Russian Grammar Research Articles

Nikolai Gogol: Performing Hybrid Identity by Yuliya Ilchuk

Reviewed by: Nikolai Gogol: Performing Hybrid Identity by Yuliya Ilchuk Timothy Langen Nikolai Gogol: Performing Hybrid Identity. By Yuliya Ilchuk. Toronto and London: University of Toronto Press. 2021. xvi+ 267 pp. $52.50. ISBN 978-1-4875-0825-8. From the beginning of his career to our day, Gogolʹ's works have generated highly charged interpretative fields, and in recent years, 'Russian' and 'Ukrainian' have [End Page 148] been two of the most powerful hermeneutic magnets. With this monograph, Yuliya Ilchuk subjects both terms to dynamic, historicizing analysis. By her reading, Gogolʹ's national identity is not fixed but rather constituted (at least partially) in performance, before heterogeneous audiences, with multiple cultural and linguistic codes, giving rise to gestures and texts capable of generating divergent interpretation. Her focus is not on classifying Gogolʹ as essentially 'Russian' or 'Ukrainian', or as first one and then the other, but rather on the constant (and constantly shifting) interpenetration of these categories in the contexts in which Gogolʹ enacted his own literary and personal identity. This book is methodologically and theoretically ambitious. The chapters treat, in order, the history of Ukrainian elites in the Russian empire; Gogolʹ's varying self-presentation in the 1830s; the distribution of Ukrainian and Russian (and hybridized) lexical, syntactic, and idiomatic elements among the narrators of his Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka (1831); the interaction of various languages and linguistic markers (especially Russian, Ukrainian, German, and Yiddish) in Gogolʹ's writing and in Russian cultural and political debates during his career; the changes he made to Taras Bulba and Dead Souls (both 1842); and the posthumous treatment of his texts in Russian, Soviet, and Ukrainian contexts. Ilchuk brings considerable theoretical sophistication to bear on these topics; she is as ready to see in Gogolʹ's self-conscious linguistic hybridity a challenge to Bourdieu (p. 71) as she is to find in Greenblatt's and Bhabha's paradigms a useful framework for reading Gogolʹ. Equally well managed is her use of large data sets for stylistic analysis, with technical appendices giving extra information about her methodology. The results support her overall argument that Ukrainian and Russian elements do not simply coexist in Gogolʹ's texts, but rather operate in varying manners and proportions according to audience and occasion. In addition to this lexical corpus analysis, Ilchuk draws attention to a kind of dual coding whereby (typically) a Russian reader will receive one sort of message from Gogolʹ and/or his narrator(s), while a Ukrainian reader or listener will hear something different. Both the early Dikanka tales and the later revisions of Taras Bulba and Dead Souls have this property, as she argues. One sign of the value of a book like this is the way it can reframe arguments which its subject does not address directly. Ilchuk repeatedly emphasizes performativity—Gogolʹ's social manners, his sartorial and coiffuristic gestures, and his deviations from literary Russian grammar and usage. Readers of Boris Eikhenbaum's 1919 article 'How Gogolʹs Overcoat Is Made' (repr. in Gogol from the Twentieth Century: Eleven Essays, ed. and trans. by Robert A. Maguire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974), pp. 267-91) will recognize a similar claim here but with new light cast on it. Eikhenbaum's Gogolʹ is irrepressibly performative and creative, rather than concerning himself with what one might call 'content'. For Ilchuk, performance is how Gogolʹ engages content. It is hard to think what more this book could do. Devoted to the topic of identity in its dizzying complexity, it is theoretically sophisticated, clearly and engagingly written, methodologically bold, and rich in detail. Ultimately Ilchuk's aim, in the best spirit of the theorists whose ideas she mobilizes, is not only to provide an objective [End Page 149] analysis of an acuvre, idiom, and life, but also to show its positive generative potential. She succeeds. Timothy Langen University of Missouri Copyright © 2023 Modern Humanities Research Association

О РАЗНИЦЕ УПОТРЕБЛЕНИЯ В ТУРЕЦКОМ ЯЗЫКЕ КОНСТРУКЦИЙ С ИМЕНАМИ ДЕЙСТВИЯ -DIĞI / -ACAĞI И УСЕЧЁННЫМ ИНФИНИТИВОМ -MASI

This article offers the author's interpretation of the use of specific complex grammatical constructions of the Turkish language, usually causing significant difficulties in studying them with Russian-speaking students. We are talking about participles -dığı / -acağı (adjective-verbs – “sıfat-fiiller”) and truncated infinitives -ması (noun-verbs / verbal nouns – “isim-fiiller”). The purposes of the study undertaken are to compare the interpretations of Turkish and Russian linguists; on the basis of morphological, morphemic, semantic and syntactic methods of analysis, to find out the origin and essence of adjective-verbs -dığı / -acağı and truncated infinitive -ması in Turkish; correctly describe them in close terms of Russian grammar; find out the logic of use in Turkish and of translation into Russian. As a result, it managed to find out that -dığı / -acağı / -ması structures undoubtedly have a high degree of specificity and unusual for Russian-speakers both in terms of the correct understanding of their essence and morphological correspondence and practical application. However, it turned out to be possible to find for them in the Russian language semantically and morphologically close parts of speech and syntactic constructions. Also to describe the main logic of their use as detailed members of the proposal (subject, predicate, definition, object, aderbial modifier) and to formulate proposals for Russian Turkologists by changes in approaches to teaching these topics.

Корпус архивных документов Войска Донского: проблемы морфологического анализа

The article presents the results of the collective project aimed at comprising a special annotated diachronic corpus of documents of the 18 th – 19 th cen. from the "Mikhailovsky Stanitsa Ataman" Archive Fund (State Archive of Volgograd Region, Russia). In the course of the work, linguistic, technical and software tasks related to meta-marking, morphological tagging and representation of marked texts in an electronic search environment were solved. The texts are written in cursive script of the 18 th cen. with the use of the old Cyrillic letters, which have spelling specificity. To work correctly with them, an add-on to the stemming tool MyStem by I. Segalovich was created. This application adds to the MyStem the following capabilities: the option to work with the old Cyrillic symbols, a convenient graphical interface; it provides the opportunity to remove homonymy manually, enables marked text exporting to an external data storage and processing system. Morphological analysis of some texts revealed the presence of nominal case form variants, which were not noted in the "Russian Grammar" by M.V. Lomonosov, in modern studies of literary texts of the 18 th century. These findings point to effectiveness of automatic tagging which allows word form correction. The research results substantiated text tagging software tools adjustment for the extension of homonymous forms grammatical analysis options, aimed at identification and manual removal of homonymy. A quantitative analysis of these variants will allow the authors to evaluate their significance for the regional administrative language. The information obtained confirms the importance of the corpus creation for studying the history of the Russian language.

Hungary’s Rusyn Policy in the Early 1940s: The Subcarpathian Scholarly Society, the Journal Zoria/Hajnal, and the Rusyn Language

Hungary’s Rusyn Policy in the Early 1940s: The Subcarpathian Scholarly Society, the Journal <i>Zoria/Hajnal</i>, and the Rusyn Language

II Interuniversity Online Scientific Seminar in Memoriam of Professor Vera V. Babaytseva “Multiaspectivenes of Language and Speech Units” (Novosibirsk, NSU, February 10, 2022)

The review on the scientific seminar in memoriam of Professor V. V. Babaytseva devoted to the problem of multiaspectiveness of the language and speech units. The seminar took place online on the digital platform of Novosibirsk National Research State University and joined scholars from twelve universities of Russia (Moscow, Nizhny Novgorod, Orel, Ufa, Novosibirsk, Vladivostok) and China (Beijing). Different scientific directions were presented there: the School of synchronous transitivity (formed by Vera Vasilievna Babaitseva) and Novosibirsk syntactic school (formed by Maya Ivanovna Cheremisina). Presented reports covered number of topical grammar issues of the modern Russian language: problems of morphology discussed by Natalia Petrova, Anna Bertiakova, Elena Sorokina, and Maria Milovanova; problems of syntax addressed by Natalia Koshkareva, Irina Vysotskaya, and Larisa Bednarskaya. The seminar’s main theme was the linguistic mechanisms behind the formation of grammatical semantics and ways of its interpreting. A number of accounts were based on the literary language of Alexander Pushkin (a report by Irina Fadeeva), Nikolai Gogol (a report by Ekaterina Ogoltseva), Vasiliy Shukshin (a report by Galiya Khisamova). Zhou Haiyan presented her monograph “The Study of Transient Phenomena in Russian Grammar” (Beijing: Peking University, 2021). Maria Milovanova announced the publication of a collective monograph “General and Russian Linguoaxiology” (Moscow: Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Pushkin State Institute of Russian Language, 2022) A report by Tatiana Guskova expressed the idea of a multiple-aspect study of Professor Babaitseva's creative heritage.

Terminological Tools to Describe the Connecting Units of the Russian Language

Purpose. The article is devoted to the dynamics of theoretical understanding of connecting elements and the development of corresponding terminology in the Russian linguistic tradition. The research analyzes classic works of the founders of traditional Russian grammar as well as the latest linguistic works.Results. The study reveals three main levels of terminology which is applied to connecting units and related to their very nature: connecting units play an important role in creating the coherence of oral and written speech, and therefore are studied in the linguistics of discourse and text; connecting units are used in the organization of simple and complex sentence, and therefore are studied in syntax; connecting units are special lexical units that receive morphological characteristics. In general, we can say that in the 20th century the part-of-speech paradigm moved to syntactic and textual ones. First linguists tried to determine the place of connecting elements among the classes of words (parts of speech), but since the middle of the 20th century the idea of the priority of syntactic function over morphological characteristic has been increasingly expressed. This tendency was clearly manifested in discursive linguistics studying coherent texts and integrating very heterogeneous phenomena on the basis of common functions.Conclusion. Despite some inconsistency of the modern Russian terminology describing connecting elements it identifies their semantic-grammatical and functional originality.

Modern russian grammar

The study aims to determine the degrees of correspondence between the differential features of nouns in the instrumental case without a preposition, which manifest the peripheral stage of the original part of speech on the scale of adverbialization on the one hand, and the differential features of nuclear nouns and the differential features of nuclear substantive adverbs on the other. The authors used the methodology of oppositional analysis and indexation. As a result, the main stages of the functional transposition of non-positional forms of nouns into the semantic-grammatical category of temporal adverbs are revealed; the share of features of nuclear nouns and nuclear subjunctive adverbs in the structure of peripheral nouns such as “zimoi” is established. The results of the study can be used in further development of the problems of interaction between the semantic and grammatical in the structure of language units.

Три издания грамматики русского языка И.А. Гейма и их источники в истории педагогики

Introduction. The research of Russian grammar textbook of I.A. Heym (Bernhard Andreas von Heym, 1759-1821) is of interest for the history of pedagogy, as it allows revealing the features of teaching Russian as a foreign language in Russia at the end of the 18th century. The study of the sources of three editions of this grammar allows us to understand which of the existing grammatical traditions had the strongest influence on the authors of the Russian language textbooks of that time. The purpose of this research is to study the features of the description of Russian grammar in three editions of the textbook by I. A. Heym, allowing to establish their sources and reflecting the methodological views of the author. Materials and Methods: the research material is the sections “Name”, “Pronoun” and “Verb” in three editions of the Russian language textbook for Germans “Russische Spraclehre für Deutsche” (1789, 1794, 1804). The description of not all grammatical categories of the name, pronoun and verb is subjected to analysis, but only those whose interpretation is different in various textbooks, and causes difficulties for foreign students: gender and declension of nouns, degrees of comparison of adjectives, categories of pronouns, tenses of the verb. Research methods: descriptive, comparative and analytical. Results: Three editions of Heym’s Russian grammar for Germans have an internal unity, but at the same time differ from each other in details. The first version of the textbook (1789) was based on the grammar of M.V. Lomonosov, and in some cases on the grammar of J. Rodde. The 1794 edition is also based on the grammar of M.V. Lomonosov, but at the same time on the grammars by J. Rodde and P.I. Sokolov. The text of the 1804 edition reveals a dependence on the academic grammar of 1802. I.A. Heym was more of a pedagogue than a linguist. His merit lies in the fact that he sought to make grammatical rules more accessible and understandable by systematizing and simplifying them and giving more common examples.

PEMBELAJARAN BAHASA RUSIA BAGI PEMANDU WISATA DI PULAU BALI

The use of the Russian language in Bali is very important due to the large number of Russian tourists visiting the island of Bali. Even though Russian grammar is very diverse and has significant differences from Indonesian grammar, this does not reduce the enthusiasm of the students to continue learning Russian. The method used in this research is a qualitative method with a cultural approach. The results of the study show that there are more and more Russian-speaking tour guides in Bali in line with the number of Russian tourist visits which continue to show an increase from 2002-2017. Some of them learn Russian through teaching institutions, and some are self-taught. In fact, a lot of information related to tourism to the island of Bali has now been made in Russian to make it easier for Russian tourists to understand.

Категория залога в курсе русской морфологии для тюркоязычных студентов-филологов

The article considers the morphological category of the Russian verb voice in the linguo-didactic aspect. The aim is to characterize the theoretical and applied aspects of studying the voice category within the framework of the discipline “The Modern Russian Language. Morphology” for Turkic-speaking philology students. The scientific novelty of the work is determined by the fact that for the first time, from the point of view of the methodology of teaching language disciplines, it analyses the system of voice oppositions of the Russian and Tatar languages, as well as related verbal categories (reflexivity, transitivity and actant derivation), substantiates methodological principles and gives recommendations for its study in the Turkic-speaking audience. As a result, methodologically relevant (didactically significant) differences between the Russian and Tatar languages in the field of voice form composition have been revealed, the consideration of which helps to optimize the process of teaching the Russian grammar to Turkic-speaking students.

M. V. Lomonosov’s Phonetic Terminology in German Translations (Exemplified by the Material of “Russian Grammar” and Its German Translation)

The article concerns the study of M. V. Lomonosov’s “Russian Grammar” sections which describe the phonetic structure of the Russian language, including segmental and suprasegmental levels, as well as the corresponding paragraphs in the German translation of this grammar made by Johann Stavenhagen in 1764. The main purpose of studying these text sources is selection of phonetic terminology used by Lomonosov and its comparison with German terminology in the structural and semantic perspective to establish conformity between Stavenhagen’s translation solutions and the author’s intentions in the terminological sphere. The relevance of the work is determined by the fact that at present there are practically no comparative studies devoted to the study of Lomonosov’s grammar and its translation into German in terms of parallel text metalanguage. Russian linguists have mostly focused on the original Russian text published in 1755, plenty of publications being concerned with its description and analysis, as well as with the historical and linguistic aspect of the German version of Lomonosov’s grammar design. The main research methods are those of vocabulary structural, semantic, definitional, and comparative types of analysis. While studying the selected Russian vocabulary, we have identified five thematically different terminological groups: 1) terms characterizing the suprasegmental level of utterance (intonation and prosody), 2) terms nominating articulation organs, 3) terms used to classify vowels and consonants, 4) terms of graphics and orthography, 5) units of articulation. Terminological units found in previous grammatical publications make up its main part. The author’s terminology, introduced for scientific use by Lomonosov himself appear to be a smaller part of the selected vocabulary. When translating the “Russian Grammar”, Stavenhagen primarily resorted to literal translation of phonetic terms employed by Lomonosov, and in some cases to a descriptive way of conveying the semantics of certain Russian terms in accordance with the norms of the German language of that time. A terminological comparative analysis allows identifying a number of orthographic and morphological doublets in the Russian and German phonetic terminological systems. The use of doublets agrees with the author’s and translator’s wish to make a grammar text more understandable to the reader.

S. Karcevski et R. Jakobson, grammairiens de la langue russe à l'époque du Cercle linguistique de Prague

Jacqueline FONTAINE, Université de Paris-VIII : «Karcevski and Jakobson, grammarians of the Russian Language in the Prague Linguistic Circle» &#x0D; It is always interesting to investigate how people making statements on general principles in linguistics (always better known than their methodology) manage when they work on the concrete field of writing a grammar, where the description will necessarily reveal the choices that they have made.&#x0D; A comparison between Karcevski and Jakobson, whose signatures were several times linked in linguistic manifestos at the time of the Prague Linguistic Circle, shows many convergences and divergences, in both the style and the concepts used to describe the grammar of Russian.&#x0D; Such an analysis throws further light on the diversity of scope, and the autonomy of the researchers who were members of the Prague Circle.

Russian grammar

The purpose of the study is to study the degree to which differential features of nouns in the prepositional case that explicate the periphery stage of parenthetic-modal units and expressions on the transitivity scale match, on the one hand, the differential features of nuclear representatives of nouns, and on the other hand, the features of nuclear representatives of parenthetic-modal units originating from adjectives. It is established that when used as a detached parenthetic-modal component of the utterance, "po sovesti" reaches the periphery zone of parenthetic-modal units. At the same time, the functional modalate that undergoes semantic and grammatical transformations does not disturb the semantic equivalence of the original substantive lexeme. The results of the study can be used when developing the theory of the parts of speech and inter-part-of-speech categories as well as to create the transpositional grammar of the Russian language.

К ИЗУЧЕНИЮ ИСТОКОВ ОТЕЧЕСТВЕННОГО ЛИНГВОКРАЕВЕДЕНИЯ И РЕГИОНАЛЬНОЙ ОНОМАСТИКИ

The article presents an analysis of scientific literature devoted to the study of the linguistic local history direction of language learning. The aim of the work is to describe the origins of Russian linguistic local history, regional onomastics based on the use of textological analysis, descriptive method, elements of comparative and comparative-historical methods. The material of the research is presented by works that have a linguistic local history character, starting from the 30s of 18th century. Based on the analysis of scientific works of the 18th and early 19th centuries, including the linguistic local history component, the author comes to the following conclusions. Since the first third of the 18th century in Russia, there have been some fragmentary attempts at linguistic local lore commenting when describing settlements by historians, geographers, physicians, and biologists who participated in research expeditions across Russia. Of particular importance in this respect was the historical and regional studies activities of V.N. Tatishchev, who compiled detailed questions for the study of settlements in Russia, prepared the first part of the “Lexicon of Russian historical, geographical, political and civil”. The material of the research shows that the origins of scientific linguistic regional studies in Russia are associated with the activities of V.K. Trediakovsky and M.V. Lomonosov. M.V. Lomonosov consistently introduced the linguistic local history component into the research methodology, which was applied in practice in the compilation of the “Russian grammar”, in the organization of centralized work on the historical and geographical study of Russian settlements, in the development of the foundations of teaching Russian students in their native language. M.V. Lomonosov is the founder of the linguistic local history direction in Russian linguistics. The beginning of scientific regional onomastic research is associated with the activities of E.A. Bolkhovitinov, who for the first time in 1800 gave a detailed historical and linguistic description of the toponymy and microtoponymy of the Voronezh Territory.

Language Code Mixing in the Discourse of IT Companies

The mixing of English with national languages in business communication is a consequence of global processes: the development of transnational corporations, modern technologies, the intensification of communication flows and the dominance of English in intercultural communication. Mixing and switching of language codes is quite often observed in the corporate media discourse of IT companies. For organizations in this sphere, English is the main language of business communication, but its use goes beyond professional slang and terminology, creating characteristic forms of language codes mixing. The purpose of the research presented in the article is to identify and analyze situations of mixing English and Russian in the corporate media discourse of IT companies. The research material was corporate media texts in Russian and English posted on the pages of official websites, corporate blogs and in the social networks Twitter and Facebook. In the analyzed texts in Russian, English inclusions (phrases, individual words and their parts) are often observed to denote work programs and tools, corporate events. As part of the professional slang of IT professionals, English words are transmitted using the Cyrillic alphabet and in accordance with the rules of Russian grammar. The influence of English on Russian media discourse in the IT field is also observed in the expansion of the meanings of some words. In Russian media texts, there are also phrases that are not typical for the Russian language, but represent a literal translation of English phrases. English-language sentences are used in Russian texts as mottos or slogans of the company, as congratulations or advice. As a result of the content analysis of the selected media texts, it was also found that along with the English language, the values typical for the discourse of American corporations are being borrowed. It was found that the value dominants of the corporate discourse of IT companies are change and progress, success, equality, partnership.

A Morphological Study of Grammatica Russica (1696): Focusing on Correlation of The Correct Syntax of Slavonic Grammar (1619)

This paper examines Russian grammar system patterns shown in Heinrich Wilhelm Ludolf’s Grammatica Russica in comparison with Meletius Smotrytsky’s Church Slavic grammar book, The Correct Syntax of Slavonic Grammar from a morphological view of nouns, prepositions, and conjunctions. By doing so, this study found the following. First, instead of systematizing the Russian grammar based on Greek and Latin, Ludolf wrote Grammatica Russica with the help of Smotrytsky’s book which demonstrated the linguistic transition of Church Slavic grammar. Second, in comparison with Smotrytsky’s The Correct Syntax of Slavonic Grammar, the simplified grammar found in the content and overall flow of Grammatica Russica not only reflects the inductive information on Russian language that Ludolf experienced and observed, but also can be reviewed as an optimal system to provide a practical approach to learning Russian for Europeans. Lastly, in discussing the difficulty of learning Russian, especially of its grammar, it should recognize its universality and specificity in relations with other European languages. And Grammatica Russica’s explanations in terms of contrast linguistics view are in line with today’s pedagogy in teaching foreign languages. Also, unlike Smotrytsky’s The Correct Syntax of Slavonic Grammar, it provides an opportunity to show Russia’s language and culture of its time in the section introducing the diminutive noun and its usages in everyday life. In this context, the Russian grammar system and its patterns shown in Grammatica Russica have significance as it provides an opportunity to review the history of Russian education as a foreign language.

M. V. Lomonosov’s "Russian Grammar" as the first rulebook of Russian orthography

The paper analyses the 1757 and 1765 editions of "Russian Grammar" and on this basis aims to formulate M. V. Lomonosov’s orthographic program as well as specific spelling rules set forth in his grammatical piece of work. An important objective of this research is to trace the influence of the Lomonosov rules on the orthographic practice in the XVIIIth–XIXth centuries and works by the great scientist’s followers. As a result, the study identified the enormous significance of Lomonosov’s works for the formation of the Russian literary language spelling standards. Not all rules prescribed in the Grammar were supported in common usage and stood the test of time, for instance, including the prefix s- (Russian с-) to the rule concerning the prefixes ending in z- (Russian з-). Nonetheless, the scientist deserves much credit as he laid the fundamental groundwork for the Russian literary language spelling standards. M. V. Lomonosov was the first to formulate the basic orthographic principles; he made it a rule to spell roots according to their derivation ("po proizvozhdeniyu"); in addition, the scientist insisted on the uniformity of spelling prefixes and suffixes; finally, he suggested standardising the spelling of Russian endings by contrast with Church Slavonic ones. The norms prescribed in the "Russian Grammar" treatise underpin all the later Russian spelling rulebooks and are still relevant nowadays.

Пассивизация непереходных глаголов в русском языке: существует ли системный запрет?

ABSTRACT The article challenges the traditional theory according to which only transitive verbs can have passive voice forms in Russian. Based on the Russian National Corpus and texts found on the Internet, the paper shows that the grammatical system of Russian permits the passivization of oblique-complement verbs and verbs that govern prepositional phrases. The analysis shows that whether or not a verb permits the formation of passive voice forms depends on the communicative status of the complement rather than its grammatical form, while the semantic and morphonological restrictions on passivization equally apply to verbs regardless of the form of their complements. The paper gives evidence confirming that some passive voice forms are loan translations from other languages, but argues that the use of the loan translation mechanism does not bring about anything that contradicts the rules of Russian grammar, but rather leads to a more comprehensive implementation of previously unused capabilities of the grammatical system.

Flipping the Classroom? From Text to Video in Teaching Russian Grammar

Flipping the Classroom? From Text to Video in Teaching Russian Grammar

A study of the speech of bilingual children of Russian Germans living in Germany

The article presents the relevant issue of analysing the common features of the grammar of Russian as language inherited by the second or third generation of migrant children in Europe and in the world. The novelty of the study is in the fact that it compares the speech of children with different dominant languages and, in particular, studies the speech of a group of children from families of Russian Germans living in Germany under dual language inheritance. Their parents have a very rich migration history, as they are, in turn, also heritage speakers of German, the language, which they spoke in their family. In the present paper, the main task will be to identify the common features determined by the contact between Russian as a heritage language and other languages, especially at morphological and lexical levels. For this purpose, a field research project was conducted at the Learning and Integration Centre Dialog e. V. in Reutlingen. The analysis of oral and written works of bilingual children of the last generation of Russian Germans showed not only the common elements of erosion identified in the heritage grammar, but also the special linguistic features caused by the transition from German-Russian to Russian-German inheritance. The influence of their parents language distinguishes them from other groups of Russian students, emphasizes the importance of studying not only childrens, but also their parents speech, as well as teaching standard Russian in the framework of non-formal education.