Can anyone explain why when they talk about the connection between the Russian and Arabic languages, they don’t talk about their connection with Sanskrit, and when they talk about the connection between Russian and Sanskrit, they don’t talk about their connection with Arabic, and they simply don’t talk about the connection between Arabic and Sanskrit ?
Original taken from blagin_anton There were no riddles and there are no words. There is a sleeping consciousness
Codes R A
It is a fact that any Russian word or an expression (idiom) that has no motivation in Russian is explained through Arabic, its roots.
Arabic unmotivated words and expressions are explained through Russian language.
All unmotivated words and expressions of other languages ultimately go back to Russian or Arabic. And this is regardless of history or geography.
There are no exceptions, the etymologies are laconic, in the corridor of axiomaticity.
So, magpie in Arabic means “thief”, despite the fact that no bird is designated by this word in Arabic.
Thus, there is no need to talk about borrowing.
During the search for etymological solutions, it turned out that not nations invent for themselves language, and language forms peoples and not only, but the entire system called Life.
It turned out that the words that we use to communicate are at the same time elements of the programs according to which the evolution of Life from organelles occurs plant cells to human communities and which control the behavior of any biological object, as well as processes, including physiological, social and even spontaneous.
Due to the action of verbal programs, the periodic law of chemical elements, discovered by D. I. Mendeleev, extends far beyond the boundaries of chemistry and even covers ethnic groups that are distributed according to the linguistic-ethnic table like chemical elements, so that there are correlations between the first and second.
In particular Russian ethnicity corresponds to hydrogen , A Arabic - helium .
This correspondence can be traced by numbers, place in the table, mutual structure and function.
Russian and Arabic languages form unified linguistic system, which is the core of all languages, and like the Sun, consisting of hydrogen and helium, and giving physical light, forms “semantic sun”, giving non-physical light that allows one to distinguish things of the spiritual world and reveal all the secrets of the Universe.
The materials on the website of N.N. Vashkevich, Arabist, candidate, will tell you about this in detail. philosophical sciences and military translator: http://nnvashkevich.narod.ru/.
Some examples that personally surprised me:
"...You know that fish is for the Jews—sacred food? Do you know that kashrut rules prohibit eating fish if it does not have scales, for example, an eel? Do you know why this happens? Of course, you don’t know, because no one knows. Even Jews! Neither of them knows this. But no one knows this, because they neglect both the Russian language and Arabic. Do you know what the Russian word “fish” means in Arabic? No, you don't know? So I'll tell you. In Arabic this is "loan interest". Do you also not know what scales are called in Arabic? So I’ll tell you: flu:s (فلوس). The same word means "money". If you haven’t guessed what’s going on, what’s the trick here, then I’ll tell you this too. The meaning of this ban is simple: where there is no money, a Jew has nothing to do. Do you also not know where this word “fulus” (scales) comes from in Arabic? So I'll tell you. From the Russian word "to flatten". This is how money was made, by minting... "
"...The Arabic word أراضي "ara:dy "earth", from where the Hebrew - Aretz "earth" cannot be explained in Arabic. Because it comes from the Russian "roda". After all, the earth will give birth, and we will harvest what has been born. But the Russian word “earth” cannot be explained in Russian. Because it comes from the Arabic root زمل = حمل ЗМЛ=ХМЛ “to bear, to be pregnant”.
What follows from this? And the fact that the Hebrew word aretz "land" ultimately comes from the Russian language..."
"... The term dialectic is understood by both ancient and modern philosophers as “dispute,” as a word related to the Greek dialogue, supposedly originally the art of conversation. In fact, the only philosopher from the entire philosophical army who understood this term correctly was Plato He taught that dialectics is the decomposition of the complex. This is precisely the meaning of the term when read in Arabic and from right to left: CT CLIT. Thousands of philosophers did not heed the teacher. We were particularly unlucky. We were simply dumbfounded by this term..."
.<<It is a fact that any Russian word or expression (idiom) that has no motivation in the Russian language is explained through the Arabic language, its roots. Arabic unmotivated words and expressions are explained through the Russian language. All unmotivated words and expressions of other languages ultimately go back to Russian or Arabic. And this is regardless of history or geography.
There are no exceptions, the etymologies are laconic, in the corridor of axiomaticity. So, magpie in Arabic means “thief”, despite the fact that no bird is designated by this word in Arabic. Thus, there is no need to talk about borrowing.
During the search for etymological solutions, it turned out that It is not peoples who invent a language for themselves, but a language that forms nations and not only, but the entire system called Life. It turned out that the words that we use to communicate are at the same time elements of the programs according to which the evolution of Life occurs from the organelles of plant cells to human communities and which control the behavior of any biological object, as well as processes, including physiological, social and even spontaneous.>>
N.N. Vashkevich.
There was and is no riddle of the word. There is a sleeping consciousness. .
Once the language core and accompanying universal language code are discovered, there are no secrets associated with language.
The essence of the discovery boils down to the following.
All Russian unmotivated words and expressions (idioms) are motivated by Arabic roots, and incomprehensible (unmotivated) Arabic vocabulary, in particular Islamic terms, is motivated by the Russian language.
All other unmotivated words of any language are ultimately reduced to either Russian or Arabic. This pattern does not depend on history or geography. Thus, the linguistic core consists of two languages, Russian and Arabic (RA).
Just a few examples.
Shark in Arabic means “gluttonous”, ram means “innocent”, lark “flapping its wings without flying”, magpie means “thief”, honeycomb means “six-fold”, Kalmyks means “camel breeders”, Kara Sea means “icy”.
These kinds of words cannot be called borrowings, because Arabic there are none.
From idioms.
In the idiom "moving matchmaker", not matchmaker, but the Arabic word savvaha "avid traveler", in the idiom "nightmare (cold, etc.) dog" is not a dog, but the Arabic kabos (read the other way around, i.e. in Arabic ) "nightmare". There are no exceptions, so it makes no sense to multiply examples, especially since the etymological dictionary of Russian idioms has already been published.
Here are some examples of Arabic unmotivated vocabulary.
Ashwel means "left-handed" in Arabic.
Salavat - “prayers”, from the Russian to glorify, especially since another name for prayer in Arabic means literally “glorification”.
The Koran in reverse reading gives in Russian NAROC, which according to Dahl’s dictionary means COVENANT.
Sufism, (written TSUF) from Russian. deserts.
Hajj, pronounced: khazhzhon, “pilgrimage” from Russian walking.
If we take the ancient Greek civilization with its language and mythology, it turns out that the heroes and gods of myths have “speaking” surnames if you read them in Arabic. Let's take this short story: "Jealous Hera sent a mental illness to Hercules, and he, in a fit of rage, killed his children born to his beloved wife Megara." In Greek these names mean nothing. And in Arabic, gera means “jealous,” ger ’aqel means “mad,” and megara means “object of jealousy.”
The list is easy to continue. The god of the sea element Poseidon in reverse reading, in Arabic means “storm-causing” (who dares object?), the mother of Bacchus, the god of wine, Semele, is not “earth”, as the Greeks themselves thought, this name contains the Arabic word samula “to get drunk” ". Actually, Russian hops come from the same source. The newfangled word sommelier, “a specialist in wines and spirits,” is not a French word at all, as we see, but an Arabic one. As for Bacchus himself, his name in Arabic means “rude, impudent, impudent,” that is, the kind a drunk person becomes.
And here is a trace of the Russian language. in ancient Greek myths. Laocoon is the only one of the defenders of Troy who exclaimed: the horse is a fake. In fact, he simply translated his name from Russian to Greek. And perhaps the most important word is theos "god". It comes from the Russian SVET. The letter vav also conveys the sound O. But the most important god is Zeus, which in Arabic means LIGHT. You just need to remove the Greek ending.
Available in ancient greek mythology and a joint Russian-Arab trail. Aphrodite, according to available dictionaries, is translated as “born from foam.” But to give birth is a Russian word, and not at all Greek, while ʿafr is in Arabic “the foamy crest of a sea wave.”
And the effect of RA extends beyond the boundaries of myth-making. There are Greek words in our language. For example, a chameleon, in Greek “earth lion” (?), jellyfish - it seems to have no meaning at all. We just know what it is Greek word, and that's the end of the matter. The first name in Arabic means “protected by color”, the second means “burning”. You can't say more precisely. In Mediterranean resorts, according to media reports in last year Tens of thousands of people who suffered from the stinging tentacles of jellyfish turned to doctors.
Particularly striking in its meaninglessness is the medical terminology supposedly Greek origin. Trachoma - “rough”, syndrome - “running together”, leprosy (leprosy) - “lumpy”. In fact, the first term is from the Arabic itrahamma “bad vision”, the second is (when read backwards) “half-disease”, the third is “lion’s disease”, literally “disease of the maned one”. Al-'afrus "maned head". This is the name of a lion in Arabic. This disease is also called in Arabic: “lion disease.” One of the main signs of leprosy, according to medical reference books, this is the so-called "lion's face".
Everything that has been said fully applies to reading the dark places of sacred books in a variety of languages.
Dark places in the Koran are read with “Russian eyes”, then they become understandable. Biblical texts are sometimes read in Arabic, sometimes in Russian. We will not burden the reader with Arabic texts, but we will work with the Bible, which is more familiar to the reader.
Let's start right from the first book of Moses, Genesis. In Hebrew it is called Bereshit. The Jews named the chapters of the book not according to their meaning, but according to the first word of the text. In this case, it is the first word of the first phrase: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Bereshit means "in the beginning."
It is literally difficult for a modern person to understand this phrase. The Earth is far from the first object in the Universe. If there are doubts about the correctness of this understanding, one must turn to an already proven method. This method did not come out of nowhere. I do roughly the same thing when I read Arabic texts every day. If the meaning does not add up, it means that I have identified the root incorrectly somewhere or have placed the vowels incorrectly. We have to look for another reading option. So it is here.
We look at the word Bereshit with “Arab eyes.” Now the same letters are read like this: birasih “with your head.” We will show the phonetic and morphological features of the word. Bi is the preposition of an instrument, ras "head, in Hebrew resh, them is a continuous pronoun of the third person (him). The final aspiration in some cases, depending on the context, can be read as it, which happened in Hebrew.
So, we have come to the conclusion that we are talking about the fact that God created the heavens and the earth with his head, i.e. according to his own providence. First I thought, and then I created. We usually do the opposite.
Below we read that God created man in his own image and likeness. It's completely unclear. Is man, a vessel of sin, filled with envy, selfishness and all possible sins, including the seven mortal ones, similar to God? I can’t imagine a God filled with physical impurities that a person is forced to get rid of every day, sometimes walking around in small ways, and sometimes in big ways.
Naturally, in such cases they resort to allegory to explain. But this method is too ambiguous and often leads to arbitrary interpretations, which, in my opinion, is unacceptable for sacred books. Did God really not have the words to express his thoughts clearly? My method of penetrating the true meaning is different. Resorting to it, I again look for suspicious words where a semantic glitch could occur.
It is clear that the error lies in the phrase “in the image and likeness”. It is immediately clear to an Arabist that the original most likely sounded in Arabic. Arabic texts are replete with such synonymous repetitions. Well, let's translate it into Arabic. And you may need to listen to the translation with “Russian ears.” The translation is: "bi-misli". It is clear that this is Russian “by thought”, by design. I think it is hardly worth challenging the simple and extremely clear idea that the Creator created everything, including man, according to his providence.
It's over. Let's move on to other riddles.
One of greatest mysteries The Bible consists of a six-day creation. You cannot create everything in six days. This contradicts the laws of nature, which are the laws of the Creator. God will not contradict or try to refute himself.
In general, anyone who undertakes to reveal the meaning of biblical and other sacred texts must grasp a simple idea. It is formulated in three words: God does not speak nonsense. One might add: His language is simple and clear. If there is stupidity or dark passages in the texts, it is not His fault. This is the fault of translators or interpreters, and indeed of the prophets themselves, the direct producers of texts as revelations. Sometimes they hear something wrong.
There are many versions of interpretation of the text of “Shestidenev”. Some exist with rights seemingly recognized by the church, as long as they are presented in theological literature. The trouble is that there is not a single logical one. Let's try to find a logical one using our method.
Let us turn directly to the text about the Creation of the World. In Arabic, this chapter is called takwin, which means “creation”, “creation”. But this word also has another meaning: “structure”, “device”. Such a meaning does not imply a process unfolding in historical sequence. Agree, this changes things somewhat.
It is also useful to note that the text has a weekly structure, since seven days make up a week. Starting from this thought, we immediately exclude from the list possible languages original Greek. The Greeks did not know the seven-part week, but divided the month into decades. Ancient Hebrew is also excluded from such languages, because the Jews named the days of the week not with numbers, as is done in the text (day one, day two...), but with letters, i.e., their names: yom alef, yom bet, Yom Gimel...
The Arabs number the days of the week with numbers: day one, day two, day three. Only Friday is left out of this count. It is called jum'a "conciliarity", i.e. "day of congregational prayer." It is clear that this day was renamed in connection with the establishment of Mohammedanism in Arabia. Just like the name Sunday, in Arabic yom ahad "day one" or "day one", appeared in connection with the event of the resurrection of Christ.
As we have seen, the Russian language is always accompanied by Arabic and vice versa. Let us focus our attention on the Russian word DAYS, despite the fact that this word is considered a translation, possibly, of an Arabic word. If you remove the softness of the pronunciation of the sound N, and the softness-hardness of consonants usually does not differ in other languages, you will get the word DAYS.
It is clear that we are not talking about the duration of the creation of the world, but about the structure of Being, its levels. Otherwise, about the seven-bottom world.
Now it is easy to rewrite the text indicating these levels, allowing yourself a little editing. After all, some elements of the text could appear due to a misunderstanding initially. Let's not pay attention for now special attention for these little things.
Day one. The first level of existence is cosmic plasma, the substance of the sun and stars. As science has found, cosmic plasma makes up more than 99% of the detected matter.
Day two. The second level is chemical, translated from Arabic as “hidden”, cf. hema "dwelling, tent". Hidden in the sense that it is not accessible to direct observation.
Day three. The third level is “physical, bodily”, a level where the main concept is the body, which can be touched, seen, weighed, etc.
Day four. The fourth level is the “vegetation level”, flora.
Day five. The fifth level is the “level of the animal world,” fauna.
Day six. The sixth level is the “human level”.
Day seven. The seventh level is the “level of information fields,” the level of the Spirit, called in the Bible the day of rest. According to the consonance of the Arabic sab'at "seven" and the Russian sleep, ar. Subat "hibernation", Jews strictly forbade themselves to do any work on this day.
Look what happened. With such a minimal semantic twist, the text becomes not only extremely understandable, but reveals to us scientific picture peace. It is clear that just a few centuries ago any possibility of understanding it was excluded, since the idea of the level organization of systems developed in science only in the 20th century. Tsiolkovsky also wrote that man consists of atoms. At that time, the great scientist could still afford a statement that carried the burden of man’s dark ideas about the structure of the world.
In fact, a person does not consist of atoms, but of organs, organs consist of tissues, tissues consist of cells, cells consist of organelles, organelles consist of molecules, molecules consist of atoms. And this entire multi-level structure is immersed in semantic fields that control a person at all levels of his organization.
What are we talking about if even in our time not all scientists are close to the idea of a level organization of being, which, as it turns out, is presented, as if in a disguised form, in the ancient text of the Bible.
Let us return, however, to the biblical text. Let's look at the names of its main characters, Moses and his brother Aaron. As we could observe in fragments of ancient Greek mythology, the gods and heroes there bore names that were incomprehensible in Greek understanding, but which instantly became “speaking” when viewed through the prism of Arabic and Russian languages. Jewish legends are no exception in this regard.
The name Moses is believed to mean "saved from the water" in Hebrew. Indeed, there is such a fact in his biography, but to his role in Jewish history this event has almost nothing to do with it. It is even possible that this story was inserted into his biography in order to justify the understanding of the name suggested by the Hebrew language. If we look at the name Moses in the Arabic, Koranic version: Musa, then when we restore the guttural articulations that have fallen in all Semitic languages, two reading versions appear.
Restoring the final sound of 'ayin gives us musa', "received power from God."
And when restoring the guttural sound of the sound s in this name, in Arabic studies this is called emphaticism, giving the word moussa “receiving the covenant.” Here we conventionally denote emphaticity by doubling the letter s.
Anyone who is familiar at least firsthand with the history of Moses will note to himself that two main events are recorded in the name of Moses, which determined not only the fate of Moses himself, but the fate of the Jewish people.
The first happened at the burning bush, when Moses' attention was attracted by a strange bush that burned without burning. And suddenly, from behind him, the voice of God was heard, who gave him instructions to save the Jewish people, who were at that time in slavery Egyptian pharaoh. Moses, being tongue-tied and indecisive, began to refuse, but God gave him strength and determination, indicating that the speech part of the task could be completed by his eloquent brother Aaron.
The second happened on the fiftieth day after the Exodus, during the ascent of Moses to Mount Sinai, during the so-called Sinai revelation. It's about about a book called the Torah, otherwise called the Pentateuch of Moses, where the covenants of God (mitzvot) were included.
Knowing that emphatic sounds fall, and in their place the sound Ts appears, we can easily understand that the Hebrew word mitzvot has the same root as the Arabic moussa (t) “covenants” and in the name Moussa itself.
It was time to take a close look at the name of his eloquent brother Aaron. In the Arabic version it sounds like Harun. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to guess that this is the Russian word for talker. True, in the Arabic version the weak consonant vav was dropped, but it is dropped often in Arabic, which is why it is called weak.
It should not escape us that one brother’s name is revealed through the Arabic language, the name of another brother through the Russian language. Is this not an indication of the key with which we are now clearing up the dark places of the Bible? And not only. Previously, we used these two languages to clarify the names of the heroes and gods of ancient Greek mythology. It was shown earlier that all Russian idioms without exception are also revealed. Their number in the Russian language is in the thousands.
These are not hypotheses, because the work “Idioms. Etymological Dictionary” has already been published. It must be said that idioms have never been the subject of etymology. This is the first time such work has been done.
Moreover, a dictionary of etymological and hidden meanings of all unmotivated Russian vocabulary has been prepared. At the same time, the dictionary included not only native Russian words, but also borrowings from the most different languages. Two issues (up to letter 3 inclusive) have already been published.
Some experience has also been gained in revealing the meaning of the darkest part of the vocabulary of any language - toponyms. For example, the Kara Sea. No one knows what the name means. There are no versions. With the use of Arabic the word becomes extremely clear. This turns out to be the Cold Sea. Who can argue with that? The method gives extremely concise results, as they say, in the corridor of axiomaticity.
Let's return to the Sinai revelation. According to legend, Moses, having ascended Mount Sinai, received from God not only the Book of Covenants (Torah), but also two stone tablets on which the Ten Commandments were inscribed.
The issue with the commandments is not very clear. There are much more of them in the Talmud - 613. This suggests that you can come up with as many commandments as you need. Why exactly ten? But here we will be concerned not so much with the number of commandments as with the tablets themselves. After all, the Ten Commandments are set out in the text of the Torah. Why else are there tablets? Let's try to solve this riddle in a proven way.
Two tablets in Arabic lohathein. Strange. Because two languages in Arabic are logatein. The point is not only that these two words differ in sounds that are very similar to each other. It is also very important that Moses, being an Egyptian in language, could not distinguish between these two Arabic sounds by definition. They are only available in Arabic. In all Semitic languages they have fallen. There are none. Neither one nor the other. In some languages, pale traces of them remain in the form of sounds similar to aspiration.
So what did God tell Moses: two tablets or two tongues?
We can accept the first version, then nothing becomes clearer. We can accept the second version. Then everything is explained. God revealed the keys to one of the brothers. Keys to understanding sacred texts in general, not just the Bible. Keys to understanding all words in general, not just Russian and Arabic. As for the material of the “tablets,” it is not stone, but the Arabic word for fireplace, “secret,” “hidden.” In our case, “unsolved”.
It should be noted that Moses had doubts about the tablets. Which version should I choose? Stone tablets? Or unsolved clues in the form of two languages?
He chose both. Apparently, just in case. The bilingual version is embodied in something sacred for Jews bakery product called challah. In Russian vernacular it is called pletenka. It consists of two dough tongues woven together, sprinkled with poppy seeds and baked. We use it, as they say, in vain, but for Jews it is a special Shabbat bread. Nobody knows, not even the Jews, why it is called that. What does the word challah mean? This Arabic word actually means "to unravel." And this is its meaning.
If you don’t untwist your two tongues, you will remain a fool (poppy in Arabic is to be a fool). Or you can understand it this way: while you’re a fool, you can’t untwist your two tongues.
Lairi Younes
2nd year student, medicalWowfacultyAGBOU VPO "Kazan State Medical University", Kazan
E-mail: number 5 ramiz @ mail . ru
Yakubova Liliya Syaitovna
scientific supervisor,Art. teacherDepartment of Russian and Tatar languagesGBOU VPO "Kazan State Medical University", Kazan
The purpose of this work is to compare nouns, adjectives and pronouns in Russian and Arabic.
A noun in Arabic is characterized by the categories of gender, number and case, animate-inanimate and definite-indefinite.
Nouns in Arabic have two genders - masculine and feminine. The suffix indicates that it is feminine -at-. In colloquial speech the final -T- no longer required: Talib(student) ―Talib(student).
It must be remembered that Russian nouns, masculine and female gender with b at the end of the word. In Russian and Arabic, the following nouns have the same gender:
1. Masculine nouns in both languages: day, rain, stone, cough, root, camp, zero, noon, path(road), dictionary etc.
2. Feminine nouns in both languages: life, thought, region, memory, degree etc.
3. Masculine nouns in Russian are feminine in Arabic: ship, fire, briefcase, path, play etc.
4. Feminine nouns in Russian are masculine in Arabic: pain, disease, eyebrow, breast, dirt, door, bone, bed, blood, Love, furniture, shoes, autumn, signature, dust, salt, notebook, etc.
5. Nouns that have synonyms of a different kind in Arabic: square―sāha(f.r.) and Maidan(m.r.), power―sulta(f.r.) and ruling(m.―r.).
In Arabic, as in Russian, there are exceptions to the rule of feminine nouns that do not have the suffix -at-: for example, ’ ummm– mother, nār―fire.
The Arabic language is not characterized by nouns denoting a profession or occupation and related in Russian to equally to both male and female persons: doctor, director, engineer, philologist etc. In Arabic, such nouns differ by gender, for example: tabub(male doctor) - tabūba(female doctor), mudarris(male teacher) - mudarrisa(female teacher), etc.
There is no category of neuter gender in Arabic, so in Arabic audiences there are often mistakes when the masculine gender is used instead of the neuter gender. For example: « Turn off the radio, becausehe bothers me» .
Unlike the Russian language, in Arabic nouns are distinguished by 3 numbers: singular, dual and plural. The dual form is formed using the ending -ani. The numeral “two” is not used: twobooks―kitābāni. The plural is formed in two ways:
a.with the help of external inflection ―ending ―yna: mu،allim(teacher) ―mu،allimyna(teachers) ;
b.using internal inflection (changing root vowels) by various models: kitāb(book) ―qutub(books), kalam(pencil) ―،aklam(pencils) etc. The second method is used more often than the first.
All inanimate nouns in plural agree with adjectives and verbs as feminine nouns. Yes, noun kitāb(book) in the singular is a masculine noun and agrees with a masculine adjective. But in the plural noun qutub(books) is consistent with the feminine singular adjective, which literally translates as “good books” (in Arabic, adjectives are in postposition in relation to nouns) and provokes errors in the Russian speech of Arab students.
It is also necessary to keep in mind that, unlike the Russian language, in Arabic all nouns denoting animals refer to inanimate (i.e., non-thinking), and therefore answer the question “what?”, and not “who?” This is where Arab students get errors like: « I saw a bear at the zoo», « The elephant defeated the tiger» etc.
The category of plural in Arabic in its meaning contains a connotation of collectiveness. This feature of the Arabic language is associated with the fact that it does not have only plural nouns that have the meaning of a single object or phenomenon (in Russian this is a group of nouns such as “trousers”, “vacations”, “glasses”, “days”). . In Arabic there are collective nouns that are only singular and collective nouns that can be formed into the plural. (For comparison, in Russian the noun “youth” has only a singular number, and “people” - “peoples” - has a singular and plural form). This contributes to the appearance in the speech of Arab students of errors like: “ Many young people came here».
The Russian case system also presents significant difficulties for Arabic students, which is caused by the divergence of verb control in Russian and Arabic and the difference in the distribution of case meanings. Thus, in the Arabic grammatical system there are only 3 cases: nominative, genitive and accusative.
The nominative, as in Russian, is, first of all, the case of the subject. However, Arab students often do not distinguish between nominative and accusative case and, using the subject in the accusative case. This is due to the fact that in Arabic, unlike Russian, the subject can be in the accusative case after certain particles (for example, the particle Inna- “truly”, “truth”, “really”. Wed: Indeed, Russia is a big country. The word Russia in Arabic has the accusative case); after a modal word perhaps (for example: Perhaps the weather is cold); in subordinate clauses after conjunctions that, as if (for example: She found out that her father would be in Moscow); after linking verbs to be, become, appear, seem.
The genitive case in Arabic is extremely capacious. It includes the functions of Russian genitive, dative, accusative, instrumental and prepositional cases with prepositions in various adverbial and other meanings.
The genitive case without a preposition in some functions (for example, accessories - brother's book) is the same in Russian and Arabic. In others (for example, in the function of assigning an object), the Arabic genitive case corresponds to other syntactic contexts in Russian (for example, bookcase, bookcase - literally in Arabic - “cabinet of books”, as well as “teeth brush”, “faculty of medicine” ").
Arab genitive with prepositions fi (in) and ala (na) corresponds to the Russian prepositional case with the meaning of place. However, the semantics of these prepositions in Russian and Arabic are not identical, leading to common mistakes Arab students associated with the mixing of these prepositions (in my homeland, in the faculty).
Pretext ala used only in a narrow, special meaning, literally - on the surface of an object: on a table, on the floor. In other cases, the preposition is used fi.
The differences between Russian and Arabic verbal control are also significant. The transitivity of verbs in Arabic is much more developed than in Russian. Often Russian verbs that control the genitive, dative, and instrumental cases without prepositions correspond to transitive verbs in Arabic. Yes, verbs answer, tell, help, give and others that control the dative case in Russian are transitive in Arabic. This explains the desire of Arab students to use the accusative case of a noun after them.
In Russian, adjectives have the form of gender, number and case. They relate to the noun and agree with it in the same gender, number and case. Unlike Arabic, in Russian adjectives are usually placed before the noun they define. In Arabic, an adjective denotes an external, visible, internal, attribute of an object, comprehended by the senses or mind, and is divided into qualitative, relative and enhanced qualities. Qualitative adjectives have degrees of comparison: comparative and superlative.
Adjectives in Arabic change by gender: in the masculine gender - zero ending, in the feminine gender - ending (a), by number: in the singular feminine gender ending (a), in the singular masculine gender - zero ending, in the plural - null ending and new form words. Adjectives in the comparative degree by gender and number do not change.
In Russian, like in Arabic, there are personal pronouns. But in Russian only pronouns change by gender he, she, it; pronouns me, you, you, we, they can refer to both masculine and feminine genders. In Russian, the gender of possessive pronouns is my, yours, ours, yours does not depend on the gender of the owner of the object, as in Arabic, but depends on the gender of the noun to which the pronoun refers. Possessive pronouns his, her, theirs, as in Arabic, they depend on the gender and number of the word denoting the owner of the item. Unlike Arabic, they usually come before nouns.
Pronouns in Arabic are used together with a noun, they correspond to in Russian possessive pronoun "mine" and are in a certain state. Conjoined pronouns do not change with changes in the grammatical gender of the noun; their gender is determined by the gender of the owner of the object.
The pronominal definition is placed before the word being defined and agrees with it in gender and number. As consistent definitions, fused pronouns can be used with names that have an article. Agreement in case does not find its expression in definitions - pronouns due to their indeclinability in Arabic.
We hope that the results of these comparisons will help Arab students overcome the interfering influence native language when using Russian nouns, adjectives and pronouns in speech.
References:
- Ibragimov I.D. Arabic language ―SPb: AST, 2007 ― 256 p.
- Frolova O.B. We speak Arabic: Textbook / O.B. Frolova. ―M.: Philology, 2002 ―286 p.
Since 2010, it has been customary to celebrate Arabic Language Day. This began when the UN Department of Public Affairs proposed establishing its own holiday for each of the six official languages of the organization. This initiative aims to strengthen intercultural dialogue and develop a multilingual world. The date chosen for Arabic Language Day in the international calendar is December 18th.
This date was not chosen by chance, because it was on this day in 1973 that the UN General Assembly included Arabic among the official and working languages of the United Nations.
Mikhail Suvorov, Doctor of Philology, Associate Professor of the Department of Arabic Philology, Faculty of Oriental Studies, St. Petersburg State University, talks especially for Islam.ru about the Arabic language and its significance.
Mikhail Nikolaevich, we are very glad to see you in the editorial office of the Islam.ru website. I would like to talk with you about such a topic as the importance of the Arabic language for Russia, in particular. If you ask any Muslim what Arabic means to him, he will say that it is the language of the Koran, the language spoken by the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him). What can you say about the Arabic language?
Arabic is my profession, so it would be strange not to love this language. Naturally, this is a language that I love very much, which has accompanied me since childhood, because as a child I lived with my parents in Yemen, which is probably why I chose the specialty of Orientalist-Arabist. For me personally, the Arabic language is everything. This language is also very important for Russia, where a huge number of Muslims live, and for them Arabic is the language of the Koran, the language of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), accordingly, a real Muslim should strive to learn the Arabic language, at least to some extent. In addition, it must be said that Russia has always maintained contacts with various Arab countries, so the Arabic language was necessary for translators and specialists who work in Arab countries. And although these ties died down to some extent in the 90s, they now continue to develop again. Therefore, Arabic is of interest not only to Muslims.
In your opinion, what percentage of people in Russia know Arabic?
I think not so much. This is due to the fact that before perestroika (in Soviet times) there were actually 5 or 6 educational institutions in the USSR where Arabic was taught: these were St. Petersburg University, Moscow University, Baku, Tashkent and, probably, Alma-Ata. That is, there were few places where Arabic was taught. I don’t know if the language was taught in mosques in those days, I have no doubt that not, so there are not many people who know Arabic. But after perestroika, many Islamic educational institutions and not only Islamic ones appeared, i.e., the Arabic language began to be introduced into the curriculum in other secular universities, where it had not existed before. Therefore, the number of people who know him is now, of course, much larger.
It should be noted that the level of knowledge of the Arabic language in the USSR was high. Everyone knows Baranov's Arabic-Russian dictionary, which is used by a huge number of people. As I know, our modern orientalists-Arabists have an excellent command of the Arabic language, even the Arabs are surprised.
Despite the fact that there were not many educational institutions where people trained in Arabic, the level of training in them was very high. Now there are a large number of institutions where Arabic is taught, and I believe that the level in them is also generally good.
Especially in Dagestan, in universities where Arabic is taught, many teachers know the language very well, they have extensive speaking and reading practice, they are excellent experts in the Arabic language.
What doors open to a person who knows Arabic? What does this give?
I would say that there are two directions for further work with the Arabic language. Firstly, this is work in Arab countries as a translator, specialist, in the diplomatic corps. The language is becoming popular and you can become a teacher of Arabic, that is, with knowledge of the Arabic language you will not be left without a piece of bread. I am quite pleased that I chose this profession, because back then it was not so popular. People knew little about the Arabs, and in particular not much was known about Muslim culture. Now Muslim culture in Russia is being revived, and the Arabic language is needed everywhere. I consider myself very lucky with my choice of language.
People, studying Arabic in Russia from classical books, master literary Arabic, and when they travel to Arab countries, they are faced with the problem of Arabs not understanding the language in which our compatriots are trying to communicate with them. Our classical language is a little incomprehensible for Arabs. They wonder how our people know such a language.
This is a very interesting question, of course, but it has always been there. We teach in all educational institutions literary Arabic, but sometimes we add a dialect course to this. For example, in our faculty (among Arabists) the Egyptian dialect is taught, because the Egyptian dialect is the most famous at present, since the Egyptians graduate large number film and television products, as this is in demand in all Arab countries. In Arab countries, they know the Egyptian dialect best because they watch Egyptian programs.
The problem, of course, is for the translator who, having learned the literary language, ends up in the Arabic East. When he speaks, everyone understands him. Once upon a time, the literary language was an alien language for ordinary Arab people, because they only knew the dialect. Since all media are in literary language, now the most common person understands the literary language. Another thing is that it is difficult for a Russian specialist, for example, to understand this dialect. But this is a matter of habit. Within a short time a person begins to understand it too.
Is it difficult for a Russian person to get used to letters and sounds that do not exist in the Russian language? Are they difficult to pronounce?
I would say that this is the minimum problem you might encounter when learning Arabic. When a person begins to learn Arabic, within a month he goes through the alphabet and an experienced teacher, as they say, “puts these letters” on him, that is, helps him learn to pronounce them correctly. They're not so crazy, these sounds. Maybe the most difficult sound is "'ayn", a guttural sound, but nevertheless, I don't know that anyone has problems.
As a specialist, what do you tell the ordinary Russian person, how long will it take to normally learn to speak, read, and write in Arabic?
This is a difficult question. It depends on how regularly a person exercises.
How difficult is Arabic to learn? Is English easier to learn or Arabic?
This is perhaps a difficult question, because if, for example, a person knows English, studied it at school, and then he chooses French or Arabic, then French is easier to master, since it is closer to English. But if you consider that a person does not have any linguistic base, he only knows Russian, and the choice is to study English or Arabic, then I would not say that Arabic is more difficult than English. For example, many things in Arabic are easier than in English: for example, in Arabic both are pronounced and written, but in English we pronounce a word, but we still have to know how to spell it. There are no complex tense structures in Arabic. In many ways, Arabic is even simpler, I would say.
In the republics of the North Caucasus there were problems with teaching Arabic in schools. Should you be wary of the Arabic language? Is this language dangerous enough to be banned from public schools?
Well, of course not. Because the socio-political problems that we can observe in these republics have nothing to do with the Arabic language. This is not a language problem. If a person knew Arabic, he himself would be able to better familiarize himself and understand what they are lying to him about. Knowing an additional language brings only benefits to a person; it is unlikely to cause harm. I don’t even understand why they don’t allow teaching Arabic in schools. We can assume that this is not some kind of political problem, maybe it has something to do with the curriculum. It's hard for me to judge this.
It seems to me that the level of knowledge not only of Arabic, but of foreign languages in general in Russia is slightly lower than the global average. It often happens that a child studies at school for 11 years, of which he studies English for 7-8 years, still goes to university, etc., but the level is low. You couldn't encourage schoolchildren and students to study more foreign languages, and tell them what opportunities knowledge of a particular language opens up for them.
To be honest, it seems to me that there is no need to even call, since this is already obvious to everyone. Previously a problem was that the children learned English, but there was actually no benefit to them from it. Because travel abroad was closed, there were practically no English-speaking people inside the country. The same can be said about the Arabic language. Now the world has changed. We travel to other countries, do business with them, and engage in some educational and cultural projects. Therefore, a modern person without knowledge of a foreign language is unlikely to be able to make a successful career. English, since it has become a world language, and Arabic have become very important for Muslim regions.
- Specialty of the Higher Attestation Commission of the Russian Federation10.02.01
- Number of pages 452
Chapter I. Articulatory features of consonant phonemes of Russian and Arabic languages based on radiographic data.
§ I. Some general questions.
§ 2. Labial consonants.
§ 3. Front lingual consonants.
§ 4. Arabic interdental.
§ 5. Forelingual stops.
§ 6. Forelingual emphatic stops.
§ V. Forelingual sibilants.
§ 8. Forelingual fricative emphatic.
§ 9. Forelingual sibilants.
§ 10. Arabic front-lingual bifocals /
§ II. Front-lingual affricates /С/ and /С/.
§ 12. Front-lingual laterals.
§ 13. Forelingual tremors.
§ 14. Middle lingual consonants.
§ 15. Back lingual consonants.
§ 16. Uvular consonants.
§ 17. Pharyngeal consonants.
§ 18. Laryngeal consonants.
Conclusions.
Chapter II. Comparative analysis of consonantal phonemic systems of Russian and Arabic languages.
Chapter III. Issues of Russian-Arab interference and foreign accent in the Russian speech of Arabs.
§ 2. On the issue of interference.
§ 3. On the issue of foreign accent.
§ 4. Accent errors in the Russian speech of Arabs in the area of consonants.
3 Conclusion.
B i b l i o g r a p h i .
Introduction of the dissertation (part of the abstract) on the topic "Comparison of consonantal systems of Russian and Arabic languages in order to predict interference phenomena in the Russian speech of Arabs"
This work is a linguistic comparative study of consonantism in the Russian and Arabic languages in order to predict sound interference resulting from contact between the Russian and Arabic languages; The work also establishes and analyzes the reasons for the emergence of accented pronunciation in the Russian speech of Arabs using the example of consonant sounds.
Over the past three decades, friendly, cultural, economic and political ties between Soviet Union and countries of the Arab East. The huge interest in the Arab world in the Russian language is undoubtedly caused by the historical successes of the Soviet state in the areas material production, in scientific and technological development, in the implementation of the policy of friendship and peace between peoples, free economic assistance to Arab countries, support for the Arab national liberation movement, support for the forces of freedom and social progress.
The Russian language serves as one of the main languages of international communication, one of the world languages, one of the official languages of the United Nations. If at the end of the 19th century French, English and German were the languages of science and international diplomacy, now the Russian language occupies a leading place among international languages. The Russian language reflects the best achievements of world science and culture, finds its highest embodiment of the linguistic norm in the field of artistic expression, and receives the most accurate designation for various concepts of a socio-economic, socio-political and technical nature. The Russian language is heard at international congresses, conferences, festivals, and symposiums. Knowledge of the Russian language allows you to master the latest achievements worldwide! science, technology, culture, get the most possible information about modern social development. The Russian language is included in the curricula of schools and universities in many Arab countries; many Arabs study in higher and secondary specialized educational institutions of the Soviet Union. Many Arab workers and specialists undergo industrial practice at enterprises of the USSR. A large number of Soviet specialists go to Arab countries To help them boost their economy, the exchange of government, party, trade union, scientific, cultural, student, sports and other delegations between the Soviet Union and the countries of the Arab East significantly expanded. All this caused the need to expand, on the one hand, the teaching of the Russian language to Arabs both in the USSR and in the countries of the Arab East, and on the other hand, the study of the Arabic language in the USSR expanded and deepened. Relations between states inevitably lead to contact between them at various levels, including linguistic and cultural.
When two languages come into contact, it means that speakers have to use two different linguistic structures for the purpose of communication. This is where bilingualism arises. The phenomenon of bilingualism is inevitably associated with the phenomenon of dual culture. When studying bilingualism, it should be borne in mind that a bilingual individual not only learns a second language, but at the same time becomes familiar with a new culture. Individuals who assimilate a culture that is new to them discover a unique “cultural accent” that is similar in nature to a linguistic accent*. "Just like there are linguistic accents, - pi
Zhluktenko Yu.A. Linguistic aspects E. Haugen is bilingual, - there are also accents in relation to: cultures, which are a consequence of the interference of clashing patterns of behavior "and it can be just as difficult to get rid of them as it is to get rid of linguistic accents." some anthropologists consider language contact only as one aspect of the contact of cultures, and language interference as one of the manifestations of the interpenetration of cultures.♦ Such an accent of cultures, along with a linguistic accent, is strongly manifested among Arabs, carriers of Russian-Arabic bilingualism, but it is not included into our research.
The study of issues related to the interference of different languages is one of most important tasks comparative phonetics.
In theoretical terms, they are especially important for further comparative research of contacting language systems for the purpose of general linguistic training of future teachers of Russian as a foreign language.
In practical terms, they are necessary for the linguistic substantiation of the methodology for teaching the Russian language to Arabs. Improving the methods of teaching Russian pronunciation to Arabs is impossible without comparing the phonological systems of the two languages. Comparative phonetics helps the teacher to teach students correct Russian pronunciation in the shortest way, since the accent errors of Arabs are mainly the result of sound interference, i.e. interaction of two sound systems: Russian and Arabic. In addition, studying the accent helps chiya. Kyiv, 1974, p.54.
Chauger Einar. Language contact. - New in linguistics, issue 71* 1972, pp. 63~64. O
Weinreich U. Language contacts. Kyiv, 1979, p.28. highlight typical mistakes, recommend methods for eliminating them”, determine and justify the sequence of presenting phonetic material to Arab students.
G. Gleason believes that for practical proficiency in a language you need to know almost 100/? phonological aids, $50-90 grammatical aids and 1% vocabulary*. R.Y. Avanesov writes that it is phonetics that poses a certain difficulty in mastering the desired language. Therefore, a lot of serious research has been devoted to phonetic phenomena when mastering a non-native language (see bibliography), in which the fundamental, indisputable fact is that difficulties in mastering the pronunciation of a foreign language are associated mainly with the influence of well-established pronunciation skills determined by the system of the native language. language. According to E. Sapir, “phonetically, every language values not so much its sounds as such, but their modeled system”4. S.I. Bernggane wrote that there is not a single language in the world whose systems would completely coincide4. “Mastering a language,” writes A. Martinet, “means learning to differently analyze what constitutes linguistic communication”5.
The study was based on the principle systematic approach G l i s o n G. Introduction to descriptive linguistics. M., 1959, p. 339.
Ovanesov R.I. Russian literary pronunciation* M., 1972, p.72.
3 S e p i r E. Language. Introduction to speech analysis. M.-L., Sots-egiz, 1933, p.36.
4Bernstein S.I. Issues of teaching pronunciation (in relation to teaching the Russian language to foreigners). M., 1937, sLZ*
5 M a r I n e A. Fundamentals of general linguistics. - New in linguistics, issue 3, p. 375. to the facts of language, which in our work can be realized in an attempt to analyze paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations to the analysis of interference and accent.
By paradigmatic relations we understand possible oppositions of phonemes to each other.
By syntagmatic relations we understand the relations of possible combinations of various phonemes with each other, their sequence and arrangement.
Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations are closely interrelated and interdependent, since the description of any language can be considered complete if we indicate not only the opposition of phonemes (the system of phoneme oppositions), but also the basic patterns of their combination.
Paradigmatic analysis of consonantal systems must precede syntagmatic analysis. The study of the compatibility of phonemes on the syntagmatic axis is impossible without analyzing the phonetic and phonological features of these phonemes in a paradigmatic sense.
If a phoneme is not determined syntagmatically, but is completely determined by the paradigmatic plan in the language system, then it is in a paradigmatically strong and syntagmatic weak position. These are, for example, Russian and Arabic paired voiced and voiceless consonant phonemes in the position before vowels relative to the sign of deafness-voicing. If a phoneme is not paradigmatically determined, but is completely determined by the syntagmatic plan, that is, by its context in speech, then it is in a syntagmatically strong and paradigmatically weak position. Such, for example, are Russian consonant phonemes, paired according to deafness-voicing, at the absolute end of a word relative to the sign of deafness-voicing*. See Panov M.V. On some general trends in the development of Russian literary language XX century - VYa, 1963, L X.
In work on phonetics it is impossible to do without defining the main functional unit - the phoneme. This or that understanding of it determines the principle of approach to the analysis of the material itself. We accept as the most consistent definition of phoneme given by A.A. Reformatsky: “Phonemes are the minimal units of the sound structure of a language, which serve to form and distinguish significant units of language: morphemes, words”*.
The purpose of the dissertation is to:
1. Describe and compare the articulatory patterns of consonant phonemes in Russian and Arabic based on experimental data.
2. Describe and compare the consonantal systems of the Russian and Arabic languages.
3. Consider issues of language contacts and phonetic interference in order to highlight similarities and differences between niches, identify potential interference and describe its types.
4. Consider general issues of foreign accent, highlight typical errors in the Russian accented speech of Arabs, determine their causes and thereby confirm the correctness of the theoretically predicted interference pattern.
To solve the problems posed in the work, various methods were used: direct observation, auditory analysis, X-ray diffraction, oscillography.
The use of experimental methods (instrumental and auditory) of research in phonetics has now made it one of the most precise disciplines in the system of linguistic sciences and has been one of the true means of describing the sound composition of a language and studying
Reformatekiy A.A. Introduction to linguistics. M., 1967, p.211. research on the mechanism of phonetic interference and accent. Experimental phonetics makes it possible to compile the acoustic and articulatory characteristics of the sound system of a language, and this is the main material necessary for comparing phonological systems, studying interference and foreign accent, which is necessary, in turn, for correct setting pronunciation of sounds when teaching Russian as a foreign language.
A large and important place in our study of the sound composition of the Russian language was played by experimental studies carried out by students of I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay based on his theory of phonemes and the methods he indicated. These are experimental studies by V.A. Bogoroditsky and L.V. Shcherba. The works of V.A. Bogoroditsky and L.V. Shcherba make it possible to assert that experimental phonetic studies of sounds also include a physical analysis of speech sounds and an anatomical and physiological description of articulation.
When analyzing the consonantal system of the Russian language, we relied mainly on the experimental data of L.R. Zinder, M.I. Matusevich, N.A. Lyubimova, L.V. Bondarko, L.V. Verbitskaya. R.FLaufo-shma, S.S.Vysotsky and others.
We used X-ray diagrams of Russian consonants made by M.I. Matusevich, N.A. Lyubimova, N. Konechnaya, V. Zavodovskaya and L.G. Skalozub.
For the acoustic analysis of Russian consonants, we relied on the experimental data of L.R. Zitsdbra, R.F. Paufopshma and on the research of R. Jacobson, G. Fant and M. Halle.
In our acoustic analysis of Arabic consonants, we relied mainly on experimental data obtained at the University of Baghdad by Dr. Edward Shanna.
Mn took 60 radiographs of Arabic consonants in the pronunciation of 5 speakers. Radiography was carried out in the laboratory of the Department of Human Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, UDI, under the guidance of Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor V.P. Kulik. The photographs were taken using a technique developed by Doctor of Medical Sciences G. Ginsburg for radiography of the speech organs from the larynx to the lips*.
Pictures were taken when turning the head in profile, technical conditions: KU - 90, MA - 30-40, time 0.2-0.3 sec., 100 cm.
Radiography was carried out on film 18-24. The film was installed on a frame behind the translucent screen. The filming was supervised by A.M. Krylov.
In order to better contrast the contours of the moving parts of the speech apparatus on the profiles of the radiographs, they were lubricated with a barium solution. First of all, the speaker swallowed half a spoonful of barium solution, thus lubricating the root of the tongue, its deepest parts, then a narrow strip was applied along the midline along the tongue, the midline of the hard and soft palate, the tongue and lips were encircled with barium. The tip of the tongue was especially carefully lubricated. The announcer pronounced the word, and at the moment the desired sound was pronounced, filming was taken.
We have created a special program for taking radiographs. The consonant sound we needed was always in the initial position before the vowels.
In a number of cases, some oscillograms of Arabic consonants were taken to compare them with the corresponding Russian ones. In addition, a comparison of oscillograms of the pronounced accent sound and its normative equivalent was used.
The oscillograms were taken in the laboratory of experimental phonetics at the Patrice Lumbba Peoples' Friendship University under the guidance of Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor V.I. Petryankina. See Zh i n k i n N.I. Mechanism of speech. M., 1958, p. 165.
The auditory analysis was carried out according to the method developed by A.I. Rabinovich, and was aimed mainly at studying the interference and accented pronunciation of Arab students. We recruited more than 50 Syrians (students, graduate students and interns) as informants. The informants were subjected to a survey, as a result of which the following data were established:
First and last name of the informant;
Age of the informant;
Year of admission to the university;
University, faculty, year of study;
Year of graduation from high school* (if a student) and university (if a graduate student or trainee);
Foreign languages that the informant speaks and reads fluently;
Other foreign languages that the informant knows;
The Syrian province in which the informant lived;
Level of knowledge of the Russian language;
Level of knowledge of literary Arabic.
The following sources served as material for the study:
1. casual conversations recorded on tape;
2. reading passages from fiction;
3. reading specially composed texts in which all phonemes of the Russian language were presented in different positions and in different distribution;
4. reading individual words.
The texts reproduced by the informants were recorded on ferromagnetic tape and carefully analyzed. Phonetic errors of any kind were recorded on cards and classified. As a result of the classification, tables and a dictionary of accent errors were compiled.
The scientific novelty of the work consists of I) instrumental analysis consonants of the Arabic language based on radiographic data. This work was done in full for the first time. 2) in a comparative description of the features of the articulatory base of Russian and languages, 3) in identifying the nature of Russian-Arabic phonetic interference and predicting accent deviations in the Russian speech of Arabs, 4) in compiling methodological recommendations for work in the field of practical phonetics.
Practical value of the work. Predicting accent deviations, and especially the analysis of accent errors, determining their causes and ways to eliminate them have direct implications for the practice of teaching a foreign (Russian in this case) language to students speaking Arabic. The conclusions of the dissertation can be used to determine the sequence of studying phonetic material, to compile introductory phonetic courses, as well as how practical recommendations phonetic teacher.
Approbation of work. On the topic of the dissertation, reports and communications were made at scientific student circles, at conferences of young scientists and specialists of the UDN (1978-1980), at the MAPRYAL congress (1979), the dissertation materials were used at practical exercises in the Russian language with Arab students, in lectures on the phonetics of the Russian language.
This work consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion and appendices.
The introduction justifies the choice of topic, indicates the purpose of the work, defines the objectives of the research and the experimental methodology.
The first chapter presents the results of an x-ray experiment and compares the articulatory patterns of consonant phonemes in Russian and Arabic.
The second chapter describes the consonantal phonological systems of the Russian and Arabic languages.
The third chapter examines issues of language contacts, bilingualism and interference, identifies the similarities and differences between the two consonantal systems, identifies a zone of potential interference, examines issues of accented pronunciation of Arabs and identifies and classifies their errors.
The conclusion summarizes the results of the study and provides conclusions.
Appendices include X-ray diagrams, oscillograms, experimental texts, error classification tables, error dictionary, and bibliography.
Question about transcription. In our work we used Latin transcription with the following diacretic values (it is a consonant symbol):
Pharyngealization £ - interdental
Implosive semi-softness ъ" - tension ^ - non-tension t - voiced beginning of a semi-voiced \ - voiced end of a semi-voiced
The transcription of Arabic consonants is based on the transcription system proposed by J. Cantino 1 (see Table I).
When transmitting accent errors, when not the whole word is transcribed, but part of it, we used Russian transcription so as not to make it difficult to read the word with two sign systems.
I J.Cantineau. Cours de phonetique arabe Paris, I960 p.8
Table I
Arabic consonants
Russian consonants z£uk letter t
VI ± a b a b a 8 b
G, a2 k t i „
9 b b * G a. i» a* i* O L A o-S e) h s sound ъ ъ» р. r"t w"
V a a» p p* 1
1" g" g* 3 g. about 6 k. k" in, V ukva<5 п в Ф с
D n l r c h
Before approaching the question of comparing two languages (Russian and Arabic), it is necessary to dwell on the question of phonetic research done on one of these languages (Arabic) in order to determine the place of our research among them.
The phonological systems of languages differ in that consonantism or vocalism plays a decisive role in them. The Arabic language belongs to the family of Semitic languages, which have a pronounced consonantal character. “For languages of the Semitic system,” states G.P. Melnikov, “the most optimal is a rather specific consonantism with the widespread use of very exotic oppositions in the absence of many consonants common in most languages of other systems”*. Determining the properties of Semitic languages, G.P. Melnikov emphasizes the poverty of vocalism in this family. All these features of Semitic languages are clearly reflected in both the spelling and morphology of these languages. Orthographically, the alphabet in these languages consists either of consonants alone, or of consonants and long vowels^. Morphologically, the root of a word in these languages consists of only consonant sounds. Most roots consist of three root consonants, some of four. Consonant phonemes of Semitic languages, unlike vowels, are the main carriers of semantic meaning, hence the need for clear articulation, clear pronunciation and amazing stability
Melnikov G.P. Systematic analysis of the reasons for the uniqueness of Semitic consonantism. M., Moscow School of Art named after V.I. Lenin, 1967, p. (Velveneon, Israel. History of Semitic languages. Cairo, 1929, p. 14). ipg^il. ♦ o and Grande B.M. Introduction to the comparative study of Semitic languages" M., 1972, p. 17. See also: Starinin V.P. Semitic word structure. M., Eastern literature, 1963, p.20. these consonants. “Within the dialects of one Indo-European language over hundreds of years,” says G.P. Melnikov, “greater differences in the composition of consonants often arose than between different Semitic languages over thousands of years” -1.”
Arab philologists of the Middle Ages - the founders of Arabic linguistics - perfectly described the system of consonant sounds in the Arabic language. At the same time, they paid more attention to consonantism than to vocalism.
The first Arabic philologist is Al-Khalil I'n Ahmed (718-791), who compiled the first dictionary of the Arabic language, in which words are arranged according to phonetic-physiological characteristics, i.e. according to the place of articulation of the first consonant: first there are laryngeal, then back-lingual, middle-lingual sibilants and hissing and, finally, labial2. In addition, Al-Khalil is the first researcher of the rules of Arabic metrics based on Arabic, Bedouin poetry. Al-Khalil ibn Ahmed classified Arabic "sounds" according to the place of formation,
Melnikov G.P. Op. op., p.8.
2 V.I. Zvegintsev and Ya.V. Noah doubt the actual authorship of Al-Khalil and confirm this by the fact that the dictionary has not reached us. It should be noted here that Al-Khalil's dictionary "Kitab"
Al-AYN" was almost completely preserved and was published in Baghdad in 1967 (see: ¿гй-*-1^^ ^ ^ (
See: Zvegintsev V.I. History of Arabic linguistics. M., 1959, p.46; L about I Ya.V. History of linguistic teachings. M., 1968, p.26.
3 “Arab grammarians used the same word “Harf,” writes B.M. Grande, “to designate both the sound of speech and the letter representing this sound.” “However, it cannot be assumed,” writes G.M. Gabuchan, “that Arabic grammarians did not see the difference between a sound unit and its graphic representation. Harf is considered rather as a diacritic element that can be perceived in one or another physical substrate (acoustic or graphically marked 8 pears but the direction from the larynx to the teeth, but there were serious deficiencies in his phonetic system.
Al-Khalid's phonetic observations are set out in the book of his student Sibawayha (died 796), who improved his teacher's system in Al-China.
Sibawayhi considered not only the basic type of consonants of the Arabic language (28 consonants), but also their literary varieties (6 varieties) and dialectal (8 varieties). He classified consonants according to the place of formation / tahag 1<а| а1-ьйгйе ^^ I ^и, установив 16 мест образованиями по способу образования (смычные, X фрикативные и полнопроточные) /га-\™аЬ,ёа<31ба11,Ъаоп1й¿аЬ з^олг^, по звджости-глухости/та^йш-аь-таьтйзаь) " » по эмфатичности-неэмфатичности/ ти^Ъа(з.аЬ-шшгСа^ЬМ1 а^, и по работе задней части спинки языка на поднятые и неподнятые т^аГранде Е.М. Курс арабской грамматики в сравнительно-историческом освещении. М., 1963, с.П;Габучан Г.М. К вопросу о структуре семитского слова (в связи с проблемой флексии). - В сб.: Семитские языки, вып.11, ч.1, с. 120. См.: c^Jl^UljJ^^jjL^k. i/£. 1 ♦ Л * Met* J^bUJI Мы заимствовали этот термин из работы Мельникова Г.П. "Под полнопроточными мы будем понимать те согласные, при артикуляции которых воздух сравнительно свободно проходит по тому, иле иному органу, например, через нос или через открытые щели вокруг языка",
See* ¡Melnikov G.P. Systematic analysis of the reasons for the uniqueness of Semitic consonantism. M., MPS named after. V.I.Lenin, 1967, p. a1-*lnb1ga£ NOSOVY© /ligyS a1-£shtab «¿¿Lu^r. sounds /a!~da1da1a]1 I and WHISTLING sounds
Lirshg as-vaPr (See Table 2).
Here we should especially dwell on the phonetic treatise of Avicenna, the author of the “Medical Canon” (980-1037), since he was the first to clearly distinguish the consonants /birge zat^ab ^u^^ from the vowels/burd? zа^аь distinguished between long and short vowels I ^VI LOVI and»^ In addition, Avicenna’s work is an acoustic and physiological study, which provides the reasons and methods for the formation of sound in general as a physical phenomenon and the sound of speech as its modification, the process of its perception by organs hearing and describes the anatomy of the speech organs.
Characterizing and classifying consonant sounds (see Table 3), Avicenna, unlike all other medieval philologists, uses terminology from the field of medicine and physics of that time. We find in him such terms as “simple” sounds, i.e. “with a full bow” ;^оГ^Л and “complex” sounds, i.e. "with an incomplete stop" Гь ^^^ . Avicenna also understands by these terms the duration of the sound, since “simple” are instantaneous sounds, and “complex”, i.e. Fricatives are continuous sounds. Avicenna’s “weak” sounds are relaxed, and “strong” sounds are tense. They characterize the emphatic tone /a1->1*ba4 as the simultaneous raising of the back of the tongue to the soft palate in combination with the anterior lingual articulation of the bow or cleft in the area of the upper teeth or gums, resulting in the formation of an overlapped space that serves as a resonator, forming a specific timbre coloring emphatic compared to non-emphatic
I igt ^Lil,^!.
Avicenna. Phonetic treatise. Cairo, 1932).
Table 2
Consonants of the Arabic language but Sibawayhi
Place of education
Voiced stops raised f I s
1 o blind raised façades
Full flow 1 che f 8 0
Frictional voiced f a o i ® n raised f 1 a r voiceless 3
§ f and raised f I o f. e
I. Upper and lower lips w V
2♦ Lower teeth and tips of upper teeth
3 «Tip of the tongue and tips of the upper and lower incisors
Continuation of table 2
1 I: 2: 3: 4: 5: 6: 7: 8: 9:TO:11:12:ХЗ:Х4:15:Х6:Х7
4. The tip of the tongue and the roots of the upper incisors ¿< z 8 8
5. The front part and the edges of the upper back of the tongue of the incisors t a t
6. The anterior part of the dorsum of the tongue and the superior alviola
7. The anterior part of the back of the tongue and the anterior palate
8. Lateral parts of the tongue and corresponding upper teeth 1
9 «Anterior lateral parts of the tongue and molars a
10. The middle part with the middle palate kicks the tongue and<32 3
II. The back of the dorsum of the tongue and the back of the palate
12. Posterior part of the tongue and uvula<1
13. Root of tongue and uvula 5
14. Upper larynx 9 b «
15. Lower larynx 9 b
Table 3
Consonants of Arabic according to Avicenna
According to the place of formation With a complete barrier With an incomplete barrier weak: strong weak: strong ♦ neem-:noso~:side-: dro-:neem-:iLa-fat.: howl: howl: reaping: fat. » »< « неэм- |яеэм-фат. : фат. 9 эмфат.
Labiolabial ъ w W ■
Labiodental g
Interdental a b a PR
Forelingual a A 1 g t 2. *
Forelingual-anteropalatal a
Middle palatal az 3 e
Postopalatines
Uvular I. X
Pharyngeal p S
Laryngeal? b accuracy. Avicenna does not classify the sounds of the Arabic language according to deafness-voicing /ai-<^|ahr,ai-hams , так как он классифицирует их по надря^енности-ненапряженности1.
Avicenna's phonetic treatise, unlike the works of other Arabic classical philologists, is the only work in which issues of phonetics are covered independently, regardless of issues of grammar.
In addition to Avicenna's treatise, all the works of Arabic classical philologists who studied the phonetics of the Arabic language following Siba-wayhi (the work of Ibn-Jini / 942-1002 / sirr dssina9ah itUJIj- * the work of al-Zamakhshari / XII century / ai-mufassai jJuji, work of Ibn Yansha / III century / sarh al-mufassal, work of al-Khaffaji / 1032-1073 / sirr al-fasahah, work of Ibn-Hajib DS century / as-safi^ah "work of Ibn al-Jazri DU v. / an-nasr and many others), were aimed either at commenting on Sibaveikha, or at compiling new manuals in which the material is presented more consistently. V.G. Akhvlediani believes that strong, according to Avicenna, are voiceless consonants, and weak ones are voiced ones. On this occasion, he writes: “Comparing the rows of consonants that are distributed according to two characteristics, we see that the “weak” ones are voiced, and the “strong” ones<* ными" являются глухие". Однако Авиценна характеризует и как два "сильных" звука, а эти два "сильных" звука противопоставляются по глухости-звонкости. (См.: Ахвледиани В.Г. Фонетический трактат Авиценны. Тбилиси, 1966).
It seems to us that medieval Arab philologists meant by the terms linguist-voiced not only deafness-voice, as it seems to most modern Arabists, but also tension-laxness, since the category of dullness-voiceness is inextricably linked with the category of tension-laxness. This explains, it seems to us, the fact that Arab philologists, including Avicenna, who carefully and subtly developed the system of consonant sounds, never recalled the work of the vocal cords. and in a more accessible form, and this direction develops especially intensively in the 18th-20th centuries. , since the teaching of Sibawayhi was a sacred teaching for Arab classical philologists. They all imitated him and repeated what Sibawayhi himself said without major additions, which became a brake on the development of Arabic linguistics. “We are still teaching Arabic in our schools and institutes,” writes the famous modern Arabic writer Taxa ZycetH, “as the ancient Arabs taught it in their madrassas and mosques more than a thousand years ago. Perhaps we can make a demand to take over such a language.” work and make such efforts in studying syntax, morphology and vocabulary, as the ancient Arabs did."
Modern literary Arabic is the result of the slow and long development of classical Arabic. As a result of the expansion of the Arab-Muslim caliphate, a long process of interaction between the Arabic language and the languages of the peoples of the countries conquered by the Arabs began. This process, on the other hand, contributed to the development of Arabic dialects within each country. “Dialects were developed,” writes G.Sh. Sharbatov, “in the process of long-term interaction and mutual influence of the Arabic language and the local languages of those countries where various Arab tribes settled. Thus, the Coptic language influenced the development of the Egyptian dialect, Aramaic - on Syrian and Iraqi dialects, Berber languages - on the Maghreb dialects In addition, the Turkic language, which was th.
Gubachan G.M. On the issue of Arabic grammatical teachings. - In: Semitic languages, 1963, p.40.
2 1 L-Y") y! oVI ¡1л* ♦ ^»Л * OS-"*"
We quote from the article by V.M. Belkin. "Discussion of problems of the national language in the Arabic press." - VYa, X959, No. 2, p.123. O
Sharbatov G.Sh. Modern Arabic. M., 1961, pp. 16-18. "state language of the Ottoman Empire during the period of Turkish domination in Arab countries (HUT - early 20th centuries)" also left its mark on the Arabic language.
Modern literary Arabic pronunciation in every Arab country is the product of interference between the sound structures of the classical language and the local dialect1. N.V. Shmanov divides Arabic dialects into five groups: Arabian, Mesopotamian, Syro-Palestinian, Egyptian and Maghreb^. Consequently, five pronunciation variants can be distinguished in modern Arabic: Arabian, Iraqi, Syro-Lebanese, Egyptian and Maghreb. Researchers of the Arabic language often cannot distinguish dialectal elements from classical ones and are confused about the modern pronunciation of the Arabic literary language. C. A. Ferguson states that "no one, so far as I know, has attempted to give a systematic analysis of the various intermediate forms of Arabic which are neither 'purely' classical nor 'purely' colloquial." In our present work we will rely mainly on the Syro-Lebanese version of the pronunciation of the modern Arabic literary language.
At the present stage of development of science in general and linguistics in particular, phonetics has noticeably advanced, its problems have expanded significantly, and the experimental base has created fertile ground for more objective solutions to phonetic problems. In the fifties of this century, new studies of the Arabic language began to appear in Cairo and Beirut. Their authors were graduates
I named after J^ISJI. ^LyijcU^JJI jc.Lljjiy.Jt". d30U*
Fyck, Johann. Arabic. Cairo, 1951, p. 14).
Yushmanov N.V. Grammar of literary Arabic. M., 1928, p.3.~
3 Ferguson S.A. Foreword in Contribution to Arabic linguistics. Cambride, Ma's. 1966. p«p.3 mi Western European universities. In 1950, Ibrahim Anis's book "Phonetics of the Arabic Language" * appeared, in which he used the works of such modern linguists as Miller, Bloomfield, Jespersen and others, as well as the works of classical Arabic philologists. The value of Anis's work is that it is the first serious modern study of the phonetics of modern literary Arabic (Egyptian version), in which issues of phonetics are considered in diachronic and synchronic aspects. In this book, for the first time, Arab philologists touch upon the issues of stress and intonation, consider prosodic units and syllable structure in the phonetics of the Arabic language.
There are some weaknesses in I. Anis's work that should be highlighted here. It is noteworthy that in this work some Egyptian dialectal elements of pronunciation are considered as literary elements of pronunciation, for example, I. Anis considers the sound /ch/ not uvular, but posterior palatal like A /, but A / slightly advanced towards the lips . That is, I. Anis describes this sound as the Egyptians pronounce it now (except for the reciters of the Koran, who still maintain the norms of classical pronunciation). The same sachet can be said about the sound / ag /, which I. Anis characterizes not as an affricate, but as an explosive o sound / e /, i.e. the way it is pronounced in the Egyptian dialect. The author identifies the sounds /з/ and /*/ in a separate group, the group of semivowels, although from our point of view these sounds are consonants,
2 Avicenna says that the sounds / з>/ and / 4| / the same place of formation: “is that which is formed without an initial barrier, and ^” “as if beginning with an obstacle that is eliminated later.” Such pronunciation is still considered normative (Quranic). can be semi-vowels *“ In the work of I. Anis, there is no acoustic aspect of phonetic analysis and only the articulatory characteristics of sounds are given, which was inherent in traditional Arabic linguistics.
Among modern Arabic studies, the works of A. Ayyub, T. Khaesan, K. Bishr, and those published after the work of I. Anis stand out. Unfortunately, all these studies were made on the basis of the Egyptian version of modern literary Arabic and the influence of the Egyptian dialect cannot be ruled out.
At the beginning of the 11th century, foreign Arabists began to become interested in Arabic phonetics. Most of their works were written on the material of the Egyptian dialect and the Egyptian version of the literary language (W.W. Gardner, H. Birkelayad, T. Mitchell, R. Harrell, C. Ferguson, etc.). On the basis of the Iraqi version, a study was made by S. al-Ani, and on the basis of the Syro-Lebanese version, a study by R. Nag and J. Cantino.
In 1941, the work of J. Cantinop "Cours de phonet^que arabe" was published, which reflected the main provisions of the Prague Linguistic Circle, and above all the theoretical provisions about
N.S. Trubetskoy, Before Cantino, phonetic studies in Arabic studies were purely descriptive; functional analysis was completely absent. J. Cantino gives in this work a description of phonemic series, their members and their compatibility in the flow of speech.
Soviet Arabic studies made a significant contribution to the study of the Arabic language, but it paid more attention to grammar than to phonetics. We join the opinion of K. Bishr on this issue. See: ♦ À Г -К1 Ijo ♦ me 5y>UJI fLJi jjlU! jju. J^^JUi o
See: Ognetova G.P. On phonological theory in Arabic studies. - In the collection: Arabic philology. M., 1968, pp.III-120.
Most research on phonetics is based on a descriptive method using the works of Arabic classical philologists. Some of the works are in the nature of textbooks (Yushmanov N.V., Baranov H.K., Kovalev A.A., Sharbatov G.Sh., Kamensky N.S., Grande B.M. - see bibliography). Of particular interest in the field of Arabic phonetics are the candidate dissertations of V.S. Segal “Some Issues of Sound Composition and Orthoepy of the Modern Arabic Literary Language” (M., 1964) and B.N. Romachev. "Issues of verbal stress in modern Arabic literary language" (Moscow, 1967). These works differ from all previous ones in that they are supported by some experimental data on the issues under consideration.
Most modern Arab and foreign studies of Arabic phonetics are not based on experimental data and are made either on the basis of auditory observations or by commenting on Arabic classical philologists*. Our work should complement all previous studies of Arabic consonantism with experimental data. %
1 In the work of T. Halan there are some experimental data obtained using a kymograph and a palatograph.
Conclusion of the dissertation on the topic "Russian language", Al-Qudmani, Radwan
1. In Russian and Arabic phonological systems, consonantism plays a decisive role.
2. In the consonantism of both languages compared, phonologically significant are the signs of the place and method of formation, acoustic signs, as well as the nature of additional articulation (for the Russian language - palatalization and velarization, for Arabic - pharyngealization).
3. In the category of deafness-voicedness in both languages, neither the number of voiced and voiceless phonemes, nor the nature of the opposition on this basis are the same. The phonological nature of voiced-voicedness also differs. The absence of paired voiceless or voiced in the Arabic language and its presence in Russian increases the role of the sign of tension-laxness and phonologizes it. 4. The feature of tension-laxness in both languages is not phonologically significant; it is a redundant, accompanying feature.
5. Comparing the two phonological systems of consonantism in the Arabic and Russian languages, it can be argued that in the Arabic language there is no palatalization and velarization as differentially significant articulations, and, therefore, in the Arabic language there is no phonological opposition in hardness-softness. In the Russian language, pharyngealization is not phonologically significant; therefore, in the Russian language there is no differential sign of emphaticity-emphaticity.
Chapter III
ISSUES OF RUSSIAN-ARAB INTERFERENCE AND FOREIGN ACCENT IN THE RUSSIAN ARAB COMPANIES
§ I. On the issue of language contacts and bilingualism
Language contact is regular verbal communication between speakers of two or more languages1. Language contacts and bilingualism began to be studied back in the 15th century (see the works of G. Schuchardt, A. Martinet, U. Weinreich, E. Haugen; in Russia I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay, L.V. Shcherba, V. A. Bogoroditsky, E. A. Polivanov.), and in modern linguistics - as V. Yu. Rosenzweig notes - the problem of language contacts has acquired paramount importance both due to its connection with the general theory of linguistic relations, and due to the importance of the practical application of its solutions . Nowadays, bilingualism is becoming increasingly widespread. In the new modern life, monolingualism is retreating on a broad front before bilingualism. The widest international cultural exchange, diverse and growing connections lead to an increasing spread of bilingualism. Bilingualism can be observed both when teaching foreign languages and when teaching Russian to foreign students who came to universities in the USSR.
The theory of language contacts is not purely linguistic, since it is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon; it reflects not only the facts of language, but intertwines linguistic, psychological, socio-political and educational-methodological
1Rozentsweig V.Yu. Language contacts. L., 1970, s.Z.
Rosenzweig V.Yu. 0 language contacts. VYa, 1963, No. I, p. 66. aspects* If V.Yu. Rosenzweig and Yu.A. Zhluktenko consider language contacts as a linguistic problem, then B.M. Vereshchagin believes that psychology should deal with the problem of bilingualism. We see bilingualism as a multifaceted and multidimensional problem, which is closely related to the problem of teaching a foreign language.
The psychological approach examines questions about the mechanism of production and perception of speech in a second language, questions about the ways of mastering foreign languages, the place and role of the native language in learning a non-native language, questions about the most optimal age for learning a second language, as well as the influence of intelligence on mastering languages, and vice versa - the influence of learning languages on the development of intelligence.
With a socio-political aspect, researchers are interested in issues of language policy, i.e. issues of sociological interpretation of bilingualism, the influence of social conditions on the emergence and functioning of bilingualism, the social role of the second language in different conditions.
In the educational and methodological aspect, issues of organizing the educational process of studying a non-native language, improving the principles of comparative language learning, developing objective linguistic data, on the basis of which a rational methodology for teaching a non-native language can be built, can be considered.
From a linguistic point of view, the theory of language contacts poses the task of describing and comparing the contacting language systems, then identifying the similarities and differences between them, especially those that make it difficult to master a second (non-native) language, predicting the interference features of the contacting language systems and indicating deviations from the norms of each from these languages. Osu language contacts
Weinreich U. Monolingualism and multilingualism. - New things are revealed in the speech of native speakers of the languages in contact; Consequently, the place of contact is the individual himself - a carrier of bilingualism1. Bilingualism is the very process of contacting languages, which arises mainly in cases where a person, or a group of people, is faced with the task of mastering a non-native language, which they must use together with their native language alternately depending on the requirements of the situation*
In the scientific literature we find different classifications of bilingualism. r
L.V. Shcherba proposed to distinguish between pure and mixed bilingualism. The first, more specific, is characterized by the fact that in the mind of the speaker there are two autonomous and non-interacting systems, so that only the real situation can be a mediator for translation from one language to another. The second, mixed bilingualism, is characterized by the fact that a complex system is created in the minds of speakers in which two forms of expression correspond to a single meaning common to two languages (“a language with two terms”). L.V. Shcherba observed such bilingualism while studying Lusatian dialects: “I could state that any word of these bilingual persons contains three images: a semantic image, a sound image of the corresponding German word and a sound:, obra”, the corresponding Lusatian word , and all together form the same unity as the word of any other language"3.
U. Weinreich distinguishes three types of bilingualism: coordinated, corlinguistic, edition UT. 1972, p.27.
Rabinovich A.I. Principles of studying phonetic interference when contacting different systems of languages. - Cand. diss. Alma-Ata, 1970, p.12. O
Shcherba L.V., Current problems of linguistics. - Fav. slave. on linguistics and phonetics, vol.1. L., 1958, pp. 6-8. O
Shcherba L.V. On the concept of confusion of languages. Ibid., p.48. relative and subordinate. Coordinative bilingualism is characterized by two non-overlapping language systems, i.e., as it seems to us, this type corresponds to the pure type of L.V. Shcherba. The correlative and subordinate types, taken together, correspond to the mixed type of L.V. Shcherba. They differ from each other in that the correlative type arises in conditions of direct contact with a foreign language environment, and the subordinative type is acquired through the native language through “classroom” training1. In the correlative type of bilingualism, two language systems are combined in terms of content and separated in terms of expression. The subordinate type of bilingualism, acquired as a result of training, is characterized by the fact that the meanings of words in a second language are correlated not with realities, as in the correlative type, but with words of the native language, which act as the meaning of foreign words. As E. Haugen notes, the subordinate type of bilingualism is a strengthened, taken to the limit, correlative type of bilingualism, when the second language is subordinate to the first, and the word of the first language becomes the meaning of the linguistic sign of the second language.
Other researchers distinguish two types of bilingualism: “full,” which corresponds, as it seems to us, to pure bilingualism in L.V. Shcherba, and “incomplete”, when knowledge of a second language significantly lags behind knowledge of the native4. With incomplete bilingualism, an individual, according to E. Haugen, may have slightly less than two systems
^Weinreich U. Language contacts. Kyiv, 1979, p.
2 See Vinogradov V.A. Linguistic aspects of language teaching. Issue I. 1972, pp.29-30.
3 E. Haugen. Bilingualism in the America t A bibliography and research guide. " PttMcation of the American Dialect.
4Gornung B.V. On the question of types and forms of interaction between languages. - In the book: Reports and communications of the Institute of Linguistics of the USSR Academy of Sciences, L 2. 1952, p.5. mi, although more than one system1.
Psychologists distinguish two types of bilingualism: combined and correlated. The combined type develops during oral “unteachable” acquisition of a second language, in which two combined language systems are developed. This type of bilingualism corresponds to the correlative type of U. Weinreich. When two sets of linguistic means are associated with the same semantic series, we are dealing with a correlated type. Correlative bilingualism develops through the learning process, where translation and matching are a common method of acquiring a new language. This type of bilingualism corresponds to the subordinative type of U. Weinreich*."
Some researchers distinguish between natural and artificial bilingualism. Bilingualism can be natural, when an individual speaking a second (non-native) language is located directly in a foreign environment, and artificial, when artificial conditions are created to ensure the acquisition of a second language. Thus, “natural bilingualism occurs where the learning of a second language occurs as a result of direct contact with native speakers of another language in the process of joint practical activity. Artificial bilingualism occurs in conditions of deliberate learning of a second language in a specially created environment for this purpose (school, institute , courses.), where the language is learned indirectly, through a teacher, using programs, teaching aids and 4 technical means." X a u g e n E. Language contact. - New in linguistics. Vol. U1. 1972, p.62. O
L See Ibragimbekov F.A. On the psychological foundations of teaching the Russian language in a national school. Baku, 1962, p.4. O
Zhluktenko Yu.A. Linguistic aspects of bilingualism. Kyiv, 1974, p.18. -------
4Rozentsweig V.Yu. About language contacts. - VYa, 1963, p.26.
It is generally accepted that in conditions of natural bilingualism, a second language is learned faster and easier. Artificial bilingualism is temporary, but natural bilingualism leaves its traces for a long time. With artificial bilingualism, there is a one-sided influence of the native language on the second language, and with natural bilingualism, there is mutual influence of the two language systems. In bilingual individuals who have lived for a long time in a foreign environment, the influence of the second language is clearly expressed in native speech in a strong need to resort to the use of the second language at different linguistic levels. This is most evident at the level of vocabulary; Thus, Arab specialists, graduates of Soviet universities, retain the need to use Russian terminology for a long time. “We have recorded many such cases; for example, in the speech of Arab doctors, graduates of Soviet universities, words such as “abortion” are often found instead of ?izhäd, " chamber" instead of qism, (janbar "tuberculev" instead of sill
J~ . In a conversation of one Syrian theater director in Arabic with colleagues - graduates of Soviet universities - we came across such Russian words and expressions as “circumstance, type, character, passion, living people, realists, etc.”. From this short conversation (250 words), we give as an example the following sentence, which consists of 6 words, three of them are Russian:
- “circumstance” tutawwir al “character” wa taz^aluh “many-faceted”. (“Circumstances themselves develop characters and > make them multifaceted”).
We often find this “Arab-Russian dialect” in the speech of students studying at UDN, where more than $60 of the students are foreigners. Students from each region form a language community that is in close linguistic contact with the natural (Russian) environment. Here the question arises: what type of bilingualism are these students, artificial or natural? After all, on the one hand, these students learn Russian in classroom conditions, where the evaluation criterion is not the communicative value of speech, but its form, i.e. compliance or non-compliance with the norms of a non-native language. In these conditions, all attention from the very beginning of training is aimed at achieving purity and correctness of speech in the target language, therefore a rather weak answer in content, but correct in form, in classroom conditions always receives a higher grade than a deep and emotional answer in content, but imperfect according to form. On the other hand, these same bilingual students live in a natural environment and communicate with native speakers of the language they are studying in the classroom. Therefore, mastering a second language occurs as a result of direct contact with native speakers of this language and in the process of joint practical activities (in dormitories, in construction teams, on vacation). Under these conditions, there is a certain tolerance for errors in the speech of a bilingual individual, especially those that do not interfere with mutual understanding, since attention here is drawn not to the form and structure of the utterance, but to its content, i.e. not on how a person speaks, but on what he talks about.
We find it appropriate to call the type of bilingualism, in which mastery of a non-native language occurs in the process of classroom learning, on the one hand, and regular speech communication in the natural environment, on the other hand, the natural-subordinative type of bilingualism. We can observe this type of bilingualism among foreign students studying at UDN.
So, we will call bilingualism the knowledge of two languages to a degree sufficient for understanding by representatives of a second (non-native) language. The degree of understanding can serve as a criterion for the presence of bilingualism.
We tried to summarize the types of classification of bilingualism presented in the scientific literature in Table 9 below.
CONCLUSION
The increasing interest in the Russian language every year, the spread of the Russian language throughout the world puts forward as one of the urgent tasks the analysis of the phonetic features of a non-native (studied) language in comparison with the native language.
The study of these features for teaching purposes must be carried out both in articulatory and phonemic terms. Such a study allows us to predict the area of potential interference and emphasis.
In this work, an attempt was made to describe the articulatory base of the Arabic language (consonantism) based on radiographic data. At the same time, the previously known fact was confirmed that the articulatory zone of the Arabic language when pronouncing consonants is wider than in the Russian language, since it covers the area of the pharynx and larynx.
The data from our radiographic analysis suggest that the ratio of dorsal and apical articulations in the Russian and Arabic languages is not the same. This analysis also shows that paired emphatic and non-emphatic consonants are not entirely identical in place of formation.
Partial use of electroacoustic (oscillographic) analysis reveals the semi-voicing of some Arabic consonants and their spirantization.
In general, the Arabic articulatory base is characterized by a posterior structure of the language, in contrast to Russian, which is characterized by a high structure of the language.
Differences in the articulatory bases of the Russian and Arabic languages usually lead to accentual errors of the articulatory type.
From a phonemic point of view, the languages under study differ both in the inventory of phonemes and in the nature of phonemic oppositions, which makes it possible to predict interference in the categories of voiced-voiceless, hard-soft. At the same time, the phonemic characteristics of positions change significantly: strong positions of one language turn out to be weak for speakers of another (Arabic) language and vice versa.
Auditory and oscillographic analysis of accent errors in the Russian speech of Arabs confirms the predictions made a priori. Accent errors affect the sphere of voiceless-voiced (at the same time, semi-voiced ones are also realized in pronunciation) and hard-soft phonemes of the Russian language (in this case, pharyngealized ones can appear in place of hard ones, and semi-soft ones (“medium”) in place of soft ones, in combination with middle-lingual /; ) /). As a result of a thorough auditory analysis, a previously unnoticed accentual feature was discovered - the presence of a fricative glottal sound in Russian words ending in a vowel.
The main reason for the accented pronunciation of Russian consonants should be considered the sound interference of two systems (Russian and Arabic), leading to the phenomena of a foreign accent.
Identifying interference and accent is an important theoretical and practical task designed to solve complex methodological issues in teaching pronunciation.
1. Avanesov R.I.
2. Avanesov R.I.
3. Avanesov R.I., Sidorov V.N.
4. Artemov V.A.
5. Akhvelidiani V.G.
6. Akhunyazov E.M.
7. Barannikova L.I.
8. Baranov H.K.
9. Baranovskaya S.A.
10. Barsuk R.Yu.
11. Belkin V.M.
12. Belkin V L.
List of references for dissertation research candidate of philological sciences Al-Qudmani, Radwan, 1981
1. Russian literary pronunciation. M., Education, 1968, 287 p.
2. Essay on the grammar of the Russian literary language. M., Uchpedgiz, 1945, 236 p.
3. Experimental phonetics. M., Ed. Lit. to foreign lang., 1956, 278 p.
4. Phonetic treatise of Avicenna. Tbilisi, Mets-niereba, 1966, 85 + 30 p.0 differentiation of interference and transference in conditions of language contacts. VYa, 1978, No. 5, pp. 72-81.
5. The essence of interference and the specifics of its manifestation. In: Problems of bilingualism and multilingualism, M., "Science", 1972, pp.88-98.
6. Textbook of the Arabic language. M., MIV, 1947, 162 p.
7. Consonantism of the modern Russian language (voiced-voiced, hard-soft). Diss. for the job application scientist Art. Ph.D. Phil. Sci. M., UDN, 1967, 206 p.
8. Language contacts as a methodological problem in teaching a second non-native language. Psychology and methods of teaching foreign languages at university, part 1. M., MISHIN, 1976, pp. 30-39.
9. Arabic linguistics of recent years. VYa, 1957, No. 6, pp. 97-100.
10. Discussion of the problems of the national language in Arabic countries. VYa, 1959, No. 2, e.122-126.14. Bernshtein S.B.15. Bernstein S.N.
11. Benveniet E. Levels of linguistic analysis. In: new in linguistics, issue 1U. M., "Progress", 1965, pp.434-449.
12. On the problem of language mixtures. In the collection: Against the vulgarization and distortion of Marxism in linguistics, ch.P. M., Inst. Linguistics, USSR Academy of Sciences, 1952.
13. Issues of teaching pronunciation (in relation to teaching the Russian language to foreigners). In: Issues of phonetics and teaching pronunciation. M., M1U, 1975, pp. 5-6.
14. Basic concepts of phonology. VYa, 1962, No. 5, pp. 62-80.
15. Language. M., "Progress", 1968, 607 p.
16. Phonetics of the Russian language in the light of experimental data. Kazan, 1930, 357 p.
17. Baudouin de Courtenay I.A. Introduction to linguistics, 5th ed. Pg., 1917, 223 p.
18. Baudouin de Courtenay I.A. About the mixed nature of all languages.
19. Selected works on general linguistics, vol.1. M., USSR Academy of Sciences, 1963, pp. 362-372.16. Bernstein S.I.17. Bloomfield G.18. Bogoroditsky V.A.21. Bondarko L.V.
20. Bondarko L.V., Verbitskaya L.A., Zinder L.R.
21. Bondarko L.V., Zinder L.R.24. Bondarko L.V.25. Boni R.A.
22. Sound structure of the modern Russian language. M., Education, 1977, 175 p.
23. Acoustic characteristics of unstressedness. In: Structural typology of languages. M., Nauka, 1966.
24. About some differential features of Russian consonant phonemes. VYa, 1966, No. I, pp. 10-14.
25. Oscillographic speech analysis. L., Leningrad State University, 1965, 47 p.
26. Sounds and intonation of Russian speech. M., Russian language, 1977, 279 p.
27. Practical phonetics and intonation of the Russian language. M., Moscow State University, 306 p.
29. Language contacts. Kyiv, Vishcha school, 1979, 263 p.
30. Phonology in the process of teaching Russian pronunciation to foreigners. Russian language abroad, 1967, No. 3, pp. 43-48.
31. Notes on the monograph by U. Weinreich “Language Contacts”. In the book: Issues of speech generation and language teaching. M., Moscow State University, 1967, pp. 118-140.
32. The concept of “interference” in linguistic and psychological literature. In: Foreign languages in higher education, vol. 4. M., Higher School, 1968, pp. 103-109.
33. Consonantism and vocalism of the Russian language (practical phonology). M., Moscow State University, 1971, 82 p.
34. Linguistic aspects of language teaching, vol. I. M., Moscow State University, 1972, 68 e.; issue 2. M., Moscow State University, 1976, 64 p.
35. Sound changes that do not affect the foundations of modern phonetic processes in Russian dialects. In: Physical foundations of modern phonetic processes in Russian dialects M., Nauka, 1978, pp. 67-130.
36. On the issue of Arabic grammatical teachings In the collection: Semitic languages. M., Science, Vost. lit., 1963, pp. 37-55.
37. On the question of the structure of the Semitic word (in connection with the problem of inflection). In: Semitic languages, issue 2, part 1. M., Science, Vost. lit 1965, pp. 114-126.
38. On the issue of confusion of languages. New in39. Gak V.G.40. Genko A.I.41. Girgas V.42. Gleason G.43. Gornung B.V.44. Grande B.M.45. Grande B.M.46. Derkach M.F.
39. Desheriev Yu.D., Protchenko I.F., 48. Dubovtsev V.I.49. Zhinkin N.I.50. Zhluktenko Yu.A.51. Zvegintsev V.A.52. Zinder L, R. linguistics, issue 6. M., 1972, p.94^111.
40. Interlingual comparison and foreign language teaching. Institute of Nuclear Sciences, 1979, No. 3, pp. 3-10.
41. On the issue of language mixing. Japhetic collection, No. 2. Pg., USSR Academy of Sciences, 1923, pp. 120-136.
42. Essay on the grammatical system of the Arabs. St. Petersburg, 1873, 148 p.
43. Introduction to descriptive linguistics. M., Ed. Foreign lit., 1959, 486 p.
44. On the question of types and forms of interaction between languages. In the book: Reports and communications of the Institute of Linguistics of the USSR Academy of Sciences, No. 2. M., 1952, pp. 3-16.
45. Introduction to the comparative study of Semitic languages. M., Science, Vost. lit., 1972, 442 p.
46. Course of Arabic grammar in comparative historical coverage. M., USSR Academy of Sciences, 1963, 344 p.
47. On the issue of phonation as a distinctive feature underlying the differential perception of voiced and voiceless consonants. Problems of physiological acoustics. L., 1959, pp.I87-I9I.
48. Basic aspects of the study of bilingualism and multilingualism. In: Problems of bilingualism and multilingualism. M., Nauka, 1972, pp. 26-42.
49. On the issue of predictive modeling of various types of interference. "Methods of teaching foreign languages", issue 4. Minsk, 1974, pp. 166-207.
50. Mechanisms of speech. M., APN, 1958, 370 p.
51. Linguistic aspects of bilingualism. Kyiv, Publishing house Kyiv University, 1974, 176 p.
52. History of Arabic linguistics (brief outline). M., Moscow State University, 1958, 80 p.
53. Kovaley A.A., Sharbatov G.Sh.64. Kuznetsova A.M.65. Kuznetsova A.M.
54. General phonetics. L., Higher School, I960, 312 p.
55. Phonetic units of Russian speech. (Experimental studies). Author's abstract. doc. diss. M., Moscow State University, 1970, 29 p.
56. Phonetic implementation of consonantal oppositions in the Russian language. M., UDN, 1974, 115 p.
57. On the psychological foundations of teaching the Russian language in a national school. Baku, 1962, 25 p.
58. Syntagmatics and paradigmatics of phonemes of the Russian language. RYNP, 1972, No. 4, pp. 6-17.
59. Language contacts. M., Nauka, 1970, 205 p.
60. Introductory course to modern Arabic literary language. M., Military. inst. foreign lang., 1952, 278 p.
61. The importance of language contact theory for diachronic phonology. In the book: Basic problems of language evolution. Samarkand, "Fan", 1956, pp. 274-277.
62. On the issue of building a theory of language contacts. Foreign languages, issue 3. Kazakh University Alma-Ata, 1967, pp. 5-15.
63. Specifics of natural and artificial bilingualism and the theory of teaching foreign languages. In the book: Foreign linguistics and literature, issue 2. Alma-Ata, Kazakhstan University, 1972, p.26-33,
64. Textbooks of the Sharabian language. M., Nauka, 1969, 687 pp.
65. Changes in vowels under the influence of neighboring soft consonants. M., Nauka, 1965, 80th.
66. Some issues of phonetic characteristics of hardness and softness of consonants in Russian dialects. In: Experimental phonetic study of Russian dialects. M., Nauka, 1969, pp. 35-137.
67. Kuznetsov P.S. On the basic principles of phonology. VYa, 1959.1. Jfe 2, pp. 28-35.
68. Lebedeva V.G., Introductory course of modern Arabic literature-Yusupov^?M^A" nogo m""B™" 19?2, 480 p.
69. Lomtev T.P. General and Russian linguistics (Selected works).
70. Phonology section. M., Nauka, 1976, pp. 74-121.
71. Loya Y.V. History of linguistic teachings. M., Higher School, 1968, 259 p.
72. Lyubimova N.A. Acoustic characteristics of Russian sonants (group and individual). Author's abstract. Ph.D. diss. L., Leningrad State University, 1966, 17 p.
73. Lyubimova N.A. Teaching Russian pronunciation. M., Russian language, 1977, 190 p.
74. Lyubimova N.A. Spectral characteristics of Russian sonants. - "Bulletin of Leningrad University", 1965, No. 2, pp. 159-167.
75. Martinet A. Fundamentals of general linguistics. New in linguistics, issue 3. M., Progress, 1963, pp. 366-566.
76. Martinet A. Language distribution and structural linguistics. New in linguistics, issue 6. M., 1972, pp. 81-93.
77. Maslouh Saad Acoustic characteristics of the Arabic consonan-Abd-el-Aziz Tism and vocalism and the norm of poetic rhyming.
78. Ph.D. diss. M., Moscow State University, 1975, 146 p.
79. Matusevich M.I., Introduction to general phonetics. M., Education, 1959, 135 p.
80. Matusevich M.I. Modern Russian language. Phonetics. M., Education, 1976, 288 p.
81. Matusevich M.I., Album of articulations of sounds of the Russian language. M., Lyubimova N.A. udN) Ig63> 37
82. Interdependence of the structure of tiers in the languages of the Semitic system. Semitic languages, issue 2, part 2. M., 1965, e.783-816.
83. Systematic analysis of the reasons for the uniqueness of Semitic consonantism. M., MGOI im. V.I.Lenin, 1967, 32 p.
84. History of the rules for combining consonant sounds in the Russian language. Author's abstract. Ph.D. diss. M., Moscow State University, 1966, 19 p.
85. Russian phonetics. M., Education, 1967, 438 p.
86. Some questions related to the category of deafness-voicing of consonants in dialects of the Russian language. In: Experimental-phonetic study of Russian dialects. M., Nauka, 1969, pp. 138-215.
87. Phonetic convergences. VYa, 1957, No. 3, pp. 77-83.
88. Principles of studying phonetic interference when contacting different systems of languages. Candidate's dissertation, Alma-Ata, 1968, 547 p.
89. Introduction to linguistics. M., Education, 1967, 543 pp.
90. Dichotomous classification of differential features and phonemic model of language. In: Questions of the theory of language in modern foreign linguistics. M., USSR Academy of Sciences, I960, pp. 106-122.
91. Reformatsky A.A. 0 some difficulties in learning pronunciation. In: Russian language for foreign students. M., Higher School, 1961, pp. 5-12.
92. Reformatsky A.A. Pronunciation teaching and phonology. "Philological Sciences", 1959, no. 2, pp. 145-157.
93. Reformatsky A.A. About the comparative method. RYANSH, 1962.5, p.23-33.
94. Reformatsky A.A. Consonants contrasted by method and place of formation and their variation in the modern Russian language. Reports and communications from the Institute of Linguistics of the USSR Academy of Sciences, U1N. M., 1955, pp. 3-23.
95. Reformatsky A.A. Phonological studies. M., 1975, 133 p.
96. Reformatsky A.A. Phonology in the service of teaching the pronunciation of a foreign language. RYANSH, 1961, No. 6, p.67-71.
97. Rodova L.N. On interference in second language learning. In: Linguistics and methodology in higher education, issue 1U. M., Ministry of Higher Education of the USSR, 1967, pp. 203-226.
98. Rosenzweig V.Yu. Linguistic approach to describing cultural contacts. M., Nauka, 1964, 8 p.
99. Rosenzweig V.Yu. Basic questions of the theory of language contacts. - New in linguistics, issue 6. M., 1972, pp. 5-22.
100. Rosenzweig V.Yu, 0 language contacts. VYa, 1963, No. I, pp. 57-66.
101. Rosenzweig V.Yu. Problems of language interference. Dr. diss.1. M., 1975, 479 p.
102. Rosenzweig V.Yu. Language contacts. L., Nauka, 1972, 80 p.
103. Salistra I.D. Essays on methods of teaching a foreign language.
104. M., Higher School, 1966, 252 p.
105. Segal B.C. Some questions of sound composition and spelling106. Serebrennikov B.A., 107. Skalozub L.G.108. Sovsun G.V.109. de Saussure F.PO. Starinin V.P.111. Trubetskoy N.S.112. Haugen E.113. Chernykh P.Ya.114. Chistovich L.A. et al.
106. Chistovich L.A., Bondarko L.V.116. Sharbatov G.Sh.117. Shcherba L.V.118. Shcherba L.V.Epics of the modern Arabic literary language. Cand. diss. M., MShMO, 1964, 262 p.
107. Is every comparison useful? RYANSH, 1957, Sh 2, p.10-15.
108. Palatograms and radiographs of consonant phonemes of the Russian literary language. Kyiv, Publishing house Kyiv University, 1963, 144 p.
109. Comparative systems of phonemes of Russian and Arabic languages for the purpose of teaching Arabs Russian pronunciation. In: Theoretical phonetics and teaching pronunciation. M., UDN, 1975, pp. 198-210.
110. Course of general linguistics. Works on linguistics. M., Progress, 1977, pp. 39-269.
111. Structure of the Semitic word. M., Eastern literature, 1963, 115 p.
112. Fundamentals of phonology, M., Foreign literature, i960, 372 p.
113. Language contacts. New in linguistics, issue 6. M., 1972, p. 61-80.
114. On the issue of “mixing*1 and “purity” of languages. Academic Zap. Moscow Regional Pedagogical Institute, 1955, vol. 32, issue 2, pp. Z-P.
115. Speech. Articulation and perception. M.-L., Nauka, 1965, 241 p.
116. On the control of articulatory organs in the process of speech. In: Studies on structural typology. M., Institute of Slavic Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1963, pp. 169-182.
117. Modern Arabic. M., Vost. lit., 1961, 112 p.
118. About the concept of confusion of languages. In the book: Shcherba L.V. Selected works on linguistics and phonetics. L., Leningrad State University, 1958, pp. 40-53.
119. Current problems of linguistics. Elected119. Shcherba L.V.120. Shcherba L.V.121. Shcherba L.V.122. Shevoroshkin V.V., 123. Shirokova A.V.124. Schuchardt G.125. K)tsina L.P.126. Yuimanov N.V.127. Jacobson R., Halle M.
120. Jacobson R., Fant G.M., Halle M.129. Yartseva V.N. New works on linguistics and phonetics, vol. 1. L., Leningrad State University, 1958, pp. 5-24.
121. The concept of bilingualism. In the book: Teaching foreign languages in high school. M., APN, 1947, pp. 54-59.
122. Teaching foreign languages in high school. General questions of methodology. M.-L., ANP, 1947, 96 p.
123. Phonetics of the French language. M., Ed. lit. to foreign lang., 1957, 312 p.
124. Sound chains in the languages of the world. M., Nauka, 1962, 188 p.
125. Lectures on comparative grammar of the Russian language. M., UDN, 1977, 32 p.
126. On the issue of language mixing. Selected articles on linguistics. M., Ed. foreign lit., 1950, pp. 174-184.0 the role of the native language in teaching Russian to foreigners. In the book: From the experience of teaching Russian to foreigners. M., Moscow State University, 1X4, p.6-20.
127. Grammar of literary Arabic. L., 1928, 144 p.
128. Phonology and its relation to phonetics. New in Linguistics, vol. II. M., 1962, pp. 231-278.
129. Introduction to speech analysis. New in Linguistics, vol. II. M., 1962, pp. 173-230.
130. The problem of the connection between language and society in modern foreign linguistics. In the book: Language and society. M., Nauka, 1968, pp. 39-54.
131. Cantineau J. Cours de phonetique arabe. Dans Etnde Unguistique arabe par J. Cantineau. Paris, Klinsieck I960. 167 p. .
132. Ferguson Ch.A. Foreword in Contriduction to Arab linguistics.
133. Carabride, Mass. 1966. 161 p.
134. Ferguson Ch.A" The.Egyptien Emphatic in Arabie. Language, vol. rr.3, 1965. pp.451-452.
135. Ferguson Ch.A. Two problems in Arabic phonology. Word. 13.1957. pp.460-478.
136. Gairdner W.H. The phonetics of Arabic. London, Oxford,
137. University Press, 192? . 107 p.
138. Harrell E.S. A Linguistic analysis of Egyptian Radio Arabic.
139. The Phonology of Egyption Colloguial Arabic", ed., C.H. Ferguson, Cambridge, Harverd University I Press, I960. I6p.
140. Koneczna, H. Obrazy rentgenograficzne rasyskich. Warszawa, 1. Zawadowski W« Tncc1. X956. I60 p.
141. Yildomes V. Multilingualism. Leyden, By Veroboj Yildomes,1. Sytholf. 1963. 357 p.3y»GJW J* *^U>JI ; a^o-.1 *I38
142. Tîôl^ïrYl Â-^aJIv-ÏJlH ^ IJ ♦ T i: r/ : Y/E»j.tnM/c
143. UtçjiJI^I U-Jt ^¿k««- u-I^VI«L®^,1. TTi ♦ IUU1/J»*rr îyblîjl1. AWe J-IiJI zr*r/Js* ll^JI ÎAj.ïll jlj é ¿uJJIi.lyeVl ^YYA a Ml)^ uji j i ^ i f ui i i^jj i ^1. J^f OK1 ♦ 139x" .1401411421431. O^M J15" 4 .144
144. Ijc.l^.UljbüJI ^ ¿LI, j ^-J! .162
145. ы I; I J 6 UJI 4 J I jrJ>J J-C ♦ ^I"I^K O>jUJI) o-r-JI1. CONTENTS1. Page.
146. Oscillograms of accented pronunciation.3
147. X-ray diagrams of Arabic consonants.13
148. Some radiographs of Arabic consonants.47
149. Experimental texts.63
150. Dictionary of accent errors.80
151. Voiced /b/ in place of Russian /p/ in the word “livestock”.ch
152. Deaf /f"/ in place of Russian /v"/ in the word "sheep"
153. On the oscillogram of the word “in Evpatoria” the following is noted: 1. voiceless /f/ in place of Russian /v/2. voiced /v/ in place of Russian /f/3. affricated /t /zet t/1.S
154. On the oscillogram of the word form “newspapers” (r.p.), the pronunciation of the voiceless afriticated /k / in place of the Russian /g/ is noticeable.
155. On the oscillogram the words “contribution” are noticeable: 1. pronunciation of voiced /v/ in place of Russian /f/2. epenthetic vowel /ъ/ between two consonants3. unvoicing at the end
156. On the oscillogram of the word “factor”, svonky /v/ is noticeable in place of Russian /f/ iaffricated /t¡
157. The oscillogram of the word “about this” shows the pronunciation of a labiolabial voiced voiced with an incomplete stop that turns into a gap * *
158. Ni|ii||||||||||1i1||||||ii||||||||1shi|ii||ii11Sh111a|ini|i1Sh1Shiii1Shhi1|Shiii11iii|||1i|1ii111iiSh1
159. On the oscillogram of the word form “in the deep” (“fъglubnyh”) it looks like: 1. voiceless /f/ in place of Russian /v/2. epenthetic vowel /ъ/ between two consonantsshtttptpmntshtntt,
160. On the oscillogram the words “in this” are noticeable: 1. semi-voiced labial-dental in place of the Russian voiced /v/2. voiced affricated /t/ in place of the Russian voiceless /t/
161. On the oscillogram of tin “January”, the adental deafness of the voiced labial-dental11 is noticeable! 11 Ш 111 p,y
Please note that the scientific texts presented above are posted for informational purposes only and were obtained through original dissertation text recognition (OCR). Therefore, they may contain errors associated with imperfect recognition algorithms. There are no such errors in the PDF files of dissertations and abstracts that we deliver.
