|
ИСТИНА |
Войти в систему Регистрация |
Интеллектуальная Система Тематического Исследования НАукометрических данных |
||
Ономастика и норма: 40 лет спустястатья
- Автор: Васильева Наталия
- Сборник: Onomastikas pētījumi II / Onomastic Investigations II. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference (Rīga, May 10-12, 2018). Editors: L. Balode, C. Zschieschang. Rīga: LU Latviešu valodas institūts
- Год издания: 2020
- Место издания: LU Latviešu valodas institūts Rīga
- Первая страница: 312
- Последняя страница: 326
- Аннотация: The issue of the onomastic norm has its own history. In 1976, the Nauka Publishing House in Moscow published a collection of articles entitled Onomastika i norma ‘Onomastics and Norm’. For the first time in Russia the word norm was placed in the title of the book on onomastics. When we argue about the term linguistic norm, it is important to remind of its polysemy. On the one hand, there is a norm as various linguistic characteristics that distinguish a given speech community from others (norm 1), and on the other hand, there is normativity as the result of codification processes of the language (norm 2). Norm 1 correlates to such concepts as system and usus. Norm 2 is represented in a set of prescriptive rules, following which puts the given unit within the framework of the grammar of the literary language. What do we see in onomastics? On the one hand, 40 years ago, the attention was focused mainly on normativity from the point of view of the literary language and the grammatical norm (norm 2). On the other hand, it was at that time that the concept of the anthroponymic norm associated with the notion of the anthroponymic system appeared (norm 1). So how could we evaluate the ratio of “onomastics and the norm” for the Russian language 40 years after the issue was first raised?1. There is a blurring of the norm 2 for proper names in connection with the general trend of blurring of the boundaries of the literary language (declension/non-declension of surnames, fluctuations in the morphology of patronymics, disparity in the transliteration of foreign names). 2. For the pragmatic norm (norm 1), the following tendencies are noted: the growth of tolerance for foreign and non-systemic names (anthroponyms and toponyms); restructuring of the traditional three-term name formula; public approval of onomastic creativity. The variability of the pragmatic parameters of the onomastic norm observed at the present time is connected with the globalization processes in modern society. As one of the criteria for discursive stratification of the pragmatic onomastic norm, the concept of onomastic implicatures (ethnic, gender, chronological, etc.) is suggested.
- Добавил в систему: Васильева Наталия Владимировна