“The interest in the language is at the same time the interest in the man himself, because an important characteristic of a man is how he uses the language” [1,225]. This thesis explains the reason why we need knowledge of why and how to use language. In its turn, it is necessary to have a special knowledge determined the whole trend which studies the mechanisms of language functioning, it is named as Orthology.
The term “Orthology” (from the greek orthos – “right, correct” + greek logos – “a word, a concept, a study”) has been used actively in the linguistic literature for the last two decades. This concept is reviewed in the works of linguists belonging to different linguistic schools and different trends of science about the language. It is presented in the works of Russian and Czech linguists on specificity of literary languages, as well as on culture of speech. The concept Orthology is connected with the possession of oral and written literary language norms, i.e. the rules of pronunciation, stress, grammar, punctuation, word formation etc. The category of variation is recognized as the main category of Orthology.
The term Orthology was fixed in the linguistic literature in the 60s of the twentieth century and it is typical for works with normative and normalizing character. O.S. Akhmanova, Y.A. Belchikov and
V.V. Veselitsky founded a special linguistic discipline Orthology.
The discussed term was first fixed in the "Dictionary-Reference book of Linguistic Terms” by D.E. Rosental, M.A. Telenkova "Orthology is the study about the correctness and normativity of speech."[2,182]. A more detailed description of the term represented in the encyclopedia “Russian language” [3]. The author of the entry, L.K. Graudina interprets the Orthology as “a branch of linguistics, the object of which is the theory of correct speech”. By defining the object and the bounds of Orthology as a special linguistic discipline O.S. Akhmanova, Y.A. Belchikov, V.V. Veselitsky pointed out that the object of Orthology is the study of coexisted but heterochronic variants in itself: “The finite task of Orthology is the exact relative assessment of functioning of variants at any given moment of language development, to fix their "correct" usage...”[4,36]
S.I. Vinogradov considers Orthology as a part of science about culture of speech, “as a relatively autonomous trend of research, the object of which is linguistic norm.” A close point of view is shared by Valgina defining Orthology as “a branch of linguistics that studies trends in the development of norm and defining the bounds between the variations within the norm and declinations from it”.
The problem of Orthology which is the subject of attention of many linguists in recent years is still requires the solution of many theoretical and practical problems.
The study of norms in functional varieties and subsystems of literary language is becoming an important trend. This fact defined one of the perspective tasks of Orthology, i.e. the codification of oral speech. Besides the “sphere of interest” of Orthology includes not only the literary language, but also other forms of national language existence. Phenomenon passed through literary language from slang and colloquial language should be gone through orthological assessment, as these forms of language existence have in modern conditions an enormous influence on literary uzus.
Recognized modern interpretation of orthology as an independent trend of linguistics is the typology of norms formulated by A. Edlichka. It consists of three orthological classes:
- formational (systematic) norms – “a set of linguistic means and their usage regularity typical for this form of language existence which it is charged by communicative society and in accordance with it the given communicative society uses it as compulsory one”;
- communication norms – orthological formation is closely connected with the process of communication due to communicative situation and regulating the usage of not only verbal but also nonverbal elements;
- stylistic norms orthological phenomena which do not limit the problem of choice and usage of language means in the text, but covering verbal, thematic and actually textual components [5,140].
The concept of the Czech linguist expanded the subject field of orthological researches: scientists focused their attention on to the communicative, genre and stylistic norms. However, formational,
linguistic norms were on the periphery of the research programs which are not still studied thoroughly. For these reasons, the system norms may be the subject of special, independent research. Thus, Orthology is considered as a part of science about the culture of speech, relatively autonomous field of research, the object of which is the language norm, and the science that studies the formal variation of language means, and as a theory of correct, normative speech.
With gaining the independence and the emergence of a new state the linguistic situation in Kazakhstan has been changed. The restoration and return of historical names, the fixing of unified rules of the transferring of Kazakh names into other languages became the basis of national onomastic policy of independent Kazakhstan.
As a result of actively implemented activity on regularizing the toponymic and other onims with significant variances in writing and a wide variability in uzus the Kazakhstan linguists were engaged in the problem concerning the regulation of their spelling.
Current instructions of the RK on transferring of Kazakh onims into Russian worked out on the principle of ultimate approach to the source language graphic however the unified usage of these rules in oral practice is not observed. The variety of languages in the world, the presence of specific sounds in each language, and usage of peculiarities of writing systems makes this task not so simple. So genetically and typologically different languages such as Kazakh and Russian inherent in variance of phonetic systems, as the Kazakh language has sounds that do not exist in Russian.
Functioning of Kazakh onims in Russian speech due to active interaction of two linguistic and speech systems attracted the attention of local linguists as an act of interlingual and intercultural communication. However, the attempts to find common criteria of codification of Kazakh onims and their written adaptation in Russian language in
domestic linguistics still remains unsolved, and questions of their orthographic codification in authoritative academic journals were considered only in fragments as single illustrations. It is explained that the vocabulary of any language is in a state of continuous development, one of the regularities of which is the lexicon completion with proper names and the need of transferring them into recipient language.
Currently the role of mass media (communication) is emphasized in the formation of linguistic norms. Printed media, television and radio broadcasting have a great influence on the formation of literary language, linguistic norms, they become a major factor of formation and distribution of basic norms of literary language. In accordance with studies of recent decades the influence of modern literary texts in literary language are visibly weakened. The dynamics of literary norms is influenced by functional styles developed in an environment of social and professional area: in political journalism, mass media, business speech, professional and scientific speech.
At present orthographic regime is pressured greatly by modern informedia. Particularly this process is taking place in the language of mass media where geographical names are used in a large volume. The variability of orthographic norms appeared in visible breach of uniformity in the use of:
- uppercase and lowercase letters;
- conjoint and separate writing;
- with hyphen or without.
Analysis of the printed media shows the necessity of liquidation of variants and normalizing of lowercase/uppercase, conjoint, separate or with hyphen writing of onims to have a unified orthographic regime.
The current “Rules of Russian Orthography and Punctuation” approved in 1956 as an obligatory code of rules have failed to solve many problems concerning the spelling of national onims at present. In "Rules ..." there is no separate paragraph on writing of geographical names, illustrative material does not cover all list of toponyms of Kazakhstan. For example, in “Rules ...” the usage of capital letters, conjoint or with or without hyphen in onims weren`t presented in separate chapters, it is given in general section “Capital letters" and "Nouns.”
The main contradictions in the norm implementtation of lowercase/uppercase, conjoint, separate or with hyphen in writing onim usage related, firstly, to the contradictions of the current orthographic norm and, secondly, different interpretations given to the norm, e.g. the choice of upper or lower case letters is the most problematic because in some cases it is difficult to draw line between “proper name”–“common name”.
After the law “On languages in the Republic of Kazakhstan” adopted in 1997 the activity on improvement of orthographic norms and formulation of new rules of transferring geographical names from Kazakh into Russian started. As a result of these acts many distorted names of inhabited localities and administrative-territorial units are gradually being put into an appropriate norm. Many of them are still to be corrected according to new "Law on Administrative Territorial Structure of the Republic of Kazakhstan" (December 8, 1993.) and Presidential Decree (December 29, 1995.), Government Resolution (March 5, 1996.) where the rules on Russian transferring of Kazakh onims were approved.
In 2006 the “Reference Book on Onomastics” on the Russian transferring of Kazakh and Kazakh transferring of Russian geographical names of the Republic of Kazakhstan was published. This regulatory document worked out in accordance with Articles 7 and 93 of the Constitution of the RK, the Law on the languages in the RK from July 11, 1997, the concept of RK language policy approved by Presidential Decree from 4 November 1996, the State program of functioning and development of languages.
One of the principles of the given regulation is the transferring of Kazakh names into Russian carried out by close form of writing according to international standard of unification and standardization of toponyms. Due to the fact that the transferring of Kazakh toponyms into languages of near and far abroad countries are still implemented through Russian we believe that the current regulation will serve as main source for designers of maps of different content and scope, scientific, reference, travel publications, dictionaries and reference books. In the case of Kazakhstan's transition to the Latin alphabet the countries that use this graphic can transfer the Kazakh names into their own languages without any difficulties.
In 2008 a multivolume reference book of toponyms of separate regions of Kazakhstan was published, which divided into several columns containing former name, current name of a place in the Kazakh language in accordance with the norms etc.) geographical and administrative-territorial and other names. However, there are some writings that do not meet the recommendations of the “Reference Book on Onomastic” for example, the transferring of some vowels and consonants and compound names into Russian.
Following years “Reference book of Kazakhstan Toponyms” issued where almost all geographical names were taken into account. The difference of this reference book from previous ones is the corpus of geographical names of Kazakhstan presented in three languages: Kazakh, Russian and English. Nevertheless the analysis of the periodical press shows that in written practice this reference book is not mostly taken into account, hence the wide variation in the usage of onims is observed.
In conclusion, we note that any geographical name is history and a valuable cultural monument of every nation. Age, people, events pass, but the memory about them remains in toponyms: names of towns, villages, rivers, lakes, streets, squares, seas, mountains etc. It is important not only to know the origin and meaning of geographical names, but their correct pronunciation and writing.
Hence the productive work is needed on unification of written form of Kazakh onims both in Kazakh and Russian languages, as the transcription of geographical names have not only vital scientific and theoretical, but also national importance. This question is topical also for the transliteration of Kazakh geographical names into other world languages due to the contemporary politics of Kazakhstan and its active entry into world space.
As a result of actively undertaken activity on normalizing of toponyms the distortions have been eliminated in a number of place names of the Republic of Kazakhstan, but there are no specific references defining the rules of transferring of Kazakh onims in Russian. Recommendations of the given instruction on the transferring of Kazakh onims in Russian language are not highlighted neither in new academic reference book "Rules of Russian orthography and punctuation" (M, 2006) approved by the orthographic commission of RAS nor in the latest lexicographical sources. In this connection the specific recommendations describing various possible ways of orthographic codification of Kazakh onims in modern Russian and other languages should be carried out by Kazakh linguists.
of modern Kazakh literary language and a transcription in Russian. This reference book is the first experience of unification of transferring of geographical names into Russian, including all (cities, lakes, stations, villages, towns, mountains,
- Ажеж К. Человек говорящий: Вклад лингвистики в гуманитарные науки. – М., 2003. С.408.
- Розенталь Д.Э., Теленкова М.А. Словарь-справочник лингвистических терминов: Пособие для учителя. – М.: Просвещение, 1985. – С.399.
- Граудина Л.К. Русский язык: Энциклопедия. – М., 1997. – С.298.
- Ахманова О.С., Бельчиков Ю.А., Веселитский В.В. К вопросу о «правильности» речи// Вопросы языкознания.1960. №2.
- Едличка А. Типы норм языковой коммуникации// Новое в зарубежной лингвистике: Вып.20: Теория ЧССР. М.: Прогресс, 1987.– С.320.
- Матыжанов К., Оразов С., Кокеева Ж., Мадиева Г., Иманбердиева С. Справочник по ономастике. – Алматы, 2006. – С.219.