Denis fonvizin in Russian literature. Denis fonvizin's contribution to the development of the Russian literary language - fonvizin - writer's personal corner - file catalog - literature teacher

One of the writers who played a significant role in the development of Russian literary language at the new stage, there was Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin. In the second half of the 18th century. pompous verbosity, rhetorical solemnity, metaphorical abstraction and obligatory adornment gradually gave way to brevity, simplicity, and precision.

In the language of his prose, folk-colloquial vocabulary and phraseology are widely used; as building material proposals are made by various non-free and semi-free colloquial phrases and stable turns; a combination of “simple Russian” and “Slavic” language resources, so important for the subsequent development of the Russian literary language, is taking place.

He developed linguistic techniques for reflecting reality in its most diverse manifestations; outlined the principles of constructing linguistic structures that characterize the "image of the storyteller." Many important properties and trends that have found their way further development and received full completion in the Pushkin reform of the Russian literary language.

Fonvizin's narrative language is not confined to the spoken sphere; in terms of its expressive resources and techniques, it is much broader, richer. Of course, focusing on colloquial, on “living use” as the basis of the narrative, Fonvizin freely uses both “book” elements, and Western European borrowings, and philosophical and scientific vocabulary and phraseology. The richness of the linguistic means used and the variety of methods for organizing them allow Fonvizin to create on a common colloquial basis various options narration.

Fonvizin was the first Russian writer who understood by describing complex relationships and strong feelings of people simply, but for sure, you can achieve a greater effect than with the help of certain verbal tricks. It is impossible not to note the merits of Fonvizin in the development of techniques for realistic depiction of complex human feelings and life conflicts.

In the comedy "The Minor" inversions are used: "the slave of his vile passions"; rhetorical questions and exclamations: “how can she teach them good behavior?”; complicated syntax: abundance clauses, common definitions, participles and participles and other characteristic means of book speech.

Uses words of emotional and evaluative meaning: spiritual, heartfelt, depraved tyrant. Fonvizin avoids the naturalistic extremes of a low style, which many of today's outstanding comedians could not overcome. He refuses rude, non-literary speech means... At the same time, it constantly preserves both in the vocabulary and in the syntax the features of colloquiality. The use of techniques of realistic typification is also evidenced by the colorful speech characteristics created by attracting words and expressions used in military life; and archaic vocabulary, quotes from spiritual books; and broken Russian vocabulary.

Meanwhile, the language of Fonvizin's comedies, despite its perfection, nevertheless did not go beyond the traditions of classicism and did not represent a fundamentally new stage in the development of the Russian literary language. In the comedies of Fonvizin, a clear distinction between the language of negative and positive characters was preserved. And if in the construction of linguistic characteristics negative characters on the traditional basis of the use of vernacular, the writer achieved great liveliness and expressiveness, then the linguistic characteristics of positive characters remained pale, cold rhetorical, divorced from the living element of the spoken language.

Unlike the language of comedy, the language of Fonvizin's prose represents a significant step forward in the development of the Russian literary language, here the tendencies outlined in Novikov's prose are strengthened and further developed. The famous "Letters from France" was a work that marked the decisive transition from the traditions of classicism to new principles of constructing the language of prose in Fonvizin's work.

In "Letters from France" Folk colloquial vocabulary and phraseology is presented quite richly, especially those groups and categories that are devoid of sharp expressiveness and are more or less close to the "neutral" lexical-phraseological layer: "Since my arrival here I have I can not hear…"; “We're getting along pretty well”; "Wherever you go, everywhere is full."

There are also words and expressions that are different from those given above, they are endowed with that specific expressiveness that allows them to be qualified as vernacular: “I won’t take both of these places for free”; "At the entrance to the city, a disgusting stench knocked us over."

Observations on folk colloquial vocabulary and phraseology in Letters from France make it possible to draw three main conclusions. Firstly, this vocabulary and phraseology, especially in that part of it, which is closer to the "neutral" lexico-phraseological layer than to vernacular, is freely and rather widely used in letters. Secondly, the use of folk colloquial vocabulary and phraseology is distinguished by an astonishing selection process for that time. Even more important and indicative is that the overwhelming majority of the common words and expressions used by Fonvizin in Letters from France found themselves permanent place in the literary language, and with one or another special stylistic “task”, and often just along with “neutral” lexical and phraseological material, these expressions were widely used in the literature of a later time. Thirdly, a careful selection of folk colloquial vocabulary and phraseology is closely connected with the change, transformation of the stylistic functions of this lexical and phraseological layer in the literary language.

Stylistically opposite to the folk-colloquial lexico-phraseological layer - "Slavicisms" - is distinguished by the same main features of use. Firstly, they are also used in letters, secondly, they are subjected to a rather strict selection, and thirdly, their role in the language of “Letters from France” does not completely coincide with the role assigned to them by the theory of three styles. The selection manifested itself in the fact that in Letters from France we will not find archaic, “dilapidated” “Slavisms”. Slavicisms, contrary to the theory of three styles, are rather freely combined with “neutral” and colloquial elements, lose to a large extent their “high” color, “neutralize” and act no longer as a specific sign of a “high style”, but simply as elements of a book, literary language. Here are some examples: “what it felt like for me to hear her exclamations”; “His wife is so greedy for money ...”; "Writhing, disturbing the human sense of smell in an intolerable way."

Popular colloquial words and expressions are freely combined not only with “Slavisms”, but also with “Europeanisms” and “metaphysical” vocabulary and phraseology: “here they applaud for everything about everything”; "In a word, although the war has not been formally declared, this announcement is expected from hour to hour." The features of the literary language developed in Letters from France were further developed in Fonvizin's artistic, scientific, journalistic and memoir prose. But two points still deserve attention. First, the syntactic perfection of Fonvizin's prose should be emphasized. In Fonvizin we find not separate well-constructed phrases, but vast contexts, characterized by diversity, flexibility, harmony, logical consistency and clarity of syntactic constructions. Secondly, in fiction Fonvizin receives further development of the method of narration on behalf of the narrator, the method of creating linguistic structures that serve as a means of revealing the image. Analysis of various works of D.I.Fonvizin allows us to talk about, of course, important role him in the formation and improvement of the Russian literary language.

The writing

The role of Fonvizin as an artist-playwright and author of satirical essays in the development of Russian literature is enormous, as well as the fruitful influence he exerted on many Russian writers, not only in the 18th century, but also in the first half. 19th century... Not only the political progressiveness of Fonvizin's work, but also his artistic progressiveness determined that deep respect and interest in him, which Pushkin quite clearly showed.

Elements of realism emerged in Russian literature of the 1770s and 1790s simultaneously in different areas and in different ways. This was the main trend in the development of the Russian aesthetic worldview of that time, which prepared - at the first stage - the future Pushkin stage for it. But Fonvizin did more in this direction than others, if not to talk about Radishchev, who came after him and not without dependence on his creative discoveries, because it was Fonvizin who first raised the question of realism as a principle, as a system of understanding man and society.

On the other hand, realistic moments in Fonvizin's work were most often limited to his satirical assignment. It was precisely the negative phenomena of reality that he was able to understand in a realistic sense, and this not only narrowed the scope of the themes he embodied in the new manner he discovered, but also narrowed the very principledness of his formulation of the question. In this respect, Fonvizin is included in the tradition of the “satirical trend,” as Belinsky called him, which is a characteristic phenomenon of the Russian Literature XVIII centuries. This trend is peculiar and almost earlier than it could be in the West, it prepared the formation of the style critical realism... By itself, it grew in the depths of Russian classicism; it was associated with the specific forms that classicism acquired in Russia; it eventually exploded the principles of classicism, but its origin from it is obvious.

Fonvizin grew up as a writer in the literary environment of Russian noble classicism of the 1760s, in the school of Sumarokov and Kheraskov. For his whole life artistic thinking retained a clear imprint of the influence of this school. The rationalistic understanding of the world, characteristic of classicism, is strongly reflected in the work of Fonvizin. And for him, a person is more often not so much a concrete individual as a unit in social classification, and for him, a political dreamer, the public, the state can completely absorb the personal in the image of a person. The high pathos of social duty, subordinating in the mind of the writer the interests of the "too human" in man, and forced Fonvizin to see in his hero a scheme of civic virtues and vices; because he, like other classics, understood the state itself and the very duty to the state not historically, but mechanically, to the extent of the metaphysical limitations of the educational worldview XVIII century generally. Hence, Fonvizin was characterized by the great advantages of the classicism of his century: both the clarity, the clarity of the analysis of man as a general social concept, and the scientific nature of this analysis at the level of scientific achievements of his time, and the social principle of evaluating human actions and moral categories. But the inevitable shortcomings of classicism were also characteristic of Fonvizin: the schematism of abstract classifications of people and moral categories, the mechanistic nature of the idea of ​​a person as a conglomerate of abstractly conceivable "abilities", the mechanism and abstraction of the very idea of ​​the state as a norm of social existence.

For Fonvizin, many characters are not built according to an individual law, but according to a predetermined and limited scheme of moral and social norms. We see a lawsuit - and only a lawsuit of the Counselor; Galloman Ivanushka - and the entire composition of his role is built on one or two notes; soldier Brigadier, but, apart from the soldier, there is little characteristic features... This is the method of classicism - to show not living people, but individual vices or feelings, to show not everyday life, but a diagram of social relationships. Characters in comedies, in satirical sketches, Fonvizin's sketches are schematized. The very tradition of calling them "meaningful" names grows on the basis of a method that reduces the content of a character's characteristics primarily to the very trait that is enshrined in his name. The bribe-taker Vzyatkin, the fool of the Slabooms, the "khalda" Khaldin, the tomboy Sorvantsov, the truth-lover Pravdin, etc. appear. At the same time, the artist's task is not so much the image of individual people as the image of social relations, and this task could and was performed brilliantly by Fonvizin. Social relationships, understood as applied to the ideal norm of the state, determined the content of a person only by the criteria of this norm.

Subjectively, the noble character of the norm of state life, built by the Sumarokov-Panin school, also determined the trait characteristic of Russian classicism: it organically divides all people into nobles and "others." The characteristics of the nobles include signs of their abilities, moral inclinations, feelings, etc., - Pravdin or Skotinin, Milon or Prostakov, Dobrolyubov or Durykin; the same is the differentiation of their characteristics in the text of the corresponding works. On the contrary, the "others", "ignoble" are characterized primarily by their profession, class, place in the system of society - Kuteikin, Tsyfirkin, Tsezurkin, etc. The nobles for this system of thought are still people par excellence; or - for Fonvizin - on the contrary: the best people should be nobles, and the Durykins are noblemen only by name; the rest act as carriers common features their social belonging, assessed positively or negatively, depending on the attitude of this social category to the political concept of Fonvizin, or Sumarokov, Kheraskov, etc.

For a classicist writer, the very attitude to tradition, to the established roles-masks is typical. literary work, to the habitual and constantly repeating stylistic formulas, representing the settled collective experience of mankind (the author's anti-individualist attitude to creative process). And Fonvizin freely operates with such ready-made formulas and masks given to him by the ready-made tradition. Dobrolyubov in "The Brigadier" repeats Sumarokov's ideal comedies in love, the Clerk's Counselor came to Fonvizin from satirical articles and comedies of the same Sumarokov, just as the Petitemaster-Counselor appeared in plays and articles before the Fonvizin comedy. Fonvizin, within the limits of his classical method, does not seek new individual themes. The world seems to him long ago dismembered, decomposed into typical features, society as a classified "mind" that predetermined assessments and frozen configurations of "abilities" and social masks. The genres themselves have been defended, prescribed by rules and demonstrated by examples. A satirical article, a comedy, a high-style solemn speech of commendation (in Fonvizin's "Word on Paul's Recovery"), etc. - everything is unshakable and does not require the invention of the author, his task in this direction is to inform Russian literature the best achievements of world literature; this task of enriching Russian culture was solved all the more successfully by Fonvizin because he understood and felt specific features the very Russian culture, which refracted in its own way what came from the West.

/ / / What is the role of positive characters in Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor"?

The comedy of Denis Fonvizin has a vivid gallery of images, both negative and positive. The role of the first in exposing the vices of society in the 18th century. Mrs. Prostakova and Skotinin personify the ignorance and cruelty of serfs, Mitrofanushka - laziness and unwillingness to learn. The author helps us to judge the qualities of a character, starting with their first and last names. If we read about Skotinin, then we understand that this hero behaves like an animal. Prostakova is a simple ignoramus, whose designs, though mean, are not far off. And Mitrofanushka - "revealed by the mother" - really looks like his mother, Prostakova.

The main idea of ​​comedy is in portraying far from comedic problems of society: inhuman serfdom, autocracy and malevolent upbringing. Negative characters help readers understand these problems more deeply, while positive ones show that these problems can still be dealt with.

The fact that the hero is positive can also be learned from his name. There are several such characters in the comedy: Starodum, Sophia, Pravdin, Milon. Each of them has an important role to play.

- nobleman, uncle the main character Sophia. He is the girl's guardian, but leaves for Siberia for long time, leaving her in the care of the Prostakovs. The surname Starodum comes from the phrase "old thoughts". That is, the writer hints that this hero thinks in the old way. One would think that this is bad, because you need to live in step with the times. However, the time of the action in the play was the time of the willfulness of cruel serf-owners, who worried only about their estates and did not think about the development of culture. Starodum received his education and upbringing even during the reign of Peter, the tsar, who was for enlightenment. And therefore, the "old" time was just more progressive than the "new". The hero cannot accept that the nobles care only about their own benefit, and have forgotten about their duty to their homeland. Therefore, he leaves his villages and leaves for Siberia, where he can honestly earn a fortune.

- a wise girl, which is clear from the meaning of her name. She received a good education, therefore he looks at the Prostakovs with irony, seeing their ignorance and greed. The heroine is not a rebel, but fights for her love. She does not agree to marry Mitrofan or Skotinin, because she is in love with Milo.

- a nobleman, a member of the governorship, who is entitled to audit the villages. For a couple of days he stops at the Prostakovs' estate and gradually realizes that they are cruel serf-owners. He is asked to read Starodum's letter, but he replies that he does not read letters intended for others. Pravdin justifies his name, because he always speaks the truth and despises lies.

And after Prostakova behaves badly in relation to Sophia, she decides to excommunicate her family from the management of their villages. Pravdin is the embodiment of harsh justice in comedy.

Milon is a brave officer, Sophia's beloved. He is a worthy man.

Positive characters play the role of a noble force that opposes ignorance and cruelty in the guise of negative characters.

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin was the first among Russian writers who had a special gift to see and convey everything absurd in life. I want, I want to get married ”and others. But it is not so easy to see that Fonvizin's witticisms were born not of a cheerful disposition, but of the deepest sadness due to the imperfection of man and society.

Fonvizin entered literature as one of the successors of Kantemir and Sumarokov. He was brought up in the conviction that the nobility to which he himself belonged should be educated, humane, constantly caring for the interests of the fatherland, and royal power- to nominate for the common good worthy nobles on high positions... But among the noblemen he saw cruel ignoramuses, and at court - "nobles in the case * (simply put, the empress's lovers), who ruled the state at their whim.

From a distant historical distance it is clear that the von Vizin time, like any other, was neither unconditionally good nor unconditionally bad. But in the eyes of Fonvizin, evil overshadowed.

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin was born on April 3, 174 5 years. For a long time Fonvizin's surname was written in German style: "Von Wiesen", and sometimes even "von Wiesen" during his lifetime. Pushkin was one of the first to use the current form with the following comment: “What kind of infidel is he? He is Russian, from pre-Russian. " The spelling "Fonvizin" was finally established only after 1917.

Rod Fonvizin German origin... Denis Ivanovich's father was a rather wealthy man, but he never aspired to great ranks and excessive wealth. He did not live at the royal court in St. Petersburg, but in Moscow. Denis's older brother Pavel in his younger years wrote not bad poetry and published them in the magazine "Useful entertainment".

Comedy "Minor" is recognized the best piece the outstanding Russian playwright D.I.Fonvizin. In it, the writer faithfully portrayed the Russian feudal reality, exposed it, in the words of V. G. Belinsky, "as if to shame, in all the nakedness, in all the terrifying ugliness."

The cruelty and arbitrariness of the landowners declare themselves in Fonvizin's comedy "at the top of his voice." Serf owners like Prostakova and Skotinin commit their iniquities in full confidence in their own righteousness. The local nobility completely forgot about honor, conscience, civic duty... Landowners with stupid disdain for culture and education, interpret laws based only on their own benefit, at their own discretion and understanding. And it is simply not given to the ignorant, illiterate serf-owners to understand these laws: for example, in the Decree on the freedom of the nobility, Prostakov sees only confirmation of the nobleman's right to whip his servant "whenever he wants." Only "injustice" grieves her in relation to her peasants. “Since we have taken away everything that the peasants had, we cannot rip anything off. Such a disaster! " - Prostakova complains to his brother.

Trying to give brightness and persuasiveness to the images, Fonvizin reveals the features of their character not only with the help of depicting behavior, actions, views on life, but also with the help of well-aimed speech characteristics... The characters of the comedy, primarily negative ones, are endowed with a mark, deeply individualized speech, sharply distinguishing each of them from the rest of the heroes and emphasizing the main features, main shortcomings and vices of this or that person.

Everybody's speech actors in "Nedoroslya" it differs both in lexical composition and intonation. Creating your heroes, giving them bright language peculiarities, Fonvizin makes extensive use of all the wealth of the living folk speech... He introduces numerous folk proverbs and sayings, widely uses common and swear words and expressions.

The most striking and expressive are the language characteristics local nobility... Reading the words spoken by these heroes, it is simply impossible not to guess who they belong to. The speech of the characters cannot be confused, just as it is impossible to confuse the characters themselves with someone - they are so bright, colorful figures. So, Prostakova is a domineering, despotic, cruel, vile landowner. At the same time, she is incredibly hypocritical, capable of adapting to situations, changing her views solely for her own benefit. This greedy, cunning lady actually turns out to be cowardly and helpless.

All of the above features of Prostakova are clearly illustrated by her speech - rude and spiteful, saturated with swear words, swearing and threats, emphasizing the despotism and ignorance of the landowner, her soulless attitude to the peasants, whom she does not regard as people from whom she strips off "three skins" and at the same time is indignant and reproaches them. "Five rubles a year and five slaps a day" receives from her Eremeevna, a faithful and devoted servant and nanny ("mother") of Mitrofan, whom Prostakova calls "an old hrychovka," "a nasty hare," "a dog's daughter," beast "," channel ". Outraged by Prostakova and the girl Palashka, who lies and raves, vabolev, "as if noble." "Swindler", "cattle", "thieves' mug" - these words are brought down by Prostakov on the head of the serf Trishka, who sewed "pretty much" a caftan for the "child" Mitrofan. In this, Prostakova herself is confident that she is right; out of ignorance, she is simply not able to understand that peasants should be treated somehow differently, that they are people too and deserve an appropriate attitude. “I manage everything myself, father. From morning to evening, as if hung by my tongue, I don’t report my hands: now I swear, now I fight; that is what keeps the house, my father! " - the landowner confidentially informs the official Pravdin.

It is characteristic that the speech of this hypocritical mistress is capable of completely changing its color in conversations with people on whom she depends: here her language acquires flattering, cunning intonations, she intersperses the conversation with constant ingratiations and words of praise. When guests meet guests, Prostakova's speech acquires a touch of * secularism "(" I recommend you dear guest"," You are welcome "), and in humiliated lamentations, when after the failed abduction of Sophia she begs for forgiveness for herself, her speech is close to the folk one (" Oh, my priests, the sword does not cut a guilty head. My sin! Do not ruin me. " Sophia.). You are my dear mother, forgive me. Have mercy on me (pointing to my husband and son) and on the poor orphans ").

The speech of Prostakova also changes in those moments when she communicates with her son, Mitrofanushka: “Live and learn, my dear friend!”, “Darling”. This despotic landowner loves her son and therefore addresses him affectionately, at times naively and even humiliatingly: “Don't be stubborn, darling. Now you can show yourself "," Thanks to God, you already understand so much that you yourself will cock the kids. " But even in this case, Prostakova, being nee Sk-tinina, shows an animal essence: "Have you ever heard of a bitch giving out her puppies?" There are also apt proverbial expressions in her harsh, often primitive speech (“like for the language of a submissive”, “where there is anger, there is mercy,” “the sword does not cut a guilty head”). But the main distinctive feature of Prostakova's speech - the frequent use of vernaculars (“pervoet”, “deushka”, “arichmeti-ka”, “child”, “sweat him and soothe him”) and vulgarisms (“... and you, beast, were dumbfounded, but you didn't my brother in a mug, but you didn’t rip his snout over the ears ... ”).

In the image of another landowner, brother of Prostakova Taras Skotinin, everything speaks of his "animal" nature, starting with the surname itself and ending with the hero's own confessions that he loves pigs more than people. This is about people like him ten years before the appearance of "The Minor" poet A.P. Sumarokov said: "Oh, should cattle have people?" "Skotinin is even more cruel in his treatment of serfs than his sister, he is a cunning, calculating and cunning owner, who does not miss his own profit in anything and uses people solely for profit. “If I’m not Taras Skotinin,” he declares, “if it’s not all my fault. In this, my sister, I have one custom with you ... and any loss ... I will rip off my own peasants, and the ends are in the water. " In the speech of such landowners as Skotinin, one can trace confidence not only in their own righteousness, but also in absolute permissiveness and impunity.

The speech of other negative characters also serves to reveal their socio-psychological essence, it is characteristic and rather individualized, although it is inferior to the language of Prostakova in diversity. So, Mitrofanushka's father, Prostakov, in the scene of his acquaintance with Starodum, appears: "I am a wife's husband," thereby emphasizing his complete dependence on his wife, lack of his own opinion, life position... It has absolutely no independent meaning. Like his wife, he is ignorant, as evidenced by his illiterate speech. Downtrodden by his formidable wife, Prostakov enthusiastically speaks of his son: "this is a smart child, something reasonable." But we understand that there is no need to talk about the mind of Mitrofanushka, who has absorbed all the ugly features of his parents. He is not even able to distinguish true words from outright mockery. So, reading the Church Slavonic text proposed to him by his teacher, Kuteikin, Mitrofan reads: "I am a worm." And after the teacher's comment: "A worm, that is, a beast, cattle", he humbly says: "I am a cattle" and repeats after Kuteikin: "Not a man."

The language of Mitrofan's teachers is also bright and individualized: soldier jargon in Tsyfirkin's speech, quotes (often inappropriate) from Holy Scripture in Kuteikin, the monstrous German accent of the former coachman Vralman. The peculiarities of their speech make it possible to unmistakably judge both the social environment from which these teachers came, and about cultural level those who are entrusted with the education of Mitrofan. It is not surprising that Mitrofanushka remained a small man, having received neither useful knowledge nor a decent upbringing during his studies.

The basis of the speech of positive characters is made up of "straight", book turns. Starodum often uses aphorisms ("it is in vain to call a doctor to the sick is incurable", "arrogance in a woman is a sign of vicious behavior", etc.) and archaisms. Researchers also note direct "borrowing" in Starodum's speech from prose works Fonvizin himself, and this is quite natural, because it is Starodum who expresses in the comedy author's position... For Pravdin, clericalism is characteristic, and in the language of the young people Milon and Sophia there are sentimental turns (“the secret of my heart”, “the mystery of my soul”, “touches my heart”).

Speaking about the peculiarities of the language of Fonvizin's heroes, one cannot fail to mention the servant and nanny Mitrofan Eremeevna. It is a vivid individual character, due to certain social and historical circumstances. By belonging to the lower class, Eremeevna is illiterate, but her speech is deeply popular, absorbing the best features of the simple Russian language - sincere, open, imaginative. In her sorrowful statements, the humiliated position of the servant in the Prostakovs' house is especially clearly felt. “I have been serving for forty years, but the mercy is all the same ...” she complains. "... Five rubles a year and five slaps a day." However, despite such injustice, she remains loyal and loyal to her masters.

The speech of each comedy hero is distinctive. In this, the amazing skill of the satirical writer was especially vividly manifested. The richness of linguistic means used in the comedy "Minor" suggests that Fonvizin had an excellent command of the vocabulary of folk speech and was well acquainted with folk art... This helped him, according to the just assertion of the critic P. N. Berkov, to create true, life images.