Love to motherland
1) Ardent love for the Motherland, We feel pride in its beauty in the works of the classics.
The theme of heroic feat in the fight against the enemies of the Motherland is also heard in M. Yu. Lermontov’s poem “Borodino”, dedicated to one of the glorious pages of the historical past of our country.
2) The theme of the Motherland is raised in the works of S. Yesenin. Whatever Yesenin wrote about: about experiences, about historical turning points, about the fate of Russia in the “harsh, formidable years” - every Yesenin image and line is warmed by a feeling of boundless love for the homeland: But most of all. Love for the native land
3) Famous writer told the story of the Decembrist Sukhinov, who, after the defeat of the uprising, was able to hide from police bloodhounds and, after painful wanderings, finally made it to the border. Another minute - and he will find freedom. But the fugitive looked at the field, the forest, the sky and realized that he could not live in a foreign land, far from his homeland. He surrendered to the police, he was shackled and sent to hard labor.
4) Outstanding Russian singer Fyodor Chaliapin, forced to leave Russia, always carried a box with him. No one had any idea what was in it. Only many years later did relatives learn that Chaliapin kept a handful of his native land in this box. No wonder they say: the native land is sweet in a handful. Obviously, the great singer, who passionately loved his homeland, needed to feel the closeness and warmth of his native land.
5) The Nazis, having occupied France, offered General Denikin, who fought against the Red Army during the Civil War, to cooperate with them in the fight against the Soviet Union. But the general responded with a sharp refusal, because his homeland was more valuable to him than political differences.
6) African slaves, taken to America, yearned for their native land. In despair, they killed themselves, hoping that the soul, having thrown off the body, could fly home like a bird.
7) The most terrible Punishment in ancient times was considered to be the expulsion of a person from a tribe, city or country. Outside your home there is a foreign land: a foreign land, a foreign sky, a foreign language... There you are completely alone, there you are nobody, a creature without rights and without a name. That is why leaving one’s homeland meant losing everything for a person.
8) To an outstanding Russian hockey player V. Tretyak was offered to move to Canada. They promised to buy him a house and pay him a higher salary. Tretyak pointed to the sky and earth and asked: “Will you buy this for me too?” The famous athlete's answer confused everyone, and no one else returned to this proposal.
9) When in the middle In the 19th century, an English squadron besieged the capital of Turkey, Istanbul, and the entire population stood up to defend their city. Townspeople destroyed their own houses if they prevented Turkish cannons from conducting aimed fire at enemy ships.
10) One day the wind decided to fell the mighty oak tree that grew on the hill. But the oak only bent under the blows of the wind. Then the wind asked the majestic oak tree: “Why can’t I defeat you?”
11) Oak answered that it’s not the trunk that’s holding him up. Its strength lies in the fact that it is rooted in the ground and clings to it with its roots. This simple story expresses the idea that love for the homeland, a deep connection with national history, with the cultural experience of ancestors makes a people invincible.
12) When over England When the threat of a terrible and devastating war with Spain loomed, the entire population, hitherto torn apart by enmity, rallied around its queen. Merchants and nobles equipped the army with their own money, and people of ordinary rank enlisted in the militia. Even the pirates remembered their homeland and brought their ships to save it from the enemy. And the “invincible armada” of the Spaniards was defeated.
13) Turks during During their military campaigns they captured boys and young men as prisoners. Children were forcibly converted to Islam and turned into warriors called Janissaries. The Turks hoped that the new warriors, deprived of spiritual roots, having forgotten their homeland, brought up in fear and obedience, would become a reliable stronghold of the state.
The problem of preserving the culture of the Russian language (the problem of language clogging) - ready-made arguments
Possible theses:
- Changes from the “high and mighty” are necessary, even if it causes inconvenience to people
- The change in the Russian language has a particularly painful impact on the lives of the older generation
- Due to the appearance of new words in the language, difficulties may arise in understanding the interlocutor
- The Russian language is not in danger of dying; it is so flexible that it can adapt to any changes
- Indeed, we cannot do without borrowed words, however, their excessive use makes it very difficult to understand the text (speech)
- By using buzzwords, people clog up their speech, which complicates communication between people
- Excessive use of borrowed words clogs speech
In the book “The Russian Language is on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown,” Maxim Krongauz says that our world is changing and therefore the emergence of new words, even borrowed ones, is a normal phenomenon. If the language does not change, it will cease to fulfill its functions. The linguist gives an interesting example: global warming led to the fact that the Eskimos did not have enough words in their language to give names to animals moving to the polar regions of the globe.
M. Krongauz popular science book “The Russian language is on the verge of a nervous breakdown”
In the book “The Russian Language is on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown,” Maxim Krongauz came to the conclusion that significant changes in our language worry mainly the older generation. There are too many new words, and they blur the boundaries of the literary language, which frightens and irritates people who are accustomed to this language.
M. Krongauz popular science book “The Russian language is on the verge of a nervous breakdown”
M. Krongauz did not avoid this problem either. The linguist believes that concerns about the Russian language are groundless, but at the same time notes that its rapid changes make it difficult for people to communicate, especially if they belong to different generations.
M. Krongauz popular science book “The Russian language is on the verge of a nervous breakdown”
Linguist M. Krongauz does not see a threat to the Russian language, reading that it is not afraid of either the flow of borrowings and jargon, or the changes that are taking place in it. The Russian language will “digest” all this, retaining some, discarding some, developing new norms, and stability will come in place of chaos.
A. Knyshev “News on air”
A. Knyshev does not hide his ironic attitude towards the topic under discussion. Using the example of the story “On the Air of News,” where the news presenter uses mostly borrowed words, which makes his speech extremely incomprehensible, he shows what will happen to the Russian language if we oversaturate it with “foreign words.”
A. Knyshev “News on air”
In a short story, A. Knyshev makes fun of people who mainly use borrowed words to demonstrate their “modernity.” Using the example of a news anchor whose monologue is difficult to read and almost impossible to understand, the satirical writer shows how ridiculous the speech of a person who follows the fashion for words sounds.
A. Knyshev “News on air”
In A. Knyshev’s story “On the Air of News”, the host of the program cannot be understood, since his speech is oversaturated with borrowed words. Of course, when portraying the image of a modern speaker, the writer deliberately exaggerates, however, the humorous text once again proves that it is more difficult for people to understand the speaker if he uses too many borrowed words.
Example from life
The emergence of new, including borrowed, words is necessary. “Computer”, “smartphone”, “slow cooker” alarmed and confused people, but today we use these words more often than the original Russian “well” or “kalach”. It’s even more difficult to imagine that “car” and “TV,” not to mention “potatoes,” were once incomprehensible to Russians. The world is changing, and language is forced to adapt so that people can understand each other.
The antipode of Morozki is Pavel Mechik. In the novel he is an "anti-hero". This is a young boy who joined the detachment only out of curiosity. But he immediately became disillusioned with the ideas, for the sake of which he “ceased” being a city intellectual. But Mechik hid this from everyone. The people who surrounded Paul brought him a lot of disappointment, because they turned out to be incompatible with the “ideal” heroes that their ardent young imagination created them. is still weak, since in the subsequent narrative he betrays the members of the detachment. Mechik was put on patrol by Levinson, the head of the detachment, but Pavel considered this to be wrong and, without fulfilling his duty, disappeared into the forest, which led to the death of the detachment. “...The sword, having already driven quite far, looked back: Morozka was riding behind him. Then the squad and Morozka disappeared around the bend... He dozed off. He didn't understand why he was sent forward. He raised his head, and his sleepy state instantly left him, replaced by a feeling of incomparable animal horror: there were Cossacks on the road...”
Mechik disappeared and only saved his own life, putting the lives of the squad members at stake. Fadeev focuses his attention not on the battles themselves, but on the time between us, when there comes a moment of respite, rest. These seemingly “peaceful” episodes are full of internal tension and conflict: be it the case of killing fish, confiscating pork from a Korean, or waiting for the result of the Metelitsa reconnaissance. This construction contains the deep meaning of the story: moral, ideological and political problems and their philosophical understanding are important. The characters' train of thought, their behavior, their internal vacillation in relation to everything that happens around them - this is what Fadeev called “the selection of human material.”
In this regard, the image of Morozka, one of the heroes of the novel, is interesting. Actually, his presence at the center of the work is explained by the fact that he is an example of a new person undergoing a “remake.” The author spoke about him in his speech: “Morozka is a man with a difficult past... He could steal, he could swear rudely, he could lie, he could drink. All these traits of his character are undoubtedly his huge shortcomings. But in difficult, decisive moments of the struggle, he did what was necessary for the revolution, overcoming his weaknesses. The process of his participation in the revolutionary struggle was the process of forming his personality...”
Speaking about the selection of “human material”, the writer had in mind not only those who turned out to be necessary for the revolution. People “unsuitable” for building a new society are mercilessly discarded. Such a hero in the novel is Mechik. It is no coincidence that this man, by social origin, belongs to the intelligentsia and deliberately joins the partisan detachment, led by the idea of the revolution as a great romantic event. Mechik’s belonging to a different class, despite his conscious desire to fight for the revolution, immediately alienates those around him. “To tell the truth, Morozka didn’t like the rescued one at first sight. Morozka did not like clean people. In his life experience, these were fickle, worthless people who could not be trusted.” This is the first certification that Mechik receives. Morozka’s doubts are consonant with the words of V. Mayakovsky: “An intellectual does not like risk, / He is as red as a radish.” Revolutionary ethics is built on a strictly rational approach to the world and man. The author of the novel himself said: “Mechik, the other “hero” of the novel, is very “moral” from the point of view of the Ten Commandments... but these qualities remain external to him, they cover up his internal egoism, lack of dedication to the cause of the working class, his purely petty individualism " There is a direct contrast here between the morality of the Ten Commandments and devotion to the working class cause. The author, preaching the triumph of the revolutionary idea, does not notice that the combination of this idea with life turns into violence against life, cruelty. For him, the professed idea is not utopian, and therefore any cruelty is justified.
- The Russian language is our common heritage, which must be preserved
- Most people have forgotten the value of their native language
- Internet communication is a serious test for the Russian language
- Love for your language is manifested in careful handling of words, studying the rules of the language and the peculiarities of their use
- Distortion of words has a negative impact on the development of the Russian language and the preservation of its charm
- You can tell a lot about a person by how he treats his language.
Arguments
T. Tolstaya “Kys”. With their irresponsibility, people have caused enormous damage to the language. Its former beauty and melodiousness have been lost, because everyone just “throws” words without thinking about the consequences. Incorrect pronunciation of words destroys the beauty of the language. The work encourages us to think about the consequences of such an attitude towards language. After reading the book, I want to protect and preserve my native language, eliminating slang and jargon.
D.S. Likhachev “Letters about the good and the beautiful.” Reflecting on the richness of the Russian language and people’s attitude towards it, Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev says that language allows you to evaluate a person at the first meeting with him. Language makes it possible to learn about someone’s relationship to the world around them and to themselves. A smart, well-mannered, intelligent person will not unnecessarily speak too loudly, emotionally, or use inappropriate and ugly words. Learning beautiful, intelligent, competent speech is not easy. You need to learn to speak, because speech is the basis of human behavior, the thing by which you can judge him in the first place. These thoughts of Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev are very accurate. They are relevant now and will be just as true many years from now.
I.S. Turgenev “Russian language”. The lines of this prose poem are known to everyone since school. It’s amazing how accurately the writer assessed the strength and power of the Russian language in just a few lines. For I.S. Turgenev’s native language is “support and support.” The entire poem, even if it is small, is filled with a sense of pride. The writer appreciates the Russian language.
V.G. Korolenko “Without a tongue.” The author claims that without language, each of us is “like a blind or small child.” People who cannot write and speak correctly and beautifully clog up speech, thereby causing irreparable damage to the language. Native speech should not only be appreciated, but also protected and tried to be preserved. The future of the Russian language depends only on the person.
The problem of spirituality, a spiritual person is one of the eternal problems of Russian and world literature
Ivan Alekseevich Bunin(1870 -- 1953) - Russian writer and poet, first winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature
In the story "Mr. from San Francisco" Bunin criticizes bourgeois reality. This story is symbolic already by its title. This symbolism is embodied in the image of the main character, who is a collective image of the American bourgeois, a man without a name, called by the author simply a gentleman from San Francisco. The hero’s lack of a name is a symbol of his inner lack of spirituality and emptiness. The thought arises that the hero does not live in the full sense of the word, but only exists physiologically. He understands only the material side of life. This idea is emphasized by the symbolic composition of this story, its symmetry. While “he was quite generous on the way and therefore fully believed in the care of all those who fed and watered him, served him from morning to evening, preventing his slightest desire, guarding his purity and peace...”.
And after sudden “death,” the body of the dead old man from San Francisco returned home, to his grave, to the shores of the New World. Having experienced a lot of humiliation, a lot of human inattention, having wandered from one port shed to another for a week, it finally ended up again on the same famous ship on which so recently, with such honor, it was transported to the Old World.” The ship "Atlantis" sails in the opposite direction, only carrying the rich man already in a soda box, "but now hiding him from the living - they lowered him deep into the black hold." And on the ship there is still the same luxury, prosperity, balls, music, a fake couple playing at love.
It turns out that everything he has accumulated has no meaning in front of that eternal law to which everyone, without exception, is subject. It is obvious that the meaning of life is not in the acquisition of wealth, but in something that cannot be assessed monetaryally - worldly wisdom, kindness, spirituality.
Spirituality is not equal to education and intelligence and does not depend on it.
Alexander Isaevich (Isaakievich) Solzhenitsyn(1918-- 2008) - Soviet and Russian writer, playwright, publicist, poet, public and political figure, who lived and worked in the USSR, Switzerland, USA and Russia. Winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature (1970). A dissident who for several decades (1960s - 1980s) actively opposed communist ideas, the political system of the USSR and the policies of its authorities.
A. Solzhenitsyn showed this well in the story "Matryonin's Dvor". Everyone mercilessly took advantage of Matryona’s kindness and simplicity - and unanimously condemned her for it. Matryona, apart from her kindness and conscience, did not accumulate any other wealth. She is used to living according to the laws of humanity, respect and honesty. And only death revealed the majestic and tragic image of Matryona to people. The narrator bows his head before a man of great selfless soul, but absolutely unrequited and defenseless. With the departure of Matryona, something valuable and important leaves life...
Of course, the germs of spirituality are inherent in every person. And its development depends on upbringing, and on the circumstances in which a person lives, on his environment. However, self-education, our work on ourselves, plays a decisive role. Our ability to look into ourselves, question our conscience and not be disingenuous in front of ourselves.
Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov(1891--- 1940) - Russian writer, playwright, theater director and actor. Written in 1925, first published in 1968. The story was first published in the USSR in 1987
The problem of lack of spirituality in the story M. A. Bulgakova “Heart of a Dog”
Mikhail Afanasyevich shows in the story that humanity turns out to be powerless in the fight against the lack of spirituality that arises in people. At the center of it is the incredible case of a dog turning into a human. The fantastic plot is based on the depiction of the experiment of the brilliant medical scientist Preobrazhensky. Having transplanted the seminal glands and pituitary gland of the brain of the thief and drunkard Klim Chugunkin into the dog, Preobrazhensky, to everyone’s amazement, gets a man out of the dog.
Homeless Sharik turns into Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov. However, he still has the dog habits and bad habits of Klim Chugunkin. The professor, together with Dr. Bormenthal, is trying to educate him, but all efforts are in vain. Therefore, the professor returns the dog to its original state. The fantastic incident ends idyllically: Preobrazhensky goes about his direct business, and the subdued dog lies on the carpet and indulges in sweet thoughts.
Bulgakov expands the biography of Sharikov to the level of social generalization. The writer gives a picture of modern reality, revealing its imperfect structure. This is the story not only of Sharikov’s transformations, but, above all, the story of a society developing according to absurd, irrational laws. If the fantastic plan of the story is completed in plot, then the moral and philosophical one remains open: the Sharikovs continue to breed, multiply and establish themselves in life, which means that the “monstrous history” of society continues. It is precisely such people who know neither pity, nor sorrow, nor sympathy. They are uncultured and stupid. They have dog hearts from birth, although not all dogs have the same hearts.
Outwardly, the Sharikovs are no different from people, but they are always among us. Their inhuman nature is just waiting to emerge. And then the judge, in the interests of his career and the implementation of the plan to solve crimes, condemns the innocent, the doctor turns away from the patient, the mother abandons her child, various officials, for whom bribes have become the order of the day, drop their mask and show their true essence. Everything that is lofty and sacred turns into its opposite, because the inhuman has awakened in these people. When they come to power, they try to dehumanize everyone around them, because non-humans are easier to control, and for them all human feelings are replaced by the instinct of self-preservation.
In our country, after the revolution, all conditions were created for the appearance of a huge number of balls with dog hearts. The totalitarian system greatly contributes to this. Probably due to the fact that these monsters have penetrated into all areas of life, Russia is still going through difficult times
Boris Vasiliev's story "Don't shoot white swans"
Boris Vasiliev tells us about the lack of spirituality, indifference and cruelty of people in the story “Don’t Shoot White Swans.” Tourists burned a huge anthill so as not to feel inconvenience from it, “they watched the giant structure, the patient work of millions of tiny creatures, melt before their eyes.” They looked at the fireworks with admiration and exclaimed: “Victory salute! Man is the king of nature."
Winter evening. Highway. Comfortable car. It is warm and cozy, with music playing, occasionally interrupted by the announcer's voice. Two happy, intelligent couples are going to the theater - a meeting with the beautiful lies ahead. Don't let this wonderful moment of life get away! And suddenly the headlights pick out in the darkness, right on the road, the figure of a woman “with a child wrapped in a blanket.” "Crazy!" - the driver screams. And that's it - darkness! There is no former feeling of happiness from the fact that your loved one is sitting next to you, that very soon you will find yourself in a soft chair in the stalls and will be spellbound to watch the performance.
It would seem a trivial situation: they refused to give a ride to a woman with a child. Where? For what? And there is no space in the car. However, the evening is hopelessly ruined. A “déjà vu” situation, as if it had already happened, the heroine of A. Mass’s story flashes through her mind. Of course, it happened - and more than once. Indifference to the misfortune of others, detachment, isolation from everyone and everything - phenomena are not so rare in our society. It is this problem that writer Anna Mass raises in one of her stories in the “Vakhtangov Children” series. In this situation, she is an eyewitness to what happened on the road. After all, that woman needed help, otherwise she would not have thrown herself under the wheels of the car. Most likely, she had a sick child; he had to be taken to the nearest hospital. But their own interests turned out to be higher than the manifestation of mercy. And how disgusting it is to feel powerless in such a situation, you can only imagine yourself in the place of this woman, when “people happy with themselves in comfortable cars rush past.” I think the pangs of conscience will torment the soul of the heroine of this story for a long time: “I was silent and hated myself for this silence.”
“People satisfied with themselves”, accustomed to comfort, people with petty proprietary interests are the same Chekhov's heroes, "people in cases." This is Doctor Startsev in “Ionych”, and teacher Belikov in “The Man in a Case”. Let us remember how plump, red Dmitry Ionych Startsev rides “in a troika with bells”, and his coachman Panteleimon, “also plump and red,” shouts: "Keep it up!" “Keep the law” - this is, after all, detachment from human troubles and problems. There should be no obstacles on their prosperous path of life. And in Belikov’s “no matter what happens,” we hear the sharp exclamation of Lyudmila Mikhailovna, a character in the same story by A. Mass: “What if this child is contagious? We also have children, by the way!” The spiritual impoverishment of these heroes is obvious. And they are not intellectuals at all, but simply philistines, ordinary people who imagine themselves to be “masters of life.”
