As “ - ushk “ and “ - yushk “ help to cope with vital difficulties?“ To me two kilograms of a kartoshechka “ - we ask the seller in the market. “ It is possible you for a minute? “ - we address the passerby. “ I will set only one question! “ - we finish people in turn, forcing the way to a treasured window. Kartoshechka, minute, question... And why, actually, not potatoes, question, minute? From where we have such violent draft to umenshitelno - to caressing suffixes?
“ The Main character of our language consists in extreme ease with which everything is expressed on it - abstract thoughts, internal lyrical chuvstvovaniye, “ lives myshya bustle “ shout of indignation, scintillating prank and tremendous passion “ . (And. Herzen)
Even the person, far from linguistics, will tell at once that words with diminutive suffixes are used at informal communication in an informal situation. Exactly there is Russian, and so infinitely inventive in word formation, proves in all power and variety. All these - ok, - ik, - Chick, - the check, - ushk, - ishk, - an itsa etc., except the message on a size trifle, bear also emotionally - estimated loading, expressing love and caress, pity and tenderness, affection and protection.
S. T. Aksakov wrote: “... small it is peculiar to be darling. The caress assumes diminutivity of a subject... Diminutive glass is as if directed at objects, and they, decreasing, become darlings “ .
Usually several informal is the share of one word of official style single-root diminutive. For example: the son - the sonny - the sonny - synulya - the little son, a leg - a leg - a nozhenka - a nozhonka etc. Neutral nouns literally drown in diminutive, their ratio about 1:4. Quite often dictionaries join all modifications of the word, and then the impression of absolutely immense lexical richness of language is made. And actually it is, of course, about style richness of colloquial style.
If conversation came about styles, our bow to great M. V. Lomonosov. It adapted the medieval doctrine about three styles of poetics and rhetoric nearly 250 years ago - high, average, low - for Russian and literature. To it language represented a motley mash of outdated tserkovnoslavyanizm, varvarizm, primordially Russian and foreign words which were delivered to Russia thanks to Pyotr`s reforms. Together with heavy slow syntax such language did not meet requirements of the developing society any more.
The theory of Lomonosov about “ three calms “ established connection between a genre, a subject and style of a statement. So odes have to be written by elevated style, poems, tragedies, an average are written the elegy, “ prosaic descriptions of affairs memorable “ theatrical compositions, “ where the human word " is required; and low - letters in prose, the comedy, songs, fables, “ descriptions of ordinary affairs “.
Naturally, for two and a half centuries it “ tryokhshtily “ underwent strong changes. The limit of modern styles passes across the line formal (semi-official organ) / informal (not semi-official organ), and the last shares on neutral and familiar. Modest diminutive suffixes also charged themselves with stilerazlichitelny burden. I.e. the daughter - the official word, the daughter - neutral, a dochechka - familiar.
A large number and a variety of diminutive suffixes of Russian - the phenomenon unique, and therefore an enduring headache for translators.
So, for example, in English there are very few suffixes for transfer of the small size or a sneering attitude: - let (islet - an island, kinglet - the kinglet), - kin (lambkin - a lamb), - ette (kitchenette - a kitchenette), - ock (paddock - a luzhok). And generally small size is transferred by a combination of adjectives of little, small, tiny to a noun (old little lady - the old woman).
In German the most widespread umenshitelno - a caressing suffix - chen forced out outdate - lein and joins almost all nouns (to Sternchen - an asterisk, Jungchen - the fellow).
It is interesting that magnifying suffixes of Russian - shche, - shcha are used much less often than diminutive and are perceived as archaic: ruchishcha, settlements, great man. So they are mentioned in the RuNet most often in connection with Gorky who remembered that Lenin spoke of Tolstoy as about “ experienced great man “.
“ Revolution Loud-hailer “ Century. V. Mayakovsky was drawn towards magnifying suffixes (“ voynishcha “ “ luchishche “) adherents of the world revolution and builders of communism with might and main used hyperboles, and language very much objected and opposed, constantly addressing litotes and diminutiva - underestimations and deliberate mitigation. On everyone - look for and - looking for there was quiet - ushk and - yushk where even hissing sound without threat and as a gentle lisping.
Linguists have a theory that diminutive character of the speech carries out a certain compensatory, therapeutic role. The serfdom, the totalitarian state, oppression of chiefs of all levels and calibers suppressed the person, did it small and worthless. And to restore the true growth, the importance and advantage, the person invents the umenshitelno - tender conversation, the benefit Russian with hunting meets requirements of him. “ You would remove a jacket, the citizen nachalnichek... “
In this small lovely world where there are a garden and a tree, a doggie and a small bench, posidelochka an evening with a tea and pryanichka, with a horror film on a TV set where in the morning it is possible to be run on a bazarchik or to rummage in an ogorodika, the person surely straightens shoulders and feels like the owner. In this world there are no humiliation and fear, here it is simpler to cope with any problem, to settle affairs, to consult on a question, to ventilate an obstanovochka.
Ignoring big people “ somewhere there above “ with their slogans and hyperboles, the native language takes the part of the little person, adding it self-esteem and self-affirmation, “ gives it strength to resist not to be crushed by destiny “.