Article: PDF
DOI: 10.51762/1FK-2021-26-04-21
Abstract: Proper names actively respond to all processes taking place in society. Anthroponyms, like any ot- her proper names, are peculiar social signs that reflect changes in society. The article discusses vocative formulas coined on the basis of anthroponyms, used in the youth environment to express the phatic function. While ana- lyzing utterances containing direct address, the author distinguishes three main vocative forms with different degrees of frequency and displaying certain dependences in the aspect of linguistic and extralinguistic causes. Thus, the hypocoristic name is most neutral in terms of expressing subjective evaluation, and its use does not show any change. Qualitative deminative addresses are coined using such word-forming means, which are unconventional for the system of personal names of the modern Russian language and are results of a language game. Qualitative meliorative forms of the name are represented by both word formation variants and a set of other forms derived to express subjective evaluation. The result of the analysis is the statement that modern vocative forms represent the outcome of speech generation from the position of the naming subject, where the purpose of the nominator, their sense of language, and creative abilities are explicated. In addition, the variety of vocative forms in oral communication makes it possible to distinguish three aspects in the nominator’s formation of direct address forms: derivational, slangy and mental, where mostly irregular, unconventional forms of address are analyzed. Each aspect presented reflects the functions of the onym and the intentions of the nominator while coining a direct address. And the derivational aspect supplements other aspects, since any new form of vocative relies, among other things, on the word-forming and semantic potential of the Russian affixes. The article concludes that unconventional forms of direct address indicate the formation of fashionable trends in this area, which are associated with such factors as the processes of internationalization and globa- lization, target settings and sense of language of the nominator, and the specific features of speech generation.
Key words: Vocative; derivation; language game; mentality; word formation models; speech generation; youth; proper names; anthroponyms

Для цитирования:

Федотова, Т. В. Тенденции варьирования вокативных форм в молодежной языковой среде / Т. В. Федотова // Philological Class. – 2021. – Vol. 26 ⋅ №4. – С. 241–248. DOI 10.51762/1FK-2021-26-04-21.

For citation

Fedotova, T. V. (2021). Trends in the Use of Vocative Forms in the Youth Language Environment. In Philological Class. 2021. Vol. 26 ⋅ №4. P. 241–248. DOI 10.51762/1FK-2021-26-04-21.

About the author(s) :

Tatyana V. Fedotova

Kuban State Agricultural University named after I. T. Trubilin (Krasnodar, Russia)

ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8271-7202

References:

Balashova, L. V. (2011). Rechevoi etiket v sovremennom slenge (na materiale metaforicheskikh obrashhenii) [Speech Etiquette in Modern Slang (Based on Metaphorical References)]. In Uchenye zapiski Krymskogo federal’nogo universiteta imeni V. I. Vernadskogo. Filologicheskie nauki. No. 2–1, pp. 266–270.

Daniel, M. A. (2008). Zvatel’nost` kak diskursivnaya kategoriya. Neskol’ko gipotez [Voicefulness as a Discursive Category. Several Hypotheses]. In Issledovaniya po teorii grammatiki.Issue 4. Moscow.

Fedotova, T. V. (2019). Motivatsionnye i derivatsionnye tendentsii v obrazovanii prozvishch sovremennoi molodezhi [Motivational and Derivational Trends in the Formation of Nicknames of Modern Youth]. In Filologicheskie nauki. Nauchnye doklady vysshei shkoly. No. 5, pp. 17–21.

Firdevs, B. K. (2017). Obrashchenie v sovremennom russkom yazyke: vidy i funktsii [Circulation in Modern Russian: Types and Functions]. In Vestnik VGU. Seriya: Filologiya. Zhurnalistika. No. 4, pp. 74–76.

Il»yasova, R. S. (2018). K voprosu ob obrashchenii v sovremennom russkom yazyke [To the Question of Circulation in modern Russian]. In Gumanitarnye i sotsial»nye nauki. No. 3, pp. 72–78.

Kostomarov, V. G. (1999). Yazykovoi vkus epokhi. Iz nablyudenii nad rechevoi praktikoi mass-media [The Linguistic Taste of the Era. From Observations on the Speech Practice of the Mass Media]. Saint Petersburg, Zlatoust. 320 p.

Kryukova, I. V. (2015). Nauchnye podkhody k issledovaniyu modnogo imeni [Scientific Approaches to the Study of the Fashion Name]. In Onomasticheskie nauki. No. 6, pp. 24–28.

Madieva, G. B., Suprun, V. I. (2010). Antroponimy kak sredstvo vyrazheniya natsional»noi kul»tury [Anthroponyms as a Means of Expressing National Culture]. In Izvestiya VGPU. No. 6, pp. 96–102.

Podolskaya, N. V. (1988). Slovar» russkoi onomasticheskoi terminologii [Dictionary of Russian Onomastic Terminology]. Moscow, Nauka. 199 p.

Polonsky, A. V. (2001). Egotiv, vokativ, nominativ: sub»ekt i padezhnaya paradigma [Egotive, Vocative, Nominative: Subject and Case Paradigm]. In Russkii yazyk za rubezhom. No. 3, pp. 46–61.

Ryzhova, L. P. (1981). Kommunikativnye funktsii obrashheniya [Communicative Referral Functions]. In Semantika i pragmatika sintaksicheskikh edinstv. Kalinin, pp. 76–86.

Suprun, V. I. (2000). Onomasticheskoe pole russkogo yazyka i ego khudozhestvenno-esteticheskii potentsial [Onomastic Field of Russian Language and its Artistic and Aesthetic Potential]. Volgograd. 172 p.

Suprun, V. I. (1995). Sokrashchenie imen kak yazykovaya frekventaliya [Name Abbreviation as Language Frecventalia]. In Kirillo-Mefodievskie traditsii na Nizhnei Volge. Volgograd, pp. 56–57.

Suprun, V. I. (2015). Obrashchenie kak otrazhenie russkoi kommunikativnoi kul’tury [Conversion as a Reflection of Russian Communicative Culture]. In Nauka. Mysl‘: elektronnyi periodicheskii zhurnal. No. 11. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/obraschenie-kak-otrazhenie-russkoy-kommunikativnoy-kultury.

Vezhbitskaya, A. (1996). Lichnye imena i ekspressivnoe slovoobrazovanie [Personal Names and Expressive Word Formation]. In Yazyk. Kul’tura. Poznanie. Moscow, pp. 89–200.

Volodina, N. Yu. (2009). Sovremennyi imennik: strategii imyanarecheniya [Modern Namesake: Naming Strategies]. In Vestnik BGU. No. 10, pp. 106-108.

Volodina, N. Yu. (2011). K voprosu ob otnoshenii variativnosti sredi imen sobstvennykh (antroponimov) [To the Question of the Relation of Variability among Proper Names (Anthroponyms)]. In Vestnik IrGTU. No. 2 (49), pp. 244–247.

Vrublevskaya, O. V. (2016). Antroponimicheskaya periferiya kak zona aktivnosti yazykovoi mody [Anthroponymic Periphery as an Activity Zone of Language Fashion]. In Vestnik Ryazanskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. S. A. Esenina. No. 2 (51).

Yanko, T. E. (2010). Obrashcheniya v strukture diskursa [Appeals in the Discourse Structure]. In Logicheskii analizyazyka. Mono-, dia-, polilog v raznykh yazykakh i kul’turakh. Moscow, pp. 456–468.