Lexical means (tropes)
trails - words or turns of speech used in a figurative, allegorical sense.
1. Epithet - an adjective that has a figurative-emotional meaning (can be a noun, adverb, verb).
Golden grove. Funny birds were flying. The azure sky laughs. The petrel soars proudly. The poet is the echo of the world.
2. Metaphor one is replaced by the other figurative meaning(hidden comparison).
Burn on the ground. The chintz of the sky is blue.
3. Personification - phenomena or objects endowed with the properties of living beings.
Time is running out. Gloomy forest.
4. Metonymy - replacement containing - content; thing is material.
I ate three bowls. Crystal and bronze on the table.
5. Synecdoche - replacement plural singular, the use of the whole instead of the part (and vice versa).
All flags will visit us (meaning: states).
6. Allegory - allegory, the image of a particular concept in artistic images(in fairy tales, fables, proverbs, epics).
Cunning - in the image of a fox, courage and strength - in the image of Ilya Muromets, beauty - in the image of Apollo.
7. Hyperbole - exaggeration of properties, qualities.
I've said it a hundred times. My love, as wide as the sea, the shores cannot contain.
8. Litota - understatement of properties, qualities.
Two steps from here.
9. Paraphrase - retelling, a descriptive phrase containing an assessment (the subject is not called directly, properties or similar meanings indicating the subject are called).
White stone capital (Moscow). Sad time! Eyes charm, (autumn).
10. Pun - a play on words, a humorous use of polysemy of words or homonymy.
Spring will drive anyone crazy. Ice - and he moved; The director held a conference... And journalists...
11. Irony - the use of the word in the opposite sense of the literal; the goal is subtle or hidden ridicule; the highest degree of irony - sarcasm.
We are minds, and you are, alas; between us speaking, this engineer of human souls, turned out to be an extremely insolvent and limited subject.
12. Paradox - an unexpected conclusion, diverging from logic or customary opinion.
13. Comparison - comparison of similar elements in the text + comparative conjunctions (as if, as if, exactly, like, etc.).
... like gold, ... as if cut with a jigsaw.
Lexical means (not tropes)
Lexical means based on the meaning of words.
1.Phraseologism - a fixed expression used in a figurative sense.
Jump on your hind legs.
2. Lexical repetition - repetition of a word, phrase in a sentence or text.
Wind, wind all over the world.
3. Synonyms - words of the same part of speech that are identical or close in their lexical meaning
Conjecture, conjecture, hypothesis.
4. Contextual (or contextual) synonyms - words that are synonymous only in the given text.
Lomonosov - a genius - a beloved child of nature. (V. Belinsky)
5. Antonyms - words of the same part of speech that are opposite in their lexical meaning
Black - white, hot - cold, high - low.
6. Homonyms - words that sound the same but have different meanings
Club(smoke), club (hunters and fishermen), club (night).
7. Professional vocabulary - words characteristic of professional dialects; professional words used by groups of people united by common occupations, occupations
Where is the compass architect, palette and cutter
Your learned whim was obeyed
Syntactic means
Syntactic means - figures of speech used to enhance the expressiveness (expressiveness) of the statement (not based on figurative meaning)
1. Comparative turnover - there is something that is compared, something with which it is compared + comparative conjunctions (as if, as if, exactly, like, etc.).
He's like an elephant in a china shop.
2. Ellipsis - omission of one of the members of the sentence, easily restored in meaning (most often the predicate). This achieves dynamism and conciseness of speech, a tense change of action is transmitted.
We sat down - in ashes, cities - in dust,
In swords - sickles and plows.
3. Oxymoron - a combination of logically incompatible concepts.
ringing silence, hot Snow terribly funny, terribly funny.
4. Question-answer form of presentation - the text is presented in the form of rhetorical questions and answers to them.
And again a metaphor: "Live under minute houses ...". What do they mean? Nothing lasts forever, everything is subject to decay and destruction
5. Rows of homogeneous members of the proposal - enumeration of homogeneous concepts.
He was waiting for a long, serious illness, leaving the sport.
6. Quote - transmission in the text of other people's thoughts, statements indicating the author of these words.
As it is said in the poem by N. Nekrasov: “You have to bow your head below the thin bylinochka ...”
7. Anaphora - repetition of initial words.
I swear by the first day of creation, I swear by its last day
8. Epiphora - repetition of final words.
9. Antithesis - comparison of opposite concepts in meaning in a sentence or text.
The foolish will judge, but the wise will judge.
10. Invert - change right order words for emphasis.
The horses were brought out. I didn't like them. Winter was waiting for nature.
11. Parallels - a similar arrangement of elements, the same type of construction.
The coachman whistled, the horses galloped, the bell rang.
12. Gradation - "ladder" of words close in meaning with an increase or decrease in their semantic significance.
Women cry: streams, lakes, oceans of tears!
13. Parceling - division of the proposal into several.
Night. The street. Lamp
(25) The boy broke the glass.
- (26) Who did this? the teacher asks.
(27) The boy is silent. (28) He is not afraid to ski off the most dizzying mountain. (29) He is not afraid to swim across an unfamiliar river full of insidious funnels. (30) But he is afraid to say: "I broke the glass."
(31) What is he afraid of? (32) Flying down the mountain, he can break his neck. (33) Swimming across the river, he may drown. (34) The words "I did it" do not threaten him with death. (35) Why is he afraid to pronounce them?
(36) I heard how a very brave man, past the war, once said: "It used to be scary, very scary."
(37) He spoke the truth: he was scared. (38) But he knew how to overcome his fear and did what his duty told him: he fought.
(39) In a peaceful life, of course, it can also be scary.
(40) I will tell the truth, and I will be expelled from school for this ... (41) I will tell the truth - they will be fired from work ... (42) I’d rather not say anything.
(43) There are many proverbs in the world that justify silence, and perhaps the most expressive: "My hut is on the edge." (44) But there are no huts that would be on the edge.
(45) We are all responsible for what is happening around us. (46) Responsible for everything bad and for everything good. (47) And one should not think that a real test comes to a person only in some special, fatal moments: in a war, during some kind of catastrophe. (48) No, not only in exceptional circumstances, not only in the hour of mortal danger, human courage is tested under a bullet. (49) It is tested constantly, in the most ordinary everyday affairs.
(50) Courage is one thing. (51) It requires that a person always be able to overcome the monkey in himself: in battle, on the street, at a meeting. (52) After all, the word "courage" does not have a plural. (53) It is one in any conditions.
(According to F. A. Vigdorova) *
* Frida Abramovna Vigdorova (1915-1965) - Soviet writer, journalist.
Task 25 No. 10369
“Delia Steinberg Guzman, in this piece of text, makes the reader think about very important questions. Closely intertwining his own reasoning with the description of the storyteller's meeting with the child, the author uses a large number of expressive means to involve us as deeply as possible in reflection on these issues. At the level of syntax, it should be noted abundantly used (A) _______ (sentences 10, 22), as well as such a lexical and syntactic device as (B) _______ (sentences 26-27). Among the many tropes, one can distinguish (C) _______ ("shining ... look" in sentence 20, "cruel ... lesson" in sentence 22, "tender eyes" in sentence 30) and (D) _______ (in sentence 20) ".
List of terms:
2) parceling
3) comparison
4) colloquial words
5) metonymy
6) phraseological unit
7) epithets
8) oxymoron
9) anaphora
| A | B | AT | G |
(1) Today I saw a child ... (2) Many people say that children today have become different, and with great joy they explain: they behave just like adults. (3) And they also say that now children are more “smart” and learn everything much faster. (4) Adults rejoice at their questions out of place, and the loss - if not the absence - of naivety is regarded as a step forward in the development of the younger generation. (5) That is why the child I saw today attracted my attention. (6) He really was a child - trusting and unsophisticated, as it should be at his age, with shining, curious eyes, with lively and light movements, natural for a little man who was born not so long ago. (7) I saw him walking, looking inquisitively at everything around and trying to uncover the secret sleeping behind the outside of objects and events. (8) Questions constantly flew from his lips - the thirst for knowledge was so great in him.
(9) The questions he asked were simple and deep at the same time precisely because of their simplicity. (10) He wanted to know everything about the sky, about the stars, about the boundaries of the universe. (11) He wanted to know why insects fly and why a person does not have wings. (12) He wanted to know why people cry and why he sometimes wants to laugh and scream ... (13) But his parents answered him only with a smile and jokes. “(14) And who did this kid go to? (15) He is in no way like us ... (16) And I am even ashamed of his questions, it seems that he does not understand anything at all ... (17) Why are you not like the rest of your comrades? (18) Why don't you play with your friends? (19) Son, what else can I tell you about the moon if I don’t know more than what I have already told?
(20) The previously radiant and happy look of the child became gloomy, like autumn skies, a shadow fell on him, which, better than a thousand dictionaries, could tell what sadness is. (21) And it seems to me that it was at that moment that he lost his gullibility and spontaneity and, without wanting or understanding it himself, matured ahead of time. (22) He learned a cruel life lesson: one must be silent, faced with misunderstanding, hide one's innermost dreams in the depths of one's soul, not talk about the beautiful, but express only what others want to hear.
(23) And if at first I saw a child, now in front of me was an adult, on whose shoulders lay the burden of experience, the burden of pain and sadness. (24) Why do we doom beauty and innocence to death? (25) Where is the child who once lived in us and whose voice should still sound in our heart, awakening inexhaustible curiosity and the need for love? (26) Are we no longer able to perceive good and pure? (27) Is our growing up necessarily associated with the loss of children's ability to be surprised?
(28) Sad was the day when I saw this child.
(29) Now I will tirelessly peer into the faces of those around me in search of another similar look that will tell me about the ingenuity of the first ideals that have not yet been polluted by the rampant modern rhythm of life.
(30) I will look for young, inquisitive and tender eyes; eyes that reflect longing for heaven and eternal questions that find an answer only in the depths of the human soul, sleeping today in anticipation of better times.
(According to D.S. Guzman) *
* Delia Steinberg Guzman (born in 1943) - Argentine and Spanish musician, philosopher, culturologist, writer, author of many works, the book "Today I saw ...".
Task 25 No. 10394
Read the review snippet. It examines the linguistic features of the text. Some terms used in the review are missing. Fill in the gaps with the numbers corresponding to the number of the term from the list.
“In an effort to engage the reader in reflection on serious issues, Delia Steinberg Guzman describes the meeting of the heroine-narrator with a child, framing her own reasoning. Among the means of expression, thanks to which the text acquires contrast and strength, it is worth noting the following: at the lexical level, this is (A) _______ (in sentences 12, 23) and (B) _______ (for example, "eyes" in sentence 30), and on the syntactic level it is definitely (B)_______ (sentences 24-27). Such a lexical-syntactic device as (D) _______ (sentences 10-12) is also very expressive.
List of terms:
1) antonyms
2) rhetorical appeal
4) lexical repetition
6) anaphora
7) rhetorical questions
8) metonymy
9) dialectisms
Write down the numbers in response, arranging them in the order corresponding to the letters:
| A | B | AT | G |
Task 25 No. 10419
Read the review snippet. It examines the linguistic features of the text. Some terms used in the review are missing. Fill in the gaps with the numbers corresponding to the number of the term from the list.
“In the story “Watercolors”, K. G. Paustovsky, telling the story of the artist Berg, once again convinces the reader of simple truths. To reveal the topic, the author uses a number of means. artistic expressiveness. In the syntax of the text, one should note (A) _______ (sentences 4, 6, 8) and active use of (B) _______ (for example, in sentences 17, 25).
In turn, the use of lexical means, in particular (B) _______ (chatter in sentence 4, seem in sentence 15), and such a path as (D) _______ (quiet blue, dry life, stupid resentment), enliven the narrative, decorate text".
List of terms:
2) antithesis
3) parceling
4) colloquial words
5) rows of homogeneous members of the proposal
6) exclamatory sentences
7) comparison
9) metonymy
Write down the numbers in response, arranging them in the order corresponding to the letters:
| A | B | AT | G |
(1) When the word "motherland" was pronounced under Berg, he grinned. (2) I didn’t notice the beauty of nature around, I didn’t understand when the soldiers said: “(3) Let’s take back our native land and water the horses from our native river.”
- (4) Chatter! Berg said gloomily. - (5) People like us do not and cannot have a homeland.
- (6) Oh, Berg, cracker soul! - the fighters answered with heavy reproach. - (7) You do not love the earth, eccentric. (8) And also an artist!
(9) Maybe that's why Berg was not good at landscapes.
(10) A few years later, in early autumn, Berg went to the Murom forests, to the lake, where his artist friend Yartsev spent the summer, and lived there for about a month. (11) He was not going to work and did not take oil paints with him, but brought only a small box of watercolors.
(12) For whole days he lay on the still green glades and looked at flowers and herbs, collected bright red rosehip berries and fragrant juniper, long needles, aspen leaves, where black and blue spots were scattered across the lemon field, fragile lichen of a delicate ashy shade and withering cloves. (13) He carefully examined the autumn leaves from the inside, where the yellowness was slightly touched by lead frost.
(14) At sunset, flocks of cranes with a cooing flew over the lake to the south, and Vanya Zotov, the son of a forester, said to Berg every time:
- (15) It seems that birds are throwing us, flying to the warm seas.
(16) Berg for the first time felt a stupid resentment: the cranes seemed to him traitors. (17) They abandoned this forested and solemn land without regret, full of nameless lakes, impassable thickets, dry foliage, the measured rumble of pines and air smelling of resin and damp marsh mosses.
(18) Once Berg woke up with a strange feeling. (19) The light shadows of the branches trembled on the clean floor, and a quiet blue shone behind the door. (20) Berg met the word "radiance" only in the books of poets, considered it pompous and devoid of a clear meaning. (21) But now he understood how accurately this word conveys that special light that comes from the September sky and the sun.
(22) Berg took paints, paper and, without even drinking tea, went to the lake. (23) Vanya took him to the far shore.
(24) Berg was in a hurry. (25) Berg wanted to give all the power of colors, all the skill of his hands, all that was trembling somewhere in his heart, to this paper in order to depict at least a hundredth of the magnificence of these forests, dying majestically and simply. (26) Berg worked like a man possessed, sang and shouted.
... (27) Two months later, a notice was brought to Berg's house about an exhibition in which he was supposed to participate: they asked him to tell how many of his works the artist would exhibit this time. (28) Berg sat down at the table and quickly wrote: “I am exhibiting only one sketch in watercolor, made this summer, my first landscape.”
(29) After a while, Berg sat and thought. (30) He wanted to trace in what elusive ways he had a clear and joyful sense of his homeland. (31) It has matured for weeks, years, decades, but the last push was given by the forest region, autumn, the cries of cranes and Vanya Zotov.
- (32) Oh, Berg, cracker soul! - he remembered the words of the fighters.
(33) The fighters were right then. (34) Berg knew that he was now connected with
his country not only with his mind, but with all his heart, as an artist, and that love for his homeland made his smart, but dry life warm, cheerful and a hundred times more beautiful than before.
(according to K. G. Paustovsky *) *
* Konstantin Georgievich Paustovsky (1892-1968) - Russian Soviet writer, classic of Russian literature.
Task 25 No. 10444
Read the review snippet. It examines the linguistic features of the text. Some terms used in the review are missing. Fill in the gaps with the numbers corresponding to the number of the term from the list.
“The story of K.G. Paustovsky "Watercolor paints" combines simplicity of form and depth artistic content. In the syntax of the text, it should be noted that the author used such a technique as (A) _______ ("weeks, years, decades" in sentence 31). BUT syntactical device- (B) _______ (sentences 4, 6, 8) - adds live human emotions to the text. Another technique - (B) _______ ("Berg" in sentences 24-26, "everything" in sentence 25) - plays an emphasizing, amplifying role. And such a trope as (D) (proposals 19, 25) once again shows us the skill of Paustovsky as an artist of the word.
List of terms:
1) metaphor
2) metonymy
3) parceling
4) exclamatory sentences
5) gradation
6) epiphora
7) comparative turnover
8) vernacular
9) lexical repetitions
Write down the numbers in response, arranging them in the order corresponding to the letters:
| A | B | AT | G |
Task 25 No. 10662
Read the review snippet. It examines the linguistic features of the text. Some terms used in the review are missing. Fill in the gaps with the numbers corresponding to the number of the term from the list.
"G. K. Sapronov speaks about V.P. Astafiev simply, honestly, without excessive pretentious distortions and false idealization. Using a number of means of artistic expression, he argues, describes and narrates at the same time, thanks to which the reader has before his eyes a living image of an outstanding writer. In every word one can feel deep respect and admiration for Astafiev's personality. At the lexical level, this is facilitated by the use of such a trope as (A) ______ ("wise, cheerful, reasonable, hot" in sentence 9), and such a means as (B) ______ ("Astafiev" in sentence 21). An important role in the text is played by the use of such a technique as (B) ______ (in sentences 15–20). At the level of syntax, Sapronov actively uses (D) ______ (in sentences 2, 4, 6).
List of terms:
1) rows of homogeneous members of the proposal
2) lexical repetition
3) comparison
4) colloquial words
5) metonymy
6) phraseological unit
8) quoting
9) anaphora
Write down the numbers in response, arranging them in the order corresponding to the letters:
| A | B | AT | G |
(1) When I am in Krasnoyarsk, I always go to Ovsyanka to Viktor Petrovich: walk around his village, look into his house, go to his library, to his church ...
(2) Viktor Petrovich Astafiev was born on May 1, 1924 and, having gone through orphanhood, homelessness, blood, wounds and dirt of war, through a chain of endless battles, enduring all the pain and hard labor of writing, left us on the morning of November 29, 2001.
(3) It would seem that life did everything so that we would not have such a writer. (4) She mutilated his childhood, threw him into the meat grinder of war, finished off the soldier who returned from the front with post-war poverty and hunger, tormented his consciousness with ideological dogmas, shredded the best lines with a ruthless censorship scalpel. (5) He survived! (6) He did not become either an embittered layman, or a dissident with a fiddle in his pocket, or a literary gentleman like those whose names somehow instantly disappeared, sunk into oblivion. (7) He always remained himself, regardless of empty and mediocre opinions, with the "trends" of the time, with imposed norms. (8) Astafiev himself was both the norm and the rule, and, as time has proven, he became a truly national writer in the highest sense of this difficult concept. (9) All of us who knew him, were in correspondence with him, were friends with him, somehow got used to the fact that we have such Viktor Petrovich - wise, cheerful, reasonable, hot.
(10) Astafiev taught us, first of all, freedom, and he himself was free - both in life and in creativity. (11) I remember that at one of the meetings he was asked: “How to become a free person?” (12) Viktor Petrovich answered with a smile: “(13) Start by stopping lying to yourself and bending in front of your boss.”
(14) Tired, sick, having worked his soul to the bottom, every morning he sat down at his desk in order not only to have time to finish what he had planned (how many more unborn plots and heroes are left that we will never meet again!), But also in order to to honestly earn your bread, feed your family, raise orphaned grandchildren, help your son and his family. (15) “What a heavy, burning us, like on fire, our work!” - he writes in one of the letters. (16) And in another letter: “... even the sledgehammer, which I once wielded in the foundry, did not exhaust as much as the “light” pen of the writer. (17) But, of course, none of my work brought so much enthusiasm as this literary work. (18) When suddenly out of nothing, from an ordinary ink bottle you extract something similar to life, recreate from words a picture or character dear to yourself, and sometimes to other people, and freeze like an artist in front of a canvas, struck by this magic - after all, from nothing happened! (19) Lord! (20) Did I really do that?
(21) Of course, the soul of Astafyev, the star of Astafyev will forever shine on his present and future readers. (22) And he will forever be ours ...
(according to G.K. Sapronov*)
* Gennady Konstantinovich Sapronov (1952-2009) - journalist, publisher, member of the Russian Book Publishers Association.
Task 25 No. 10687
Read the review snippet. It examines the linguistic features of the text. Some terms used in the review are missing. Fill in the gaps with the numbers corresponding to the number of the term from the list.
“The multifaceted, integral image of V.P. Astafiev, a strong man and a talented writer, is created by G.K. Sapronov in the presented text. The use in vocabulary of (A) ______ (“lie”, “bend (in front of the boss)”, “hungry”) and such a trope as (B) ________ (in sentences 4, 21) gives rise to a harmonious contrast between the simplicity and grandeur of Astafiev’s personality . The syntax of the text, especially within such a compact volume, also becomes "speaking", acquires a special semantic and emotional load. It is especially worth noting the use of (C)________ (sentences 5, 19), as well as (D) (in sentences 9, 14).
Read a fragment of a review based on the text. This fragment examines the language features of the text. Some terms used in the review are missing. Fill in the gaps with the necessary terms from the list. Gaps are indicated by letters, terms by numbers.
Fragment of the review:
“The ideas of the characters about life, their aspirations, their attitude to each other’s actions and statements helps to convey such a form of speech as (BUT) __________, which forms the basis of the text. Avga Shulin's desire to understand the reasons for his friend's actions is manifested in his intense reflections, in which the technique is used - (B) __________ (suggestions 43, 44, 45-46, 47, 48). Avga's speech is emotional and convincing, which is facilitated by the use of various means of expression, among which the lexical means - (AT) __________ (“you will sit on your neck” in sentence 34, “blood from the nose” in sentence 68, “there is not enough gunpowder” in sentence 82) and tropes - (G) __________ (in sentences 81,83)".
List of terms:
1) epithet
2) personification
3) comparison
4) synonyms
5) phraseological units
6) syntactic parallelism
7) opposition
8) anaphora
9) dialog
Text:
Show text
(1) I opened the front door, and Avga Shulin appeared in the hallway in a checkered cap and a gray quilted jacket, from which he had long outgrown. (2) On tiptoe, in order to watch less, Avga crept into the kitchen and, twitching his chin, stared at me inquiringly and anxiously.
(3) Almost a year and a half of life in the city did not change Avga in the least - the same cap, the same jacket and the same rustic physiognomy. (4) At first, I considered Shulin a diligent village dumbass and even mockingly nicknamed him the count. (5) He didn't take offense at the nickname. (6) He didn't take offense at all. (7) An amazing person, he accepted everything with a smile, they say, pour it, pour it, I'll figure it out later. (8) According to Newton's law, action is equal to reaction, and no one was offended by it, or rather, they simply did not notice it. (9) I only then paid attention to Avga, when he once answered me with a grin to the “count”: “What a count I am - a decanter! (10) Krinka! (11) There was a sudden sincerity, and courage, and a glimmer of intelligence in this. (12) Not everyone dares to give himself such an assessment. (13) I began to communicate with him more, and soon I liked his rustic physiognomy, and funny words, and naive, but correct, in my opinion, thoughts, and accurate remarks. (14) And in the eleventh we sat down at the same desk and finally became friends.
(15) Avga continued to look at me inquiringly, waiting for some explanation. (16) I understood that for him, who, by the way, is also an amazing thing! - he trembled before the teachers, whose legs gave way at the sight of the director, for him my today's feint with defiant departure from the lesson turned out to be unexpected, because I was not listed as an anarchist.
— (17) Was there noise? I asked.
— (18) Did not have. (19) And what did you throw up?
— (20) I'm leaving school!
— (21) Hm!
— (22) Here's your "hmm"! (23) Get undressed! (24) We will have lunch!
(25) Shulin lived with his aunt, lived from hand to mouth, afraid to overeat her family, as he himself once admitted to me. (26) By big holidays, he received transfers and parcels with bacon and dried mushrooms. (27) For five days after being sent, Shulin ate himself, and then tightened his belt again, although I never once noticed a sidelong glance or an offensive hint from my relatives. (28) Rather, on the contrary, they would inflate Avga if they knew about it. (29) I did not confuse my friend with his something and an attractive principle, but at every opportunity I fed Shulin.
(30) Having already put the spoon into the cabbage soup, Avga froze and again raised his eyes full of bewilderment at me.
— (31) Are you serious?
— (32) Absolutely.
— (33) What will you do? (34) Will you sit on your father's neck?
— (35) You are a bastard, Count! (36) I will work!
— (37) Yeah, in the workers, then you will move! (38) I aimed at the intellectuals, and you, on the contrary, as if I were squeezing you out.
— (39) No one is squeezing me out,” I said with a sigh. — (40) And, in fact, what is wrong with the working class?
— (41) The working class is not bad,” Shulin replied. — (42) But I do not understand! (43) Your mother is a doctor, your father is an engineer. (44) You have everything. (45) Just study, get an education, and you are somewhere sideways ... (46) I have nothing, but I press! (47) Dad threw himself at me with his fist, shouted that there was no one to mow the hay, and the uncle is now sawing, they say, where am I, stupid, climbing. (48) And I'm climbing! (49) No, I'm not bragging, I'm arguing!..
— (50) One of my grandfathers was a peasant, and the other worked all his life at a factory.
— (51) There is nothing to judge by grandfathers. (52) Now we have to judge by the fathers,” objected Shulin. — (53) But in general, now you can’t judge much by fathers. (54) Take mine out! (55) No, you have to judge yourself! (56) Only by yourself!..
— (57) Well, firstly, I confess, for that matter, I haven't decided anything yet, time! (58) And secondly, it is precisely such reasoning that I expect from parents!
— (59) Don't they already know?
— (60) No.
— (61) Here you are rushing about, and I have already calculated my life to half! (62) Yes Yes! (63) Escape from the village - time! (64) Ran away. (65) Finish school in the city - two! (66) I'm finishing! (67) To enroll as a hunter or a geologist - three! (68) And I will do it - blood from the nose! (69) And I will learn! (70) Let tyatki and uncles with cleavers run and make noise - I'll get out!
— (71) Well done!
— (72) Why are you smiling?
— (73) Yes so.
(74) Avge liked to say that he had run away from the village. (75) But to run away means from the bad and without looking back, and Shulin, in my opinion, is sleeping and seeing his Cheremshanka. (76) And as soon as you touch the village in conversation, he shudders like a compass needle near a magnet. (77) Once we went for his parcel, so Avga brought it to his nose five times and sniffed - native smells. (78) So it's hardly a sweet getaway.
(79) And I asked:
“But didn’t you run away in vain?”
— (80) Not in vain. (81) For me, going to college is like going to the moon,” Shulin explained. — (82) There is not enough gunpowder to start from the village, and the attraction there is healthy. (83) And the city is like an intermediate station: I will refuel - and further. (84) Here's what I'm doing now. (85) No, the calculation is correct!
— (86) Well, Tsiolkovsky!
— (87) The only way!
— (88) But I also have some calculations for my future,” I said modestly.
— (89) Come on! (90) Your head is wow! Shulin agreed importantly. — (91) And you're flailing! (92) This is what I don't understand.
(According to G.P. Mikhasenko)
Gennady Pavlovich Mikhasenko (1936-1994) - Russian Soviet writer, playwright, poet.
Review Review (German rezension, Latin recensio, English review - review, evaluation, consideration) - analysis, analysis, evaluation of a publication, work or product. Dividing all journalistic genres into groups, we identified three types of genres: informational, analytical, artistic and journalistic. Each of these genera is divided into species. All species, as we have already noted, are now diffusing, that is, they penetrate each other, intersect and / or unite. This is clearly seen in the example of a modern review. A review, usually classified as an analytical genre, may well receive all the signs of an artistic-journalistic genre: for this, the author just needs to shift the focus from the work under review to his own opinion about it, add reasoning about related phenomena and problems, writing all this in a bright journalistic style , and the review will move from one classification group to another. Why is this happening? The fact is that classifications are natural and artificial. All artificial classifications applied by a person according to some arbitrarily chosen feature (alphabetical order, age, place of residence, etc.)> are easy to understand and easy to change. All natural classifications cause problems for researchers because of the complexity of the world around us and the general variability of things101. And when creating an artificial classification, disputes are inevitable. Difficulties in the modern classification of genres arose, as we have already noted, when the emphasis in the relation "fact - author" was shifted from fact to author, which occurred in the early 1990s. 20th century The review, once an extremely popular genre with clear visual characteristics, glided freely over the surface of any classification precisely because the role of the author was significant in reviews before, but now has become huge. The author can act as a reviewer-informant, reviewer-researcher, reviewer-essayist - in a word, create any genre hybrid and at the same time not distort the intention of the reviewed works and not drop himself. Why is review so helpful? In all its forms, there must be a characteristic and assessment of the phenomenon. For a journalist-reviewer who wants to declare his vision of the world, both of these components are extremely attractive: after all, before characterizing a phenomenon, it must be selected from a variety of related ones, and when assessing, one should select arguments, draw conclusions, and one can speculate about the prospects of the phenomenon being evaluated. It turns out that reviewing is creativity, individualized to a somewhat greater extent than in other genres. Of course, each reviewer should theoretically strive for an objective characterization and a balanced assessment of a phenomenon (a book, a play, a film, a program, a picture, etc.), but even in these matters objectivity is a conditional thing. At any degree of approximation to the original, the mirror will only be a mirror. Reflection of already reflected reality - this applies to reviews, and to the artistic and critical review of any works, and to any subspecies of these genres, if in a journalistic material we are talking not about the phenomena of life directly, but about the depiction of reality by other authors. The reviewer is obliged to determine the genre and species affiliation of the work he is considering, its place in the stream of similar ones, to note characteristics of this particular work, to express their attitude on the basis of the ideas and norms adopted for evaluating works of this type in the cultural and professional community. Remember this. It is assumed that the reviewer is familiar with many other similar works, has analyzed them publicly and has the right to express his opinions. The reviewer is a respected figure who has authority in his professional community, an expert, an erudite, a specialist who is known to really understand the topic. We have described the ideal situation. What is its difference from the real one? Mainly in the fact that not all modern reviews are written by professionals who have distinguished themselves in their field. Quite often, a review of, for example, a book is written not by a literary critic, but by an editorial worker who liked this genre for some reason. good reasons . Quite often, it is not critics, bibliographers or even bibliophiles who are engaged in book and literary criticism in glossy mass magazines, but simply those journalists who, from the point of view of the editor-in-chief, do it smartly, bitingly, etc. It is not without reason that Literaturnaya Gazeta in In 2003, for a long time, from issue to issue, there was a discussion with the participation of critics and literary critics: why do we have little criticism? why did the crisis of criticism come? At first glance, this is strange: critics talk about why there is no criticism. In fact, there is no particular paradox, since two other factors have temporarily supplanted the possibility of a flowering of art criticism: the absence of generally understood criteria for truth and beauty, coupled with the increased role of advertising. All critics, starting from the same nineties, began to be suspected of creating hidden advertising (under the guise of reviewing) or of defending purely group interests. The criteria have been shaken and have been revised for almost a quarter of a century due to total changes in ideology, the structure of society and in social thought, as well as in artistic styles and trends. The rise of Internet technologies has made its own amendments to the dissemination of any opinions. Anything can be said by anyone. Finding a truly professional judgment on new products is not easy. The ubiquity of advertising unwittingly makes readers suspicious of all reviews in general - in the sense that a reviewer who has written something laudatory about some work may be suspected of self-interest. Reading a book review in the mass press, we are increasingly confronted with a style of presentation that is close to colloquial and even sometimes colloquial. Such reviews tell us quite a lot about the reviewer's vocabulary, but not very much about whether the book being reviewed is good and why. Not all the reasons for the crisis of this wonderful genre are listed here. It is very important, this genre, and we warmly advise novice journalists to learn how to write quality reviews. The craft of acting teaches you how to go on stage and act. And true art should teach how to consciously arouse the unconscious creative nature in oneself for superconscious organic creativity, said the great reformer of the Russian theater K.S. Stanislavsky. The craft of a reviewer should begin with the difficult ability to hide (better - to remove altogether) one's own ambitions. We emphasize once again that self-expression and creative activity of a journalist are incompatible. At first, many students think that journalism is created to express the aspirations of a journalist, but as they approach mastery, this delusion must disappear. The art of the reviewer begins with demonstrating such a close, qualified and interested look at the work under consideration, which advances this entire sphere of artistic activity to new frontiers, encourages further development, creativity, not only of the reviewed author, but also of many of his colleagues. This really requires great knowledge and skills, and not just the briskness of the pen. Recall an interesting historical plot. About a hundred years ago, when the Moscow Art Theater first went on tour abroad, to Germany, the whole troupe was very worried. The first press, which decided the fate of the theater abroad, was naturally expected with great trepidation and impatience. What happened next was this: the artists in the morning, still in their pajamas, burst into Stanislavsky's with triumphant faces. The wife of one artist, who knew German, translated the review: it was written approvingly and with exceptional knowledge of the matter. All the artists rejoiced, and not only because they were praised, but because it was done in a highly qualified manner. Stanislavsky later asked knowledgeable people , how do the Germans "produce such connoisseurs of the theater" for newspapers? (Indeed, a qualified newspaper theater critic is still a rarity now.) A secret was revealed to him: “We instruct a novice critic to write not an abusive, but a laudatory article: anyone who does not even understand the matter can scold, but only an expert can really praise.” Significant words! This is, perhaps, a universal recipe for raising a classy critic: let a young reviewer praise someone competently, without flattery, without obtrusiveness, without intoxication with his own style and capabilities, but with an analysis of the real merits of the reviewed work. Here is a fragment of a review published in the "Books" section of a massive glossy magazine. As an example of the current state of the genre, this is curious. Lazy and inattentive, accustomed to beach novels and newspaper articles, it is better not to read Banville. He writes amazingly long, incredibly intricate, really good. But true connoisseurs will receive true physical pleasure - comparable only to what only Nabokov, the great and beautiful, could deliver to his readers. In a nutshell and in order to shine in small talk, then this is a novel about an actor. Just about a retired actor. who lived. I loved. And, of course, he suffered. What did you think? What follows is a six-line quotation from the novel Eclipse under review, which does not support these assessments. Perhaps the reviewer did not seek to create informational unity in his text. Maybe it's hard for him to do it. But the phrase from the quote: “I bypass her like explosives,” which characterizes the relationship between the hero and the heroine, does not seem long, or confusing, or really good. This review has nothing to do with literature in general, with the work of the writer under review in particular, with the assessment of the specific novel "Eclipse". Experts peacefully say about this type of "literary criticism" as follows: well, this is glossy criticism, let it be like that. And yet, this is a review in essence, since it reflects an artistically reflected reality: the novelist reflected the life of a retired actor, the journalist reflected the work of a novelist. The readers of the magazine learned that there is such a novel, that it is about love and can be mentioned on a par with Nabokov. This, of course, is the most risky part of both the review and the prospects of secular chatter, because Nabokov is a recognized master of words, and the reader knows only what is printed in this magazine about the novel Eclipse. Relying on such an assessment of the reviewer, you can get into a mess, especially if a really well-read person suddenly turns up in a “secular society”. You can now get acquainted with reviews written more or less in the traditions of this genre in thick literary magazines - Novy Mir, Friendship of Peoples, Oktyabr, Moskva, etc. Their circulation has decreased to several thousand copies, but the magazines still survived in the market environment, go out, have their own websites. AT Soviet time when these magazines had millions of copies, and it was difficult to subscribe to them, even one small review in such a publication could draw the attention of the audience to the work. Now the situation has changed radically: quality culture has a marginal representation in the press, while mass culture still leads by an insurmountable margin. Since such a situation is unlikely to be stable and long-lasting in Russia, we recommend that young journalists learn how to write classic reviews: an accurate characterization plus an adequate analysis. Having mastered the classical approaches, you will notice that a review in a simplified-colloquial-glossy version, if necessary, will turn out without much effort. Speaking of art criticism, one more genre, extremely rich in its history and names, should be mentioned: the literary-critical article. In the history of Russian literature of the XIX century. critics left their mark, influencing with their articles not only literature, but also the course of socio-political processes in the country. Magazine journalism, and in it literary criticism developed rapidly. This was due to a whole range of reasons: a) the development of the press and literature in general took place, of course, in the absence of electronic media; b) artistic verbal creativity was not mass in the sense and volume in which it appears now: it was the lot of mainly educated people; c) many journalistic genres (from among the currently widespread ones) had not yet developed (for example, interviews); d) the attitude of the reading public to the printed word was attentive and deep, the public was interested in the development of national culture; e) the dissemination of information of any type took place under conditions of censorship, i.e., each printed performance was represented not only by the author and the editors, but also, as it were, by the state, which influenced both the ratings issued and the social weight of the reviewers; f) the state itself was structured much more clearly than it is now, as a result of which the reader almost always felt from what social level the printed word was addressed to him. Of course, one should not believe that high-quality art criticism has now ceased to exist. It is alive, in particular in foreign Russian-language publications, in émigré literature, although it is highly politicized; in the thick literary magazines mentioned above, in research work on art. A galaxy of young literary critics has grown up, which can be seen, for example, in the Debut literary prize. Such criticism is, of course, a specialized type of creativity and requires great knowledge and skills. at the Literary Institute. M. Gorky has a corresponding department, small in number of students, but still regularly graduating specialists. It is difficult to predict the development of these genres in this century, but we consider it necessary to encourage students of the Faculty of Journalism to study the richest national heritage, since professionals will always be in demand one way or another. The main thing for a journalist who is leaning towards art criticism now is the love of reading and studying works of literature. Then skills will come, and maybe mastery, but the first thing such a journalist needs is the ability to constantly be interested in what they are doing in artistic creativity other. It is very important to distinguish between what others can and what you yourself cannot, but you want to understand others and explain to the public what kind of work of literature has been published, what is its role and weight, context, and how you understand it. The real critic of this very path is literally prescribed to be a fan of someone else's creativity. It is not psychologically easy, so there are not many good reviewers, let alone first-class critics. The image of the famous Russian critic of the 19th century is characteristic. Vissarion Belinsky, recreated by a contemporary: Belinsky fell into the same "fever" when he struggled "day and night" over the solution of some damned issue. “It was his doubts that tormented him,” Turgenev recalls, “deprived him of sleep, food, relentlessly gnawed and burned him; he did not allow himself to forget and did not know fatigue ... I weakened ... I wanted to rest, I thought about a walk, about dinner, Belinsky's wife herself begged both her husband and me to wait a little, although she reminded him to interrupt this debate for a while doctor's prescription... but it was not easy to deal with Belinsky. “We have not yet resolved the question of the existence of God,” he once told me with bitter reproach, “and you want to eat! ..” Such a passion for business is an example that is now practically not found in journalism, but, believe me, to ensure immortality in creativity can only be fully immersed in their vocation people.
