Mikhail Epstein. The gift of words. Issue 3

The gift of words. Issue 3
Projective dictionary of the Russian language.

Mikhail Epshtein

Publication date: November 18, 2002

loving

---

I thank the readers of "Dar" for the interesting questions and comments.
Since projective vocabulary is an unusual genre, at least in Russian literature (but not only in it), I would like to briefly explain once again
his goals. Each proposed word has at least three tasks, relatively speaking, (1) minimum, (2) medium and (3) maximum:

1. Point out some vital concept or phenomenon that is not yet lexically designated in the language. This is an analytical task: identifying gaps, semantic voids and trying to fill them.

2. Propose a word that could be perceived as an independent work in the tiny one-word genre: so that the word has its own intrigue, its own lexical and/or grammatical plot, semantic twist, expressiveness, dexterity, unexpected and at the same time reasonable selection of constituent elements ( morphemes), etc. Accuracy in determining meaning is also important, in particular, the delimitation of synonyms, as well as persuasiveness, diversity, and stylistic plasticity of speech examples. A speech example is also an independent verbal genre, and the most important, although completely unstudied. It is through the speech examples given in school textbooks for this or that rule that we master the written language, its word production and word combinations, which are then stored in memory for the rest of our lives and regulate our speech activity. This is an aesthetic task: to create a word and speech examples that would meet the criteria of an independent work in these mini-genres of literature.

3. Finally, the highest and almost impossible communicative task, or rather, hope: to create a word that could be usefully used by other speakers and speakers, and ultimately enter the language, to the point of oblivion of authorship, dissolution in the rivers of folk speech.

I hope that the words included in this dictionary fulfill the first task and at least partly the second. But the third hope remains almost unrealizable, and all that remains is to repeat after F. Tyutchev :

We can't predict
How will our word respond?
And we are given sympathy,
How grace is given to us.

---

In Russian erotic vocabulary there is a strong lack of stylistically neutral words. As is known, the prevailing duality of Russian culture has left a strong imprint on this sphere , which is sharply divided into high, bookish, poetic - and lower, colloquial, abusive registers.

I will refer to the recent observation of the writer and critic Vladimir Novikov :

“In Russian erotic discourse, as well as in our language as a whole, there is clearly a lack of “middle calm”. “Possessed her” is a high style, “fucked her” is low, and what will be neutral? Medical and legal language (“committed sexual intercourse”) act") are clearly going downhill. There is no neutrality in such a fundamental area: either - or." 1

In Russian, words denoting this act can be divided into the following categories:

archaic-bookish - copulation, intercourse;

medical terminology - coitus, sexual intercourse;

clerical-descriptive - sexual intimacy, sexual communication, intimate relationships, married life;

poetically figurative: merging, piercing, “catching a nightingale,” “plucking a rose”;

obscene or slang-obscene - f..., fucking, shoving.

Is it possible to find a word that would designate this phenomenon directly, decently and at the same time colloquially, without falling into either archaic grandiosity, or dry terminology, or the bureaucracy of popular brochures?

This and a number of other issues of “ The Gift of Words ” will be devoted to new formations “about this”, the main goal of which is to expand the average stylistic layer of love vocabulary. In particular, these are various derivatives of the root “lyub” - potentially one of the most prolific, but little used roots of the Russian language. In the "Dictionary of Morphemes of the Russian Language" the root "lyub" is noted in only 54 words. 2 Meanwhile, Velimir Khlebnikov alone lists about 250 branches from this root. 3 True, the overwhelming majority of Khlebnikov’s new formations are devoid of clear lexical meanings, are not defined in any way - and are given either in simple lists, as experiments in combining and varying morphemes, or in associative poetic contexts. For example, the morphological combination “loving” is recorded by Khlebnikov in the following context: “You love your loved ones, you love your loved ones, you love your loved ones, you will out-love.” 4

---

loving (noun female b. 1st class) - carnal love, intimacy; love as play and pleasure; joint, reversible actions of lovers and loved ones.

The word " lyublya " combines the root "lyub" with the productive suffix "la" of verbal nouns (cf. "rowing", "purchase", "trade").
Thus, in the Russian language there can be at least two main nouns from the root "lyub": "lyubov" and " lyublya ".

The introduction of a new word is all the more justified since in Russian the word “love” is stretched to too many meanings, which in classical languages ​​(Greek and Latin) are conveyed by at least half a dozen different words:

Eros (amor) - love-passion, attraction, lust

Storge - love-friendship, affection, devotion

Philia - love-liking, inclination, disposition

Pietas - love-reverence, piety, admiration

Agape (caritas) - love-mercy, pity, brotherly love

You can introduce Greek-Latin notations for the following varieties:

Mania - love-obsession, frenzy, madness

Ludus - love-game, fun, joy

The word “ lyublya ” could partly diversify the Russian repertoire of this feeling and bring under its wing at least two varieties of love - eros and ludus, in their intertwining.

In the Russian language, the harsh suffix "ov": "blood", "church", "brow", "mother-in-law" - is more fortunate with the root "love" than the lively, friendly, sociable suffix "la" ("l" + ending " a"): “catching”, “rowing”, “buying”, “trading”, “drop”... There was not yet the word “ loving ” in our dictionaries, because it is a sweet feeling, knightly-admiring, shepherd-sensual , did not fit in our hearts.

Yes, to love as our blood loves,
None of you have been in love for a long time!
Have you forgotten that there is love in the world,
Which both burns and destroys! -

A. Blok addressed the West in “ Scythians ” ( 1918 ) on behalf of Russia, falling into the same frenzied rhyme on “ov”. Yes, the West has not known such burning, destructive love-blood for a long time, just as we did not know its Romano-Franco-Italian love : eros-ludus. After all, even the English “make love, not war” was translated in Russian in a fiercely pacifist way: “love, not war,” whereas it should have been softer: “ love , not slaughter.”

Isn't it time to fill this historical gap? Perhaps, with a new word and concept, the emotional mood of society will change a little? Love will cease to be so harsh, demanding, and accountable, because part of our joys and desires will move from the department of “love” to the realm of “ love .” After all, you can no longer say: “ loving with the homeland, with the people, with the party, with the working people of the whole world” - all these contexts, where the ideologeme “love” was implanted, are not at all suitable for “ love ,” which presupposes proportionality and compatibility between the lover and the beloved, their intimacy.

The point is not only in suffixes, but also in the difference in the combining properties of these words. “Love” and “ lyublya ” have different methods of prepositional control. “Love” is combined with the preposition “to” and the dative case, which suggests a one-sided direction: someone’s love for someone or something (“love for a woman, homeland, work...”). "The love of someone with someone or something", i.e. prepositional and case compatibility expressed is not provided for by the rules of compatibility of the Russian language 5 .
According to the laws of grammar, love should always be “ to ” - to someone who, perhaps, does not notice it. You have love for your homeland or people, for work or freedom, but what do they care about you?

But this does not happen with love , it is always “ with ”, like life and play, it requires the instrumental case in the meaning of participation, togetherness. “ Loving with a wife, with a husband, with a friend, a charming young lady, the first person you meet, a mysterious stranger...” It is the compatibility with the preposition “with” and the instrumental case that gives the word “ lyublya ” a different lexical and grammatical meaning than that of “love.” "Love" is a feeling and action in one direction, from the lover to the beloved. “ Loving ” is a reversible feeling and action, in which lovers and loved ones participate together, “love each other,” “ are loved ,” “ fall in love ,” without dividing into subject and object.

The noun “love” is derived from the transitive verb “to love someone, what” and retains this transitivity in its combination with the preposition “to”: love for whom, what . “ Loving with whom, than ” is derived rather from the reflexive verb “ to be loved ,” which is now used in colloquial speech, at its lower border with colloquial speech, but over time can establish itself in the literary language. Such verbs with the particle “xia”, such as “communicate, meet, kiss, hug, sue, collide, quarrel,” and finally, “ love ” are called reciprocal : an action is performed by several subjects, each of which is also the object of the action. It is precisely this grammatical meaning of reciprocity that is inherent in the noun “ loving ,” which, like a number of other nouns from the same reciprocal verbs: “communication, embrace, meeting, collision, quarrel,” requires the preposition “ with .” 6

In fact, one should compare entire word complexes, where nouns are given together with their characteristic tools of prepositional control: love-to and loving-with . “ Love for ,” dividing “to love” into subject and object, gives this feeling tragic tension and potential irreciprocity. “ Loving with ” is a feeling and action mutual, divided, simultaneous or alternate: love is a game, pursuit, infatuation, intoxication, catching, hiding, overtaking, circling. Love is when one strives for another, loving is when they are already together. Love is the potentiality of feeling, loving is the actuality of action. The previous Russian culture - both feudal and socialist - was mainly a culture of aspirations, not realizations, a culture of “to”, not “with”.
In her, the distant triumphed over the close, love was lexically and conceptually recognized and loving was rejected.

Unlike love, loving does not turn into a sacred duty or a world-saving action. Now we can love the way “ loving with ” wants, and not just the way “loving to” requires. Now everyone has a choice of how to love, “ov” or “ la ”.

Examples of use:

What happened between them was not love in the lofty and indistinct sense of the word, but rather love , but so cheerful, happy that they did not even think about love: the wine of life simply played and foamed in them.

Behind the wall the sounds of love could be heard, sometimes loud, sometimes fading. “Bed... chair... floor...” - this is how Krainev defined their movements for himself.

Oleg spent a long time watching the love of pigeons, turtles and other innocent creatures, filled with tenderness for nature, which deprived no one of this joy.

Loving with this almost stranger, almost untouchable, turned the entire past week into a kaleidoscope of dreams for Vergunov: tufts of dry grass on the hilly slope of the Neskuchny Garden... a jacket thrown at the bottom of a blue boat... evening city lights floating under a Ferris wheel...

“Love comes first, and loving comes later,” said old man Pogodin in his instruction to the young.

One night together in a hotel - and many years of memories. In Bunin's story " Sunstroke " what happened as love turns into love with separation.

“How do you love me, like “ov” or like “ la ”?” - she asked him. “Both “ov” and “ la ,” he answered, kissing her hands and lips alternately.

Our society is moving from "ov" to "la". It is no longer a church, but a trade. No longer blood, but purchase. And that means it’s no longer love, but loving . A new note in the music of the Russian revolution: la-la-la.

Lyublya is Venice, “a golden dovecote by the water,” as Akhmatova wrote. Love is a soft word, like cooing; I want to stroke him like a dove. Love is Bunin's " Dark Alleys " - a veil, a glove, stiletto heels, violets, light breath, a greenish stocking, a warm pink body... Dostoevsky , Tolstoy , Chekhov , Blok , Mayakovsky - everyone wrote about love, and only Bunin managed to find enchanting words for love .

“Love” is the pearl word of our Middle Ages. Like any heritage, it needs to be preserved and increased. We know love as a sacred right and duty, love for God, mother, family, neighbors... But when will we mature before the Renaissance? When will we have the Renaissance concept of “ loving ,” in which the entire universe brightly smiles at a person with its sensual brilliance?

Modern literature “about this” is divided into three categories. Some writers have only “liu”, others have only “blya”, and still others have both interspersed. Some lull, others bleat, others create a polystylistic cacophony. But for “lu” and “blya” to be together, inseparably, this is not possible. But the word “ loving ” itself was not yet in the language. If it is in language, it will be in literature. He is still all torn, our tongue is all up and down, and he can’t pronounce “lu” and “fuck” in one breath, as a single word.

To conclude this issue, I will cite poems by Timur Kibirov , where the word “ love ” is already anticipated, already soars phonetically, lyrically exhaled, although it is not fixed in a specific lexeme.

Here, fuck, what things happened -
Passion tormented and burned my heart,
Liu, fuck, and blue, fuck,
And I can’t fucking live.
I can not live without you.
Timur Kibirov, "Song of Solveig"

Notes

1 Vladimir Novikov. A novel with language or sentimental discourse. M., Agraf, 2001, p. 150.

2 A.I. Kuznetsova, T.F. Efremova. Dictionary of morphemes of the Russian language, M., Russian language, 1986, pp. 195-196.

3 Natalya Pertsova. Dictionary of neologisms by Velimir Khlebnikov. Wiener Slavistischer Almanach. Sonderband 40, Wien-Moskau, 1995, pp. 201-213, 437-438.

4 Ibid., p. 208.

5 Dictionary of combinability of words of the Russian language, ed. P.N. Denisova, V.V. Morkovkina. Ed. 2nd. corrected. M. Russian language, 1983, p. 267. Here, with the word “love”, in all four main meanings, only the syntactic position of control with the preposition “to” is given. "Love for a woman, for a husband... for people, for a mother, for a party, for freedom... for work, for one's work, for science, for reading, for sports, for nature... for a teacher, for a commander ". The dictionary does not note that “love with” is occasionally used in colloquial speech (“Vanya’s love with Masha”). It is characteristic that such a combination, perceived as a deviation from the literary norm, most often indicates physical intimacy.

6 Although the categories of transitivity and reflexivity apply only to verbs, they also affect the grammatical properties of nouns formed from these verbs. “Love” is a “transitive” noun, and “ lyublya ” is a “reciprocal” noun.