Аннотация: Доклад Е. Черниковой (на английском языке) и Приложения (11, на русском языке) Перевод на английский Полины Лопатенко
Loemail@example.comFacebook Polina Lopatenko
writer, journalist, professor
member of the Expert Committee of the contest "Slovo Goda, Rossiya",
moderator of the Facebook groups "Slovo Goda" and "Neologism Goda"
Action "Slovo Goda" in Russia: 2007 - 2017
The following report consists of two chapters and further applications (11). It is being informed that, since 2007, at the initiative of Mikhail Epstein, culture expert, philosopher, philologist, Professor of Cultural Theory and Russian Literature at Emory University, USA and Honorary Professor in the School of Modern Languages and Cultures, Durham University, UK, the action "Slovo Goda" ("Word of the Year") has been held in Russia. The author of the given report - coordinator of the contest and the moderator of its group Facebook (since January 2012 till present) - is Elena Chernikova, writer and journalist. The first chapter is devoted to the Russian contest "Slovo Goda" in general. It covers the basic principles of the action, summarizes the results of the contest during the last ten years, gives details about the daily work of the Facebook groups "Slovo Goda" and "Neologism Goda", about the final stage voting process, about the results being published in media and, finally, the cultural feedback. Also, certain opinions of the members of the "Slovo Goda" Expert committee are being quoted which sheds the light upon the connection between the events happening in the country at a given period of time and lexical-semantic contents of the language material. In the second part of the report, the author speaks about the contest "Neologism Goda" which is an essential part of the action "Slovo Goda" and is also based on the principles elaborated by Mikhail Epstein. The author of the report contemplates upon viability of certain words, protologisms included, the latter being created by the members of the group "Neologism Goda". The application to the report is provided with lists (sorted by year) which illustrate both the way the words and expressions are being selected inside the Facebook groups, and the voting of the Expert Committee.
My name is Elena Chernikova. I am a writer, journalist and professor. I am immensely thankful to you for the opportunity to address you at this conference. I am grateful for your attention and give my deepest respect to Mr. M. Lazinsky for his interest to the Russian model of the contest "Slovo Goda". I have participated in this contest since the year 2007 and, starting from 2012, have been moderating its two groups on Facebook.
The participants come from different countries, their worldviews being completely different as well, and our slovo goda reflects, shall we say, a global, planetary approach to the Russian language, and our goal is to provide the panoramic view of it.
These days, the eleventh season is coming to its end. The end of November will meet the final of the contest "Slovo Goda" in Russia.
How did the contest start for me? I have spent many years working on the radio. Back in 2007, Mikhail Epstein came as a guest to one of my live programs where we spent fifty minutes discussing his project "Dar Slova". At the end of the program Epstein voiced his wish to develop the international action "Slovo Goda" implementing it in Russia. Having said this, he suggested that I join the participants and come up with a word which, in my opinion, would best characterize the year we were in, 2007.
Given the fact that it was November, the shortlist almost ready, the expert voting only several days away, I had to think very fast: what is this word which, in this year, 2007, has practically engulfed all of us who speak and think in Russian? What is it, right there, on the tip of the tongue? Enormous in size and amount, fundamental determination of our lives... Glamur! - my intuition screamed. I hardly made it on time, sending my finding on the last day of the contest to Mikhail Epstein. "Glamur" became the leader. Later on, it was also selected as the word of the decade, years 2001-2010.
Thus, the International contest "Slovo Goda" came to Russia in 2007. At the initiative of Mikhail Epstein we, just like the other countries involved, select words, expressions and phrases common for each year given. For me as a writer, this word list is of extreme importance; I feel like I am looking at a bathyscaphe monitor. In my view, the contest "Slovo Goda" can sometimes depict the state of minds more precisely than many journalistic and sociological surveys.
2007 - glamur
2008 - krizis
2009 - perezagruzka
2010 - zhara/ognebortsy
2011 - politsiya
2012 - Bolotnaya
2013 - gosdura
2014 - krymnash
2015 - bezhentsy
2016 - brekzit
Only ten words given above. However, each of them has a great story of search and selection. This material would be valid for several dissertations, this is the context which, being put into the language of cinematography, could make the basis of a thriller, melodrama, tragedy, comedy - any genre, you name it.
Mr. M. Lazinskiy suggested me regarding five questions. Answering them, I will be quoting Mikhail Epstein and other colleagues, as well as sharing my own observations.
Question one. How is the word of the year elected?
Judges vote at the end of November. Words and expressions are being collected during the year on Facebook. The members of our groups ("Slovo Goda" and "Neologizm Goda" are the two inseparable parts of our action) - philologists, linguists, writers, journalists and other specialists living in Russia and abroad, as well as Russian-speaking citizens from other countries. There are also slavicists who know Russian language and are interested in the life and culture of Russia.
Both groups on Facebook are closed. In order to get in, one should let know about his or her wish to do so. As a rule, we gladly accept new-comers since we deeply value the future member"s affection for the language analysis in the first place. Then, events take their natural course: there are active participants as well as comers and goers. At the start, political views of a new-comer are not taken into consideration. However, they can become a serious reason for them to leave the group later on. I will explain. In case someone, commenting on a word, makes a bad decision to start a political dispute, I, the moderator, suggest carrying the ideological dialogues over to their own accounts and discuss politics to their hearts" content, in private. The description says: "This group has been organized with the purpose of discussion and selection of the words most relevant to the year, for the language introspection of the Russian society".
A new season starts in January, in both our groups at the same time ("Slovo Goda" and "Neologism Goda"). Day by day, the members of the groups search for words and offer their findings.
Not all judges of the contest are the members of the Facebook group. The majority comes into the picture only for the final voting. The words and expressions are being collected and stored during the year and then, they make a very long list. Then, the judges, our Expert Committee, get down to work.
The list they receive is tremendous. It is arranged by the linguist Yana Astakhova, an incredibly attentive person. An example of this list - both the initial and the one including assessment - is given from the year 2012 (see the Application below). When you compare the two lists, you will get a clear picture of how our work is being done. Please, pay attention to the Application on the whole: these very lists are the visual answer to our first question - how. In fact, the whole gigantic work of thousands of people during ten years has been compressed into this Application. Each year you see reflects our search, doubts and decisions. Metaphorically speaking, this is the image of the ten-year history of Russia told you by the Russian-speaking intelligentsia.
At the moment, the two groups make about 2000 members in total, many of which are involved in both at the same time.
The search which goes from January till November is expressly subjective. The search is spontaneous, just like the people are, reacting to the smallest moves and events. Each participant can recommend a friend, suggest words and expressions for the contest, relying on his or her own ideas of their relevance to the given period of time. Any member of the group can be active but also can leave, guided by their emotions. My job is not to manage the search of words and expressions (the choice is not limited by any criteria) but to control the way they are presented to the public. Ten-year practice has shown that political discussions in the group "Slovo Goda" make absolutely no sense. Besides, political views of contestants can already be seen in their choices of words, their remarks and comments. Any type of a dialogue and brainstorm is more than welcome in the group "Neologism Goda" which is a creative group, I start and support the conversations, and together, guided by our impulses, we come up with new words. More information about this group will be given in the second part of my report.
The Expert Committee votes online. Upon receiving the long list, the judges choose ten leaders for each nomination (the number and names of rubrics-nominations have changed more than once). Having chosen those ten leaders, each judge gives his points to every word and sends the tables of results to Mikhail Epstein. Every member of the Expert Committee can add his comments to the points, and this is really appreciated. A comment can be published, that is, a judge, writing it, knows a priori that he brings his word out into the public. We do not argue with each other. Since judges are famous people, media materials about the word of the year become a cultural fact. They are later used in various researches, starting from those which student conduct for their graduation papers. I am aware of this, being a professor at a humanitarian university.
Therefore, the collection of words is being arranged in the closed group on Facebook and the voting is done in silence, at home, where each expert chooses and assesses the final list.
Question two. What is the media-, culture- and social response to the action?
In 2007, suggesting "glamur" as the word of the year, I commented on my choice: "About five years ago, when "glamur" suddenly sprang out in Russia, mass media treated it as "good", "sacred", "desired", "beautiful", etc. Surely, those who used this word on a daily basis, did not remember about Greta Garbo or Marlene Dietrich - the real symbols and founders of this style and image, genuinely glamorous, that is, magnificent, seductive, luscious. In fact, many people in Russia had no idea that this word was actually from the dictionary, they thought it came from a pack of pantyhose, but what an enthusiasm and passion they put into their voice pronouncing this word! Some time passed, and now, Russian "glamur", together with glamorous girls, things, manners, magazines and parties brings nothing but irony. I guess, it didn"t come to hatred only because, it turned out, there is nothing to hate, actually - emptiness, mediocrity, absurdity, no sense at all. Luxury, yes, but expressed way too loudly. Sparkle - as if obligatory, imposed, otherwise no one will ever look at you, you non-glamorous Mr. Nobody. Well, the extreme stage of consumerism, reached successfully. The notion of glamour has traveled in time, from Greta Garbo all the way to Sobchak Kseniya Anatolyevna... Laughing. Through tears ".
This commentary was later on quoted by Mikhail Epstein in his interviews and articles. Then, ten years ago, bitterly chuckling at glamur, we were united in our assessment of the main phenomena of the year. In our discussions, we regarded this word as some philosophical definition. Here is a commentary of the philosopher Grigory Tulchinskiy: "This word holds apotheosis of the year 2007, the whole triumph of the mass culture and its values. The choice of the Russian so called "elite". Eyes, half-closed, directed somewhere diagonally upwards, lips half-opened, with the mist of fog and bliss around. Plus, straightforward programming, not only in advertising but in the news and politics... "
The writer Anatoly Kurchatkin finds glamourness not only in the material image of the life of elite but also in the new socio-political establishment: "In the year that is now ending, glamour has swiftly infiltrated into the lives of all categories of the Russian population, has broken into politics, occupying the primary position there. All our election campaigns, the process of deputy candidates- and presidential nominations, their public speeches - everything has taken shape of glamur in its present-day meaning for the Russian ear, that is, no truth, except for a sparkling gold-plated appearance".
Look, how strongly they agree in opinion assessing this phenomenon. Apparently, ten years ago, we were more united even though idealistic.
There is always a media response, with materials appearing in various genres, starting from brief notes ("Brekzit became the word of the year in Russia in 2016") all the way to pamphlets. Mikhail Epstein makes the biggest contribution into the press coverage: interviews, analytical reviews in media of different countries, taking part in radio programs, etc. Kseniya Turkova, Andrey Arkhangelskiy and other professionals annually comment on the results and compare them with those of previous years. What brings more interest into the December commenting of the contest is that not all members of our Expert Committee know each other in person. The view of the opinions is being completed spontaneously and without self-censorship.
Question three. What makes Russian words of the year stand out on the background of those of other countries?
First, let Mikhail Epstein take the floor: "These are very politicized and emotionally colored words, some of which come from jargon. Among them, there are hardly any belonging to science or technology (except for the borrowings), since the Russia of the present day is not very much advanced in this sphere. There are many words and expressions with negative touch, rude and judgmental ones".
These words of Epstein are directly addressed to this very conference. The two of us have agreed that my speech will be provided with the same kind of pluralism which is proper to our joint work.
I have some ideas of my own to share with you. In my view, the list is politicized not exactly because that"s the way the life goes but that"s the way the Internet goes, actually. All words-nominees go through at least three filters: human perception of events (impulse), personal activity of the nominators in the virtual space (involvement) and professional and personal experience of the judges (that"s a complicated combination, effects impossible to calculate). Since the judges do not depend on each other during the voting, each one, giving their points to the word nominated (10 maximum), inevitably relies on their view of the world which, as I see it, helps to make a choice as if on behalf of the social group which a specialist personally identifies himself with. For instance, the leader of the year 2013, gosdura (a slip of the tongue made by the TV journalist Vladimir Pozner) - caused heated discussions on Facebook. I did my best to convince my colleagues that this word could not serve as a symbol of the whole year, but only those two weeks when it became a reason for a scandal. My attempts were to no avail. The word became the leader but I do still think the choice was not right. On the other hand, it serves as a very good proof to the point about how notably emotional the Facebook users are.
The year 2014 was of extreme importance.
It was marked by the events. "Krymnash" became the word of the year, an indisputable leader. The nomination "Expression and phrase of the year" was conquered by "vezhlivye lyudi", "Neologism Goda" - "bannyi den" ".
A note in one source wrote "Russian linguists announced "krymnash" to be the word of the year". Announced comes with a touch of biased nature here: one can imagine a crew of town criers distributing some sort of promotional information. This does not correspond to the reality, since the word election is held by voting according to the final list given, nothing can be simply announced there, not a single word comes at random. That is, the work we do is not exactly the way it is perceived by journalists whose wish it is to make a bright headline, come up with a sensation. Unfortunately, a thrill for sensationalism is a wide-spread disease in modern journalism.
Viability of our words - both re-discovered and brand new ones - is what interests me most. "... The experience of creating new words as bunches of notional energy" - this is how Epstein motivates our activity. I will add to that: how big is the energy capacity of those bunches? Take, for instance, the list of the year 2014: then, everything that was named seemed obvious. Now, some of the material would require explanations. Have a look at the geopolitical password krymnash and bannyi den" - how can these two be possibly related to each other? Here is the answer. Philologist Aleksey Mikheev, the author of the expression bannyi den" , meant that a social network user, being tired of arguing with political opponents, especially on the topic of Crimea, one day simply loses his temper and frantically clears his friend list of the black sheep. "To ban" is an English word meaning "to prohibit", "to outlaw". As we all know, virtually it is about blocking the access to your account not only against those you haven"t met in person but relatives or whoever, and, as an action, it became archi-popular especially in 2014. Banya is originally a Russian word meaning both a special room where one washes himself and the whole washing procedure.
Question four. What can you learn about the development of the Russian language reflected in the mirror of the words of the year?
Here is what Mariana Yagodkina, Doctor of philological sciences, professor, linguist, said in 2011, commenting on the contest "Slovo Goda":
"Changes in the language system are always connected with changes in society, including political and economical ones. Is it possible to make a conclusion about what is happening with the Russian language relying on the voting results? Of course it is, because the selection presented is a cut-through made synchronically by the participants".
Professor M. V. Yagodkina is a leading specialist of the Linguistic school "Systematic relations of language units and their interpretations"; as a writer, I consider this question about the development of the Russian language through the mirror of the words of the year to be the most important one but too vast for this given report.
Here, an inter-disciplinary approach is heavily required. A mirror? Yes, it reflects the whole year which has passed, but in order to understand how this is happening, one has to be very well familiarized with all of the events inside and out, not only from media.
In my view, it is possible to speak about an emotional cut-through and, what is more, one made in a particular layer of the society, namely, educated Internet users. Intelligentsia makes the core of the contest. But the truth is that our intelligentsia (which is a very broad notion by itself) has a very diverse and not always adequate vision of the public (which is also a very broad notion). My own concept and vision of the contest are close to my concept and vision of intelligentsia, its thoughts and feelings.
Many contestants are so deeply into the digital reality that they automatically put the "=" mark between the language of the Internet-media and the modern, up-to-date Russian language as it is. This imaginary equality occasionally causes misunderstandings in the "Slovo Goda" group on Facebook. For instance, this summer I suggested the expression mozhnopozhaluista which has practically become one word gluing together the two Russian expressions: mozhno vas poprosit" and dayte pozhaluista. And not on the Internet only but in the live speech I can hear the youth (mostly), along with older generations use this centaur without thinking. The first conclusion is obvious: an Anglicism came as a copy and rapidly settled down because of the vast development of the English language. The second conclusion: the Russian-speaking youth is not very sensitive to traditional Russian request formulae of mozhno vas poprosit" and dayte pozhaluista. The high-speed mozhnopozhaluista, semantically being pretty clumsy, has turned out to be a type of a so-called politeness, very comfortable for articulation but plain and neglectful one. The third conclusion: plain, artificial politeness is becoming a norm, pushing sincerity to the background. I tried to discuss this centaur with my colleagues in the group, however, one writer-translator, a new contestant who suddenly appeared, out of the blue, practically stormed into the conversation: "An English copy, that"s all! - there seems to be nothing to talk about". Said it and vanished. And never came back. He might belong to some other spheres or he might have decided that the moderator of the group is exaggerating and makes a mountain of a molehill.
Question five. Are there, among the words of the year, some natural words-turnkeys of the Russian culture meant to last longer than one year?
It would make sense to talk about the response of the society to the action and about the influence which social life has on the list of the words of the year. But the hottest question, as far I see it, would be: how much of the historical-cultural truth is being sealed into this word-of-the-year-jewelry-box?
Clearly, the analysis of how life and a language affect each other, would take years. I have brought you the lists of words (leaders and outsiders) collected in the ten-year"s time. They all can be seen in the Application. Curiously enough, that, while making my survey, I was really surprised to see that even to me some of those words and expressions were not actually recognizable. Even I, at times, can hardly bring myself to trace back their history and the way they got into the list. Some of them have remained in live speech till now. Some were forgotten right away. Some used to be leaders and next thing you know - they are out of the view. So, as I have already mentioned, there are nominations slovo desyatiletiya (the word of the decade) and vyrazhenie desyatiletiya (the expression of the decade) - for those which have stood the test of time. These were implemented back in 2011.
First of all, we think that "Slovo Goda" is even more prominent than "Chelovek Goda" (the person of the year), it allows to come to the shortest verbal and conceptual conclusion of the whole year which has passed and keep it for descendants to learn about the epoch.
Answering the question about the long run, Mikhail Epstein writes in his letter to me: "Naturally, the finals of the "Slovo Goda" clear out a lot about deeply-rooted habits and inclinations of the Russian society: increased emotionalism, a taste for negative emotions, the rude way they are expressed in, etc."
Journalists Andrey Arkhangelskiy and Kseniya Turkova, in their annual surveys, seek to answer the same question about each word"s lifespan - how long is it? a year? a century? We might disagree in our assessment of the results of the contest and our thoughts about the long run but this does not impede the process of our work. In my view, the split-up during the assessment process depends on each journalist"s background knowledge. As far as my ten-year observation has shown, the initial awareness of the world is precisely what affects the "likes" given for each nomination, which is understandable, since we are all humans, aware of our prejudice and our own biographies - these can not but get on the way during the assessment procedure. Going impassively through the elaborate analysis of all details and sub-layers could probably happen only with some form of artificial intelligence involved. It would (hopefully) discard all personal feelings, getting straight to mechanical work.
Clearly, we all want to know whether our words are the keys of the culture or just a striking coincidence. I do believe that, to a certain extent, everyone would like to know what the future has got prepared and unlock the secret door with a golden key.
One chooses the words of the year as means to support his or her view of the world. This is more than acceptable and will a priori come out successful. However, having put oneself aside and looked at the words impassively, is it possible for a subject to turn himself into an object and, at the same time, remain what and who he is, staying out of any danger coming from the outside world?
Intuition of a native-speaker, in my opinion, plays an essential role while he is choosing the words characterizing the year. But in order to get the sixth-sense mechanism work effectively, one, apparently, has to be deeply socialized, professionally observant (that is, goal-oriented), attentive to historical and political processes, broad-minded.
I live in Moscow, I am a writer, a journalist and a teacher which is all about profound involvement into the Russian language. My daily work is about prose, media, sharing my knowledge using my native language, the only I think and write in. And, I do understand that relevant and simply notable/frequently used are two different notions.
We do not consider frequency of usage of a word to be a determinant in our assessment. We take into account the fact that during the action-packed times, with heated disputes happening in society, any curse can be very frequently used. Take "eti idioty" (these idiots) for instance. This is a pretty frequent one. We do keep statistics in mind, but we can not allow it hypnotize us. We do take into account the fact that Internet is packed with fake profiles, trolling, holy wars and that is why we rely much more on our personal understanding and perception of our culture. During these ten years, we have worked out a certain algorithm which both automatically includes the human factor and still helps us remain objective in our work.
Clearly, we constantly aim for general understanding of tasks, the search of those keys already mentioned above. But people are emotional still, that is why it is important to remind about the essence of the Facebook group. This is what Mikhail Epstein has written in his recent post: "Slovo Goda is not about some fun catchphrases taken from your household, it is about actual words and expressions bearing social meaning and serious response, those having become milestones in politics, technology, culture and public awareness. These words, phrases and expressions symbolize the substantial events of the year passing, the language material that should get into history, reach our descendants in the form of a clear message of what to remember this year by. Everything most specific for the year 2017, characterizing its main trends and vectors, the spirit of time".
It is my constant duty to remind our contestants about the rules, neatly elaborated during these ten years, because there are always new-comers who make the same mistakes which we have already gone through time and again. At times, it takes tons of patience. But we do remember that this is a public space, not a secret congregation of scientists, and our openness is itself a key to the present time.
About the contest "Neologism Goda"
"Neologism Goda" makes a separate, special part of the contest "Slovo Goda". It is solely about personal invention of a word or expression, a fantastically hard type of language art work where we also have our own patriarch, Mikhail Epstein, the author of his own dictionary. We aim to feel for, to compose word-protagonists which would later on make a foundation for new ideas, with the help of language reflection. "To think means to re- create the language which will go across the habitual one, would be critically cleared of trivial meanings, clichés, automatic reactions of the mind", - says Mikhail Epstein in his recent material written for the "Snob" magazine.
While choosing the word of the year, we basically rely on its ability to reflect, like a mirror. But, in case with a winning protologism, there are much more features considered: it has to be pleasant to ear, have long life expectancy and other characteristics to be remembered for.
The final list of neologisms is also being formed by November and, in December, we publish the results of it together with the "Slovo Goda".
All personal protologisms have their life stories and different outcomes, many of them are especially worth mentioning. The rules are also reminded annually. Hereby, I am quoting Mikhail Epstein:
"September 20th, 2017 is the starting date of the 11th contest of neologisms or, better say, protologisms, since each one of them, according to the rules, has to be a new-born phrase suggested for the first time ever. The contest will last till the 20th of November.
This is the period during which only protologisms are being published in our group. They also have to stick to a certain format: Word - Definition - Example.
I am calling for everybody"s active participation because the number of "likes" determines whether the words will make their way into the final list. Judges are going to receive not more than 30-40 neologisms/neophrases - those with the biggest number of "likes".
Let me remind you the rules of the contest:
1. Every protologism is a SEPARATE post.
2. In order to find out whether the author really is the author of the word being suggested, he or she is invited to google his finding and find out if the word has ever been used in the same meaning.
Common, ordinary words are not accepted. The author himself holds responsibility for plagiarism.
3. The post has to include both the new word and its definition. Two-three examples of its further usage in speech are highly appreciated.
4. Each participant can suggest MAXIMUM of 10 new words, all of them numbered accordingly, from 1 to 10.
5. Neophrases can be suggested as well. Those are word combinations which have no previous records on the Internet.
6. Contestants are allowed to suggest protologisms created by those NOT BEING the members of our Facebook group (preferably, with their permission to do so).
7. Protologisms are passed over to the judges anonymously, authors not being named. The judges also can suggest their own protologisms but, in this case, do not have right to vote in this nomination.
8. The FINAL LIST consists of the words holding the biggest number of votes from the members of the group.
9. The Expert Committee includes writers and poets: Elena Chernikova (the coordinator of both groups), Vladimir Sharov, Tatiana Shcherbina; linguists Lyudmila Zubova, Olga Severskaya, Natalya Fateeva, Elena Shmeleva; journalists and philologists Andrey Arkhangelskiy, Marina Koroleva, Kseniya Turkova; philologist and professor Evgeniya Abelyuk; director Vladimir Mirzoyev; philosophers and culture experts Andrey Desnitskiy, Grigoriy Tulchinskiy and Mikhail Epstein (council chairman)".
I have quoted Mikhail"s post as it is, with some words in block capitals. Sometimes we just have to accentuate in such a way, since the rules are never followed collectively and automatically. As it happens, some of the contestants will forget to give a definition or an example of usage of their protologism. At the end, the list is being formed properly but we still have to watch the discipline. At times, the author gets emotionally overwhelmed with the discovery and hurries to share their neologism with the world. This is perfectly understandable. I really enjoy the moments when, affected by somebody"s finding, the other members of the group "Neologism Goda" get all excited and involved into collective discussions, puns, brainstorms. Thus, the newborn word is actively welcomed into life, settles down, gets further development. Such game does not guarantee its immortality, of course, but has really great effects. People get to know each other better while involved into this collegiate reflection and creativity, some make friends in real life later on.
Now, let us speak about the creative work itself. It can be highly estimated or go by, unnoticed. For instance, in the year 2017, I have come up with a word matildOmetr.
MatildOmetr - a device allowing to detect faction in any work of any type of art.
"To give graduates their diplomas and matildOmetres!"
The word got a big response - lots of "likes" and a whole train of variations. I do not know if it will make its way to the final list or stay in the language at all, just as the film "Matilda", the basis of my discovery, directed by Aleksey Uchitel and released in 2017, might make history or, on the contrary, be forgotten after some time. Definitely not this year, having caused heated social disputes.
Here is an example of a protologism not linked to actuality.
At the beginning of October 2017 M. Epstien suggested his protologism in the group (he always does it in an exemplary manner):
zhivolyudie - a lively gathering of people, a communion place.
zhivolyudnyi - an adjective for a place crowded with people, their activities and communication.
Про улицы большинства американских городов не скажешь, что они живолюдны (there are hardly any streets in American cities that could be called zhivolyudnye)
Перед входом в театр кипело обычное вечернее живолюдье (there was a usual evening zhivolyudie happening by the entrance to the theatre).
The question is: how will this brilliant neologism end up? Will it stand out and be accepted by the language? Several years ago, the word molchevidets became a winner. It seemed very melodious and made a lot of sense, looked very promising. However, it is has not really succeeded in taking roots. It might, later.
Sometimes it happens that a neologism suggested can be followed by silent tension inside the group, as if everyone has just been deeply hurt, all at once. For instance, this word-nominee:
Б) семинар для молодых (seminar dlya molodykh/workshop for young writers)
Examples of usage. "На ТВ-шоу позвали всю стихотворню во главе с основателем ресурса, давно заработавшим миллионы на первых книжках молодых". (The whole stikhotvornya was invited to the TV show, together with the founder of the source, who has long ago earned his millions on first books of young authors).
"Семинар из Липок переехал в Сибирь, и стихотворня стала малодоступной: разве что Аэрофлот станет благотворителем". (The workshop has been moved from Lipki to Siberia, making stikhotvornya much less possible to take part in: unless Aeroflot falls into charity and provides free tickets).
P.S. The word does appear on the Internet in its "workshop" meaning, even though only once. Thus, I can nominate only the option A.
In order to get into the list of finalists, a neologism needs to get seven or more "likes". For now, stikhotvornya has only been supported by Mikhail Epstein and if no one else gives a "like", my invention stays out. Such is the rule.
Here is an extract from a conversation between Mikhail Epstein and journalist Kseniya Turkova, the member of the Expert Committee of the contest. They are discussing future prospects of our neologisms:
"Out of neologisms, those called "neprichyomyshi" (words which have nothing to do with any topic) which, sadly, make the majority, have chances to stay in the language. Also, "lingvalidol" (jokingly, medicine for those being hurt by language mistakes), "sovetosh" (sovetskaya vetosh"), mezhrozhdestvenie (festive break between Catholic and Orthodox Christmas, with the New Year right in between). But in fact, according to linguists, it would take at least 30-40 years to define whether a word will stay or leave the language. This is a very long trial period".
The fact is undeniable. Take, for instance, ekologiya, the word invented in 1866 by a biologist Ernst Haeckel. It has been living ever since, even though with its semantics broadened and its author accused of falsification of scientific data in the biological sphere. In spite of all this, the word has survived.
I really like the story about how Mikhail Epstein imagined his own Dictionary: "In general, the work on the Dictionary, - he writes, - went for 34 years. The conception of it as a separate projective genre appeared in my mind in 1984. I was pondering over the meaning of a strange term "agnosticheskiy gnostitsizm", which I came across reading Nabokov"s "Priglasheniye na kazn"". This was when, suddenly, I came up with the idea of a book which would contain potential terms and definitions for the whole variety of systems of thought - as much and as wide as it was possible for my mind to embrace. This imaginary book took shape of a dictionary where the words and notions would not just go plainly alphabetized on the flat surface of a page but whose meanings and definitions would cross each other, thus, making such book stereometrical. Every word would be italicized and as if stitched through with a bright thread which would connect them all, one after another, and not through the surface of a text but actually through and through, via the "3rd dimension" of the book. Then, the year 1995 comes, and there I am, learning about the 3D technology on the computer screen, first-born Internet pages flickering in front of me".
The art work Epstein invites to join requires constant support, communication, its own environment. I love his culturological and philosophical books. I collect dictionaries. I am deeply in love with letters, to me, they make a whole ten-dimension universe. And when I see a person who has comfortably settled himself among morphemes as if a sultan in his harem, I am more than ready to cooperate with him, whatever it takes.
To me, philologist and philosopher Mikhail Epstein is a humanitarian analogy of the mathematician and physicist Albert Einstein. Imagination and talent for prediction based on the potential of the language as a space, at first hard to confirm experimentally, can serve as a seed. And a seed can grow. Then, we should fertilize and water it. One of Albert Einstein"s fantasies was brought into life after 100 years: in 1916, he started speaking about gravitational waves and, in 2017, physicists got the Nobel prize for having discovered them. By the way, I have nominated the expression "gravitatsionnye volny" this year.
At the end of November, we will know what word will be chosen by the Expert Committee. Post-analysis and presenting the results to media are planned for December. Thank you for your attention.
Перевод на английский Полины Лопатенко
Facebook Polina Lopatenko
Конкурс проводился впервые, в двух номинациях
Слово-2007 и слова, набравшие максимум баллов
1. Гламур - 35 баллов
2. Нанотехнологии - 23
3. Блог, блогер - 15 баллов
4. Раскрутка - 11
5. Выборы - 9
6-8. Гендер; пиар; имхо - 7
(в эту номинации входили слова-подмены, слова-фальшивки)
1- 2. Креатив, политконкретность - по 15 баллов
3. Преемник - 11
4. Шакалить - 9
5-6. Враги России; мачо, мачизм - по 6
Номинаций - пять. Номинация "Антислово года" стала называться "Антиязык"
1. кризис - 27 баллов
2. коллайдер - 14
3. великодержавность - 12
4. война - 11
5. коррупция - 9
6. волатильный - 6
7. нефть - 6.
Жаргонизм и неологизм - 2008:
1. пазитифф (позитифф) - 17
2. Обаманна - 16
3. стабилизец - 15
4. кошмарить - 13
5. замкадыши - 8
6. брехлама - 7
7. тандемократия - 7
1. кошмарить бизнес - 27
2. пилинг и откатинг - 17
3. офисный планктон - 14
4. психически неформальный - 11
5. кризис доверия - 9
6. на халяву - 8
7. социальные сети - 7
1. принуждение к миру - 34
2. подниматься с колен - 23
3-4. замиротворить; миротворческие войска - 10
5. проект - 9
6. коренная территория - 8
(в эту номинацию входили слова, которые могли бы стать ключевыми в грядущем году)