Ким Игорь Ефимович -доктор филологических наук, заместитель директора по научной работе Института филологии СО РАН (ул. Николаева, 8, Новосибирск, 630090, Россия; kim@philology.nsc.ru); профессор Гуманитарного института Новосибирского государственного университета (ул. Пирогова, 1, Новосибирск, 630090, Россия) Зюзина Ольга Николаевна -аспирант кафедры общего и русского языкознания Гуманитарного института Новосибирского государственного университета (ул. Пирогова, 1, Новосибирск, 630090, Россия; 8olechka@mail.ru) Дерябина Евгения Александровна -аспирант сектора русского языка в Сибири Института филологии СО РАН Complex semantic model of social action in the Russian languageThe paper provides a complex semantic classification of social actions in the Russian language. Social action is considered to be an interaction between two persons having their own will. Such interaction has physical and symbolic aspects. The classification of social actions includes seven parameters revealing the complexity of the action being modeled.The most significant parameter is the type of the second person's action (the first person is "the point of reference"). The first type is actions towards addressee, with the core being information transmitting and the periphery presented by giving and receiving. The second type is actions with counter-agent, with the positive one being negotiation and the negative one -conflict. The third type is actions with co-agent. In case the second agent is more active and dominating, the action is managing. When co-agent is less active, the action is secondary. The fourth type is actions towards an object, with the second person being a patient.The second important parameter of the classification is the degree of explicitness of the physical and sign components of the action. The social actions may be represented syncretically, without singling out physical and sign aspects, but sometimes one of the aspects is expressed independently. The third parameter is the relevance of the social hierarchy. It is of importance in management or training activities. The fourth parameter is the perspective from the first or the second person. When viewed from another angle, some actions may change their name. The fifth parameter is the initiative or responsive quality of the action. Some social actions are made in response to other actions, for example, secondary or hindering ones. The sixth parameter is the general evaluation of the action, with conflict actions having negative one, and negotiation not having any. The seventh parameter is the semantic field of the social sphere where the action takes place. The division into semantic fields corresponds to the division of social life into the spheres of activity.

Русская орфография на пути от неупорядоченности к единообразию Рецензия на книгу: Науменко С. В. Вариативность в русской орфографии (XVIII-XХ вв.) / Краснояр. гос. пед. ун-т. Красноярск, 2019. 356 с. Рассматривается монография С. В. Науменко, в которой дано подробное описание вариативности в русской орфографии XVIII-XX вв. Автор монографии исследует в большей мере не графическую практику, а ее осмысление в теоретических, нормативных и методических трудах лингвистов. С. В. Науменко показывает сложный и противоречивый путь русской орфографии к устранению необоснованной вариантности. Ключевые слова: история русской орфографии, вариантность, орфографическая норма, орфографическая мысль, интраварианты, экстраварианты.

The Russian punctuation is a system of signs with its own functions and its own formal organization, different from the organization of alphabetic characters, numbers and other written signs of the Russian language. In terms of formal organization, punctuation marks differ from two-dimension characters in geometry and in onedimensionality or even zero-dimensionality. In terms of function, they are used as signs of articulation and organization of the text (as the metatext by A. Wierzbicka). Punctuation marks are located between graphic (linguistic-visual) and paragraphic (nonlinguistic visual) systems of writing. They perform their function in combination with the system of spaces (word space, arbitrary line end, empty part of the page, empty page) and paragraph tools. The punctuation is similar in function to road signs and computer text markup but unlike them punctuation marks are situated on the line alternately with the main objects of the writing.

The universals of the artistic language are fundamentally different from the universals of other language systems. The artistic language itself is opposed to both the so-called “natural” languages and artificial systems since it acts as a secondary modeling system resulting from the removal of such universals inherent in ordinary speech as automatism in the use of already existing statements, an orientation towards ease of understanding, etc. Secondary modeling systems are immanent, unique, and exclusive in each case. The paradox of the universals of the artistic language is that its code uniqueness is created anew every time and does not depend on the thematic content of the statement. At relatively late stages of development, the artistic language creates specific universals that are fundamentally impossible in other language systems. The most significant universal of artistic language is the presence of two co-opposed speech systems - verse and prose - in their various ratios, depending on the genre and direction. A more complex case can be observed in folklore and early literature, where syncretic forms predominate. The universals of the artistic language, as a rule, turn out to be closely tied to the artistic text. The article identifies five pairs of oppositions that claim to be called universals of a literary text: repetition - contrast, symmetry - asymmetry, background - figure, one’s own - someone else’s, discrete - continuous.