CHAPTER 8. Orthoepy
§ 1. The concept of orthoepy
Orthoepia (from Greek orthos - correct and epos - speech) is a section of linguistics that studies pronunciation norms (and also the totality of these norms). Orthopia in a broad understanding includes rules for the use of phonemes and pronunciation of allophones, as well as the rules for stitching, the use of intonational patterns and the features of pronunciation of foreign words and individual variant grammatical forms. In a narrow sense, the orthoepia includes only the rules for the use of phonemes and, in part, the rules of pronunciation of allophones. It is advisable to distinguish the tasks of orthoepia for people who speak Russian as a native language, and for people who do not speak or do not know the literary pronunciation norm. For the first category, orthoepy is primarily a theoretical discipline; the pronunciation correction here does not take much space. For the second category (and it is formed mainly by foreigners), the study of phonetics is reduced mainly to orthoepy; First of all practical problems are solved here. Of course, in this section, which is a course of theoretical phonetics, orthoepia is also considered theoretically.
§ 2. Orthoepy and Orthophony
The difference between orthoepia and orthophony, introduced by LA Verbitskaya , reflects the ratio of phonemes and allophones in the aspect of the pronunciation norm. Orthoepy defines the rules for the standard phonemic composition of word exponents, and orthophony - the rules of pronunciation of allophones. So, the differences like / h /then and / sh /then , horse/ h /but and horse/ sh /but , /s/tena and / c '/tena are among the phonemic and thus orphoepic; differences of the type box [ Ʌ ] and box [ ъ ], i.e. unstressed allophones /a/, are orthophonic, since the phonemic composition of the exponents remains the same. Orphonic differences can be caused by the absence in the system of phonemes of the corresponding opposition.
Orthoepy constantly proceeds from the obvious reality of the existence of pronunciation options, due to different reasons. One of these causes is the type of pronunciation.
§ 3. Types of pronunciation
The speech of a person, depending on the conditions of communication, is very different - from a casual friendly conversation to speaking at a grand meeting. Each type of speech communication is characterized by its pronouncing features, conditioned by the rate of speaking and the degree of clarity that depends on it. These kinds of pronunciation, considered in the phonetic aspect, are called types of pronunciation. The full type of the utterance allows a single phonemic interpretation of the sound elements of the spoken segment of speech, incomplete type does not provide this possibility. In practice this means the difference between a more careful, somewhat slower pronunciation when the speaker cares to be fully understood so that there is no obstacle to understanding from the sound form, and the pronunciation is more relaxed, maybe even careless, when the pronunciation inaccuracies are "compensated" ; due to the semantic redundancy of speech, when the listener replenishes the unheard of on the basis of the general content of the utterance.
The notion of types of pronunciation was introduced by the followers of LV Shcherba as an improvement and refinement, primarily in the strictly phonetic aspect, of his concept of pronunciation styles , i.e. different forms of speech, depending on various purposes and conditions of communication. Shcherba allowed the existence of a set of pronouncing styles, but for reasons of simplicity of description, he considered it possible to confine himself to recognizing two styles - full and colloquial , correlating with complete and incomplete types of utterance. The distinctiveness of the full style of utterance, when all the syllables of each word are clearly pronounced, is broken, according to Shcherbe, in everyday speech. As a result, the "i-zy-ka-you-e-a-co-b-n-ni-sti" of the complete style turns into an insight into the colloquial & quot; [Shcherba, 1953, pp. 21-24]. As can be seen, Shcherba's complete style is deliberately thorough and somewhat unnatural pronunciation. In this respect, the complete type of utterance in the concept of his followers is much closer to the linguistic and verbal reality.
The coexistence of complete and incomplete types of utterance means their mutual influence, more precisely - the influence of an incomplete type on a complete type. Incomplete type with its ease, realization in a situation of dialogue (or polylogue - conversation of several people), in a situation of friendly communication, etc. is a more natural speech form for native speakers. Incomplete type is owned by every speaker, incomplete style does not need to learn (this, of course, does not apply to foreigners). On the contrary, the full type is acceptable in a few situations, such as the speech of television and radio announcers, official speeches, lecture speech, speech of teachers, etc. Not everyone knows it. The dominance of incomplete style leads to the fact that the norms of full style begin to experience its influence, "adjust" under it. The literary pronunciation norm thus tends to decrease. There is a differentiation of a more strict, book pronunciation and more free, colloquial. It is clear that the second, representing a newer trend, affects the first. Pronunciation of the type [ e ] tag can not be considered a violation of the literary norm; it simply corresponds to a more strict pronouncing variant, which gives way to another.
§ 4. Petersburg and Moscow pronunciation
The difference between the St. Petersburg and Moscow variants of the literary pronunciation standard has long been recognized and described with varying degrees of completeness. With respect to the present moment, it can be said that the former significant differences have been reduced to a minimum. This is easily seen from the speeches of people speaking on television, where to distinguish the "Muscovites" from & quot; Petersburgers & quot; almost impossible. Therefore, the problem of the ratio of the two options is of interest mainly in the historical plan.
Historically, the literary pronunciation norm was formed on the basis of Moscow's dialect. However, with the founding of St. Petersburg and its transformation into the capital, it began to develop a different pronunciation from Moscow. First, Petersburg is surrounded by northern Russian dialects, which have specific features in the system of unstressed vocalism and in the pronunciation of some consonants. Secondly, the influence of the speech of foreigners, who lived in the new capital in large numbers, was noticeable in Petersburg. From this there was such a feature of the Petersburg pronunciation, as its proximity to spelling. In particular, it contained a long-lasting pronunciation of the type p [ e ] ka , gradually giving way to the icon. The characteristic features of the St. Petersburg pronunciation were: pronunciation of combinations /chn/ and /cht/ at the place of the corresponding spellings ( boo ch Th ) ; ; pronunciation to [ pc ], and [ shch ] and instead of the "Moscow" to [ w ']; and [ w ': ] and , soft /c'/ in the return particle and a number of others. In St. Petersburg, there were also several mannered features of speech of the type of pronounciation of solid labial before the e: q ve ] m instead of q [ в'э ] т. Specific features of the Moscow (and now simply old-Moscow) pronunciation were: softening of the lips before /k '/ (< and - shops ) ; a solid /s/ in the return forms ( of soaps [ sa ] - washed ) ; the wide spread of the assimilative softening the front-language consonants before the soft consonants ([ d ] , o [ c'l ] ik ); the pronunciation of the percussion /y/ in the verb endings of II conjugation ( hear [ ut ], ho [ 'ut ]).
How to ...
We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)