a comparative analysis of the Karelian-language names of boats, taking into account the data of closely related Karelian languages. The article considers the issue of interaction of languages and cultures of the Karelian, Finnish and Russian population, resulting from close contact, which is confirmed by the presence of Russian and Finnish loan words in the Karelian language and Karelian loanwords in the dialects of the Russian language. Objective: to identify the ways of formation of boat names in the dialects of the Karelian language. Research materials: dialect names of boats in the Karelian language. Results and novelty of the research: the novelty of the study is in the first etymological analysis of the vocabulary under consideration with the involvement of dialect material of the Karelian language. The author comes to the conclusion that the lexemes denoting different types of boats are in most cases identical in the dialects of the Karelian language. Linguistic analysis showed that the formation of the studied lexical-thematic group in the Karelian language was influenced by the Russian and Finnish languages; the reverse process is also observed – the borrowing of Karelian vocabulary into Finnish and Northern Russian dialects. More than 30 different Karelian dialect variants of the lexemes used to designate boats were analyzed. The theoretical significance of the research lies in the fact that the analysis of the Karelian-speaking names of the boat, compared with the names in other languages, makes it possible, in general, to deepen knowledge of the lexical composition of the Karelian language. The practical significance is determined by the fact that the results obtained in the course of research work can be used in university courses of the Karelian language (lexicology, dialectology), as well as in teaching local history and ethnography.

The paper focuses on the study of the situation of teaching of the Karelian language in light of contemporary language policy. Education is a sphere of regimented communication regulated by administrative and governmental authorities. The regulation is targeted at orderly use of language in the society, and is effected by means of language legislation. The process to revitalize the Karelian language was initiated by the resolution of the conference “Karelians“ in 1989. In the academic year 2010/2011 the Karelian language was taught in 11 districts (Belomorsky, Kemsky, Kalevalsky, Kondopozhsky, Louhsky, Medvezhjegorsky, Muezersky, Olonetsky, Prionezhsky, Pryazhinsky, and Suojarvsky) and two municipalities (Petrozavodsk and Kostomuksha). The Karelian language is taught also in institutions for extra-curricular education. In 2011, 48 children studied Karelian proper and 43 children – the Olonetsian dialect in such institutions. Thus, the situation with the Karelian language in education today does not look bright at all. Schoolchildren are not motivated to study the Karelian language as it is unlikely to bring any “bonuses” in education, finding a job or further socialization. Furthermore, placement of Karelian language students is very problematic. Although the Karelian language does function in education – one of the spheres maintaining the language vitality –in the situation where the Russian language dominates in most major spheres of communication the real-life social status of the Karelian language is such that there is no potential for “building up” the communicative load of the newly scripted Karelian language and widening its functionality. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12731/2218-7405-2013-7-21

the article examines the specifics of functioning of the component Jumal ‘God’ in Karelian lexemes. Names with the semantics “God”, as well as terms containing the composite under consideration as part of complex words in the Karelian language in comparison with Vepsian, Finnish and Russian languages are analyzed. Objective: to determine the role of the lexeme Jumal ‘God’ in the formation of cultural and linguistic thesaurus of the Karelians. Research materials: Karelian-language linguistic sources. Results and novelty of the research: the author examines the semantic and motivational principles of nomination of Karelian names containing the component Jumal ‘God’ in genitive or nominative construction. In addition, terms with the semantics ‘God’ that are important in the aspect of spiritual culture are analyzed. Their etymological, word-formation and ethnolinguistic analysis is revealed. As a result of the study, 20 dialect variants were identified that denote God in the Karelian language and have different origins: Russian borrowings, substantivized participles, denominal nouns, as well as lemmas of Baltic-Finnish origin. The name Jumal functions most widely in the linguistic picture of the world of the Karelians and other peoples: in the names of diseases, Christian terminology, as well as meteorological vocabulary. In the vocabulary under study, linguistic and cultural contacts of the Karelians, Vepsians, Finns and Russians are traced. The scientific novelty of the research is due to the first comprehensive study of the functioning of the component Jumal ‘God’ in Karelian lexemes

For nearly 400 years, New England has held an important place in the development of American English, and “New England accents” are very well known in popular imagination. But since the 1930s, no large-scale academic book project has focused specifically on New England English. While other research projects have studied dialect features in various regions of New England, this is the first large-scale scholarly project to focus solely on New England English since the Linguistic Atlas of New England. This book presents new research covering all six New England states, with detailed geographic, phonetic, and statistical analysis of data collected from over 1,600 New Englanders. The book covers the past, present, and future of New England dialect features, analyzing them with dialect maps and statistical modeling in terms of age, gender, social class, ethnicity, and other factors. The book reports on a recent large-scale data collection project that included 367 field interviews, 626 audio-recorded interviews, and 634 online written questionnaires. Using computational methods, the project processed over 200,000 individual vowels in audio recordings to examine changes in New England speech. The researchers also manually examined 30,000 instances of /r/ to investigate “r-dropping” in words like “park” and so on. The book also reviews other recent research in the area. Using acoustic phonetics, computational processing, detailed statistical analyses, dialect maps, and graphical illustrations, the book systematically documents all of the major traditional New England dialect features, other regional features, and their current usage across New England.

This article discusses the dialect system of the Russian and Uzbek languages in a comparative aspect. Studying the dialect system of the Russian and Uzbek languages in a comparative aspect makes it possible to create a comparative dialectological competence. This article is devoted to the creation of dialectological competence at the comparative level of different languages. In long-distance areas dialects, dialect systems and folklore still exist. Improving the system of comparative dialect competence of the Russian and Uzbek languages at present can give a methodical direction to students of the national group. A competent approach to the study of the dialect system develops the knowledge of future Russian language teachers in national schools. Dialect words in both the Uzbek language and the Russian language are considered in a semantic aspect.

This paper focuses on a special form of English borrowing: the use of acronyms with phraseological meaning. The Russian computer language, more precisely the Russian computer slang, is unthinkable without the influence of English. This influence is manifested at various language levels and in a variety of forms (borrowings, calques and half-calques, univerbats, reverse derivatives, alphabetic and alphanumeric abbreviations, “distorted forms” of both full names and acronyms). Based on the English abbreviations, first the meaning of the respective full form is explained in English and then its fate is illustrated in the Russian host language. Comparison with German, which also borrowed a large number of such abbreviations, shows similarities and differences in the processing of these phraseological units. The term “digital communication” here refers not only to communication on the Internet in a narrower sense (chats, forums, e-mail, etc.), but also to such channels as SMS, Twitter, WhatsApp, and others. The Internet plays a double role in the development of the modern Russian language: firstly, as a means of mass communication that provides an opportunity to popularize new linguistic phenomena in the shortest possible time and with maximum range, and secondly, as a generator of new linguistic forms that would be impossible without the Internet itself. One part of these neologisms refers to the technical features of digital communication and the tools necessary for it, while the other part refers to the implementation of a new communicative style that is clearly different from analogue communication in its oral and written forms.

In the article, on the basis of linguistic analysis, the dialect features of the Terekhiv sub-dialect of the Polissya dialect of the Ukrainian language are investigated, which is due to the actualization of the study of separate microareals of the dialect space. Today, dialectical discourse is perceived not as a deviation from the literary norm, but as another, equal form of the national language with significant linguistic and communicative potential. Polissya is characterized by a diverse ethnic composition, which makes this region, an area of multilateral intensive ethnic contacts, and creates the preconditions for the study of interlingual and interdialectal interactions. The source of the study is the actual material collected in 4 localities: Terekhivtsi, Malynivtsi, Tovstolis, Stasy. The main geohistorical data of the villages subordinated to the Terekhiv rural community are established, which explain the peculiarities of the formation of vocal and consonant systems of speech, word-changing paradigms. It was found that the speech of dialect speakers was formed under the influence of the languages of countries that played a significant role in the history of Chernihiv: the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Russia, Belarus. Phonetic and morphological features of speech as a separate microareal of dialect space are revealed and characterized. Dialectal differences proved to be multifaceted, both in their meaning and in their functional yield. At the level of vocalism and consonantism, the most notable phenomena are “akanya” (karomyslo, ad'in, stayat); “dzekannya” (dz'akuvalá, dzadz'ko) the presence of the diphthong ie (d'evchini, b'iel'en'k'iy, hm'iel'u); crossing of sound fields / i / and / y / (vkral'i, sakol'ik, z'imu); preservation of the relic of ancient softness [h'] (chi, khoch', vódoch'k'i); getting harder [ts′] (khlóptsy, vyétsa, zhýrytsa). Among the mophological features the most characteristic are the ancient ending -e and the absence of elongation in the nouns of the second declension of the middle gender (káhane, plákan’e), short forms of masculine adjectives in N. v. (sl’ip, smut’ón, ves’ól), unstressed forms of adjectives of the middle gender (saldatskóye, bahátoye), forms of the past tense (býla z vám’i s’edalá). It has been established that the Terekhiv sub-dialect has many dialectal features that are common of the transitional dialects of the Ukrainian language Polissya dialect. Significantly expressed is the influence of the Belarusian and Russian languages. In addition, the sub-dialects of this region, like most sub-dialects of the Polissya area, retain a number of archaic features.

Etat actuel de cette methode. Quelques ameliorations basees sur l'emploi du traitement du langage naturel ont atteint finalement les moteurs de recherche du commmerce, mais il n'y a pas d'usage normalise en terminologie pour decrire leur processus

Introduction: the article is a study of syntactic connectors and relationships in complex sentences of the Livvi-Karelian language, the objectification of which are conjunctions and conjunction words included in classes of connectors and discursive words that are wider in terms of coverage of units. Objective: a comprehensive description of the system conjunctions and conjunction words functioning in the Livvi-Karelian language. Research materials: conjunctions and conjunction words functioning in the Livvi-Karelian language. Results and novelty of the research: the article provides a comprehensive description of conjunctions and conjunction words functioning in the Livvi-Karelian language in comparative aspect with closely related languages (the Finnish and partly with the Karelian language); identifies the groups of conjunctions through the way of formation and structure, as well as through functional and semantic criteria. On the basis of the studied material, it was revealed that the richness of the functional-semantic potential of a complex sentence in the Livvi- Karelian language is due not only to the historically established immanent properties of Karelian syntax, but also to the double influence of the closely related Finnish language and the Russian language belonging to another language family. The novelty of the study lies in a comprehensive study of conjunctions and conjunction words in the Karelian language (on the example of the Livvi dialect).

The authors analyse the Russian speech of immigrants' descendants from Russia to the Chinese Three Rivers region in the Inner Mongolia in the 20th century. The relevance of the study is due to the need to study various forms of existence of the modern Russian national language, including those in foreign countries. The research is based on both oral and written sources collected by the authors in 2017-2018 during their expeditions to Enhe Russian Ethnic Township (China). The research has shown deviations in the speech of immigrants' descendants from the norms of the Russian literary language due to the use of Russian in its dialect form, as well as interference from Chinese. The authors have proved that the Russian dialects of the Three Rivers region are genetically related to the Russian dialects of Eastern Transbaikalia, which, in turn, are related to the North Russian dialects. The dialectal features of the Russian dialects of the Chinese Three Rivers quialify them as the translitional dialects on the North Russian basis. Since there were no external factors of influence on the dialectal Russian language from its other idioms, the stated dialectal form of the Russian language remained unchaged until the early 21st century. The article considers both the dialectal originality of Russian speech in the Three Rivers region at different language levels (phonetics, morphology, syntax, vocabulary), and the cases of interlingual interference resulting from the influence of the Chinese language on the Russian dialect system. The authors describe the following factors that determine the intensity of interference: generation, education, profession, and language environment. Having described the active zones of interaction between typoLogicaLLy different Chinese and Russian and determined the areas of interference in the Russian speech of bilinguals, the authors detected “weak points” of the Russian language system in the situation of Russian-Chinese bilingualism. Thus, the authors have studied the variant of the Russian language specific for the Chinese Three Rivers region and concluded that it preserves the Russian dialect base influenced by the interference from Chinese, which is an understudied fact of the Russian language environment in emigration.

The article deals with the comparative analysis of the verbalization of the concept Word at the lexical level in the English, Russian and Uzbek languages. The analysis of the representation of the concept Word/ Сўз/Word was carried out on the basis of lexicographic data given in the explanatory dictionaries of the English, Russian and Uzbek languages. The results of the analysis showed that in spite of being one of the universal concepts peculiar to any language and linguaculture, the concept Word has a number of culturally specific features of representation in each of the languages. The analysis revealed that the meanings of the concept Word can be subdivided into linguistic and philosophical-religious zones. The linguistic zone is represented by meanings, most of which are common to all languages under consideration (word is a unit of speech, language unit, text, proverb, conversation). The philosophical-religious zone is represented by meanings inherent only to the English and Russian languages (the Word is the Bible, the Word is Jesus Christ, the Word is Logos), which is explained by the commonality of religious and philosophical views of these cultures.

The vocabulary of a language is a variable quantity, it is constantly changing, responding to the needs of life and reflecting its new realities. The events taking place in the South-East of Ukraine since March 2014 have significantly changed the usual picture of the world of the parties involved in this conflict, led to a new interpretation of reality, the emergence of new mental constructs, objectified in the language using a number of lexical innovations, most of which fall under the definition of „hate speech”. The purpose of this article is to try to examine the impact of the armed conflict in the South-East of Ukraine on the emergence of lexical innovations in the Russian language, to identify ways of forming new units and their main thematic clusters. The material for the work was neoplasms recorded in electronic Russian and Russian-speaking Ukrainian mass media, as well as selected from social networks and videos. The analysis showed that in the context of the armed conflict in the South-East of Ukraine, the characteristic manifestations of „hate speech” are mainly numerous new categories-labels with a pronounced conflict potential. The priority in this regard is offensive and derogatory nominations of representatives of the opposite camp, taking into account their worldview / ideological, national / ethnic, territorial / regional characteristics. The military jargon has also undergone a significant update, incorporating not only the reactualized slangisms of the era of the Afghan campaign of 1979-89, but also lexical innovations caused by the military and political realities of the current armed conflict in the Donbas. Neologisms are formed in accordance with the existing methods in the Russian language (word formation, semantic derivation, borrowing). At the same time, non-standard word-forming techniques are also used (language play, homophony, etc.).

The article analyzes the contents and reflects the growth dynamics of a representative group which comprises compound neologisms with the first component stem II (ИИ) (a Russian abbreviation for “artificial intelligence”). It is the process of language integration that plays a significant role in the formation of compound nouns with the first component stem II: the currently widespread functioning of the above-mentioned pattern as well as of similar patterns results from the impact the analytism makes upon the vocabulary and grammar of the Russian language. The research based on the analysis of the data contained in the Russian National Corpus and the “Integrum” mass media database has proved that the component stem II belongs to the most productive formants in the Russian language of the 2010s. The article displays the main tendencies in the formation of lexical paradigms of the “II-compounds” in the modern Russian language. Of special significance in a quantitative sense is the hypernym-hyponym composition of nouns containing a seme “the ability to perform the functions which have traditionally been considered a human’s prerogative”: II-advokat (artificial intelligence (AI) barrister), II-dermatolog (artificial intelligence dermatologist), II-sekretar’ (artificial intelligence secretary), II-yurist (artificial intelligence lawyer). The article also mentions the process of discourse transition of scientific terms with the first component stem II into the modern newspaper and magazine publicism. On the basis of the expert sampling analysis a conclusion is drawn in the article about the heterogeneity of the formant II and the principles of its lexicographic description are outlined which are going to be represented in the publication of annual neological dictionaries “Lexical innovations in the Russian language” recommenced at the department of Modern Russian Lexicography at the Institute for Linguistic Studies of the RAS.