Since the second half of the 19th century, a real interest in the processes that took place in the language centuries ago was born in Russian linguistics. A young linguist at that time, I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay, comparing ancient written monuments, comes to the conclusion that “in language, as in nature in general, everything moves, everything changes” and that constant changes occur in the morphological structure of the word, in particular in the stem (14, p.4).
This marked the beginning of etymology.
“The science of “etymology” (from the Greek “etymon” - “truth” and “logos” - “word, teaching”) deals with the origin of words, in particular, it finds out on what basis an object, phenomenon, or action is named.
The subject of etymology as a branch of linguistics is the study of the sources and process of formation of the vocabulary of a language, including the reconstruction of the vocabulary of the most ancient period. It is relatively simple, based on the achievements of comparative historical linguistics, to trace the history of the sound and morphological composition of a word. As for semantic evolution, it is often very difficult to explain.
Scientists have found that the Russian word river associated with an ancient root that conveyed the idea of movement (it is related to the words swarm, swarm, rush).
The feature that formed the basis of the name gradually loses its imagery and “darkens out.” Nobody remembers what the word is anymore swan hides the idea of whiteness and what's the word pigeon from a historical point of view, it is related to the word yellow.
Thus, the object of etymology is mainly the so-called “dark” words, in which native speakers do not understand the connection between form and meaning. The obfuscation of this connection (de-etymologization) is a consequence of historical changes in the form and meaning of words, as well as lexical and grammatical systems of the language" (26, p. 643).
Etymological analysis helps us find out the historical morphemic composition of a word and past word-formation connections. As N.M. noted Shansky: etymological analysis reveals “linguistic “metrics” of a word, indicating the time and place of its birth, its “relatives and parents,” its original form and meaning.” (34, p.236)
In the previous paragraph, we already mentioned that the main methodological technique for carrying out vocabulary and spelling work in elementary school is memorizing words with unverifiable spellings.
However, most of the spellings classified as unverified can in fact be verified on the basis of the source language, on the basis of knowledge of etymology and historical changes in the phonetics of the Russian language: bag - from fur; capital- from table; road, cow, freezing- contain full agreement - oro-, in which there is no letter A etc. (8, p.55)
No matter what amazing and varied changes occur with the Russian word over time: changes in sound, morphemic composition of the word and even lexical meaning, the literal appearance of the word usually remains almost unchanged. Another famous Russian teacher V.P. Sheremetevsky said: “The spelling of a word is the biography of a word, briefly but intelligibly telling about its origin” (14, p. 17).
S.I. Lvova points out the reason for the preservation of the “literal appearance” of the word: “The stability of the graphic appearance is characteristic of the vast majority of words, the phonetic side of which has undergone historical changes. The reason is hidden in the almost uninterrupted operation in the language of the main spelling law, the essence of which is the uniform spelling of significant parts of the word.” Write “morpheme is always the same” is the basic rule of Russian orthography. And even if some morpheme was absorbed into the word of the neighboring one, it still retains its “face” even in such conditions.
What explains, for example, the difference in the spelling of words charm And sense of smell? First of all, differences in origin and historical morphemic structure. In the first word (“charm, attractive force”) the etymological root -ba-, which we find in the ancient verb babble- "speak" ( charm- “to slander, to bewitch with words”) and its derivatives ( fable, bye-bye, tale). Noun sense of smell(“the ability to perceive smells”) is derived from the verb stink(“to smell”), which means that when writing a word it retains the graphic appearance of the root of the original word stench("smell")." (14, p. 18)
Thus, etymological analysis is able to move unverifiable words into the category of words with verifiable or at least explainable spellings. At the same time, the deadened morphemes in the word seem to be revived, their orthographic appearance is more firmly remembered, and the essence of the main law of Russian spelling is better absorbed by students. (14, p.18)
I.V. Pronina notes that the main advantage of etymological analysis compared to other types of work with “difficult” words is that “it brings to the aid of memory the powerful forces of the student’s conscious intellectual activity” (12, p. 5).
K.D. Ushinsky, speaking about the conscious acquisition of spelling, recommended the use of rather complex etymologies when teaching the spelling of difficult words already in the third year of primary school. So, for example, in the textbook “Native Word” (year three), explaining the spelling of the letter O in some words from "The Tale of the Goldfish", he refers to their etymology. "Word answered consists of two words: an old, no longer used verb celebrate, or broadcast(to speak), and prepositions from, and in the preposition from we clearly hear that the letter should be written O" (33, p. 113).
Explaining the spelling of a word trough, K.D. Ushinsky writes: “Here there are dubious sounds: one at the root, the other at the ending. Let’s begin to recall words from the same root. It is clear that the word trough came from the word bark, because in the old days troughs were probably made from tree bark. But in a word bark the stress is on the last syllable, and therefore the sound O also not clear. Let's take the diminutive of this word - crust, crust, and we will clearly hear the sound O, because the emphasis shifted to him" (33, p. 114).
HE. Levushkina writes in her dissertation that A.D. also spoke out for historical language teaching. Alferov, proposing the following stages: “in the lower grades - individual episodes from the history of the language, and a systematic course in the history of the language - in the upper grades” (12, p. 36).
Many methodologists pointed out the possibility of using information about the origin of words, but mainly in working with borrowed words. So, for example, M.V. Ushakov emphasized that when working “on foreign words, references of a historical nature make the study of spelling more conscious” (12, p. 39).
Reflections on the use of etymology in teaching spelling in the work of N.S. are contradictory. Rozhdestvensky. On the one hand, he states: “There is no need to talk about elementary school, where it is impossible to study the etymology of words” (24, p. 209). On the other hand, trying to explain the reasons for the predominance of mechanical learning of difficult words by the fact that students lack knowledge of historical phonetics and etymology, he cites the old school as an example: “Sometimes they say that in the old school (meaning mainly high school) students They mastered spelling well, although it was more difficult than the modern one. If this statement is true, then is this situation partly explained by the fact that the students studied etymology? Now we are afraid of etymologies, and not without reason, but we cannot give up what was valuable. in etymology classes" (24, p. 210). The scientist proposes to use not the entire etymological analysis, but only its elements, which make it possible to explain to schoolchildren the reasons for certain spellings. "In some cases, spellings that we consider traditional are illuminated if we establish known patterns of language or simply compare such spellings with each other. For example, many historical alternations of vowels and consonants are reflected in high school textbooks. If the teacher Grades 3-4 matches words fire, victory, weather, shame, peace, submissive, rush, and the children will write these words in a column and underline the first syllable By in these words, then for the first stage of orthographic knowledge this will be enough; in the future, their “etymological” knowledge will be refined and deepened. The same can be said about words like people, pressure, pressure, intensity, order, outward, by heart, askew; lock, splinter, order, stock, constipation; booty, armor, annoyance, achieve, leisure, enough, worthy; food, leprosy, product for orthographic purposes, there is no need to look for roots in these words (they are mostly stressed syllables), and they will not always be available at the initial stage of grammatical development. But already highlighting the prefixes will help to understand and remember the spelling of these words, and in the future they can also highlight some roots" (24, p. 209).
N.M.'s point of view Shansky echoes the statement of N.S. Rozhdestvensky. N.M. Shansky believes that “Etymological analysis should be used only in cases where it is necessary as an auxiliary technique for spelling, lexical, etc. purposes” (34, p. 240).
N.M. Shansky was one of the first to note the need to distinguish between etymological and morphemic analyzes of words in lessons. In linguistics, an unshakable requirement has long been established to distinguish between synchronic and diachronic approaches to the analysis of language facts. But it is in morphemic analysis that this requirement is more difficult to apply than in other types of word analysis. This happens because a word can change its meaning without changing its form. Therefore, there is a temptation to combine, to call words related, words that have long diverged in meaning and have become strangers to each other. Words cannot be considered related tree And village, paw And bast shoe, since there is no longer a direct semantic connection between them. "It's obvious that village is not a "settled area in which a lot of trees", A bast shoe are not "shoes for paws"Such interpretations would be clearly artificial and would lead to the arbitrary imposition of semantic connections that are not characteristic of the language" (28, p. 239).
In fact, it is sometimes very difficult to establish the boundary between morphemic and etymological analysis, and students do not feel this boundary at all.
S.I. Lvova in her work “Etymology in the Service of Spelling” gives an example of students parsing a word metropolitan: "Sorting out the composition of the adjective metropolitan, many students highlight the root - table-. Moreover, some guys quite accidentally name a noun as a related noun table(“piece of furniture”), based only on the purely external sound similarity of the parts of these words. Proof of this is the verbs cited as cognates crowd, collide, collide. At the same time, many students argue their opinion quite competently, drawing on information from a literature course, where they become acquainted with the texts of epics, in which the combination is often found capital city (table- "throne"; compare: throne). In this case, morphemic analysis is replaced by etymological analysis. And all because schoolchildren intuitively perceive etymological connections that are still tangible in the modern language or rethink them from the point of view of the modern language" (14, p. 11).
When carrying out a morphological analysis of a word in practice, one should not forget that it must not be confused with the etymological one. “After all, if morphemic analysis gives us a picture of the morphological composition of the word in question in the present, then etymological analysis introduces us to its past, sometimes very distant,” writes N.M. Shansky (34, p.239).
But this is not the only difference between them. Word formation and etymological analysis are not correlated and differ sharply in the scope of their tasks.
When a word is subjected to word-formation analysis, one is interested only in its morphological structure and composition, but not in its meaning as such, or in its original Russian or borrowed character. The etymological analysis of a word “is not limited to determining how the word was divided before, in what way and on the basis of what words it was formed. Its tasks turn out to be much more diverse and, accordingly, more complex.
Specifically, the tasks of the etymological analysis of the word include:
1) determination of the original or borrowed nature of the word (with a given meaning and structure),
2) clarifying the image (idea) underlying the word as the name of an object of reality,
3) establishing when the word appeared in the language and how, on the basis of what and with the help of what method of word formation it arose,
4) reconstruction of its original form and old meaning" (34, pp. 241-242).
HE. Levushkina writes that R.I. Likhtman continued the thought of N.M. Shansky: “Historical information, of course, is very useful, but only if the phenomenon in the past is not confused with its correspondence in the modern Russian language. Mixing these two types of analysis leads to incorrect morphemic division of words, therefore, to a distortion of the meaning of the word, to folk etymology, and as a consequence, to spelling errors" (12, p. 42).
N.A. also writes about this in his dissertation. Podshibyakina: “When working on the etymology of a word, the teacher should not weaken attention to the facts of the modern Russian language. Work should be systematically carried out to distinguish between modern and historical elements in a word. It is necessary to constantly draw the attention of students to the fact that when morphological and word-formation analysis one must proceed from the facts modern Russian language, for example, in the word. currant, formed from the ancient currants, currently the suffix -in - doesn't stand out. It is part of the root, since the words currants does not exist in the modern Russian language" (18, p. 104).
The most thorough modern work devoted to the use of etymological analysis in the study of difficult words is the book by I.V. Pronina "Study of difficult words using etymological analysis." The work emphasizes the unity of the orthographic and semantic aspects of dictionary work, which is achieved through the use of etymological analysis: “Thanks to etymology, students realize that the spelling of a word reflects its meaning, and when writing they begin to look for support in the semantic side of the word. The habit of finding the root, relying on such An important linguistic factor, such as the semantics of a morpheme, having become involuntary, increases students’ vigilance to spelling-difficult places in a word and their attentiveness when performing any written work.
The student gets used to the idea that in order to write correctly it is necessary to understand the morphological structure of the word, and develops the most necessary habit when learning spelling, the habit of thinking when writing about the root of the word, about its structure" (20, p. 12).
I.V. Pronina emphasizes: “Etymological analysis is an effective technique for enriching students’ vocabulary. This technique can serve as an excellent means of explaining the meanings of incomprehensible words related to scientific and socio-political terminology. Terms are among the most difficult words to understand, the reason for which is their abstract meaning. Given the concreteness of children's thinking, it is very important to place the abstract word on a solid foundation of objective representation" (20, p. 12).
I.V. Pronina also indicates the conditions for using etymological analysis in school: “... etymological analysis as a methodological technique cannot be as thorough and exhaustive as scientific” (20, p. 3). Therefore, it can be used in school for practical purposes only.
E.I. writes about the possibilities of using etymological analysis in school. Nikitina: “... when using etymological analysis in school, we are forced to simplify it somewhat.
1) We use school etymological analysis to teach children how to correctly write “difficult” words. Therefore, it may not be complete, but partial, “simplified”. Etymological analysis in school lessons is carried out to the extent necessary to solve a practical problem. Often one or another, for example, a Latin root is “overgrown” with French or English suffixes, and sometimes roots, and an “overgrown”, “swollen” word comes into our language. During the elementary etymological analysis in the lesson, we pay attention only to the original word in which unstressed vowels, and sometimes dubious consonants, are in the supporting position. For example, the word parade came to us from the French language, in which it is formed using the suffix -ade-, from the Latin verb paro - "I'm cooking" (original meaning of the word parade- "review of readiness for defense"). In student dictionaries, this reference is simplified and written as follows: parade - (Latin) n`ap (o)= I'm cooking.
Oral, more extensive explanations of etymological references are very important, in which the semantic relationship of words is revealed and brought to the students’ consciousness and as many words of the modern language, formed from a given historical root, are named.
2) Foreign words in the dictionaries of students who do not know Greek, Latin and other alphabets have to be conveyed very imperfectly, only in Russian letters. This is again a simplification. But there is no other way out: the effectiveness of using etymological analysis is so high that abandoning it would be too great a sacrifice" (15, p. 109).
A.N. Kokhichko believes that “the question of whether to write a borrowed word in Latin or Russian letters is not of fundamental importance. The generating word can also be written in Russian letters, which, in our opinion, should be done in elementary school, since primary schoolchildren still have poor command of Latin alphabet" (9, p. 84).
A.N. Kokhichko also writes that “students do not have to memorize etymological data: this is auxiliary material, and it will fulfill its teaching role if, on its basis, primary schoolchildren learn the spelling of unverifiable and difficult-to-verifiable words” (9, p. 85).
Based on the fact that spelling skill is formed in the process of speech activity and has substantive and operational aspects that are interconnected, A.N. Kokhichko identifies 4 stages that contribute to a qualitative change in the skill of spelling untestable words.
1. Preparatory stage.
The purpose of this stage is to equip students with the necessary theoretical knowledge and practical skills.
At this stage of spelling skill formation, the following tasks are solved:
introduce children to an untestable word, find out and clarify its lexical meaning;
teach schoolchildren the spelling and orthographic pronunciation of a given word;
begin to develop the ability to consciously find a spelling, determine its class and type.
The need to develop this skill is determined by the fact that in the process of developing spelling skills, students must promptly and correctly indicate the spelling;
introduce schoolchildren to an etymological reference to an unverifiable word.
Thus, at the preparatory stage, students master the knowledge that makes up the content side of the skill of spelling untestable words.
2. Indicative stage.
At this stage, students become familiar with the structure of the spelling action, that is, they come close to deciding what needs to be done to correctly spell an untestable word. At this stage, the object and purpose of the action being formed is clearly formulated for primary schoolchildren. Thus, the object is an unverifiable word, and the goal is the correctness and awareness of its spelling.
3. Consolidating stage.
At this stage, through the use of various exercises, such qualities of spelling skills as consciousness and correctness are developed. Consciousness is manifested in the validity of the performed structure of the action, in the establishment of connections between the operations that make up the action. Correctness as a quality of skill is expressed in the characteristic used knowledge, that is, the correct spelling of an unverifiable word.
At this stage, the etymological information about the word should be repeated whenever students violate the spelling or norms of speech use of the word. When repeating, you need to activate that etymological form that strengthens and defines the spelling. For example, in the word horizon a schoolboy makes a spelling mistake O. Teacher reminds support spelling orosis, meaning "limit" in Greek. If there is a spelling mistake And, then the reference spelling is reminiscent orizo- “I limit.”
The exercises performed by students at the consolidation stage are aimed at the practical application of knowledge and skills that form the basis of spelling skills, as well as at the development of speech to activate and enrich the vocabulary of younger schoolchildren, develop skills in the field of word formation and inflection, coherent speech, and speech culture.
4. Stage of control and self-control.
The need for this stage is due to the very essence of the etymological skill: firstly, the skill is formed in speech activity (its written form), which involves performing not only a number of grammatical exercises, but also creative work that contributes to both the speech development of students and the improvement of literacy of the tasks performed. works Secondly, the development of a skill is manifested in cases when writing the spelling pattern being studied becomes for students not a goal, but a means in solving speech problems" (8, pp. 55-60).
HE. Levushkina cites in her dissertation methods for checking the spelling of words with unverifiable spellings based on etymological analysis, formulated by P.L. Pokrovsky:
"1) Comparison of words in which it is difficult to recognize etymologically related stems. In many cases, students know these test words, but they do not rely on them: watercolor - aquarium, balcony - beam, brochure - brooch. When comparing the analyzed word with a historical relative, the teacher must show that this is indeed related vocabulary.
Comparison of a difficult word directly with the basis, with the root from which it is formed or to which it goes back. We resort to this technique in cases where there is no etymological relative in the modern Russian language: conversation, size, showcase.
Analysis, during which students observe the historically consistent development of the word...: art - art - tempt - kusiti (v. - syllable kusiti - “to torture”).
Comparison of words in modern Russian with words of the same root in other Slavic languages. … For example: crimson, crimson, crimson. All these words go back to the Old Slavonic word gaff.
Comparison of spelling-difficult words with words of the same root of the foreign language that the student is studying... A special effect is observed in the case when the stress in a Russian word does not coincide with the stress in the languages being compared" (12, pp. 45-46).
N.A. Podshibyakina established through research that a certain sequence in the use of etymology in Russian language lessons (from words with transparent to words with obscure etymology) allows for a differentiated approach to students’ learning the meaning of a word. “Initial work with words that have a simple etymology allows students who make a large number of spelling errors to develop the ability to see the sign underlying the name of a word and develop the ability to carry out a semantic analysis of the word. Having this base, such children perceive well in the future even darkened , and distant etymologies" (18, p. 24).
N.A. Podshibyakina defines the general requirements for the selection of vocabulary for etymological analysis: “When selecting vocabulary for etymological analysis, the age of students and the level of training in the Russian language must be taken into account. In this regard, compliance with the principle of accessibility is of great importance. This principle requires the skillful use of scientific etymologies. Thus, explanation of words boot (from sniffle), ship ( from Greek karabos - "ship"), etc. with the help of this technique can give rise to errors. In such cases, it is better to refrain from historical analysis. In addition, it is necessary to use exclusively reliable facts, since false etymology, that is, alteration and reinterpretation of words without taking into account the real facts of their origin, can also cause spelling errors" (18, p. 103).
"Z.A. Potikha warns that it is impossible to give more than 6-8 etymological references at the same time in one lesson (even the simplest and most entertaining ones), that references should be as brief as possible and that it is necessary to refrain from etymological analysis in cases where it can lead the student to spelling or semantic errors" (18, p. 41).
So, the use of etymological analysis in Russian language lessons when working with words with unverifiable spellings puts teaching spelling on a scientific basis. In this case, the child’s consciousness is involved, due to which vocabulary and spelling work becomes more effective.
When using etymological analysis in lessons, it is necessary to clearly distinguish it from morphemic analysis in order to avoid incorrect morphemic division of words.
Etymological analysis in elementary school should be used as an auxiliary technique for spelling, lexical and other practical purposes and carried out by the teacher, taking into account the age characteristics of students. In this case, etymological certificates are available to younger schoolchildren and are perceived with great interest. At the same time, the explained words are acquired by schoolchildren both in meaning and in terms of spelling.
Unfortunately, etymological analysis is rarely used in elementary school for spelling purposes. The reason is that schools are insufficiently equipped with material specifically focused on such analysis.
Changes in phonetics or grammar are difficult to notice over the life of one generation, but changes in vocabulary occur literally before our eyes. When the picture of the world expands due to the emergence of a new concept, the easiest way for a language to borrow a ready-made word from another language along with the new concept. But borrowed words often cause spelling difficulties because they do not obey the rules of Russian spelling. Etymological analysis can help you delve deeper into the mysteries of words, better understand their meaning and learn the correct spelling.
There are especially many borrowed terms in the Russian language, for example, sports terms. The word football consists of foot “leg” and ball – “ball”; the word volleyball is made up of volley “flight” and ball “ball”, hockey - hockey.
Often the history of a word is associated with more than one language, for example, the word dialogue: in French dialogue, in German dialog, and the primary source is the Greek dialogue, which consists of two parts: dia- (“between”) + logos (“word”), so Thus, dialogue is “a conversation between two or more persons.” The words ideology and ideal are interesting in their spelling. The word ideology was formed from two bases: the Latin idea - “science”, “idea”, “thought” and the Greek logos - “word”, “teaching”, “science” - with the connecting vowel o; literally translated as “the doctrine of thought.” Similar words: ideological, ideologist, ideologize. The word ideal appeared in modern Russian in the 20s of the 19th century, which, in particular, was reflected in Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin”: “On the fashionable word ideal / Lensky quietly dozed off.” At the same time, for example, the single-root word ideal was known earlier. The noun ideal was borrowed by the Russian language from the German ideal, from where it spread to many Western European languages: ideal (English, French), ideale (Italian). The primary source common to all is the Latin word idea - “science”, “thought”. It is with the word idea that you can check the unstressed vowel e in words of this root. Similar words: idealistic, idealize, idealist.
People far from science love to look for the origins of words. True, they are usually interested in semantic and semantic connections. Under the influence of such folk etymology, words that are distant from each other often come together. Scientists say that the ancestor of the word slap in the face is the verb to spit (once fighters before a fist fight had the habit of spitting on their hands). And some may think that it is connected with the word ear.
One humorous game is based on folk etymology. This is how it is described in the story of the Russian writer Nadezhda Aleksandrovna Teffi “Instead of Politics”:
“A red-cheeked third-grader high school student rushed into the room, kissed his mother’s cheek as he walked, and shouted loudly:
– Tell me: why is the anthem-Asia, and not the anthem-Africa?
- Lord have mercy! Lost my mind! Where are you going? Why are you late for lunch? And the soup is cold.
- I don’t want soup. Why not the African anthem?
- Well, give me a plate, I’ll put you a cutlet.
- Why is it a summer cat and not a winter cat? – the schoolboy asked busily and showed the plate.
“They probably whipped him today,” the father guessed.
“Why did you flog, and not we flog?”
Gradually, the game captured all family members. There is a more complex and interesting version of this game: not “Why are we talking?”, but “Why aren’t we talking?” Here you need to determine the word that someone has guessed by its parts, encrypted with synonyms or antonyms. For example, why don't we say robber of the north? Because we say thief-yuga.
The Russian language has a very large number of words, the spelling of which can be checked using etymological analysis. The “Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language” by N. M. Shansky and T. A. Bobrova will help you obtain information about the origin and meaning of words. I will give several examples from the school curriculum in which etymological analysis helps to understand the spelling of a word. The word neighborhood is borrowed from the Old Church Slavonic language, where it is derived from the word cross. Literally, “the area around the cross.” Orangerie - borrowed in the 18th century from the French language, where orangerie is a derivative of orange ‘orange’ (originally greenhouse - orange plantation). The word genuine is originally Russian. It is believed that the meaning “real, valid” appeared because earlier during interrogation, in order to achieve the truth, they beat with long sticks - originals (literally from the word length, long). We use the same principle to write the word ins and outs. This original Russian word arose on the basis of the expression ins and outs (under the nail) secret (from a special kind of torture during interrogations in Ancient Rus'). Let's consider the origin of the word etymology itself. This word was borrowed in the 17th century from Greek, where etymologia is the addition of etymon ‘true, original meaning of the word’ and logos ‘teaching’.
The etymology of words attracts constant attention, involuntarily instills in native speakers an interest in philology as a science, expands their linguistic horizons, improves the general culture and culture of speech, promotes practical literacy, allows them to penetrate deeper into the secrets of our language, better understand the meaning and learn the correct spelling of words.
Back Forward
Attention! Slide previews are for informational purposes only and may not represent all of the presentation's features. If you are interested in this work, please download the full version.
The purpose of the lesson is show the morphemic originality of words in the Russian language, compare the morphemic structure of words from modern and etymological points of view; prove the effectiveness of etymological analysis of words in improving spelling literacy.
Tasks:
- educational: repeat and summarize students’ knowledge in the section “Morphemics. Word formation. Spelling"; to develop the ability to study the morphemic structure of words using word-formation and etymological analysis, to select words with the same root from the point of view of modern word formation and etymology, to apply the acquired knowledge in practice;
- developing: develop logical thinking, cognitive interest, creative activity of students; development of oral speech and visual memory of students;
- educational: cultivate a love for the Russian language; instill accuracy in writing; create conditions for nurturing a culture of speech behavior, collective responsibility, mutual assistance, shaping the personality of students through hard work, attention in class, and interest in Russian language lessons.
Equipment:
- board
- projector
- presentation
- cards
- handout
Lesson type: systematization and generalization of the studied material on the topic “Morphemics. Word formation. Spelling".
Lesson format: lesson-research.
Lesson progress
I. Organizational moment.
II. Setting goals and objectives for the lesson.
Guys, today we have an unusual lesson: a research lesson. Today we will not only remember the studied morphemic and word-formation parsing, but also find out that there is no guarantee that words that are now root, non-derivative, were not previously broken up into morphemes, that words that are now segmented in some way were previously segmented in the same way . All this can be understood only by etymological analysis. Thus, we will look “inside” the words, find the hidden meaning of the words and make sure that etymological analysis will help us easily remember the correct spelling of words. So, go ahead.
III. Work in class.
1. Educational material. Word analysis.
Can you imagine that bull, bug and bee are related words? Let's see how the appearance of a word can change over time (sometimes beyond recognition).
Verb bellow among the ancient Slavs it meant “moo, roar,” that is, make a low, drawn-out sound. At the root -beech- sound at could be pronounced for a long time. Afterwards so long at turned into s- it turned out bull. But at could be pronounced very briefly and denoted by a special letter - ъ(erom), like another short sound O. From here the second “mooing beast” looked like this: bchela. Then a short at disappeared and it worked bee. However, combinations warhead turned out to be quite difficult to pronounce. It was necessary for both sounds to become either voiced or unvoiced. And so it happened: the Ukrainian language chose the first - bjola, Russian - second - bee. And indeed, the bull and the bee are similar: they are well-fed and moo, or rather, howl. The word is bug formed by means of suff. -cat bugash- ‘bug’. Bukash- derivative with suff. -ash- from beech– ‘dull sound, buzzing’. Thus, the primary morphemic composition of the word bug next: buk-ash-k-a. Modern morphemic composition: bug-a. So, historically bull, bee and bug - words with the same root.
Word doctor formed from lie using the suffix -CH from VRATI, but in its old, original meaning “to speak”.
Astronomers are specialists in astram. Astronomers study celestial bodies. But considering that aster translated from Greek means “star”, we can assume that there is some truth in this assumption.
Turns out south relates to dinner. “Dinner” is formed using the suffix -INЪ (modern -IN) from ugh- "south, noon." Original meaning of the word dinner- "afternoon snack".)
Bag is a relative of the word “fur.” Originally by word bag called a container made only from the skin (fur) of a wild animal or domestic animal.
What could be the connection between compote And composer? It turns out that both words have the same etymological root as the Latin verb ponere(“put, put”). Moreover, their etymological prefix is absolutely the same: also a Latin prefix com-, synonymous with Russian co- in words employee, sympathy. Composer literally means “compiler, writer”, and compote– “put together” (from different fruits and berries). Interestingly, etymological relatives composer And compote(both from the root side and from the prefix side) are also composition(literally “composition”), component(“a component of something”), layout(“making a whole from parts”), compose.
What do the words cabbage and captain have in common? Both words begin with cap. The word captain comes from the Latin "kaput" - head. Cabbage is a very ancient word that appeared in the Russian language before captain and was formed from the word “kaput” - head.
Thus, etymologically related connections can be found in words that are, at first glance, semantically different.
2. Students work in pairs. Consolidation.
Now try to find the related connections of words yourself, and then analyze them from the point of view of etymological structure.
Kennel, towel, chicken, burdock, shovel.
Help: Word stem kennel from noora(cf. other gender n ura- “hole”), which has the same root as hole, dive, using the prefix ko- (the same prefix has historically stood out in words hobble, pick). Towel is a suffixal diminutive derivative of canvas “piece of fabric”. Word chicken turns out to be derived from the word chickens(cf.: like chickens in cabbage soup) to designate a female individual. Kur, i.e., the rooster was called onomatopoeic in nature (by its cry crow). Shovel- there used to be a word " spade", the same as a hand, palm. It was from this that " shovel" - blade-like, and “ burdock” is a plant with wide palm-shaped leaves. This explains the meaning of the word “ lop-eared” - having large ears resembling a burdock.
3. Acquaintance with new terms.
In the process of historical development of a language, the morphemic structure of a word can undergo various changes. The most important of them include: simplification, re-elaboration, complication. Simplification This type of historical change in the morphemic composition of a word is called, in which a previously derived stem becomes non-derivative. For example, pi-r-?< nu-ти (“пить”). Re-decomposition- this is a change in the boundary between morphemes in a word. For example, in a word rod(“part of a fishing rod is a long flexible stick to which a line is attached”) now the suffix -lish-, and not -ish-, as in the word city-isch-e, stands out. This suffix included the suffix -l-, which previously belonged to the word udil-o, lost in modern Russian. Complication– transformation of a previously non-derivative base into a derivative base.
4. Consolidation of what has been learned. Work in groups.
Now you need to work in groups. Each group has a card on their desk with the name of the type of historical change and words that you should try, after consultation, to parse from the point of view of modern morphemic and etymological structure.
5. Student performances.
Our school textbooks contain a lot of vocabulary words, memorizing which sometimes causes significant difficulties for students. You and I must try to prove that the use of etymological analysis of words in Russian language lessons will help improve literacy in comprehending and understanding the spelling of dictionary words. That is, etymological analysis will help you spell the word correctly. Let's listen to our classmates.
1) In a word alley it is written LL, since the spelling of the word alley conveys the spelling of its French original - allee - “passage, road”, which was inherited by LL from its “parent” - the verb aller - “to go, pass”. In a word seal you need to write the letter E, since it is formed using the suffix -Ть from peketi (seal), which is a derivative of pekti - “oven”. The original meaning is "burnt mark". At the root of the word grass is written with the letter A because it is formed from tinder- "spend". Grass- literally “that which is spent, consumed, eaten.
2) The word log is written with the letter O, since historically the root POL “half” stands out in it. From the word “weed” - to cut, split in two. The word garden was formed from the word “to fence” - “a place enclosed by a fence.” It is related to the word city. Vegetable garden - fence in this case, the help helps memorize the spelling of a dictionary word.
3) Village- in the old days, the place where they uprooted, pulled up trees, and then built houses, plowed up arable land - was called a village ("village" - "tree" - a place cleared of trees). Rooster- so nicknamed for his ability to sing. Those. rooster is derived from the word to sing.
4) Adjective mercantile in itself is difficult both for understanding the meaning of the word and for writing. Etymology will become a source of light here too. And noun commerce, and adjective mercantile, and the name of the Roman god of trade Mercury contain the same root as the Latin word merx("product"). ( Commerce In addition, it has an etymological prefix com-, familiar to us from the words compote And composer,- hence the doubling of the consonant). In a similar way, you can solve the problem of mastering spelling that is unstressed, but etymologically verifiable e: com MERZ iya ––> MERK Uriy, MERK Antillic.
6. Practice. Work in groups.
Now try to explain the spelling of an unverified vowel or consonant in a dictionary word, based on its etymology, and then indicate the morphemic structure of these words from different points of view.
Bear, pencil case, tram, painting, skates, weather, hello.
Reference: Bear- derived from the words “honey” and “knows”. Those. a beast that knows where to find honey in the forest. Pencil case- feather in Latin is “penna”, and feathers were stored in a box called a pencil case. Although we no longer write with them, the name has been preserved. Tram- English "tram" - carriage, "way" - road, path. Painting- from the era of Peter I. The Italian "cartina" - thin, beautiful paper, comes from the word "card" - paper. Skates- the curve of a skate was usually depicted in the old days in the form of a horse’s head. Hence the name skates - “little horses” (skates - horse). Weather- common Slavic. Formed with the help of the prefix po- from the disappeared year (compare year, the primary meaning is “good weather”). Hello- derived from “hello”. When meeting, people wish each other health.
7. Summing up.
Well, guys, our lesson has come to an end. I hope you are convinced that a lot of interesting things are hidden in seemingly simple words. But by revealing the “past” of a word, we thereby discover for ourselves in it what belongs to it as a specific lexical unit, we understand its meaning more accurately and more accurately, we more fully imagine its place in linguistic “society,” and we consciously assimilate its orthographic appearance , we penetrate deeper into its artistic and expressive capabilities and figurative essence. In addition, etymological analysis of the structure of words also helps to write it correctly.
You passed all the tests with dignity, found the correct answers to all the tasks. And all we have to do is summarize. In the meantime, share your impressions of the lesson using the beginning of the sentence that you see on the board:
- today I found out...
- it was interesting...
- it was difficult...
- I was doing tasks...
- I realized that...
- now I can...
- I felt that...
- I purchased...
- I learned...
- I did it...
- I was able...
- I will try...
- I was surprised...
- I wanted...
And fill out a short questionnaire, according to which I will also summarize the results of our joint activities:
1. I worked during the lesson active / passive
2. By your work in class I'm happy / not happy
3. The lesson seemed to me short / long
4. For the lesson I not tired / tired
5. My mood it got better/it got worse
6. I had the lesson material clear / not clear
7. Homework seems to me
interesting / not interesting
useful/useless
interesting / boring
easy / difficult
Grading.
V. Homework:
1. Prepare etymological references for words: birch, car, crimson, hockey, notebook, soldier.
2. Carry out a morphemic analysis of words from the point of view of modern and etymological structure, selecting words with the same root: cucumber, lunch, berry, red, taste, charm, irresistible.
List of used literature.
1. http://www.e-reading.bz/chapter.php/1006422/152/Shanskiy_ _Lingvisticheskie_detektivy.html(Origin of words and etymological analysis).
2. http://jivuchest.agni-age.net/CULTURE/ENCYCL/SVET/CHAP01/chap0124.htm(Encyclopedic Dictionary "Vitality of the Fundamentals of Culture")
3. http://www.k2x2.info/jazykoznanie/lingvisticheskie_detektivy/p4.php(Linguistic detectives)
4. Kovalev V.I. Dictionary of etymologically verifiable words in the Russian language. Lugansk, 2002.
5. Lebedev N. M. Tournaments of Russian language experts: Didactic materials. – M.: Verbum. M, 2006.
6. Lvova S.I. Spelling. Etymology in the service of spelling. M., 2000.
7. Paskhalov A.P. Amazing etymology. M. ENAS, 2008.
8. Shansky N.M., Bobrova T.A. Etymological dictionary of the Russian language. M., 1994.
9. VOSH assignments in the Russian language.
