--- Yamail [http://yandex.ru]
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Lunohod1:
... The rules of the Russian language on TV and radio.
You know, I'll probably cool fall in your eyes
but the transfer of the right speech on the radio I listen with
great pleasure. The most popular is not always correct.
Now a little rehabilitated.
"New Russian spelling" I think the machinations of the world
(ie, American) imperialism, in order to undermine our culture,
that it was easier to have three skins tear (in the form of raw
materials).
And the radio broadcasts done by those who for their country
radeet. In narrow-minded understanding of such people, alas,
are called fools.
<...>
P. $. More about the literacy of speech. You're talking
about the rules of the native language, as the whim of some fat
with bindaskapil uncle who absolutely nothing to do.
Navydumyvali, they say, every hemorrhoids. Loaded honest boys
...
Did you know that on the literacy of speech depends on our
thinking. If it is correct, and thoughts ... clear. And if not
- confusion in the head. And if the confusion in the head, then
hands suchat to no avail. In short, how to think and live.
Your life depends on your thoughts and those of speech, of
words!
Alone Coder:
I agree, that is, do not rule out that the authors of
transmission of correct speech are guided by the best
intentions. But this scary - gave his opinion why.
People by and large, all try to act in their own
understanding of how best. For example, Jack the Ripper
believes that makes the world a cleaner, a sadist - he may be
teaching someone to live. Those Patriots are different: some of
the best intentions decide that children should definitely
drive systems, and then put under the gun. Others, however,
guided by the same spirit, consider it necessary to perform a
recovery home economy based on the Argentine model. Still
others - prefer to save Russia by the "Smite HHHov" where XXX
is chosen instead of taste-Russian nationalities.
So just can not justify unprofessional (even shameful in
this case) work radeniem for the country. The mother tongue
should be treated more carefully.
Language is complex, it determines the complexity of our
thinking. In this you're right.
Each word needs approach. NOT enjoin people (among other
things, out of ignorance credulous) to use the only option
lexical unit only because it seemed more true authors of the
transfer. Language is not formed in a separate head in his
uncle's hat. Literary language - is the result of
generalization of literary texts. Spoken Language - is the
result of finding the optimal way to transfer information from
person to person. And in fact, and in another case study of the
language is accompanied by WRAP within the rules. Having a
system of rules to any person who knowingly working with text.
In 1956, it seems, were adopted rules of spelling
Russian language. They came out so successful that did not
change in 1947 years - much longer than previously established.
Rights were available to explain to children in school,
language was not devoid of flexibility and is easily absorbed
as (and to this day successfully absorb) new words that reflect
a modern view of the world, and not rejects the new forms of
old words.
It was in that spelling there is a big part of Monuments
Russian-language text, including many dictionaries and
reference books, which I use constantly, and I recommend to
others.
Specified argument, perhaps, quite enough against the
reformers' paraShUTnikov "(or perhaps" PARAShUtistov ") if
ktolibo readers still have doubts about them.
With respect to myself, I venture to say that through my
hands since 1998 years have passed about 7 M texts (about 10
volumes), which I immediately typed and corrected. I personally
this number enough to have opinions about their own language
and at the same time domestic law to criticize the respected
authors of cognitive (and rather entertaining) programs.
However, I'm afraid I have one, they will not listen.
And what kind of gentlemen? One can argue that it is unlikely
have any significant weight in the literary circles of writers,
as well as the speakers are not brilliant and certainly not
fair philologists.
Why not first? Because of their major publications is not
say, however, as not necessary to see the discharge the same.
Why not the second? Because in their arsenal contains the
following sloppy phrase :"... recently sent a letter to our
listener Takovskaya Imyarek Batkovna, and that's what she wrote
... "
Why not the third? I managed to hint above, in its
recommendations, they do not always adhere to the rules of word
formation And absolutely never condescend to distinct
explanations of his views. An example from the same
transmission (I think their corona) - pronunciation of
word-form "call". Option writers - the emphasis on the second
syllable. Indeed, this pronunciation can be in a number of
dialektov.Tem Still, it's unprovable, but refuted instructive
(even symbolic) example: similar changes words. "Call" and,
sorry, "drive". In most forms, they are the same way. Not
satisfied? Take then the other examples: "Led", "salt",
"wander."
Do not Believe the uncles. Read books.
