Religious style of speech. Church-religious style

Church-religious style
One of the functional styles of the modern Russian literary language, serving the sphere of church and religious social activity and correlating with the religious form of public consciousness. Communication in this area includes speeches by clergy to mass audiences on the radio, at rallies, on television, in the State Duma, during the rite of consecration of schools, hospitals, offices, carried out in the modern Russian literary language, which is represented by churchly-religious style (religious, religiously-preaching, religiously-iconic). Systematicity of Ts.-r.s. reflected in the following parameters:
a) content side;
b) communicative goal;
c) the image of the author;
d) the nature of the addressee;
e) the system of linguistic means and features of their organization.
The content of the texts allows us to distinguish two sides in them:
1) dictum (actually event-based) content specified by the topic;
2) a modal frame of dictum content, formed by congratulations, instructions, advice, praise of the activities of the church, etc.
The communicative purpose of the texts of Ts.-r.s. complex, multifaceted. The author strives for an emotional impact on the addressee; to the religious enlightenment of the people, their upbringing. The author's image is two-dimensional, because in this case, bilingualism is observed: on the one hand, the author speaks Church Slavonic, on the other hand, he uses the church-religious style. Texts of R.-ts.s. represent official speech, and therefore the Ts.-r.s. is a bookish functional style of a codified literary language.
The system of linguistic means includes four types of lexical units:
1) neutral, interstyle vocabulary ( to help, speak);
2) general book ( perception, being);
3) church-religious ( patronal feast, kingdom of god);
4) newspaper and journalistic vocabulary ( sovereign states, the sphere of education).
The grammatical resources of the style include morphological and syntactic means that provide:
1) bookish character of the style;
2) archaic stylistic coloring of speech.
The purposes of enhancing expression are:
1) extensive citation;
2) the use of tropes and figures of speech (metaphors, epithets, repetitions, gradation, antithesis, inversion, rhetorical question);
3) techniques for complicating the composition of texts.

Terms and concepts of linguistics: General linguistics. Sociolinguistics: Dictionary-reference book. - Nazran: Pilgrim LLC. T.V. Foaling. 2011.

Stylistic features of church and religious speech

The considered extralinguistic foundations of the church-religious style of speech determine its constructive principle - a special content-semantic and actual speech organization of texts, the purpose of which is to promote unity human soul with God blessing. This principle is implemented by a set of specific stylistic features, the most important of which are:

- archaic-sublime tonality of speech, corresponding to the high goal of religious activity and serving as a manifestation of the centuries-old tradition of communication with God;
- symbolization of facts and events invisible world, as well as possible options for a person’s moral and religious choice;
- evaluation of speech oriented towards religious values;
- modality of certainty, reliability of what is being reported.

The first of the named style features is archaic-sublime tone of speech- is determined by the sublimity of religious thoughts, feelings, and value systems, which presuppose the use of linguistic means corresponding to them with their stylistic coloring - primarily Church Slavonicisms. These are not only multi-level linguistic units, but also so-called communicative fragments, i.e. “ready-to-use pieces of linguistic material” (B.M. Gasparov): a loving Father, who will cleanse us from sins, for our salvation, the miracle of God’s creation, descends from heaven, the path of temptation and trials, became a Sacrifice for us, etc. This kind of linguistic and speech units accumulate centuries-old experience of religious communication; they are “populated by the voices” of previous generations of believers (our “brothers and sisters”) - voices expressing the same feeling of love for God and neighbors that a believer experiences when uttering prayer or “heart” perceiving the sermon. Therefore, the stylistic coloring of linguistic units traditionally used in worship (coloring enhanced by a special timbre, intonation, rhythm of speech and forming a single complex of communicative means with church music and painting) performs a special function - to maintain in every believer the feeling of his inseparability from the spiritual community of people bound by faith across generations. In other words, this tonality, corresponding to sublime religious thoughts and feelings, also serves as a manifestation of the conciliarity of the Christian community.

The well-known Russian theorist of Amphitheater preaching convincingly wrote about the importance of using sublimely archaized Church Slavonic means in religious communication and the unjustification of using linguistic units here that evoke associations of a non-religious nature, especially words with reduced connotations: what would happen, he asked, “if we, imitating secular language, instead of “Lord Jesus” they would say “Mr. Jesus”, instead of “brothers” - “brothers”, instead of “baptism” - “bathing”, instead of “sacrament” - “secret”, instead of “miracle” - “curiosity” " and so on." (Quoted from the book: Archbishop Averky (Taushev). Guide to homiletics. M., 2001. P. 85).

The second of the named style features is symbolization of events of the invisible world- is based on the fact that spiritual facts that are absolute in their meaning cannot be represented in human communication except with the help of symbols that help, as far as possible, to comprehend the content of religious truths. Therefore, church-religious speech is necessarily symbolic. The most important means of expressing this stylistic trait are those tropes and figures of speech that reflect the similarity of phenomena - mainly metaphors, allegories and comparisons.

Consider the statement: Since then the trial of the world began. The metaphorical nature of the word “judgment” helps to understand - at least in the most general terms - the truth about punishment from God for the sins of people. Its in-depth interpretation is given in a broader context, using new symbols:

God is not like an earthly judge; he does not judge or condemn us inhumanly, following the letter of the law. No, he comes to us God's love, comes to the entire human race and to each of us. And then something happens to us... God's Love... suddenly falls into the dirt and cold of the dumb soul, and then an explosion occurs. Not because God has rage or anger, only man has this, but because the pure and the unclean met... - and a storm occurs.- Sermon by Archpriest Alexander Men.

Here are some more examples of metaphorical symbols:

What is the invisible? The invisible is here, next to us, in our soul...; Where has the Lord ascended? Where is He? Of course, not in the sky that our eyes see and which stretches above our heads...; You hear the word “redemption” a lot. What does it mean? Literally it means “ransom”, “liberation”, “acquisition for oneself”. With this word we convey the meaning of the mysterious action of God, by which the Lord frees us, sinners and weak ones, from the power of Satan...- Archpriest Alexander Men; ...the cross and suffering are the lot of the elect, these are the narrow gates through which they enter the Kingdom of Heaven.- Archimandrite John (Peasant).

In the religious-symbolic function, in addition to metaphors themselves, allegories are widely used - a type of expanded (textual) metaphors that express abstract content with the help of specific ideas. In the fragment of the sermon given below, the priest interprets the symbolic meaning of the Gospel story about Mary Magdalene mourning Jesus Christ:

And Mary stood at the tomb and cried. A soul that has lost God experiences suffering and sorrow. She is looking for shelter and does not find it. Nothing can replace her communication with the Heavenly Father.

And when she cried, she leaned into the coffin... If the soul is alive and wants to understand the meaning of its existence, then, reflecting, it will certainly come to the problem of death, which is inexorably approaching with every passing day. The immortal human spirit is unable to come to terms with death. If at the end of life there is non-existence, then why be?

...And he sees two Angels, in white robes, sitting, one at the head and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus lay. From death, a person’s thought inevitably turns to the invisible world. And a person meets witnesses of the spiritual world: churches, icons, church singing...- Archpriest Dmitry Smirnov.

As is known, in gospel parables ah, which are allegorical texts, in a symbolic form, along with the events of the invisible world, the religious and moral positions of people are presented. Indicative in this regard is a fragment from the parable “About the Prodigal Son” and the preacher’s commentary on it:

His eldest son was in the field and, returning, when he approached the house, he heard singing and rejoicing.

And calling one of the servants, he asked: what is this?

He said to him: Your brother has come; and your father killed the fatted calf, because he received it healthy.

He became angry and did not want to enter. His father came out and called him.

But he answered his father: Behold, I have served you for many years and have never violated your orders; but you never gave me even a kid so that I could have fun with my friends.

And when this son of yours, who had wasted his wealth with harlots, came, you killed the fatted calf for him.

He said to him: My son! You are always with me, and all that is mine is yours.

And it was necessary to rejoice and be glad that this brother of yours was dead and has come to life; lost and is found.

First of all, this parable is about our Heavenly Father. When we say: “I will not be saved, I am not fit, I am not fit, there is no hope,” let us remember that there is One who is waiting for us, because we are all His children.

This is also a parable about self-righteous people... Look at this eldest son. He is always with his father, but how different he is from him. Doesn't look like him at all! Because he has no love, no good attitude towards his brother, and even towards his father. An envious, smug man.- Archpriest Alexander Men.

An important feature of faith as a special type of cognitive communicative activity is that the assimilation of religious truth means not only and not so much rational as its intuitive-emotional comprehension, “acceptance by the heart.” Therefore, in religious speech when symbolizing phenomena spiritual world comparisons are widely used, referring a person to his moral, religious and everyday experience.

The passage below compares the humble love of Jesus Christ with a mother's willingness to serve her infant in the most humiliating ways. This comparison makes accessible the religious truth about the kenotic love of Jesus Christ, helps to “feel” it, thereby establishing contact between the Gospel word and the human soul:

Expressed in forms Holy Scripture, we can say that God is humility. And a humble God is characterized by humble love, and not from above... God, who created everything that exists with His word, became incarnate and lived, humiliating Himself to limits inaccessible to us. It's there characteristic the love of God: it is self-exhausting, kenotic - so the Lord, so that they would accept His word, before His crucifixion on Calvary, washed the feet of the apostles and said: “I have given you an example so that you should do the same as I did to you.”

In human love there is a love that, somewhat more than all other human manifestations, approaches this type of kenotic love - this is the love of a mother: she endures everything from her baby; she is ready for all humiliating forms of service to her baby - this is the kenotic love of a mother. And the fathers do the same, but in different forms. This is more clearly expressed in the position that the child’s mother assumes.- Archimandrite Sophrony.

It must be emphasized that symbolization reveals the specificity of the church-religious style of speech not just as a formal way of indirectly expressing meanings (this method is also used in other areas of communication, including in the artistic, political and ideological spheres), but as a necessary structural feature of religious activity, consisting in the sign-symbolic expression of Divine truths for their assimilation by people. In turn, metaphors, allegories, comparisons used in the symbolic function create the originality of the church-religious style precisely by their semantic relevance to the spiritual world, their involvement in activities aimed at bringing the human soul closer to God.

Organically connected with the basic extralinguistic factors of the functional style under consideration is such a feature as evaluation of speech based on Christian values. Indeed, it is determined by the very motivation of religious activity - to transform the sinful earthly order of life, all everyday relationships according to the model of heavenly ones - saints, perfect ones. At the same time, a believer must strive to cleanse his soul from sin and develop in it virtues that are a reflection of Divine perfections

Hence, on the one hand, a negative self-esteem imbued with a feeling of repentance in confessional, including prayer, speech (example 1), as well as a sharply negative assessment of forces hostile to God (example 2), on the other hand, a positive assessment of speech glorifying God and the saints ( example 3):

(1) Lord, my Lord! I am a bottomless abyss of sin: wherever I look into myself - everything is bad, whatever I remember - everything is done wrong, said incorrectly, badly thought out... And the intentions and dispositions of my soul are one insult to You, my Creator, Benefactor!- O. Boris Nikolaevsky; We, many sinners, confess to the Lord God Almighty... and to you, honorable father, all our sins, voluntary and involuntary... We sinned by being unmerciful towards the poor, had no compassion for the sick and crippled; They have sinned through stinginess, greed, wastefulness, greed, infidelity, injustice, and hardness of heart.- The rite of general confession, compiled by Archbishop Sergius (Golubtsov).
(2) ...demons don't have claws. They are depicted with hooves, claws, horns, and tails because it is impossible for the human imagination to imagine anything more vile than this species. This is what they are in their vileness, for their willful falling away from God and their voluntary resistance to the Divine grace of the Angels of Light, as they were before falling away, made them angels of such darkness and abomination that they cannot be depicted in any human likeness.- Archimandrite John (Krestiankin);
(3)He [God] is light without any darkness according to His divine mind, as omniscient, knowing everything that exists completely truly and perfectly to the smallest detail. He is light and purity according to His divine will, as the all-holy, abhorring everything unclean and loving only the holy and pure. From Him emanates the light of rationality, truth, virtue and holiness. .

Detailed evaluative descriptions of the most important Christian virtues and basic human vices, reproof and exhortation.

The nature of faith is also determined modality of certainty, reliability of speech. In fact, faith presupposes a person’s conviction in the existence of a Supreme Principle (God) and in the truth of His revelation. According to church doctrine, a secular speaker, including a scientist, can make mistakes, since he proceeds from personal convictions, while in church-religious texts the Divine teaching is embodied, which is absolutely true. A characteristic marker of this conviction is the particle amen at the end of a sermon or prayer - “truly, truly.”

The most active linguistic means of expressing confidence in the truth of what is being communicated are the so-called factive verbs (know, remember, believe, believe etc.), introductory words with the meaning of confidence, nouns truth, truth and derivative words true, truly, truly, truly: ...You and I are called Christians because we know: God most clearly revealed himself to man in the face of Christ; We know that the word of the Lord is true; ...we believe that the rock of the Church is unshakable; The apostle expressed this sad truth with the words...; God did not create death, and, of course, sin could not come from the One who is the highest Good.- Archpriest Alexander Men.

References to the highest authority of Holy Scripture, to the testimonies of the Holy Fathers of the Church, have convincing power for the consciousness of a believer. This explains the widespread use of constructions of other people’s speech (direct and indirect):

The Word of God of the Old and New Testaments speaks convincingly that at the end of the world there will be a general resurrection of the dead; The Word of God tells us truthfully:<…>; The Lord Himself in the Holy Gospel repeatedly assures us of the existence of a future afterlife: Truly, truly, I say to you: the time is coming, and has already come, when the dead will hear the Voice of the Son of God.- Archimandrite Kirill (Pavlov).

Narratives of supernatural events (miracles) often found in religious texts are also an expression of faith as a belief in the existence that does not require proof Divine powers. It is characteristic that in many cases the priest speaks of miracles as facts attested in church history - indicating proper names and dates:

...having learned from relatives that there was indeed an icon of the Mother of God “Joy of All Who Sorrow” in the Church of the Transfiguration on Ordynka, she called a priest with it to her home and after performing a prayer service with the blessing of water, she received healing. In memory of this miracle, the first miracle from the icon “Joy of All Who Sorrow,” a holiday was established in her honor on October 24 (November 6). And currently this miraculous image is in the temple on Ordynka.- Archimandrite Kirill (Pavlov).

Linguistic means of church-religious style

From the previous presentation it is clear that the specifics of faith determine the most important features of the church-religious style of speech, created by the natural selection and use of linguistic means. Let's take a closer look at these tools.

As noted, multi-level linguistic units regularly used in Russian religious speech are characterized by a special archaic-sublime functional coloring, which can be called ecclesiastical. The fund of these units (and the rules for their implementation) is represented primarily by borrowings from the Old Church Slavonic language.

Thus, at the phonetic level, along with modern Russian pronunciation norms, Church Slavonic norms operate (Prokhvatilova O.A. Orthodox sermon and prayer as a phenomenon of modern sounding speech. Volgograd, 1999): the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of fully formed vowels in unstressed positions are often preserved (God; b[o]g[o]pleas[o]; [o]n[o]sent); the stressed [e] is occasionally pronounced after soft consonants, hissing and [ts] before hard consonants (sanctified [sh:’e]nnoy; pri[n’es]; ko[p’ijem]); in some cases, the voicedness of paired consonants is noted at the end of the word (commandment[d’]).

Lexical Church Slavonicisms are especially widely used: good, temple, oblivion, gain, humble, hope and etc.

In the field of morphemics, Old Slavonic prefixes and suffixes are characteristic: most holy, most pure, most merciful, experience, expel, redeem, creator, patron, comforter, sower, intercession, boldness, service, humility and the like.

Speaking about methods of word formation, it should be noted that in church-religious speech, word composition is represented much more widely than in other speech spheres ( beneficence, long-suffering, mercy, hymn, love of mankind, God-fearing, miraculous etc.) and substantivization ( feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, teach the ignorant, give to your neighbor etc.).

Morphological Old Church Slavonic means are occasionally used, giving the expression the color of church speech, in particular the forms of the vocative case of nouns: lord, father, Mother of God, genitive singular masculine of adjectives and participles: holy A hey, honest A oh, enlightened A th and etc.

Syntactic biblicalisms also have the indicated connotation - inversions in phrases with agreement: Heavenly Father, Holy Spirit, word of God, king of the Jews, human race, sea of life etc.

Of course, an archaic sublime coloring is also inherent in many units of non-Old Slavic origin, which also form a fund of actively used means of church-religious communication, for example words dare, meek, vow, murmur, passion, blasphemy etc. In the creation and expression of this coloring, the role of means of expressive syntax, including stringing of similar constructions, is significant (See: Krysin L.P. Religious-preaching style and its place in the functional-stylistic paradigm of the Russian literary language // Poetics. Stylistics .Language and culture. In memory of T. G. Vinokur. M., 1996).

It must be borne in mind that the selection and use of linguistic units with an archaic-sublime connotation is only one of many patterns that determine the stylistic and speech systematicity of religious speech. Thus, the regular use of means of symbolizing phenomena of the spiritual world (metaphors, allegories, comparisons) was noted above. Other tropes and figures of speech are also widely used, and their functions consist not so much in its decoration, but in the effective implementation of communicative tasks in the religious sphere, primarily the task of emotional impact on the consciousness of the addressee. Active, as already indicated, are the means that express the modality of the certainty of what is being communicated (introductory words of the corresponding semantics, constructions of someone else’s speech, etc.). Evaluative linguistic units are often used, forming a kind of stylistic antithesis in religious speech holiness (virtue) - sin. Grammatical means of expressively enhancing evaluation are widely used: prefix pre, expressing the highest degree of quality: most blessed, most holy, most pure; Superlative forms of adjectives: most honest, most glorious, greatest, most powerful and under. The conciliarity of religious communication reveals itself in the active use of the personal pronoun of the 1st person plural, as well as the personal possessive pronoun our and the corresponding verb forms: …we can move from defilement to eternal salvation. And this is in our will. It's up to us. And when we do this small thing according to our small strengths, then the great power of God can come to us. And we prepare ourselves only by studying this word day and night...- Archimandrite Sophrony.

It is important to keep in mind that in any church-religious text (and often in a separate fragment of it) one finds the manifestation of a whole complex of stylistic features created by the specific selection and use of language means:

...we trust in the mercy of God, we hope that our sins have not yet completely destroyed our soul.

You ask: “Isn’t the soul immortal?” Of course, she is immortal, but if she is all saturated with evil, then in the process of purification she will, as it were, lose herself. What will be left of her?

...But the one who is still here, in this earthly life, collects spiritual treasures for himself through prayer, goodness and the fight against his own sins, brings himself closer to the Gospel ideal, and even before death begins to cultivate wings that will carry him to eternity.- Archpriest Alexander Men.

There are linguistic units with an archaic-sublime coloring (we trust in God, to cultivate), and metaphors-symbols that have the same coloring (purification, wings, spiritual treasures), and words of religious-evaluative semantics (sin, evil, good), and marker of speech reliability (introductory word of course) as part of a question-answer complex. In addition, it is significant to use the personal pronoun We and the personal forms of the verb: we hope..., we hope.

In this combination, “alloy” of these features, the stylistic and speech systematicity of the church-religious style is manifested, created by the natural use of interrelated linguistic units and expressing the specificity of religious speech.

At the same time, church and religious speech is heterogeneous. The considered invariant features of it are always supplemented by particular features inherent in one or another genre, and within its framework - one or another typical textual unit - doxology, thanksgiving, petition, repentance, explanation of doctrinal truths, narration of the events of sacred history, instruction, reproof, etc. .

For example, a prayer request, as well as pastoral instruction, involve, in particular, the use of definite personal sentences with the main member expressed by the imperative mood of the verb. (The illocutionary acts performed in this case, of course, are different: in the first case it is a plea, in the second it is an urgent appeal.) Lord, forgive us sinners! Grant us all, Lord, a saving time of fasting and repentance...; Help everyone. Don't be vicious. If the call is addressed not to a group of parishioners, but to all followers of Christian teaching, then the sentence takes on a generalized personal meaning: Thou shalt not kill.

In addition, the instructions widely include sentences with a compound verbal predicate, including modal words with the meaning of obligation or necessity: We must love God with all our hearts; You must preserve the purity of your soul in every possible way, you must avoid all temptations and seductions in every possible way. But unlike official business texts expressing a legal prescription, the modality of an appeal or teaching is implemented here.

In any other textual unit, for example, in the explanation of religious truth, a largely different set of frequently used linguistic and speech means is revealed. They will be nominal subject-predicate sentences (N1 -N1): Sin is a deliberate violation of the will of God; Baptism is a sacrament of the Church; complex sentences with conjunctions or conjunctional analogues of cause and effect semantics: Christ was born of the Virgin, because Mary could not belong to anyone: neither her parents, nor her husband; We are people, and therefore God reveals himself to us in human form. It is natural to see question-and-answer moves that activate the attention of listeners: Who is a prophet? This is a man through whose mouth the Spirit of God speaks; What does it mean? This means that by the power of the Lord we are made partakers of the Glory of Christ.

It is noteworthy that, in accordance with the goal setting of certain text units, they develop characteristic semantic shades of grammatical forms. For example, when interpreting Gospel parables and other stories, the preacher often uses the verb form of the present tense, which has a special meaning - the present all-time. In contrast to abstract timeless semantics, reflecting a certain pattern ( The sun rises in the east), all-time meaning reflects an action performed not just always, but in moment of speech And Always. According to D.S. Likhachev, “this is the present time of an event now taking place and at the same time an image of “eternity”” (Likhachev D.S. Selected works. L., 1987. T. 2. P. 565). Examples:

And we, like the Apostle Peter who drowned in the sea, are drowning in the sea of life<…>But now...” you will see the Lord walking on the sea near you. He, the most merciful, is always with us, at all times of the day and night He calls us to fearlessly come to Him, He always extends to us the divine hand of His almighty help.- Archimandrite Kirill (Pavlov)

... let us remember our Heavenly Father, who stands, who waits, who will accept everyone who from the depths of their soul says: “Father, I have sinned before heaven and before You.”- Archpriest Alexander Men.

There is a modification of the semantics of a language unit in accordance with the specifics of the speech variety and its communicative attitudes.

Thus, in church and religious texts, along with their invariant stylistic characteristics, special features associated with the specifics of genres, as well as individual typical text units, appear.

Borrowings from other styles

In speech works of the functional style under consideration, linguistic and speech means typical of other styles may occasionally be used. Does this indicate the “multi-style” of religious speech, its lack of stylistic unity?

No, it doesn't testify. As has been noted more than once, a functional style is a special quality of speech, a special nature of its organization, determined primarily by some general communicative goal setting (the purpose of the corresponding type of activity). In our case, the goal setting is to strengthen faith (the union of man with God). To achieve it, those means that are usually used in other communication areas can be used. Then other-style units are organically included in the speech system of the religious text; their functional coloring does not contrast with the general tone of speech, but complicates it in accordance with the characteristics of a specific communicative situation. Let's look at a few examples:

If there are those among the penitents today who have ever committed direct murder, that is, killed someone willfully or accidentally with some weapon, hand, poison or something else, the priest must repent separately.- Archimandrite John (Peasant)
Now winter comes, and all nature seems to die. The trees stand without leaves, the grass and flowers are dead, not a single bird sings in the forest, insects lie numb in their shelters. But then spring comes, comes new life and everything comes to life. Grass and flowers appear, trees again receive sap and are clothed in their beauty...- Archimandrite Kirill (Pavlov)
...in the street crowd we happen to see some drunkard who has just drunkenly rolled out in the mud. ...But we ourselves are in everything similar to this unfortunate man, if not much worse than him. The clothes of our souls are soiled with the stinking dirt of passions and lusts.- Metropolitan Vladimir.

The first text fragment represents evidence (in the special, religious sense of the word) and contains scientific terminology: circle, center, point, radius. Moreover, the purpose of the priest’s speech, of course, is not a geometric substantiation of religious truth. It lies in the effective use of analogy, “visual evidence,” which corresponds to the peculiarities of religious consciousness, which allows, based on life (school) experience, to better assimilate the truth comprehended by faith. Thus, the preacher in his speech strictly follows the normative for religious activity to use the specific life experience of believers. The implementation of this attitude does not exclude resorting to the form of scientific evidence and scientific terms, but now in a different function - as a means of instilling religious ideas.

The second example illustrates the possibility of organically using language constructions typical of official business speech in religious texts. In fact, we have before us a complex sentence of imperative semantics ( I need to repent...), beginning with a subordinate clause, which is again characteristic of official business speech, and at the same time complicated by an explanatory phrase, including a number of homogeneous members: ... direct murder that is, killed someone voluntarily or accidentally with some weapon, hand, poison or something else . (In legal texts, such constructions are intended to accurately define the scope of the concept of an offense.) As we see, a syntactic means typical for the administrative-legal sphere of communication turns out to be in demand when solving a religious problem: together with other means, it is used in preparing believers for confession.

The third text fragment resembles a journalistic speech. The use of clichéd phrases from modern media in it is indicative: slavery of totalitarianism, market profit, impoverishment of the people, depreciation of money etc. Nevertheless, the preacher, when creating a text, does not carry out a political-ideological activity, as it might seem, but a strictly religious one. We are talking about a special variety of it, aimed at exposing the vices of the era, people’s adherence to sinful ideas and rules of behavior. In this case, the priest defends not a political doctrine (this would be a deviation from the principle “the kingdom of God is not of this world”), but the need to follow Christian commandments not only in personal, but also in public life. At the same time, the religious truth about the inadmissibility of serving “foreign gods” is instilled. The use of journalistic vocabulary is predetermined here by the very genre topic of communication, while the ideological evaluation of words is transformed into religious evaluation.

The fourth fragment of the text reveals individual manifestations of figurative concretization - the most important feature of artistic speech. But even in this case, the preacher, using methods accepted in church practice, introduces listeners to religious truth. Evoking figuratively emotional memories in the minds of believers ( Grass and flowers appear, trees again receive sap and are clothed in their beauty), he creates an idea of the universality of the transition from death to new life and thereby helps parishioners to assimilate the dogma of the future resurrection. The stylistic significance of the linguistic means used here is not in their form, but in their function.

Finally, the fifth example shows that colloquial and even colloquial words ( drunk, drunk, dirty), the stylistic coloring of which, as noted, is not consistent with the general elevated tonality of church-religious speech, can nevertheless be occasionally used in the latter. They sometimes appear as a means of optimizing communicative contact with the audience and as lexical material for denoting sinful things in human life: The clothes of our souls dirty... with dirt.

Status of the church-religious style

When deciding the issue of the stylistic status of church-religious speech, one must keep in mind that the styles of the modern Russian literary language are open types of its functioning that have developed in one or another communicative sphere, and that all of them, to a greater or lesser extent, allow the use of linguistic means of other spheres. At the same time, units that are different in style for any speech variety are used in it in a modified function and therefore cease to be means of a different style.

Religious speech is no exception. We have seen that units and phenomena characteristic of one or another of the functional styles of the Russian language can occasionally be included in the fabric of church and religious texts and that, participating in the performance of religious communicative tasks, they are functionally transformed in it, becoming elements of a new speech organization.

Thus, the texts of the considered sphere of communication, embodying faith and realizing its purpose, objectifying religious activity, are characterized by stylistic-speech consistency, corresponding to the specifics of religious speech, they display a holistic complex of specific stylistic features. Consequently, there is a special way of functioning of the modern Russian literary language, which forms one of its functional styles - church-religious.

The study of the church-religious style of the Russian literary language is just beginning. To gain a deeper understanding of the emerging issues in this area, familiarization with the following works will help:

Kozhina M. N. On the foundations of functional stylistics. Perm, 1968 (p. 160 - 175)
Krysin L.P. Religious-preaching style and its place in the functional-stylistic paradigm of the modern Russian literary language // Poetics. Stylistics. Language and culture / In memory of T. G. Vinokur. M., 1996
Mechkovskaya N. B. Language and religion. M., 1998
Maidanova L. M. Religious and educational text: stylistics and pragmatics // Russian language in the context of culture. Ekaterinburg, 1999
Prokhvatilova O. A. Orthodox preaching and prayer as a phenomenon of modern sounding speech. Volgograd, 1999
Krylova O. A. Does a church-religious functional style exist in the modern Russian literary language? // Cultural and speech situation in modern Russia. Ekaterinburg, 2000
Rozanova N. N. Communicative-genre features of temple sermon // Baudouin-de Courtenay: Scientist. Teacher. Personality. Krasnoyarsk, 2000
Shmeleva T.V. Confession // Culture of speech: Encyclopedic dictionary-reference book. M., 2003
Karasik V.I. Language circle: personality, concepts, discourse. M., 2004 (p. 266 - 276), etc.

See also foreign functional-stylistic studies.

Church-religious style is a functional variety of modern style. rus. lit. language, serving the sphere of church-religious public activity and correlating with the religious form of public consciousness. In pre-perestroika times (1917–1980s), this area of Russian functioning. language, due to well-known extralinguistic reasons, was practically closed to the philologist-researcher, which resulted in the absence of an indication of the Ts.-r. style in the literature on stylistics, as well as the widespread opinion that this area is served not by modern Russian, but by the Church Slavonic language. Currently, the sphere of church-religious public activity is expanding its boundaries. Communication in this area includes, on the one hand, the pronunciation of various canonical liturgical texts, the reproduction of prayers and chants, where the Church Slavonic language is actually presented, and on the other hand, speeches by clergy to a mass audience on the radio, at rallies, on television, in the State Duma, during the rite of consecration of schools, hospitals, offices, etc., carried out not in Church Slavonic, but in modern. rus. lit. language, which appears in this case in the form of a special function. style - church-religious(in other terminology - religious, religious and preaching or religious-cult; term church-religious preferable because indicates simultaneously the sphere of social activity in which it functions, the religious form of public consciousness, and church leaders as authors of the relevant texts, but does not limit its implementation only to the genre of sermon). Thus, the sphere of church-religious social activity turns out to be the sphere bilingualism. But if the Church Slavonic language has been studied and described in detail, then the study of Ts.-r. functional With. modern rus. lit. language is just beginning; there are descriptions of the genres of church-religious messages and temple sermons; you will have to study the genres of parting words, funeral words, etc. words, the speech of clergy in an official setting - i.e. all genres and forms of speech in which the C.-R. is embodied. functional With. Systematicity C.-r. With. reflected in such parameters of the corresponding speech genres as: a) content side; b) communicative goal; c) the image of the author; d) the nature of the addressee; e) the system of linguistic means and features of their organization. Content texts published in the Ts.-r. p., allows us to distinguish two sides in it: the dictum (eventual) content specified by the topic, and the modal frame of the dictum content formed by congratulations, appeals, religious instructions, advice, praise of the activities of the Church, etc.: “Addressing you with Easter greetings, I urge you to successfully continue serving the Church and the Fatherland in boundless devotion to Christ, in fidelity to His commandments and love for every person and the entire human race.”(Easter message of Alexy II, 1988). These two substantive aspects of the Central Revolution. texts are correlated - respectively - with content-factual and content-conceptual information (according to I.R. Galperin). A specific feature of content-conceptual information (or the modal frame of the content side) is its explicit character; it reflects religious ideology and does not allow any other interpretations. Communication goal texts of the Ts.-r. With. Always complex, multifaceted: by revealing the dictum content, the author simultaneously strives to emotional impact on the addressee, and this emotional impact is associated with a specific event from biblical history, from the lives of the apostles, saints, Church leaders, etc., recalling which, the author strives to religious education audience; noting the most important events in modern church and - more broadly - public life, the author achieves another goal - promoting the positive role of the Church in life modern society and, finally, calling for the observance of Christian commandments, for the preservation of religious traditions, for the observance of church institutions, the author pursues the goal education religious audience. Thus, the combination of emotionally impacting, religious-educational, religious-propaganda and educational-didactic goals realizes the multilateral communicative orientation of the C.-R. texts. A complex communicative goal forms and author's image , which in Ts.-r. With. it turns out also complex, two-dimensional: on the one hand, this is a spiritual shepherd, a mentor of the laity, and on the other, one of "child of the Mother Church" experiencing feelings of joy, jubilation or, conversely, feelings of regret or sorrow along with those listening; This variation in the image of the author is reflected, in particular, in the variation of the linguistic form denoting the narrator. The image of the author as an intermediary between the Church - “the vicar of God on Earth” - and the believers, the people, and the intermediary who understands the people and is close to them, determines the absence of an explicit author’s expression of will in the form of a categorical order: the obligatory prescriptive nature of the presentation in the form of a categorical imperative C. -R. With. not typical.

Destination texts of the Ts.-r. With. - these are, on the one hand, Orthodox Christians, if the text is heard in church and addressed to believers, or a wider audience, if the text is addressed, for example, to listeners of radio broadcasts, television viewers, etc., i.e. generalized and mass addressee(according to N.I. Formanovskaya). In the case of a clergyman’s address to other church figures of various ranks, the addressee predictable and specific. But always texts written in Ts.-r. p., addressed to a mass audience, therefore, represent public official speech , and therefore Ts.-r. With. is book function style of codified lit. language . Language system C.-r. With. includes lexical units of four layers : 1) neutral, interstyle vocabulary ( help, talk, do, everyone, then, Moscow); 2) general book ( perception, being, original role, traditions, however, very much, adhere to other worldviews); 3) church-religious ( Lord Almighty, monks and nuns, monastics, laity, patronal feast day, divine service, kingdom of God, hierarchs, God-loving shepherds, Holy Land, consecration, myrrh-bearing women); 4) vocabulary with newspaper and journalistic functional and stylistic coloring ( sovereign states, militants, education, overcoming difficulties, economic and social situation, problems of refugees and regions). The main lexical resource of the style is vocabulary that is emotionally expressive, in particular archaic-sublime and emotionally evaluative ( unparalleled devotion, exalt warriors, unearthly greatness, draw inspiration, glorious holiday), the use of which is associated with the implementation of those communicative goals discussed above: with an educational and didactic goal and the goal of a positive emotional impact aimed at developing certain moral concepts in the addressee. Grammar Resources style include such morphological and syntactic means that provide: 1) book the nature of the style (in particular, the genitive subsubstantive, participles and participial phrases, passive constructions); 2) archaic stylistic coloring of speech (archaic morphological forms, outdated management, inversion of the agreed component in the phrase); 3) creation expressive effect(series of homogeneous members, superlatives); eg: 1) summer of the goodness of the Lord; words of peace and love; communication that pleases the heart; the Cathedral of Christ the Savior being restored in Moscow; 2) with love in Christ; it will be blotted out; now born; beloved in the Lord; on the ground; to the heavenly world; keep the fatherly faith; Church of Heaven; 3) ... I congratulate you, my dears, on this bright and blessed holiday; most important; abundant; glorious; multi-useful; most joyful; most honest; most blessed. From a negative point of view, the arsenal of grammatical means of style is characterized by the absence of multicomponent complex sentences with heterogeneous syntactic connections, a non-union way of expressing subordinating relations, which is associated with the desire for accessibility and understandability of the C.-r. texts to a mass addressee.

Purposes increased expression and, in particular, the creation of an emotional and evaluative stylistic coloring of speech, serve, in addition to the use of evaluative and emotionally expressive vocabulary: a) extensive quotation; b) the use of tropes and figures of speech (the most typical of which are metaphors, epithets, repetitions, gradation, antithesis, inversion, rhetorical question); c) techniques for complicating the composition of texts; eg: “We are sinners and unclean // And She (the Mother of God) / Most Pure”(antithesis); “And really / to whom and when did God refuse the grace / of enlightenment / Which Christian / cannot receive / wisdom from God?”(a rhetorical question); (examples from N.N. Rozanova).

In general, from the point of view of linguistic embodiment, the studied genres of C.-r. With. differ a combination of general book elements with church-religious and newspaper-journalistic elements , and archaic-solemn and emotional-evaluative coloring , What distinguishes Ts.-r. With. from all other book functions. styles, including those from newspaper and journalistic , with which he comes close due to the complexity of the communicative function, the mass nature of the addressee and the emotional and expressive coloring of many linguistic means included in his system. However, these signs, as well as the different directions of influence, the nature of the author’s image, the lack of that openness to stylistically reduced, pejorative-evaluative and even non-literary elements, which is characteristic of newspaper-publics. style - all this does not allow us to consider the Ts.-r. With. "variety" or "substyle" of newspaper-publics. functional modern style rus. lit. language.

Bulletin of Volgograd State University.

Series 2. Linguistics. Issue – pp. 19-26.

EXTRA LINGUISTIC PARAMETERS

AND LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS

RELIGIOUS STYLE

The existence of a religious style - a variety of modern Russian literary language functioning in the sphere of religion - was recognized quite recently - at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries.

This state of affairs is due primarily to the fact that, due to extralinguistic reasons, modern Orthodox spiritual speech has long remained outside the scope of scientific study. In Russian linguistics and literary criticism, researchers turned mainly to the analysis of classical examples of Russian church preaching speech of the Middle Ages: they determined the boundaries of the genre of medieval sermon and its typological features1; the relationship between tradition and originality in ancient Russian preaching was established2; the compositional structure of the sermon was revealed, the principles of its rhythmic organization were revealed3; described methods for implementing the influencing function of medieval preaching4; the typological parameters of hymnographic monuments of the Russian Middle Ages were considered5. Actually, linguistic studies of spiritual speech were associated with the disclosure of the peculiarities of the selection and functioning of lexical means in medieval sermon6; identifying ways to include someone else’s speech in preaching texts7; a description of the content and stylistic specificity of original and translated Church Slavonic texts8; establishing the relationship between semantics and rhythm in prayer texts9.

The phenomenon of modern spiritual speech is that it contains texts in Church Slavonic (Holy Scripture, prayers, psalms) and speech works in modern Russian literary language (epistles of church hierarchs, liturgical sermons with which the pastor addresses parishioners, as well as called secular spiritual speech, which sounds outside the temple). This circumstance allows researchers to state the presence of bilingualism within the sphere of religious communication, which, in turn, necessitates the need to resolve issues related to determining the real status of the Church Slavonic language in relation to the modern Russian literary language, on the one hand, and with clarifying the stylistic system of the Russian literary language - on the other.

The idea of the need to isolate and describe the religious-preaching style as one of the functional styles of the Russian literary language belongs to, who in the mid-90s of the twentieth century, in one of his works, outlined the problem of identifying the genre diversity and linguistic characteristics of spiritual speech and outlined its stylistic features10. In subsequent years, this idea was supported by leading Russian scientists11 and work began on studying the stylistic variety of language functioning in the sphere of religion.

To date, there are descriptions of some genre varieties of modern spiritual speech (sermons, prayers, church messages)12, its main stylistic parameters have been outlined,13 many of which require clarification and addition.

Modern approaches to the study of functional varieties of a literary language involve the disclosure of both extra-linguistic properties of style and those linguistic elements and categories that make up its stylistic “content”. This article offers a description of the extralinguistic qualities and linguistic features of the religious style - a variety of the modern Russian literary language, which functions in the sphere of religion along with the Church Slavonic language.

We give preference to naming religious style, since it contains an indication of the most important, basic criterion that underlies modern classifications styles – the sphere of use of the type of language functioning. As for other terms that are used to describe this style - religious-preaching 14 and church-religious 15 – then the first of them, according to a fair remark, contains a limitation of the implementation of style by the genre of sermon, and the second, from our point of view, contains a hidden tautology (cf.: church– ‘connected with the church, with religion, with worship’; church – ‘religious organization of clergy and believers, united by a community of beliefs and rituals’16).

In our opinion, the most important extralinguistic features of a religious style, which determine the systematic nature of its linguistic characteristics, are:

a set of types of communication relevant for the religious sphere of communication - collective, mass and personal communication, as well as a special type - hypercommunication;

a specific type of “speaker-listener” relationship in religious communication;

the inherent dialogic nature of a monologue religious text;

a combination of message and impact functions, in which the educational and didactic orientation of religious texts is realized;

stylistic dominant, which is a synthesis in religious texts of elements of two language systems - Russian Old Church Slavonic and modern Russian languages.

As is known, the type of communication is one of the most important features that determine the content and formal properties of a speech work. The nuclear genres of religious style, primarily temple sermons, are characterized by belonging to the sphere collective communication, since a pastoral sermon is a public speech addressed to a collective addressee - believers gathered for worship. There is also reason to assert that spiritual preaching, along with the church message, exists in conditions mass communications, since modern technical means make it possible for today's church hierarchs and preachers to significantly expand their audience with the help of radio, television and print media. In addition to collective and mass communication, in religious communication it is possible personal communication (for example, in confession).

Religious texts are also implemented in hypercommunication(from Greek ‘up’e¢r – ‘above, above, through, on the other side’ and Latin communicatio< communicare – ‘делать общим, связывать; общаться’). Это специфичный вид речевого общения, который актуален только для религиозной коммуникации и возникает при чтении молитвословий и Священного Писания или их цитировании в духовной проповеди, церковном послании или в текстах других жанров религиозного стиля. Гиперкоммуникация характеризуется особым статусом Адресата и трансформацией языкового кода, связанной со спецификой восприятия сакральных текстов, сакрального Слова как воплощения Божественной сущности Спасителя. В терминах семиотики такое отношение к языковому знаку определяется как его неконвенциональная трактовка, при которой знак интерпретируется не как “условное обозначение некоторого денотата, а как сам денотат или его компонент”17. В аспекте формы гиперкоммуникация проявляется в асемантичности интонационного оформления речи, которая реализуется в ритмизации звучания духовных текстов, а также в интонационной невыраженности синтаксической структуры высказывания, синтаксических связей между его частями18.

The type of relationship “speaker - listener” in religious communication is defined by us as a combination of symmetrical (equal) and asymmetrical (unequal) relationships between the speaker and the listener). There is a point of view according to which in the field of religious communication the clergy and believers act as equal speech partners. This conclusion is reached, for example, by arguing that symmetrical, subject-subject relationships are based on the preacher’s perception of his listeners as brothers, members of the same family - the Orthodox community, on respect for the spiritual sovereignty of the listener’s personality19.

Agreeing with the fact that the dialogical nature of the shepherd’s monologue reflects the hierarchy of relations between the preacher and the listeners, we note that the description of the relationship between the addresser and the addressee in the sermon proposed by the researcher is not complete and exhaustive. It seems that in communication between the pastor and parishioners, it is advisable to consider the hierarchy of relations between the participants in communication not in one, as he does, but in two planes - vertical and horizontal. And only in the first case the relationship between the preacher and the listeners is characterized as equal, while in the second case there is a dependence of the addressee on the subject of speech. Let us make the necessary explanations.

As is known, the basis of religious communication is a special, so-called evangelical dialogue, the ontological structure of which contains, in addition to the two existential positions of the speaker and the listener, a third - the divine position: “Where two or three are gathered in My name, there I am in the midst of them” (Matthew 18 :20). Consideration of the relationship between the preacher and his listeners along the vertical, the top of which is the Almighty, allows us to state the absence of hierarchy between the addressee of the speech - the shepherd and the addressee - the believers, for everyone is equal before God. The temple in which the sermon is heard embodies the common House of church brotherhood, where the opposition “collective - I” is removed, where the spirit of conciliarity reigns.

However, conciliarity and churchliness do not eliminate the presence of hierarchy, since the rector of the parish, while remaining a member of the church brotherhood, acts as a spiritual father for his parishioners. In this case, we can talk about the horizontal plane of the “preacher-flock” relationship. We define them as subordinate, asymmetrical, which is reflected in the didactic, instructive orientation of the preacher’s speech.

Thus, we note the coexistence in religious communication of asymmetrical and symmetrical relationships between the speaker and the listener, which, by the way, explains the high frequency of verb forms of the 2nd and 1st person plural in the core genres of religious style (sermons and messages). The first of them are a marker of the asymmetrical relationship between the clergy and the believers, and the second act as a linguistic expression of the symmetry of the positions of the addresser of the speech and its addressee.

Dialogue, which is one of the extralinguistic parameters of the religious style, is defined as a property of a monologue text associated with the reproduction of elements of dialogue in it. In religious texts, dialogism is represented by three types: external dialogical, internal dialogical and deep dialogical.

The external dialogic nature of a monologue word realizes the focus of speech on the addressee, reveals the status of the addressee and the nature of the relationship between the addresser and the addressee of the speech. This type of dialogicity is ensured by the actualization of the “you”-sphere of the utterance, the immutability of the speech position of the subject of speech, the irreversibility of the addresser and addressee of speech and is explicated by introducing into the monologue context the linguistic forms that are most frequent for the dialogic communication situation (addresses, interrogative and incentive statements, question- response units, etc.).

The basis of the internal dialogicity of a religious text is authorization, understood as an indication of the source of information in speech, and associated modifications of the “I”-sphere of the utterance. Internal dialogism becomes possible in cases where someone else’s speech is introduced into the monologue context - statements of high spiritual authorities, maxims, proverbs, sayings, speech characters in narrative text fragments. This type of dialogicity is realized in the presence of the following features: actualization of the “I”-sphere of the utterance, a change in the speech position of the subject of speech, irreversibility of the addresser and addressee of speech. The specificity of the forms of transmitting someone else's word in religious tests is the priority of direct speech over indirect speech.

Deep dialogicality arises when fragments of sacred texts—the Holy Scriptures and prayers—are introduced into spiritual texts. When praying to the Almighty, the Mother of God, angels, etc., a special Addressee appears in the speech. In cases where the Bible is quoted, the speaker’s speech position changes and a special Subject of speech appears20.

The extralinguistic parameters of a religious style determine its linguistic characteristics, the description of which involves determining the internal organization of the functional type of speech, that is, a set of linguistic units that are united by a common task, the goals of speech communication.

The system of linguistic means of spiritual speech is permeated with archaic components of all levels, which, in combination with units of modern Russian literary languages, create its stylistic originality.

10 About one gap in the system of functional styles of the modern Russian language // Russian language at school. 1994. No. 3.

11 See: Academician Sirotinina and modern problems stylistics // Int. anniversary session dedicated to the 100th anniversary of his birth. Abstracts of reports. M., 1995; , Prewodnik po stylistyce polskiey / Red. Naukowy Stanislaw Gaida. Opole, 1995 // Philological Sciences. M. 1997. No. 5; Is Krylov’s church-religious functional style in modern Russian literary language? // Cultural and speech situation in modern Russia. Ekaterinburg, 2000.

12 See: Prokhvatilov’s sermon and prayer as a phenomenon of modern sounding speech. Volgograd, 1999; It's her. Speech organization of sounding Orthodox sermon and prayer: Author's abstract. ... diss. ... doc. Philol. Sci. M., 2000; Rozanova - genre features of temple sermon // de Courtenay: Scientist. Teacher. Personality / Ed. . Krasnoyarsk, 2000; So Eun Young. Speech genre of modern church-religious message: Author's abstract. ...dis. ...cand. Philol. Sci. M., 2000; Individual implementation of a genre sample of a sermon // Stereotyping and creativity in the text: Interuniversity collection. scientific tr. Perm, 2002; Yarmul orientation of modern church messages // Bulletin of VolSU. Episode 9. Vol. 3. Part 1. Volgograd, 2004.

13 Krysin - preaching style and its place in the functional-stylistic paradigm of the modern Russian literary language // Poetics. Stylistics. Language and culture: Sat. memory. M., 1996; It's him. Religious-preaching style // Culture of Russian speech: Encyclopedic dictionary-reference book / Ed. , et al. M., 2003; Krylova. op.; It's her. Church-religious style // Stylistic encyclopedic Dictionary Russian language / Ed. . M., 2003.

14 The term was introduced into scientific circulation.

15 The term has been proposed.

16 Dictionary of the Russian language: In 4 volumes / Ed. . T. IV. M., 1984. P. 644.

17 Mechkovsky linguistics. M., 1996. P. 73. See also: Uspensky - name - culture // Works on sign systems. T. IV. Tartu, 1973. pp. 284–288.

18 For more details, see: Prokhvatilov’s sermon and prayer...; It's her. On hypercommunication in spiritual speech // World of Orthodoxy: Sat. scientific tr. Vol. 3. Volgograd, 2001.

19 Michalska Socrates: Lectures on comparative historical rhetoric. M., 1996.

20 For more details, see: Prokhvatilov’s sermon and prayer...

21 For more details, see: Prokhvatilov - sound organization of modern spiritual speech // Questions of Russian linguistics: Sat. Vol. IX. Aspects of the study of spoken speech: Collection of scientific articles for the anniversary of Elena Andreevna Bryzgunova. M., 2004. pp. 163–174.

22 Term. See: Queen's sacred and liturgical vocabulary in modern Russian language and in literary text: Author's abstract. ... diss. ...cand. Philol. Sci. Volgograd, 2003.

23 Some researchers note the presence of journalistic vocabulary in religious texts (see, for example: Krylova - religious style...; So Eun Young. Op. cit.). However, the analysis of those presented in the “Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language”, ed. (M., 1935) and “Big Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language”, ed. (St. Petersburg, 1998) stylistic marking of 2,500 lexical units, extracted by a continuous sampling method from the texts of modern spiritual sermons and messages, did not reveal the presence of vocabulary with a journalistic connotation in them.

24 Term.

25 See, for example: Russian grammar.. In 2 vols. M., 1982. T. I. P. 622.

Chapter 1. Religious-preaching style of the modern Russian literary language as a linguistic problem

§1. Language education in the sphere of religion

§2. Forms of existence of the religious-preaching style

§3. The problem of the “hybridity” of the language of religious-preaching texts

§4. On some linguistic features of the religious-preaching style

1. Phonetics and orthoepy

2. Vocabulary

3. Phraseology

4. Morphemics and word formation

5. Morphology

6. Syntax

Chapter Conclusions

Chapter 2. Moral concepts of religious-preaching style and their analogues in secular discourse

§1. On the secular and religious ethical picture of the world

1. From the history of the emergence of secular and religious meaning of lexemes

2. Classification of ethical vocabulary of religious-preaching style

§2. Lexemes correlated with general ethical concepts and their analogues in secular discourse

§3. Lexemes associated with virtues and their analogues in secular discourse

§4. Lexemes associated with sins and their analogues in secular discourse

Chapter Conclusions

Introduction of the dissertation 2002, abstract on philology, Golberg, Inna Mikhailovna

The events of the last decades of the 20th century radically changed the social and cultural situation in our country. This is especially true in the sphere of religion. The activities of clergy, which for a long time were on the periphery of public consciousness, are today acquiring increasing social significance. The word of the priest can now be heard not only in churches, but also on radio, television, in parliament, at rallies, and at lectures.

It is impossible not to note the originality of the language used by the leaders of the Russian Orthodox Church: with all the diversity of the individual manner of each of the representatives of the clergy, their speech is united by some common patterns in the selection and use of special lexical, morphological and other linguistic means. Here are examples of such speech:

Only the grace of the Lord, which heals the weak and replenishes the impoverished, can help and strengthen me in the service ahead of me: preserving the unity of our Holy Orthodox Russian Church; the opening of many temples and holy monasteries, where clergy should be placed so that they can rightly rule the word of Christ’s truth" (from the Word His Holiness Patriarch Alexy P, pronounced at the Pyukhtitsa Assumption Monastery on July 6, 1990)1;

Another year we lived has gone into eternity. What does the Holy Church call us to on the eve of the New Year? She calls us to thank the Lord for all the mercies that he has bestowed upon us in the past year. We must turn to the Lord and pray that the Lord will forgive us all the sins we committed in the past summer

1 Quote from: Kravchenko, 1992, p. 20. new. We will ask the Lord to bless the coming summer with His goodness, to bless His people with peace." (from the Word of Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Alexy II at the New Year's prayer service in Epiphany Cathedral December 31, 1993 (Appendix 1, 30)).

This peculiar linguistic phenomenon - the special style of language of the leaders of the Russian Orthodox Church and believers1 - attracted our attention and became the object of this study.

This work is devoted to the study of the religious-preaching style2 of the modern Russian literary language. By religious-preaching style we understand such a functional variety of the Russian literary language that serves the sphere of religion. Here we mean only the sphere of activity of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC); the question of the specifics of linguistic entities of other faiths is not considered in the work. Particular attention in this study is paid to the issue of the functioning of lexical units correlated with moral concepts within the framework of the religious preaching style.

In modern Russian linguistic stylistics, the concept of a religious-preaching style has not yet become widespread, but the issue of identifying a special type of literary language that functions in the sphere of religion is not new to linguistic science.

1 The question of the carriers of the religious-preaching style, as well as the problem of the forms of existence of this linguistic formation, is specially considered by us in §2 of the First Chapter.

2 Term L.P. Krysin (see, for example, Krysin, 1994, p. 70).

Language formations serving other faiths also deserve detailed consideration, but the scope of this study does not allow us to analyze this problem.

Thus, Czech linguists, following B. Havranek, highlight the “philosophical-religious sphere of activity” in relation to the question of the functional-style stratification of the literary language (see about this Havranek, 1963, p. 13; Kraus, 1974, p. 30; Barnet, 1995, p. 175). The features of the “religious style” are considered in the works of the Slovak researcher J. Mistrik (Mistrik, 1992). " Religious language"is actively studied by Polish linguists (see Wojtak, 1998 for more details). American sociolinguistics also paid attention to this problem, or more precisely, its direction, within the framework of which the theory of “language codes of small social groups” was developed (see, for example, Gumperz, 1970).

This question has also been raised in our linguistics1.

In 1973 V.M. Zhivov and B.A. Uspensky, in his article “Center and Periphery in the Light of Linguistic Universals” (Zhivov, Uspensky, 1973), lists “ritual speech” among the linguistic phenomena ignored by linguists. The authors consider the reason for the lack of research on such topics to be the non-standard, “peripheral” nature of such phenomena (op. cit., p. 24).

In 1975 V.A. Avrorin in the monograph “Problems of studying the functional side of language” (Avrorin, 1975), highlighting “spheres of human activity with specific speech traditions,” the emergence and existence of which is, in his opinion, “the reason and basis for the stylistic differentiation of linguistic means,” calls “ the sphere of religious worship" (op. cit., p. 75). There V.A. Avrorin describes in some detail the linguistic and cultural situation within this sphere. However, specific consideration in

1 The problem of the “Orthodox language” was also discussed in some Russian works on literary criticism (see, for example, Arkhangelsky, 1994). asking about the religious-preaching style and its significance for the modern Russian literary language was not part of the author’s tasks.

In 1976 L.B. Nikolsky in the book “Synchronous Sociolinguistics (Theory and Problems)” (Nikolsky, 1976) speaks of the need to revise the traditional theory of styles and offers his own classification, in which we find “ritual or cult style” (op. cit., p. 78) . At the same time, a specific description of this style in relation to the Russian language is in the tasks of L.B. Nikolsky are also not included.

The absence of any research on this subsystem as a functional variety of the modern Russian language may be explained not only by other tasks of the authors of the works listed above, but also by the political situation of those years in our country, which made itself felt until the end of the 80s XX century. Thus, in the Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary, although it mentions “the sphere of cult, the social significance of which in many nations gives rise to the corresponding functional variety of language” (Murat, 1990, p. 567), nothing is said about the possibility of the existence of a similar style in modern Russian literary language.

The study of modern religious discourse begins in the 90s of the 20th century. A number of works appear in which, with varying degrees of completeness, the question of the special style of the modern Russian literary language serving the sphere of religion is addressed.

In 1990, an article by M.I. was published in the journal "Russian Linguistics". Shapira “The language of everyday life / languages of spiritual culture” (Shapira, 1990). The work is devoted to the problem of languages, the norm of which is formed artificially. The author includes any literary language (including Russian literary), as well as languages of spiritual culture, as such formations. According to M.I. Shapira, the literary language (in the traditional sense of the term) serves the “sphere of official life” (op. cit., p. 136), and the linguistic formations of spiritual culture (the latter include the languages of science, fiction and religions) function in the corresponding area of spiritual culture. The author defines this phenomenon as sociocultural multilingualism. Moreover, each of the languages of spiritual culture “has in everyday life (official - I.G.) its own substitute - a certain functional style” (op. cit., p. 141). Any of these styles (including religious preaching) is a “translation” from the corresponding language of spiritual culture into a literary language.

In 1992 A.A. Kravchenko, in his diploma work “The experience of describing the phonetic system of the Church Slavonic language and modern liturgical pronunciation” (Kravchenko, 1992), says that “liturgical activity has a certain marking in the structure of the language” and suggests the existence of “another, not identified by stylists, functional style of the Russian language (liturgical style - I.G.)" (op. cit., p. 20). Here the author gives a number of striking examples of this style. In addition, A.A. Kravchenko in this work cites another interesting fact for us: commenting on the problem of translating Church Slavonic liturgical texts into modern languages, he talks about the activities of the Belarusian Biblical Commission, which translated the Gospel into the Belarusian language. The Preface to this edition says: “The main goal of the translation undertaken by our Biblical Commission is the free development of the liturgical style of the Belarusian language”1. Unfortunately, detailed

1 Quote from: Kravchenko, 1992, p. 13. Analysis of the issue of liturgical style was not included in the tasks of A. A. Kravchenko.

The problem of interest to us is reflected relatively fully in relation to the modern Russian literary language in the article by L.P. Krysin "On one gap in the system of functional styles of the modern Russian language"; The article was published in the magazine "Russian Language at School" in 1994 (Krysin, 1994). The author notes that “in the existing classifications (of functional styles. - I.G.) there is no functional variety that serves the sphere of religion” (op. cit., p. 70). The reason for this is L.P. Krysin sees that “some time ago the activities of priests and preachers were on the periphery of social life” (ibid.). Today, the speech of Church leaders can be heard more often, religious literature is becoming widespread. “These types of speech activity,” writes the author of the article, “are characterized by originality in the selection and use of verbal and syntactic means of the Russian language, which gives grounds for identifying a special religious preaching style” (ibid.). L.P. Krysin also cites a number of linguistic features of this style, but within the framework of the article it was impossible to give a comprehensive description of this linguistic phenomenon. At the same time, the author is confident that “the religious-preaching style should take its rightful place in the functional-stylistic paradigm of the Russian literary language and receive an appropriate description in the literature on stylistics” (op. cit., p. 21)1.

HELL. Shmelev in the article “Functional stylistics and moral concepts” (Shmelev, 1999) offers slightly different grounds for

1 See also Krysin, 1996 about this. highlighting the religious-preaching style. According to the point of view of A.D. Shmelev, “the basis for the specificity of any functional style is the set of speech acts characteristic of it and the method adopted in it for marking the illocutionary force of an utterance” (op. cit., p. 217). At the same time, the author believes that “only two religious genres are certainly specific, from the point of view of the functional-stylistic means used: prayer and sermon,” but “the fact that their illocutionary potential is completely different is opposed to classifying them as the same functional style.” (op. cit., p. 223). However, according to A.D. Shmelev, there is still “something common to the most diverse genres of religious discourse, which distinguishes it from other types of discourse in the Russian language” - “the special use of words related to moral concepts” (op. cit., pp. 224-225). The article provides a number of specific examples that prove the last statement. This thesis about the special use of ethical vocabulary in religious discourse is important for this study: part of our work is devoted specifically to studying the peculiarities of the functioning of ethical vocabulary of the religious-preaching style.

It is also important to note that in Lately There are studies devoted to the analysis of specific genres of religious-preaching style - the works of V.V. Rozanova, O.A. Krylova, S.A. Gosteeva, J.I.M. Maydanova, O.A. Prokhvatova, etc. (see, for example, Rozanova, 2000; Krylova, 2000; Gosteeva, 1997; Maidanova, 1999, Prokhvatilova, 1999).

So, the relevance of this study is due to the urgent need to consider the legitimacy of identifying a special style serving the sphere of religion in relation to the modern Russian literary language, as well as to describe various aspects of this linguistic and cultural phenomenon.

The novelty of the work is determined by the fact that the religious-preaching style has not been sufficiently studied and has not been studied at all from the point of view of conceptual analysis. A systematic description of the linguistic expression of moral concepts and the reconstruction of the corresponding fragment of the linguistic picture of the world - the system of naive ethics - is also being undertaken for the first time.

The theoretical significance of this topic lies in the fact that a multi-aspect study of the religious and preaching style will make it possible to more fully reflect the functional-stylistic system of the modern Russian literary language. The results of the work should also contribute to the general understanding of the linguistic conceptualization of the world. In particular, they confirm the position about the non-uniqueness of ethical ideas reconstructed based on the analysis of data from a certain language: within the framework of one national language, different ethical systems corresponding to different varieties of this language can coexist.

In practical terms, this material can be used in teaching lexicology, stylistics, history of the Russian literary language, as well as (subject to a certain degree of adaptation) in Russian language and rhetoric lessons in high school. The results of the study can also be applied in lexicographic practice to clarify the interpretation of words correlated with moral concepts.

The purpose of the study is to identify the specifics of the religious-preaching style in terms of the functioning of lexical units correlated with moral concepts.

In the process of work we expect to solve the following problems:

Determine the grounds for identifying the religious-preaching style of the modern Russian literary language;

Describe the features of the functioning of this education;

Give a brief description of the linguistic system of the religious-preaching style;

Explore the elements of naive ethics of the religious-preaching style and compare them with the corresponding elements of secular discourse.

The material for studying the characteristics of the religious preaching style are tape recordings of speech by figures of the Orthodox Church and believers in official and unofficial settings, recordings of television and radio programs with the participation of the clergy, articles from the Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate, special literature addressed to believers, etc. 1.

The main method of work is observation. Comparative and component analysis is used to process the obtained data.

The research is based on data from modern semantics, linguistic stylistics, sociolinguistics, semiotics, and the history of the Russian literary language.

The following main provisions are submitted for defense.

1. In the system of functional styles of the modern Russian literary language, one can distinguish the religious-preaching style - a functional variety (subsystem) of the modern Russian literary language, which serves the sphere of religion (sphere of action).

1 The list of sources published in print is contained in Appendix 1 to this work. of the Russian Orthodox Church), and the features of which are determined by the specifics of communication in this area.

2. The religious-preaching style is the only one of all the functional styles of the modern Russian literary language that has a materially expressed standard for constructing a statement. The corpus of liturgical texts in Church Slavonic serves as such a model. The focus on exemplary texts is the reason for the linguistic “hybridity” of the religious-preaching style.

3. The religious-preaching style is characterized by a special naive linguistic ethical picture of the world, different from the corresponding picture of the world of secular discourse. This is manifested in a special set and specific functioning of lexical units correlated with moral concepts within a given style.

The work consists of an introduction, 2 chapters, brief conclusions to the chapters, a conclusion, a list of references and two appendices.

The first chapter discusses general issues related to the problems of isolating, functioning and characterizing the language system of the religious-preaching style.

The second chapter is devoted to the analysis of the ethical vocabulary of the religious and preaching style of the modern Russian literary language.

In conclusion, the results of the study are summed up, the main conclusions are formulated and an overview of the prospects for further development of this topic is given.

The list of references contains both the works cited in the dissertation and some works that we studied as a necessary basis for this study.

Appendix 1 contains a list of sources that served as material for the linguistic analysis of the religious and preaching style of the modern Russian literary language.

Appendix 2 contains a list of moral concepts, which are described with varying degrees of completeness in the second chapter.

Conclusion of scientific work dissertation on the topic "Religious and preaching style of the modern Russian literary language"

Conclusions on Gpawa 2

In the second chapter, issues related to the naive linguistic ethical picture of the world of the religious and preaching style of the modern Russian literary language were considered. We also carried out an analysis of the ethical vocabulary of the religious-preaching style in comparison with the corresponding analogues of secular discourse. The following conclusions were made.

The religious-preaching style is characterized by a special ethical picture of the world, different from the ethical picture of the world of secular discourse. The specificity of religious naive linguistic ethics is expressed in the following.

Firstly, there are units that exist only within the framework of religious discourse (for example, non-prayer, non-church, etc.).

Secondly, in belonging to the ethical vocabulary of the religious-preaching style of words that, within the framework of everyday language, do not belong to units correlated with moral concepts (for example, sadness, boredom, etc.).

Thirdly, in the peculiarities of the meaning and use of lexemes that name ethical concepts and function both in religious discourse and everyday language (for example, patience, pride, etc.).

Fourthly, in the very organization of the naive linguistic ethical system of the religious-preaching style, where “positive” and “negative” are strictly opposed (within the framework of secular discourse, such an opposition is much more blurred).

The specificity of the ethical picture of the world of the religious-preaching style is another argument in favor of the independence of this subsystem

123 themes among other functional and stylistic varieties of the modern Russian literary language.

Conclusion

This paper examined some issues related to such a linguistic phenomenon as the religious-preaching style of the modern Russian literary language.

Our goal was to identify the specifics of the religious preaching style in terms of the functioning of lexical units correlated with moral concepts.

During the work, the following tasks were solved:

The grounds for identifying such a functional-style variety of the modern Russian literary language as the religious-preaching style are determined;

The features of the functioning of this language education are described;

A brief description of the linguistic system of the religious-preaching style at all levels of the structure is given;

The elements of naive ethics of the religious-preaching style are studied in comparison with the corresponding elements of secular discourse.

The following conclusions were made.

1. The sphere of religion (the sphere of activity of the Russian Orthodox Church) in Russia is served by the modern Church Slavonic language, which is a cult, strictly monofunctional language formation, and the modern Russian literary language, represented here by one of its parts.

2. We call the part of the Russian literary language that serves the religious sphere the religious-preaching style and define it as a functional-style variety (subsystem) of the modern Russian literary language that serves the sphere of religion (the sphere of activity of the Russian Orthodox Church) and the features of which are determined by the specifics of communication in this sphere.

3. The religious-preaching style and modern Church Slavonic are in a relationship of additional distribution. Church Slavonic functions only as the language of Orthodox worship; the rest of the sphere of religion is served by the religious-preaching style.

4. The religious-preaching style is implemented both orally and in writing, and can be represented by various types of speech and functional-communicative varieties. This style can be represented by different genres.

5. Modern Church Slavonic - the traditional language of the Russian Orthodox Church, which most accurately expresses the totality of meanings of the religious sphere - has a multifaceted influence on the religious preaching style.

6. The influence of the Church Slavonic language can be traced in the linguistic “hybridity” of the religious-preaching style. Within this subsystem, we observe the presence of two linguistic layers: linguistic features characteristic of the modern Russian language, and linguistic features characteristic of Church Slavonic (the latter serve as indicators of the sacredness of a work).

7. The religious-preaching style is the only one of all the functional styles of the modern Russian literary language that has a materially expressed standard for constructing an utterance - a corpus of liturgical texts in Church Slavonic.

8. The style being studied is also characterized by a special naive linguistic ethical picture of the world, different from the corresponding picture of the world of secular discourse. This is manifested in a special set and specific functioning of lexical units correlated with moral concepts, namely:

There are lexemes that exist only within the framework of religious discourse;

In belonging to the ethical vocabulary of the religious-preaching style of words that, within the framework of everyday language, do not belong to units correlated with moral concepts;

In the peculiarities of the meaning and use of lexemes that name ethical concepts and function both in religious discourse and everyday language;

In the very organization of the naive linguistic ethical system of the religious-preaching style, where “positive” and “negative” are strictly opposed (within the framework of secular discourse, such an opposition is much more blurred).

So, there are real grounds for highlighting the religious-preaching style of the modern Russian literary language.

It should be noted that the sphere of religion has acquired enormous significance today and has become a full-fledged area of social interaction in modern consciousness. A comprehensive study of the problem of religious preaching style will reveal the associated changes in the structure of the modern Russian literary language as a whole.

Theoretical understanding of the problem of religious-preaching style allows not only to clarify the question of the functional-style stratification of the modern Russian literary language, but also reveals some new directions for studying issues related to its history. The results of the work may also contribute to the general understanding of the naive linguistic conceptualization of the world. In practical terms, this material can be used in teaching stylistics, lexicology and the history of the Russian literary language in higher educational institutions, and can also be used in lexicographic practice to clarify the interpretation of words.

In high school, the results of the study of the religious-preaching style can be used to teach the Russian language and rhetoric. For example, we consider it advisable to analyze texts belonging to the religious-preaching style together with students in order to identify various lexical and grammatical layers. This work, in our opinion, will enrich the vocabulary of students and allow them to more accurately understand the texts often heard in churches, on radio and television, spoken by figures of the Russian Orthodox Church.

In connection with all of the above, we would like to outline some prospects for studying this topic.

The linguistic features of the religious-preaching style in different levels language system. It is also necessary, in our opinion, a detailed study of each of the forms of existence of a given style variety. It seems interesting to continue comparing other fragments of the naive linguistic picture of the world of religious and secular discourse. It will also be productive comparative analysis subsystems serving the sphere of worship in various modern languages.

List of scientific literature Golberg, Inna Mikhailovna, dissertation on the topic "Russian language"

1. Avrorin V.A. Problems of studying the functional side of language. L.: Nauka, 1975. - 276 p.

2. Aznaurova S.E. The word as an object of linguistic stylistics. (Based on English material). Author's abstract. dis. for the job application scientist, doctorate degree. Sci. M., 1974. - 35 p.

4. Apresyan Yu.D. Deixis in vocabulary and grammar and the naive model of the world // Semiotics and computer science. Issue 35. M.: “Languages of Russian culture”, “Russian dictionaries”, 1997. P.272-299.

5. Apresyan Yu.D. Selected works. T.I. Lexical semantics. Synonymous means of language. M.: School “Languages of Russian Culture”, Publishing company “Oriental Literature” RAS, 1995a. - 472s.

6. Apresyan Yu.D. Selected works. T.P. Integral description of language and system lexicography. M.: School “Languages of Russian Culture”, 19956. - 767 p.

8. Apresyan Yu.D., Boguslavskaya O.Yu., Levontshna KB., Uryson E.V. New explanatory dictionary of synonyms of the Russian language. Avenue. -M.: Russian dictionaries, 1995. 558 p.

9. Apresyan Yu.D., Boguslavskaya O.Yu., Levontina I.B., Uryson E.V. Sample dictionary entries of the new dictionary of synonyms. IRAN. SLIYA. 1992. No. 2. P.66-81.

10. Arutyunova N.D. Discourse // Linguistics. Big encyclopedic dictionary / Ch. ed. V.N. Yartseva. 2nd ed. - M.: Great Russian Encyclopedia, 1998. P. 136-137.

11. Arutyunova N.D. Truth and ethics // Logical analysis of language. Truth and authenticity in culture and language. M.: Nauka, 1995. P.7-24.

12. Arutyunova N.D. Truth: background and connotations // Logical analysis of language: Cultural concepts. -M.: Nauka, 1991. P.21-31.

13. Arutyunova N.D. Silence: contexts of use // Logical analysis of language. Language of speech actions. M.: Nauka, 1994. P. 106117.

14. Arutyunova N.D. Types of linguistic meanings. Grade. Event. Fact. M.: Nauka, 1988. - 338 p.

15. Arutyunova N.D. The phenomenon of the second remark, or On the benefits of argument // Logical analysis of language: Inconsistency and anomalousness of the text. -M.: Nauka, 1990. P. 175-190.

16. Arutyunova N.D. The phenomenon of silence // Language about language. M.: Languages of Russian Culture, 2000. P.417-438.

17. Arutyunova N.D. Language and the human world. M.: Languages of Russian Culture, 1999. - 895 p.

18. Arkhangelsky Alexander There is fire. Literature and churchliness: literary evidence // New world. 1994. No. 2. P.230-243.

19. Barnet V. Connection between the communicative sphere and varieties of language in Slavic countries // New in foreign linguistics. 1988. Vol. XX. pp. 173-188.

20. Bakhtin M.M. The problem of speech genres // Bakhtin M.M. Aesthetics of verbal creativity. M.: Art, 1979. - 424 p.

21. Belchikov Yu.A. Style in linguistics // Literary encyclopedic dictionary (Under the general editorship of V.M. Kozhevnikov, P.A. Nikolaev). M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1987. P.442-443.

22. Biblical encyclopedia: In 2 books. Reprint of the 1891 edition. M.: NB-press ■ CENTURION APS 1991.

23. Bible. Books of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. -Brussels: “Life with God”, 1973. 2357.

24. Liturgical language of the Russian Church: History. Attempts at reformation. M.: Sreten. monastery, 1999. - 411 p.

25. Bulygina T.V. Prague Linguistic School // Main directions of structuralism. M.: Nauka, 1964. P.46-127.

26. Bulygina T.V., Krylov A.S. Language system // Linguistics. Big encyclopedic dictionary / Ch. ed. V.N. Yartseva. 2nd ed. -M.: Great Russian Encyclopedia, 1998. P.452-454.

27. Bulygina T.V., Shmelev A.D. Reference and meaning of the expressions myasopust (meat and waste week) and cheese and cheese (cheese and waste week) // VYa. 1997a. No. 3. P.40-48.

28. Bulygina T.V., Shmelev AD. Man about language (Metalinguistic reflection in non-linguistic texts) // Logical analysis of language. The image of a person in culture and language. M.: Publishing house "Indrik", 1999. pp. 146-162.

29. Bulygina T.V., Shmelev AD. Linguistic conceptualization of the world (based on Russian grammar). M.: “Languages of Russian Culture”, 19976. - 576 p.

30. Vezhbitskaya A. Language. Culture. Cognition. M.: Russian dictionaries, 1996.-416 p.

31. Vezhbitskaya Anna. Semantic universals and description of languages. M.: “Languages of Russian Culture”, 1999. - 780 p.

32. Vezhbitskaya Anna. Comparing cultures through keywords. M.: Languages of Slavic culture, 2001a. - 288s.

33. Vezhbskaya Anna. Comparing cultures through vocabulary and pragmatics. M.: Languages of Slavic culture, 20016. - 272 p.

34. Vereshchagin E.M. On the relativity of the worldly ethical norm // Logical analysis of language: Languages of ethics. M.: Languages of Russian Culture, 2000. P.235-246.

35. Vereshchagin E.M. The language of the static world: the fading of movement in Slavic-Russian hymnography // Logical analysis of language: Languages of the dynamic world. Dubna: International University of Nature, Society and Man “Dubna”, 1999. P.244-253.

36. Vinogradov V.V. Results of the discussion of stylistic issues // VYa. t. 1955. P.60-88.

37. Vinogradov V.V. Russian language (Grammar doctrine of words): Textbook. manual for universities U Otv. ed. G.A. Zolotova. M.: Higher. school, 1986.- 640 p.

38. Vinogradov V.V. Stylistics. Theory of poetic speech. Poetics. - M.: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1963. 256 p.

39. Vinokur T.G. Regularities of stylistic use of linguistic units. M.: Nauka, 1980. - 27 p.

40. Vinokur T.G. On the content of some stylistic concepts // Stylistic studies. M.: Nauka, 1972. P.7-107.

41. Wojtak M. Manifestation of standardization in statements of religious style (based on the material of liturgical prayer) // Text: Stereotype and TV: Interuniversity. collection of scientific tr. Perm: PSU Publishing House, 1998. pp. 214-230.

42. Wojtak M. Stylistics of archpastoral messages // Stereotyping and creativity in the text: Interuniversity. collection of scientific tr. Perm, 2001.

43. Questions of stylistics. Problems of speech culture. Interuniversity. scientific Sat. (issue 25). Saratov: Publishing house Sarat. University, 1993. - 168 p.

44. Wolf E. M. Functional semantics of assessment. M.: Editorial, URSS, 2002. - 280 p.

45. Questions of stylistics. Oral and written forms of speech. Inter-university. scientific Sat. (issue 23). Saratov: Publishing house Sarat. University, 1989. - 184 p.

46. Gavranek B. On the functional stratification of the literary language, trans. from Czech And the Prague Linguistic Circle. M.: "Progress", 1967. P.432-444.

47. Gak V.G. Actant structure of sins and virtues // Logical analysis of language: Languages of ethics. M.: Languages of Russian culture, 2000. P.90-97.

48. Gak V.G. Truth and people // Logical analysis of language. Truth and authenticity in culture and language. M.: Nauka, 1995. P.24-32.

49. Gak V.G. Features of biblical phraseological units in the Russian language (in comparison with French biblical units) // VYa. 1997. No. 4. P.55-60.

50. Galperin I.R. On the concept of “style” and “stylistics” // VYa. 1973. No. 3. pp. 14-26.

51. Gvozdev A.N. Essays on the stylistics of the Russian language. M.: “Enlightenment”, 1965. - 408 p.

52. Gippius A.L. The system of formal features of the language of Old Russian writing as a subject of linguistic study // VYa. 1989. No. 2. P.93-110.

53. Gippius A.A., Strakhov A.B., Strakhova O.B. The theory of Church Slavic-Russian diglossia and its criticism // Bulletin of Moscow State University. Series 9. Philology. 1988. No. 5. P.34-50.

54. Gorshkov A.I. Theory and history of the Russian literary language. -M.: "Higher School", 1984. 319 p.

55. Gosteea S.A. Religious-preaching style in modern media // Journalism and culture of Russian speech. M., 1997. Issue. 2.

56. Grammar of the modern Russian literary language. M.: Nauka, 1970. - 767 p.

57. Greek A.G. About words with the meaning of speech and silence in the Russian spiritual tradition // Logical analysis of language. Language of speech actions. -M.: Nauka, 1994. P. 117-125.

58. Humboldt W. von On the differences in the structure of human languages and its influence on spiritual development humanity // Selected works on linguistics. M.: Progress Publishing Group, 2000. P.37-301.

59. Gukhman M.M. Correlation between social differentiation and other types of literary language variation // Social and functional differentiation of literary languages. M.: Nauka, 1977. P.41-61.

60. Dal Vladimir. Explanatory dictionary of the living Great Russian language: T. 1-4. M.: JSC Publishing Group "Progress", "Univers", 1994.

61. Dubrovina K.I. Features of biblical phraseology in the Russian language // Scientific reports of the Higher School. Philological sciences. 2001. No. 1. P.91-99.

62. Jedlicka A. Literary language in modern communication // New in foreign linguistics. 1988. Vol. XX. P.38-135.

63. Ermakova O.P. The concepts of conscience and envy in their linguistic expression and the Russian language today. Issue 1. Sat. articles. M.: “Azbukovnik”, 2000. P.375-386.

64. Zhdanova L.A., Revzina O.G. “Cultural word” mercy P Logical analysis of language: Cultural concepts. M.: Nauka, 1991. P.56-61.

65. Living V.M. "Holiness". Brief dictionary hagiographic terms. M.: “Gnosis”, 1994. - 112 p.

66. Zhivov V.M. Problems of the formation of the Russian edition of the Church Slavonic language at the initial stage // VYa. 1987. No. 1. P.46-66.

67. Zhivov V.M. The role of Russian Church Slavonic in the history of Slavic languages // Current problems of Slavic linguistics. M.: Publishing house. Moscow Univ., 1988. P.49-91.

68. Zhivov V.M. Language and culture in Russia in the 18th century. M.: School “Languages of Russian Culture”, 1996. - 591 p.

69. Zhivov V.M. The language of Feofan Prokopovich and the role of hybrid variants of Church Slavonic in the history of Slavic literary languages // Soviet Slavonic Studies. 1985. No. 3. P.70-86.

70. Zhivov V.M., Uspensky B.N. Center and periphery in language in the light of linguistic universals // VYa. 1973. No. 5. P.24-34.

71. Zaliznyak Anna.A. Love and sympathy: on the problem of the universality of feelings and the translatability of their names (in connection with M. Kundera’s novel “The Unbearable Lightness of Being”) //RASK. No. 9/10. 1999.

72. Zakharova S.P., Kormilitsyna M.A. Problems of functional-style differentiation of the Russian literary language in the works of Saratov linguists // VYa. 1995. No. 4. From 123-132.

73. Ivanov Vyach. Sun. Dead languages // Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary. / Ch. ed. V.N. Yartseva. M.: Sov. Encyclopedia, 1990. P.233-234.

74. Hieromonk Alipiy (Gamanovich). Grammar of the Church Slavonic language. M.: Khudozhestvennaya lit., 1991. - 271 p.

75. Kamchatnoye A.M. Linguistic hermeneutics. M.: Prometheus, 1995. - 165 p.

76. Kashtanova E.E. Linguistic and cultural foundations of the Russian concept of love (aspect analysis). Author's abstract. dis. for the job application scientist, degree in philology. Sci. Ekaterinburg, 1997. - 23 p.

77. Klassovsky V.I. Grammar of the Slavic-Church language of the new period. 2nd ed., revised. - St. Petersburg - M., 1867. - 207 p.

78. Kozhina M.L., Mishlanov V.A. Prewodnik ro stylistyce polskiey I I red. naukowy Stanislaw Gaida. Opole, 1995 // Philological Sciences. M. 1997. No. 5. pp. 116-120.

79. Kolesnikova B.S. Concise Encyclopedia of Orthodoxy. Path to the temple. M.: ZAO Publishing House Tsentrpoligraf, 2001. - 589 p.

80. Koporskaya E.S. Semantic history of Slavicisms in the Russian literary language. -M.: Nauka, 1988. 231 p.

81. Koteskaya Tam M., Shmelev A. Aleshina and Masha article (about some properties of Russian “possessive adjectives”) // Scando-Slavica. vol.40. 1994.

82. Koshelev A.D. Towards an explicit description of the concept “freedom” // Logical analysis of language: Cultural concepts. M.: Nauka, 1991. P.61-64.

83. On the problem of liturgical language. International Association for the Study and Dissemination of Slavic Cultures. News bulletin. Issue 28-29. M., 1996. P.7-95.

84. Kravetsky A.G. Discussions about the Church Slavonic language (1917-1943) // Slavonic studies. 1993. No. 5. P.116-135.

85. Kravetsky A.G., Pletneva A.A. History of the Church Slavonic language in Russia (end of the 19th and 20th centuries). - M.: Languages of Russian culture, 2001. -400 p.

86. Kravchenko A.A. Experience in describing the phonetic system of the Church Slavonic language and modern liturgical pronunciation (thesis). M, 1992.

87. Krylova O.A. Can the church-religious functional style of the modern Russian literary language be considered a type of newspaper-journalistic style? // Stereotyping and creativity in the text: Interuniversity. collection of scientific tr. Perm, 2001.

88. Krylova O.A. Is there a church-religious functional style in the modern Russian literary language? // Cultural and speech situation in modern Russia. Ekaterinburg, 2000. P. 107117.

89. Krysgt L.P. About one gap in the system of functional styles of the modern Russian language // RYASh. 1994. No. 3. P.69-71.

90. Krysin L.P. Religious-preaching style and its place in the functional-stylistic paradigm of the modern Russian literary language // Poetics. Stylistics. Language and culture: Sat. in memory of T.G. Distiller. -M.: Nauka, 1996. P. 135-138.

91. Krysin L.P. Social restrictions in semantics and compatibility of linguistic units // Semiotics and Informatics. Issue 35. M.: “Languages of Russian culture”, “Russian dictionaries” 1997. P.299-319.

92. Krysin L.P. Sociolinguistic aspects of studying the Russian literary language. M.: Nauka, 1989. - 186 p.

93. Kusse Holger. Truth and Preaching. “The Living Word” of Archbishop Ambrose (Klyucharyov, 1820-1901) and the relationship between homiletics and rhetoric // Logical analysis of language. Truth and authenticity in culture and language. M.: Nauka, 1995. pp. 78-85.

94. Levin Yu. I. Truth in discourse // Semiotics and computer science. Issue 34. M., 1994.

95. Levontina I.B. " starry sky over your head" // Logical analysis of language. Truth and authenticity in culture and language. M.: Nauka, 1995. pp. 32-36.

96. Levontina I.B. Homo piger // The image of man in culture and language. M.: Publishing house "Indrik", 1999. pp. 146-162.

97. Levontina KB., Shmelev AD. Behind justice is empty // Logical analysis of language: Languages of ethics. M.: Languages of Russian culture, 2000. P.281-293.

98. Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary. / Ch. ed. V.N. Yartseva. M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1990. - 682 p.

99. Litvina Z.N. Lectures on the Old Church Slavonic language, given at Moscow State Pedagogical University in 1991-1992. (1st and 2nd half of the year).

100. Literary encyclopedic dictionary (Under the general editorship of V.M. Kozhevnikov, P.A. Nikolaev). M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1987. - 750 p.

101. Likhachev D. S. Conceptosphere of the Russian language // Izv. RAS. Ser. lit. and language 1993. No. 1. P.3-10.

102. Losev A.F. Philosophy of the name // Losev A.F. Being. Name. Space. -M„ 1993.

103. Lososiy V.N. Essay on the mystical theology of the Eastern Church. Dogmatic theology. M.: Center "SEI", 1991. - 288 p.

104. Lotman Yu.M. Inside thinking worlds: Man text - semiosphere - history. -M.: Languages of Russian culture, 1996. - 464 p.

105. MAC Dictionary of the Russian language: In 4 volumes / RAS, Institute linguistic research; Ed. A.P. Evgenieva, - 4th ed., erased. -M.: Rus. lang., Polygraph resources, 1999.

106. Maksimov L.V. On the definition of good: logical and methodological analysis // Logical analysis of language: Languages of ethics. M.: Languages of Russian culture, 2000. pp. 17-31.

107. Melchuk I.A., Zholkovsky A.K. Explanatory and combinatorial dictionary of the modern Russian language. Vienna, 1984.

108. Maidanova L.M. Religious and educational text // Russian language in the context of culture. Ekaterinburg: Ural Publishing House, University, 1999. P. 172-194.

109. Men A.V. History of religion: In search of the path, Truth and Life: In seven volumes. T. I. Origins of religion. M.: SP “Slovo”, 1991.- 287 p.

110. Mechkovskaya N.B. Language and religion. A manual for students of humanities universities. M.: Agency "FAIR", 1998. - 352 p.

111. Mythological dictionary. / Ed. EAT. Meletinsky. M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1991. - 736 p.

112. Muravyov A. Sacred language in historical and church perspective. // ZhMP. 1996. No. 7. P.63-65.

113. Murat V.P. Functional style // Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary. / Ch. ed. V.N. Yartseva. M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1990. P.567-568.

114. Nikolina N.A. Semantics and functions of the word “AVOS” in the modern Russian language // Multidimensionality of syntactic units: Interuniversity collection of scientific works. -M., 1993. P.157-168.

115. Nikolina N.A. Types of inter-genre interaction // Russian language today. Issue 1. Sat. articles. -M.: “Azbukovnik”, 2000. P.540-551.

116. Nikolsky L.B. Synchronic sociolinguistics (Theory and problems). M.: Nauka, 1976. - 168 p.

117. Novoselov M.A. Ethics, dogma and mysticism as part of the Christian faith. M, 1995.

118. NOSS Apresyan Yu.D., Boguslavskaya O.Yu., Levontina I.B., Uryson E.V., Glovinskaya M.Ya., Krylova T.V. New explanatory dictionary of synonyms of the Russian language. First edition. - M.: School “Languages of Russian Culture”, 1997. -552 p.

119. Paducheva E.V. The idea of truth in Russian confessional cultures // Logical analysis of language. Truth and authenticity in culture and language. M.: Nauka, 1995. P.85-93.

120. Panov M.V. History of Russian literary pronunciation. XVII-XX centuries. M: Nauka, 1990. 456 p.

121. Panov M.V. Modern Russian language. Phonetics. M.: Higher. school, 1979. - 256 p.

122. Panova L.G. Sin as a religious concept (using the example of the Russian word “sin” and the Italian “peccato”) // Logical analysis of language: Languages of ethics. M.: Languages of Russian Culture, 2000. pp. 167-178.

123. Penkovsky A.B. Joy and pleasure in the presentation of the Russian language // Logical analysis of language: Cultural concepts. M.: Nauka, 1991. P.148-155.

124. Pertsov P.V. About Pushkin’s last sonnet // Logical analysis of language: Languages of ethics. M.: Languages of Russian culture, 2000. P.399-406.

125. Postovalova V.I. Picture of the world in human life // The role of the human factor in language. Language and picture of the world. M.: Nauka, 1988. P.8-69.

126. Postovalova V.I. Ethical assessment of another and self-esteem in the Orthodox spiritual tradition (based on the epistolary heritage of St. Ignatius Brianchaninov) // Logical analysis of language: Languages of ethics. M,: Languages of Russian culture, 2000. P.406-417.

127. Archpriest Alexander Men. Sacrament. Word. Image. Divine service Eastern Church. L.: "Ferro-Logas", 1991. - 208 p.

128. Archpriest G. Dyachenko. Complete Church Slavonic dictionary. Reprint reproduction of the 1900 edition. M.: Publishing house. Department of the Moscow Patriarchate, 1993. - 1120 p.

129. Prokhvatilova O.A. Orthodox sermon and prayer as a phenomenon of spoken speech. Volgograd: Volgograd State University Publishing House, 1999.-364 p.

130. Rozhdestvensky Yu.V. Glossary of terms. (General Education Thesaurus): Morality. Moral. Ethics. M.: Flinta: Nauka, 2002. - 88 p.

131. Russian grammar. M.: Nauka, 1980.

132. Russian colloquial speech. / Rep. ed. E.A. Zemskaya. M.: Nauka, 1973. -485 p.

133. Russian colloquial speech. General issues. Word formation. Syntax. / Rep. ed. E.A. Zemskaya. M.: Nauka, 1981. - 276 p.

134. Russian colloquial speech. Phonetics. Morphology. Vocabulary. Gesture. / Rep. ed. E.A. Zemskaya. M.: Nauka, 1983. - 238 p.

135. Ryabtseva N.K. Ethical knowledge and its “subject” embodiment P Logical analysis of language: Languages of ethics. M.: Languages of Russian Culture, 2000. pp. 178-183.

136. Collection of akathists. Perm: “Transfiguration”, - 1992. - 704 p.

137. Sirotinsha O.B. Inter-style and intra-style variation of the language system // Questions of stylistics. Inter-style and intra-style variability of the language system. Interuniversity. scientific Sat. (issue 21). Saratov: Publishing house Sarat. Univ., 1986. P.3-8.

138. Sirotinina O.B. Works of Academician V.V. Vinogradov and modern problems of stylistics // International. anniversary session dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the birth of V.V. Vinogradova: Abstracts of reports. M., 1995. P.190.

139. Sklyarevskaya G.N. Dictionary of Orthodox Church Culture. -St. Petersburg: “Science”, 2000. 280 p.

140. Dictionary of accents for radio and television workers. / Ed. D.E. Rosenthal. 6th ed. - M.: Rus. lang., 1985. - 810 p.

141. SO Ozhegov S.I. Dictionary of the Russian language. - M.: State. foreign publishing house and national dictionaries, 1960. - 900 pp.

142. So Eun Yee. Speech genre of modern church and religious message. dis. for the job application scientist, degree in philology. Sci. M, 2000. -189 p.

143. Soloviev B.S. Justification for good. Moral philosophy // Soloviev V.S. Works in 2 volumes T.I. M.: Mysl, 1990. P.47-581.

144. Social and functional differentiation of literary languages. M.: Nauka, 1977. - 344 p.

145. USSR Dictionary of modern Russian literary language: In 20 volumes / USSR Academy of Sciences. Institute rus. language; Ch. ed. K.S. Gorbachevich. - 2nd ed. -M.: Rus. lang., 1991.

146. Stepanov Yu.S. “God is love, “Love is God.” The relation of identity is a constant in world culture // Logical analysis of language. Truth and authenticity in culture and language. - M.: Nauka, 1995. P.41-52.

147. Stepanov Yu.S. Constants: Dictionary of Russian culture: Research experience. M.: School “Languages of Russian Culture”, 1997. - 824 p.

148. Stepanov Yu.S. Semiotics. M.: Nauka, 1971. - 167 p.

149. Telia V.N. Russian phraseology. Semantic, pragmatic and linguocultural aspects. M.: School “Languages of Russian Culture”, 1996. - 288 p.

150. Uryson E.V. Spirit and soul, towards the reconstruction of archaic ideas about man // Logical analysis of language. The image of a person in culture and language. M.: Publishing house "Indrik", 1999. pp. 11-26.

151. Uryson E.V. Fundamental human abilities and naive anatomy // VYa. 1995. No. 3. P.3-17.

152. Uryson E.V. Linguistic picture of the world VS everyday ideas: (model of perception in the Russian language) // VYa. 1998. No. 2. P.3-21.

153. Uspensky B.A. From the history of the Russian literary language XVIII early XIX century: Karamzin’s language program and its historical roots. - M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1985. - 215 p.

154. Uspensky B. A. History of the Russian literary language (XI-XVII centuries). M.: Aspect Press, 2002. - 558 p.

155. Uspensky B.A. On the question of the semantic relationship between systemically opposed Church Slavonic and Russian forms in the history of the Russian language // Wiener Slavistisches Jahrbuch. Bd.XXIl. S. 92100.

156. Uspensky B.A. Brief essay history of the Russian literary language (XI-XIX centuries). - M.: Tnosis", 1994. - 240 p.

157. Uspensky B.A. The linguistic situation and linguistic consciousness in Muscovite Rus': the perception of Church Slavonic and Russian languages // Byzantium and Rus'. M.: Nauka, 1989. P.206-227.

158. Uspensky B.A. The linguistic situation of Kievan Rus and its significance for the history of the Russian literary language. M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1983. - 144 p.

159. Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary / Editorial Board: S.S. Averintsev et al. 2nd ed. - M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1989. - 815 p.

160. Florensky submarine. At the watersheds of thought // Florensky P.A. Op. in 2 volumes. T. II. M., 1990.

161. Khaburgaev G.A. Discussion issues in the history of the Russian literary language (Old Russian period) // Vestn. Moscow Univ. Ser. 9. Philology. 1988. No. 2. P.47-63.

162. Khaburgaev G.A. Old Slavonic language. 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Education, 1986. - 287 p.

163. Christianity. Encyclopedic Dictionary in 3 volumes / Ed. S.S. Averintseva. M.: Great growth. encyclopedia, 1993.

164. Kharitonov V.I. Conceptual analysis of folklore vocabulary characterizing the moral world of man. Author's abstract. dis. for the job application scientist, degree in philology. Sci. Belgorod, 1997. 18 p.

165. Chernykh P.Ya. Historical and etymological dictionary of the modern Russian language. T. 1-2. M.: Rus. lang., 1993.

166. Chistoevich NA. History of Bible translation into Russian. - St. Petersburg: Stasyulevich, 1899. 347 p.

167. Shansky N.M. Gospel text and phraseology of the Russian language//RYASH. 1995. No. 3. P.49-54; No. 4. P.55-58; No.5.53-58; No. 6. P.54-60.

168. Shapir M.I. The theory of “Church Slavic-Russian diglossia” and its supporters//RL. 1989. V 13. No. 3. P.271-311.

169. Shapir M.I. Language of everyday life / languages of spiritual culture // RL. 1990. V. 14. No. 2. pp. 129-147.

170. Shapir M.I. The language of ethics or the ethics of language? On the deontology of science // Language and culture: Facts and values: To the 70th anniversary of Yuri Sergeevich Stepanov. M.: Languages of Slavic culture. 2001. P.257-267.

171. Shmelev A.D. Life attitudes and discourse words // Aspekteja. Tampere, 1996.

172. Shmelev AD. Pluralism of ethical systems in the light of linguistic data // Logical analysis of language: Languages of ethics. M.: Languages of Russian Culture, 2000. P.Z80-390.

173. Shmelev AD. Truth vs. truth in the diachronic aspect (Brief note) // Logical analysis of language. Truth and authenticity in culture and language. M.: Nauka, 1995. P.55-58.

174. Shmelev AD. Functional stylistics and moral concepts // Language. Culture. Humanitarian knowledge: Scientific heritage of G.O. Vinokura and modernity. M.: Scientific world, 1999. P.217-230.

175. Shmelev D.N. Modern Russian language. Vocabulary. M.: “Enlightenment”, 1977. - 335 p.

176. Shmelev D.P. Russian language in its functional varieties. -M.: Nauka, 1977. 168 p.

177. Schrader YL. Ethics. Introduction to the subject. M.: Text, 1998.270p.

178. Shcherba JI.B. Modern Russian literary language // Selected works on the Russian language. M.: Uchpedgiz, 1957. - 188 p.

179. Language and personality. M.: Nauka, 1989. - 216 p.

180. Language of the Church. Issue 1. M.: St. Philaret Moscow Higher Orthodox Christian School, 1997a. - 100s.

181. Language of the Church. Issue 2. M: St. Philaret Moscow Higher Orthodox Christian School, 19976. - 120 p.

182. Linguistics. Big encyclopedic dictionary / Ch. ed. V.N. Yartseva. 2nd ed. - M.: Great Russian Encyclopedia, 1998. -685 p.

183. Yakoveiko E.B. Heart, soul, spirit in the English and German language pictures of the world (Experience in the reconstruction of concepts) // Logical analysis of language. The image of a person in culture and language. M.: Publishing house "Indrik", 1999. P.39-52.

184. Yakovleva E.S. On the concept of purity in modern Russian linguistic consciousness and in historical perspective // Logical analysis of language: Languages of ethics. M.: Languages of Russian culture, 2000. pp. 200-216.

185. Yakovleva E.S. Fragments of the Russian linguistic picture of the world (models of space, time and perception). M.: Tnosis", 1995. - 344 p.

186. Gumperz J. Types of Linguistics Communities // Readings in the Sociology of Language. -Mouton, 1970.

187. HavranekB. Studie o spisovnemjazyce. -Praha, 1963.

188. MistrikJ. Religiozny styl // Stilistika I. Opole, 1992.

189. Wierzbicka A. Semantics, culture and cognition: universals human concepts in culture-specific configurations. New York: Oxford Universiti Press, 1992.