Учебное пособие 1681

But the role of these grammatical forms within the indicative is not limited to this function. They are also used in situations where the internal properties of verbal actions are not of interest to participants in speech communication. Usually this action is indicated in isolation, it is not an element of the described situation. We have given examples of such actions, illustrating the ability of the preterite and imperfect forms to be used with a temporal meaning simply "past" outside the framework of the coherent narrative plan. We call such an action aspectually uncooperative, and the term "General-factual action", proposed by V. S. Khrakovsky, is suitable for its definition [13, p. 557]

The features of the species semantics of the preterite and imperfect identified by us can be considered universal concepts that form the conceptual basis of the category of the verb type in General.

The preterit and imperfect are fully associated with the Russian past tense forms of the perfect and imperfect form. When used to express aspectual described action components species the values of the forms of the preterit and of the past tense the Russian perfective, and the imperfect of Russian past tense imperfective coincide almost completely. Russian form is often used to express general factual actions (I have already had lunch, Where did you buy this thing?). however, given the general role of the imperfect verb in the system, the Russian form of the imperfect form is radically different.), which is completely out of character for an imperfect in Dari.

Conclusion

1)the conceptual sphere of aspectuality or category of the verb type reflects the nature of the representation of the verb action in a particular speech act. A verbal action is denoted with the expression of its internal properties, such an action should be called aspectually characterized. The second type of representation of a verbal action is its designation as a fact; in this speech act, only the fact of the action itself is important, its internal properties are not the subject of interest. This is an aspectually uncharacteristic or general-factual action.

Aspectually characterized actions are purposefully classified in speech by internal properties, which occurs in certain speech conditions when expressing actions with elements of figurative description, for example, in the conditions of the so-called coherent narrative plan.

The aspectual characterization of verbal actions is based on: a) representation of an action in progress (process action),

b) performing an action as a result or at the final stage (non-process action). The properties of specific varieties of process and non-process actions, which are components of the semantics of grammatical forms of the verb, make up the content plan of the grammatical category of the verb type. The plan of expression of the functional-semantic category of aspectuality also includes values expressed in the interaction of multi-level means, provided that grammatical forms directly participate in this speech act.

The representation of a verbal action in the form of a general-factual, that is, an aspectually uncharacterized action, can naturally be considered as a factor of its aspectual characteristic.

Aspectually characterized and general-factual actions are equivalent, equally widespread, systemically important types of verbal actions that are characteristic of speech acts of a certain communicative orientation.

2)The division of aspectually characterized verbal actions into process and non-process actions is the most general classification of them. Among the components of species semantics that represent the internal properties of verbal actions, there are a number of other generic species features that are related or unrelated to the concept of process/non-process: duration/brevity, limit/non-limit, effectiveness/non-result, single-time / multiple-time.

The internal properties of verbal actions also include a significant number of more specific meanings from the vast sphere of methods of verbal action adjacent to the verb type.

14

3)tools for aspectual classification of actions in languages of different typologies are located at different levels of the structure. In languages with a pronounced synthetic structure, especially in languages with a developed system of derivative affixation, aspectually relevant means of expression are at the lexical level of the language structure in the form of corresponding affixes in the original verb word forms. Since the aspectual characterization of verbal actions is required only in certain conditions, it is obvious that semantic actualization of the aspectually relevant affixes of the original verbal word form occurs only when necessary. It is not required when expressing actions as general factual. This circumstance does not allow us to reduce all the functions of the verb word form to a certain invariant. Such attempts have led to the emergence of terms with elusive meanings such as "integrity", "non-integrity" and "internal limit".

4)In the languages of the analytical system of the Western Iranian type where in the source (dictionary) forms of verbs semantically are not differentiated as main species characteristics and values that are adjacent to mind a wide range of ways of verbal action, the expression of the specific values is hardly associated with the verbal vocabulary in the source (dictionary) forms. The specific characterization of verbal actions here is carried out with the participation of other parts of speech, while the most significant role in this process belongs to the means of the morphological level of the language in the person of the species-temporal verb forms of the preterite and the imperfect.

5)Aspectual qualification of verbal actions is carried out in certain speech conditions. These speech conditions can be conditionally called the sphere of specific opposition, since it is in these conditions that the potential specific meaning of verb forms is realized. Here, the means of species qualification (represented by the imperfect and preterite, the perfect and imperfect species) form an opposition with a complex internal organization of components. This principle of organizing the species opposition provides it with opportunities for broad interaction with non-grammatical aspect-relevant means and makes it an extremely effective means of differentiating verbal actions by species properties.

One of the key points of this opposition is the hierarchical relationships of the components of the species semantics of forms.

When using verb forms outside the sphere of specific opposition, their potential specific meaning is practically not used. In the Russian language, the forms of perfect and imperfect types compete with each other in a certain way when expressing general factual actions. In these conditions, the semantics of derivative affixes with a specific meaning for these word forms remains not in demand and is not implemented.

6)there are no semantic invariants that cover all functional variants of verb forms even within the indicative. Productive and effective in themselves, the concepts of "variant", "invariant", and "opposition" in morphology are applicable only within certain system structures, for example, if we are talking about the verb form, then within the sphere of specific opposition.

References

[1]Maslov Ju.S. Ocherki po aspektologii. Leningrad, 1984.

[2]Kratkaja russkaja grammatika (pod redakciej N.Ju. Shvedovoj i V.V. Lopatina). M.,

1989.

[3]Sovremennyj russkij jazyk (pod red. V.A. Beloshapkovoj). Izd-e vtoroe, isprav-lennoe

idopolnennoe. M., 1989.

[4]Russkaja grammatika. Tom I. Fonetika, fonologija, udarenie, intonacija, slovoobrazovanie, morfologija. AN SSSR, «Nauka», M., 1980.

[5]Chertkova M.Ju. Grammaticheskaja kategorija vida v sovremennom russkom jazyke. M., 1996.

15

[6] Miloslavskij I.G. Morfologicheskie kategorii sovremennogo russkogo jazyka. M.,

1981.

[7]Vsevolodova M.V. Polja, kategorii i koncepty v grammaticheskoj sisteme jazyka.

//Voprosy jazykoznanija. № 3, 2009.

[8]Kiseleva L.N. Jazyk dari Afganistana. M., 1985.

[9]Efimov V.A, Rastorgueva V.S., Sharova E.N. Persidskij, tadzhikskij, dari. // Osnovy iranskogo jazykoznanija. Novoiranskie jazyki: zapadnaja gruppa, prikaspijskie jazyki. M.,

«Nauka», 1982.

[10]Jedel'man D.I. Kategorija vremeni i vida. //Opyt istoriko-tipologicheskogo issledovanija iranskih jazykov. Tom II. Jevoljucija grammaticheskih kategorij. M., 1975.

[11]Rubinchik Ju.A. Grammatika sovremennogo persidskogo literaturnogo jazyka. M.,

2001.

[12]Ostrovskij B.Ja. Voprosy grammaticheskoj semantiki glagola jazyka dari. M., 2004.

[13]Hrakovskij V.S. Nekotorye problemy universal'no-tipologicheskoj harakteri-stiki aspektual'nyh znachenij. // Uchenye zapiski Tartuskogo universiteta. Tartu, 1980, vyp. 557.

16

UDC 81’282.2

SPEECH PORTRAIT OF THE SPEAKER OF THE PEOPLE'S LANGUAGE

OF THE VORONEZH REGION

L.V. Nedostupova

____________________________________________________________________________

Voronezh State Technical University

The chair of Russian language and Intercultural communication PhD, Associate Professor

Lubov Viniaminovna Nedostupova e-mail: nedostupowa2009@yandex.ru

____________________________________________________________________________

Statement of the problem. The article examines in detail the phonetic, grammatical and some word-formation features of the dialect of the long-livers of the small village of Progorelye, Petropavovsky District, Voronezh Region. In the course of the study, the specificity of the speech portrait of the dialectal carrier is established as a reflection of the linguistic picture of the world. The need to study the speech of old-timers living in rural areas, of course, is important for dialectologists to record, describe and preserve valuable information about the folk language.

Results. Through the most striking features of the living folk language considered in the study, we received a peculiar surviving evidence of an entire era. It covers 90 years, exactly as much as our respondent's age. A variety of language tools demonstrated interesting phenomena of the active dialect carrier: some models include Old Russian elements and elements of the South Russian dialect, elements of the Ukrainian language and its dialects. In our opinion, the relatively closed nature of the life of the dialect-bearer and the features of rural life played a significant role in the formation of a peculiar, unique portrait of speech and the preservation of its traditional features.

Conclusion. The observations made give the right to believe that the respondent’s dialect is among the transitional

Russian-Ukrainian dialects. The features of East Ukrainian dialects preserved in it are quite clearly visible in the fixed spoken language of the native speaker. The above findings obtained in the course of the analysis of the local language make it possible to really assess its current state and make a certain contribution to the study of RussianUkrainian dialects in the Central Black Earth region.

Key words: dialect personality, speech portrait, native speaker, characteristic features, phonetic features, grammatical signs, word-formation units, language facts, features of the Ukrainian language and South Russian dialects.

For citation: Nedostupova L.V. Speech portrait of the speaker of the people's language of the Voronezh region / L.V. Nedostupova // Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-didactic Researches”. – 2020. - № 1 (28). – P. 17 - 26.

Introduction

Intensive collection of material for the “Dialectological Atlas of the Russian Language” and many other dialect dictionaries began in the middle of the 20th century. During this period,

“dialectologists concentrated their forces on a wide areal examination of vocabulary, which subsequently provided the material basis for dialectological expeditions and fundamental file cabinets” [1, p. 93-94]. The publication of the “Lexical Atlas of Russian Folk dialects” opened up great prospects for researchers in studying and comprehending the richest dialect material [2, p. 96]. However, until now, most of the dialects have not come under the scrutiny of domestic linguistic scholars both on the territory of the Russian Federation and the Voronezh region. Today it is quite important to record, describe and preserve valuable information about the folk language reflected in the speech works of its native speakers.

For this reason, our research attention is focused on the unexplored dialect of the village of Progoreloye.

______________________

© Nedostupova L.V., 2020

17

Getting acquainted with the history of the formation of this settlement, we learned that at the end of the 19th century, people began to move from the territory of Ukraine en masse to the Voronezh province. Here they occupied mainly southwestern counties and made up the absolute majority in the Ostrogozhsky regiment (I revision - 89.5%, II - 93.3%, and III - 96.2%), as well as in Valuysky district (38 5, 54.6 and 68.4%). In addition, a significant number of them were taken into account in Voronezh (II revision - 2.8%, III - 6.7%), Verkhososensky (II - 27.3%, III - 31.3%), Pavlovsky, Ushersky, Khopersky and Palatovsky counties [3, p. 111, 117].

According to local tradition, during his sailing on the river Don, Tsar Peter saw a forest near Lake Gavrik and ordered it to be burned. In the burnt glade guilty soldiers were settled. That was the time when the village of Progoreloye supposedly originated. Tradition is not a documentary source, but it has also a real basis. Two facts can be taken into account here: Peter's involvement in events in the area and forest burning. It is known that at the beginning of the XVIII century in a number of places on the Don there were rare Cossack settlements. When an uprising broke out in 1707 under the leadership of Kondraty Bulavin, the Cossacks not only supported the Bulavins, but also joined rebel forces. Then, by decree of Peter the Great, Cossack settlements and towns were ravaged in many places. When ruined, smokers were burned. Moreover, sometimes forests burned. In addition, in a number of places the steppe was burned to block the way for horse Cossacks. It is possible that there was a Cossack village on the site of the village of Progoreloye before 1707, and it was burned, too. This place for a long time secured the name Burnt Glade. The area near the Tolucheevka River began to be inhabited by service people since 1716. Service people were called soldiers. This is where it becomes clear why the first settlers of the Burnt Legend are called "guilty soldiers." Then the resettlement was carried out for offenses, forcibly [4].

In 1789, a second church was built in the village instead of the first wooden one. Since wooden churches usually stood for 60-70 years, it means that the first church in Burned-out was built already in the 1720s. It leads to the following conclusions: Progoreloye began to be inhabited between 1718-1720. Thus, the name of the village Progoreloye was formed from the place where the rebel village was burnt [5, p. 254-255]. It is located 290 km from the regional center - the city of Voronezh – and refers to the Peter and Paul region. Currently, about 130 people live in Progoreloye [4].

The aim of this work is to create an individual speech portrait of a native speaker by examining its vivid phonetic, grammatical and some derivational features.

Methodology of the research

The object of the study was the lively speech of the long-living of the village of Progoreloye - Maria Pavlovna Tomasheva, (born in 1929).

The subject of the study is the specific features of the speech portrait of an informant as a reflection of the linguistic picture of the world of the dialect carrier.

The material for the work was the recording of conversations with the respondent during informal communication in the field.

In the analysis, the following methods were used: interviewing method, observation and interpretation method, descriptive method, comparison and analysis method.

Results of the research

Of greatest interest for determining the speech portrait of an informant are materials that testify to the specifics of his dialect. We single out the most characteristic phonetic features, because pronunciation features reflect the linguistic personality.

1.One of the most common occurrences is the okanye – pronunciation of the sound [o]:

[бо а́то (rich) (adv.), Boguchar (city name) (n., sg.), боты́нок (shoe) (n., sg.), вода́(water) (n., sg.), возы́ (carts) (n., pl.), Воло́дька (Volodka – a person`s name) (n., sg.) воло́кна (fibers)

(n., pl.), волы́ (oxen) (n., pl.), война́(war) (n., sg.), восьмо́й (the eighth), (numeral), выходно́й

(day off ) (n., sg.), осуда́рь (prince, monarch) (n., sg.), олодова́ть (to starve) (v. imperfect

18

mode), двора́(yard) (n., sg.), добыра́ться (to reach something) (v. imperfect mode), дожи́ть (live to) (v. perfect mode), дои́ть (to milk) (v. imperfect mode), доя́рка (milkmade) (n., sg.),

дома́(houses) (n., pl.), доро́ и (roads) (n., pl.), дошёл (reached) (v. perfect mode), зола́(ash) (n., sg.), зоря́(break of day) (n., sg.), коло́нка (column) (n., sg.), колхо́з (collective farm) (n., sg,), конвои́р (guard) (n., sg.), коне́ц (end) (n., sg.), конопля́(hemp) (n., sg.), коры́то (washtub) (n., sg.), коша́рня (sheep house) (n., sg.), лоза́(vine) (n., sg.), молоко́(milk) (n., sg.), Но-

вотро́ицкое (Novotroyetzkoye – the village name) (n., sg.), обра́тно (vice versa) (adv.), обыкновэ́нный (usual) (adv.), овца́(sheep) (n., sg.), одна́(the one) (numeral), одэя́ние (clothing) (n., sg.), окра́ина (outskirts) (n., sg.), оно́(this) (pronoun.), основно́е (main) (adj.), отёл (calving) (n., sg.), по ори́лы (have burnt) (v. perfect mode), позва́ть (to call) (v. perfect mode), полово́дье (flood) (n., sg.), полотня́нэ (made of cloth) (adj.), полы́ (floors) (n., pl.),

помо ло́ (has helped) (v. perfect mode)), помы́ть (to have washed) (v. perfect mode), по-

сле́дний (the last) (adv.), постро́елы (have built) (v. perfect mode), пото́м (later) (adv.), по-

толо́к (floor) (n., sg.), провожа́ть (see off) (v. perfect mode), прода́ть (have sold) (v. perfect mode), робы́л ((worked) v. imperfect mode), роди́тэль (parent) (n., sg.), самохо́д (self moving mechanism) (n., sg.), сапо и́(shoes) (n., pl.), слобода́(large village) (n., sg.), солда́т (soldier)

(n., sg.), ствола́(stem) (n., sg.), сторона́(side) (n., sg.), стоя́ть (stand) (v. imperfect mode), тома́т (tomato) (n., sg.), трудодни́(workday) (n., pl., v. imperfect mode), трудоспосо́бна

(employable) (adj.), хлебоубо́рка (grain crop harvesting) (n., sg.), ходы́ть (walk) (v. imperfect mode), хозя́йка (hostess) (n., sg.), хорошо́(good) (adv.)]1, etc.

2. The following variants of words have been recorded: [соси́д (neighbor man) (n, sg.),

суси́дка (neighbor woman) (n, sg.)] and [вы́копалы (have dug) (v. perfect mode), нэ купуйтэ

́

(don`t dig)].

3. At the place of etymological ѣ, [и ] ([i]) is mainly used: [виялки́ (fanners) (n., pl.),

ви́дра (buckets) (n. pl.), влиз (have climbed) (v., perfect mode), ди́д (grandfather) (n., sg.),

жила́л (wanted) (v., imperfect mode), жили́зо (iron) (n., sg.), копи́йка (kopek) (n., sg.), ли́зла (was climbing) (v., imperfect mode), ли́то(summer) (n., sg.), ми́сто (place) (n., sg.), ни́чим (nothing) (pronoun), оби́д (dinner) (n., sg.), отсива́л (sifted) (v., imperfect mode), пидвизе́ (will take somebody to a place)(v., perfect mode), пиклы́ (baked) (v., imperfect mode),

Питропа́вловка (Petropavlovka)(n., sg.), притсида́тэль (chairman) (n., sg.), си́но (hay) (n., sg.), соси́д (neighbor) (n., sg.), тижёлый (hard) (adj.), хлиб (bread) (n., sg.), чилови́к (man) (n., sg.)] and others.

4. The absence of conversion of [е] to [ʼо] is significant: [живэ́м (live) (v., imperfect mode), пи́дэшь (will go) (v., perfect mode), порвэ́шь (will tear) (v., perfect mode), пэрэживэ́шь (will go through it) (v., perfect mode), трасе́тся (shake) (v., imperfect mode)], etc..

5. The use of solid consonants in front of the front vowels is revealed: [боты́нкы (boots) (n., singular), блы́снуть (to have shined) (v., perfect mode), блы́же (more nearly) (adverb), былы́ (were) (v., imperfect mode), бра́лэ (took) (v., imperfect mode), вары́лы (boiled) (v., imperfect mode), вмэ́сти (together) (adverb), возы́лы (carried) (v., imperfect mode), вы́нэслы

(to have carried) (v., perfect mode), вэзлы́ (were caring) (v., imperfect mode), двэ́ры (doors)

(v., imperfect mode), дэнь (day) (n., sg.), дрэма́ть (doze) (v., imperfect mode), дэржа́лэ (held) (v., imperfect mode), дэрэвя́нный (wooden) (adjective), жды (wait) (v., imperfect mode), залыла́сь (flush) (v., perfect mode), звэ́нья (elements) (n., pl.), зэмля́(earth) (n., sg.), зэмляни́ка (strawberry) (n., sg.), золы́лэ (flush) (v., imperfect mode), иды́те (go) (v., imperfect mode), кача́лы (swayed) (v., imperfect mode), клы́кать (to call) (v., imperfect mode), козакы́ (kozaks) (n., pl.), косы́ть (mow) (v., imperfect mode), крэ́пкый (strong) (adjective),

кырпы́ч (brick) (n., sg.), кыпято́к (boiling water) (n., sg.), ложкы́(spoons) (n., pl.), лыть (to

1 It should be noted that the article uses simplified transcription. The sound «г» in dialect is fricative ( ).

19

pour) (v., imperfect mode), лэны́лысь (to idle) (v., imperfect mode), любы́ть (to love) (v., im-

perfect mode), лю́ды (people) (n., pl.), мынута (minute) (n., sg.), мы́ска (bowl) (n., sg.),

́

накормы́ть (to have fed) (v., perfect mode), нэ́мцы (the Germans) (n., pl.), нэурожа́й (crop failure) (n., sg.), обыкновэ́нный (usual) (adjective), одын (one) (adjective), о́зэро (lake) (n., sg.), парны́к (greenhouse) (n., sg.), пла́калы (cried) (v., imperfect mode), платы́лы (paid) (v., imperfect mode), плэми́ннык (nephew) (n., sg.), повэла́(to have led) (v., perfect mode), по- вэзла́(to have driven) (v., perfect mode), прыхо́дя (coming) (v., imperfect mode), пусты́лы

(to have let in) (v., perfect mode), пэ́нсия (pension) (n., sg.), рука́мы (by hands) (n., pl.), са- ды́ть (to plant) (v., imperfect mode), слэд (trek) (n., sg.), спо́ртылось (to have gone off) (v., perfect Mode), старыкы́ (the old) (n., pl.), становы́ть (to stand) (v., imperfect mode)), стира́лэ (to wash) (v., imperfect mode), стрэля́ть (to shoot) (v., imperfect mode), сыла́(village) (n., sg.), сы́тчик (chintz, calico) (n., sg.), труды́лысь (worked) (v., imperfect mode), тры

(three) (numeral), тры́цать (thirty) (numeral), трэво́жно (anxiously) (adverb), ходы́лы

(walked) (v., imperfect mode), цвэлы́ (blossomed) (v., imperfect mode)], and others. This feature should be attributed to the fact that after the disappearance of the reduced sounds in Ukrainian language secondary consonants palatalization has not occurred. The result of the process was the consolidation of consonants standing in front of the vowels of the front row.

6. It is noted that softened [pʼ] is preserved at the end of the word: [пожа́рь был

туточка идэ́коло́нка (the fire took place just near the column)], [на база́рь хто выбыра́вси

́

(who came to the market place)], [помидо́рʼи у мэнэ́хороши́(My tomatoes are also good)].

7. The use of soft sibilants in the place of hard ones: [парохо́дэ тя а́лы ба́ржʼи (ships drew barges)], [баржʼи возы́лы матэриа́л (barges and carries material)], [туди́вы́щи упала (there staff fell)], [йи́дэ шо-то за мущи́на (a certain man is going)], [пять чилови́к конвои́р приви́л италья́нцʼи (a guard came with 5 Italians)], [лы́жʼи былы́ у нэ о́(he had got skies)], [оны́таки́лю́ды як и на́щи (they are like other people)].

8. The phoneme [f] corresponds to [h], [hv]: [хвомы́лия Томашёва (the surname is Tomasheva)], [есть и хвотока́рточка у наз (we also have a photo)], [а хве́рма була́ни освищёна (the farm wasn`t lit)] и [ʃ]: [а сэстра́моя́ра́зи два и́лы ра́зи тры е́здыла у Лэнин ра́д

на то́ршоразроботку (my sister went to Leningrad two or three times for peat mining)].

About the named feature in the Voronezh dialects Professor N.P. Grinkova writes the following: “It is curious to note that this phonetic phenomenon covers not only the old composition of words, like хвартук (apron), хванарь (lntern), хранцуз (Frenchman) or proper names like Khvilip, Khvedot, etc., but captures the phonetic design of completely new words, at the very last time emerged in the local language: хвонт, хвакт (fact), па γрахвику (according to schedule)” [6, p. 197].

9.The hardening of the soft final labial sounds was noted: [сэм (seven), свекро́в

(squares)].

10.In place of [g] sound [d] is marked: [я у ха́ти сидю́ (I am sitting near the hut)].

ва́ше о (your) (pronoun), восьмо́ о (the eighth) (numeral.), вытя а́лэ (were drewing) (v., imperfect mode), ли́няны (made of clay) (adj.), лубо́ка (deep) (adj.), ляды́(look) (v., imperfect mode), натушкы́ (weight, stones) (n., pl.), оня́лэ (were driving) (v., imperfect mode), на́лы (drove) (v., imperfect mode), о́ди (years) (n., sg.), олодо́валэ (were starving) (v., imperfect mode), о́лос (voice) (n., sg.), осуда́рь (prince) (n., sg.), осыда́рыня (princes) (n., sg.), орб

(hump) (n., sg.), орба́ти (humpy) (adj.), о́рэ (grief) (n., sg.), о́ры (mountains) (n., pl.),

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 1 (28), 2020 ISSN 2587-8093

able) (v., imperfect mode), наше о (our) (pronoun), не ра́мотни (illiterate) (adj.), но́ ы (feet, legs) (n., pl.), ныко́ о (no one) (pronoun), о оро́дэ (vegetable gardens) (n., pl.), по на́лэ

(boots) (n., pl.), сни (snow) (n., sg.), стро́ а (strict) (adj.), тя́ лова (used for transportation of something) (adj.), у а́дывалы (were guessing) (v., imperfect mode), фсэ о́(all) (pronoun), etc.

12.There is no stunning at the end of the words: [клуб (club), колхо́з (collective farm),

Лэнин ра́д (Leningrad), наро́д (folk), наво́з (manure), раз (once), труд (labour), це́рковь

(church), щётово́д (accountant)] and others. To preserve the voiced consonants, paired in so- nority-dullness, at the end of the word in the Ukrainian language is indicated by S.V. Bromley and other scientists [7, p. 195]. This phenomenon is not characteristic for the South Russian dialects.

13.It is common to use [u] instead of [v]: [диучи́на (maiden), диуча́та (maidens), оди́у

(years), здра́уствуйтэ (good day), Коти́ука (Kotiuka (inhabited locality)), коро́у (cows), ко-

morning), с сама́ноу (made of samans – special kind of brick made from clay, manure, cut straw and chaff), сара́еу (barn), у колхо́зах (in collective farms), у водэ́(near the water), у

я́мэ (near the pit)]and others. This is a feature of the Ukrainian language.

It should be emphasized that many of the phonetic characteristics listed above are characteristic of both the Ukrainian literary language and the southeastern dialects of the Ukrainian language.

It seems relevant to consider some of these features.

1.In the area of vowels in an unstressed position, the exaggerating of the sound [ya] is

noted, but it is recorded in a few lexical units: [зэмляни́ка (strawberry), рядово́й (soldier),

святы́й (saint), хозяины́(host), якы́й (what )].

2.Frequency of pronouncing [o] in place of [a] in an unstressed position: [застовля́ть

(make somebody do something), козакы́ (cossacks), коза́чество (Cossack community), отпровля́ть (to send), пэрэроба́тывалы (to work over), розжива́лыся (got profit),

роска́зывать (to tell), троктори́ст (tractor driver)]. Particularly interesting, in our opinion, are the following cases: [воля́лось (to be lying), построда́лэ (to have suffered)], which are found in some Voronezh and Belgorod dialects.

3.There is a loss of a vowel at the beginning of the word: [мы у Новотро́ицком вакуи́рвалысь (=эвакуировались) (We were evacuated near Novotroitskaya)], [ко́ло (=около)

Дона ны ба́чилы ныко́ о (There was no one near Don)].

4.Due to the appearance of [j], the stem is lengthened: [йи́да (food), йих (their), йие́

(her), йи́хал (went), прийижжа́ли (were arriving), пирийи́халы (having arrived), прийшёл (have come)] and others.

5.Phonemé [k] sometimes corresponds to [x]: [и ти как стоя́ть вы́соко хрэсты́ (how high those crosses stand)], [есть хто выдувал (there is the one who blew it)], etc. In this case, the stop consonant is replaced by a slit consonant.

6.The phoneme [g] is sometimes replaced by [u]: [идэ́] (is going). The named phenome-

non is characteristic of many South Russian dialects. Softening before the next soft one, [ ] changed to [ј], which then could turn into a vowel [7, p. 59].

7. The combination of phonemes [st ] corresponds to [s ]: [родитель быв щётоводом

(one of her parents was accountant)].

21

8. In the result of the dissimilation of consonants in a dialect the combination [t n] chang-

es to [ n] in front of the seminal [n]: [моло́шный (milky), бла ополушна (flawless), позво-

́

но́шнык (spine)].

9.A single use of hard sibilant sounds in place of soft ones: [молоко́завэ́душый нэ да-

ва́л и там вы́пыть, нам завэ́душый нэ дае́(the superintendent didn`t let us drink milk, our superintendant doesn`t give it to us)].

10.Afflicates [t ] and [tz] in a speech differ: [ба́чила (saw), кача́лы (swang), конца́

(end), младэ́нчиском (infantile), начэла́сь (began), ничё о (nothing), учи́лыся (studied),

(church)], and others.

11.A simplification of the group of consonants and vowels is fixed: [нычё (today), тод-

ди (then), таки́(this way)].

12.Alleged forms are noted: сво о́сына, до ба́тько свово́(her son and her dad), пры-

ма́лы у колхо́з (to take kolhoz), отёл прыма́лы (delivered calving), там у то́стрэля́лэ (they

were shooting), у нэй о ти (=вот те) воло́кна (here you are, the fibers), нэ стала ныче о́да́ли (there followed nothing)].

Describing the most striking features of the speech portrait of M.P. Tomasheva, we understand that the following derivational units implemented in dialect are also their components:

1.Words of prefixal formation: [а то нычё о ни было́(there was nothing)].

2.The words of the prefix-and-suffix formation[це́рковь постро́елы (church having been built)], [вэ́дра починя́ть (to repaot buckets)], [попрыхо́дылы хло́пцы many (boys have

come)], [бычёвы прывя́зывалы (tired binder strings)], [ны о́дын (=ни один) нэ прыши́в (=не пришёл) (no one came)], [былы́ пэрэка́тчикы (there were load movers)], [роди́тэльница пэрэломы́ла (parent broke)], [ходы́лы здэсь розжива́лыся (were walking here and got profit)], [збыва́лися (= собирались) в одни́й ха́ти (gathered in one hut)], [не ра́мотни былы́ (were illiterate)], [мы сюды́ пэрэбра́лыся (we mover there)], [була́ни

освищёна (was unlit)], [короу оня́лэ до о́зэра напува́ть (= поить) (chased cows to the lake to water)], [шо мы натворы́лы (you have messed things up)], [туды склада́лэ (you put things there)], [цэ ужэ отзолы́лэ (this has already been whitened with ash)], [быстро усё сотворы́лося (everyting happened quickly)], etc.

3. Words of suffix formatioln: [роди́тельница роска́зовала (my parent told me)],

[ла еря́вот та́мэчко, и та́мэчко ха́ты (camps are there, nuts are there)], [туточка идэ́

́

коло́нка (there is a column here)], [я буду мыть такэ́нько (I will wash this way)], [так мы и коровче́нку дэржа́лэ (we kept a caw)], [полово́дье было страше́нно (the flood was teriible)], [шо же робы́ть у бабушо́к (why work for old ladies)], [сыды́ть там на бу ры́не (is sitting there on a hillock)], [вы́везуть зэ́рнычко (will bring out corn)], [шинэлы́шкы

(=шинели) одното́нни (monochromatic greatcoats)], [у сумочкы мы́сочка (there was a ness

́

on the bag)], [там сы́тчик дава́лэ (they sold chintz (calico) there)], etc.

4. Addition of the stems of the words: using a connecting vowel: [у наз заготозэ́рно называ́лося (we called it “stocked grain”), полово́дье було́(there was a flood), она була́зэр-

носкла́дом (she was a grain store manager), я трудоспосо́бна (I am employable), хлебо- убо́рка була́ (there was grain corn harvesting ), даю́ть на трудодэ́нь (give for a working day), у Лэнин ра́д на то́ршоразроботку (to Leningrad for peat extraction)]; abbreviation: [был мэтээс (МТС) в райо́ни (there was a machine and tractor station in the area), у эсэсэры (в СССР) быв (I visited my sister in the USSR)], etc.

The recorded linguistic facts “are connected, as a rule, with the lack of a codified norm characteristic of the literary language, which makes it possible to more fully realize in the dialect those trends that in the literary language are restrained by the stability of the rules for using

22

linguistic means. Emerging innovations are, therefore, the result of self-development of the dialect” [2, p. 98-99].

In our opinion, some grammatical features of the speech portrait of the respondent are of interest: words with a postfix -sya in place of -sj in reflexive verbs. They can be illustrated by the following examples: [мы с ным вмэ́сти учи́лыся (we studies together with him), власть как начала́ся (the governing power took the office), я дывлю́ся (I am surprised), она докрыча́лася (she cried), раньше стрэмы́лыся (they used to aspire), она лома́лося (she refused), оно называ́лося (it was called), раньше труды́лыся нэ лэны́лыся (in former times people worked, didn`t idle), пра́зныкы собыра́лыся (holidays were approaching)]. Also, - si in the place of – sya is used: [хто выбыра́вси (who managed to get out)].

In the course of the study, nouns ending in - ив (–iv) were noted in the speech of the in-

formant: [солда́тив ужо́было́уйма (there were lots of soldiers), тут уже солда́тив по́лно

́

(there are lota of soldiers), тут уже солда́тив стоя́ло (there were soldiers), колодизи́в (=коло́дцев) нэ було́ (there were no wells), вэдро́ помидо́рив (a bucket of tomatoes), па́ра быки́в у ярми́ (a pair of oxen in yoke)],ending in –ев (jev): [дожида́й роди́тилев (wait for parents)]. And the words of different parts of the speech with the preserved old Russian ending

-ою (-ею) (oyu (-yeyu)): [с хозя́йкою (with the host (noun)), с хоро́шею (with a good one (adj.)) буха́нкою (with a bun (noun)), вы́нэслы чёрною (прил.) (having carried out something black (adj.)), я сунды́калэ за́дныцею (I walked (moving the bottom part of body in a special way)), тут бэры́те мое́ю руко́ю (сущ.) (here you take with my (adv.-adj.) hand (n.)), между Коти́укою (between Kotykoyu (noun)), собыра́лыся бры а́дою (gathers in a brigade) (noun)] etc.

The lexical units with a typical Ukrainian ending -э (-e) are actively used by the dialectbearer: [зэ́млю на дэфча́т нэ дава́лэ (they didn`t give (v., imperfect mode) land to women), а

на хло́пцев дава́лэ (men were given (v., imperfect mode) land); на службэ был (was in the service (n. sg.)); по́Дону ходы́лы парохо́дэ (ships (n., pl.) were going in the Don); о оро́дэ усэ да́ былы́ у водэ́(All gardens (n., pl.) were near water (n. sg.)); яки́е помидори вы́шлэ

(what nice tomatoes we`ve got (v., perfect mode)); старожи́лэ роска́зывалэ (old residents (n., pl.) told (v., imperfect mode)); а в со́рок трэ́тим як по на́лэ суды́ (in the forty third trials began (v. perfect mode)); там у то́стрэля́лэ (there was shooting (v., imperfect mode) there);

вот лю́ды построда́лэ (people suffered (v. perfect mode)); там е о́закопа́лэ (there he was dug (v. perfect mode)); лю́дэ олодо́валэ (people (n., pl.) starved (v., imperfect mode)); нэ хотэ́ла там на чужы́й сторонэ́(didn`t want there, in a strange land (n., sg.)); коровчэ́нку дэржа́лэ (had (v., imperfect mode) a cow); наво́з вытя а́лэ (carried (v., imperfet mode) manured); тоди́стира́лэ, так золы́лэ (people washed (v., imperfect mode) and poured (v., imperfect mode)); сады́лэ коноплю́ (planed (v., imperfect mode)), и мя́лэ (and crumpled (v., imperfect mode)), и кипа́лэ (boiled (v., imperfect mode)), и чэса́лэ (and brushed (v., imperfect mode)); пря́лэ усю́ зи́му (and spun (v., imperfect mode) all winter); мо́кра туды склада́лэ

(put (v., imperfect mode) there something wet); меня́лэ зэ́рно (exchanged (v., imperfect mode) corn); е о́и скирдова́лэ, и суши́лэ (it was mowed (v., imperfect mode) and dried (v., imperfect mode)); трудодни́заробля́лэ (earned (v., imperfect mode) labour-day units)] and others. The given examples from the informant’s speech confirm the fact that the features of the mother’s word stem were preserved in their dialect.

A special group of lexemes with an absent final vowel is noteworthy: [ лубо́ка (deep (adj.)), оло́дни (hungry (adj.)), дру о́(other (pronoun)), дэревя́нна (timber (adj.)), жила́юща

(desired, interested (adv.)), заводни́ (like clockwork (adj.)), кладова́ (pantry (n., sg.)),

кырпы́чны (brick (adj.)), ме́ньша (smaller (adj.)), мо́кра (wet (adj.), молоди́ (young (adj.)),

одыно́ки (lonely (adj.)), о́пытни (experienced (adj.)), самохо́дни (self-moving (adj.)), соси́дска (neighbouring (adj.)), стро́ а (strict (adj.)), таки́(so, such (pronoun)), тёплу (warm

23