About Andrey Anatolyevich Zaliznyak

The year has been performed since the death of Andrei Zaliznyak (this happened on December 24, 2017), another great man with whom I was on “you”, and I periodically recall him, sorting out the details of our more than half a century of acquaintance.

I repeatedly wrote about him (on the site for his 80th anniversary there is even my recording of these vignettes ), but I want not to repeat myself, but to say something that had not occurred to my head before.

We belonged to one circle-roughly speaking, young structuralists of the second half of the 50s, students Vyach. Sun. Ivanova, but Andrei was two years older than me, and soon grew up even more, having traveled for a year to the Sorbonne and école Normale , where he, all of us, was released. The chicks of one nest, we were not especially close, did not work together, did not write anything together, I admired it from a respectful distance, but always felt my reciprocity of my sympathy. And he rejoiced that this talented senior peer with an open (I want to say-gentle) smile.

He was beautiful - a little girlish beauty, spoke and lectured almost falsettes, which did not prevent him from being a fan of the fair sex and even to go into the bully adventures, but what I will not go deeper here, although many of our conversations were on this ever -burning topic.

For six decades of our slightly distant friendship, nothing but good, I have not seen from him.

I already described how, when I got divorced (in the 1960s), he gave me a solid amount of loan (to the apartment of his wife, future Arina Ginzburg), wisely adding: “Just promise that you will not treat me worse after that.”

Around the same years, visiting a common acquaintance (Melchuk?) He responded with concern about our poisonous poisonous article about the Tartu and other fashionable structuralism, suggesting to think about whether such letters on other internal dislemmptation mean. I answered something defiantly-Petushin, but I remembered this lesson forever. (How successfully took into account - another question.)

And in 1969, in my defense, which, despite the signed by the applicant, he, already the doctor of sciences, acted as one of the opponents, which contributed to the unique award of the dissident-humanitarian of candidate degree. Andrei himself did not sign any protest letters, but every time the question arose about the protection of science, he forgot about caution and gave his voice. So he did in the future in connection with Fomenko’s lips. Therefore, the praises of my dissertation about the syntax of Somalia are two: 50% put on the approval of its scientific advantages, 50% on a sense of public duty. I don't know what is more expensive.

Then the emigration came, separation, but in 1985 I participated in the 50th anniversary of the issue of the European magazine Russian Linguistics and soon in a roundabout way I learned that my article about the portable parsnipers of Pasternak, he and his wife E.V. Paduchev appreciated.

For the first time after almost a dozen years of my emigration, internally perceived as irrevocable, we saw on my second visit to perestroika Russia, in the summer of 1989, in a computer camp for young people, organized by the foreman of linguistic perestroika Sasha Barulin near Pereslavl. Sasha collected the color of our science. In addition to Zaliznyak and Paducheva, I remember Seryozha Starostin and Natasha Chalisov, as well as numerous computer scientists there; In a huge empty bus to the station, I, a half -wax foreign visitor, came young candidate of sciences Volodya Plungyan, now an academician.

That day, Andrei struck me with a story about his uncertainty as a lecturer. It seems to have been due to heart disease. I then made a report on the deep structure of Tolstoy “after the ball”; Andrei came, listened, then asked how teaching was given to me in the States. It was a rare case when he seemed to have to learn from me. Subsequently, the crisis, as you know, passed, and Andrei became a favorite of student audiences - both at Moscow State University and Geneva (in the wake of Sossyur ☺).

We began to see my visits again, but after a while I was excommunicated from their house - due to the discontent of Paducheva with my critical speeches about our once common idol V.V. Ivanov. Meetings with Andrei became less frequent, coming only visiting common friends, but remained still friendly and frank. I remember how once, having pretty much drinking at A.Sh., we lay on the sidelines for some big trestleys and talked to hearts for a long time-about life, work, women, age. I said that I feel aging, he is that he has not yet surrendered.

When his 80th anniversary began to approach, Vladimir Alexandrov, who shot me several times, informed me that he was doing the film about Andrei and already enlisted his wish that I read something from his vignettok about him. The film included a little, but on the website of the Institute of Slavic Studies there is, as I said, a complete record.

And there is a record, and there is a memory, but there is no Andrei.

There are his books that do not need to give an assessment here - it is indisputable. Some of them stand on my shelf with his gift inscriptions: “... Alika ... friendly ...”; "... Alik ... with the best wishes ..."; "... Alik ... with endless admiration for his vital force ..."

Well, this is so, benevolent, complimentary, but nothing special. And one inscription is really to me. She is at the Antifomenovsky "History and Anti -History":

Dear Alik,
the greatest
From the understandors,
Friendly
Andrey
December 29, 2001

Also, of course, partly a compliment on duty that is natural in an incrimination to a good acquaintance, but it is important that it is precisely chosen for praise: the ability to understand.

Firstly, because in our profession-philology is almost the main quality: we must be able to understand the texts being studied, understand what others think about them, and understand what should be done with them.

Secondly, because I can claim a good understanding with a much greater basis than to extensive knowledge, and Andrei understood this.

Thirdly, because he himself was indeed a champion in understanding-both at a verbal micro level (by some miraculously dismantling that it was written in unreadable birch bark letters), and on the most general, textual (having managed to build his proof of the authenticity of the “word” on the understanding of the gigantic scales of its philological non-capacity).

And fourthly (and the latter), because these precious words were written for me, apparently, seriously-as it turned out from the Facebook recording of his young colleague (and a little eckerman). I will quote with legally pride:
“In 2013, he says a lot about A.K. Zholkovsky, about his “speed of decision”, about how a rare gift to understand people, while other linguists around heard only themselves <. . .> ”(“ Forty days. From personal memories ”; Dmitry Sichinava, January 31, 2018, 19:01) [1] .

I don’t know what to finish. Perhaps simply: “Do not speak with longing: they are not ; / But with gratitude: they were . "

[1] The recording is available to Friends Only and is given here with the permission of the author.

Subscribe to the COLTA.RU channel in Yandex.Zen to miss nothing