Depardieu or Depardieu? Richelieu, maybe Richelieu? Fet or Fet? Where is the universe, and where is the universe, what deed was perfect, and what was perfect? And how to read "Peter the Great" by A.K. Tolstoy, if we don’t know whether there should be dots over e in the sentence: “Under such a sovereign, let’s take a break!”? The answer is not so obvious, and the expression "dot the I" in Russian could well be replaced by "dot the E".
This letter is replaced when printed with "e", but forced to put dots when writing by hand. But telegrams, radio messages, and Morse code ignore it. It was transferred from the last to the seventh place of the Russian alphabet. And she managed to survive the revolution, unlike, for example, the more ancient "fits" and "Izhitsa".
What difficulties do the owners of surnames with this letter face in the passport offices and it is not necessary to say. Yes, and before the appearance of passport offices, this confusion was - so the poet Athanasius Fet forever remained Fet for us.
Whether this is acceptable or not is up to the reader who has read to the end.
foreign ancestry
The youngest letter of the Russian alphabet "ё" appeared in it on November 29, 1783. It was proposed by Princess Dashkova at a meeting of the Russian Academy to replace the inconvenient combination of IO with a cap, as well as the rarely used signs ё, їô, ió, io.
The very form of the letter is borrowed from French or Swedish, where it is a full member of the alphabet, denoting, however, a different sound.
It is estimated that the frequency of occurrence of Russian Yo is 1% of the text. This is not so little: for every thousand characters (about half a page of printed text), there are on average ten “ё”.
At different times, different options for transmitting this sound in writing were proposed. It was proposed to borrow the symbol from the Scandinavian languages (ö, ø), Greek (ε - epsilon), simplify the superscript symbol (ē, ĕ), etc.
Path to the alphabet
Despite the fact that Dashkova proposed this letter, Derzhavin is considered its father in Russian literature. It was he who was the first to use a new letter in correspondence, and also the first to print a surname with an “e”: Potemkin. At the same time, Ivan Dmitriev published the book “And my knick-knacks”, imprinting all the necessary points in it. But the “ё” acquired the final weight after N.M. Karamzin - an authoritative author - in the first almanac he published "Aonides" (1796) printed: "dawn", "eagle", "moth", "tears", as well as the first verb - "drip". True, in his famous "History of the Russian State" "yo" did not find a place for itself.
And yet, the letter "ё" was in no hurry to officially introduce into the Russian alphabet. Many were embarrassed by the “yoking” pronunciation, because it was too similar to “servile”, “low”, while the solemn Church Slavonic language ordered to pronounce (and, accordingly, write) “e” everywhere. Ideas about culture, nobility and intelligence could not come to terms with a strange innovation - two dots above the letter.
As a result, the letter "ё" entered the alphabet only in Soviet times, when no one was trying to show off intelligence. Yo could be used in the text or replaced by "e" at the request of the writer.
Stalin and maps of the area
In a new way, the letter "e" was looked at in the military of the 1940s. According to legend, I. Stalin himself influenced her fate by ordering the obligatory printing of “yo” in all books, central newspapers and maps of the area. This happened because German maps of the area fell into the hands of Russian intelligence officers, which turned out to be more accurate and “meticulous” than ours. Where the pronunciation of "yo" was "jo" in these cards - that is, the transcription was extremely accurate. And on Russian maps they wrote the usual “e” everywhere, and the villages with the names “Berezovka” and “Berezovka” could easily be confused. According to another version, in 1942, Stalin was brought an order for signature, in which the names of all the generals were written with an “e”. The leader was furious, and the next day the entire issue of the Pravda newspaper was full of superscripts.
Torment of typists
But as soon as control weakened, the texts rapidly began to lose their "ё". Now, in the era of computer technology, it is difficult to guess the reasons for this phenomenon, because they are ... technical. On most typewriters, there was no separate letter “ё”, and typists had to contrive, doing unnecessary actions: type “e”, return the carriage, put a quotation mark. Thus, for each "ё" they pressed three keys - which, of course, was not very convenient.
Handwriters also spoke of similar difficulties, and in 1951 A. B. Shapiro wrote:
“... The use of the letter ё has not received any wide distribution in the press to date and even in the most recent years. This cannot be considered a random occurrence. ... The very form of the letter ё (a letter and two dots above it) is an undoubted difficulty from the point of view of the motor activity of the writer: after all, writing this frequently used letter requires three separate techniques (letter, dot and dot), and each time you need to follow so that the dots are symmetrically placed above the sign of the letter. ... In the general system of Russian writing, which almost does not know superscripts (the letter й has a simpler superscript than ё), the letter ё is a very burdensome and, apparently, therefore not sympathetic exception.
Esoteric controversy
Disputes about "ё" do not stop until now, and the arguments of the parties sometimes surprise with their unexpectedness. So, supporters of the widespread use of this letter sometimes build their argument on ... esotericism. They believe that this letter has the status of "one of the symbols of Russian life", and therefore the rejection of it is a disregard for the Russian language and Russia. “A spelling mistake, a political mistake, a spiritual and moral mistake” calls the spelling e instead of e the writer V.T. Proponents of this point of view believe that 33 - the number of letters of the Russian alphabet - is a sacred number, and "yo" occupies the sacred 7th place in the alphabet.
“And until 1917, the letter Zh was blasphemously placed in the sacred seventh place of the 35-letter alphabet,” their opponents answer. They believe that the "e" should be dotted only in a few cases: "in cases of possible discrepancies; in dictionaries; in books for students of the Russian language (i.e. children and foreigners); for the correct reading of rare toponyms, names or surnames. In general, it is these rules that are now in effect with regard to the letter “ё”.
Lenin and "yo"
There was a special rule about how the patronymic of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin should be written. In the instrumental case, it was mandatory to write Ilyich, while every other Ilyich of the Soviet Union after 1956 was prescribed to be called only Ilyich. The letter Yo singled out the leader and emphasized his uniqueness. Interestingly, this rule has never been canceled in the documents.
A monument to this cunning letter stands in Ulyanovsk, the hometown of Nikolai Karamzin's "yofikator". Russian artists came up with a special badge - "epirayt" - for marking certified publications, and Russian programmers - "etator" - a computer program that automatically places a letter with dots in your text.
Answered by Yesenia Pavlotsky, linguist-morphologist, expert of the Institute of Philology, Mass Media and Psychology of the Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University.
You should start with the fact that the letter yo in the language there is a special status of a sign, the strict obligatory use of which is limited. No other letter of our alphabet enjoys such a "privilege". It's hard to imagine that we could write or not write a, t or at if we so desire. But here is the word hedgehog- the same as hedgehog. It turns out such a "stereo picture": a hedgehog - a hedgehog, and in our minds this is one and the same word.
Many people have a question: if there is no difference, if the use of a letter is not mandatory, then why is such a sign needed at all? Who needed to introduce it and why?
So, in order. In understanding language as a system, it will be very helpful to treat it as a historical phenomenon. When we read a textbook on the history of Russia, we are carried back to the past by exciting stories of fierce battles and great deeds. But believe me, a textbook on the grammar of the Old Russian language knows stories no less exciting than the Battle of the Ice, the Battle of Kursk and the collapse of the USSR. What are the first, second and third palatalizations, the development of intersyllable synharmonism and the great fall of the reduced. If you get acquainted with the history of the language, you will never happen to think that someone is forcibly changing, spoiling it, introducing something into it, taking something out of it, and all for the sake of some bad people in order to confuse all other good people.The appearance of the sign yo was the result of a global transformation in the Old Russian language - the transition<е>in<о>(transition of the sound [e] into the sound [o]). You can read more about this process in any textbook on historical grammar. (He writes in great detail about the prerequisites and the phenomenon itself. V.V. Kolesov.) Most often, for understanding, they give the following example: before the transition<е>in<о>word honey pronounced like [ m´ed], and then they began to pronounce it the way we hear it today - [ Maud]. (The sign in transcription indicates the softness of the consonant.) So, the phonetic phenomenon was formed, but there was no expression for it, but the appearance of a special sign, of course, was inevitable. In the 18th century, for this purpose, a combination io- mione, however, he was not destined to take root, like other options - oh, yo, їô, ió, io.
Designation of one sound with two letters io questioned the director of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences E.R. Dashkova. And, despite the fact that to replace the proposed by her yo could come offered later ö, ø, ε, ę, ē, ĕ , it is this letter that is known to us today as part of our alphabet. The search for another form of sound designation was natural: the fact is that the mark yo requires three broken actions, and in this yo is also unique - not a single letter of our alphabet consists of three separate characters, the writing of which limits cursive writing. Write with a pen a word in the middle of which will be yo- you will track what you will need to write e, stop, return the hand back, put one point and then the second. All this, of course, is not very convenient.But yo throughout its history was objectionable not only to this. Its distribution in the 18th - 19th centuries was blocked by the attitude towards pronunciation with yo as to the ignoble, petty-bourgeois. Pronunciation with e instead of yo considered something like ours call me instead of ringing- emphasized belonging to an approved group of native speakers. Pronunciation with yo was considered vulgar, denigrating the language. President of the Russian Academy A. S. Shishkov wrote that writing "stars" instead of "star" is a complete corruption of the language.
There is an opinion (and you yourself can check its validity) that the text with yo is much more difficult to read than the same text with e. Perhaps, due to the optional use of this letter and its ambiguous status, we have not been able to properly get used to its appearance and return to it not only when writing - with our hand, but also when reading - with our eyes, as if “stammering”.
Well, in the end, yo they even refuse to be a full-fledged letter. So, A.A. Reformed writes that there is only a special icon umlaut(two dots) above the letter e, which is an opportunity to avoid discrepancies - but not an independent letter yo.
So, we have already found out that the path yo complex, unenviable fate. It remains to understand the main thing: are there cases when the norm establishes its obligatory nature. Yes, there are such cases.
Firstly, yo obligatory in special texts: primers, school textbooks for native Russian speakers and foreigners, as well as dictionaries. It is necessary for learning the language.
Secondly, yo is required to indicate the correct pronunciation in cases where the word is new, little known, or vice versa - is characterized by a common erroneous pronunciation, like words *convicted, *newborn. Letter yo, which, as a rule, indicates the place of stress, helps to indicate the norm - convict, newborn.And thirdly, you must admit, there is a difference between before we, or let's take a break. In some cases yo has a semantic function all and all, perfect and perfect.
Also yo required in proper names.
In all other cases, the use yo optional and determined by the choice of the author of the text.
Scoundrel Karamzin - came up with the same letter "yo».
After all, Cyril and Methodius already had both B, and X, and F ...
So no. Aesthete Karamzin thought this was not enough...
Venedikt Erofeev
Myth #7. Writing e instead of yo- gross spelling mistake.
In fact: According to the rules of Russian spelling, the use of the letter yo in most cases optional (i.e. optional).
A small preface. We begin to consider the issue, which has recently become one of the most acute for many native speakers of the Russian language. The controversy surrounding the letter yo, in their bitterness are comparable only to the discussion about what preposition should be used with the name of the state Ukraine - on or in. And, frankly, there is something in common between these completely different, at first glance, problems. Just as the question of choosing a pretext for Ukraine constantly goes beyond the scope of a conversation about language, affecting other aspects - politics, interethnic relations, etc. - so does the problem of using the letter yo has recently ceased to be properly linguistic. It ceased mainly due to the efforts of the irreconcilable "yofikators" (as people call themselves who are fighting to ensure that the use of the letter yo became ubiquitous and obligatory) that perceive spelling (spelling!) hedgehog and let's go to instead of Hedgehog and let's go to like a gross mistake, like ignoring the fact of existence yo in the Russian alphabet, and therefore - due to the fact that this letter is endowed by them with the status of "one of the symbols of Russian life" - as a disregard for the Russian language and Russia in general. “A spelling error, a political error, a spiritual and moral error,” pathetically calls the spelling e instead of yo the ardent defender of this letter is the writer V. T. Chumakov, chairman of the “Union of Yofikators” created by him.
How did it happen that of all the alphabetic and non-alphabetic signs of Russian writing, it is precisely two dots above yo become an indicator of the level of love for the Fatherland? Let's try to figure this out.
But we’ll immediately make a reservation: this article was not written at all in order to once again enter into a debate with the “yofikators”. The purpose of the article is different: we invite to a calm, detailed conversation those who want to understand why, out of all 33 letters of the Russian alphabet, it is yo is in a special position who is interested to know what arguments were expressed by linguists in different years for the consistent use of yo and against such use, for whom it is important to hear what the law still says about this - the current rules of Russian spelling.
Many facts from the history of scientific discussion related to the letter yo, as well as quotes from the works of linguists, we have taken from the book “Overview of proposals for improving Russian spelling” (M .: Nauka, 1965). (This edition went out of print at a time when there was a heated discussion in society about the fate of Russian writing - the proposals developed by the Spelling Commission for amendments to the rules of Russian spelling were discussed.) In the corresponding section of the book, all proposals that were put forward in different years are collected and commented on (from the end of the 18th century to the 1960s) regarding the use of the letter yo(and - more broadly - related to the problem of the letter pair to about), arguments are given in favor of sequential and selective writing e. Readers interested in an in-depth study of this issue are strongly encouraged to refer to this book.
While working on the article, we had at our disposal a unique document - a fragment of the correspondence of two outstanding Russian linguists - Alexander Alexandrovich Reformatsky and Boris Samoylovich Schwarzkopf. In a friendly letter to B. S. Schwarzkopf1 A. A. Reformatsky (probably continuing the previous discussion with the addressee) explains the reasons why the famous Russian chess player A. A. Alekhin could not stand it when his name was pronounced A[l'o]khin. The chess player “liked to emphasize that he was of a good noble family, stubbornly insisting that his last name be pronounced without dots over the “e”. When, for example, someone asked on the phone whether it was possible to speak with Alekhine, he invariably answered: “There is no such thing, there is Alekhine,” A. A. Reformatsky quotes L. Lyubimov’s memoirs “In a Foreign Land.” Then comes the commentary of the linguist himself: “All this is fair, but the reader gets the impression that all this is some kind of whim of a great chess player and fanfare of the nobility, and “in truth” he should be Alekhin ... In fact, all this is not so. The point here is not in “whim” and not in “buffoonery”, but in the laws of the Russian language, to which the surname Alekhine is also subordinate.
With a conversation about these patterns, we begin our article. Before talking about the features of the use yo in modern Russian writing, it is necessary to answer the question, why letter yo was absent in the Cyrillic alphabet from the very beginning, and why did it become necessary to introduce it?
To answer this question, we will have to make a brief digression into the history of Russian phonetics. In the Russian language of the most ancient era, the phoneme<о>did not speak after soft consonants. In other words, our ancestors once said, for example, the word dog not as we say now - [p'os], but [p'es], the word honey not [m'od], but [m'ed]. Letter yo so they just didn't need it!
And then a very important change took place in the phonetics of the Old Russian language, which linguists call the “transition e in about"(more precisely, the transition of the sound [e] into the sound [o]). The essence of this process is as follows: in a position under stress after soft consonants (let's not forget that all hissing ones were soft at that time) at the end of the word and before hard consonants, the sound [e] changed into [o]. This is how the modern pronunciation [m'od] arose. (honey),[p'os] (dog),[all] (all). But before soft consonants, the sound [e] did not turn into [o], but remained unchanged, this explains the ratio, for example, [s'ol] a - [s'el'] sky (villages - rural): before a hard [l], the sound [e] went into [o], and before a soft [l '] it did not go. In a letter to B. S. Schwarzkopf, A. A. Reformatsky gives numerous examples of such relationships: whip - whip, cheerful - fun, daily - day, crack - gap, smart - thinking, the same in proper names: Savelovo(station) - Savely(name), lakes(city) - Zaozerye(village), Styopka - Stenka, Olena (Alena) - Olenin (Alenin) etc.
(The attentive reader will ask: why, then, in the modern language, after a soft consonant, before a hard one, it is often pronounced [e], and not [o]? There are many reasons for this, a complete listing of them will take us away from the main topic of this article. So, there is no specified transition in words, where once there was "yat", - forest, place, Gleb, in words where the consonant has hardened after the transition e in about ended - first, female, in borrowed words - newspaper, Rebekah. Transition details e in about can be read in works on the historical phonetics of the Russian language.)
Thus, in the surname Alekhine really should be pronounced [e]: before the soft [x ’] there are no conditions for the transition [e] to [o] (cf .: Lyokha - there is a transition before the solid [x]). Then what does the noble origin that the chess player was talking about have to do with it? The fact is that in the highest circles for a long time there was an opinion that “yokane” was the lot of common speech, but not the Russian literary language. It is known, for example, that the ardent opponent of "yokanya" and the letters yo(after its appearance) was a conservative and purist A. S. Shishkov.
But we're getting ahead of ourselves a little. So the transition e in about occurred (the first evidence of it appears in ancient Russian texts as early as the 12th century), but there are no special letters to designate the combinations that appeared as a result of this change
But is it a letter? The answer is not obvious. Over 200 years of existence yo polar opinions were expressed in the Russian letter. So, in an article of 1937, A. A. Reformatsky wrote: “Is there a letter ё in the Russian alphabet? No. There is only a diacritical sign "umlaut" or "trema" (two dots above the letter), which is used to avoid possible misunderstandings ... "
What is "wrong" in the inscription of the sign yo that not only many writers avoid using it, but even some linguists deny it the right to be considered a letter (while no one doubts that, for example, sch is an independent letter, not " sh with a ponytail"? Are all these people really all “loafers” and “slobs”, as the “yofikators” claim, or are the reasons much deeper? This question is worth thinking about.
A little-known fact: the proposal of E. R. Dashkova and N. M. Karamzin did not mean at all that the search for a sign that could become a letter pair to about, terminated. In the XIX - XX centuries. instead of yo letters were offered at different times ö , ø (as in Scandinavian languages), ε (Greek epsilon), ę , ē , ĕ (the last two signs were proposed already in the 1960s), etc. If any of these proposals were approved, the word honey we would now write like mod, or fashion, or mεd, or med, or honey, or mĕd, or in some other way.
Note that the proposed letters were created in some cases on the basis of about(because there was a search for a letter pair to about), but more often based on e, which is not surprising: after all, the sound for which the letter is sought comes precisely from e. The question arises: what was the meaning of such searches, why the authors of these proposals were not satisfied with the inscription yo? The answer to this question will lead us to understand one of the main reasons why the letter yo in the minds of native speakers is not perceived as a mandatory . In 1951, A. B. Shapiro wrote:
“... The use of the letter ё has not received any wide distribution in the press to date and even in the most recent years. This cannot be considered a random occurrence. ... The very form of the letter ё (a letter and two dots above it) is an undoubted difficulty from the point of view of the motor activity of the writer: after all, writing this frequently used letter requires three separate techniques (letter, dot and dot), and each time you need to follow so that the dots are symmetrically placed above the sign of the letter. ... In the general system of Russian writing, which almost does not know superscripts (the letter й has a simpler superscript than ё), the letter ё is a very burdensome and, apparently, therefore not sympathetic exception.
Now let us once again pay attention to the signs offered in the function of the letter pair k about and created on the basis of the letter e: ę , ē , ĕ (in 1892, I. I. Paulson also proposed such a very exotic sign as e with a circle at the top). It becomes clear: there was a search for such an alphabetic sign, which, on the one hand, would emphasize kinship with e, and on the other hand, it required not three, but two separate techniques (as when writing th), i.e., would be more convenient for the writer. But despite the fact that almost all the proposed signs are more convenient in design yo, they were never able to replace the letter that had already come into use. One can hardly expect the introduction of any new letter instead of yo in the future (at least for the foreseeable future),
Meanwhile, numerous inconveniences yo for more than a decade has delivered not only to writers, but also to printers. First - to typists, for the simple reason that there was no corresponding key on typewriters for a long time. In the textbook by E. I. Dmitrievskaya and N. N. Dmitrievsky “Methods of teaching typing” (M., 1948) we read: “On the keyboards of most typewriters currently working in the USSR there is no ... the letter "ё" ... The sign has to be composed ... from the letter "e" and quotation marks. Typists thus had to resort to pressing three keys: the letters e, carriage return, quotation marks. Naturally, sympathy for yo this did not add: typists developed the habit of replacing a complex compound press with a simple one in the form of a letter e and saved it later, after the appearance yo on the keyboard of typewriters.
Letter required special attention. yo and with the advent of the computer age. In different layouts yo occupies a different place (often inconvenient), on some keyboards produced at the dawn of the computer era, it was not provided at all, sometimes it was possible to type a letter only using special characters of a text editor.
So, the following situation has developed, which we invite readers to fully understand: in the function of the letter pair to about in our alphabet (despite repeated proposals to introduce another, more convenient sign) a letter has become entrenched, which is unusual in its style for Russian writing, complicates it, requires increased attention and additional efforts from those who write and print. Thus, native speakers actually faced a choice between two evils: not to designate combinations
But it must be admitted that the first of these "evils" is by no means always such an evil, since in most cases the failure to write yo does not lead to significant problems when reading; a literate person is unlikely to make a mistake and read the word that you just read correctly, as err [b'e] tsya. According to N. S. Rozhdestvensky, “spelling tolerance for those arising from the absence of a letter yo spelling is explained by the fact that there are few such spellings. That is why native speakers prefer to consistently dodge the "evil" of the second - inconvenient diacritics (even in cases where reading errors are still possible). Is it possible to explain this solely by the "disorder" of the writer, his "indifference" to the language? In our opinion, such statements in no way reveal the true reasons for the peculiar fate yo In russian language. “It is significant that, despite all the validity of the use of ё, it still cannot win a place in our orthography, - wrote in 1960 A. N. Gvozdev. “Obviously, the practical requirements of not complicating writing take precedence over theoretical motives for the systematic and consistent writing designation of phonemes.”
For more than two hundred years of the history of the letter yo there was only one short period when it was considered mandatory. On December 24, 1942, the order of the People's Commissar of Education of the RSFSR V.P. Potemkin “On the use of the letter “e” in Russian spelling” was published. This order made it mandatory yo in school practice (“in all classes of primary, incomplete secondary and secondary schools”). The order also dealt with the consistent application yo in all newly published textbooks, teaching aids and books for children's reading, on a detailed presentation of the rules for using yo in school grammars of the Russian language, as well as on the publication of a school reference book of all words in which the use yo causes difficulties. Such a reference book called “The use of the letter ё” was released in 1945 (compiled by K. I. Bylinskiy, S. E. Kryuchkov, M. V. Svetlaev, edited by N. N. Nikolsky). Prior to that, in 1943, the reference book was published as a manuscript (see illustration).
The initiative to issue an order (and in general to show attention to the letter yo in 1942) rumor ascribes to Stalin: as if it all started with the fact that a decision was brought to the leader's signature on conferring the rank of general to several military men. The names of these people in the resolution were printed without a letter. yo(sometimes they even call a surname that could not be read: fire or Ognev). Legend has it that Stalin immediately, in a very categorical manner, expressed his desire to see yo in writing and in print.
Of course, this is just a legend, but one believes in it: such a question could hardly have been resolved without the knowledge of the "knowledgeable in linguistics" leader. sudden appearance yo in the issue of the newspaper Pravda dated December 7, 1942, where that very decision was published, cannot be explained otherwise than by the strictest instructions from above (in the previous issue, dated December 6, this letter was not in sight).
Modern "yofikators", who aspirate about the decree of 1942 and the firm will of the leader, who put an end to "spelling slovenliness" with an iron hand during the harsh war years, usually state with regret that the process of introducing letters into print and writing yo came to naught a few years after Stalin's death. This suggests the conclusion that during the life of the leader about optional yo no one dared to think. But this is not true. Discussion about the appropriateness of the application yo resumed before March 1953. Above, we quoted A. B. Shapiro's words about the complexity that yo for the writer, said in 1951. And in 1952, the 2nd edition of the Spelling and Punctuation Handbook for Press Workers by K. I. Bylinsky and N. N. Nikolsky was published. The book says in black and white: letter yo in print it is usually replaced by the letter e (Highlighted by us. - V.P.) It is recommended to use yo in the following cases: 1) When it is necessary to prevent incorrect reading of a word, for example: learn Unlike learn; all Unlike everything, bucket Unlike bucket; perfect(participle) as opposed to perfect(adjective). 2) When it is necessary to indicate the pronunciation of a little-known word, for example: Olekma river. 3) In dictionaries and spelling guides, in textbooks for non-Russians, in books for children of primary school age and in other special types of literature.
Practically word for word, these three points are repeated in the "Rules of Russian Spelling and Punctuation" of 1956. In this way, current spelling rules consistent use of a letter yo is not provided in ordinary printed texts. Understanding the complexity of choosing between two evils (which we talked about above), linguists have found a golden mean: if from not setting two points the shape of the word is distorted - the letter yo we write (although diacritics are inconvenient, but it is more important to prevent incorrect reading of the word). If not writing yo does not lead to reading errors, it is quite acceptable to replace yo on the e. That is, the rule (we emphasize that it is still officially in force) provides for writing in ordinary texts ice, honey, tree(these words are impossible not to recognize even without yo), but all(to distinguish from all) and Olekma(to indicate the correct pronunciation of an obscure word). And only in the normative dictionaries of the Russian language, as well as in texts intended for those who are just mastering the skills of reading in Russian (these are children and foreigners), writing yo necessarily.
If the rule were a little more detailed and regulated the sequential writing yo in proper names (where options are possible: Chernyshev or Chernyshev) and if it were strictly observed, then it is quite possible that in our days there would be no battles with "yofikators", the use yo would not be overgrown with myths and conjectures, and this article would not have to be written. However, the habit turned out to be stronger: the letter yo and after 1956 was replaced by e, the words all and all were written the same way. It is in this that a number of linguists see the main drawback of the existing rule: in practice it is difficult to implement. Already in 1963, only eight years after the adoption of the rules, A. A. Sirenko noted: “Recommended by the Rules of Russian Spelling and Punctuation, the spelling of ё in order to establish differences between words and their forms is not respected even in the most necessary cases. The force of inertia is manifested in orthography: where the letter e is not indicated due to optionality, it is not indicated even in spite of obvious necessity.
That is why the discussion about the letter yo continued. And after 1956, the proposal to replace the rule with another was repeatedly considered: on the consistent use yo in all texts. At different times, linguists have given different arguments for the introduction of such a rule and against it. Here are the main 2 arguments "for":
1. Consistent writing yo would provide an indication of the correct pronunciation of words with<о>after soft consonants in a stressed position. It would prevent errors like scam, grenadier, guardian(right: scam, grenadier, guardianship) on one side and whitish, mockery(right: whitish, mock) - with another. An indication of the correct pronunciation of proper names (foreign and Russian) would be provided - Cologne, Goethe, Konenkov, Olekma, as well as little-known words - hair dryer(wind), gueuze(in the Netherlands in the 16th century: a rebel against Spanish tyranny).
2. When used consistently yo the written form of all words that include a phoneme<о>after soft consonants in a stressed syllable, would contain an indication of the place of stress. This would prevent such speech errors as beetroot, quicklime(right: beets, quicklime) etc.
3. Mandatory use yo would facilitate reading and understanding of the text, distinguishing and recognizing words by their written appearance.
However, the arguments against mandatory yo quite a few, and they are by no means exhausted by a statement of the inconvenience of this letter for those who write, print and read. Here are some other counterarguments cited by linguists:
1. In cases where pronunciation is in doubt, the requirement to consistently use yo would lead to great difficulties in the practice of printing. It would be very difficult (and in some cases impossible) to solve the problem of writing yo or e in the publication of texts by many authors of the 18th - 19th centuries. According to A. V. Superanskaya, Academician V. V. Vinogradov, when discussing the rule on the obligation yo turned to the poetry of the 19th century: “We do not know how the poets of the past heard their poems, whether they meant forms with yo or with e". Indeed, can we say with certainty how his lines from the poem "Poltava" sounded in Pushkin's time: We are pushing the Swedes army after army; // The glory of their banners darkens, // And the grace of the god of war // Our every step is sealed? Banner - Imprinted or banner - imprinted? Apparently banners - sealed but we won't know for sure. Therefore, the introduction of mandatory yo in the practice of printing would require special rules for publications of authors of the XVIII - XIX centuries. But to what extent it would be possible to guarantee their implementation given the mass nature of such publications?
2. Mandatory use yo would complicate school practice: the attention of teachers would be constantly directed to checking the presence of “points above e”, non-positioning of points would have to be considered an error.
Above, it was not by chance that we called the rule fixed in the code of 1956 the “golden mean”. To sum up the arguments "for" the mandatory spelling yo and "against", it can be seen that, subject to strict adherence to the existing rule, almost everything of value is preserved, which gives a proposal for the consistent use yo and at the same time there are no difficulties associated with such use. This is the main advantage of the existing rule.
"Overview of proposals for improving Russian spelling" gives us an idea of how for almost two hundred years (from the end of the 18th century to 1965, that is, until the publication of the book) there was a scientific discussion about the pros and cons of consistent and selective letter usage yo. Let's pay attention: it was just a scientific discussion, various arguments were expressed - convincing and controversial, a view of the problem was given from the point of view of a linguist and from the point of view of a native speaker - a non-specialist. And what was not in this controversy? There was no populism, no exaggerated claims about the letter yo as a stronghold of the Russian language and one of the foundations of Russian statehood. There were no arguments testifying to the incompetence of their authors (in particular, the argument that the use yo cannot be optional, because in orthography, as if, in principle, options are unacceptable3). There were no near-scientific and pseudo-scientific arguments, including esoteric ones (that yo in the Russian alphabet, it is no coincidence that it is listed under the “holy, mystical” number seven) and nationalist (that due to the lack yo in the book of the great Russian writer Leo Tolstoy, the Russian surname Levin turned into Jewish Levin, and also that they reject the letter yo those who are characterized by "irritation at everything pronounced Russian"). There were no direct insults to opponents. It never occurred to anyone that writing Kremlin tree less patriotic than Kremlin tree.
All this obscurantism, unfortunately, appeared in the late 1990s and continues today. Of course, not in the works of linguists: a scientific discussion about the use of yo, and other orthographic issues are being conducted quite correctly within the linguistic community. But in recent years, there has been a flourishing of what Academician A. A. Zaliznyak calls "amateur linguistics": people who are far from academic science, basing their views not on a strict scientific basis, but on their own, have joined the conversation about the modern Russian language and its history. thoughts and attitudes. “Where the criterion of a serious scientific analysis of the problem is discarded, motives of a taste, emotional, and especially ideological order will certainly come forward in its place - with all the social dangers that follow from this,” A. A. Zaliznyak rightly points out. We come across similar phenomena typical of amateur linguistics - a manifestation of one's own taste, heightened emotionality (sometimes going beyond the limits of decency), an appeal to readers who share a certain ideology - we encounter when reading menacing articles and interviews of "yofikators" -amateurs. They tell of the "crime against the mother tongue" committed by those who write e instead of yo, there are theses that are against yo a “holy struggle” is being waged, a set of pseudo-patriotic clichés is repeated, regrets are expressed about the absence of a law that would presuppose – literally – repression for not writing yo. Its unstoppable defenders call this letter “the most unfortunate”, “publican”, while operating with such concepts far from scientific terminology as “extermination” of the letter, “monstrous distortions of the native language”, “ugliness”, “mockery”, “foreign terror” and etc., and in every way they try to convince native speakers that writing e instead of yo - a) a gross spelling error and b) a sign of lack of patriotism.
They are trying, admittedly, not without success. The myth that writing e instead of yo in all cases, it is a violation of the norms of Russian writing, which is now shared by many native speakers, including writers, public figures, journalists, and many officials. Under the pressure of "yofikators" mandatory spelling yo is now accepted in many print and electronic media, as well as in official documents of a number of regions of Russia, for example, the Ulyanovsk region, where the letter yo in 2005, even a monument was erected. At the same time, the zeal of officials, their hasty introduction yo into the practice of writing did not go unnoticed by publicists: “spelling national project” ironically calls the new cult of the letter yo writer, journalist, philologist R. G. Leibov.
We want to draw the reader's attention to the wording that can often be heard from the mouths of "yofikators" who spread the myth of the "war against yo", and people who are already in the grip of this myth: "there are 33 letters in the Russian alphabet, the letter yo no one canceled, therefore, writing e instead of yo - error". Many do not know what to object to this, and agree: yes, indeed, since the letter yo no one canceled e instead of yo, seems to be a bug. In fact, the first two theses in this formulation are absolutely fair, no one denies them, but the third one does not correspond to reality and does not follow from the first two at all! Yes, there are 33 letters in the Russian alphabet, yes, yo no one canceled, however, according to the current rules of Russian spelling, this letter is used selectively in ordinary printed texts - that's how things are. It must be admitted that the cunning combination in one sentence of truthful statements with a false conclusion confuses many.
And one more important note. From the several previous paragraphs, the reader may erroneously conclude that both the author of the article and other linguists who oppose the forced “yofification” of Russian texts have some kind of strange dislike for yo and speak of the introduction of this letter, which has taken place in some contexts, with regret. This, by the way, is another of the myths spread by the “yofikators”: as if their opponents hate the letter yo and are striving with all their might to expel it from the Russian alphabet. Of course, this is not really the case. It is hard to imagine how one can hate this or that letter: a literate person, a person who loves his native language, cherishes all his letters and words, the norms of the language and the existing spelling rules are just as dear to him. The author, as well as fellow linguists who hold a similar position, do not oppose yo, a against the emerging cult of this letter, against the transformation of a private spelling problem into a political issue, against the absurd situation when a person who writes according to the rules, are accused of illiteracy and disregard for their native language. We are not at all conducting a "holy struggle" with the letter yo - we are trying to resist the aggressive expansion of militant dilettantism.
However, among the supporters of mandatory yo(we are still talking about native speakers - non-linguists) includes not only "yofikators", inflating a secondary linguistic issue to the scale of a national problem, and their followers, unknowingly believing that non-writing yo - this is indeed a grave mistake. In sequential use yo native speakers are interested, who, due to the presence of phonemes in their names, patronymics, surnames<о>after a soft consonant or combination
Indeed, in recent years, the number of such situations has increased when, due to the different spelling of the name, patronymic or surname in different documents, their carriers could not formalize an inheritance, receive maternity capital and faced other bureaucratic delays. “For fifty years, legal services have been writing names and surnames in passports and other documents without yo, - emphasizes A.V. Superanskaya, - and now they demand that the "owners" of the documents prove to them that the names Seleznev and Seleznev identical that Semyon and Semyon- the same name. And if a person does not know what to object, he is sent to court to prove that he is he.
It is significant, however, that such legal incidents related to writing / non-writing yo, until the beginning of the 1990s (i.e., before the "yofikators" introduced confusion into this area of Russian writing), there was practically no ...
But what about linguists? Are their voices heard? Is there room for scientific debate in this environment? Yes, there are still papers coming out that argue for consistent use yo and against such use. As a rule, they repeat the arguments already expressed earlier and cited by us above. So, recently, one of the discussion platforms has become the journal "Science and Life", in which in 2008 the already cited article by A.V. Superanskaya "" and - a few months later - the article by N. A. Yeskova "" were published. If A. V. Superanskaya spoke mainly about the fact that the mandatory yo would ensure the correct pronunciation of proper names and prevent legal incidents, then N. A. Eskova noted that “the introduction of the mandatory use yo for all texts is fraught with danger ... for Russian culture, "meaning the publication of texts by authors of the 18th - 19th centuries. "By entering "mandatory" yo as a general rule, we will not protect the texts of our classics from barbaric modernization,” warns N. A. Eskova.
In other words, the arguments of linguists - supporters and opponents of sequential use yo- remained the same, it is hardly possible to add something new to them. Perhaps the following argument is even more relevant today: mandatory yo complicate school practice. Indeed, if we accept non-writing yo mistake, it can be perceived as an additional punitive tool, and the attention of students will be focused not on really important spellings, but on the particular problem of writing two periods (as it was in the 1940s). Given the heated discussions around schooling going on in our society, it seems that adding another controversial issue to them would be at least unreasonable.
An attempt (in our opinion, quite successful) to put an end to the dispute that has dragged on for 200 years was made by the authors of the complete academic reference book “Rules of Russian Spelling and Punctuation” (M., 2006), approved by the Spelling Commission of the Russian Academy of Sciences. In this book, for the first time, it is clearly stated that the use of the letter yo may be sequential or selective. Consistent use is obligatory in the following types of printed texts: a) in texts with sequentially placed stress marks (these include, among other things, head words in dictionaries and encyclopedias); b) in books addressed to young children; c) in educational texts for elementary school students and foreigners studying Russian. At the same time, the most important reservation was made: at the request of the author or editor, any book can be printed sequentially with the letter yo.
In ordinary printed texts, according to the handbook, the letter yo used selectively. It is recommended to use it in the following cases: 1) to prevent misidentification of a word, for example: everything, sky, in flight, perfect(as opposed to the words everything, sky, summer, perfect), including to indicate the place of stress in a word, for example: bucket, we know(Unlike bucket, let's find out); 2) to indicate the correct pronunciation of a word - either rare, not well known enough, or having a common incorrect pronunciation, for example: gyozy, surfing, fleur, harder, slit, including to indicate the correct stress, for example: fable, brought, carried away, condemned, newborn, filler; 3) in proper names - surnames, geographical names, for example: Konenkov, Neyolova, Catherine Deneuve, Schrödinger, Dezhnev, Koshelev, Chebyshev, Vyoshenskaya, Olekma.
The attentive reader will notice that the rules for the selective use of a letter yo become much more detailed. Unlike the code of 1956, a recommendation has been added to use yo in words that have a common mispronunciation; in addition, proper names are highlighted in a separate paragraph. In a letter to V. T. Chumakov dated October 21, 2009, the executive editor of the reference book, V. V. Lopatin, points out: “In the following editions of the reference book, recommendation in this wording (yo in proper names - V.P.) may well be replaced by mandatory ... which is quite consistent with the wishes of our “yofikators”, and with the decision of the Ministry of Education and Science of May 3, 2007 on the mandatory use of the letter yo in proper names.
In our opinion, adherence to the rules set out in the handbook will help to reconcile supporters and opponents of mandatory yo and to remove the acuteness of many questions connected with the use of this letter. Indeed, on the one hand: (a) authors who wish to “fair” their own books are entitled to do so; b) the requirement for mandatory yo in head words in dictionaries and encyclopedias, in publications for those who are just learning to read or who are studying Russian as a non-native language; c) the problems of bearers of names, patronymics, surnames are solved, in which yo; d) an indication of the correct pronunciation of words that cause difficulties in reading is provided - and on the other hand: e) Russian writing will not be overloaded with diacritics that are inconvenient for writers and readers; f) the texts of the classics will be saved from "barbaric modernization", and the school from an additional "stumbling block" in the lessons of the Russian language.
Of course, this is not enough for the irreconcilable "yofikators" who do not want to make any compromises; their passionate struggle with common sense does not stop. But we hope that the majority of our readers, who are familiar with the history of scientific discussion around yo, with arguments for and against consistent use of this letter, with the prescriptions of the 1956 rules and their fuller interpretation in the new academic handbook, it will be easier to separate genuine information from false information, and competent opinion from profanity. Therefore, we suggest that you remember truism #7.
ABC's #7. Use of a letter yo obligatory in texts with consistently placed stress marks, in books for young children (including textbooks for elementary school students), in textbooks for foreigners. In ordinary printed texts yo is written in cases where a misreading of a word is possible, when it is necessary to indicate the correct pronunciation of a rare word or to prevent a speech error. letter yo should also be written in proper names. In other cases, the use yo optional, i.e. optional.
Literature
1. Eskova N.A. About the letter ё // Science and Life. 2000. No. 4.
2. Eskova N. A. // Science and Life. 2008. No. 7.
3. Zaliznyak A. A. Notes on Amateur Linguistics. M., 2010.
4. Review of proposals for improving Russian spelling. M., 1965.
5. Rules of Russian spelling and punctuation. M., 1956.
6. Rules of Russian spelling and punctuation. Complete academic reference book / Ed. V. V. Lopatina. M., 2006.
7. Superanskaya A. V. // Science and Life. 2008. No. 1.
V. M. Pakhomov,
Candidate of Philology,
editor-in-chief of the Gramota.ru portal
1 Many thanks to k. f. n. Yu. A. Safonova, who provided the original letter to the author of the article.
2 A significant place in the scientific discussion around yo occupies the question of how the consistent use of this letter contributes to the implementation of the main principle of Russian spelling - phonemic. Since it will be very difficult for a non-linguistic reader to understand this issue, we allow ourselves, when reviewing the arguments for and against yo omit this paragraph; we will only say that here, too, there are arguments both in favor of the consistent use yo and against such use.
3 The fact that this is not true is evidenced, for example, by such equal spelling options as mattress and mattress, sparrow and sparrows, hydrocephalus and hydrocephalus and many others. others
E, e (called: e) is one of the letters found in all modern Cyrillic alphabets. 6th in a row in the Russian alphabet, as well as in Belarusian and Bulgarian; 7th - in Ukrainian, Macedonian and Serbian; It is also used in writing among non-Slavic peoples.
In the Church and Old Slavonic alphabets - the 6th, is called respectively "is" and "ѥst" (from the Greek. "εστι"); the Cyrillic symbol - , has the meaning of the number 5, in the Glagolitic it looks like , and corresponds to the number 6.
It came from the letter Ε, ε (epsilon) of the Greek alphabet (the appearance of the Glagolitic spelling is sometimes also associated with Semitic scripts). In a form identical to the Latin "E, e", it has been used since 1707-1711, when the civil script was introduced.
Previously, only an open style was used for a printed lowercase letter: a narrow one, in the form of a square E, and a wide one, in the form of an elongated rounded Є (it was written only at the beginning of a word and in specific grammatical forms, sometimes after vowels). The development of small handwritten and printed e took place in the 17th century. in old Russian cursive, and before that its form was close to either lowercase Greek ε (epsilon) or є.
Pronunciation
In Russian, pronunciation depends on the stress and position of the letter in the word:
Being under stress, after vowels and at the beginning of words it denotes the sound pair [ye], is reduced in the pre-stressed 1st syllable to [yi e], in other unstressed syllables it sounds like [y];
After consonants (except for w, c and sh, and individual borrowings, like molybdenum, amber, panel, tempo, highway, Graves' disease, etc., and abbreviations such as esdek, eser), softens the previous consonant and sound under stress [e ], (in the 1st pre-stressed syllable - [and e]; in other unstressed syllables - [b]);
Under stress after w, c and w (and other consonants in the above individual cases) means [e], in the 1st pre-stressed syllable - [s e], in other syllables without stress - [b];
Also, sometimes the letter Yo is written like E. The reason for this is the acceleration of writing, due to the exclusion of dots, but when printing texts, such a replacement is usually not recommended.
The meaning of the letter in the Belarusian language is basically the same, only due to the greater phonetic nature of the language, the reading rules are somewhat simpler: it is impossible for the preceding consonant to be softened (in this case, it is written e, not e: tendenciya, shest), with a strong reduction, other letters are also used (shascі - six, Myafodziy - Methodius).
In Ukrainian, it is similar to the Russian letter E (and the equivalent of the Russian letter E is the letter Є).
In the Serbian language, it is always pronounced as [e], since in Serbian writing softening and iotation are indicated explicitly, with special letters for soft consonants (“lately” - “at the last time”).
As in Russian, in Bulgarian, it softens the preceding consonant, and after vowels and at the beginning of the word it is pronounced with iot (ezik [yezik]). This sound is typical for the east of Bulgaria. In the west of the country, the pronunciation corresponds to the Russian "e".
Derived letters "E"
From the letter E of the Cyrillic alphabet in the writings of various peoples branched off: Ѥ (used in Old Russian, Old Slavonic, Old Serbian, etc.; until the 17th century it was used in the Serbian version of the Church-sl. language), Є (used in the current Ukrainian, old Serbian, Church Slavonic), Yo (in Russian and Belarusian); from the Glagolitic form came the inscription E (exists in the Russian and Belarusian languages, previously it was also in Bulgarian and Serbian).
In the near future, the mark È, used in the Macedonian language to distinguish between homonyms, may become an independent letter (“Everything that you write will be used (can be used) against you” - “Cè what you can write and use it against you!”). Sometimes it already occupies a separate position in a number of some computer fonts and encodings.
In modern times, the Russian language is developing every day. Neologisms appear more often and acquire a new trend. But the seventh letter of the alphabet, "ё", is less and less given due importance in print. It went down in history in Soviet times in 1942 and remains to this day. However, many officials, when drawing up important documents identifying the identity of a citizen, or belonging, consider it optional to use the letter “e”, replacing it with “e”.
The Federal Law of the Russian Federation of July 1, 2005, No. 53 “On the State Language of the Russian Federation”, Article 3, obliges the use of the letter “ё” in all official documents, such as an identity card, passport, civil status registration certificates, education documents in names and surnames of citizens of the Russian Federation.
You can download the text of federal law 53 "On the state language of the Russian Federation"
Rules for writing E and Yo
The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in 2009 approved a ruling that the letters "e" and "ё" in various documents of the same person are equivalent, and valid in all rights, if the person's identity is identified. Disputable issues arise when drawing up official papers of a pension fund, when buying real estate, registering a residence permit and any other significant documents. In more than 2.5 thousand Russian surnames, it is necessary to use the letter "e" but write "e".
Thus, the law “On the Spelling of the Letters “e” and “ё” in the documents says that it is necessary to oblige a person to change acts due to the use of a particular letter only when the semantic meaning in the surname, name, patronymic or city names.
Spelling E and Yo in the surname and name
When in the name, surname, city of residence or other significant facts for any documentation there is the letter “ё”, which is written as “e”, this can cause inconvenience when buying or selling real estate, applying for citizenship, and so on.
It happens that the letter “e” is written in the passport, and “e” in the birth certificate. In this case, additional references and corrections of errors in the documents may be required. Citizens of the Russian Federation often seek advice on such issues. to the Ministry of Education and Science .
The Rules of Russian Spelling and Punctuation, certified by the Academy of Sciences of the USSR in 1956, indicate that the letter “ё” should be used in cases of warning the incorrectness of the stated word. Thus, regional bodies represented by officials are required to enter the letter “ё” in proper names (first name, last name and patronymic) in the document, as detailed in letter No. 159/03 dated May 3, 2017.
Examples
Case 1
One of the employees of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation applied to the Pension Fund with a request to accrue an insurance pension. The citizen was refused, referring to the different reading of the letters in the spelling.
In the identity card, the surname is spelled through "yo" and the letter "e" appears in the owner's work book. The Supreme Court explained to the man that there is no double meaning of the letter "e", since the letter "e" is not meaningful and does not affect the identification data of the person.
For additional confirmation, it was necessary to contact the Institute of the Russian Language. V. V. Vinogradov, where it was confirmed that the “e” and “e” in the surname Solovyov, in various letters is the same surname belonging to the same citizen. In this case, the meaning of the surname is not lost, and the refusal of the Pension Fund authorities contradicts the constitutional right of a citizen of the Russian Federation to a pension.
Case 2
Another letter to the Ministry of Education and Science dated 10/01/2012, IR 829/08 “on the spelling of the letters “e” and “e” in official documentation” confirms the law of Russian spelling and punctuation, its importance and use.
The Moscow Regional Court recently stated that it is possible to fine a person whose name contains such a mistake. However, the practice of the law says otherwise. A similar incident occurred in the young Snegirev family. A daughter was born, in the birth certificate of which was written Snegireva N.
They refused to receive maternity capital, referring to the fact that the surnames of the mother and daughter are different. The couple had to give up their original surname and forward the documents to the proper letter "e". Thus, all family members received the same last name.