Linguistic experiment as a means of cognitive activity of students with a differentiated approach to teaching the Russian language. Language game as a linguistic experiment Surface and deep structure of a sentence

OUR ARCHIVE

A.M. Shakhnarovich

LINGUISTIC EXPERIMENT AS A METHOD OF LINGUISTIC AND PSYCHOLINGUISTIC RESEARCH

The article was first published in the collective monograph "Fundamentals of the Theory of Speech Activity" (Moscow: Nauka, 1974) - the first generalizing work created by domestic psycholinguists. The author considers various types of scientific experiments in linguistics. An insufficient understanding that any appeal to "linguistic consciousness" is a kind of linguistic experiment leads to an underestimation of the place of the experiment in the system of methods of "classical" linguistics and, accordingly, an underestimation of the place of psycholinguistics in the system of disciplines of modern linguistics.

Keywords: experiment, psycholinguistics, method, research

The article was published for the first time in collaborative monograph "The bases of the theory of speech activity" (Moscow, Publishing house "Nauka", 1974) which is the first summarizing work created by Russian psycholinguists. The author describes different kinds of scientific experiments in psycholinguistics. Insufficient understanding that each access to language consciousness is a kind of linguistic experiment leads to underestimation of the place of an experiment in the system of classical linguistics methods and correspondingly to underestimation of psycholinguistics" place in the system of modern linguistics disciplines.

Key words: experiment, psycholinguistics, method, research.

The purpose of a scientific experiment is to artificially evoke a phenomenon to be studied in order to, by observing this phenomenon, to know it more deeply and fully. The experiment should provide opportunities for more detailed observation of the object of study, sometimes under conditions that are as close to natural as possible. An experiment in the formulation of a scientific theory is not only a method of verification, verification of the constructed model and the basis for its creation, but also allows you to generalize a particular case of research. Experimenting on single phenomena, the researcher must be aware of each phenomenon as a special case of the general, the mode of existence of the latter.

The experiment is empirical

the basis of a scientific theory and therefore affects its heuristic value. This fully applies to the linguistic experiment.

The linguistic experiment is most widely used in two areas of science: in linguistics and language teaching (respectively, it is called linguistic and pedagogical).

A linguistic experiment serves as a way to verify a model built by a linguist. With the help of experiment, the linguist determines the heuristic value of the model and, ultimately, the epistemological value of the whole theory. We understand the language model (logical model) as “any sufficiently correct, i.e., satisfying certain requirements for adequacy, description

language” [Leontiev 1965, 44].

The pedagogical experiment is carried out in order to find out the comparative effectiveness of individual methods and techniques of language teaching. It is carried out in the usual conditions of educational work. In addition, a pedagogical experiment can mean "testing in practice some new pedagogical idea - the possibility of its implementation, its effectiveness" [Ramul 1963]. In this case, the pedagogical idea acts as a model of the student's cognition of new material. The experiment in this case acts as a way to verify the model.

In relation to language learning, a pedagogical experiment should help answer the question, “What arguments function is the result of our learning” [Leontiev 1969]. The latter necessarily presupposes that the pedagogical experiment should be preceded by a psychological experiment.

Empirical (in our context, this is the same as experimental, due to the coincidence of these concepts in the practice of linguistic research) language learning is based on obtaining data on the functioning of the living language system in the individual speech activity of its speaker. What distinguishes such an experiment from an experiment in general is that linguistics deals with the facts themselves, processes, aspects of the language system, but not with their displayed characteristics. In other words, a linguistic experiment always deals with the study of directly displayed properties of phenomena.

The heuristic significance of a linguistic experiment is determined by how correctly it reveals the measure of the adequacy of the language model.

The linguistic experiment has found wide application in the practice of dialectological studies. Dialectologists

are faced with the task of modeling the "microsystem" of the language, going from special cases noted in live speech to building some model of a given dialect. Verification of the model is carried out in the situation of a thought experiment, when a linguist identifies himself with a native speaker of a language (dialect). On the specifics of a mental linguistic experiment, see below.

There are a number of methods of experimental dialectological research, which it would be more fair to call not methods, but methods of research. A dialectologist deals, as a rule, with native speakers of a dialect and receives information from them about different aspects of the language in various ways1. However, the observations of the dialectologist are very complicated by the fact that they are practically impossible to repeat. Having received some empirical material, having built a model of a dialect, a dialectologist is often deprived of the opportunity to check the absolute correctness of his model. This is explained by the fact that oral speech "is available for observation only at the moment of pronunciation, when the act of speech is being carried out" [Avanesov 1949, 263]. This, in particular, distinguishes experiments on living languages from experiments on dead languages.

The main techniques used by dialectologists are conversation and questioning. In the course of a live conversation with native speakers or in observing their conversation, the researcher receives phonetic and morphological material. When collecting material on vocabulary, a survey can be used. During the survey, the names of a number of household items, etc. are clarified. At the same time, questions are posed: “What is this?” and “What is it called?”. It is not recommended to ask questions like “Do you pronounce this way?”. Such questions, in addition to the fact that they lead to stereotypical answers, and not always correct ones, also create a certain attitude for the speaker of the dialect. From-

1 We do not consider the case when the dialectologist deals with texts (records, folklore).

The negative side of such questions is that they appeal to the “linguistic sense” of native speakers and the answer contains a subjective assessment that is not taken into account (so it’s not the questions themselves that are not suitable, but their use and interpretation of the answers).

The so-called "field linguistics" is close in methods of observation and purpose to dialectological research. In a broad sense, this name combines a set of techniques and methods of working with informants in the study of non-written languages. It is assumed that as a result of "field" experiments, some model of a living language can be compiled (see in this connection).

L.V. Shcherba, almost for the first time posing the problem of a linguistic experiment, wrote that a researcher of living languages, “having built some kind of abstract system from the facts of this material”, must “check it on new facts, i.e., look whether the conclusions facts of reality. Thus, the principle of experiment is introduced into linguistics” [Shcherba 1965, 368]. As follows from these words of L.V. Shcherba, the methods of a linguistic experiment are closely related to models. When experimenting in dialectological studies, the linguist usually deals with genetic models, and this determines the methods of the experiment. In "field linguistics" not only genetic models, but also axiomatic ones can be verified.

L.V. Shcherba identifies two types of experiment - positive experiment and negative experiment. With a positive experiment, “having made some assumption about the meaning of a particular word, a particular form, about a particular rule of word formation or formation, etc., one should try whether it is possible to say a number of different phrases (which can be infinitely multiplied ) by applying this rule. An affirmative result will confirm

the correctness of the postulate...” [ibid.].

If a positive experiment constructs a correct form, statement, etc., then a negative experiment constructs a deliberately incorrect statement, and the informant is required to note the incorrectness and make the necessary corrections. A negative experiment in its structure is the same positive one, and there is “no fundamental difference between them, and they often complement each other” [Leontiev 1965, 67].

The third type of linguistic experiment was singled out by A.A. Leontiev. This is an alternative experiment, during which the informant determines the identity / non-identity of the proposed segments. In this regard, it is important to objectify the data received from the informant as much as possible. To do this, Harris asks the informant to repeat what he has already said, or asks another informant the question “Would you say the same?” . However, this variant of objectification is not very successful. A more successful option seems to be when the informant is asked a standard question - about the identity or non-identity of the proposed segments of speech, which can be answered unequivocally - "yes" or "no". However, this version of the experiment also directly appeals to the linguistic consciousness of the informant. The most natural would be the data obtained indirectly - in the most natural conditions of a lively casual conversation (filmed by a kind of "hidden camera"). In the course of such a conversation, the psychologically real elements of the language system are exteriorized, they acquire functional certainty. In addition, the feedback that is established during communication allows, according to the reaction of the interlocutor, to objectify the data received. During the conversation, the informant freely operates with syllables, words, sentences - real "quanta" of the flow of speech. The psycholinguistic reality of these "quanta" is always the same (in contrast to the reality in the consciousness of information

manta phonemes, morphemes, etc.), does not depend on the level of development of speech skills and on the conditions of learning the informant's native language.

An interesting option is offered by A. Healy. He describes an experiment using two informants placed with their backs to each other. In front of one lies a series of objects, and the other is silently shown any object of the same series. The informant names the object, and his partner must choose a similar one. Thus, the constructed experiment "includes" not only the system of generation, but also the system of perception. The question of identity/non-identity of segments of speech is objectified, and it becomes possible (after a series of experiments) to assess the correctness of the statement [Healey 1964].

The task of the researcher is also to reveal and actualize all the potentialities of the language. Only if this condition is met, the description of the language will be adequate enough. In a “field” experiment, which is carried out by traditional methods of working with informants, it is often impossible to discover “potential generative possibilities of a language that, for one reason or another, are not widely used in the speech of speakers” [Kibrik 1970, 160-161]. A lively conversation in this sense also turns out to be very useful: in direct communication, the “turnover” of the potential possibilities of the language is much wider.

In the cited work, L.V. Shcherba distinguishes three aspects of linguistic phenomena. "Processes of speaking and understanding" constitute "speech activity". Dictionaries and grammars of languages constitute the second aspect - the "language system". “The totality of everything spoken and understood in a certain specific situation, in one or another era of the life of a given social

group is the third aspect of linguistic phenomena - "linguistic material"2.

This implies the need to include two other aspects in the modeling of the language (“language system”) - “speech activity” and “speech organization”. If these three aspects find their expression in the model, then in the course of a linguistic experiment linguistic phenomena should be verified in the unity of these three aspects. (In other words, the linguist must study the language used by the speaker.)

The traditionally conducted linguistic experiment is focused on only one of the aspects of linguistic phenomena. The model is verified on the "individual speech system" as a specific manifestation of the language system, without taking into account those internal factors that ultimately determine the "individual speech system" itself.

The study of the trinity of linguistic phenomena must necessarily involve, in addition to the "language system" and "linguistic material", also the clarification of "individual speech activity". In other words, it is necessary to find ways and means of actualizing the potential possibilities of the language in terms of their functioning in the mind of the speaker. At the same time, the actual linguistic data may not always coincide with those obtained as a result of the psychological (more precisely, psycholinguistic) "turn" of the experiment. In support of the above, we can cite experiments conducted by L. V. Sakharny in Perm to study the psychological reality of word-formation models. These experiments showed that the separation of semantically generalized classes of words, traditional in linguistics, does not fully correspond to specific semantic typical features when grouping

2 Wed. at A.A. Leontiev, respectively: "language ability", "language process", "language standard" [Leontiev 1965].

roving them in the mind of the speaker [Sakharny 1970]. As you can see, with such a "turn" of the experiment, linguistics also wins, because the picture of the "language system" is supplemented and refined. Thus, “...linguistics...cannot be closed within the framework of the local standard. She must study the language standard, correlating it both with the language process and with the language ability" [Leontiev 1965, 58].

What has been said above is especially important in relation to a thought experiment, which is understood as such a type of linguistic experiment, when the experimenter and the subject are the same person. L.V. Shcherba, describing this type of experiment, used the well-known psychological term "self-observation" and wrote that "an individual speech system is only a specific manifestation of the language system, and therefore the study of the first for cognition of the second is quite legitimate" [Shcherba 1931, 123]. However, the individual speech system is influenced by

There are internal and external factors, under the influence of which it is not reduced to a simple actualization of the language system. These factors can be eliminated (or taken into account) only by preparing certain conditions, formulating a hypothesis, and introducing a model to be verified (see [Polivanov 1928]). The more attention during a thought experiment is paid to the process (“speaking”, formation, organization) of an utterance, the higher the measure of the adequacy of a linguistic experiment. Insufficient understanding of the important fact that any appeal to "linguistic consciousness", linguistic "introspection" is a kind of linguistic experiment and that this experiment must be organized according to general rules, often leads to an underestimation of the place of the experiment in the system of methods of "classical" linguistics and, accordingly, , underestimation of the place of psycholinguistics in the system of disciplines of modern linguistics.

Bibliography

Avanesov R.I. Essays on Russian dialectology. T. I. - M., 1949.

Kibrik A.E. Psycholinguistic experiment in field linguistics// Proceedings of the 3rd Symrozium on Psycholinguistics. - M., 1970.

Leontiev A.A. The word in speech activity. - M., 1965.

Leontiev A.A. Psycholinguistic units and the generation of speech utterance. - M., 1969.

Polivanov E.D. Introduction to linguistics for oriental universities. - L., 1928.

Ramul K.A. Introduction to the methods of experimental psychology. - Tartu, 1963.

Sakharny L.V. On the problem of the psychological reality of the word-formation model // Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on Psycholinguistics. - M., 1970.

Shcherba L.V. About the triple aspect of linguistic phenomena and about the experiment in linguistics / / Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR - ser. 7. - 1931. - No. 1.

Shcherba L.V. On the triple aspect of linguistic phenomena and on the experiment in linguistics / / In the book: Zvegintsev V.A. History of linguistics of the 19th-20th centuries in essays and extracts. Part II. -M., 1965.

Gudschinsky S.C. How to learn an unwritten language. - Santa Ana, 1965.

Harris Z.S. Structural linguistics. - Chicago, 1960.

Healey A. Handling unsophisticated linguistic informants. - Canberra, 1964.

Samarin W. Field linguistics. - New York, 1965.

The essence and main goal of the linguistic experiment in the lessons of the Russian language

Linguistic experiment is one of the main methods of working on the text. It can be carried out at grammar lessons, speech development; when working on the language of works of art; can accompany many other types of work.

The wide and conscious use of this technique requires a deep understanding of the essence of the experiment, knowledge of its various types. Mastering a linguistic experiment will help the teacher to choose the right solutions in a problem situation, both in the classroom and outside the classroom, for example, when selecting didactic material.

What is the essence of a linguistic experiment, what are its types?

The source material of the linguistic experiment is the text (including the text of a work of art), the final material is its deformed version.

The main goal of the educational experiment is to justify the selection of language means in this text, to explain “the only correct placement of the only necessary words” (L. N. Tolstoy); moreover, the establishment of an internal relationship between the linguistic means selected for a given text.

Awareness of this should warn teachers against excessive enthusiasm for the process of experimentation and, at the same time, aim at the obligatoryness of detailed and purposeful conclusions after comparing the secondary and primary materials of the text.

So, for example, experimenting with the sentence:Wonderful Dnieper in calm weather... "(Gogol), we get secondary material:"The Dnieper is beautiful in calm weather; Wonderful Dnieper in calm weather…” But this cannot be stopped in any way. This would deprive the experiment of purposefulness and turn it into an end in itself. The following conclusion is needed: N.V. Gogol did not accidentally choose the wordwonderful, not synonymouswonderful, wonderfuletc., for the wordwonderfulalong with the main meaning (“very beautiful”) contains a shade of originality, extraordinary beauty, originality .

An indispensable condition for the truth of the conclusions in the experiment is the clarification of the boundaries of the observed linguistic unit: sound, word, phrase, sentence, etc. This means that if the teacher starts the experiment, operating with a word, then until the end of the experiment, he must work with the word, and not replace it with a phrase or other units of the language.

Linguistic experiment in its orientation can be analytical (from the whole text to its components) and synthetic (from language units to the text). When studying the language of works of art at school, as a rule, an experiment of an analytical nature is used. This does not mean at all that an experiment of a synthetic nature should not take place at school. It can be successfully used in grammar lessons and in this case is called construction .

According to the communicativeness - non-communicativeness of the final material (deformed text), a linguistic experiment can be positive and negative.

A negative experiment outlines the boundaries of the manifestation of the linguistic phenomenon under consideration in the best possible way and thereby reveals its specificity.

So, for example, attempts to replace in the phrasepour contemptthen the first, then the second word give one possible replacementscorn.

All other substitutions are negative material: “sprinkle with contempt”, “pour with anger”, “pour with disdain”, etc.

Such experimentation reveals the phraseological essence of the phrasepour contempt.

A visual demonstration of the features of the modern Russian literary language, the choice of a solution in a problem situation, an analysis of the writer's language can be carried out at school with the help of various types of experiments.

1. Elimination of this linguistic phenomenon from the text. For example, the exclusion of all adjectives in the definition function from the text (an excerpt from "Bezhin Meadows" by I. S. Turgenev). Primary text:It was a beautiful July day, one of those days that only happens when the weather has settled for a long time. From early morning the sky is clear; the morning dawn does not burn with fire: it spreads with a gentle blush.

Secondary text:There was...a day, one of those days that only happens when the weather has settled for a long time. From the very morning the sky is clear; ... the dawn does not burn with fire; it spreads ... blush.

Conclusion: the secondary text is devoid of the qualitative characteristics of the described details or objects. Such a text does not give an idea of what the artistic details are in terms of color, shape, etc.

This is how the teacher shows and learns the semantic and artistic-figurative function of adjectives.

2. Substitution (replacement) of a language element with a synonymous or single-functional one. For example, in the text of A.P. Chekhov "Chameleon" wordgoesreplace with the wordwalking,a wordstridingwordgoes: A police overseer, Ochumelov, walks across the market square in a new overcoat and with a bundle in his hand. A red-haired policeman walks behind him with a sieve filled to the top with confiscated gooseberries.

This substitution gives a secondary text with other combinations of words: a police officer is walking, a red-haired policeman is walking. After such a replacement, the conclusion is inevitable about the advantages of the primary text, in which the neutral verb is given first.goesin relation to a person of high rank, then a synonymous verb is givenstridingwith a hint of solemnity

Expanding (common text) may aim to deepen understanding of it when reading slowly .

Interpretation by the method of deployment requires, in our opinion, the beginning of the poem by M. Yu. Lermontov:And it’s boring and sad, and there is no one to give a hand to in a moment of spiritual adversity ...The deployment reveals the generalized nature of the first impersonal sentence: “I, and you, and each of us are both bored and sad ...” It would be wrong to relate the feelings expressed in this poem only to the personality of the author.

4. Curtailment may have the purpose of showing the conditions and scope of the artistic transformation or metaphorization of the word. For example, in the text of V.P. Kataev “Khutorok in the steppe” we fold the last phrase. Primary text: ...the storm had gone far out to sea, where lightning frantically ran along the blue horizon and the growl of thunder was heard.

Secondary text: ...The storm went far into the sea, where lightning frantically ran along the blue horizon and a growl was heard…

Conclusion: wordgrowl(thunder) in the text of V.P. Kataev becomes a metaphor within the phrase. A phrase is a minimal framework for the metaphorization of words.

5. Transformation (transformation) is used in school grammar when replacing the actual construction of a passive, declarative sentence with an interrogative one(Student wrote an essay – The presentation was written by a student. Brother was at work today - Was brother at work today?).

6. Permutation of words and other language units. For example, we make a permutation in the first line of I. A. Krylov's fable "The Wolf and the Lamb":On a hot day, a lamb went to the stream to get drunk.We get: Zwent to the stream to get drunk lamb on a hot dayetc. Putting the verb first emphasizes the action. Is this the intention of the author? Such permutations vary the thought, accentuate either the action, or its time, or the purpose of the action, etc., and provide justification for the “only necessary placement of words”, fixed by I. A. Krylov.

Unification is the removal of the multidimensionality of the text. Any text (speech) is multifaceted and semantically capacious. It manifests the meanings and shades of the meanings of words, the semantics of grammatical meanings and categories (for example, gender, number of nouns, aspect of verbs); features of syntactic links and structure of sentences, paragraphs; finally, the originality of rhythm and melody, the timbre of speech .

We can propose the following unification experiment:

Take as a basis five texts of approximately the same volume as primary material: business style, scientific, colloquial, artistic, journalistic. Words have been replaced by syllablesta-ta-ta.At the same time, the number of syllables, word stress and rhythm melodics were preserved.

Thus, vocabulary, morphology, syntax were eliminated to a certain extent in the texts, and the phonetic, sound side was partially preserved.

The secondary material of the experiment can be recorded on magnetic tape. When listening to it, it can be assumed that most of those in the audience will guess the style. Then the conclusion follows: rhythm-melodic is a style-forming means, “makes style”. An observation was made: listening from a distance to the muffled voice of a television or radio announcer, only by the rhythm and melody, without distinguishing words, one can guess what kind of transmission is going on (business, artistic, journalistic, etc.)

When experimenting with a coherent text, over the language of works of art, or the "art of the word" and inevitably dissecting the text to some extent, one should try not to allow the aesthetic impression of the whole text to be destroyed. From time to time, to the extent necessary, during the experiment, a whole or partial text should sound again and again, preferably in an exemplary performance (a magnetic tape with a recording of the masters of the artistic word, the best artists, records, reading by the teacher, students) .

Applying the experiment in the lessons of the Russian language and literature, one should maintain a sense of proportion; select the type, nature of the experiment in accordance with the selection of linguistic means in the text, in connection with the artistic and visual means of the work, which make it unique.

Kupalova A.Yu. Tasks of improving the system of methods of teaching the Russian language. M.: Wolters Kluver, 2010. S. 75.

Shakirova L.Z. Workshop on the methodology of teaching the Russian language in the national school. Moscow: Unity-Dana, 2008. P. 86.

Fedosyuk M.Yu. Ladyzhenskaya T.A. Russian language for students of non-philology. Tutorial. - M: Nauka, 2007. S. 56.

INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL "SYMBOL OF SCIENCE" №11-4/2016 ISSN 2410-700X

2. Reichstein A. D. Comparative analysis of German and Russian phraseology. - M.: Higher school, 1980. - 143 p.

3. Shevchenko V.D. Fundamentals of the theory of the English language: Textbook. - Samara: SamGAPS, 2004. - 72p.

4. Abbyy Lingvo: online dictionary [Electronic resource] - Access mode: http://www.lingvo-online.ru/ru (date of access: 15.02.2016)

5. Duden online: Dictionary of the German language [Electronic resource] - Access mode: http://www.duden.de/ (Date of access: 15.02.2016)

Morozova Nadezhda Mikhailovna

dr. phil. Sciences, Professor VI Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia

Voronezh, RF E-mail: [email protected]

LINGUISTIC EXPERIMENT OF A. M. PESHKOVSKY AS A METHOD OF STUDYING THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE

annotation

The article deals with the views of A. M. Peshkovsky regarding the use of a linguistic experiment in the practice of teaching the Russian language. In addition, specific examples of the application of the linguistic experiment by the scientists themselves in the works devoted to the study of the Russian language are analyzed. The scientist considered the linguistic experiment as an effective method of forming students' speech and stylistic skills.

Keywords

Method of linguistic experiment, practice of teaching the Russian language, observation of the language, types of linguistic experiment.

The modern competence-based approach in the system of higher education requires increased attention to the practical mastery of the skills of oral and written communication in Russian in the course of studying such disciplines as "Russian language and culture of speech", "Russian language in business documentation". Today, special attention is paid to those teaching methods that contribute to the formation of an exemplary linguistic personality of a specialist, whose speech corresponds to the norms of the Russian literary language, a high level of spelling, punctuation and stylistic literacy. These methods include the method of linguistic experiment, which was written about in the 1930s by the well-known Russian linguist, Professor A. M. Peshkovsky.

Of great interest to teachers are the works of A. M. Peshkovsky “Russian Syntax in Scientific Coverage”, “Our Language”, “How to Conduct Classes in Syntax and Style” even today. In them, the scientist constantly emphasizes that observations on the language are closely related to the experiment. It is with the help of a linguistic experiment that “a deliberate change is made in the actual phenomenon of speech for the purposes of learning”.

Using simple and vivid examples, the scientist shows how this method can be used to detect the distinctive features of grammatical concepts and phenomena.

A classic example of the use of a linguistic experiment for scientific purposes is, for example, the identification of the essence of isolated members of a sentence by substituting possible synonymous variants of the construction in question: I am surprised that you, with your kindness, do not feel this; I am surprised that you, so kind, do not feel this; I wonder that you, being so

INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL "SYMBOL OF SCIENCE" №11-4/2016 ISSN 2410-700Х_

kind, don't feel it; I am surprised that you, who are so kind, do not feel it; I am surprised that you, although you are so kind, do not feel it. Compare: I'm surprised you and your wife don't feel this way. The experiment performed allowed the scientist to conclude that "the intonation modifications discovered in the first of these examples are not outwardly, not random, but create a really special form of the phrase." The combination with your kindness is intoned as a separate sentence, as if inserted into the sentence that you do not feel it. A. M. Peshkovsky called such a minor member isolated.

With the help of a linguistic experiment, A. M. Peshkovsky also showed the differences between composition and subordination in complex sentences. For this, the relations expressed by unions in complex sentences were studied from the point of view of their reversibility and irreversibility. The linguistic experiment was carried out with the following sentences:

He didn't go to school and he has a headache.

He didn't go to school because he had a headache.

He has a headache and he didn't go to school

He has a headache because he didn't go to school.

The meaning of the permutation is to try to tear off the sentence that begins with the union and put it in front, and attach another sentence to the union. As a result of the experiment, it turned out that the union withstood such a gap, but the union did not. Therefore, the union because is more closely related to the sentence that it begins with itself.

The different "behavior" of conjunctions in the considered sentences determines the nature of the semantic relations between the parts of a complex whole. In the first phrase, the rearrangement of sentences did not change the relationship between them, but in the second, the relationship changed: what was the cause became the effect, and what was the effect became the cause. Consequently, the union because forms with that sentence one semantic whole, which it begins with itself. It can move from place to place without any change in meaning for the whole complex whole (except purely stylistic). And there is nothing like that in the union.

“Thus,” concludes Peshkovsky, “therefore, in one case, the indicator of the relationship stands between the correlatives, and in the other - with one of them, that is, in one case we have what is called a composition, and in the other - something what is called submission.

Experiments of this kind help to reveal various features of the grammatical phenomena under consideration.

List of used literature

1. Peshkovsky A. M. Selected Works. - M.: Education, 1959. - S. 223.

2. Peshkovsky A. M. Russian syntax in scientific coverage. - M.: Enlightenment, 1956. - p.415-416, p. 463-464.

Nazarkina Valentina Vladimirovna

undergraduate gr. M-22, KSU, Abakan, RF E-mail: [email protected]

ASSOCIATIVE EXPERIMENT IN THE FORMATION OF INTERCULTURAL

COMPETENCES

annotation

The article reflects the problem of studying intercultural communication, the solution of which is successfully

1. It is known that in the XX century. in various fields of science and art (in mathematics, biology, philosophy, philology, painting, architecture, etc.), many valuable ideas and undertakings of Russian scientists and cultural figures died out in the stuffy atmosphere of Soviet totalitarianism, but were recognized and developed in the West and decades later they return to Russia again. This applies to a large extent to the method linguistic experiment, whose enormous role was persistently emphasized in the 1920s by A.M. Peshkovsky and especially L.V. Shcherba. “Having made any assumption about the meaning of this or that word, this or that form, about this or that rule of word formation or form formation, etc., one should try whether it is possible to say a number of various phrases (which can be infinitely multiplied) using this rule.<...>In the possibility of applying the experiment lies the enormous advantage - from a theoretical point of view - of the study of living languages" (Shcherba 1974: 32).

In words, the need for experimentation in synchronic studies is apparently recognized by all Russian linguists, but in reality, however, the possibilities of this method are still not used enough. Foreign research on grammar, semantics, pragmatics is, as a rule, a series of experiments on several carefully selected examples and interpretation of the results. In Russia, work on contemporary language in this respect differ little from works on stories language: both in those and in others, large lists of examples from the examined texts are given, and the very size of the list is regarded as proof of the correctness of the position being developed. This ignores the fact that in real texts the analyzed phenomenon is often distorted. influence of additional factors. We forget the warning of A.M. Peshkovsky, who noted that it would be a mistake to see, for example, in the union and exponent of distribution, cause-and-effect, conditional-effect, adversative, etc. relationships; this would mean that “everything that can be extracted from the material content of the sentences it combines simply falls into the meaning of the union” (Peshkovsky 1956: 142). The student of language then finds himself in the position of a chemist who, for the chemical analysis of a metal, would take pieces of its ore of different mineral composition and attribute the observed differences to the metal itself. Obviously, the chemist will take for his experiment a pure metal, devoid of impurities. We must also operate with carefully selected examples, excluding the influence of additional factors, if possible, and experiment with these examples (for example, replace a word with its synonym, change the type of speech act, expand the phrase due to the diagnostic context, etc.).

5. The experiment should become for the linguist who studies modern language just as common a working technique as it is, for example, for a chemist. However, the fact that it occupies a modest place in linguistic research is by no means accidental. The experiment requires certain skills and considerable effort. Therefore, it seems to us that it is especially important to use the experimental material that is already available, "lies underfoot." We mean language game.
A paradoxical fact: the linguistic experiment is much wider than linguists use (for many centuries, if not millennia) the speakers themselves– when they play with the form of speech.
An example is a series of experiments by O. Mandelstam with pronoun such indicating a high degree of quality (e.g., he is so strong). Here are the lines from a youthful poem of 1909:

I was given a body - what should I do with it,
So single and so mine.

Here is a somewhat unusual combination of the pronoun such with an adjective single and especially with the pronoun my. Combination so mine appears to be admissible, since it is close in meaning to "completely normal" combinations of the type so dear. However, Mandelstam himself clearly felt the unusualness of this combination and repeatedly used it in humorous poems, in a kind of auto-parody:

I was given a stomach, what should I do with it,
So hungry and so mine? (1917)

(The comic effect is created by narrowing and reducing the topic itself, reducing it to stomach problems.)

Do not be upset,
Get on the tram
So empty
Such an eighth. (c. 1915)

The comic effect is caused by the combination of the pronoun such with numeral eighth, which is difficult to comprehend as a qualitative adjective. phrase such an eighth anomalous, but not meaningless: as a result of the game, a new meaning arises. The fact is that, unlike the first, “prestigious”, distinguished numerals (cf. the first beauty, the first guy in the village, the first thing) numeral eighth- unselected, "ordinary", and thus the combination such an eighth takes on the meaning of ‘so ordinary, ordinary’.

Surface and deep sentence structure

Surface structure

A linguistic term for oral or written statements that have emerged from the deep structure after operations of generalization, distortion, omission, etc.

EXAMPLE. The surface structure of each language, reflecting the peculiarities of historical development, determines the possibility of ambiguous translation from one language to another. For example, a literal translation from Russian into Ossetian of the concept of “iron discipline” has a meaning opposite to Russian, since in Russian iron, as harder, is implicitly opposed to wood, and in Ossetian, as softer, it is steel.

Granovskaya R.M., Elements of practical psychology, St. Petersburg, "Light", 1997, p. 251.

At different levels - the level of sounds, the level of words, the level of sentences, the level of paragraphs, etc. - There are different rules. Database of numerous forms of building journalistic, popular science, etc. texts at the level of several paragraphs are collected in the computer program "Techniques of Journalism & PR".

Generative grammar

A trend in linguistics that arose in the 1950s of the 20th century, founded by the American linguist Noam Chomsky.

The approach is based on the idea of a finite set of rules (techniques) that generate all the correct sentences of the language.

Thus, within the framework of the approach, the language is not described "as is", as traditional linguistics did, but the process of language modeling is described.

Deep Structure

The complete language form, the complete content of a particular statement (message), from which, for example, after generalizations, omissions and distortions, a "surface structure" appears, used in everyday communication.

Analyzing different languages, N. Chomsky suggested that there are innate "deep structures" that are the same for different languages. The number of such structures is relatively small and it is they that make it possible to translate texts from one language into another, since they fix the general schemes for constructing thoughts, statements.

EXAMPLE. “As an example of the transition of a deep structure to a surface one in the production of speech, N. Chomsky considered sentence (9), which, in his opinion, consists of two deep ones (10) and (11):

(9) A wise person is honest.

(10) The person is honest.
(11) Man is wise.

In order to “bring out” the surface structure from the deep structure, a person, according to Chomsky, sequentially performs the following operations: replaces the second group of the subject with the word who (a person who is wise, honest); omits which (a person is wise, honest); rearranges the person and is wise (the person is wise, honest); replaces the short form of the adjective wise with the full one - and gets the surface structure.

N. Chomsky introduces a number of rules for the transition of the deep structure to the surface one (rules of substitution, permutation, arbitrary inclusion of some elements, exclusion of other elements, etc.), and also proposes 26 transformation rules (passivization, substitution, permutation, legation, adjunction, ellipse and etc.)".

Guide to NLP: Explanatory Dictionary of Terms // Comp. V.V. Morozov, Chelyabinsk, "A. Miller's Library", 2001, p. 226-227.

The deep structure forms the meaning of the sentence, and the surface structure is the written or sound embodiment of this meaning.

EXAMPLE. “We can say that language is always smarter than us, because it has accumulated and accumulated all the experience of mankind. This is generally the main accumulator of experience. Secondly, the one who understands, bringing his own situation, always understands according to this situation and often sees in the text more or different than the author. There have been situations with me more than once when people came and said that in such and such a work I wrote this and that. I wondered. They took the text and started to show me that I really have it written there. And when I took their position, I had to admit that it was written there. But I didn't put it there deliberately, reflexively. We often have a lot of things in the text that we do not even suspect. And this is revealed through the process of understanding.”

Shchedrovitsky GP, Organizational thinking: ideology, methodology, technology. Course of lectures / From the archive of G.P. Shchedrovitsky, Volume 4, M., 2000, p. 134.

EXAMPLE. “When a hooligan pesters you on the street, he has a certain “scenario” in advance - a mental template of future behavior for himself and for a potential “victim” (the content of such a “scenario” is usually easily calculated). At the same time, the bully calculated in advance how to behave if you refuse to let him smoke (“What, bitch, is it a pity ?!”). There is a template in case you give a cigarette (“What are you, a bastard, giving raw ?!”). Even for the most unexpected, it would seem, case - and that is a template (“Who did you send?”). Therefore, it is necessary to break all and any patterns of communication.

Real case:

Man, do you want an awl in the eye?

Back off, goat, I have cops on my tail.

And they both parted ways. The semantics of the second phrase (in this case, the deep structure - Dictionary editor's note) is: "I'm cool myself, don't touch me, but they're chasing me." The aggressor's fantasy works in the direction: "He can fight back, besides, I can be detained by police officers who are on his tail."

Kotlyachkov A., Gorin S., Weapons - the word, M., "KSP +", 2001, p. 57.

EXAMPLE. “The Soviet linguist Lev Vladimirovich Shcherba, at an introductory lecture on the course of linguistics, suggested that students make out what the phrase means: “The glitched kuzdra shteko boked the bokra and curls the bokrenka.”

Think about this phrase, and you will agree with the students who, after grammatical analysis, came to the conclusion that the meaning of this phrase is something like this: something feminine in one step did something on some male creature, and then began to do something then prolonged with his cub. Someone specified: "The tigress broke the neck of the buffalo and is biting the buffalo."

The artist even managed to illustrate this phrase. But, as Lev Vasilyevich Uspensky, a student of Professor Shcherba, rightly writes in the wonderful book “A Word about Words”, after all, in this case no one will draw an elephant that broke a barrel and rolls the barrel.”

Platonov K.K., Entertaining psychology, M., "Young Guard", 1986, p. 191

Sections: Russian language

A student-centered approach, differentiated learning are the key concepts without which it is impossible to imagine a modern school. The Russian language lesson also requires close attention. If the forms of work with students with low motivation are already clear for many teachers, then what can be offered to those who are able to work at a high level of complexity?

One of the forms of work with gifted children in Russian language lessons can be a linguistic experiment. The dictionary of linguistic terms gives the following definition: a linguistic experiment is a test of the conditions for the functioning of a particular language element in order to determine its characteristic features, limits of possible use, and optimal use cases. “Thus, the principle of experiment is introduced into linguistics. Having made some assumption about the meaning of this or that word, this or that form, about this or that rule of word formation or form formation, etc., one should try whether it is possible to say a number of various phrases (which can be infinitely multiplied) by applying this rule . An affirmative result confirms the correctness of the postulate ... But negative results are especially instructive: they indicate either the incorrectness of the postulated rule, or the need for some kind of its restrictions, or the fact that the rule no longer exists, but there are only dictionary facts, etc. . P." (L. V. Shcherba). The importance of applying the linguistic experiment was noted by A. M. Peshkovsky, A. N. Gvozdev.

Finding new knowledge is carried out by the students themselves in the process of analyzing specific, particular phenomena of the language, from which they move on to the general, to theoretical conclusions and laws.

So, for example, when studying the topic “Animate and inanimate nouns”, the knowledge of students with increased learning motivation can be deepened with the help of a morphological experiment. Even in elementary school, children learned that animate nouns are those that answer the question: “Who?”, And inanimate nouns, respectively, answer the question: “What?”. In order for students to expand their knowledge and learn the difference between the scientific interpretation of nouns from the point of view of the category of animation - inanimateness and the everyday idea of this phenomenon, you can create the following problem situation: is the word “doll” an animate or inanimate noun?

The linguistic experiment will consist in the declension of this noun in the plural according to cases and comparing it with the forms of nouns that do not raise doubts about belonging to animate or inanimate nouns (for example, “sister”, “board”).

As a result of independent observations, students will come to the conclusion: for the nouns “doll” and “sister” in the plural, the form of the accusative case coincides with the form of the genitive case: ( no) dolls = (see) dolls(no sisters = see sisters), R. p. = V. p.

The nouns “doll” and “board” in the plural form of the accusative case do not match: no dolls = I see dolls, but there are no boards = I see boards. Doll formula: R.p. = V.p. Board Formula: I.p.=V.p

The division of nouns into animate and inanimate does not always coincide with the scientific idea of animate and inanimate nature.

For animate nouns in the plural, the form of the accusative case coincides with the form of the genitive case (for animate masculine nouns of the 2nd declension and in the singular).

For inanimate nouns in the plural, the form of the accusative case coincides with the form of the nominative case (for masculine nouns of the 2nd declension and in the singular, the form of the accusative case coincides with the form of the nominative case).

The nouns dead and corpse are synonymous, but the noun dead is animate (V.p. = R.p.: I see a dead person - there is no dead person), and the noun corpse is inanimate (V.p. = I.p.: I see a corpse - here there is a corpse).

The same can be observed in the example of the noun microbe. From the point of view of biology, this is part of wildlife, but the noun microbe is inanimate (V.p. = I.p.: I see a microbe - there is a microbe here).

Sometimes fifth graders have difficulty determining the case of nouns. Mix nominative and accusative, genitive and accusative. To understand what case the nouns of the 2nd and 3rd declension are in, they can be replaced by nouns of the 1st declension, in which the endings of the indicated cases do not match: I bought a briefcase, a notebook - I bought a book; invited a friend, mother - invited a sister. The singular form of nouns of the 1st declension, in which the dative case coincides with the prepositional, can be replaced by the plural form: on the road - on the roads (prepositional case - about the roads).

In working with students with increased motivation, the method of syntactic experiment can be widely used.

From textbooks, students learn that prepositions are not members of a sentence.

But interested children can be introduced to another point of view on the syntactic role of prepositions. Linguist Yu. T. Dolin believes: “In the process of speech practice, both the lexical and syntactic independence of a number of non-derivative prepositions noticeably increases.” The essence of the experiment will be to compare the use of two prepositions. For observation, let's take the lines of N. Rubtsov:

I, the young son of trading posts,
I want the storm to sound forever
So that for the brave there was a sea,
And if without, then the pier.

Students will be sure to pay attention to the different uses of the two prepositions.

One preposition is used before an adjective, and the second without a nominal form. In a sentence, the preposition “without” answers the question “How?” and is a circumstance. To confirm the observation, we can offer an example from a poem by E. Yevtushenko:

And this explosion is heard (sometimes late),
From now on, dividing my whole life into before and after.

Students' conclusions will be approximately as follows: the prepositions "before" and "after" answer the questions "what?" and are additions.

When parsing, you can also apply the method of linguistic experiment. In the case when difficulties arise with the definition of a sentence member, it is necessary to replace indistinct syntactic constructions with distinct ones. So in the sentence “Tourists finally noticed the exit to the surface”, difficulties may arise with the word “surface”. Instead of the sentence “Tourists finally spotted the exit to the surface”, you can use “Tourists finally spotted the exit leading to the surface” or “Tourists finally spotted the exit that leads to the surface”.

The possibility of replacing the prepositional-nominal combination “on the surface” with a participial phrase and an attributive clause proves that we are dealing with a definition.

The “silent” dictation can also be attributed to the linguistic experiment. A numeral is written on a piece of paper with a number, an object is drawn next to it. It is necessary to put the numeral and noun in a certain case. For example, no 97 (drawing), to 132 (drawing).

The linguistic experiment can take place in a group form. Each group receives a task in which a question is formulated, didactic material is presented and an experiment program is proposed to obtain a certain result. The results of the experiment can be evaluated both by the teacher himself and by a group of expert students, consisting of the most prepared students.

A linguistic experiment helps students to understand many difficult facts of the language, serves as a means to make sure that the interpretation of these facts is correct.