Tongue s and burns n. Biography

S.I.Ozhegov, N.Yu.Shvedova

Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language

Ah, union. 1. Connects sentences or members of a sentence, expressing opposition, comparison. He went and I stayed. Write with a pen, not a pencil. Handsome, not smart. 2. Attaches sentences or sentence members with the meaning of adding something. when presented sequentially, with the meaning of explanation, objection, strengthening, transition to another thought. There is a house on the mountain, and a stream under the mountain. There would be a swamp, but there would be devils (last). What you. are you doing today? and tomorrow? It's not his fault. - Who is to blame if not him? 3. Usage at the beginning of interrogative and exclamatory sentences, as well as at the beginning of speech to enhance expressiveness and persuasiveness (often in combination with pronouns, adverbs, and other conjunctions). How much fun we will have! Still, I disagree. * And also (and), conjunction - expresses accession, intensifying or comparative addition. A skilled driver and also a mechanic. He acts in films and also on television. Otherwise - 1) union, otherwise, otherwise. Hurry up, otherwise you'll be late; 2) in reality, but in reality. If it were so, otherwise it would be the other way around; Otherwise! (otherwise, of course!) (simple) - in a response, expresses: 1) confident agreement, confirmation. Cold? - Otherwise! Frost in the yard; 2) ironic disagreement, denial: Will he go? - Otherwise! Wait! And not that, a union is the same as and that (in 1 meaning). Or even a union - attaches a message about something. unwanted or unexpected. He will scream, or even beat you.

A2, particle (colloquial). 1. Indicates a question or response to someone's. words. Let's go for a walk, shall we? Why don't you answer? - A? What's happened? 2. Strengthens appeal. Vanya, oh Vanya! 3. [pronounced with varying degrees of duration]. Expresses clarification, satisfied understanding. Ah, so it was you! Why didn't you call? - The phone didn't work! - A-ah! Ah, so that’s what’s the matter!

A3 [pronounced with varying degrees of duration], int. Expresses annoyance, bitterness, as well as surprise, gloating and other similar feelings. What have I done? - A-ah! Ah, gotcha!

Ah..., prefix. Forms nouns and adjectives with meaning. absence (in words with a foreign root), the same as “not”, for example. asymmetry, illogical, immoral, arrhythmic, asynchronous.

Lampshade, -a, m. Cap for a lamp, lamp. Green a. 11 adj. lampshaded, oh, oh.

ABAZINSKY, oh, oh. 1. see Abaza. 2. Relating to the Abazas, their language, national character, way of life, culture, as well as the territory of their residence, its internal structure, history; such as the Abazins. A. language (Abkhaz-Adyghe group of Caucasian languages). In Abaza (adv.).

ABAZINS, -in, units. -Inets, -ntsa, m. People living in Karachay-Cherkessia and Adygea. II Abaza, -i. II adj., Abaza, -aya, -oe.

ABBOT, -a, m. 1. Abbot of a male Catholic monastery. 2. Catholic clergyman. II adj. abbey, -aya, -oe.

ABBATESS, -y, w. Abbess of a female Catholic monastery.

ABBEY, -a, Wed. Catholic monastery.

ABBREVIATION, -ы, zh. In word formation: a noun formed from truncated segments of words (for example, executive committee, Komsomol), from the same segments in combination with a whole word (for example, maternity hospital, spare parts), as well as from the initial sounds of words or the names of their initial letters (for example ., university, ATS, MKhAT, EVM, SKV), compound word. II adj. abbreviated, -aya, -oe.

ABERRATION, -i, g. (specialist.). Deviation from something, as well as distortion of something. A. light rays. A. optical systems (image distortion). A. ideas (translated). II adj. aberrational, -aya, -oe.

PARAGRAPH, -a, m. 1. Red line, indent at the beginning of the line. Start writing with a paragraph. 2. Text between two such indents. Read the first a.

ABYSSINIAN, oh, oh. 1. see Abyssinians. 2. Relating to the Abyssinians, their language, national character, way of life, culture, as well as Abyssinia (the former name of Ethiopia), its territory, internal structure, history; such as the Abyssinians, in Abyssinia. In Abyssinian (adv.).

ABYSSINIANS, -ev, vd. -nets, -ntsa, m. The former name of the population of Ethiopia (Abyssinia), Ethiopians. II Abyssinian, -i. II adj. Abyssinian, -aya, -oe.

APPLICANT, -a, m. 1. High school graduate (obsolete). 2. A person entering a higher or special educational institution. II applicant, -i. II adj. entrant, -aya, -oe.

SUBSCRIPTION, -a, m. A document granting the right to use something, something. service, as well as the right itself. A. to the theater. A. for a series of lectures. Interlibrary a. II adj. subscription, oh, oh.

SUBSCRIBER, -a, m. A person using a subscription, who has the right to use something. by subscription. A. libraries. A. telephone network (a person or institution that has a telephone). II subscriber, -i (colloquial). II adj. subscriber, -aya, -oh.

SUBSCRIBE, -ru, -ruesh; -anny; owls and nesov., that. Receive (-chat) a subscription, become (be) a subscriber of something. A. I’m lying in the theater.

BOARDING, -a, m. In the era of rowing and sailing fleets: attacking an enemy ship when approaching it directly for hand-to-hand combat. Take on a. (also translated). II adj. boarding, oh, oh.

ABORIGIN, -a, m. (book). Indigenous inhabitant of a country or locality. II aboriginal, -i (colloquial).

ABORIGINAL, oh, oh. Relating to the aborigines, to their life, to their original habitats; just like the aborigines.

ABORTION, -a, m. Premature termination of pregnancy, spontaneous or artificial, miscarriage.

ABORTIVE, -aya, -oe (special). 1. Suspending or dramatically changing the development and course of the disease. A. method. Abortifacients. 2. Underdeveloped. Abortive organs of plants. II noun abortion, -i, f. (to 2 digits).

ABRASIVE, -a, m. (special). A hard, fine-grained or powdery substance (flint, emery, corundum, carborundum, pumice, garnet) used for grinding, polishing, and sharpening. II adj. abrasive, oh, oh. Abrasive materials. A. tool (grinding, polishing).

ABRACADABRA, -s, w. A meaningless, incomprehensible set of words [originally: a mysterious Persian word that served as a saving magic spell].

ABREK, -a, m. During the annexation of the Caucasus to Russia: a highlander who participated in the fight against the tsarist troops and administration.

APRICOT, -a, gen.pl. -ov, m. Southern fruit tree family. Rosaceae, which produces juicy sweet fruits with large seeds, as well as its fruit. II adj. apricot, -aya, -oe apricot, oaya, -oe.

APRICOT, oh, oh. 1. see apricot. 2. Yellow-red, the color of a ripe apricot.

ABRIS, -a,m. (book). Outline of an object, contour. II adj. outlined, -aya, -oe.

ABSENTEEISM [sente], -a, m. (book). Evasion of voters from participating in elections to government bodies. II adj. ab-centeist, -aya, -oe.

ABSOLUTE, -a, m. (book). 1. In philosophy: the eternal, unchanging fundamental principle of everything that exists (spirit, idea, deity). 2. Something self-sufficient, independent of others. conditions and relationships. Build something. in a.

ABSOLUTISM, a, m. A form of government in which supreme power belongs entirely to an autocratic monarch, an unlimited monarchy. adj. absolutist, -aya, -oe.

ABSOLUTE, -th, -oe; -ten, -tna. 1. full f. Unconditional, not dependent on anything, taken without comparison with anything. The absolute value of a real number (in mathematics: the number itself, taken without the + or - sign). A. zero (temperature -273.15° C). A. champion (athlete - winner in all-around, in certain other types of competitions). 2. Perfect, complete. A. peace. He is absolutely (adv.) right. Absolute majority (overwhelming majority). Absolute monarchy (autocracy). A. hearing (hearing that accurately determines the pitch of any tone). II noun absoluteness, -i, f. (to 2 digits).

ABSTRACT, -ru, -ruesh; -a-ny; owls and nesov., that (book). Produce an abstraction (in 1 value) of something.

Ozhegov Sergey Ivanovich (1900-1964) - linguist, lexicographer, Doctor of Philology, professor.

Sergei Ozhegov was born on September 22 (9), 1900 in the village of Kamenoye (now the city of Kuvshinovo) in the Tver province in the family of a process engineer at the Kamensk paper and cardboard factory, Ivan Ivanovich Ozhegov. Sergei Ivanovich was the eldest of three brothers. On the eve of the First World War, the family moved to Petrograd, where Sergei graduated from high school. Then he entered the philological faculty of Leningrad University, but classes were soon interrupted - Ozhegov was called up to the front. He took part in battles in western Russia and Ukraine. In 1922, Ozhegov completed his military service at the headquarters of the Kharkov Military District and immediately began studying at the Faculty of Linguistics and Material Culture of Leningrad University. In 1926, university teachers Viktor Vinogradov and Lev Shcherba recommended him to graduate school at the Institute of Comparative History of Literatures and Languages ​​of the West and East.

A man is a creature opposite in gender to a woman.

Ozhegov Sergey Ivanovich

In 1936, Ozhegov moved to Moscow. Since 1937, he taught at Moscow universities (MIFLI, MSPI). Since 1939, Ozhegov has been a researcher at the Institute of Language and Writing, the Institute of Russian Language, and the Institute of Linguistics of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

During World War II, Ozhegov did not evacuate from the capital, but remained to teach.

Founder and first head of the speech culture sector of the Institute of Russian Language of the USSR Academy of Sciences (since 1952).

One of the compilers of the “Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language” edited by D. N. Ushakov (1935-1940). The author of one of the most famous and popular Russian dictionaries - the one-volume “Dictionary of the Russian Language” (1949, reprinted several times with corrections and updates, since 1992 - with the participation of N. Yu. Shvedova); Ozhegov's dictionary records modern commonly used vocabulary, demonstrates the compatibility of words and typical phraseological units. The vocabulary of Ozhegov's dictionary formed the basis of many translation dictionaries.

The main works are devoted to Russian lexicology and lexicography, the history of the Russian literary language, sociolinguistics, the culture of Russian speech, the language of individual writers (P. A. Plavilshchikov, I. A. Krylov, A. N. Ostrovsky) and others.

Editor of the “Spelling Dictionary of the Russian Language” (1956, 5th ed., 1963), dictionaries-reference books “Russian literary pronunciation and stress” (1955), “Correctness of Russian speech” (1962). Founder and editor-in-chief of the collections “Issues of the Culture of Speech” (1955-1965).

In 1964, a new stereotypical edition of my one-volume Dictionary of the Russian Language was published. Now there is an Orthographic Commission formed at the Department of Literature and Language of the USSR Academy of Sciences, which considers issues of simplifying and improving Russian orthography. In the near future, apparently, this work will culminate in the creation of a draft of new spelling rules. In this regard, I find it inappropriate to further publish the Dictionary in a stereotypical (hereinafter italics are ours - O.N.) method. I consider it necessary to prepare a new revised edition. In addition, and this is the main thing, I propose to make a number of improvements to the Dictionary, to include new vocabulary that has entered the Russian language in recent years, to expand phraseology, to revise the definitions of words that have received new shades of meaning... to strengthen the normative side of the Dictionary .

What dried up in one stream could survive in another.

From “Philological observations on the composition of the Russian language”

Archpriest Gerasim Pavsky.

In the history of Russian philology of the 20th century there are pages that seem to be well known to everyone. Isn’t that why when pronouncing the names of academicians A. A. Shakhmatov and L. V. Shcherba, B. A. Larin and V. V. Vinogradov, professors N. N. Durnovo and I. G. Golanov and many others, a reverent feeling always arises respect and admiration for their scientific works and considerable human exploits. After all, they lived in a difficult era that destroyed one thing and glorified another. And few were able to remain themselves in those turbulent years, maintaining faith in science and its traditions, being loyal and consistent in their actions. And among these names, for more than half a century, the name of Sergei Ivanovich Ozhegov has been on everyone’s lips - a historian of the Russian literary language and lexicologist, a teacher, a wise mentor and simply a living person close to many of us.

And if his scientific works constituted a milestone in the development of Russian science and continue to be discussed to this day, then his appearance, familiar, perhaps, from his student years to every philologist, is the appearance of a handsome, soft, charming in his spontaneity intellectual of the old generation with a classic beard and with an attentive, as if studying gaze - over the years, sad as it is to admit, it fades. Is it because we have begun to forget our teachers, torn apart by the vicissitudes of the current difficult times (and have there ever been other times?). Or - others, having already become (not without the help of S.I. Ozhegov) famous scientists, gave up on that past, unable to give up the ambitions of the present. And our essay, we hope, will to some extent fill this unsightly gap - the emptiness of our memory - memory in which sometimes there is no place for what is significant and bright, and worldly (or vile) vanity has captured our souls... This is partly the paradox of a Christian , which is difficult for a modern person to understand and feel, deprived of the acuteness and depth of a sense of life and the suffering and hardships that fate presents for good deeds, selfless help, living complicity and indifference to the people around them. Pavel Florensky, who experienced the bitter cup of life as a Christian in Russia, spoke well about this. And his words, so piercing and accurate, have a special wisdom - a wisdom that was largely carried “within themselves” by the Teachers we have forgotten: “Light is designed in such a way that you can give to the world only by paying for it with suffering and persecution. The more selfless the gift, the harsher the persecution and the more severe the suffering. This is the law of life, its main axiom. You are internally aware of its immutability and universality, but when confronted with reality in each particular case, you are struck as by something unexpected and new.”

Sergei Ivanovich Ozhegov was born on September 23 (new style) 1900 in the village of Kamenoye, Novotorzhsky district, Tver province, where his father, Ivan Ivanovich Ozhegov, worked as a process engineer at a local factory. S.I. Ozhegov (he was the eldest of the children) had two brothers: the middle one, Boris, and the youngest, Evgeniy. If you look at the photograph where S.I. Ozhegov is depicted as a 9-year-old child, then as a 16-year-old youth and, finally, as an adult man, you will notice an external resemblance that seems to come from those distant times: these are amazing living, burning , “electric” eyes, childishly spontaneous, but even on the early card - wise, as if they had absorbed ancestral responsibility and, if you like, a divinely predetermined belonging to that now unpopular class of “average” people, who are sometimes contemptuously called scientists , thinkers, researchers.

On the eve of the First World War, S.I. Ozhegov’s family moved to Petrograd, where he graduated from high school. A curious episode from this time was told to us by Natalia Sergeevna Ozhegova. For all its simplicity and, we would say, nakedness, the case is very cute, characterizing intelligence and, perhaps, philological abilities already manifested then. Their gymnasium was taught by a Frenchman who did not know Russian, and the students loved to make fun of him. Seryozha, a lively and receptive boy, often asked the teacher with his classmates: “Monsieur, can I go to the toilet?” And he, of course, answered: “Yes, please go out” (“toilet” in French means “to go out”).

According to Sergei Sergeevich Ozhegov, the son of a scientist, he had a “turbulent, hot youth”: he was fond of football, which was just becoming fashionable at that time, and was a member of a sports society. His handsome masculine figure, fairly tall stature and good training helped him a lot in the future. “Almost as a boy,” he joined the Socialist Revolutionary Party.

In 1918, Sergei Ozhegov entered the university. Much later, he rarely talked about his “genealogical roots” and his passion for philology. And it’s clear why: in those years it was hardly possible to talk or even mention out loud that there were members of the clergy in the family. Sergei Ivanovich’s mother Alexandra Fedorovna (nee Degozhskaya) was the great-niece of the famous philologist and teacher, professor at St. Petersburg University, Archpriest Gerasim Petrovich Pavsky (1787–1863). His “Philological Observations on the Composition of the Russian Language” were awarded the Demidov Prize during the author’s lifetime and published twice. Thus, the Imperial Academy of Sciences honored the work of the respected Russian scientist, perhaps due to its “spiritual” obligations, who understood the structure and spirit of the language more broadly and clearly than many talented contemporaries. He was revered, many learned men discussed the problems of philology with him more than once: A. Kh. Vostokov, I. I. Sreznevsky, and F. I. Buslaev. Of course, S.I. Ozhegov knew about this. We think that he not only knew this from his mother’s stories, but felt an inner need to continue the work of his great ancestor. Therefore, the “philological” choice was conscious and quite definite for the young S.I. Ozhegov. Then, we note, it was necessary to have considerable courage in order to devote one’s future to science in the hungry, terrible years.

But the classes that had begun were soon interrupted, and S.I. Ozhegov was called up to the front. Previously, the scientist’s biographers wrote: “Young Sergei Ozhegov in 1917 greeted with delight the overthrow of the autocracy and the Great October Socialist Revolution, which marked the beginning of a new era in the life of his native people. It couldn’t be any other way.” Now, based on what he has lived and changed his mind, it is hardly possible to judge so categorically the views of the young Sergei Ozhegov. Like any ardent young man, he undoubtedly felt a keen attraction to everything new, and talented philologists of that time, who had already shown themselves in the teaching department, were also involved in the turbulent events of the revolutionary years (let us remember, for example, E. D. Polivanov, who was discussed , that it replaces the entire eastern department of foreign relations of Soviet Russia). One way or another, fate provided him with this first, truly masculine test, which he withstood, participating in battles in the west of Russia, near the Karelian Isthmus, in Ukraine. After graduating from military service in 1922 at the headquarters of the Kharkov Military District, he immediately began studying at the faculty of linguistics and material culture of the university. In 1926, he completed his course of study and entered graduate school. In the coming years, he has been intensively studying languages ​​and the history of his native literature. He participates in the seminar of N. Ya. Marr and listens to lectures by S. P. Obnorsky, studying at the Institute of the History of Literatures and Languages ​​of the West and East in Leningrad. His first scientific experiments date back to this time. In the collection of S. I. Ozhegov in the Archives of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the “Project of a Dictionary of the Revolutionary Era” has been preserved - a harbinger of the future major work of the team of authors under the leadership of D. N. Ushakov, where S. I. Ozhegov was one of the most active participants, “movers”, as the teacher called him.

It should be noted that the scientific atmosphere in Leningrad in the 1920s contributed to the creative growth of the scientist. His senior colleagues and associates taught there: B. A. Larin, V. V. Vinogradov, B. V. Tomashevsky, L. P. Yakubinsky. The old academic professorship, which had extensive experience and rich traditions, also supported the first steps in science of the young talented researcher. As L.I. Skvortsov noted in his book, “except for V.V. Vinogradov, his representation [S. I. Ozhegova. - O.N.] Leningrad State University professors B.M. Lyapunov and L.V. Shcherba signed up for graduate school.” These were the most famous scientists of their time, deep experts in Slavic literatures, languages ​​and dialects, not only theoreticians of science, but also subtle experimenters (remember the famous phonetics laboratory organized by L.V. Shcherba).

Since the late 1920s, S.I. Ozhegov has been working on a large project - the “Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language” - the Ushakov Dictionary, as it was later called. This was an extremely fruitful time for S.I. Ozhegov. He was literally in love with dictionary work, and the colleagues around him were so different both in their scientific interests and in position: G. O. Vinokur, V. V. Vinogradov, B. A. Larin, B. V. Tomashevsky and before in total Dmitry Nikolaevich Ushakov - helped and to some extent educated S.I. Ozhegov. But he had special feelings for one of them, idolized him, loved and revered him - D. N. Ushakov - this legendary Russian scientist, exceptional teacher, original artist, collector and lover of folk antiquities, a wise and courageous person and, finally, a caring and a sensitive father, almost forgotten now. It is difficult for us to understand what kind of responsibility lay on him when the idea of ​​publishing the first explanatory dictionary of the “Soviet” era was conceived (by the way, ironically, precisely for the lack of this very “Sovietness” and, conversely, for “philistinism” and evasion modern tasks of that time, opponents mercilessly criticized this work), and what attacks they all had to endure. The discussion that unfolded in 1935 was reminiscent of the sad campaign of the revolutionary years, which set itself the goal of expelling competent and independent scientists. And here all methods were used. This is how S.I. Ozhegov reported this in a letter to D.N. Ushakov dated December 24, 1935, referring to M. Aptekar, their full-time prosecutor:

“The main provisions of “criticism”: politically unsharpened, toothless, demobilizing the class struggle<…>“Hooligan-tavern terminology also “disarms.” The reason is incorrigible Indo-Europeanism, bourgeois and petty-bourgeois thinking<…>There will be another fight!<….>In general, there was a lot of curious and mostly vile, vile things. Despite all the vileness<…>All these opinions reflect at least sideways certain sentiments that must be taken into account, especially since they are quite real.” It was not easy for discussions to take place among the authors themselves, with their sometimes irreconcilable position. It seems that S.I. Ozhegov was very capable here too: his mental makeup was very delicate and soft, incapable of going “for a break,” he helped D.N. Ushakov a lot, “smoothing out the corners.” It was not without reason that among the Ushakov boys (that’s what D.N. Ushakov’s students were called) he was known as a great diplomat and had the nickname “Talleyrand.”

S.I. Ozhegov moved to Moscow in 1936. Behind him are busy postgraduate years, teaching at the State Institute of Art History, Pedagogical Institute named after. A. I. Herzen, the first “tests of strength” are behind us: after the release of the 1st volume of the Explanatory Dictionary, a tough discussion broke out in Leningrad, the goal of which was to discredit the brainchild of D. N. Ushakov and to ban the publication of the dictionary. Many letters from those years that we were able to get acquainted with directly spoke about the “political” events awaiting its authors.

Arriving in Moscow, S.I. Ozhegov very quickly entered into the rhythm of Moscow life. But the main thing for him was that his teacher and friend D.N. Ushakov was now nearby, and communication with him in his apartment on Sivtsev Vrazhek now became constant. In 1937–1941 S. I. Ozhegov teaches at the Moscow Institute of Philosophy, Literature and Art. He is fascinated not only by purely theoretical courses, but also by the language of poetry and fiction in general, and pronunciation norms (it is not for nothing that, following D.N. Ushakov, who was considered the greatest specialist in speech stylistics, he later consults editors on the radio). S.I. Ozhegov merged with Moscow, but still, even years later, he loved to visit the city of his youth and visit his trusted friend, the most talented Leningrad philologist Boris Aleksandrovich Larin.

His two brothers also lived in Leningrad. Their tragic fate, filled with some kind of fatal sign, and the loss of their relatives were another difficult test for S.I. Ozhegov, a test that, it seems, he courageously carried with himself all his life. Even before the war, his younger brother Evgeniy died after contracting tuberculosis. Their little daughter also died. When the war came, the middle brother, Boris, who also lived in Leningrad, due to poor eyesight, could not go to the front, but actively participated in defensive construction and, finding himself in a besieged city, died of hunger, leaving behind a wife and two small children . Here is how S.I. Ozhegov wrote about this to his aunt in Sverdlovsk on April 5, 1942:

“Dear Aunt Zina! You probably didn’t receive my last letter, where I wrote about Bory’s death on January 5th. And the other day I received more, new sad news. In mid-January, Borin's son Alyosha died, on January 26 his mother died, and on February 1 Borin's wife Klavdiya Alexandrovna. Now I have no one left. I couldn't come to my senses. Four-year-old Natasha is alive, still there. I call her to my place in Moscow, m<ожет>b<ыть>will be able to be transported. I’ll babysit myself for now...” (from the archives of N. S. Ozhegova).

Work on the Dictionary ended in the pre-war years. In 1940, the last 4th volume was published. This was a real event in scientific life. And S.I. Ozhegov lived with new ideas... He intended to implement one of them, suggested by D.N. Ushakov, in the coming years. This was a plan for compiling a popular one-volume explanatory dictionary. But the implementation of this project was delayed for years. The war has come.

Scientific teams hastily evacuated in August-October 1941. Some, such as V.V. Vinogradov, “unreliable” ones, were sent to Siberia, others to the outback of the country. Many dictionaries were sent to Uzbekistan, almost the entire Institute of Language and Writing. D. N. Ushakov later reported about this “journey” in a letter to his student G. O. Vinokur: “You witnessed our hasty departure on the night of 14/X. How did we travel? It seemed bad (crowded, they seemed to take turns sleeping, etc.); ...twice on the way, in Kuibyshev and Orenburg, by some order we were given a huge loaf of bread for an hour<елове>ka. Compare this with the mass of grief, suffering and sacrifices that<ото>ry befell the lot of thousands and thousands of others! “On our train, one carriage is an academic one, the others: “writers”, filmmakers (with L. Orlova - well-fed, spoiled parasites in a soft carriage)…”.

S.I. Ozhegov remained in Moscow without stopping his studies. He developed a course in Russian paleography and taught it to students at the Pedagogical Institute during the war years, was on night patrols, and guarded his home - later the Institute of the Russian Language. (During these years, S.I. Ozhegov acted as director of the Institute of Language and Writing). Wanting to be useful to the country in at least some way, together with his other remaining colleagues, he organizes a linguistic scientific society and studies the wartime language. Many did not like this, and he sympathetically reported this in a letter to G. O. Vinokur: “Knowing the attitude of some Tashkent residents towards me, I am inclined to be suspicious of your silence! After all, I am blamed for the illness of DN (i.e. Ushakov. - O.N.), and for the refusal to travel from Moscow, and for the creation in Moscow of a linguistic “society,” as they seem to call it there, and for much more...”

Remaining in the center, S.I. Ozhegov helped many of his colleagues, who were in difficult conditions during evacuation, to return to Moscow soon to continue their joint dictionary work. Only D.N. Ushakov did not return. In recent weeks he had been terribly tormented by asthma; The Tashkent weather negatively affected his health, and he died suddenly on April 17, 1942. On June 22 of the same year, his students and colleagues honored the memory of D. N. Ushakov at a meeting of the Faculty of Philology of Moscow University and the Institute of Language and Writing, where insightful reports were read. Among the speakers was S.I. Ozhegov. He spoke about the main work of his teacher’s life - “Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language”.

In 1947, S.I. Ozhegov, together with other employees of the Russian Language Institute, sent a letter to I.V. Stalin asking not to transfer the Institute to Leningrad, which could significantly undermine the scientific forces. Formed in 1944, according to the authors of the letter, the Institute performs responsible functions in the study and promotion of the native language. We do not know what the reaction of the head of state was, but we understand the full responsibility of this act, which could have been followed by other tragic events. But the Institute was left in its original place, and S.I. Ozhegov took up his “brainchild” - the “Dictionary of the Russian Language”. The first edition of this now classic “thesaurus” was published in 1949 and immediately attracted the attention of readers, scientists and critics. S. I. Ozhegov received hundreds of letters with requests to send a dictionary, to explain this or that word. Many turned to him for advice, and the scientist did not refuse anyone. “... it is known that those who build a new road encounter many obstacles,” wrote S. I. Ozhegov’s famous ancestor G. P. Pavsky. So S.I. Ozhegov received not only well-deserved praise and balanced assessment, but also very tendentious criticism. On June 11, 1950, the newspaper “Culture and Life” published a review by a certain N. Rodionov with the characteristic title “About one unsuccessful dictionary”, where the author, like those (in Ushakov’s times) critics, tried to discredit the “Dictionary”, using the same political methods of intimidation. S.I. Ozhegov wrote a response letter to the editor of the newspaper, and sent a copy to Pravda. We got acquainted with this 13-page message from the scientist and immediately drew attention to the approach of S.I. Ozhegov: he did not try to humiliate the would-be reviewer, but presented him with a justifiably tough argument, relied only on scientific philological principles and ultimately won.

During the scientist’s lifetime, the Dictionary went through 8 editions, and S.I. Ozhegov carefully worked on each of them, thought through and reviewed errors and shortcomings. The discussion of the Dictionary in the academic circle was not without controversy. Former teacher S.I. Ozhegova, and later academician S.P. Obnorsky, who acted as editor of the 1st edition of the Dictionary, later could not share the positions of S.I. Ozhegova, and the disagreements that emerged in the late 1940s led to the elimination of S.I. . P. Obnorsky from participation in this publication. To make the essence of their dispute clear, we present a small fragment from his letter. Thus, S.I. Ozhegov’s opponent writes: “Of course, all spelling is conditional. I understand that in controversial cases it is possible to agree to write something together, or separately, or with a hyphen, or with a small or capital letter. I agree with this, no matter how disgusting it is for me to read “and” according to Ushakov (cf. at the same time!) [I still see “what”]. But write “gory” in<есто>"mountainous", "high" vm<есто>“highest”, “greatest” vm<есто>“increasing” is arbitrary. It’s the same as agreeing to write “business” through “deco,” for example. I cannot do such arbitrariness. Let someone else go... for whom even “cow” can be written in two yats, etc.” . There were other, not only personal, but also publishing disagreements.

This episode is interesting, which we gleaned from G. P. Pavsky’s “Philological Observations.” It seems that he, too, met with disapproving cries more than once, but found the courage to defend his own view. And this example was very indicative for S.I. Ozhegov: “There are people who do not like my comparison of Russian words with words of foreign languages. It seems to them that with such a comparison the originality and independence of the Russian language is destroyed. No, I was never of the opinion that the Russian language is a collection made up of different foreign languages. I am sure that the Russian language was formed according to its own principles...”

Why is S. I. Ozhegov’s “Dictionary” interesting and useful? We believe that this is a kind of lexicographic standard, the life of which continues to this day. It is difficult to name another publication that would be so popular and not only because of this; “fund” of words and thoughtful. concept coming from the time of D.N. Ushakov, but also due to constant painstaking work and. competent “updating” of the Dictionary.

The 1940s were one of the most fruitful years in the life of S.I. Ozhegov. He worked a lot, and future projects born in the depths of his soul found successful implementation later, in the 1950s. One of them was associated with the creation of the Center for the Study of Speech Culture, the Sector, as it was later called. From 1952 until the end of his life, he headed the Sector, one of the central directions of which was the study and promotion of native speech, not primitive, as it is now (like the one-minute walking TV program “ABC”), but, if you like, comprehensive. He and his employees spoke on the radio, advised announcers and theater workers, S. I. Ozhegov’s notes often appeared in periodicals, he was a regular participant in literary evenings at the House of Scientists, inviting such luminaries of writing as K. to collaborate in the Sector. I. Chukovsky, Lev Uspensky, F.V. Gladkov, scientists, artists. At the same time, famous dictionaries of pronunciation norms began to be published under his editorship and co-authorship, which were listened to, known and studied even in distant foreign countries.

In the 1950s, another periodical appeared in the system of the Russian Language Institute - the popular science series “Issues of Speech Culture,” organized and inspired by S. I. Ozhegov. It was on the pages of these books that T. G. Vinokur’s sensational article “On the language and style of A. I. Solzhenitsyn’s story “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” subsequently appeared. In “Questions of Speech Culture,” the work of young colleagues and students of S. I. Ozhegov, who later became famous Russian normativists, was tested: Yu. A. Belchikova, V. L. Vorontsova, L. K. Graudina, V. G. Kostomarov, L. I. Skvortsov, B. S. Schwarzkopf and many others. The attention and respect for beginning talented researchers that S.I. Ozhegov always provided with moral support, friendly complicity and simply human help invariably attracted people to him. And now the names discovered by S.I. Ozhegov - the successors of the work of their teacher - “Ozhegovites” - are largely based on the rich traditions laid down by S.I. Ozhegov. He knew how to discern individuality in a person, to feel it with some of his inner “touch”. Therefore, the younger generation, rallied around their teacher - “a mighty handful” - as K.I. Chukovsky once called them in a letter to him - opened up even under him, showing and proving their commitment; his ideas and plans.

Another matter of life (along with the publication of the “Dictionary of the Russian Language”) was the preparation of a new scientific journal “with a human face.” It became “Russian Speech” (the first issue was published after the death of S.I. Ozhegov in 1967), perhaps the most widely circulated of academic journals, enjoying success and well-deserved respect even now.

Being a deep academic specialist and carrying out extensive teaching activities (he worked at Moscow State University for many years), S. I. Ozhegov was still not an armchair scientist and eagerly responded with his characteristic kind irony to those changes in the language that were beginning to enter the vocabulary of the average person. man in the space age. He was loyal to the “verbal pranks” of young people, listened to them, knew well and could appreciate the literary jargon used in special cases. An example of this is the card index of Russian obscenities compiled by him together with another famous scientist, A. A. Reformatsky - not a collection of obscene expressions in pathetic “dictionaries” that now and then flash on book shelves, but a scientifically based and artistically designed study of the sociology of language everyday life of the urban population - something that is so popular and relevant these days. In an article dedicated to the 90th anniversary of the birth of S.I. Ozhegov, one of his most talented and devoted students, prof. L.K. Graudina wrote about the scientist’s original approach to the world of changing words and phenomena: “S. I. Ozhegov repeatedly repeated the idea that experimental [emphasis added]. - O. H.] research and permanent service of the Russian word. Surveys of the state of norms of the literary language, analysis of current trends and forecasting of the most likely paths of development - these are the aspects<…>“reasonable and objective justified normalization” of the language constitutes an important part of the activities of the speech culture department today.”

The last years of S.I. Ozhegov’s life were not simple either personally or socially (i.e. scientifically, because for him science was a service to high, now lost, social ideals). The scientist’s institute activities were overshadowed by attacks and proud attacks in his direction. Other “colleagues” who were especially skilled in intrigue called Sergei Ivanovich “not a scientist” (sic!), tried to humiliate him in every possible way, hushing up his role and contribution to science, which, let us emphasize once again, was not a personal matter for him, but socially useful. Whether he had been more rational, practical in his own interests, or subservient to the authorities, he, without a doubt, could have had a “better reputation”, which his students and colleagues were so worried about and are now worried about. But Sergei Ivanovich was, first of all, sincere towards himself and far from the political situation in science. And it, the generation of new “Marrists”, was already stepping on his heels and moving forward. Of course, not everything was so simple and unambiguous, and we are neither able nor have the right to evaluate this. There were those who walked with him to the end, in the same harness, and decades later remained devoted to the work of the teacher, there were others who turned away from S.I. Ozhegov as soon as he passed away and joined the more “promising” figure, and still others destroyed what he created.

A special topic is the hobbies of S.I. Ozhegov. He was a very interesting man “not without individuality” (by the way, it was this quality that he especially valued in women) and certainly attracted the attention of the weaker half of humanity, being passionate, amorous, and carried away. Youthful excitement, the attractive power of an “electric” look, it seems, remained with him all his life and, perhaps, that’s why he was always young and responsive in soul, pure in his impulses. S.I. Ozhegov had a real sense of time, where in his time, in the life of the generation of the 1900s, the most difficult, sometimes unbearable trials occurred, intertwined with rare years of calm and measured, prosperous life. From the sweet impressions of a happy childhood in the bosom of a caring and enlightened family and gymnasium years filled with lively interest to the terrible months of the revolution and no less difficult trials of the civil war, from the first youthful love and student and postgraduate years filled with plans and quests to the painful time of repressions that took away and crippled the lives of many of his teachers and classmates, from his acquaintance with D.N. Ushakov, who became his caring and faithful mentor, to the again tragic and long months of the Great Patriotic War, from his first success and recognition to “reprimands”, gossip and gossip - all these are fragments of his a life that was not easy, but illuminated by noble thoughts, where love, a bright quality kept in the recesses of the soul, was S.I. Ozhegov’s constant companion. The scientist’s son, S.S. Ozhegov, once told about his father: “Echoes of youth, a kind of “hussarism” always lived in my father. All his life he remained a thin, fit, person who carefully looked after himself. Calm and unperturbed, he was also capable of unpredictable hobbies. He was liked and liked to please women...” His disposition towards Man, touching attention to ladies and great personal observation were integral features of Sergei Ivanovich’s cheerful character. That is probably why he was not categorical in his assessments and did not judge people strictly.

Letters to the scientist told us a lot about his spiritual qualities - not those that become the “prey” of nimble researchers looking for big names, but those numerous reviews of his now forgotten colleagues who are filled with the most cordial, sincere feelings. One of them, who worked in the late 1950s and early 1960s. under an agreement in the Speech Culture Sector, E. A. Sidorov wrote to Sergei Ivanovich on August 19, 1962: “With a feeling of not only deep satisfaction, but also great pleasure, I am writing these lines to you, dear Sergei Ivanovich,” recalling our last conversation, not long, but so heartwarming. She, this conversation - like your letter - touched me so much that now I almost wrote “my dear friend”... Don’t blame me on this! But you can’t help but be moved: the new one coming is cosmic! (what a scope!) - the century, apparently, does not in the least affect the sincerity of such relationships, which, to my genuine joy, have been established between us.” I remember how in another letter the same scientist wrote that if it was not possible to pay for his work for the Sector, then he was still ready to work for him (and, therefore, first of all for S.I. Ozhegov) and asked to accept confidence in this position and unchanging feelings of respect for his senior colleague. The question involuntarily arises: now who would be able to disinterestedly work for an idea, for science? Or, perhaps, there are no longer names like Sergei Ivanovich Ozhegov, who are unable to force people to work for themselves, but who invariably attract people with the depth of their intellect, exceptional delicacy, respect for their interlocutor, and special Ozhegov-like charm.

His appearance - both external and internal - was surprisingly harmonious and graceful, and his priestly face, neat gray beard and manners of an old aristocrat caused funny incidents. Once, when S.I. Ozhegov, N.S. Pospelov and N.Yu. Shvedova arrived in Leningrad, they, leaving the platform of the Moscow station, headed to the taxi stand and, safely sitting down in the cabin, with calm elegance asked the driver to take them to the Academy (of Sciences), but, probably embarrassed by their appearance and the manners of the men, he brought them to ... the Theological Academy.

In recent years, S.I. Ozhegov spoke more than once about death and talked about the eternal. Perhaps he also remembered his beloved idealist philosopher G. G. Shpet, banned in Soviet times, a volume of whose works he had in his library. Probably, the days of a difficult life passed before his eyes, where hardships went side by side with hope and faith, which supported him in difficult moments and fed his suffering soul. They say that during the times of repression against S.I. Ozhegov - not physical, but moral, but which gave him, perhaps, even greater pain than physical - in the seemingly relatively calm 1960s, he did not confront his slanderers , for he lived according to different, spiritual principles, but being unable to contain the suffering and pain from the attacks of those around him, ... he cried.

He asked to be buried at the Vagankovskoye cemetery according to Christian custom. But this wish of Sergei Ivanovich was not fulfilled. And now his ashes, reconciled by time, rest in the wall of the Novodevichy necropolis. Natalia Sergeevna Ozhegova said that the word “God” was constantly present in their family. No, it was not a religious cult, and the children were raised in secular conditions, but the very touch and perception of the Spirit invariably accompanied everything that Sergei Ivanovich did. In those irreconcilable times, when the state religion was communism, and the Soviet “scientist-intellectual” already had a different appearance, S. I. Ozhegov was called a Russian master (an expression by A. A. Reformatsky). Apparently, his human essence was internally opposed to the world around him. He had his own “gait”, had refined manners and always took care of his appearance, he sat down in a special way (not, “thumped off his feet”, as now) and spoke, remaining the same simple, accessible, gentle person with his weaknesses. In Sergei Ivanovich’s family there was never any hypocrisy towards religion, but, on the other hand, there was no “ostentatious prayer service.” The only holiday he observed religiously was Easter. Then he went to the all-night vigil at the Novodevichy Convent...

In the “Russian Dictionary of Language Expansion” by A.I. Solzhenitsyn there is such a word - “to rejoice”, i.e. devote oneself to godly deeds. Sergei Ivanovich Ozhegov was such a “god-fearing”, “good Russian man and glorious scientist,” whose life, although too short, but bright, impetuous, rich in events and meetings, is worthy of our memory. Let us, at least to such a small extent, the only one possible now, as this “study”, reveal the secrets of the soul and quest of a wise, respectable scientist, a man whom many were not destined to understand during his lifetime.

We have repeatedly turned to the famous learned man of the 19th century, Archpriest T. P. Pavsky. The preface to the 2nd edition of his book ends with these words, obviously close and understandable to a no less talented descendant, who, perhaps, kept this innermost thought within himself and followed it all his life: “...to go deeper and seek out the basis of every deed and word is my favourite hobby. And they do what they love to themselves, without asking others, without much attention from outsiders.”

I am reminded here of a recent archival find - “Campo Santo of my memory”. Images of the deceased in my mind" by A. A. Zolotarev - several notebooks covered in tight handwriting, which present images of contemporaries preserved in the author’s memory: there are portraits of scientists (for example, D. N. Ushakov), writers, and artists, and clergy, and simply acquaintances close to A. A. Zolotarev. And I thought: it’s a pity that now no one writes such “notebooks”... The entry on the cover of one of them reads: “God is Eternal Love and Eternal Memory. Working lovingly to preserve the appearance of the departed is the Lord’s work.”

NOTES

1. Hegumen Andronik (A. S. Trubachev). Life and destiny // Florensky P. A. Works in 4 volumes. Volume 1. - M., 1994. P. 34.

2. Ozhegov S.S. Preface // Ashukin N.S. Ozhegov S.I., Filippov V.A. Dictionary to the plays of A. N. Ostrovsky. - Reprint edition. - M., 1993. P. 7.

3. Skvortsov L.I.S.I. Ozhegov. M., 1982. P. 17.

4 . Right there. P. 21.

5. Archives of the Russian Academy of Sciences. F. 1516. On. 2. Unit hr. No. 136. Ll. 14–14 rev.

6. RGALI. F. 2164. On. 1. Unit hr. No. 335. L. 27.

7. RGALI. F. 2164. On. 1. Unit hr. No. 319. L. 12 vol.

8. The speech of S. I. Ozhegov and other participants in that memorable meeting was published quite recently by T. G. Vinokur and N. D. Arkhangelskaya. See: In memory of D. N. Ushakov (on the 50th anniversary of his death) // News of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Literature and Language Series. Volume. 51. No. 3, 1992. pp. 63–81.

9. Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences. F. 1516. On. 1. Unit hr. No. 223.

10. Pavsky G.P. Philological observations on the composition of the Russian language. 2nd edition. - St. Petersburg, 1850. P. III.

11. Archives of the Russian Academy of Sciences. F. 1516. On. 1. Unit hr. No. 225.

12. Archives of the Russian Academy of Sciences. F. 1516. On. 2. Unit hr. No. 113. L. 5 vol.

13. Pavsky G. P. Decree. Op. S.V.

13a. An interesting document has been preserved in the archives of N. S. Ozhegova - a copy of S. I. Ozhegov’s letter to the state publishing house “Soviet Encyclopedia” dated March 20, 1964, where the scientist, in particular, writes: “In 1964, a new stereotypical edition of my one-volume book was published.” Dictionary of the Russian language". Now there is an Orthographic Commission formed at the Department of Literature and Language of the USSR Academy of Sciences, which considers issues of simplifying and improving Russian orthography. In the near future, apparently, this work will culminate in the creation of a draft of new spelling rules. In this regard, I find it inappropriate to further publish the Dictionary in a stereotypical manner [hereinafter our italics. - O.N.] way. I consider it necessary to prepare a new revised edition... In addition, and this is the main thing, I propose to make a number of improvements to the Dictionary, include new vocabulary that has entered the Russian language in recent years, expand phraseology, revise the definitions of words that have received new shades of meaning..., strengthen the normative side of the Dictionary."

14. See: Issues of speech culture. Vol. 6. - M., 1965. P. 16–32.

15. Graudina L.K. To the 90th birthday. Sergei Ivanovich Ozhegov. 1900–1964 // Russian speech, 1990, No. 4, p. 90.

16. Ozhegov S.S. Father // Friendship of Peoples, 1999, No. 1, p. 212.

17. Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences. F. 1516. Op. 2. Unit hr. No. 136. L. 5.

18. We quoted Boris Polevoy’s statement about S.I. Ozhegov (see: Archives of the Russian Academy of Sciences. F. 1516. On. 2. Item no. 124. L. 1).

19. Pavsky G. P. Decree. Op. S.VI.

20. RGALI. F. 218. On. 1. Unit hr. No. 15. L. 1. In our introductory article so far we have talked about the scientific merits of Sergei Ivanovich Ozhegov, involuntarily recalling episodes of his fate, experiences, and aspirations. We tried to show S.I. Ozhegov from a different, less accessible side, paying attention to the human appearance of the scientist. It seems quite logical to us to conclude this essay with the publication of unknown letters. They, we believe, contain that objective (in comparison with ours) idea of ​​the Man of Science, illuminate the range of his interests and the geography of communication. In these touching letters, the spiritual qualities of S.I. Ozhegov are revealed in a special way, and the scientific polemic, which appears on many lines, is still relevant, because it discusses the eternal issues of “linguistic community life.”

S.I. Ozhegov’s correspondents are both people he knows well and just random authors. In this we see the great value of correspondence conducted by a scientist who is not able to reject an inquisitive interlocutor, but, on the contrary, wants to argue with an attentive reader, and finally discuss this or that problem with a competent specialist.

Some of the letter writers, carried away by their own guesses, turned out to be wrong in some way when talking about pronunciation norms and speech culture. But nevertheless, we left their statements and do not make comments on them, rightly believing that an educated and interested reader will himself understand the essence of a scientific, but, as it turned out, ordinary dispute. Another thing is important for us: these messages and answers from S.I. Ozhegov are a part of our common history, in which for us there are no losers or winners, but only observers and “movers.” Let us also direct our gaze to them and try to understand the dynamics of their thoughts, the color of their speech, the skill of their manner. Perhaps then we will feel life more keenly and cherish the history in which we live.

LEO USPENSKY - S. I. OZHEGOV

<Ленинград>, 2.XI. 1954

Dear Sergei Ivanovich!

Not only do I not intend to “scold” you for your comments, but, on the contrary, I ask you not to leave me with them after you have finally read the book. Whether there will be a second edition or not, the consuls know about that, but in any case, to me, sensible and competent criticism is a net benefit.

I believe that in the end you will have a lot of comments: I myself have already discovered about four hundred of all sorts of “unfortunate typos”, “oversights”, etc. I corrected the old “yati” a hundred times at all stages, and yet the word “place” (p. 123) is printed with two “e”. There are also sins that I myself missed: as a result of seven years of editing (yes, that’s right!), Bukharan Jews turned out to speak Turkic instead of Tajik...; Well, what can you do: given the ability of our publishing houses to hold onto a manuscript for almost decades, interspersing their dolce-far-niente with incongruous race and haste, and otherwise you can miss it.

I’m thinking about the Latin priests. You are right, but not “one hundred percent”. Despite the generally low level of development, some of them still went through the same course, were “rhetors” and “philosophers” together or parallel to Khome Brut and Gorobets. They may not have taken any knowledge from there, but I am sure that dabbling in Latin could not help but attract them. I readily admit that Deacon Bystrogonov himself may not have known either the word “velox” or the word “dog”; perhaps some bishop (as in the text - O.N.) turned him around in an administrative manner (just as my Tatar great-grandfather in Bursa received the Russian surname “Zverev” instead of the natural “Khanzyreev”, apparently - by consonance, and at the ordination he also changed “Zverev” to “Uspensky”, obviously because of the church in which he served, but, according to family legends, with the motivation: “it is indecent for an Orthodox priest to bear such a brutal surname!”). However, when talking with children, I would not risk leading them into such a jungle of seminary practice: it would simply be difficult for them to explain without “lengthy” comments who, how and when could change Velosipedov’s surname. I think that such a degree of “tolerance” in my semi-fiction book is not reprehensible.

On the question of the soft “en” of seminary Latin, I fully submit to your authorship. I wrote this surname here like this, for autobiographical reasons: in 1918–<19>22 years old in Velikolutsky district of Psk<овской>lips<ернии>I knew two friends - workers of Vneshkoobraz, the sons of a local priest: one was called Lyavdansky, the other Benevolensky, and precisely in the pronunciation that I fixed, quite possibly without reason.

I am very flattered by your desire to involve me in your work. Of course, I would have already responded to your dear summer letter, but you then announced that you were going on vacation, and I waited for it to end.

I really regret that this is the second one. I received your message only today, November 2, upon arrival from Moscow, where I spent a week. I would definitely come to you or call you, especially since I was staying on Arbat.

Now all that remains is to fix this during one of my possible next trips to Moscow. If you are in Leningrad, then I beg you not to forget my phone number (A-1-01-43), and you know the address.

I think that it is difficult to establish the contact we need on business issues without a personal meeting: I don’t know at all the range or direction of work in your Sector.

However, I would be glad to receive from you your written thoughts on this issue: if only I can be of any use to you, I am ready to serve.

I greet you in every possible way, respecting you: Lev Us<пенский>

Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences. F. 1516. On. 2. Unit hr. No. 152. Ll. 1–2 vol.

NOTE TO THE LETTER

2. See: Uspensky L.V. A Word about Words. (Essays on language). L., 1954.

3. The same, 2nd ed. - L., 1956.

Sergei Ivanovich Ozhegov was born (9) September 22, 1900 in the village of Kamenny, former Tver province. In 1926, he graduated from the Faculty of Philology of Leningrad University, and at the recommendation of his teachers V. Vinogradov and L. Shcherba, he was recommended for graduate school at the Institute of the History of Literatures and Languages ​​of the West and East.

The main object of his scientific works was colloquial Russian speech in all its manifestations. He seriously researched the history of the Russian literary language, historical grammar, lexicology, spelling, the language of Russian writers, spelling and phraseology.

Since the late 1920s, he began work on compiling the “Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language” edited by D. Ushakov, on the basis of which Ozhegov created one of the most famous and popular dictionaries - the one-volume “Dictionary of the Russian Language”, which records modern common vocabulary and demonstrates compatibility words and typical phraseological units.

The first edition of Ozhegov’s Dictionary of the Russian Language was published in 1949, and the popularity of the dictionary immediately began to grow rapidly. From that time to 1991, the Ozhegov dictionary went through 23 editions, with a total circulation of over 7 million copies. From edition to edition, Ozhegov revised his dictionary, trying to improve it as a universal guide to speech culture. Until the last days of his life, the scientist worked tirelessly to improve his brainchild.

Since 1952, Ozhegov has been the head of the speech culture sector of the Russian Language Institute at the USSR Academy of Sciences. At the same time, the famous dictionaries of pronunciation norms were published under his editorship and co-authorship - “Spelling Dictionary of the Russian Language”, “Russian Literary Pronunciation and Stress”, “Correctness of Russian Speech”, collections “Issues of the Culture of Speech”.

On the initiative of Sergei Ivanovich, in 1958, a Russian Language Help Service was created at the Russian Language Institute, responding to requests from organizations and individuals regarding the correctness of Russian speech.

Ozhegov’s sociolinguistic research served as the basis for his formulation of the scientific problem “Russian language and Soviet society.” Monograph in four books “Russian language and Soviet society. Sociological and linguistic research” was published in 1968, after Ozhegov’s death.

Sergei Ivanovich Ozhegov was a born and tireless lexicographer, endowed with a special gift for a dictionary with a subtle sense of words. Possessing a phenomenal memory, he knew many everyday, historical, regional and purely special realities behind the vocabulary of the Russian language.

Best of the day

Probably every Russian has a huge explanatory dictionary at home, the compiler of which, Sergei Ozhegov, has long been on everyone’s lips. What kind of life should a person have for him to start interpreting various terms, categories and concepts? How did the compiled explanatory dictionary influence the Soviet education system? The answers to these questions, as well as a brief biography of Sergei Ivanovich Ozhegov, will be given in our article.

Youth of Ozhegova

Sergei Ivanovich was born on September 22, 1900 in the village of Kamenoye, Tver province. Sergei's parents were respected people. Father, Ivan Ivanovich, was a process engineer at the Kamensk paper mill. Mother, Alexandra Fedorovna Degozhskaya, had in her family the famous philologist and spiritual leader Gerasim Pavsky. Gerasim was an archpriest and a great connoisseur of Russian literature. One of Pavsky’s most famous works is called “Philological Observations on the Composition of the Russian Language.”

When Sergei Ozhegov was still a teenager, the First World War broke out. Because of her, the family moved to the territory of St. Petersburg. Here Sergei graduates from high school, after which he enters Petrograd University, the Faculty of Philology. Without studying for even a year, the hero of our article goes to the front. Sergei Ivanovich, being a member of the Red Army, took part in the battles near Narva, in Riga, Pskov, Karelia, in Ukraine and in many other places.

In 1922, Ozhegov returned to his studies. The country was poorly educated, people needed to master the art of reading and writing. Continuing his studies, Sergei Ivanovich begins to teach Russian.

Scientific activity

In 1926, Sergei Ivanovich completed his studies at the university. At the recommendation of his teachers, he entered graduate school at the Institute of History of Languages ​​and Literatures at Leningrad State University - Leningrad University.

Sergei Ozhegov began an in-depth study of lexicology, the history of grammar, spelling and even phraseology. The main object of Sergei Ivanovich's scientific research becomes Russian colloquial speech - with all its features, accents, slangs and dialects.

While composing scientific papers, Sergei Ozhegov simultaneously teaches at the Pedagogical Institute named after. Herzen. He began work on the famous “Explanatory Dictionary” in the late 20s.

Life during the war

The editor of the dictionary published by Ozhegov was Dmitry Ushakov. All 4 volumes published by Sergei Ivanovich entered the history of culture as “Ushakov’s Dictionaries”.

In the 30s, Ozhegov moved to Moscow, where he began teaching at the Institute of Art, Philosophy and Literature. Three years later, Sergei Ivanovich received the status of a research fellow at this institute.

During the Great Patriotic War, Ozhegov held the position of acting director at the Institute of Culture and Literature. At the same time, he developed and introduced into the program a course on Russian paleography - the science of ancient writing. Sergei Ivanovich also developed his own paleographic direction, associated with the language of wartime.

About the Russian language dictionary

Ozhegov’s main work is his famous explanatory dictionary, which contains rules for writing, pronunciation, and definitions of more than 80 thousand expressions and words. Initially, Sergei Ivanovich planned to create a small dictionary with brief descriptions of basic Russian concepts and verbal categories. However, the first edition of the book, published in 1949, caused such delight in society that it was decided to expand the work.

From 1949 to 1960, the dictionary was published 8 times. The entire biography of Sergei Ozhegov is closely connected with the work on the dictionary. The Soviet scientist supplemented his work until the end of his life: he constantly made amendments, changes and improvements.

Today, the “Dictionary of the Russian Language” by linguist Sergei Ozhegov includes more than 80 thousand different expressions and words. Each new version of the dictionary reflects changes in Russian vocabulary.

Russian Language Service

In 1958, Sergei Ivanovich Ozhegov created the Russian Language Help Service. The organization appeared on the basis of the Russian Language Institute. Its goal was to promote literate speech. It was possible to submit requests to the service itself about the correct spelling of individual words or expressions. All the data obtained were entered into books in the popular science series “Issues of Speech Culture,” which was published from 1955 to 1965.

Along with filling out the “Russian Language Dictionary”, Sergei Ivanovich was involved in writing the magazine “Russian Speech”. This is a large-circulation academic publication, the first issue of which appeared only in 1967, after Ozhegov’s death. The magazine is still respected. It is used as a reference book on many issues by philologists, writers, publicists and other people who care about the fate of their native language.

Ozhegov about the Russian language

The compilers of a short biography of Sergei Ivanovich Ozhegov, namely his contemporaries, spoke flatteringly about the scientist. According to them, Ozhegov was not an armchair researcher. He could not be called a conservative either. On the contrary, Sergei Ivanovich treated innovations in the language with understanding and even interest. He was no stranger to neologisms, borrowings from other languages, and even youth “verbal pranks.” Ozhegov only wanted to find out the origin of new phrases or words, to understand their meaning and significance.

Together with Alexander Reformatsky, the hero of our article created the famous “Card Index of Russian Mat”. It was not just a collection of obscene expressions, but a scientific study of individual elements of ancient linguistic use. It was Ozhegov who began to destroy the stereotype that swearing is an element of the Mongolian language. A lot of evidence collected by Sergei Ivanovich indicates that Russian obscene language comes from the Slavic category of the Indo-European language group.

Relations with linguists

There are many interesting facts about Sergei Ozhegov. Thus, it is known for certain that Sergei Ivanovich sometimes came into conflict with his colleagues. The reason for this is the innovative scientific style of the famous linguist, which clearly did not suit conservative Soviet scientists.

Ozhegov was loyal to all innovations and additions in the Russian language. This is precisely why he was not like other philologists, whose goal was a kind of “equalization.” Sergei Ivanovich advocated the preservation of many dialects, as well as the adoption of everything new. Soviet scientists had the opposite approach.

Sergei Ivanovich’s main work, his famous explanatory dictionary, also received impartial criticism. The Soviet philologist Rodionov wrote a review in the newspaper "Culture and Life" - "About one unsuccessful dictionary." Subsequently, a serious controversy broke out between Rodionov and Ozhegov, the result of which many scientists recognized the unconditional victory of Sergei Ivanovich.

Personal life

The biography of Sergei Ivanovich Ozhegov also contains some information about his family. It is known that the famous linguist had two brothers. Evgeniy, the younger brother, died of tuberculosis before the war. Boris, the middle brother, died of hunger in besieged Leningrad.

Sergei Ivanovich married a student of the philological faculty of the pedagogical institute. The Ozhegovs had no children, and therefore it was decided to adopt Sergei Ivanovich’s five-year-old niece.

The hero of our article was friends with many famous cultural figures: Lev Uspensky, Korney Chukovsky, Fedorov Gladkov and many others. Ozhegov often spoke on the radio, published notes in magazines, and even advised theater workers.

The scientist died of infectious hepatitis in 1964. The urn with Ozhegov’s ashes is kept in the necropolis of the Novodevichy cemetery.