The question, of course, is idle, but turning to the language activities of our journalists in the media, you begin to doubt whether a Russian patronymic is necessary. A few examples. Here is the caption under the photo of a far from young man: "Russian scientist Vitaly Ginzburg won the 2003 Nobel Prize in Physics "(Behind the Kaluzhskaya Zastava. 2003. December 31); " Pavel Lyubimtsev leaves the First Channel "(Coma, pravda. 2003. December 11) (about an elderly person); " Valery Goreglyad, First Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council "(Trud. 2003. December 20); "Colonel-General Georgy Shpak, Deputy of the State Duma, member of the Supreme Political Council of the Rodina bloc" (Trud. 2003. December 20); "We offer our readers a dialogue on this topic, which is conducted by members of the intellectual association" Nevsky Club "- St. Petersburg writer Andrey Stolyarov and his fellow theologian, candidate of theology Hegumen Benjamin (Novik) " (Lit. gazeta. 2003. December 17-23); "Galina Zaitseva, professor, teacher of Moscow State Pedagogical University" (Districts. South-West.

page 67

2003. November 22). In one of the TV programs "Cultural Revolution" M. E. Shvydkoi, passing the microphone to an elderly woman, said: "Professor Vera Gornostaeva of the Moscow Conservatory has the floor." Examples can be multiplied ad infinitum.

Journalists give the following arguments for not using a patronymic: a) other nations do not have a patronymic, and they do without it without any difficulties (let's be like Americans!); and b) writing a patronymic is taking up a lot of space and time. We will discard the second one right away: there is a special written (not pronounced) form for specifying the first and middle name: initials. By writing Vladimir Putin instead of Vladimir Putin, the journalist will save both his newspaper space and time.

According to the first argument: if other peoples do not have a patronymic in our sense, this does not mean that it is not necessary for the Russian. Just one example of feeling the need for a patronymic: "She (Aunt Edmee) addresses me as 'Madame Natasha'. I said to her, "Madame." How our good Russian custom of a first name and patronymic is missing here. And respect in this manner of treatment, and warmth, and friendliness. Only here in Russia... " (N. Ilyina. Roads and destinies). And here is what a student of the School of Rhetoric at the Pushkin Institute of the Russian Language told us. In the city where she lives, a monument to Pushkin was erected with the inscription Alexander Pushkin on the pedestal. The townspeople "quarreled" with each other: some claimed that only Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin was possible, while others said that it was possible as it was written. So, there is something to think about...

The Russian personal name has gone a long way of development, and as a result, we now have a developed system of name forms that allows us to mark the degree of acquaintance with a person, the official or unofficial nature of the communication environment, status and role positions, and shades of personal relationships.

First of all, we note that the use of personal names in different forms is typical for three situational spheres:

a) naming the 3rd person, more often in the mode of story, narration, description (narrative), when the author of the text, guided by "conformity and proportionality", chooses the optimal means: Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev was a thoroughly educated person; the collected works of A. N. Tolstoy were published in 1959 in 10 volumes; Lermontov reflected the battle of the Russians with the French in the poem "Borodino"; Kolya came late in the evening alarmed; b) self-naming of the 1st person in a situation of acquaintance, representation without an intermediary, as well as naming 3rd person presentation by an intermediary in direct communication mode, when the speaker chooses the form of presentation that he wants to receive as an appeal later: I am Vera Ivanovna; My name is Vera Ivanovna; Professor Skobeleva; My friends call me Vera. An intermediary, I'll figure it out-

page 68

I am familiar with the situation and choose the most appropriate one from his point of view: Meet Vera Ivanovna Skobeleva. A unique form of self-naming is a signature in a letter. Depending on the degree of formality of the letter, familiarity with the addressee, and personal relationships, the appropriate form is also chosen: one thing is I. P. Semyonov, another is Your Vanya; c) appeal to the 2nd person when attracting attention, making contact for subsequent communication, only in a communicative mode: Vera!; Vera!; Vera Mrs. Skobeleva! Each of the forms of address corresponds to the sociostylistic tone of communication, depending on the role and personal relationships of partners, in an official or informal communication environment.

All these situational spheres presuppose the fulfillment of an etiquette purpose by a personal name, limiting it to custom, etiquette, ritual, norms of communicative behavior, and national-specific typed forms. So, in the Russian community, it is impossible for a student to use any other form of address to the teacher, except for the first name-patronymic, whereas, for example, in the Scandinavian countries, in this case, a relaxed name combined with "you" is acceptable - a form of communication.

So what forms of the name do we have today? We form possible addresses from a three-term passport name, for example, Anna Petrovna Sedova, Ivan Fedotovich Popov.

Mrs. Sedova, Mr. Popov! - strictly official, respectful, aloof.

Comrade Sedova, Comrade Popov! - strictly official, respectful, among like-minded party members, the Communist Party mainly.

Citizen Sedova, Citizen Popov! - in the legal sphere, in the area of jurisprudence.

Sedova, Popov! - a single surname becomes common, neutral in the educational sphere, where a roll call on the magazine, a call to answer activates the use of this form; in industrial and domestic relations, it is stylistically reduced, familiar, combined with the you - form of communication.

Anna Petrovna, Ivan Fedotovich! - a commonly used form of calling an adult person with respect and rapprochement (when addressing children, it is used in a playful, ironic way).

Anna, Ivan! - the full form of the name, unofficial, to a well-known, junior or close friend; may receive a touch of severity in comparison with the most commonly used abbreviated form in these cases.

Anya, Vanya! - an abbreviated form that means: "your", close, equal or younger in age (position), in informal communication.

page 69

Anechka, Anushka, Anyuta, Anyutochka, etc.; Vanechka, Vanyusha, Vanyushenka, etc. - forms with diminutive affectionate suffixes are applied to "their", close, with a positive rating.

Anka, Vanka! - familiar-rude, to "his", close, in the context may receive a negative rating.

Aunt Anya, Uncle Vanya! - informal, bringing together, first, on the part of nephews, secondly, on the part of children to the friends of their parents, and thirdly, to the elderly people of "simple" professions: nannies, caretakers, etc.

Petrovna, Fedotych! - respectful among older rural residents. Such an appeal is possible in rural areas to young respected specialists, as well as in the urban environment from children to their mentors and coaches.

It should be noted that such a variety of forms of the Russian name is a national-specific cultural property, since not all peoples ' names change. For example, it is not uncommon for Vietnamese students of the Russian language to find themselves in a state of culture shock when they hear appeals to the same person. Nikolai Semyonovich, Mr. Ivanov, Kolya, Nikolai, etc., since in the Vietnamese language the name is unchangeable, so how many names, so many people.

Suffixal diminutives deserve close attention. Even those peoples who have the possibility of forming a diminutive name are amazed at the abundance of Russian endearments and pejorative forms. A German researcher of Russian appeals made an interesting conclusion: Russians are very emotional and, apparently, affectionate people. By the way, we emphasize that such forms are possible only in the position of addressing the second person, they cannot be used when self-naming and pointing to the third person, in other words, you can not imagine a descriptive text like: "Natusenka asked granny for candy", or a self-introduction when meeting: "My name is Natusenka". However, as an appeal in direct communication mode, this sounds normal: "Granny, give me some candy. "Take it, Natusenka."

Especially interesting is the Russian name-patronymic, the "encroachment" on which in the media caused these reflections to come to life.

What is a patronymic?

Many peoples have an indication of the father's name in official documents, since the designation of belonging to the closest in the family was of considerable economic importance. However, only the Russian patronymic has come into widespread use in informal contexts, being one of the most common forms of address.

The patronymic is already mentioned in the Russian chronicles, according to N. M. Karamzin, S. M. Solovyov, from the XI century (so it was earlier).

page 70

In the textbook by B. G. Pashkov " Rus. Russia. Russian Empire " in the names of chapters, princes bearing patronymics are designated: Grand Duke Izyaslav I Yaroslavich (1054-1078). Grand Duke Vsevolod I Yaroslavich (1078-1093), Grand Duke Mstislav I Vladimirovich the Great (1125-1132) - etc. The same is true in the text of the book, for example: "The intercession of the Pope hardly had any effect, since in 1076 the young princes Vladimir Monomakh (son of Vsevolod Yaroslavich) and Oleg (son of Svyatoslav Yaroslavich), having concluded an alliance with the Poles, fought in Silesia... Izyaslav Mstislavovich approached Kiev. The Olgovichi were ready for battle. Vsevolod Olgovich's son Svyatoslav was standing outside the city" (p. 64).

Later in the history of Russia, patronymics are given to boyars and nobles. Naturally, fiction reflects this phenomenon of our language and communication. So, in the play by A. K. Tolstoy "The Death of John the Terrible" we read: "Zakharyin. Shame on you, boyars! [to Mstislavsky]. You, Prince Ivan Feodoritch, you are the eldest - Do stop them! Mstislavsky. Boyars! Did you hear what Nikita Romanovich just said to you?" As you can see, in the time of Ivan the Terrible, famous boyars had a princely title and were called by their patronymic.

At a later time, during the reign of Peter I, there is a further democratization of the use of patronymics. In the history of language and society, two forms arise and are used: a semi-patronymic with the word son: Peter Ivanov son and a patronymic with the suffix-vin. So, in A. N. Tolstoy's novel " Peter the Great "boyars Tikhon Nikitievich Streshnev, Ivan Borisovich Troyekurov, Fyodor Yuryevich Romodanovsky and many others are mentioned." The Queen, entering the cell, called everyone by their first name and patronymic, sat down on a simple chair, holding a prosphora taken out in her fingers." At the same time, it is the veneration of a person that is indicated by a patronymic name, while those who went against the tsar or humiliated themselves in another way were deprived of their patronymic and acquired a pejorative form of the name: "Today, ten thousand people poured into the Kremlin, waving lists from the Petrov charter, where it was said to seize the troublemaker and thief Fedka Shaklovity with his comrades and take them to the Lavra in chains. "Give us Fedka," they shouted and climbed to the windows and onto the Red Porch, just as they had done so many years ago. "Give out Mikitka Gladkogo, Kuzma Chermny, Obroska Petrov, Priest Seliverstka Medvedev!..."

"Come on, tell the animals , I won't give up Fyodor Levontievich,"Sofya said breathlessly, pulling Vasily Vasilyevich to the door."

Peter I granted patronymic names to people who distinguished themselves in serving the state (for example, merchants) as a sign of special respect:

"- And you will go with the goods?.. The first commercialrat ... Sell to Amsterdam?..

"I don't know any languages... And if you do, then what is it? We'll trade in Amsterdam, too, and we'll be swindled.

page 71

- Well done!.. Andrey Andreevich, write a decree... To the first merchant-navigator... What's your name, Ivan Zhigulin?

Zhigulin opened his mouth, stood up, his eyes bulged, and his beard lifted.

- So you're going to write us with your middle name?.. Yes, for this-what do you want!

And, as before the Savior, to whom he prayed for the success of affairs, he fell to the royal feet... " And the people themselves, recognizing the dignity of a growing merchant, called him by his half-patronymic or even patronymic.: "Brovkin Ivan Artemyev (people forgot when he was called Ivashka) was standing on the porch of the old church on Myasnitskaya Street. A new mutton sheepskin coat, covered with blue cloth, bulged on it, new felt boots straight from the shoe, a new wool scarf wrapped so that the head was lifted up." And the "bosses" switched to new forms of appeals: "The Volkovsky steward no longer poked him - Ivashka, but evasively called him Brovkin."

Thus, patronymic as a sign of respect ["Dictionary of Ethics" (ed. by I. Cohn, Moscow, 1983) considers recognition of the dignity of the individual as one of the most important requirements of moral attitude to people. Respect is associated with such concepts as justice, equality of rights, freedom, satisfaction of interests, sensitivity, politeness, delicacy, etc. It was initially applied to people of the upper classes, but was gradually democratized. Catherine II ordered the persons of the first five classes of the Table of Ranks to write with-vich, the ranks of the VI-VIII classes with semi-patronymics, and all the others only by name. Since the middle of the XIX century, other classes also used the patronymic na-vin.

Patronymic as a formation on behalf of the father with the help of suffixes-ovin, - evin,- ich, - aries, - evna,- ichna (- inichna) is known already at the birth of a person, but in our time it is actively used after reaching social maturity and independence. The conditions for using the first name-patronymic form are similar to those that are important for choosing forms of communication (but not always), whereas the name requires mainly you-forms (but not always). Here we can distinguish four main conditions that are closely related and interact: the degree of familiarity of communicators, the formality/informality of the communication environment, the status and role positions of equality/inequality, and the nature of personal relationships. So, the choice of a first and middle name is associated either with a small degree of familiarity, or with the formality of the situation, or with the high status, role and age of the partner, or with a particularly respectful, respectful personal attitude. These signs can interact, or one of them turns out to be the leading one. So, in communication with a person to whom friendly feelings are shown and a name with a you-form of communication is used in everyday life, in an official setting there is a transition to a first name-patronymic and a You-form. For example, two business partners who have worked together for many years and are on friendly terms, before the meeting of the Council of Europe-

page 72

Taiga: "Volodya, I will have to ask you some difficult questions about your project." During the meeting of the council: "Vladimir Petrovich, can I ask you to clarify a number of provisions of your project?". Any change in one of the listed attributes leads to a change in the forms of naming when contacting: they got to know each other closely and left their first and middle names, moved on to names; they quarreled and left their names, moved on to a first and middle name; and so on.

Let's go back to today. Now in the media, only the form of addressing a respected person by first name and patronymic remains almost unchanged, and even then there are some violations, especially in relation to the addressee of indirect, secondary, indirect, which is the mass of TV viewers, radio listeners, and newspaper readers. Often, a journalist, somewhat proud of his close acquaintance with a debate partner, calls a solid politician, scientist, or artist by name, on you.

In the sphere of references to the 3rd person, as mentioned above, the patronymic is often discarded by journalists. We read and hear in the media: The Children's Musical Theater celebrated the 100th anniversary of Natalia Sats; 83-year-old WWII veteran Ilya Sorokin met with schoolchildren; The director of school No. 554 Larisa Pilyaeva introduced new rules; The article about the bathhouse in Yuzhny Butovo "Only old people go to the heat" reports about old people: ... Felix Zolochevsky, who lives next door, winner of the USSR State Prize in 1986 for developments in the field of biotechnology... (Behind the Kaluga outpost. 2003. December 17); Doctor of the children's regional polyclinic Vasily Kuznetsov ... - etc. However, in the articles and notes themselves, journalists vary the names. So, Vasily Kuznetsov is called Vasily Alexandrovich after a few lines to avoid repetitions.

And even in the 1st person zone, when the speaker chooses what to call himself, he often acts in accordance with the trend imposed by newspapers, i.e. does not use patronymics where listeners expect it. So, a female guide in her late forties, introducing herself to a group in which half are young people, says: "- Let's get acquainted, I'm Marina!", thus giving a signal: "let's drop the formalities, let's become friends." But a normally well-bred young man will (and should!) feel embarrassed when addressing a little-known woman of his mother's age, and even to a senior in position only by name.

What conclusions can be drawn from this?

In Russia, they said: "What should I call you?" Patronymic magnification - exaltation by demonstrating a respectful attitude. By removing the patronymic from a person's name, we seem to remove the element of respect and something else that is elusive...

Analyzing the use or non-use of a patronymic, we see the following. Name of a well-known (usually nationwide) person in ka-

page 73

to some extent, it becomes alienated from its bearer, begins to live independently, becoming, as a verbal sign, the property of national culture and absorbing the socio-cultural component in the complex of elements of meaning, i.e. turning into a linguoculturema (logoepisteme). These are the names of famous writers, artists, and public figures, for whom only the first and last names are enough in the mass media and in the minds of people: even without a patronymic, honor and respect are great. At the same time, the usus, custom, and accepted use also apply. So, we say Leo Tolstoy, but still Ivan Sergeyevich Turgenev. The general trend is noticeable, and if until recently there was Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev, then for his 200th anniversary the media offered us only Fyodor Tyutchev, and instead of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, we read Alexander Pushkin on the monument (see the example above). And yet custom rules the ball, and we have Marina Tsvetaeva, Boris Pasternak, Leonid Utesov, Leonid Filatov, Oleg Tabakov, Yuri Luzhkov and Vladimir Putin...

But here's what's remarkable. I asked students of philology: can you say: - Yuri Luzhkov made a decision... - Yes, the students answered, so to speak. You can say: - Natalia Formanovskaya gave a lecture? "No," they said, " you can't say that. When talking to students: "There is an article about your principal Lyudmila Prokhorova in the newspaper." The students protested: "You can't say that, we have Lyudmila Nikolaevna." Analyzing these examples, we come to the conclusion that there is another extralinguistic feature: the division into "friends" and "strangers". Yu.S. Stepanov writes about the opposition of "friends" and "strangers" in the book "Constants: a dictionary of Russian Culture", arguing that this concept created an attitude to "one's own" in the family, to the motherland, to one's people, and gave rise to patriotism. Thus, if the mentioned person is "your own", it is impossible, as the examples show, to express respect for him outside of the patronymic, even calling him in the 3rd person. That is why in the example already given, many residents of the city want the monument to have the inscription Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin. - this is "your", native, close; that is why employees of literary museums call their heroes, without eliminating the first name and patronymic.: Marina Ivanovna Tsvetaeva, Anna Andreevna Akhmatova, Vladimir Semyonovich Vysotsky, Vladimir Vladimirovich Nabokov...

Again, first name and last name can be used for the 3rd person when the name of a person has become universally known and, as it were, alienated from the person. For" your own", even a very famous one, a patronymic is necessary. An example from an interview with E. A. Ryazanov is illustrative. Speaking of his teachers, he says, " Oh! My teachers! This is Grigory Mikhailovich Kozintsev, Sergey Mikhailovich Eisenstein. I have already told you about Ivan Alexandrovich Pyryev, and he opened my eyes to many things..." And although it is customary to say Sergey Eisen-

page 74

stein, but not in the context of " my teacher, a person dear to me." As you can see, the "friend" or "stranger" attitude strongly influences the choice of naming.

If, as was repeatedly said earlier, a well-known name, being alienated to the official sphere, can be marked in the media in two terms: first name + last name, then other rules apply for ordinary people who are not publicly known. It seems that in contexts where the respectable age, merits, status and position of a respected person is indicated, you should not remove the patronymic. So, the following names look obscene: "82-year-old war veteran Yegor Afanasyev spoke to students"; "The statement of a famous ancient doctor was made by Academician-Secretary of the Department of Biological Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Director of the Institute of Medical and Biological Problems Anatoly Grigoriev "(Poisk. 2003. December 17); " Leading critics of Russia have already taken part in our discussion: Pavel Basinsky, Lev Pirogov, Inna Rostovtseva ... "(Lit. gazeta. 2003. December 17-23) and many others (see also examples above).

In this case, the newspaper "Moscow University" acts tactfully, marking the initials of the mentioned professors and associate professors: "Professor V. I. Dobrenkov, Professor A. I. Antonov and Associate Professor V. I. Medkov took part in the sociological congress... "; also reported on the anniversary of Tatyana Ivanovna Evdokimova (October 2003). Let us repeat that in the written text, the use of initials is both brief and respectful in relation to what is mentioned. The seemingly low information content of initials is no less than the information content of a single name, since the name alone does not allow you to contact a person and forces you to request a patronymic.

Let's sum up the results. The name-patronymic, being one of the many forms of naming a Russian person, has a unique national and cultural specificity and, according to customs and traditions, is used in various spheres and situations of communication: when calling a respected person in the 3rd person (he, she ), when referring to a person in the 2nd person (you, You ), as well as during a personal introduction, acquaintance in the 1st person (I ). An ordinary, "ordinary" person cannot be called without a patronymic in contexts that mark their respectable age, status, role, and merits. In a written text, initials successfully perform this role. A person who is deprived by our journalists in the media of a patronymic (greatness), called only by the first and last name, seems to be deprived of respect, and the text turns out to be contrary to the norms of communication culture and the rules of speech etiquette.

If a person has become famous, his name, regardless of the time of life, its carrier, becomes a fact and the property of the culture of the people. In this case, when naming the 3rd person, the name may be alienated to the official sphere, and then the name and fami are sufficient-

page 75

lii. If the speaker (writer) He wants to emphasize the warm (unadorned) attitude to the popularly known as "his", belonging to his native country and culture, the patronymic again turns out to be necessary - such are Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev and many other glorious people of the Fatherland.

Journalistic games with a Russian patronymic are dangerous as a violation of communication traditions. Konrad Lorenz, a biologist and researcher of animal behavior, Nobel Prize winner, said this very well: "So let's not mock the slave of habit that sits in a person who has aroused in him an attachment to ritual and forces him to hold on to this ritual with a tenacity that would seem worthy of a better application. Few things are more worthy! If the Usual was not fixed and isolated,.. if it did not become a sacred end in itself, there would be no reliable communication, no reliable understanding, no loyalty, no law. Oaths do not bind anyone and contracts are worthless if the partners who conclude the contract do not have a common basis - inviolable customs turned into rites ..." (K. Lorenz. Aggression. St. Petersburg: Amphora Publ., 2001, p. 114).

Permanent link to this publication: