The Syntaxeme 'pri tsare' (‘in tsarist time’) in the Meaning of ‘in Russia until 1917’ (according to the Russian National Corpus)

Chzhan Tintin PhD in Philology Postgraduate Student, Department of Russian Language, Lomonosov Moscow State University 119991, Russia, Moscow region, Moscow, Leninskie Gory str., 1, p. 51 tt0608@mail.ru

Zhdanova Larisa Aleksandrovna PhD in Philology Associate Professor, Department of Russian Language, Faculty of Philology, Lomonosov Moscow State University 119991, Russia, Moscow region, Moscow, Leninskie Gory str., 1 zhdala@mail.ru

The conceptual and cultural approach to the study of the category of time is one of the most relevant in modern linguistics and is represented by a significant number of studies (for a detailed review, see ^[2]). The most significant for our article are the works of E. S. Yakovleva on time models in the Russian language, in particular ^[3], and the research of the group "Logical Analysis of Language", presented in a series of collections, primarily in ^[4]. A fragment of the Russian language picture of the world, which can be called a "naive chronology", has a number of discrepancies with the scientific picture of the world (for the relationship of the concepts "scientific picture of the world", "linguistic picture of the world", "naive picture of the world", see ^[5]), so far it has not been the subject of a special comprehensive description, although individual observations are contained in a large number of linguistic works, for example ^[6],[7],[8], and in other studies devoted to the conceptualization of time in language, as well as in some historical works, for example, the paragraphs "Images of time" and "Temporal picture of the world" in ^[9].

 The "naive chronology" can be reconstructed according to the nominations with which native speakers of the Russian language structure their history. Such nominations include syntagmas with anthroponyms and their derivatives (under Peter, in Stalin's time, etc.), nominations indicating the nature of state power (in tsarist times, under the tsar, in Soviet times, under the Bolsheviks, etc.) and others. There are quite a lot of such nominations, their full description goes beyond the scope of this article, in which we will focus on the absolute use of the syntaxeme under the tsar in the meaning of ‘before the revolution of 1917'. The syntaxeme includes the preposition at in the temporal meaning, which in the "Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian language by S. I. Ozhegov, N. Y. Shvedova is presented as follows: "4. Indicates the time, the situation, the circumstances. Under Peter the Great" ^[10]. The dictionary example uses a definition expressed by an anthroponym and specifying the epoch: under Peter I it means ‘during the reign of Peter 1’ and clearly defines the time limits of the designated period. However, the syntaxeme under the tsar can be used absolutively — without an attribute-an anthroponym, and in this case usually implements the meaning ‘under the tsarist regime’ (= ‘during the reign of the Russian tsars’), that is, it denotes a wide time range with a blurred lower boundary. A number of ambiguous nominations are also used in this meaning (in tsarist times, in tsarist Russia, before the revolution, in the pre-revolutionary period, before the seventeenth year, and some others), which can be considered synonyms of the syntaxeme in question in its absolute use.  Note that the word revolution is also often used by representatives of Russian linguoculture absolutively (without dependent words) to indicate specific events in Russian history, since by default they understand what kind of revolution is meant (October Socialist 1917).

These methods of designating periods of Russian history are natural for native speakers, but are not always understandable to foreigners. The information presented in explanatory and encyclopedic dictionaries cannot explain the peculiarities of the use of such nominations, therefore, a description of their semantics and pragmatics with a linguistic and cultural commentary is required.

The revolution of 1917, which ended the existence of the Russian Empire, which was under the rule of Emperor Nicholas II, is a key event for the Russian history of the XX century. In March 1917, Nicholas II abdicated from power, which passed to the Provisional Government, and then, as a result of the October Socialist Revolution, the power of the Soviets gradually established in the main part of the territories of the former empire, and in 1922 the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was formed, which collapsed in 1991. The role of the 1917 revolution is key for "naive chronology", which is recorded in the internal form of frequency nominations with the adjectives pre-revolutionary, post-revolutionary, in syntaxes before / after the seventeenth year and some others. However, in the "naive chronology" reconstructed according to the language, there are some discrepancies with the historical periodization. Thus, nominations indicating the nature of state power divide the XX century into three main periods: tsarist Russia (aka pre-revolutionary Russia), the Soviet era and the post-Soviet era. Thus, some of the events of real history seem to "fall out" of this nomination system. Thus, it does not reflect the period of power of the Provisional Government: in 1917, two revolutions occurred in Russia, and it was the February revolution that led to the abdication of the emperor in March 1917, however, for native speakers, the adjectives pre-revolutionary and post-revolutionary do not correlate with it, but with the socialist October Revolution. The period between it and the formation of the Soviet Union is also not isolated for a modern native speaker, and the nomination pre-Soviet (period) can be used synonymously with pre-revolutionary (period). If necessary, to designate the period of 1917-1922, the expressions the first years after the revolution or the post-revolutionary (period) can be used. Thus, the modern "naive" picture of the world is characterized by an enlargement of the scale, in which some events and periods of a century ago cease to differ, are not isolated in nominations, and the syntaxeme under the tsar becomes synonymous not only with the syntaxeme before the revolution, but also before the Soviet government and is opposed to the syntaxeme in Soviet times.

The syntaxeme under the tsar is represented in 964 contexts of the main subcorpus of the National Corpus of the Russian Language ^[1], however, not all uses are absolute and not in all cases have temporal significance. There is a syntaxeme-a homonym with the meaning ‘near, near, in the presence’ (No one drinks, the commander drinks alone — right in front of the king [1: 1972]), but it makes up no more than 7% of word usage. In other contexts, the temporal meaning of the syntaxeme is realized, which can be extended by an attribute or used absolutively. In the first case, the attribute is most often an anthroponym, and the whole collocation has the meaning ‘during the reign of N’ (under Tsar Ivan the Terrible). The absolute temporal use of the syntaxeme appears only in contexts after 1917 . As a result of manual processing of contexts, homonymy was removed and uses with attributive anthroponyms correlating collocation with different countries and epochs were cut off. In the meaning we are interested in, the syntaxeme is represented in 368 contexts (38% of the entire sample), which is less than the aggregate of uses with distributors, but significantly more than the number of contexts correlated with any particular historical period. Let us characterize the main types of usages (shades of the meaning under consideration).

The contexts of 1918-1930 implicitly or explicitly contain the juxtaposition of the old and new political system, their evaluative comparison takes place (when it was better: under the tsar or now [1:1924]). The opposition is explicitly supported by adverbs then, before, before and now, now, adjectives old and new, etc.: ... what happened under the old regime, under the tsar and under the bourgeoisie, and what is now [1:1922]; They say, before, under the tsar, no sharp objects were allowed in prisons [1:1937]; It was better for me, as a writer, under the tsar, then it was possible to write at least something, now nothing [1:1919]; we sat under the tsar, and now we sit [1:1922].In these and many similar contexts, it is possible to distinguish a shade of the meaning of ‘under the former political power'.

The opposition under the tsar is still characteristic of modern uses of the syntaxeme, but it is no longer based on the nature of political power, but on other signs: Herzen and Ogarev lived in London under the tsar, now ... our "new Russians" [1:2013]. However, in most modern contexts, there is also a retrospective comparison of life under the tsar and under Soviet power, and the second period also has names under the Soviets / under the Communists / under the Bolsheviks / after the victory of October: You were born under the tsar, and I ? under Soviet power [1:2003]; ]; under the tsar would have built a church, and under the Soviets ? the Palace of Culture [1:1997] ]; Both under the tsar and under the Communists, society had a class character [1:1999]; ... neither under the tsar, nor under the Bolsheviks, nor under "controlled democracy" [1:2003]; Under the tsar, reactionary writers wrote denunciations on progressives, after the victory of October — progressives on reactionary [1:2014]. In these and similar contexts, it is possible to distinguish a shade of meaning ‘in the pre-revolutionary period’, while the designated period does not have a clear lower boundary, however, apparently, it does not number centuries, but decades, that is, it correlates with the end of the XIX — beginning of the XX centuries. — the time of the reign of Nicholas II. Thus, the absolute syntagma can be understood as a reduced version of the widespread syntagma under the <last Russian> tsar.

However, there are contexts in the sample that clearly correlate with a wider time range and allow us to highlight the shade of the meaning of ‘under the rule of the Russian tsars’: Pushkin and Lermontov died in duels under the tsar, V. V. Mayakovsky shot himself in 1930 [1: 1994]; Serfs under the tsar were [1:1994]; And this temple was built, even under the tsar, but not by the tsar, but by Russian architects and craftsmen [1: 1970] (about the cathedral of Christ the Savior).

In most modern uses, the syntaxeme is used in the meaning of ‘a very long time ago’: ...and it began at least under the tsar [1:2007]; In the past distant years, even under the tsar [1:1993]; But it was put in immemorial times, almost under the tsar [1:2012]), it is often accompanied by amplifiers: adverbs still (in 42 cases), a long time ago, before, before and similar: Many, many years ago, even under the tsar, my great-grandmother studied at the gymnasium ... [1:1990]. This shade of meaning is supported by the well-known phraseology under Tsar Peas, presented in 98 contexts of the general sample (which is second in frequency only to the syntaxe under tsar in the meaning of ‘before 1917’) and less famous under Tsar Kosar (7 contexts). (For these phraseological units, see ^[11].) There are also contexts with contamination: How time flies and how long ago it was! Almost under the tsar Peas, ? sighs grandmother. ? Did Tsar Peas rule before the revolution? ? the granddaughter is interested [1:2008].

Let's pay attention to the fact that the syntaxeme under the tsar in almost all cases of absolute use does not allow replacing the word tsar with emperor without adding a proper name, although the rulers of the Russian state from Peter I to Nicholas II were precisely emperors.  When referring to the pre-revolutionary period (that is, the period before 1917), the adjective imperial is also not used, the adjective royal is used instead: in tsarist (not imperial) Russia. The adjective royal has the following definitions: «2. Referring to the monarchy headed by the tsar. Tsarist Russia. Ts. regime" ^[10]; "Associated with an unlimited autocratic form of government, in which state power is concentrated in the hands of the tsar, based on this form of government. The tsarist government. Tsarist autocracy. The tsarist regime" ^[12]. Syntagmas denoting the historical period before 1917 usually consist of the attribute royal and substantive with the general meaning of the historical period time, times, epoch, period, years.  We analyzed the compatibility of the adjective with these substances in the main subcorpus of the National Corpus of the Russian language ^[1]. In total, 411 contexts were analyzed with collocations consisting of the adjective royal and the substantives time (215), times (145), period (5), epoch (46), years (2). In a number of contexts, the opposition with the syntagmas Soviet times / Soviet time is presented. The adjective royal is mainly combined with the lexemes time and times, denoting the period before 1917, however, the lower limit of the period and the connotations of the nominations vary, as in the case of the syntaxeme under the tsar. Taking into account the derivational relations and the possibility of translation into other languages, it is possible to consider nominations in tsarist times /epoch / period / in tsarist times / years / in tsarist Russia as variants, and nominations before the revolution, before the seventeenth year, in the pre–revolutionary era / time /period / years - synonyms of the nomination under the tsar.As a result of the analysis of the corpus data, the following conclusions can be drawn.

One of the ways to structure the historical past is to indicate significant events that are turning points in history and become reference points for native speakers. For Russian history and "naive chronology", one of such reference points is the October Revolution of 1917, which is reflected in stable ambiguous nominations that are among themselves in textual paradigmatic relations: under the tsar / before the revolution / before the seventeenth year , etc . – in synonymous, under the tsar / under Soviet power, etc. – in antonyms. The syntaxeme under the tsar in the absolute temporal meaning appears, according to the National Corpus of the Russian language, after 1917 in the meaning ‘in Russia before 1917’, has shades of meaning: ‘in the pre-revolutionary period’, ‘under the rule of the Russian tsars’, ‘a very long time ago’ (the last shade of meaning prevails in modern usage). It can be assumed that the use of the word tsar in a syntaxe with a temporal meaning is one of the factors determining the preservation of the word in the active vocabulary of modern native speakers. The study and description of this syntaxeme is important not only in the syntactic, but also in the linguodidactic aspect.