The value of learning the Russian language at school. Russian language as a subject "different types of secondary educational institutions

The most important and even dominant place of this subject in the curriculum is determined by the role of the Russian language in life Russian society, in the development of children's thinking, in the formation of their consciousness and self-awareness. The success of students in mastering both the Russian language itself as a means of communication in all forms of its use, and all other academic subjects, therefore, largely depends on the level of its teaching.

Download:

Preview:

Kalina Victoria Gennadievna

Teacher of Russian language and literature

MBOU secondary school №7

Chkalovskoye village, Primorsky Krai

"The role and place of the Russian language in the system of school subjects"

Now they talk a lot about what subjects and to what extent you need to study, what you can “sacrifice” in return for fashionable subjects or special courses, but the set of those subjects that without fail studied in general education school, represents the fundamental core of education. And exactly Russian language the main role is assigned here, since it is not only a subject of study, but also a means of studying other subjects.

The basis of the Russian language as a school subject is the science of the Russian language. It is multidisciplinary: it includes the modern Russian language, its history and dialectology, related sciences - graphics, spelling and punctuation. In different periods of development of the national school, the composition of the subject "Russian language" changed depending on the goals of studying the Russian language, on the level of development of the science of the Russian language and the sciences of the psychological and pedagogical cycle. The Russian language as a native language is one of the most important academic subjects that, together with other school disciplines, form the basis general education graduates.

The teaching of the Russian language in our country has a rich tradition and recognized achievements. Naturally, the transition of the school to new educational standards cannot but worry teachers, and the educational community as a whole. The task of a Russian language teacher today is also to become an active consumer of new information in the field of pedagogy, which appears in large quantities on the net, analyze it and use it in teaching that difficult contingent that has come to classes in recent years.

From the point of view of social order, the modern school should give a solid knowledge of the language, achieve fluency in it. Linguistic science has quite fully described all levels of the Russian language and all functional and stylistic varieties of Russian speech. This made it possible to set the task of learning the language in all its main manifestations. The method of teaching the Russian language, based on the achievements of pedagogy and child psychology, has developed a system for studying new sections of the science of language included in the program and developing coherent speech, thereby creating the possibility of realizing the set goals.

Russian language as academic subject solves two groups of problems: special (they follow from its features) and general subjects (they are implemented by all school disciplines). Also, the Russian language as an academic subject is extremely important in the humanitarian preparation for the life of the younger generation: it lays the foundations of linguistic education, i.e. a body of knowledge about the main means of communication - language, its structure and functioning in speech. Knowledge about it performs two functions: it ensures the competence of students in using the language, and also serves as the basis for the formation of language and speech skills.

The competence of students in knowledge of language and speech is ensured as a result of studying all aspects of the language (its phonetics, vocabulary, word production, morphology and syntax) and speech (its textual basis, stylistic varieties and types of utterance organization), its both forms - oral and written, literary norms. All this, learned quite firmly, provides students with a conscious use of the language in their own speech, a basis for self-control when using the language as a means of communication.

The Russian language program includes a large number of language and speech skills, the formation of which is closely related to knowledge of the language. Spelling and punctuation skills occupy a large place among the skills and abilities formed at school.

State educational standard general education determines, in addition to the general concept of education, the goals and content of training in subject areas. "A mandatory minimum content of the main educational programs» includes a list of topics that must be included in any program in the Russian language, ensuring the formation of three types of competencies: communicative, linguistic and linguistic (linguistics), cultural studies.

The requirements for the level of training of graduates are also included in the Mandatory minimum and describe what exactly as a result of studying the Russian language the student must know, understand, be able to use in practice and Everyday life. For the main general school, an orientation towards speech development and the formation of communicative competence, for high school, a distinction is made between the basic and profile levels.

The need for a deep study of the Russian language at school is determined by its main functions.

The Russian language serves a person:

means of design and expression of thought,
communicative means, serving the members of society in their communication with each other,
a means of expressing feelings, moods (emotional sphere).

The Russian language stores the results of the cognitive activity of the people, reflecting its past and present, and passes on the accumulated knowledge to the next generations.

The most important and even dominant place of this subject in the curriculum is determined by the role of the Russian language in the life of Russian society, in the development of children's thinking, in the formation of their consciousness and self-awareness.

The success of students in mastering both the Russian language itself as a means of communication in all forms of its use, and all other academic subjects, therefore, largely depends on the level of its teaching.

The role of the Russian language in the system of general education.

Goals and objectives of teaching the Russian language at the present stage.

The structure and content of the Russian language course in secondary school.

Russian language programs for high school.

Interdisciplinary connections in the lessons of the Russian language.

1. The role of the Russian language in the system of general education

The native language, as a universal means of conveying social experience, plays a huge role in the self-consciousness of the people, is the most important source and means of knowing and preserving the traditions of national culture and history, and the primary element of fiction. With the help of language, a person masters the cultural heritage and culture of modern society. F. I. Buslaev, pointing out the need to study mother tongue, noted that "the native language is an inexhaustible treasury of the entire spiritual existence of mankind ...".

Russian is one of the most widely spoken languages in the world. It is spoken by about 250 million people. Russian is the working language of the UN (along with English, Arabic, Spanish, Chinese, French). The Russian language is used as the language of interethnic communication between the peoples of Russia.

The Russian language occupies a special place in the education system, due to its social significance. Being the state language of the Russian Federation, it is a compulsory subject of all general education schools, being included in the federal component of the curriculum. As an academic subject, the Russian language acts as a means of developing logical thinking, moral, aesthetic and communicative culture of students, influencing the quality of mastering other school subjects. The role of the Russian language in the development of memory, attention, observation and other personality traits is great.

In recent decades great importance is given to the cultural aspect in teaching the Russian language, which aims at the assimilation of the cultural component of language units, reflecting the concepts of spiritual and moral values of the people, awareness of the beauty and expressiveness of native speech. "The language, considered as the property of all those who speak it, by virtue of its cumulative function, is a true mirror of national culture."

The cumulative function of language - the function of accumulating social experience and knowledge - is manifested in the ability to reflect and store knowledge. Thanks to the language, scientific, religious, philosophical ideas become common property, the continuity of generations is preserved.

The cumulative function of language is closely connected with the nominative and cognitive function - everything that is known in objective reality receives its nomination, i.e., is fixed in the language. Language and culture are defined as the most important social phenomena that have an activity character, since they exist only in the sphere of human activity. Language, not being a form of culture, serves as the main means of its expression, the material basis for the creation of any cultural values, an instrument for the accumulation, storage and transmission of information.

The cultural approach to the study of a language is associated with the concepts of "linguistic picture of the world", "linguistic personality", "dialogue of cultures".

Language picture of the world- these are the features of the culture of the people, reflected in the language. In the linguistic picture of the world, both individual knowledge about the world and social knowledge (of a team of people, specialists), as well as universal knowledge and values are distinguished. According to Yu. N. Karaulov, “acquiring an idea of the external world, improving, detailing and developing his picture of the world (in ontogeny), a person masters the language, deepens and makes language semantics more flexible, develops his ability or competence.”

The linguistic picture of the world expresses the national and cultural specifics of the worldview of the people. Language is closely connected with the psychological make-up of the ethnic group to which it belongs. Therefore, when studying subjects of the philological cycle, the principle of taking into account the national psychology of students is important. Introducing students to the national culture, Special attention one should pay attention to what unites it with the cultures of other peoples and, most importantly, to that advanced and valuable thing that has positive influence on the formation of the personality of students in modern conditions.

Being the source of universal human morality, national culture, the personality is considered as the leading social and ethical category expressing spirituality. Language personality is formed throughout the entire period of schooling, and above all in the process of learning the native language as a source of development of the spiritual abilities of schoolchildren. “Linguistic personality is that cross-cutting idea that ... permeates all aspects of language learning and at the same time destroys the boundaries between disciplines that study a person, since you cannot study a person outside his language.”

Dialogue of cultures in the process of teaching the Russian language, it helps schoolchildren to learn the national culture, to find common features that unite the cultures of different peoples. “The main focus of the cultural aspect is the students' awareness of the phenomenon of the Russian language, its richness, originality, and national identity. Its main goals are the development of the spiritual and moral world of the student, national and personal self-awareness, students' awareness of the diversity of the spiritual and material world, their recognition and understanding of the values of another culture, respect for it.

The lessons of the Russian language, therefore, should be considered as lessons in the education of morality, familiarization with the national culture, the formation of national self-consciousness. Teaching the native language in this aspect is associated with the intellectual development of the individual, her thinking.

Russian language as a subject in elementary school

The Russian language is compulsory for studying at school, in particular, in the primary grades. This is determined by its main functions:
language serves a person as a means of designing and expressing thoughts, a means of communication and a means of expressing feelings, moods;
ability to speak, read and write in one's native language necessary condition and a means of educational work of students;
language is an important means of education.
One of the most important tasks of the methodology of the Russian language is to define and form the course of the Russian language at school (and, in particular, in the primary grades of the school) as an academic subject.

Tasks of teaching the Russian language:
develop oral and written speech of students;
to teach children who came to grade 1 to read and write, that is, elementary reading and writing, and to further improve these skills;
to teach the literary norm - spelling and punctuation literate writing, orthoepic correct pronunciation and mastering the expressiveness of speech and elements of style;
study theoretical material on grammar, phonetics, vocabulary, form a system of scientific concepts in the language;
to introduce schoolchildren to samples of fiction, popular science and other literature through reading and grammar lessons, to help them master the ability to perceive a literary work.
The Russian language program for elementary grades specifies these tasks. The program is a state document that determines the content of the subject, its volume, the sequence of presentation of the material, as well as the basic requirements for the level of knowledge, skills and abilities in the subject. The implementation of the program by the teacher and students is strictly mandatory, and expansion or narrowing of the program is not allowed.

Principles for constructing a curriculum in the Russian language:
System-descriptive (when selecting the content of training, it ensures that students master the system of the Russian language and how to apply the knowledge of this system in practice);
Communicative-speech (orientation towards interconnected learning of all types of speech activity (listening to speaking, reading, writing) in order to form students' ability to solve communicative tasks by language means in different situations of communication);
The principle of cultural conformity (determines the direction of the content of language education towards the assimilation and appropriation by students of the cultural, spiritual, moral values of the Russian people, enshrined in the language).

Types of programs:
The sample program is a federal reference document with a minimally specific description of the content.
An exemplary program is a guideline for compiling author's curricula and textbooks, work programs training course, subject, discipline and determines the mandatory part of the training course, subject, discipline, outside of which there remains the possibility of the author's choice of the variable component of the content of education.
The author's program is a document created on the basis of the Federal State Educational Standard and an exemplary program and having an author's concept of building the content of a training course, subject, discipline. The author's program is developed by one or a group of authors. Implementation into practice educational institutions The author's program is preceded by its examination and approbation.
Work program - regulatory and management document educational institution characterizing the system of organization of educational activities.
The work program specifies the Federal State Educational Standard, taking into account the necessary requirements for its construction, and also describes the national-regional level, takes into account the possibilities of methodological, informational, technical support educational process, the level of preparation of students, reflects the specifics of education in a given educational institution.

Methods of teaching the Russian language.
The problem of classification of teaching methods is still relevant. At present, there is no single point of view on this issue. Due to the fact that different authors base the division of teaching methods into groups and subgroups on different signs, there are a number of classifications.
I. The earliest classification is the division of teaching methods into teacher's work methods (storytelling, explanation, conversation) and student work methods (exercises, independent work).
II. From the beginning of the 30s of the 20th century to the present, the classification of methods according to the source of knowledge acquisition is considered the most common, and as applied to the Russian language, it is presented as follows:
verbal methods - the source of knowledge is the oral or printed word;
practical methods - students gain knowledge and develop skills by performing practical actions;
visual methods - the source of knowledge is observed objects, phenomena, visual aids (showing posters, diagrams, films, demonstrating experiments, etc.).
Classification according to the source of knowledge acquisition has been criticized in the pedagogical literature more than once and quite justifiably. The main drawback of this classification is that it does not reflect the nature of the cognitive activity of students in learning, does not reflect the degree of their independence in educational work.
III. Classification of methods according to the nature of the cognitive activity of students:
Information-receptive (explanatory-illustrative) - a method consisting in the presentation of ready-made information by the teacher and its assimilation in the form of students.
Reproductive - a method that involves organizing the reproduction of methods of activity that the teacher reported earlier and showed a sample of the implementation of which (solution of typical tasks, exercises, retelling of texts on the instructions of the teacher).
Method of problem presentation - a method that involves the formulation of the problem by the teacher; the teacher himself solves this problem, but certainly demonstrates the contradictory ways of the process of cognition itself, illustrating the culture of thinking in the course of solving the problem.
Partial search (heuristic) method - a method that involves the initial mastery of individual elements of search activity by students (for example, the teacher poses a problem, the students put forward only a hypothesis, or the teacher states the facts, and the students draw conclusions).
Research - a method that involves the organization by the teacher of the search creative activity of students by setting new problems and problematic tasks for them.

Russian language textbook as a source of knowledge.
The textbook is the most important teaching tool, the main source of systematized knowledge. Its content and structure are subordinated to the tasks of teaching, developing and educating students.
Components of the Russian language textbook:
1. Systematized educational material that contains knowledge in the form of rules (grammar, spelling, punctuation) and language concepts.
2. Language material: letters, syllables, words, sentences, texts.
3. Apparatus for organizing assimilation:
questions and tasks
exercises (for the introduction of new material; for the formation of skills)
instructional instructions (memos, analysis samples)
4. Orientation apparatus (table of contents, headings, symbols).
The tutorial can be used for:
organizing observations on linguistic material
working with the rule
consolidation of knowledge
homework
references

On the first of September, new ones appear in schools compulsory subjects- native language and native literature, as well as a second foreign language.

From the manuals

“Unlike the subjects “Russian language”, “literature”, the study of the subjects “native language”, “native literature” is of a cultural nature,” said AiF-Altai vaguely in the education committee of the city of Barnaul.

In the methodological explanations on this matter, it is ornately stated that "study should provide: the education of a value attitude to the native Russian language and native Russian literature as the guardian of culture, the acquisition of knowledge about the native language as a system and a developing phenomenon."

Judging by the discussions of the topic in parent chats, while new items cause more negative emotions

"We are confused"

“To be honest, we are not happy about this, moreover, we are confused,” the head teacher of one of the schools shared with the AiF-Altai correspondent on condition of anonymity. “Firstly, many teachers still do not have any methodological recommendations, and secondly, it is not clear how to include new hours in the schedule - the load is already heavy.”

According to the interlocutor, before that, the school wanted to make a five-day week, now these plans are ruined.

“Indeed, the introduction of new subjects makes schools postpone the transition to a five-day period, otherwise it will be too much work,” explained Natalya Mikhalchuk, deputy chairman of the city education committee.

Each school, as we were told, will decide for itself how to add these hours. For example, in Barnaul Gymnasium No. 40, an hour was taken away from mathematics for the “native language”.

“Before that, we studied folklore, Altai literature within the framework of those hours that were,” says the mother of three schoolgirls Maria Saltykova. - Now teachers need to somehow manage to take time away from other subjects. How they will do it is not clear.”

“Another problem is the lack of textbooks, they will only guidelines", sigh the teachers.

A good idea turns into a parody

“The idea of learning one's native language is a good one in itself,” says children's writer Irina Tskhai. - Once upon a time there was a Korean language school in Barnaul under the organization of the National Korean Society, and we went there to study. The teacher Pak Gennady Alexandrovich was a unique person. It is very interesting to understand the depths of one's language, but I suspect that what will happen in schools now will be a parody. No one will provide teachers for Armenian, Tatar, and so on.”

“Yes, there are many children of migrants studying in our schools today. They write a statement that they want to study Russian as their native language, ”the city education committee explained.

“And they will have to agree to learn Russian,” says Alexander Ovsievsky, director of gymnasium No. 40. “We also have children from foreign countries- everyone learns Russian, no one asks for their native language. We simply do not have the capacity to provide individual educators.”

Russian language as a subject, its specificity.

School subject- this is a particular scientific discipline or field of activity adapted to the study.

The Russian language as a mother tongue is one of the most important academic subjects that, together with other school disciplines, form the basis of the general education of graduates.

Functions:

subject of study and teaching

means of studying all other subjects.

PR in modern school

studied from I to IX class. In grades X-XI, for many years it was taught as an optional subject (depending on the type of school and the possibilities to introduce the subject "Russian" into the curriculum). At present, in many regions of Russia, compulsory Russian language lessons are provided for in high school.

Learning objectives- one of the main categories of methodology that characterizes the subject in terms of the reason for its inclusion in the curriculum.

This category is historically variable. In different periods of the development of the national school, different goals for teaching the Russian language were set - narrow or broad. There was a period when the Russian language was not studied at all (1923-1927), but the goals of work on the language were formulated.

Goal Setting Factors: social order; the level of development of the relevant science (in this case, linguistics); the level of development of pedagogy, child psychology and the very methodology of teaching the Russian language.

From the point of view of social order, the modern school should give a solid knowledge of the language, achieve fluency in it. Linguistic science has quite fully described all levels of the Russian language and all functional and stylistic varieties of Russian speech. This made it possible to set the task of learning the language in all its main manifestations. (For the first time this task was set by F.I. Buslaev in 1844. See 2.) The methodology of teaching the Russian language, based on the achievements of pedagogy and child psychology, developed a system for studying new sections of the science of language included in the program and developing coherent speech, thereby creating the possibility of achieving the set goals.

The Russian language as an academic subject solves two groups of tasks: special (they follow from its features) and general subjects (they are implemented by all school disciplines).

Course composition:

A system of linguistic concepts that should make up students' knowledge of language and speech,

Spelling and punctuation rules that are introduced into the Russian language course; the acquisition of the ability and skill to apply spelling rules is one of the most significant practical goals of teaching the Russian language,

Speech skills that should be developed in the process of studying the main course and lessons in the development of speech.

The course structure assumes a specific distribution of the material by classes, semesters, quarters.

When determining what children need to be taught, one should know the composition of the school course of the Russian language, the principles of selection educational material, as well as features of selected concepts and skills included in the Russian language program for secondary school.

Of the four types of educational material, the school course of the Russian language includes three:

Language knowledge

Language skills

Methods of activity with linguistic phenomena.

At school, only a part of the scientific course of the Russian language is studied. This is explained by the age of the students and the needs of their education at the age of 11-15. For this purpose, the scientific course is minimized, the minimum of necessary knowledge is selected from it.

When forming the conceptual basis of the modern school course of the Russian language (that is, knowledge about the language), the compilers of the programs are guided by both general didactic principles and special ones. The concepts selected for study at school are considered from the point of view of their scientific nature, general acceptance, and accessibility.

The basis for minimizing the scientific course of the Russian language for the school was special criteria, i.e. principles arising from the tasks of the school course of the Russian language: ideological, systemic, functional, aesthetic, communicative, practical, historical and interdisciplinary.

Technologies, methods and techniques of teaching (on the material of the subject "Russian language").

Pedagogical technology- this is a strictly scientific design and accurate reproduction of pedagogical actions that guarantee success.

Since the pedagogical process is always based on a certain system of principles, pedagogical technology can be considered as a set of external and internal actions aimed at the consistent implementation of these principles in their objective relationship, where the personality of the teacher is fully manifested. This is precisely the difference between pedagogical technology and the methodology of teaching an academic discipline.

The concept of "methodology" expresses the use of a set of methods and techniques of training and education, regardless of the actor. Pedagogical technology involves the participation of a teacher who provides training. It follows from this that any educational task can be effectively solved with the help of adequate technology used by a professional teacher in his work.

Methods of teaching the Russian language.

Werner-Stavkin classification

According to the nature of cognitive activity

reproductive:

reproductive

The goal is to acquire new knowledge. Teach students to work on their own. For this method, light or partially familiar topics are selected.

explanatory - illustrative

The goal is to communicate ready-made knowledge.! Saves time - The teacher gives a sample for studying in the literary language.

Productive:

Partial search

The goal is to teach the elements of creative activity. The teacher organizes the work - the students themselves do the task, then draw a conclusion.

Problem based learning

The teacher himself poses the problem and shows how to solve it.

Research

Children must find the problem themselves. (In Panov's textbook). Task: to help children understand the essence of our language.

According to the logic of the presentation of the material

Deductive

Inductive

What determines the choice of method:

Age features

Level of existing knowledge

From the nature of the material

From the didactic and educational purpose of the lesson.

Methods must be combined!

Functions of teaching methods:

Educational, developing and educating. The unity of training, development and education is the basic principle of the educational process carried out by the modern school.

The leading function of the teaching method is educational(training), which is aimed at deep and lasting assimilation of program material. The student's ability to apply the acquired knowledge in practice or to acquire new knowledge is a criterion for the teaching function of the method.

Educational the function of the teaching method is closely related to the educational one. So, the exercise is designed to implement a teaching function, but at the same time it should be designed for the general development of students, for the development of their thoughts, creative abilities. This function is manifested in the consistent development of the quality of the student's knowledge, his spelling and speech skills.

nurturing the function of the teaching method involves the implementation of educational tasks in the learning process, i.e. this is such training in which an organic connection is achieved between the acquisition of knowledge, skills and abilities by students and the formation of their personality.

Teaching principles:

Unity of form and content

Gradual formation of linguistic knowledge and linguistic concepts with their mandatory systematization

Any language concept must be introduced, used, applied to other sections

Relationship between grammar and speech

Relationship in the study of language sections: vocabulary-morphemic; morphemic-morphology; morphology-syntax; syntax-phonetics (intonation)

Creative assimilation of all rules, definitions. Understanding can emerge from analysis.

The relationship of language lessons with artistic text(text analysis)

Analysis Lesson Structure

Types of lessons

Recently, in the theory and practice of teaching (including the Russian language), there has been a tendency towards a wider use of non-traditional forms of conducting lessons.

lesson-seminar

lesson-test

lesson-discussion

practical lesson, etc.

As practice of experienced teachers has shown, these forms of lessons are quite effective and have many advantages, in particular:

- contribute to the development of the ability to analyze, compare and generalize the studied phenomena;

- contribute to the improvement of the process of mastering knowledge and skills, the development of oral and writing students;

– develop skills in working with linguistic reference literature, etc.

Such lessons are recommended not only in high school, but also in the middle level of education. The ambiguous approach of some scientists to non-traditional forms of education is interesting. It manifests itself, in particular, in the interpretation of the relationship between the type of lesson and the form of its conduct, i.e., the relationship between the concepts of “type” and “kind” of a lesson: for example, some experts consider a lesson-seminar, a lesson-dispute, a lesson-workshop, etc. etc. as varieties of individual types of lessons, while others single them out as separate types, which cannot be accepted, since in all these cases the new forms are only varieties of individual types of lessons. Such approaches also take place in the methodology of teaching the Russian language.

* Types of lessons

Thus, the division into types should occur within the framework of the lesson typology used. So, for example, M. I. Makhmutov, within the framework of individual types, also identifies the corresponding types of lessons, which can be illustrated by the following table:

A LITTLE HISTORICAL FUCK:

Then the most famous were the works of such authors of university textbooks (and teaching aids), as I. N. Kazantsev, M. N. Danilov, B. P. Esipov, I. T. Ogorodnikov, T. A. Ilyina, G. I. Shchukina, V. A. Onishchuk, Yu. B. Zotov and others. It should be emphasized that the classifications of lessons by different authors differed not only in what they are based on, but also in the number of types distinguished, even if they are based on the same feature (or a number of features). For example, classifications built according to a didactic purpose have an unequal number of lesson types (I. N. Kazantsev has 10 types of lessons, I. T. Ogorodnikov has 5, B. P. Esipov has 5, Yu. B. Zotov has 4, etc.).

One of the reasons for the discrepancy in the classification of lessons is the ambiguous understanding of some important concepts of didactics, for example, the concepts of "general didactic (educational) goal" and "the goal of organizing classes."

Let's explain this with a specific example. For a long time, the most common classifications of lessons in pedagogical theory and practice were (and still remain) the classification of lessons according to the main didactic purpose of the lessons. Thus, the well-known didacticist V. A. Onischuk in the manual “Types, structure and methods of the lesson” (Kyiv, 1985) proposed the following typology of lessons according to the main educational goal: 1) a lesson in mastering new knowledge; 2) a lesson in mastering skills and abilities; 3) a lesson in the integrated application of knowledge, skills and abilities; 4) a lesson on generalization and systematization of knowledge; 5) a lesson in checking, evaluating and correcting knowledge, skills and abilities; 6) combined lesson. Such a typology of lessons has found wide application in the methodology of teaching the Russian language at school. However, the whole problem is that the concept of “main educational goal” was understood by different authors ambiguously, which M. I. Makhmutov drew attention to in his book “Modern Lesson” (M., 1985), which distinguishes between the concepts of “didactic goal” and "the purpose of the organization of classes." The first has, in his opinion, a more general and purely pedagogical character (organize the study of new material, improve the knowledge, skills and abilities of students, etc.). The second goal clarifies the essence (methodology) of studying (or improving) knowledge, skills and abilities. This is the assimilation of new concepts, the application of what has been learned in exercises and in solving problems, etc. in the very course of training. The indistinguishability of concepts and goals has led to the fact that some authors, for example, V. A. Onishchuk, single out such lessons as separate types:

– lessons of mastering new knowledge;

– lessons of mastering skills and abilities;

- lessons in the application of knowledge and skills.

The above typology of lessons was also focused on the study of the Russian language course, which does not correspond to the specifics of this subject, since the assimilation of new knowledge here practically occurs simultaneously with the assimilation and application of skills and abilities in the same lesson (and not three).

In fact, they intersect, providing the implementation of a systemic-activity approach in learning, when knowledge is acquired as ways of activity.

Unfortunately, it can be stated that there is still no consensus either on the classification of lessons, or on what principle certain types of lessons should be distinguished both in didactics and in private methods. This problem undoubtedly requires further research and practical development. Some advances in solving this issue were made in the works of M. I. Makhmutov, a well-known didactic specialist in issues of problem-developing education. In particular, he suggests the following typology of lessons:

1) lessons of learning new material, including an introductory lesson;

2) lessons on improving knowledge, skills and abilities, including lessons on consolidating knowledge, developing skills and abilities, lessons on generalization and systematization of knowledge, lessons on targeted application of what has been learned, etc.;

3) combined lessons, which include the main types of all four types;

4) lessons of control and correction of knowledge, skills and abilities.

The main content of the lesson of the first type is the study of new material. Main didactic goal this lesson- ensure that students fully master the new material. This didactic goal is achieved by solving the following main tasks: the assimilation of not only new concepts, but also methods of action, the formation of a knowledge system and methods of independent search activity.

In the lesson of the third type (combined lesson), problems of both the first and second types are solved in the aggregate.

Control lessons serve to assess the learning process and its results, the level of assimilation of the knowledge system (on the topic, section, the entire course), the formation of skills and abilities of students' educational and cognitive activity. Control can be carried out both orally and in writing.

In addition, from the standpoint of the development of cognitive independence of students, M. I. Makhmutov classifies all varieties of the modern lesson on the basis of the problem principle:

1) problem lessons;

2) non-problem lessons.

The author considers a problematic lesson in which the teacher deliberately creates problem situations and organizes the search activity of students to independently formulate educational problems and solve them (the highest level of problematicity) or he himself poses problems and solves them, showing students the logic of thought in the search situation (the lowest level of problematicity). ).

M. I. Makhmutov calls problem lessons “synthetic”. The main thing here is not that several didactic tasks are solved in the lesson. The essence of a synthetic lesson lies in the fact that in it the repetition of what has been passed usually merges with the introduction of new material, as a result of which there is, as it were, an imperceptible entry of students into a new topic. A synthetic lesson continuously repeats knowledge, skills and abilities, including them in new connections and combinations, which ensures the complexity and interconnection of the main stages of the lesson (explaining new material, perceiving it, mastering new concepts, developing skills).

Thus, in a problematic "synthetic" lesson there is no clear division into stages, everything is closely interconnected in it due to the combination of teaching and learning methods.

In conclusion, it should be noted that of the modern pedagogical trends that develop the concepts of the lesson, the most advanced is the concept of problem-developing learning and the corresponding model of the problem lesson, which is most fully covered in the works of M. I. Makhmutov. Therefore, to a certain extent (taking into account the peculiarities of the methodology of the subject) it can be relied upon in the further development and improvement of the basic models of Russian language lessons in modern schools.

Stylistic mistakes

The use of the word in an unusual sense: To be literate and have a large jargon of words, you need to read a lot. Correct: To be literate and have a large vocabulary, you need to read a lot.

Violation of lexical compatibility: cheap prices vm. low prices, increase the level of welfare vm. increasing the level of well-being (“level” can be increased or decreased, but not increased or decreased); This is of great importance. It has a big meaning or It plays a big role (“meaning” is combined with the verb “to have”, “play” is combined with “role”).

The use of an extra word (pleonasm): Feathered birds have arrived. The birds have flown; He was indignant at the indignation of vm. He was indignant. or He was indignant.

The use of words next to or close to each other in a sentence with the same root (tautology): The story "Mumu" tells ... vm. The story "Mumu" tells...; In the image of Nilovna, she is depicted ... vm. In the image of Nilovna,...

Lexical repetitions in the text: I recently read an interesting book. This book is called The Young Guard. This book tells an interesting story... Better: I recently read an interesting book called The Young Guard. It tells... In order to study well, students must pay more attention to teaching. Better: To be successful, students need to pay more attention to class.

The use of a word (expression) of inappropriate stylistic coloring. So, in a literary context, the use of jargon, vernacular, abusive vocabulary is inappropriate; in a business text, colloquial words, words expressively colored should be avoided. Example: The trustee of charitable institutions sucks up to the auditor. Better: The trustee of charitable institutions fawns over the auditor.

Mixing vocabulary from different historical eras: On the heroes of chain mail, trousers, mittens. That's right: Nabogatyrs wear chain mail, armor, mittens.

Poverty and monotony of syntactic constructions: The man was dressed in a burnt padded jacket. The quilted jacket was roughly darned. The boots were almost new. Moth-eaten socks. Better: The man was dressed in a roughly darned, burnt padded jacket. Although the boots were almost new, the socks were moth-eaten.

Wrong word order: There are many works that tell the story of the author's childhood in world literature. Better: In world literature there are many works that tell about the author's childhood.

Stylistic and semantic disparity between the parts of the sentence: Red-haired, fat, healthy, with a shiny face, the singer Tamagno attracted Serov as a person of great inner energy. Better: The enormous inner energy that attracted Serov to the singer Tamagno was also reflected in his appearance: massive, with lush red hair, with a face splashing with health.

If we group the defective statements collected here on linguistic grounds, bringing the same type of errors into a single block, we will get two dozen of their varieties, among which stylistic, grammatical (control, coordination, incorrect formation), lexical and accentological, i.e. accent errors. Isolated facts represent violations related to the grammatical gender of abbreviations (one Central Committee instead of one Central Committee, the IMF itself instead of the IMF itself, NATO - it instead of it and similar; with the formation of a comparative degree of adjectives and a short form (weaker, weaker, more modest, more worse, more detailed, former instead of former); with a omission of a word in the phrase (introduce Chernomyrdin instead of introduce Chernomyrdin's candidacy; wind gusts reached fifteen to twenty meters per second instead of reaching speed; the film "Armageddon" will take place instead of watching or premiere of the film; the result of our circle questions instead of the outcome of the consideration; whom the President had in mind instead of the President, etc.); with a logical contradiction in the statement generated by a hidden mental conflict, or with a contamination of several phrases (I saw it again for the first time; the temperature will not be very cold; Gaidar said, that I did not believe my eyes; an internationalist group of criminals, which included two Tajiks, Mr. Ruzin, Chechen, Ukrainian and Muscovite).

Two groups of error types:

· Precision

Contamination of words and forms

In the future, the commentary will concern the most common types of errors listed above, but first we would like to single out two groups of specific violations of the correctness and purity of Russian speech, which, in addition to the frequency of their occurrence and the linguistic grounds for their appearance, are characterized by additional sociopsychological properties that require separate consideration.

precision errors

So, the first of the two groups of errors combines the words and constructions that we called precision. The term, having rethought it somewhat, we took from the theory of translation, where language units are called precision, which require particularly high accuracy when translating them into other languages. These are, as a rule, proper names, numerical values and some newly emerging names that have not yet received unambiguous equivalents in other languages. All of them require precise knowledge. As applied to linguistic errors that violate the accuracy of Russian speech, in the scope of the term “precision”, we include words and constructions that serve as a stumbling block in mastering the norms of literary speech. In them, deviations from the rules are constantly made in speech practice, just as constantly and persistently noted by experts in the culture of speech, which cannot be eradicated in usus for a long time. This type of error serves as a kind of litmus test, a cultural and speech test for speakers, which determines the degree of their mastery of the culture of Russian speech. The motto of the group of precision words and forms so understood should be the call:

“It must be learned and known!” These include errors of all levels of the language system - grammatical, lexical, orthoepic. Let's start with lexical errors. This is an unacceptable use:

The non-prefixed form "lay down";

The verb “put on” [on oneself] instead of “put on”: you need to wear different shoes - E. Dodolev;

I can wear jeans - V. Tretiak;

I can't wear anything - A. Pugacheva;

He put on himself - Glam;

We will put on a watch, put on headphones, put on glasses, etc. It must be said that this mistake has a centuries-old history, and most of those who make it today in the practice of spontaneous speech theoretically know that the verb “put on” should be used in relation to oneself, since the insistent recommendations of linguists on this matter are known to everyone. Such an internal conflict between widespread usage and knowledge sometimes leads to the opposite effect with a punning meaning: “I was wearing so much ..., i.e. not put on, but hopes” (instead of clothes);

Take action instead of take action, but take steps or actions;

Voice in the meaning of “call, inform, pronounce aloud”:

candidates announced (N. Ryzhkov); voiced information that (O. Sitnova); the message was voiced by (N. Petkova); voiced the point of view (M. Dementieva); and, finally, a double mistake - he voiced that (G. Zyuganov). The verb to sound in literary Russian has the meaning "to record the soundtrack (of the film) separately from the shooting." Its use in the above sense (“to pronounce”) is a gross violation of the norm, distorting the laws of word compatibility and aesthetically insulting the hearing of a native speaker of the Russian language, but in this erroneous use, some politicians and journalists fell in love with it so much that it became an accessory, a kind of sign of political and journalistic "jargon".

Apparently, the political "jargon" could be the subject of a separate study. The words and word forms included in it play a special sociopsychological role, serving for those who use them as a sign of belonging to the same circle of closely interacting (interacting not only cooperatively, but also located in different positions in this interaction) and understanding each other people. Such a sign, for example, is the word with the wrong accent “intention” (Yu. Maslyukov, G. Kulik, Y. Luzhkov, G. Yavlinsky). Similarly, at one time in the circle of people close to I.V. Stalin, the pronunciation of the word “laviruet” became widespread, which was supposed to emphasize that the one about whom this is said does not always firmly follow the general line of the party. Among the units of political jargon of our time, I would also include the erroneous emphasis in the form “accept”, the failed, fortunately, tendency to pronounce “start”, the use of the verbs “vote whom” instead of “vote for whom (vote Stepashin) and “introduce whom ( Chernomyrdin)” instead of “nominate Chernomyrdin”;

the word “progress” and the construction “about what” (about this last one - below);

To dominate: this word in the distorted sense of “to exert pressure, to put pressure” is often noted by experts as a cultural and speech error, but nevertheless continues to be found in persons prone to some mannerism and pretentiousness of speech (“... Ivanishevich dominates the Frenchman ... ”- S. Cheskidov). In literary correct usage, to dominate means "to be self-sufficient, to satisfy."

Lexical errors indicating ignorance of the form or meaning of foreign words include such uses as:

The last statement is a creed...” instead of a creed (S. Beloshapkina);

- “Wait for the expansion of creative people” (M. Margolis);

Debitors of this bank ... (A. Knyazeva), where the basis of the error is the paronymic convergence of the words debit and debut;

- “the main topic of the rally was the contradictions between Protestants” (E. Glazunova), where the last word in the phrase is the author's new formation from the phrase of an adjective with a noun PROTEST + demonstrator-ANTS. But at the same time, the speaker did not feel that the occasionalism she created by contracting two words into one coincided with a word already existing in the language with a completely different meaning, which gave rise to difficulties in the perception of the statement by the listeners;

Incorrect pronunciation of the words “incident” (O. Mayatskaya) and “compromise” (D. Muratov, N. Petkova) with an extra sound “n” in the root.

In the field of grammar, we find old, for many years, ineradicable errors:

In case management: according to many years of observations (A. Lebed), according to the laws (V. Komissarov, G. Seleznev), where the genitive form is used instead of the dative (correctly - according to the laws); pay for services (Yu. Luzhkov) instead of paying for services or paying for services;

In agreement: both departments, both sides (Druzhba newspaper, M. Leontiev) instead of both; out of seventy cases, two are accepted for consideration instead of two cases, but two people.

Nai more errors for agreement are given by compound numerals, which are correctly changed by cases, agreeing on the forms of their constituent parts, many journalists, Politicians and government officials are not able to: to the eight hundred and fiftieth anniversary of Moscow (A. Krotov) instead of eight hundred and fifty years; in all four hundred and seventy volumes of this case (N. Nikolaev) instead of four hundred and seventy; three hundred and seventy deputies voted, with sixty-three against (A. Andreev) instead of sixty-three, and so on. in the statements of V. Sinelnikov, S. Mironov, P. Lobkov, E. Novoselskaya, in the texts of “MK”. As one of the explanations for most errors in the formation of case forms of complex numerals, the following circumstance should be borne in mind. The speaker wants the number he calls to be exactly, without distortion, perceived by the listener. Oral speech proceeds in different conditions and often encounters interference - extraneous noise, distraction of the listener's attention, possible pronunciation defects of the speaker, malfunctions in technical means connections. In order to minimize the impact of interference on the way of transmitting numerical information, the speaker, taking into account the interests of the addressee of speech, pronounces numerals as unchanging words. This circumstance, of course, does not justify the mistake, but somehow helps to understand it. possible reasons(Recall that in the language of professional military, in order to avoid distortion, it is forbidden to inflect the names of settlements and numerals that convey digital designations.).

From the field of syntax, to the group of precision errors, I include the above forbidden adverbial phrase (“looking out the window, my hat fell off”) and the construction “about that”. You can “talk about what”, you can “tell” or “hear”, but not all verbs for transmitting and receiving information allow such control. The spread in the public “about what” to an increasing number of “informational” verbs, having become a sign of political and journalistic jargon, is now turning into a mass trend that puts pressure on the literary norm, and in relation to those using this construction is evidence of an insufficiently strict attitude to your own speech. Such expressions should be considered unacceptable: they discussed that (B. Berezovsky); claim that (A. Ankudinov); understood / was understood that (S. Sorokina, A. Krupenin, V. Tokmenev); during the period of time that you indicate (V. Putin); means that (M. Zadornov); do not believe that (A. Lukyanov); expected that (V. Ilyukhin); a mistake was made that (P. Gusev), voiced that (G. Zyuganov); speaking about what he noticed (E. Kiselev).

Finally, the last variety of uncodified expressions in this group are errors in stress. In general, accentological errors

recorded in the material under consideration are very diverse, however, I include among the precision ones those that are found in a small group of words, but are constantly repeated and with which speech culture experts have been struggling for decades. These words in the correct pronunciation (agreement, quarter, funds, intentions, language Oh, accept, start) you just need to memorize those who sin with these mistakes, adding to this list a group of participles, often pronounced with the wrong emphasis on the root -nes- and root - ved-, while their normative sound requires the emphasis on the suffix (carried out, applied) or on the ending (given, erected, introduced, etc.). The word “begin” has a complex accentological paradigm with a movable stress in its various forms, and although the incorrect original form “begin” has become a byword and has given rise to many anecdotes, the mistake expelled through the door flies into the windows of its other word forms: the fire has begun (A . Medvedev) - instead of started or started; negotiations that have begun (A. Stepanenko) - instead of those that have begun; began to get involved (W. Wolf) - instead of beginning, etc.

Although the total precision errors noted in our material are no more than 10%, they cut the ear of a native speaker most sharply. Any of the words and expressions listed in this section can be used to test the speech literacy of speakers: “how do you pronounce the word “remedy” in the plural?” In general, these precision words need to be known, learned once and for all.

Contamination of words and forms

The second group of violations of the correctness and accuracy of speech combines phenomena of a nature other than those discussed above and is one of the most numerous, accounting for about 20% of the entire array. This type of error is no longer associated with static knowledge or ignorance of the rules and specific words, but is determined by the dynamics of the speaker's linguistic competence, his ability to control and develop his speech. In other words, the nature of such errors is no longer only linguistic, but also psychological. Language competence, in addition to knowledge and experience, includes the ability to reflect on the form of the spoken text and the ability to self-evaluate what was said. In conditions of shortage of air time, a TV presenter or an interviewed politician, when formulating an idea, seeks to express it as briefly as possible, but this is the case when the “sister of talent” turns out to be not close and dear to him, but distant, consolidated: “I will not pour many words”, - says A. Asmolov. This statement is the result of reduction, compression of approximately such a normative and normal text: "I will not pour water and say a lot of words."

Such facts, generated by the speaker's desire to combine, "merge into a single word" the meaning of a detailed, verbose expression, received a special name in linguistics - univerbation. The trend towards univerbation has its advantages, responding to the principle of "economy of effort" - one of the fundamental laws of the development of language and speech practice. Compare: we say “detente” instead of “detente of international tension” or “philological faculty” instead of “philological faculty”, etc. But positive effect can turn into its opposite, and univerbation leads to a distortion of the correct Russian speech in situations where the speaker, when formulating his thoughts, has “rival prearticulation plans”, or “conflict speech intentions”, as psychoanalysts put it.

home » Roof installation » The value of learning the Russian language at school. Russian language as a subject "different types of secondary educational institutions