The lexeme "normal" in Russian speech: a case study

Omelchenko Liliya Nikolaevna PhD in Philology Associate professor, Department of Russian Language and General Linguistics, Buryat State University 670000, Russia, Buryatia region, Ulan-Ude, Smolina str., 24 a, office 2208 liliya03-67@mail.ru Other publications by this author     Bokhieva Marina Viktorovna PhD in Philology Associate professor, Department of Russian Language and General Linguistics, Buryat State University 670000, Russia, Buryatia region, Ulan-Ude, Smolina str., 24 a, office 2208 marina.bohieva@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

Zyryanova Elena Vasil'evna PhD in Philology Associate professor, Department of Russian Language and General Linguistics, Buryat State University 670049, Russia, respublika Buryatiya, g. Ulan-Ude, ul. Smolina, 24 a, kab. 2208 lenkor75@mail.ru Other publications by this author

1.                 Introduction

The topic of the article is related to the problem of functional homonymy in modern Russian linguistics. The lexeme normally was chosen as the subject of the study, the analysis of which is carried out by us in semantic, syntagmatic, functional aspects. In addition to lexical and semantic analysis, corpus methods were used, since in the last twenty years digital information resources have become an important tool of linguistic research, along with traditional sources (dictionaries, grammars, etc.). Reflecting on the prospects for the development of corpus linguistics, V. A. Plungyan wrote that "the corpus, in a sense, returned to linguists their true object - texts in natural language to the fullest extent possible, and the consequences of this unexpected acquisition will still affect in the near future not only linguistic practice, but also linguistic theory" ^{[17, p. 14]}. The data of the National Corpus of the Russian Language (NCRR) served as the material of our study ^[14].

The concept of "functional homonyms", introduced into scientific circulation by O. S. Akhmanova ^{[2, p. 160]}, is clarified in further works: "These are etymologically related words that coincide in sound, but relate to different parts of speech. In most cases, functional homonyms are close in meaning" ^{[3, p. 194]}. The authors of the Russian Corpus Grammar also point out the homonymy of words in grammatical terms ^[20]. To distinguish functional homonyms, linguists rely on the following criteria: categorical meaning, syntactic function of the word, syntagmatic features, semantics. A group of functional homonyms is commonly referred to as the term "homocomplex" ^{[3, 5, 6, 10, 18, 23 and others]}. 

2.                 Discussion

Based on the data we selected from the NCR, it can be argued that the homocomplex "normally" in modern Russian unites a group of functional homonyms (adjective; adverb; predicative (category of state); interjection), which differ in a set of morphological features, syntactic function, syntagmatic features, expressed semantics. All homonyms can be considered active, although not equally. In addition, the word has pragmatic and stylistic features in different speech spheres.

The lexical and semantic analysis of the word involves referring to the lexicographic sources of the Russian language. In explanatory dictionaries, the lexeme normally is marked, first of all, as an adverb formed from the adjective normal, and in its first direct meaning: "NORMAL, adverb. 1. Adverb. to normal (in 1 value). The child is developing normally" ^[22].  The dictionary definition of the adjective is given as follows: "NORMAL, -aya, -oe, -flax, -flax. 1. Corresponding to the norm (in 2 values), relying on the norm. Normal height. The normal length of the working day. || Corresponding to something generally accepted or ordinary, laid down. Normal behavior. 2. Mentally healthy. To a normal, healthy person, it seems that he understands everything he sees and hears. Chekhov. Fear. Everything is fine – everything is fine" ^[22]. The short form of an adjective is normally not fixed separately by explanatory dictionaries in accordance with lexicographic practice.

The data of the NCRE indicate the fact that the lexicographic literature does not provide a complete description of all homonyms normally. Thus, the predicative (category of state) normally remained outside the attention of lexicographers, although it is in this category that the pragmatic potential of the studied word is realized; in addition, cases of the use of the lexeme in the discursive function have not been noted.

Before proceeding to the actual analysis of the token, it is necessary to make the following remark. Russian Russian Grammar in the morphological markup of the NKRJ, as in the subsequent "Russian Corpus Grammar" ^[20], created on the basis of the NKRJ data, the boundaries of parts of speech are determined following the "Grammatical Dictionary of the Russian language" by A. A. Zaliznyak ^[9]. The controversial issue of the Russian grammatical tradition about whether the predicative (category of state) is an independent part of speech is resolved positively, which is reflected in the morphological standard of the corpus, which "serves as the theoretical and methodological basis for morphological markup" ^{[13, p. 117]}.

At the moment, the volume of the NCR is more than 2 billion words, which makes it very representative; the volume of texts allows the researcher to "discover such meanings and uses of the unit of interest that are absent in grammars and dictionaries and in linguistic literature in general" ^{[16, p. 318]}. Our research is based on the material of the main corpus, which includes written prose texts of various genres from the middle of the XVIII century to the beginning of the XXI century; the volume of the corpus is 131488 texts, more than 374 million words. In some cases, examples from the corpus of oral speech, containing transcripts of tape recordings of public and household speech, as well as transcripts of films, were used for comparison and analysis; the volume of this corpus is 4396 texts, more than 13 million words. It is important that grammatical homonymy is removed in these corpora.

Searching in the corpus allows you to get a concordance, that is, a list of examples in which the analyzed word is used in any text, and with an indication of the source. By searching the main body for the presence of the lexeme normally, we received a concordance of 4055 texts with this lexeme functioning in different spheres of speech. Such a volume of concordance becomes valuable material for quantitative and qualitative research. Historically, we did not conduct a special study, however, an attempt was made to trace the development of the semantic and pragmatic potential of the analyzed lexeme. The graph of the distribution of search results by date of creation from 1800 to 2022 allows you to see what is normal for the first time recorded in the main body in the middle of the XIX century. The statistical capabilities of the corpus allow us to consider collocations, that is, such combinations of words that "appear next to each other due to the regular nature of mutual expectation," which is due to the speech tradition ^{[12, p. 35]}. Among the selected texts, a small part turned out to have a grammatical homonymy removed "manually", the main part – with an uncompressed homonymy, their markup in the corpus was done automatically, so we had to differentiate the examples ourselves.

It is normal to have an adjective in short form

The form of the short adjective unit h. cf.R. the lexeme normally occupies the position of the nominal part of the compound predicate in a two-part sentence, as in the following text (this is chronologically the first example with the adjective normally in the main body, dating back to the first half of the XIX century.):

Artificial deadness! Yes, if you want, it is artificial, and in any case it is not normal: do I stand for it? Am I saying the opposite? Name me, for God's sake, at least something that would not be artificial; name at least one attitude, at least one motive, for which one could vouch that it is normal! [M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Contradictions (1847)]

The definition of partial belonging of word forms is not normal, normally in this fragment does not cause difficulties: it is not normal – undoubtedly, the short adjective J.R. in a compound nominal predicate, which is coordinated with the subject it (deadness) in a two–part sentence; normally - the short adjective cf.R. in the same syntactic function with the subject it (motive). The antonymic use of these adjectives in the same context in the novel by M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin "Contradictions" implements the first meaning of the lexeme normal: "corresponding to the norm, that is, the established order"; it is the deviation from the norm that causes the author to exclaim emotionally.

The full form of the adjective normal was the subject of research in the historical aspect, its meaning was considered in relation to the lexeme "ordinary" in translation practice; it was established that the beginning of its use in the Russian language dates back to the 1780s ^[7]. According to our observations, the short form of cf.r. of this adjective is used extremely rarely in Russian speech, which is due to grammatical restrictions imposed by the syntactic function of this homonym. Semantically, in such sentences, the speaker evaluates whether a certain situation corresponds to a certain norm. The range of nouns cf.r., combined with the adjective normally, is limited to the following collocations: behavior, use, health and some others; in such nominal combinations, changes in the use of this short adjective have not occurred in a century and a half:

"Your behavior is disgusting in heaven," he sighed. – And on earth it's worse than ever. – And your behavior? Brass Knuckles asked with a mixture of horror and impudence. "My behavior is normal," he shrugged. – I can't make mistakes and do something wrong. Didn't they tell you about the box? [A. Silaev. The Army of Gutentak (2007)]

Syntagmatic limitations normally contributed to the formation of the phraseologism everything is fine, which is used, according to the NCRE, mainly in non-strict areas of speech. The explanatory dictionary notes the meaning of this phraseology "everything is in order" ^[22], which can be clarified by comparing contexts. The main corpus contains 51 examples with this phraseological unit. Using the new corpus tool, we ranked the examples by date of creation, this allowed us to establish the first case of using everything is fine, noted in the corpus, these are the diaries of composer P. I. Tchaikovsky, written in the second half of the XIX century.:

In general, I appreciate and love Alyosha quite only in the village, where everything is normal and there is nothing to argue about. There was a fuss with rearranging things just when he was called to dinner. My anger. They left. [P. I. Tchaikovsky. The Diary (1886)]

The context in the village ... everything normally preserves in the specified homonym the first meaning of the adjective, noted in explanatory dictionaries: "corresponding to the norm", that is, the established order in the village. Further, in other examples from the main body, it can be observed that gradually the spatial determinant in this construction was replaced by a personal one: Everything is fine with me (with us, etc.). The use of such constructions is found in written genres reflecting private life (letters, diaries) (35 examples in total), which was recorded for the first time in the diary of academician M. V. Nechkina (1940):

I don't have anything. My main feeling, which permeates everything, is despair. For fifteen years I thought that if I had everything normal and had a child, I would live. But now it's too late and there's nothing. Only despair. [M. V. Nechkina. The Diary (1940)]

It seems interesting to compare the data on the functioning of the phraseology everything is fine, obtained from the main corpus, with similar data from the corpus of oral speech. In the oral corpus, this phraseologism is recorded in the replicas of the dialogue more than 700 times, which indicates its relevance and active use in the oral non-strict sphere of speech. In the following dialogue, the phrase everything is fine is used as a stereotypical response, as is the particle of nothing preceding it in the replica, "indicating the normativity of the situation" ^{[23, p. 112]}.

[Yura (Andrey Mironov, husband, 21)] And what?

[Alik (Oleg Dahl, husband, 21)] Yes, no/ nothing/ everything is fine.

[Yura (Andrey Mironov, husband, 21)] And what are you/ in philology?

[Alik (Oleg Dahl, husband, 21)] Yes/ yes. We need to study/ I understood this. [A. Zarkhi, V. Semakov, V. Aksenov, M. Ancharov. My Younger Brother, k/f (1962)]

The discursive function of the lexeme is normally especially activated in single use without a subject, as will be discussed below.

Normal is an adverb

As is known, "adverbs on -o/-e are the largest and most productive class of Russian adverbs", they are "regularly formed from qualitative adjectives" ^{[21, p. 115]}. The adverb normal is no exception in this regard: it is formed from the adjective normal (in the first direct meaning), which is noted in explanatory dictionaries. According to linguists, to describe the semantics of a word, the frequency of its syntagmatic connections is important. The most frequent connection of adverbs is normal with verbs.

As a result of the search in the NKRJ for verbal collocations for this adverb, 2,720 texts were selected, in which 198 different collocations occur, the most frequent of them are the following: work normally – 441 examples; walk normally – 352; live normally – 296; walk normally – 227; develop normally – 171; feel normally – 142; function normally – 114 (one third of the examples are presented with a frequency of other verbs less than 6). Such a variety, combined normally with verbal lexemes, is quite expected. Thus, the combination with the most frequent verb to work appeared at the end of the XIX century, and only one example relating to this time is recorded – the novel by the writer A.V. Amfiteatrov:

It wasn't like that with Lyudmila... Her imagination was not upset. My head was working fine, my mind was not changing. But the murder of Revizanov has now become the main event of Lyudmila Alexandrovna's life, forever poisoned her memory. [A.V. Amfiteatrov. A Poisoned Conscience (1882)]

Further, the adverb normally works with the collocate is activated in the 1920s and is then used relatively evenly; a sharp jump, for obvious reasons, occurs in 1941, then in 1961, followed by a long period of relatively uniform use of this combination. The subject matter of such texts is mainly related to technology, devices, etc. So, 19 examples are found in the diaries of N. P. Kamanin, the organizer and head of the training of the first Soviet cosmonauts; here is one of the typical examples where the names communication, equipment are used as actors:

After the meeting, all the members of the commission went to the workshop and watched Gagarin and Titov train in the ship. The training went well, the ship's communications and equipment worked fine. [N. P. Kamanin. The Diary (1961)]

In texts where the adverb normally characterizes the actions of any technique, the evaluative seme "good / bad" does not manifest itself in its lexical meaning, the speaker does not act as the subject of evaluation. In the 1920s, the use of this adverb gradually moved into the personal sphere, the subject matter of the texts began to relate to private life, which contributed to the further development of evaluative connotation, as in the following example:

I haven't been myself all day today. I couldn't work properly. What kind of work is there when the whole factory was buzzing like a disturbed hive… The mood in our family is also funereal. [N. F. Novikov. The Diary (1926)]

In the oral corpus, we did not note any peculiarities in the use of adverbs normally with verbs. It does not seem to be combined with other parts of speech, in rare cases it may depend on an adjective, for example:

There is only one appearance against us: the number of normally developed personalities in humanity is incomparably less than deviations from the conditions of the norm. But what is the purpose of the life and activity of great people, if not to free the mass of humanity from the shackles of appearance and thus bring it closer to the purity and fullness of godlike? [V. N. Maikov. Koltsov's poems with a portrait of the author, his facsimile and an article about his life and writings (1846)]

Normal is a predicative (in other terminology, a category of condition)

The most controversial place in the homocomplex is normally occupied by the predicative, which is usually not noted in explanatory dictionaries. This situation is primarily related to the controversial attitude in grammatical research to a group of words of the Russian language, which was named, as is known, by L. V. Shcherba, the category of condition. In the works of other linguists, the term "predicative" is used" ^{[3, 5, 9, 10, 11 and others]}. Based on typological observations, A. B. Letuchy argues that in the Russian language, the feature zone includes "not only adjectives and adverbs, but also predicatives, whereas, for example, in Germanic or Romance languages, one can speak only about the first two types. If adverbs and adjectives are typologically common parts of speech, then predicatives as a separate category of words are a rather rare phenomenon" ^{[11, p. 107]}. In the Russian language, predicatives, as V. V. Vinogradov noted, are an actively developing part of speech, and the formation of the predicative is normal from the adjective normal corresponds to this trend.

The first texts with the predicative normally, recorded in the NKRJ, belong to the end of the XIX century, as well as texts with a homonymous adverb. Here is an example of this period – a fragment from the diary of N. I. Pirogov, in which the predicative has the meaning "in accordance with the norm", as well as the corresponding adverb. The scientist asks the question "Is it OK to analyze yourself?" (that is, does this action correspond to the norm accepted in psychology), since the foundations of psychoanalysis are only being formed in science at this time:

Hardly anyone who has practiced a lot in analyzing the actions, feelings and thoughts of another acquires the ability to analyze himself flawlessly through the same exercise. In general, the question remains open for me – is it normal to analyze yourself? A person, as they say, is whole, it seems, lives, thinks, acts without examining his "I". [N. I. Pirogov. Questions of life. Diary of an old doctor (1879-1881)]

In the given example, we observe a combination characteristic of the predicative normally with the infinitive in the dependent position. In this combination, the predicative has a factual meaning, which can be formulated as follows: is it normal that a person analyzes himself? The factual meaning of the predicative, noted at the end of the XIX century, is normally preserved in its subsequent use in various fields:

Wolf said, "It's okay to go to a party when you're called. It's terrible to go to a party when you're not invited. However, the best thing is when they call and you don't go. [Sergey Dovlatov. Notebooks (1990)]

In the future, it becomes common, apparently under the influence of colloquial speech, a variant of an impersonal sentence with truncation, which includes only a predicative with a personal dative. It should be noted that it is in impersonal sentences that the development of the pragmatic potential of the word normally is observed from the first direct meaning to the evaluative (subjective) meaning. "On the gradation scale, the norm may occupy a different place" ^{[1, p. 67]}. In the following example, the speaker expresses precisely the assessment of a certain situation (fact) of his life: the fact that I work every day is normal for me, and not my temporary state, as in impersonal sentences like I'm cold:

– No, - Ira shook her head. – When should I rest? I work every day. But don't think about it, I'm not too tired. I'm fine. I can handle it. [Alexandra Marinina. The Illusion of Sin (1996)]

Reflecting on the role of predicatives in the Russian system of parts of speech, A. B. Letuchy identifies two types of this class of words: predicatives of properties expressing the meaning of a fact, and predicatives of a state ^{[11, p. 107]}. According to our observations, predicative normally in modern Russian speech can have both types of semantics: both a factual meaning linking a predicative with a correlative adjective (as in the previous examples), and the meaning of a temporary state (physical or psychological). So, in the example from the oral corpus (a fragment of a comedy about the 1990s), the semantics of the physical state is normally implemented, which is supported by the context of the interrogative remark of the interlocutor with the "traditional" predicative of the physical state of cold (as well as the actions of the interlocutor: wraps Grisha in a plaid). It can be seen how the physical condition of the speaker, after the actions of the interlocutor, passes on the "cold – warm" scale from the middle zone "normal" (that is, "neutral, not cold and not warm") to the right zone "warm", which is accompanied by the appearance of a better, very:

[Grisha (Leonid Yarmolnik, husband, 41, 1954)] Will you leave?

[Luciana (Irina Selezneva, Wives, 34, 1961)] Are you cold?

[Grisha (Leonid Yarmolnik, husband, 41, 1954)] I'm fine.

[Luciana (Irina Selezneva, Wives, 34, 1961)] [wraps Grisha in a plaid with herself] Is that better?

[Grisha (Leonid Yarmolnik, husband, 41, 1954)] Very much. [Alla Surikova, Emil Braginsky. Moscow Holidays (1995)]

There are a sufficient number of such examples in the oral corpus; it can be argued that impersonal constructions of the type I am normal, expressing the temporary state of the subject, are not synonymous with constructions with a full adjective of the type I am normal.

Based on the data of the NCRE, it is possible to observe the development of the semantics of the predicative normally, formed at the end of the XIX century from the adjective normal (its use was recorded a century earlier): the semantics corresponding to a certain norm moves to the right zone of the scale – to the area of positive evaluation.

It's okay to have an interjection

Interjections are traditionally defined as "a class of unchangeable words that serve for the undifferentiated expression of feelings, sensations, mental states and other (often involuntary) emotional and emotional-volitional reactions to the surrounding reality: ah, dear, well, oh, have mercy, ugh..." ^[19]. As we noted, the first texts with the predicative normally, as well as with the homonymous adverb, recorded in the main body of the NKRJ, belong to the end of the XIX century.; The use of the lexeme normally in the interjection function appears much later, in the 1980s. First of all, the interjection normally allows the speaker to convey an assessment of the compliance of a certain situation with a certain norm:

Alive and well. He pulled himself up, clung to the structure with his feet, and so flew to the site. — Well, Sasha? — I'm telling you. — It's fine, — he answers and dived into the helicopter to the pilots. This guy then not only saved his life, he saved the idea of helicopter mounting. [G. Rozov. Three hours above the TV tower // Ogonyok, 1981]

In the dictionaries of Russian argot, the interjection of the analyzed word is noted: "IT's OKAY, interjection. Great, great; well, well, wow, wow."^[8] Note that according to the NCRE, the meaning of "excellent, excellent" is not realized in the interjection normally regularly. So, in the following dialogue, presented in the oral corpus, in the lexical meaning of the word normal, the seme "good" (not "excellent, fine") is really actualized, expressing the speaker's approval of the event reported by the interlocutor (apparently, the purchase of clothes):

[Lilya, wife, student] For how much?

[Elvira, wife, student] We'll wear it together. Four hundred.

[Lilya, wife, student] Normal.

[Elvira, wife, student] Yes.

[Lilya, wife, student] All right/ Elvir/ come on/ I'll call you back later. Ok? [Sisters talking on the phone (2015)]

The pragmatic potential of the word normal is most clearly manifested in the discursive function. Moreover, the evaluative semantics can vary within the polar zones of positive/negative. In the following example, a positive evaluation of an interjection is normally supported by the context – lexeme well, which also performs a discursive function:

[Vera (Lyudmila Gurchenko, wives, 47, 1935)] And here ... money for melons ...

[Andrey (Nikita Mikhalkov, husband, 37, 1945)] Yeah.

[Vera (Lyudmila Gurchenko, Wives, 47, 1935)] Suitcases... over there/ under the service table.

[Andrey (Nikita Mikhalkov, husband, 37, 1945)] It's fine. Yeah. Fine.

[Vera (Lyudmila Gurchenko, Wives, 47, 1935)] I'm even with you! [Eldar Ryazanov, Emil Braginsky. Train station for two, k/f (1982)]

In the context of a work of fiction (the main body), the writer recorded the widespread use of words in oral speech as an interjection expressing a negative assessment. The use of an insertion construction in the character's response allows the author to include a parallel comment by the diegetic narrator ^{[15, p. 206]}. It is the narrator who gives a negative assessment of the verbal behavior of a young character who addresses an old man as "you".:

He (that is, you) called in sick. — That's right — he told me! THE OLD MAN is silent. — And if tomorrow you (young and old poke, fine!) that's how they'll press it to the nail. We're not going to hesitate and say we're sick. We will rush to the defense — we are ready to defend right away, aren't we? [Vladimir Makanin. A table covered with cloth and with a decanter in the middle (1993)]

In situations of oral speech with an interjection, the intonation and gestures accompanying the utterance seem to play a normally meaningful role, as is often the case with words in the discursive function ^[4].

The frequency of using the lexeme normally in the meaning of compliance with the norm, that is, the middle on the rating scale, has led to the appearance of a connotation of indifference in some contexts of oral speech. Indifference is frowned upon in society, therefore, normally, as a retaliatory remark, it is often perceived by the addressee of speech as an unwillingness to speak, as a way of detachment, which is reflected in critical discussions about the pragmatics of communication:

— It's not true, I'm not asking you out of politeness, "how are you", not out of politeness!.. I was outraged. — But you answer me formally! You always answer me the same way — "fine." And "normal" means that you don't answer at all!.. You can send me such an answer by pager, e-mail or by SMS to my phone number... [E. V. Kolina. Diary of Betrayal (2011)]

Ekaterina Andreevna almost every evening quarreled with Dimochka and shouted: "I'll leave." But they stayed. Alla did not talk to Dimochka. Communication with my mother was reduced to three words — "fine", "no", "I ate". [Masha Traub. We're going out next week (2011)]

3. Conclusion

Corpus research methods allow us to trace the dynamics of the functioning of the homocomplex "normally". The adjective in the short form of a unit of the MS.R. is used in Russian speech since the first half of the XIX century. The first texts with the predicative normally, as well as with the homonymous adverb, recorded in the NKRJ, belong to the end of the XIX century.; The use of normally as an interjection in a discursive function appears much later, in the 1980s. There is a gradual process of movement of the semantics of the lexeme normally from reasoning about the normal (corresponding to any established norm) – to erasure the primary meaning, the transition to the zone of positive evaluation, and then to stereotypical, discursive use, unrelated to the norm as such. The versatility of the word, the presence of lexical shades make the lexeme normally difficult to understand and use correctly when learning Russian as a foreign language.