Критические рецензии на БАС

IBASThe urge of reviving some critical essays from the mid XX century was becoming very essential. Not only have Academic Dictionaries become very difficult to find, but also critical essays on academic lexicography have almost vanished. For this reason, carefully chosen and edited research material is included in the body of this monograph representing extremely harsh critical reviews of  academicians Victor Vinogradov and Fedot Filin  et al.

Whose essays probably have not seen the light of day for the last 50 years or so. Some of these essays were written during the Linguistic war   between Leningrad and Moscow, dogmatic communists accusing Slavists. Therefore, hostility is what the reader may find in the subject of the essays.

■ БАС1: «Эссе , нескл., ср. Очерк, трактующий литературные, философские, социальные и т. п. проблемы не в систематическом, строго научном виде, а в свободной форме. [Тэрэн] привлек к работе.. в качестве военного корреспондента Фридриха Энгельса, экономиста, давшего непревзоийденные образцы корреспондентских «эесэ». Павлен. Баррикады.

— С иным напис: Эссэ (прим. см выше).—

БСЭ: эссе ; Слов, иностр. слев. 1949. эссе — Франц. essai» [1].

During that period a review was understood by putting the lexicographical material under the “microscope”. This is not the case now! A large publication like the GAD is impossible to review like Victor Vinogradov, Fedot Filin and others did. In the mid XX century a particular critical style was emplоyed by the Moscow Linguistic Circles to criticize the GADa la Vinogradov. However, this is not the style we are going to employ today to review the Great Academic Dictionary!



          The Great Academic Dictionary is immune to criticism! The critical essays of the past, regarding the Dictionary of Contemporary Russian Literary Language are still current and can still be used against the Great Academic Dictionary. Based on our thorough examinations of the Academic Dictionaries, and especially the new GAD (GAD3), volumes 1 through 21, and the entire array of critical essays about them, nothing abnormal was found about the GAD3 but the following three points of flaws:

            some minor typographical errors;

          One example only: совсем узкоспециальное слово       ГЛОССЕМАНТИКА повторяется ошибочно 6 (шесть) раз подряд! Это слово представляет не терминологию ядерной  физики или космической медицины! Этож чисто лингвистическое слово

scattered or ununified style within the referential/etymological zone. Пароки в этимологической зоне БАС.

referrals, ссылочные слова. What is the reason of trying to save space in an already colossal dictionary like the GAD? Читатель вообще не любит гоняться по словарным статьям словаря большого размера.

          Слова с окончанием ация всегда ведет читателя ссылками к глаголам, которые часто семантически не оправдывают актуальное значение слова

          Example: слово «Глобализация». Это слово даже теряет свое значение изза бесконечных ссылок.

          ■ «ГЛОБАЛИЗАЦИЯ, и, с. ж., 2. в мировой экономике Процесс усиления власти (в основном англо-американских) транснациональных корпораций и монополистических компаний за счёт резкого ослабления или уничтожения национально-государственного суверенитета путём экономической окупации эксплуатационного характера для данного государства и народа целиком как жетва третего мира [МMK]»[2].

“Such defects are not errors in orthography [or in definition — MMK], but spots of barbarity impressed so deep in the <…> language, that criticism can never wash them away; these, therefore, must be permitted to remain untouched: but many words have likewise been altered by accident, or depraved by ignorance, as the pronunciation of the vulgar has been weakly followed; and some still continue to write variously, as authors differ in their care or skill: of these it was proper to inquire the true orthography, which I have always considered as depending on their derivation, and have therefore referred them to their original languages: thus I write enchant, enchantment, enchanter, after the French, and incantation after the Latin; thus entire is chosen rather than intire, because it passed to us not from the Latin integer, but from the French entier.”[3].


[1] БАС, Словарь современного русского литературного языка, том XVII, столб. 1921, Москва, Ленинград, 1965.

[2] [Новый] Большой Академический Словарь Русского Языка, том 4, страница 156, Москва & Санкт — Петербург, 2006.

[3] Samuel Johnson, A Dictionary of the English Language, Preface, § 11, 1755, London.



Поделиться ссылкой:

Комментарии к статье