Is it worth it to fight with obscenities and will feminitives take root: the opinion of philologist Igor Isaev

Language is constantly changing, and children often speak very differently from their parents. This process began at the same time when speech appeared, and will continue as long as humanity exists. Philologist Igor Isaev spoke in an interview with Boris Vedensky about what changes are considered normal and whether it is worth fearing that the Internet will “spoil” the language. Their conversation posted on the YouTube channel "The basis”, and Lifehacker made an outline of it.

How do new words appear in a language?

The phonetics and grammar of the language change very slowly. We pronounce words in much the same way as 50 or 100 years ago, and we construct sentences according to the same principles. But the vocabulary, even in a decade, can become different.

New words are constantly appearing in the language, and this process always follows the same rules. A new concept, phenomenon or thing arises. If we start to encounter this innovation all the time, we definitely need to name it somehow. We have two ways: come up with a word for it ourselves or use the name that is already used in another language.

Usually the name comes along with the thing: where the novelty comes from - from the same language and its name. But there are exceptions. For example, at first the word “airplane” appeared in Russian, and then it was replaced by another option - “airplane”. But later other aircraft appeared - without engines. They again required a foreign word - "glider", which remained in the language.

It is impossible to protect the language from borrowed words. As well as to impose artificial, invented concepts. For example, “wet shoes” instead of the word “galoshes” did not take root in our vocabulary. People just didn't use it. But among the concepts familiar to us, “pencil”, “horse” or “bread” once appeared. These are Russian words for a long time, and it doesn’t matter that they once came to us from other languages. The language is almost impossible to manage - it is a very flexible and stable system that regulates itself.

Can television and the Internet significantly change the language

Well, the language cannot be regulated by prohibitions or encouragements. But there is the Internet, instant messengers, television. It seems that they cannot but affect our vocabulary.

It turns out that they really affect the language, but the danger or, conversely, the beneficial effects of their influence are greatly exaggerated.

If a person constantly watches TV, then, of course, he hears how the characters on the screen speak. But he doesn't talk to them. There is no dialogue here, just a monologue. Therefore, the viewer continues to speak as is customary in his environment. And each region has its own dialect words, which may be incomprehensible to visitors.

From generation to generation, intonation, ways of pronouncing vowels and consonants, stable speech constructions are transmitted. We unconsciously imitate those with whom we communicate - and this is definitely not TV or YouTube.

Now oh messengers. Those where you can start sentences with a small letter, forget about punctuation marks, communicate with unfinished phrases and sentences. It would seem that this is a horror for linguists: all language rules are ignored in instant messengers.

But in reality, nothing bad happens. Messenger is an analogue of oral communication. It is an informal conversation, in which it is not necessary to strictly adhere to the rules of syntax and punctuation. In normal communication, we may not finish the sentence, cut off the phrase, or even shrug instead of words. And this does not affect the literary Russian language. In the same way, it is not affected by correspondence in instant messengers.

How to treat the mat and whether to get rid of it

In society, different people treat swearing differently. For some, this is a strict taboo, while others use it almost daily. Linguists take swearing calmly. They perceive curse words just as part of the vocabulary. And it has always been like this - for example, we know that in one of the editions of Dahl's dictionary at the beginning of the 20th century they included a section with abusive vocabulary. But it could not be used everywhere - for example, offered to high school students in the classroom. Such dictionaries exist today, but they are definitely not in schools.

This is fine. You just need to remember that there are different sections of vocabulary. Including those words from which cannot be used always and everywhere. These include, for example, scientific vocabulary. It is impossible to speak at home with your family in the same language that you lecture at the university.

The use of various words and set phrases is governed by ethical and aesthetic rules that are recognized by society. It is not customary for us to widely use words that relate to the process of reproduction. They are perceived as sacred - those that cannot be spoken aloud. Christian norms generally limited the manifestations of corporality.

And once, in the times of paganism, people treated everything connected with the birth of a new life in a completely different way. And the lexicon was also different back then.

Which speech turns become common, and which of them should not be used, is decided only by the society. Perhaps there will come a time when swear words will become habitual. Or maybe not - all these concepts will remain sacred. It's pointless to make predictions here. Just like specifically to fight with the mat.

Will feminitives take root in the modern language

There is no problem here at all: feminitives have always existed in Russian speech. So, for our language system, this is normal. There is only one question - about expanding the scope of their use. But it is also not decided by linguists.

If the social situation changes, then there is a need for new forms of familiar words. Such a request arose in society - and it is becoming the norm, for example, to say “journalist” and “journalist”. This is a relatively new feminitive, but it already seems familiar. Perhaps the word "director" and other similar forms will take root. Or maybe not - only sociologists will say more precisely.