Until the end of the 19th century. no systematized codes of writing rules appeared, although many specific questions of Russian writing were actively discussed in the press. The spelling was based on the accepted use of words and expressions - usus.

The first reform carried out by Peter I was associated with the transition to a civilian script. In the middle of the XVIII century. gradually and carefully entered the Russian letter with a hyphen; its appearance is associated with the name of V.K.Trediakovsky.

{!LANG-952231adc39a32cafd6a000203176f79!}

{!LANG-fa66d9bd1007a3fc78d8fbec1a32d808!}

{!LANG-e19d342c39f6edf3da04e0e15b728a13!}

{!LANG-f8ad3f9ccc19bf5396ba71a98f2f2ba9!}

In the summer of 1917, the Minister of Education of the Provisional Government, A.A. Manuilov, sent an order to the localities on the gradual (!) Transition to a new spelling.

After the October Revolution, the new spelling was introduced everywhere by decrees of 1917 and 1918. Thus, the Bolsheviks quickly took advantage of the ready-made project, while applying their revolutionary methods. One way or another, in a country with a predominantly illiterate population, the introduction of the new letter really played a positive role - it must be admitted that the so-called universal literacy was achieved under the Bolsheviks in such a short time, in no small measure thanks to the spelling reform.

In 1929, a new Spelling Commission was created (it included A. M. Peshkovsky, N. N. Durnovo, S. P. Obnorsky and others); the commission's work was reduced to discussing a number of proposals.

In 1940, the book “Rules for Unified Spelling and Punctuation with the Appendix of a Concise Dictionary. Project. Compiled by the Commission for the Development of a Unified Spelling and Punctuation of the Russian Language, established by the Decree of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR dated July 10, 1939 ". The war prevented the implementation of this project.

New "Rules of Russian Spelling and Punctuation" were being prepared already in the late 40s - the first half of the 50s. SI Ozhegov, AB Shapiro, SE Kryuchkov took an active part in the work on them. In 1955, the draft "Rules" was published (under the stamp of the Institute of Linguistics of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR and the Ministry of Education of the RSFSR). This project was officially approved by the Academy of Sciences, the Ministry of Higher Education of the USSR and the Ministry of Education of the RSFSR in 1956 and published at the same time (simultaneously with the academic "Spelling Dictionary of the Russian Language" for 100 thousand words edited by S. I. Ozhegov and A. B. Shapiro). The Rules played an important role as the first set of spelling rules to be followed by the press and schools.

Among the spellings proposed by the Rules, some spelling changes of a private nature were also made. So, since 1956, they began to write the words shell, barber, scurvy, mat with the letter and after the c, the words apparently and still - with a hyphen, and in time - together.

For the first time, the rule was fully formulated: after the Russian prefixes, the letter y is sequentially written instead of the consonant - not only in Russian roots (previous, summarize, search, play), but also in foreign languages \u200b\u200b(prehistory, lack of initiative, improvise, imitate, etc.) - spellings that still cause internal protest among some, but nevertheless are inevitable).

At the same time, quite soon after the approval of the 1956 "Rules", their incompleteness, in some cases understatement, and often unilateralism due to directive political restrictions began to be revealed. So, in the practice of printing very soon the recommendation of the "Rules" to write the word Republic with a capital letter only in the names of the republics of the USSR and the so-called "countries of people's democracy" ceased to be observed - such spellings appeared as federal Republic Germany or South Africa. According to the recommendations of the "Rules", one should write, for example, combinations of the Seven Years 'War and the Hundred Years' War with a capital letter, and the first world War and the Second World War - with a lowercase letter, as if they were “not proper names” (by the way, this injustice in the practice of writing of the last decade has already been overcome). There are plenty of such inconsistencies in the Rules.

It is unlikely that the original recommendation of the "Rules" to write sound abbreviations "denoting common nouns" in lowercase letters was already correct. Only a few of the sound abbreviations are written this way (as exceptions) - university, rono, pillbox, bunker, NEP, registry office (the last two have variant spellings in capital letters: NEP, registry office). However, the rule, based on a rather long tradition, is just the opposite - to write any sound abbreviations in capital letters: for example, HPP, GRES, CHPP, VTEK, ROE are written from the old abbreviations of the "early Soviet" period - TOZ , CHON, from later, new ones - NOT, AIDS, ZhEK, DEZ, OMON, TEK, AON, VIA, mass media, ultrasound and many others. It is not said in the "Rules" on how to write words derived from abbreviations, on the non-preservation of capital letters in them, for example: Moscow Art Theater, Foreign Ministry (from the Moscow Art Theater, Foreign Ministry), NKVED, SS (from the NKVD, SS).

Nothing is said about the need to replace the hyphen on a dash in structures with applications containing non-single-word names: director - artistic director, researcher - cosmonaut, etc. Cannot satisfy now the recommendation of the "Rules" concerning writing structures with an appendix that precedes defined word and "can be equated in meaning to an adjective": such combinations as an old man's father or a beautiful daughter, it is proposed to write separately. In this recommendation, one cannot fail to see a violation of one of the cultural and historical traditions of writing: which proofreader would raise his hand to write Lermontov's line without a hyphen "An old woman-mother is waiting for her son from the battle" or the title of AN Ostrovsky's play "Handsome man"? And the statement that "a hyphen is not written in a combination of a common noun followed by a proper name" is actually true only for combinations such as the city of Moscow or the Volga River, but is absolutely inapplicable in cases where the proper name is preceded by an evaluative application. This is clearly seen in an example from another classic: "You are wretched, you are abundant, you are powerful, you are powerless, Mother Russia" ...

Much of what was not explained in the text of the "Rules" then had to be explained in various reference books for press workers, methodological developments for schools, etc. Such is, for example, the question of the spelling of nouns formed from hyphenated nouns, which remained open in the Rules: cf. trade unionism, general governorship, non-commissioned officer, but a saltomortalist, yacht club, as well as Almaty, New York, Orekhovozuevites, etc. (as opposed to adjectives formed from the same nouns and, in accordance with the "Rules" hyphen: New York, Orekhovo-Zuevsky, etc.).

The question of writing complex adjectives - "geographical" definitions in compound names remained unclear: the rules regulate the spelling of such adjectives in geographical names such as the West Siberian Lowland, but nothing is said about the names of institutions and enterprises such as the West Siberian Metallurgical Combine. Is it any wonder that the very text of the still valid "Rules" is now little known (they have not been republished since the early 60s), but the press workers are guided exclusively by reference books and other similar manuals (D.E. Rosenthal et al. ).

In 1963, the newspaper Izvestia published an article by prof. AI Efimov on the low level of literacy in the country and the need to simplify spelling. Soon, by the Decree of the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences of May 24, 1963, a Commission for the improvement of Russian spelling was created (chairman - V.V. Vinogradov, deputy chairman - M.V. Panov). The decree especially emphasized "the insistence of the Soviet public ... to make improvements and simplifications in the spelling system." The commission was given a very short time - "to complete the work and submit their proposals to the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences in 1964". Some of the commission's proposals were quite radical in nature: for example, to write at night, mouse; hare, dress; cucumbers, etc .; completely abandon the letter b. It seems that with all the purely scientific, linguistic substantiation of many of the proposals, the authors of that project overlooked the inevitable social and cultural shock caused by the reaction to the breaking of a number of traditionally (historically) established rules and principles of writing and the established spelling skills based on them. The non-linguistic, socio-cultural factor is too great in matters of spelling.

Published in Izvestia (No. 228 and 229 for 1964), the commission's proposals provoked a violent reaction of protest, which was expressed in a number of publications in the same Izvestia in the fall of 1964. The termination of the discussion coincided with the removal of NS Khrushchev. Later, in the "era of stagnation", they tried to forget about these proposals, but they are still remembered at every opportunity by representatives of the intelligentsia, who are now very suspicious of any attempts to interfere with the spelling rules, and some journalists see such attempts as invaluable "fried »Material.

Nevertheless, at the beginning of the 70s at the Institute of the Russian Language of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, already by order of the Department of Literature and Language, the Spelling Commission was re-established (chaired by V.I.Borkovsky). The proposals of this commission, much less radical, were formulated in 1973 and submitted to the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Having received no response, they were “buried” in the bowels of the Presidium. In the next 15 years, work in the field of spelling rules (and, by the way, spelling dictionaries too - the academic “Spelling Dictionary of the Russian Language” was republished over the years only by stereotyped editions) was practically mothballed.

This work was resumed already in the years of perestroika: in 1988, a spelling laboratory was created at the Institute of Russian Language of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR (later - the sector of spelling and spelling), and by order of OLYA - the Spelling Commission in a new composition (chairman - D.N.Shmelev, then Yu.N. Karaulov, at present - V.V. Lopatin). The main result of her work is a draft of the new edition of the “Rules of Russian Spelling and Punctuation” prepared at the Institute, discussed and approved by the Spelling Commission. This project meets the requirements of the time, it is quite complete, in many cases it clarifies and concretizes the existing rules, corresponds to the current state of the Russian language and the science about it. Changes to the current rules proposed in the draft are few and are largely dictated by modern writing practice.

The same sector of the Institute of the Russian Language of the Russian Academy of Sciences has prepared a new "Large Russian Spelling Dictionary" published in 1999 with 160 thousand words. For the first time, many words and combinations of words written with a capital letter were introduced into the dictionary; it spells out hundreds of new words that appeared in the Russian language at the end of the 20th century.

The country should finally have a real, not phantom and not surrogate, set of rules for Russian spelling. The presence of such a compulsory set of rules, as well as another normative source of the "Great Academic Spelling Dictionary", is an important component of national culture, one of the signs of the cultural health of society.

Modern Russian graphics presents a slightly modified graphics of the Old Church Slavonic, the so-called Cyrillic alphabet.

Old Slavonic graphics were compiled in the 9th century. in Bulgaria by brothers Cyril (Constantine) and Methodius, Byzantine missionaries, scientists and diplomats, based on the Greek alphabet and through partial use of other alphabets, in particular the Hebrew.

From the X century. Old Slavonic graphics began to be used in Russia when rewriting existing books and when creating original works of writing. The theory of writing and spelling rules did not exist at that time. The scribes who practically mastered the art of writing were mostly copiers of ready-made manuscripts. This does not mean that the Old Russian scribes mechanically used the techniques of the Old Slavonic language. Preserving in Russian writing the techniques of Old Slavonic graphics (in particular, the letters of nasal vowel sounds that did not exist in Russian), Russian scribes adapted it to Russian pronunciation.

In the XII-XIII centuries. Russian writing is increasingly freed from Old Slavic influence and is gradually turning into an independent system that brings writing closer to living speech.

Due to the historical development of the language, the growing traditions of Russian writing, of course, had to be in some conflict with the natural changes in the phonetic and grammatical system of the language. This is how a well-known discrepancy arose between the graphic and sound systems of the Russian language, between the developing tradition of writing and pronunciation.

The scribes' reliance on pronunciation led to certain changes in the writing schedule. By the XIII century. the letters ъ and ь, denoting special vowel sounds in the Old Russian language in certain phonetic conditions, are replaced under stress, in accordance with the new pronunciation, with the letters o, e. From the 16th century. the letter ъ generally loses its sound meaning and becomes a sign of softness of consonants and a separating mark, and the letter ъ is used to denote hard final consonants. On the other hand, the established tradition of writing (reliance on pronunciation) was not particularly effective in the designation of consonants paired in voiced-voicelessness, as well as in relation to akanya (pronunciation of unstressed about as a). Sounding-stunning consonants and akane, which appeared in the phonetic system of the language, were not widely reflected in the writing. Pronunciation and tradition - these contradictory factors of writing - proved to be progressive and equally effective in the development of Russian graphics and spelling.

The development of Russian writing was somewhat delayed by the influence of South Slavic writing, which began at the end of the 16th century, when South Slavic liturgical books appeared in Russia, corrected in accordance with the Greek originals. The graphics and spelling of these books imparted a certain artificiality to Russian writing, depriving it of independence and connection with a living language.

Book printing, which arose in Russia in the 16th century, played a positive role in establishing a uniform writing. The printed matter becomes a model for all writers. Until the XVI century. Russian scribes wrote one word after another without spaces between them. Separate spelling of words is associated with the development of typography.

Of great importance in the history of Russian graphics and spelling was the decree on the introduction of the Russian civil alphabet, issued in 1708 by Peter I. This event, which was an indicator of the decline of the authority and influence of the church, was expressed in some change appearance and the composition of the Russian alphabet: superfluous letters for the Russian sound system were excluded, “titla” (abbreviations) and “forces” (stresses) were eliminated. The strengthening of graphics and spelling was also facilitated by the opening in 1727 of an academic printing house, whose editions adhered to a specific spelling system.

At the turn of the first half of the 18th century. questions of graphics and spelling are formulated in principle. They are associated with issues of the Russian literary language and acquire public importance.

The first to raise the question of the basis of Russian spelling was Trediakovsky. In his treatise "Conversation between a stranger and a Russian about the spelling of the old and the new, and everything that belongs to this matter" (1748), Trediakovsky proclaims the phonetic principle of spelling. Considering that phonetic writing is most accessible to the masses, Trediakovsky, however, recognizes only the pronunciation of people who know the norms of the literary language as correct, and makes a number of concessions to traditional spellings. Trediakovsky did not resolve the issue of the essence of our spelling, his views were not decisive in the history of our spelling.

M.V. Lomonosov included speculations on spelling in his Russian Grammar (1755). Lomonosov's characterization of the theoretical foundations of spelling is a combination of the phonetic principle of spelling with the morphological one. Paying attention to tradition in writing, Lomonosov covers a wide range of spelling issues related to grammar. Despite their authority and credibility, Lomonosov's rules did not receive universal recognition. The rules were not approved by the highest government agency and did not have the force of law. The establishment of the spelling norms proposed by Lomonosov was facilitated by the works of V. Svetov and A.A. Barsov, authors of grammatical works of the school type. In their works, these authors gave a short set of spelling rules of the second half of the 18th century, implementing the morphological principle of spelling established by Lomonosov. The final approval of the morphological principle of spelling is associated with the publication of the Russian Grammar by the Academy of Sciences (1802, 1809, 1819) and the Dictionary of the Russian Academy (1789-1794). The spelling norms established in the middle of the 18th century were not very stable. Significant differences in spelling were noted both in official documents and in the works of writers.

Grammars compiled at the beginning and middle of the 19th century. (Vostokov, Grech, Davydov, Buslaev), and dictionaries published at that time could not eliminate the spelling inconsistency that continued throughout the 19th century.

A lot of useful things were introduced into Russian spelling by N.A. Karamzin, who influenced his orthographic practice with his authority (justification of spellings of Russian and foreign words, introduction of the letter ё instead of io).

An extremely important milestone in the history of Russian spelling is the capital work of Academician Ya.K. Grotto "Controversial Issues of Russian Spelling from Peter the Great to the Present" (1873, 1876, 1885) and his book "Russian Spelling" (1885), presenting a practical guide for school and print. Grot's work is devoted to the history and theory of Russian spelling. It covers practical spelling issues from a scientific perspective. Groth's spelling code was instrumental in establishing spelling norms. The spelling established by Grot was recommended and gained academic fame, but it did not completely eliminate the inconsistency, and most importantly, it did not simplify the Russian spelling. Groth jealously adhered to the principle of legitimizing tradition and ignored the movement to simplify writing, which gained wide public scope in the 50s and 60s of the 19th century. Therefore, Grot's Russian Spelling did not meet with unanimous and complete recognition.

At the beginning of the XX century. more and more broad social tasks of spelling reform are revealed, and the Academy of Sciences is in charge of solving spelling issues. The resolution on the spelling reform, adopted at a broad meeting at the Academy of Sciences on May 11, 1917, had no practical significance. The reformed spelling remained optional for school and print. Only the Soviet government, by decrees of December 23, 1917 and October 10, 1918, approved the resolution of the meeting of the Academy of Sciences. The new spelling was declared compulsory for all Soviet citizens.

Spelling reform 1917-1918 greatly simplified and facilitated our writing, but did not touch on many particular questions of spelling, which served as a source of discord in the practice of writing. It shook common system spelling and caused many difficulties in the work of publishing houses, as well as in school teaching.

In 1930, an organized attempt was made to carry out a radical reform of our letter. The draft of such a reform was drawn up by a special commission of the People's Commissariat for Education. The project introduced a breakdown in the Russian spelling that was not caused by a genuine vital need, moreover, it was not scientifically justified, and therefore practically inappropriate. The project was rejected. The need to streamline spelling became more and more urgent.

"The task of the present moment is not to reform the methods of writing, but to streamline some of them in the direction of uniformity and consistency and in the resolution of individual puzzling cases ... Having established everything that has not been established so far, it is necessary to publish a complete spelling reference, authorized by the educational authorities", - so determined the further development of Russian spelling prof. D.N. Ushakov.

The implementation of this task began in the mid-30s, when work was organized to compile a complete set of rules for spelling and punctuation. The long-term work of philologists and teachers resulted in the "Rules of Russian Spelling and Punctuation", approved in 1956 by the USSR Academy of Sciences, the USSR Ministry of Higher Education and the RSFSR Ministry of Education. The rules are binding for all who use the letter, both for the press, educational institutions, government and public organizations, and for individual citizens.

The "Rules of Russian Spelling and Punctuation" is, in fact, the first complete set of rules for modern Russian spelling in the history of Russian writing and consists of two parts - spelling and punctuation - with a dictionary of the most difficult or dubious spellings attached. Spelling dictionary (110 thousand words), compiled on the basis of the "Rules", was published in 1956 "Rules" formed the basis of a number of reference books, dictionaries, manuals (see § 46).

However, by the end of the XX century. The 1956 "rules" are largely outdated and do not currently reflect the emerging trends in spelling. Therefore, a special commission has been created at the Institute of the Russian Language of the Russian Academy of Sciences, whose task is to create a new set of rules for spelling and punctuation.

Periodic adjustment of the rules is natural and quite natural, as it meets the needs of the developing language and the practice of its coverage.

HISTORY OF RUSSIAN GRAPHICS. As part of modern Russian graphics, there is an alphabet invented for Slavic writing and carefully developed for the Old Slavonic language, which about a thousand years ago was the literary language of all Slavic peoples.

Modern Russian graphics presents a slightly modified graphics of the Old Church Slavonic, the so-called Cyrillic alphabet.

Old Slavonic graphics were compiled in the 9th century. in Bulgaria by brothers Cyril (Constantine) and Methodius, Byzantine missionaries, scientists and diplomats, based on the Greek alphabet and through partial use of other alphabets, in particular the Hebrew.

Since the X century. Old Slavonic graphics began to be used in Russia when rewriting existing books and when creating original works of writing. The theory of writing and spelling rules did not exist at that time. The scribes who practically mastered the art of writing were mostly copiers of ready-made manuscripts. This does not mean that the Old Russian scribes mechanically used the techniques of the Old Slavonic language. Preserving the techniques of Old Slavonic graphics in Russian writing (in particular, the letters of nasal vowel sounds that did not exist in Russian), Russian scribes adapted it to the Russian pronunciation.

In the XII-XIII centuries. Russian writing is increasingly freed from Old Slavic influence and is gradually turning into an independent system that brings writing closer to living speech.

Due to the historical development of the language, the growing traditions of Russian writing, of course, had to be in some conflict with the natural changes in the phonetic and grammatical system of the language. This is how a well-known discrepancy arose between the graphic and sound systems of the Russian language, between the developing tradition of writing and pronunciation.

The scribes' reliance on pronunciation led to certain changes in the writing schedule. By the XIII century. the letters ъ and ь, denoting special vowel sounds in the Old Russian language in certain phonetic conditions, are replaced under stress, in accordance with the new pronunciation, with the letters o, e. From the 16th century. the letter ъ generally loses its sound meaning and becomes a sign of softness of consonants and a separating mark, and the letter ъ is used to denote hard final consonants. On the other hand, the established tradition of writing (reliance on pronunciation) was not particularly effective in the designation of consonants paired in voiced-voicelessness, as well as in relation to akanya (pronunciation of unstressed about as a). Sounding-stunning consonants and akane, which appeared in the phonetic system of the language, were not widely reflected in the writing. Pronunciation and tradition - these contradictory factors of writing - proved to be progressive and equally effective in the development of Russian graphics and spelling.

Of great importance in the history of Russian graphics and spelling was the decree on the introduction of the Russian civil alphabet, issued in 1708 by Peter I. This event, which was an indicator of the decline of the authority and influence of the church, was expressed in a slight change in the appearance and composition of the Russian alphabet: of the Russian sound system of the letter, “titla” (abbreviations) and “forces” (stress) have been removed. The strengthening of graphics and spelling was also facilitated by the opening in 1727 of an academic printing house, whose editions adhered to a certain spelling system.

Over the thousand-year period of its existence, Russian graphics have undergone only partial improvements, while the sound system of the living Russian language has been continuously, although not always noticeably, changing. As a result of this, the relationship between Russian graphics and the sound system of the Russian language by our time turned out to be devoid of full correspondence: not all sounds pronounced in different phonetic positions are indicated in the letter with special letters.

The modern Russian alphabet has 33 letters.

HISTORY OF RUSSIAN SPELLING. Book printing, which arose in Russia in the 16th century, played a positive role in establishing a uniform writing. The printed matter becomes a model for all writers. Until the XVI century. Russian scribes wrote one word after another with no space between them. Separate spelling of words is associated with the development of typography.

At the turn of the first half of the 18th century. questions of graphics and spelling are formulated in principle. They are associated with issues of the Russian literary language and acquire public importance.

The first to raise the question of the basis of Russian spelling was Trediakovsky. In his treatise "Conversation between a stranger and a Russian about the spelling of the old and the new, and everything that belongs to this matter" (1748), Trediakovsky proclaims the phonetic principle of spelling. Considering that phonetic writing is most accessible to the masses, Trediakovsky, however, recognizes only the pronunciation of people who know the norms of the literary language as correct, and makes a number of concessions to traditional spellings. Trediakovsky did not resolve the issue of the essence of our spelling, his views were not decisive in the history of our spelling.

M.V. Lomonosov included speculations on spelling in his Russian Grammar (1755). Lomonosov's characterization of the theoretical foundations of spelling is a combination of the phonetic principle of spelling with the morphological one. Paying attention to tradition in writing, Lomonosov covers a wide range of spelling issues related to grammar. Despite their authority and credibility, Lomonosov's rules did not receive universal recognition. The rules were not approved by the highest government agency and did not have the force of law. The establishment of the spelling norms proposed by Lomonosov was facilitated by the works of V. Svetov and A.A. Barsov, authors of grammatical works of the school type. In their works, these authors gave a short set of spelling rules of the second half of the 18th century, implementing the morphological principle of spelling established by Lomonosov. The final approval of the morphological principle of spelling is associated with the publication of the Russian Grammar by the Academy of Sciences (1802, 1809, 1819) and the Dictionary of the Russian Academy (1789-1794). The spelling norms established in the middle of the 18th century were not very stable. Significant differences in spelling were noted both in official documents and in the works of writers.

Grammars compiled at the beginning and middle of the 19th century. (Vostokov, Grech, Davydov, Buslaev), and dictionaries published at that time could not eliminate the spelling inconsistency that continued throughout the 19th century.

A lot of useful things were introduced into Russian spelling by N.A. Karamzin, who influenced his orthographic practice with his authority (justification of spellings of Russian and foreign words, introduction of the letter ё instead of io).

An extremely important milestone in the history of Russian spelling is the capital work of Academician Ya.K. Grotto "Controversial Issues of Russian Spelling from Peter the Great to the Present" (1873, 1876, 1885) and his book "Russian Spelling" (1885), presenting a practical guide for school and print. Grot's work is devoted to the history and theory of Russian spelling. It covers practical spelling issues from a scientific perspective. Groth's spelling code was instrumental in establishing spelling norms. The spelling established by Grot was recommended and gained academic fame, but it did not completely eliminate the inconsistency, and most importantly, it did not simplify the Russian spelling. Groth jealously adhered to the principle of legitimizing tradition and ignored the movement to simplify writing, which gained wide public scope in the 50s and 60s of the 19th century. Therefore, Grot's Russian Spelling did not meet with unanimous and complete recognition.

At the beginning of the XX century. more and more broad social tasks of spelling reform are revealed, and the Academy of Sciences is in charge of solving spelling issues. The resolution on the spelling reform, adopted at a broad meeting at the Academy of Sciences on May 11, 1917, had no practical significance. The reformed spelling remained optional for school and print. Only the Soviet government, by decrees of December 23, 1917 and October 10, 1918, approved the resolution of the meeting of the Academy of Sciences. The new spelling was declared compulsory for all Soviet citizens.

Spelling reform 1917-1918 greatly simplified and facilitated our writing, but did not touch on many specific questions of spelling, which served as a source of discord in the practice of writing. This shook the general spelling system and caused many difficulties in the work of publishing houses, as well as in school teaching.

In 1930, an organized attempt was made to carry out a radical reform of our letter. The draft of such a reform was drawn up by a special commission of the People's Commissariat for Education. The project introduced a breakdown in the Russian spelling that was not caused by a genuine vital need, moreover, it was not scientifically justified, and therefore practically inappropriate. The project was rejected. The need to streamline spelling became more and more urgent.

"The task of the present moment is not to reform the methods of writing, but to streamline some of them in the direction of uniformity and consistency and in the resolution of individual puzzling cases ... Having established everything that has not been established so far, it is necessary to publish a complete spelling reference, authorized by the educational authorities", - so determined the further development of Russian spelling prof. D.N. Ushakov.

The implementation of this task began in the mid-30s, when work was organized to compile a complete set of rules for spelling and punctuation. The long-term work of philologists and teachers resulted in the "Rules of Russian Spelling and Punctuation", approved in 1956 by the USSR Academy of Sciences, the USSR Ministry of Higher Education and the RSFSR Ministry of Education. The rules are binding for all who use the letter, both for the press, educational institutions, government and public organizations, and for individual citizens.

The "Rules of Russian Spelling and Punctuation" is, in fact, the first complete set of rules for modern Russian spelling in the history of Russian writing and consists of two parts - spelling and punctuation - with a dictionary of the most difficult or dubious spellings attached. Spelling dictionary (110 thousand words), compiled on the basis of the "Rules", was published in 1956 "Rules" formed the basis of a number of reference books, dictionaries, manuals (see § 46).

However, by the end of the XX century. The 1956 "rules" are largely outdated and do not currently reflect the emerging trends in spelling. Therefore, a special commission has been created at the Institute of the Russian Language of the Russian Academy of Sciences, whose task is to create a new set of rules for spelling and punctuation.

Periodic adjustment of the rules is natural and quite natural, as it meets the needs of the developing language and the practice of its coverage.

REFORM OF RUSSIAN SPELLING: PROPOSALS,

–– Write consecutively without the letter ith before the e common nouns with the -er component; accept the changed spellings conveyor, styer, flare, fireworks; approve the spelling player for the new word (by eliminating hesitation). In other words (mostly rare and exotic), keep the spelling of the letter y before e, y, i: vilayet, doyenne, foyer; kikuyu; hallelujah, frond, guayava, maya, papaya, paranoia, sequoia, tupaya, etc.

–– Write with the letter y (instead of y) the words brochure and parachute (and derivatives from them), as they are consistently pronounced with a solid w. This brings under general rule writing two common words from among the exceptions that did not obey the rule of writing the letter y after hissing. Spellings with the letter y after w and w in common nouns julienne, jury, monteju, ear cushions, pshut, fishyu, shute, schutzkor are preserved, in which the soft pronunciation of w and w is not excluded.

–– to extend spellings from ъ to all complex words without connecting vowels; write with ъ not only words with the first components of two-, three-, four- and the word pan-European, courier (spellings provided for by the current rules), but also write: art fair (a new word with the first part of art- meaning "artistic", cf. . artsalon, art market, etc.), hypernucleus (where hyper is not a prefix, but part of the word hyperon), Hitler Youth.

–– Write the adjective windy with two n (instead of one) - as all other abbreviated adjectives are written with this suffix, always unstressed: cf. alphabetic, painful, watchman, maneuverable, senseless, etc., including other formations from the word wind: windless, windward, leeward (but: chickenpox, chickenpox - with a different suffix). Also write words derived from windy: windy, windy, windy, windy (predicative: it is windy outside today).

–– Write together formations with the prefix ex- in the meaning of "former", which is combined with nouns and adjectives, eg: expresident, ex-minister, ex-champion, ex-Soviet - the same as formations with the same prefix in the meaning of "out": extraterritorial, expatriation. The consolidation in the 1956 code (§ 79, clause 13) of a more freely functioning component ex- with hyphenated components of the chief, non-commission, label, headquarters, vice, found in a narrow circle of job titles and titles, not has compelling reasons.

–– Write connections with the component half- ("half") always with a hyphen: not only half a sheet, half an orange, half past ten, half Moscow, but also half a house, half a room, half a meter, floor -the twelfth, half-first, etc. The unification of spellings with half- replaces the previous rule, according to which spellings with half- before consonants, except for l (continuous) and spellings with half- before vowels, consonant l and before capital letter ( hyphenated).

–– Eliminate the exceptions to the rule of continuous spelling of compound nouns with connecting vowels by extending the continuous spellings to: a) the names of units of measurement, for example: bed, parking space, passenger-kilometer, airplane departure, man-day; b) the names of political parties and directions and their supporters, for example: anarchosyndicalism, anarchosyndicalist, monarchofascism, monarchofascist, left radical, communopatriot. In the 1956 set of rules (§ 79, paragraphs 2 and 3), such names were proposed to be written with a hyphen.

–– Write each other's pronouns with a hyphen, which is actually a single word, although it is still written separately. It belongs to the class of nouns and constitutes a special category of them - mutually reflexive pronouns (see, for example, the encyclopedia "Russian language", 1997, articles "Pronoun" and "Reflexive pronouns").

–– Replace the separate spelling of the following adverbs with a continuous separate spelling: in the heart, dozarezu, doupadu, midday, after midnight, canopy, groping, afloat, rushing, nesnach, match, and also not averse. The process of codification of continuous spelling of adverbs traditionally has a purely individual character, that is, it is aimed at specific linguistic units. The selective approach to consolidating the continuous spellings of adverbs is conditioned, on the one hand, by the stability of the writing traditions, and, on the other hand, by the lively nature of the process of separating adverbs from the noun paradigm and the resulting possibility of different linguistic interpretation of the same fact.

IN ancient Russia (X-XI centuries) the problem of spelling did not arise yet. At this time, the Russian letter was phonetic (they wrote as they spoke).
In the XII-XVII centuries. In the phonetic system of the Russian language, significant changes took place: the decline of the reduced b and b, the development of akanya, the loss of a qualitative difference in the pronunciation of the letters "yat" and e ("yat" was pronounced as [ei], and e as [e]). This led to the fact that the spelling began to differ significantly from the pronunciation.
By the XVI century. new techniques of Russian spelling are formed: the text is divided into words, capital letters are introduced. In the XVII century. the first works on Russian spelling appeared, among which the most popular was "Grammar ..."
M. Smotritsky. The first reform carried out by Peter I was associated with the transition to a civilian script. The first serious research in which the question of the principle of Russian spelling was posed was by V. K. Tredikovsky, where a phonetic spelling principle based on literary pronunciation was proposed. Given the lack of a unified national pronunciation, MV Lomonosov advocates a reasonable combination of morphological and phonetic principles, taking into account the historical tradition ("Russian grammar", 1755). In the middle of the XVIII century. gradually and carefully entered the Russian letter with a hyphen; its appearance is associated with the name of VK Trediakovsky. At the very end of the 18th century. the letter ё appeared, replacing the combination io. It was introduced into Russian graphics by N. M. Karamzin, who published a collection of poems "Aonida" with this letter in 1797. The letter ё still has a special status in the Russian alphabet, remaining essentially optional. This is not surprising: unlike all other vowels, e is used only under stress, in the unstressed position it is always replaced by the letter e (all other vowels are preserved in the unstressed position). For example: meat is meat, but ice is icy.
In the first half of the XIX century. grammars appeared
NI Grech, A. Kh. Vostokov, II Davydov, FI Buslaev, who played a well-known role in the unification of spelling. Nevertheless, the Russian spelling remained variegated.
The rules of Russian spelling crystallized spontaneously, primarily under the pen of classic writers. A significant milestone was the appearance of the works of Academician J. K. Grot "Controversial issues of Russian spelling from Peter the Great to this day" (1873) and "Guss spelling" (1885; 22nd ed., 1916). They studied according to the Grotto rules both before the revolution, and (with amendments for the reform of 1918) after it.
In 1904, the Academy of Sciences took up spelling issues. The Spelling Commission of 55 people was created. A subcommittee stood out from it, which worked on simplifying the Russian spelling. The subcommittee included well-known linguists: A. A. Shakhmatov, F. F. Fortunatov, A. I. Sobolevsky, F. E. Korsh, I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay and others. The commission's proposals, finally formulated in 1912, were reduced to a simplification of graphics based on the phonemic principle (elimination of letters that did not denote any sounds, for example, at the end of words, and letters denoting the same sounds as other letters - "yat", w decimal "," fit "," Izhitsa "); other changes were few (for example, the introduction of a single ending -th, -th in the nominative plural of adjectives). The Subcommittee published a draft spelling simplification, but it was not adopted. Disputes between supporters and opponents of the spelling reform continued until 1917. By the way, among the arguments expressed then by the “conservatives” - opponents of the reform, there was also the thesis of the poet and thinker V.I. Ivanov, which is still relevant today: should spelling be simplified to suit the needs schools? After all, pedagogy is ancilla vitae (maid of life, lat.), And not the other way around ...
Russian spelling was simplified by decrees of the Soviet government. In the decree of the Council of People's Commissars of October 13, 1918, the following spellings were established:

1. the endings of -th (-th) in the genitive case of masculine and neuter adjectives (previously they wrote -ago (yago) in an unstressed position - a krysnago scarf, and -th (his) in a stressed one - a gray-haired person);
2. the ending -th (s) in the nominative plural of adjectives, participles and pronouns in all genders (earlier they wrote -yya (ia) in feminine and neuter words - red roses, but -s (s) in masculine words - red tulips);
3. writing prefixes in z (out-, as-, raz-, rose-, bottom-, without-, over-, across-) according to the phonetic principle: before deaf consonants it was recommended to write with (previously they wrote z in all cases: homeless and limitless ).

In the 30s. several commissions were organized to streamline spelling and punctuation. As a result of the work of the commissions, in 1940, the draft "Rules for Unified Spelling and Punctuation" was published with a short spelling dictionary attached.
In the first half of the XX century. V.V. Vinogradov, D.E. Rosenthal, D.N.Ushakov, S.I.Ozhegov, S.E. Kryuchkov and others addressed the problems of Russian spelling.
In 1956, the "Rules of Russian Spelling and Punctuation" were published, which is the first complete set of spelling rules. It was in them that the spelling of s was adopted after the prefixes for the consonant and in borrowed words (improvise), the spelling in the prepositional case of monosyllabic nouns na -ii (oh cue), the hyphenated spelling of complex adjectives denoting shades of colors (pale pink), continuous spelling not with nouns expressing a new concept (non-specialist, non-Russian) and some others.
In 1963, the newspaper Izvestia published an article by Professor A. I. Efimov about the low level of literacy in the country and the need to simplify spelling. Soon, by the Decree of the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences of May 24, 1963, a Commission for the improvement of Russian spelling was created (chairman - V.V. Vinogradov, deputy chairman - M.V. Panov). The decree especially emphasized "the insistence of the Soviet public to introduce improvements and simplifications in the spelling system." The commission was given a very short time frame "to complete the work and submit its proposals to the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences in 1964". Some of the commission's proposals were of a rather radical nature, for example, to write night, mouse, hare, plait, cucumber, etc .; completely abandon the letter b. It seems that for all the purely scientific, linguistic substantiation of many of the proposals, the authors of that project overlooked the inevitable social and cultural shock that will be caused by the reaction to the breaking of a number of traditionally (historically) established rules and principles of writing and the established spelling skills based on them. The extra-linguistic, socio-cultural factor is too great in matters of spelling. The commission's proposals published in Izvestia provoked a violent protest reaction. The termination of the discussion coincided with the removal of NS Khrushchev. Later, in the "era of stagnation", they tried to forget about these proposals.
Nevertheless, at the beginning of the 70s at the Institute of the Russian Language of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, by the order of the Department of Literature and Language, the Spelling Commission was re-established (chaired by V.I.Borkovsky). The proposals of this commission, much less radical, were formulated in 1973 and submitted to the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Having received no response, they were “buried” in the bowels of the Presidium. In the next 15 years, work in the field of spelling rules (and, by the way, spelling dictionaries too - the academic “Spelling Dictionary of the Russian Language” was republished over the years only by stereotyped editions) was practically mothballed.
This work was resumed already in the years of perestroika. In 1988, at the Institute of the Russian Language of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, a spelling laboratory was created (later - the sector of spelling and orthoepy), and by the order of OLYA - the Spelling Commission in a new composition (chairman - D.N.Shmelev, then Yu.N. Karaulov, now time -
V.V. Lopatin). In the sector of spelling and orthoepy of the Institute of the Russian Language of the Russian Academy of Sciences, a new "Russian spelling dictionary" was prepared and published in 2000 - a normative compulsory reference manual for a wide range of users. The Dictionary contains a list of words whose spelling has been changed in comparison with the previously published normative academic "Spelling Dictionary of the Russian Language". (We provide this list at the end of our book as an appendix.)

The term "spelling" is based on the roots of the Greek words orthos "correct" and grapho "write"; its literal translation (tracing paper) into Russian is the term "spelling";

In the modern sense, spelling is a system of rules for spelling words. These rules are not of the same type, therefore, several relatively independent parts are distinguished in the spelling itself. The main parts of spelling are as follows:

• 1) Letter designation of the sound composition of words. This part of the spelling is a direct continuation of the graphics (and the alphabet), therefore the general task of lettering the sound composition of words is solved by graphics and spelling together, for example (the spelling part is highlighted): city, support, take, etc. All other parts of spelling are incomparable with graphics ...
• 2) Separate, solid and semi-solid (with a hyphen - a dash of writing: no one, no one, some; done your way, etc.)
• 3) The use of uppercase (large, capital) and lowercase (small), letters: eagle - bird, Eagle - city, etc.
• 4) hyphenation rules - rules that allow one part of a word to be written at the end of one line, and another part at the beginning of the next line: pi-smo or letter, but not "p-ismo", "writing", "letter".
• 5) Graphic (letter) abbreviations of words: abbreviation of words in writing: consciousness. - with., conscious, but not "so.", "soz.", "conscious." etc.

Parts of spelling are different general principlesunderlying their specific rules. The spelling principles are the basic, initial principles on which specific rules are built, as well as a generalization of these rules. The principles indicate the main way to achieve the goals of spelling - consistent spelling of words.

But the parts of spelling also have something in common, which unites them into a single system. All of them, in one way or another, are focused on the word: the letter designation of the sound composition of words, the combined and separate spelling of words, the hyphenation of words, the reduction of words, the use of large and small letters in words. This is the basis of the general definition of spelling as a system of rules for spelling words.

The theoretical foundations of spelling are, first of all, the principles on which it is built. The principles of spelling - along with the type of writing (sound, syllabic, or other) and the composition of its signs - are one of the most important characteristics of its signs, and the construction of a methodology for teaching spelling directly depends on them. This dependence was once emphasized by the title of his monograph by N.S. Christmas; he called the book as follows: "Properties of Russian spelling as the basis of teaching methods" (Moscow, 1960).

Spelling, as a system of rules, consists of five sections: 1) rules for transferring phonemes by letters in words; 2) the rules for using uppercase (uppercase, uppercase) and lowercase (small) letters; 3) rules for transferring words from one line to another; 4) rules about continuous, semi-continuous (hyphenated) and separate spellings of words; 5) rules for graphic abbreviations of words.

Each of these sections rests on certain principles.

The central section of spelling is the first: depending on the basis on which the designation of the phonemic composition of words in a particular national spelling is built, they talk about the principle of one or another spelling system.

Without going into detail on the principles underlying the second - fifth sections, since they do not cause significant disagreements in the definition and interpretation, let us turn to the first section. It is here that there are most different opinions. They have changed over time, with the development of language and science about it. But even at the same time, different theoretical interpretations of the spelling principles on which the designation of phonemes is based have appeared and are still possible. This is due to the fact that the development of the science of writing is closely connected with the development of the science of the sound basis of writing.

By the end of the XIX century. the birth of a special science of sounds - phonology, and the XX century. is characterized by already branched directions in it. The conviction of the "correctness" and "uniqueness of one's truth" in the interpretation of the concept of a singled out unit of language, namely, in the interpretation of the concept of a phoneme reflected in writing by a letter, inevitably leads to the fact that the authors of theoretical constructions of spelling enter into a dispute among themselves.

What is the position of the teacher in this case?

First of all, the teacher, of course, needs to know the science itself, be able to compare different points of view and choose among them the one that is more in line with his own views. And the main thing is not to confuse different phonemic theories with each other, on which the modern theory of spelling is based.

The search for a reasonable basis in the construction of national spelling and attempts to comprehend the basic principle of Russian spelling in the form as it developed by the turn of the 16th-17th centuries were already made by anonymous authors of Slavic grammars of the 16th-17th centuries.

In the 18th century. VC. Trediakovsky and M.V. Lomonosov defined the leading rule of Russian spelling as spelling "by the root", "by the production of words." VK Trediakovsky did not like this spelling (he suggested changing it to the letter "by ringing", that is, by sounds, by pronunciation, however, only for consonants). MV Lomonosov saw high expediency in the existing spelling system.

In the treatise of V.K. Trediakovsky "A conversation of a stranger with a Russian about the spelling of old and new and about everything that belongs to this matter" it is noted that the letter "by the root" is not always observed (we write "I can", "I can", nor "opportunity", and not "Possibility"). This fact was used as an argument for the expediency of writing "by bells" (since it is not always possible to write "by the root", but "by bells" can always be). "What do I need," writes Trediakovsky, "that the root of the work will not be visible?" "Does the whole society of writers strive about roots?" Lomonosov, on the other hand, explains the motives of the letter "by the root" differently: "A friend does not write druk for the sake of indirect cases." In the "Russian grammar" about the spelling of ftekayu, ogozhu, rub, breathe, it is said that this is "very strange and disgusting to the ability of easy reading and recognition of folded from simple" (ie, derived words from non-derivatives).

In the future, it was the fact of reflecting historical alternations in writing while not reflecting positional ones that was used as an argument in discussions of supporters of different points of view on the theoretical foundations of Russian spelling. The phonemic theory and the typology of alternations built on its basis gave an answer, what is the difference between - opportunity and [g] [k] in can - could. And nevertheless, the transfer of historical alternations in writing, on the one hand, as if by a kind of inertia, continued to be considered a "limitation" of writing "by the root" (AN Gvozdev); on the other hand, perfectly understanding the phonemic inconsistency and practical absurdity of constructed spellings like "sandy", "sand", "sand", "sand" instead of sandy, sand, sand, sand (from sand), some scholars argued that such spellings ( with a graphically uniform root) are supposedly the "ideal" of those theorists who stand on the positions of writing "by the root" (or, in other words, on the positions of writing based on the morphological principle Panov MV Theory of writing. Ortrography // Modern Russian / Under ed. by VA Beloshapkova. - 2nd ed. - M., 1989 - p. 159, although no one has ever proclaimed such an "ideal" for Russian writing.

Now it is already quite obvious that the question of the inevitability of transferring historical alternations in writing is decided at the level of graphics, and not spelling, just as graphics make the uniformity of the morpheme break in cases like ash-earth (the ending is the same, but it is written differently depending on the hardness or softness of the substrate).

For a long time, only spellings such as water, oak were attributed to the spellings "for the production of utterances" (etymological), and they did not include spellings such as grass, soup. For the first time, the uniformity of the relation of spellings such as pond and rod to the principles of spelling was noted by V.A. Bogoroditsky. He was also the first to call the principle of writing "by analogy" (a pond as a pond; a rod as a rod) morphological. But for a long time, spellings of the rod type (i.e. spellings corresponding to pronunciation), even prominent theorists did not always include in the number of spellings based on morphological relationships.

The typology of spelling was most fully developed in the works of A.N. Gvozdeva A. N. Gvozdev Basics of Russian spelling - M., 1947; 4th ed. - M., 1954, and they were preceded by detailed methodical and spelling works by M.V. Ushakov. A.N. Gvozdev belongs to the most successful (in those years) definition of the morphological principle. He emphasized that, firstly, the unity of the same morphemes is preserved in writing, “despite the fact that in the pronunciation of different conditions when used, they have a changing sound appearance ”; secondly, "the graphic image of morphemes conveys the phonetic composition in relation to each sound in its most differentiated position."

In the first part of A.N. Gvozdev's expression is extremely important despite, because many definitions of the morphological principle say that morphemes are written uniformly regardless of pronunciation (or regardless of pronunciation). This is more than imprecise. Between letters and phonemes in Russian spelling, a strict systemic relationship is observed, and. the spellings are very strict, with few exceptions, determined by pronunciation. The word water is written not at all arbitrarily, not at all regardless of pronunciation: in it you can write either the letter o (which is written), or the letter a. Other options are excluded. Only the spelling of o or a is allowed by pronunciation: they are determined by the positionality of the alternation of phonemes / o / and / a /. That is why the definition, which for a long time, was given by the authors of "A manual for classes in the Russian language in the upper grades of secondary school", is inaccurate: "The spelling of the meaningful parts of a word is based on the morphological principle: the meaningful parts of a word (morphemes) are written uniformly, regardless of pronunciation." Grekov V.F., Kryuchkov S.E., Cheshko L.A. A manual for classes in the Russian language in the upper grades of secondary school .-- 12th ed. - Moscow, 1963 .-- P. 35. This edition was revised, but the above wording repeated word for word the wording adopted in 1 m edition (1952). The definition of the morphological principle was changed only in the 32nd edition (1983). In it, the words "regardless of pronunciation" are replaced by "regardless of changes in speech pronunciation of vowels and consonants." This is more accurate .. At the same time, of course, the authors of the manual did not mean the arbitrariness of the spellings (examples follow. Water. Water, water), but nevertheless the wording was unsuccessful. With a certain degree of variability, a similar formulation can be found in many other authors.

In the second part of A.N. Gvozdev, it is important that it excludes the understanding of the morphological principle as the observance of some abstract graphic unity of the morpheme. The second part of the definition clarifies the first.

Theoretical interpretation of the principles of Russian spelling by A.N. Gvozdev was based on the phonemic theory of L.V. Shcherba, outlined by him in the book "Russian vowels in qualitative and quantitative terms" (St. Petersburg, 1912) and subsequent works. L.V. Shcherba defined a phoneme as a unit capable of differentiating words and their forms. He established the conditionality of the division of the speech stream into phonemes by morphological division: in the words were-l, for-sleep-l, or he-a, the final phonemes are separated due to the ability to draw a morphological border in front of them, and the ability to break each word into phonemes is determined by just such a potentially existing relationship between morpheme and phoneme. As the smallest sound unit, a native speaker is aware not of what is “pronounced” in one articulation (as they still write in some phonetics textbooks), but the smallest sound segment that can express meaning (be a morpheme). The linguistic function of L.V. Shcherba also associated with her ability to participate in the formation of the sound image of a significant unit (dressed - dressed, etc.)

The followers of V. Shcherba (scientists of the Leningrad phonological school) are characterized by the statement that the system of phonemes of a particular language is not just the result of the logical constructions of the researcher, but the real organization of sound units, which provides each native speaker with the ability to generate and perceive any speech message.

In the late 20s - early 30s, another phonological theory was created, which stands apart in world phonology. It was called by its founders the theory of the Moscow Phonological School (abbreviated as MFS). For a presentation of the ideas of MFS see; Kasatkin L.L. Moscow Phonological School // Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary .-- pp. 316-317. A very thorough comparative analysis of the phonemic theories of LFS and MFS is given in the textbook “Educational-methodical development in Russian phonetic transcription. - Part I. Phonemic transcription ": Publishing house of the Leningrad University. L., 1984, compiled by L.L. Bulanin and A.L. Miertskiy .. This early (first) version of the IDF theory is usually called the “theory of variations and variants”, and more often - simply the “theory of variants”, because the specificity of the IDF is determined by the concept of a variant. So, if variations are called modifications of phonemes like [o], [o *], [* o], [* o *] (for example, in the words gon (t. [O] n), thin (t [o *] ), dark (t [* o] mny), Lenya (l [* o *] nya), then the variants are the sounds of weak positions, with which the sounds of strong positions alternate positionally in one morpheme. For example, the sound in the word water is a variant of the phoneme / o / (compare in [* o] dy - in yes), and in the word tr va - a variant of the phoneme / a / (compare tr [a] vy - tr va).

The ideas of this theory were applied to the alphabet and graphics by N.F. Yakovlev, for spelling - R.I. Avanesov and V.N. Sidorov. The typology of phonemic spellings (absolutely phonemic, relatively phonemic and non-phonemic) was developed in detail by I.S. Ilyinskaya and V.N. Sidorov. They called the leading principle of spelling phonemic. The article by these authors was sensational in a sense. For almost two centuries (from the middle of the 18th to the middle of the 20th century), word-production (etymological, morphological) was considered the leading principle of Russian orthography - and suddenly there was no place for it among the spelling principles. The reason for this was a different view of the phoneme. But the new phoneme theory was not accepted by everyone.

The place of the morphological principle was finally determined. And at present, the theory of the morphological principle (based on the Shcherbov phoneme theory) is widely accepted, although along with it, it is presented, especially in textbooks for universities, and the theory of the phonemic principle put forward in those years (based on the phonemic theory of the IDF.

Moving from phonemic theory to spelling, M.V. Panov supports the idea of \u200b\u200bI.S. Ilyinskaya and V.N. Sidorov on the phonemic principle of Russian spelling, claiming that we have a "writing based on paradigm-phonology." The emergence of the IDF theory was positive and progressive. Its emergence in the late 1920s and early 1930s is associated with the needs of writing: this was the time of "language construction". In 1929, a revolutionary radical was proposed and in the highest degree unsuccessful project of reform of Russian spelling, which declared that "the reform is equal to the illiterate and illiterate in the first place." This project had to be rejected, and such argumentation was proposed by R.I. Avanesov and V.N. Sidorov.

With the proclamation of the phonemic principle of Russian orthography in the interpretation of theoretical issues, spelling, an acute competition arose. The latter always contributes to a more thorough drilling of positions, their clarification, and everything in general contributes to the development of theory. In the theory of Russian spelling, only two considered phonemic theories are reflected: LFS and MFS (with its variants). In accordance with the theory of LFS, the leading principle of Russian spelling is defined as morphological, in accordance with the theory of MFS - as phonemic. But the end result is one result: a uniform graphical appearance of the morphemes (where possible). According to the LFS theory, this is obtained from the desire to achieve exactly this (the action of conscious morphological analogies when denoting the sounds of weak positions). According to the theory, the IDF is a result, a consequence of the designation of the phoneme (in the sense of it, as is customary in the IDF).

“The consequence of phonemic writing,” writes R.I. Avanesov, - is ... the unity of the morpheme. Each morpheme in a word, regardless of its real pronunciation in different positional conditions, is written in the same way ... "And he explains:" Of course, we are talking about the fact that positional changes in phonemes are not indicated in writing, and not about traditional historical alternations, phonemes. ..

Due to the graphic uniformity of the morpheme, supporters of the phonemic principle of spelling also use (albeit as synonymous) the term "morphological principle".

Two interpretations of the leading principle of Russian spelling (as phonemic or as morphological, depending on the phonological position of their authors) are usually presented in university textbooks. In stable school textbooks, the principles of spelling, as a rule, are not theoretically revealed. The exception was the textbook edited by L.V. Shcherba (1944). The guiding principle of Russian spelling was defined in this textbook as follows:

"The morphological principle is that each significant part of a word (prefix, root, suffix, ending) is always written in the same way, although the pronunciation of this part of the word in different phonetic conditions may be different." This definition "lasted" in school textbooks until 1951.

In most school textbooks, the material is actually described on the basis of L. Sherba's phonemic theory.

On the basis of the IDF phoneme theory, spelling classes were held in one of the schools in Kharkov.

Teaching spelling based on the familiarity of students with the guiding principle of spelling undoubtedly contributes to a more conscious understanding of the Russian writing system.

The definition of the leading principle of Russian spelling is given in the "Manual on the Russian language for senior students ..." V.F. Grekova, S.E. Kryuchkova, L.A. Czech.

The leading principle of spelling is also determined in books for extracurricular reading: Panov M.V. Entertaining spelling. A book for out-of-class reading for students in grades 7-8 - M., 1984 (the principle is defined as phonemic and the understanding of the leading principle of Russian spelling as morphological is condemned); Moiseev A.I. Sounds and letters, letters and numbers ... A book for extracurricular reading for pupils of 8-10 grades of secondary school - M., 1987 (the leading principle of spelling is revealed as morphological based on the theory of LFS).

There are other textbooks published with the subtitle “elective course,” but apparently not used in school (as non-curriculum) or not widely used. Let's call them: Ivanova S.F., Nikolenko L.V. and others. The Russian word as a subject of linguistics. Moscow, 1972; Vetvitsky V.G. Ivanova V.F., Moiseev A.I. Modern Russian Writing: A Handbook for Students - L., 1974. Both in the first and in the second book the morphological principle is carried out.

The phonemic principle (based on the MFS theory) is carried out in the book: Russian language. Ch., I. Experimental teaching materials for secondary schools / Ed. I.S. Ilyinskaya and M.V. Panova - M., 1979. This book was used in classes in a number of Moscow schools.

In addition to orthograms that correspond to the morphological principle (or, in another interpretation, phonemic), the Russian letter contains a small number of orthograms that correspond to the phonetic principle (the most important of them is the prefix z). Such spellings contradict both the morphological and phonemic principles. They do not respect the graphic unity of the morpheme. There are many orthograms in Russian writing that correspond to the traditional principle. Traditional spellings (for example, dog, boots) do not contradict either the phonemic or morphological principle (since they correspond to one of the two letters possible here). However, they do not answer them: unlike morphological spellings such as water, grass for choosing letters (o or a) there are no test words here. “For the writer, there is a choice here, and at the same time it is often painful and difficult ... Therefore, it should be stated that there are many non-onematic spellings in Russian orthography, much more than is customary to think,” wrote R.I. Avanesov.

The rules based on the phonetic principle (the most important of them is the rule about prefixes once-, without-, out-, who-, over-), require the teacher to strengthen auditory work (more attention to phonetic analysis), and the rules built on the traditional principle - strengthening the visual work (more attention to visual aids). In addition, traditional spellings, like morphological ones, are more interesting and useful to study with the involvement of historical and etymological references. Therefore, improving the historical and linguistic culture of the teacher is one of the most important tasks of philological education.

Explanatory remarks from the teacher require writing such as rye, night; cut, hide; protect. The spelling here b is not related to pronunciation: after h it is redundant, after w it contradicts the pronunciation. The letter ь is here a graphic equalizer of morphological categories: rye, may, bend in the same way as a spruce (rye, at night, spruce), and a knife, a doctor - like a table (with a knife, a doctor, a table); hide, hide, cut, cut "trim" under the throw, throw, and take care - under the throw. By virtue of such written analogies, the principle of using the soft sign here can be called the principle of graphic-morphological analogies. Otherwise, it is also called grammatical (L.R. Zinder), grammatical (Yu.S. Maslov), morphological (A.A. Reformatsky).