Learn Russian

literary Russian formed at the beginning of the 19th century.
I guess, some grammatical constructions may sometimes sound old-fashioned to us - but still the language that was used 150 years ago is clear and completely "understandable" to us =)

From:

wire-shock.livejournal.com

There are uses of cases that are peculiar for the time, but not much more, I suppose... Grammatically, you have to dig deep to find anything that would be totally unlike modern Russian.
For example, in the 18th century short adjectives could be used as attributes and be declined. Now they can only function as predicates and have no declension. You may find examples of it in literature after the 18th century as well, but that soon died out. Pushkin was one of those who abandoned it, I think.

From:

megilla.livejournal.com

AFAIR 95% of modern russian was formed at the early 1800s. And as I know, Pushkin and some others did a lot fot russian language reform You can find some noticable differences only in 1700s texts, and in the pre-PeterI' Russia, the 17th century (1600s) it had been used old-russian language that is pretty strange to hear and to read now. It is used only in orthodox church nowdays. This is one of the reasons why we don't trust religion - God's word is not clear for us in such form.

From:

edricson.livejournal.com

Well, this is a question that is probably more about Swedish than Russian. Of course in Strindberg's time people never said bleve or äro etc. (and if you look closely, you'll see that when, say, Strindberg wants to show that the character is reall really vulgar, he starts writing in almost normal modern Swedish) It was just the norm to write that way, because the Swedish norm of that time was somewhat older (going back to Svenska Argusen and the like). The Russian norm that Dostoevsky sticked to was much younger, and hence closer to the colloquial that is of course closer to modern Russian. So it's not the language itself that changed so much or little, it was the rules of writing it (as you probably know, Swedish newspapers abandoned voro and kommo almost overnight sometime after WWII).

From:

Thanks! That's really intressting!

Also, spoken Russian doesn't have that many different regional accents that really differ, maybe there is some connection?

As a foreigner, I'm greatful though! It makes the litterature and the country more accesible.
In sweden, if somebody studied Swedish in the north, he would not understand the people in the south. Many swedes in the north do not understand the people in the south!

From:

Oh, yes, that makes sence... when you listen to the oldest radiorecordings in swedish, they speak kind of funny, but perfectly understandable, and I guess they wheren't speaking natural spoken language either.

From:

When i studied leagal history a had to read some old laws, "Sobornoe ulozheniye, and petrovskie ukazy (not to mention the russkaya pravda). I really tried, very hard, but I didnt understand much.... when all the endings are different, you simply cannot make sence of the sentence, even if you recognize the roots of most of the words.

From:

There used to be many local dialects before the 1917 Revolution, but then the language underwent koinization (term named after Koine, the Athens dialect, which was lingua franca in Ancient Greece). The Moscow dialect (known, among other things, for the tendency to pronounce unstressed "o" as "a") has largely replaced everything else. That process became even more rapid when TV appeared. Now the best-preserved local dialect is highly distinctive Pomor (spoken in villages along the White Sea coast), there are also distinctive dialects in Lake Onega area and other parts of the Russian North, in Volga Valley (where people tend to pronounce unstressed vowels as "o"), in the south (people there speak more softly, a bit like Ukrainians - Gorbachev's speech is a good example), in Kirov (Vyatka) area, and in Ryazan (where unstressed vowels are tilted towars "ya" sound). Most of those are better preserved in remote villages than in cities. There are also minuscule differences in Siberia, in SPb vs. Moscow, and so on.
As for the language changing in general, since Pushkin's times there were only two periods of rapid change: one in 1917-1950, and the other one since 1990. The latter is still gaining speed.

From:

archaicos.livejournal.com

and what is that happening since 1990?

From:

there is a huge influx of English words, there is a rapid exchange between written language and various slangs, and grammar is becoming much more relaxed.

From:

You do mix up two different languages - Ancient Russian and Church Slavonic. Church Slavonic is not Ancient Russian, it is a distinct language, evolved from ancient Southern Slavic languages (old Bulgarian, proto-Macedonian etc.)

From:

mytza.livejournal.com

Can you elaborate a little on the relaxing of grammar?

From:

I am not the best person to ask this question: I've been living in the US for nine years. As far as I know, some outdated and highly formalistic rules related to the number of "n's" in suffixes, etc. are virtually ignored in practice, and are maintained for the sole purpose of torturing students at university entry exams. There have been talks of relaxing them for over a decade now, but I'm not aware of any official changes. Some single-case exceptions, such as masculine gender for "kofe" and yu in "paraschute" are other prime candidates for disappearing completely.
Generally speaking, it is now very unusual to see a text without any grammatical errors. If you find such a text, it is usually written by somene living in the US or Israel.

From:

crculver.livejournal.com

But Church Slavonic is a hybrid of OCS, indeed originally based on the dialect of Solun, with the collapse of the yers and loss of the yus as they occured in early Russian.

From:

So, what difference it makes? It is not Ancient Russian, anyway.

From:

crculver.livejournal.com

As Russia has no literary tradition until relatively recent times except for Church Slavonic, it's easy to see how Church Slavonic could be perceived as "ancient Russian", just like Bulgarians perceive Old Church Slavonic as "Old Bulgarian" even though Sts Cyril and Methodius were from outside the Kingdom of Bulgaria and their speech distinct.

From:

If you listen to earliest recordings of spoken Russian, like the 1908-1909 phonograph records of Leo Tolstoy, you wonder if something changed in spoken literary Russian at all (colloquial language is another story.)

From:

..and that's a pity. because for me, for example, it's really sad that nearly none of my peers, of my friends and even profs at university can write a text in normal, correct Russian.

and ignoring the number of Ns in suffixes is a reason to worry - but it doesn't meant that this rule is going to be abandoned. it's just low level of education and ignorance shown by people.

i am proud of myself that i myself can write correct, nearly perfect Russian..))

From:

Ancient Rus, and its different parts with different dialects, may have or not have a rich literary tradition before, say, 16th century, but there is a relatively rich tradition of secular writing in what was the spoken language of the day - private letters (especially in Ilmen Slovenian language of the Great Novgorod,) business correspondence, household records, etc. All that wasn't written in Church Slavonic. However, some valuable texts of ancient Russian literature were also written not in Church Slavonic, but in Ancient Russian (though the gross amount of Chusrch Slavonic texts, primarily religious ones, is overwhelmingly greater.) "The Teaching of Vladimir Monomach," "The Prayer of Daniil the Hermit," "Slovo o polku Igoreve," "Zanonshchina," Ivan the Terrible's and Prince Andrey Kurbsky's mutual correspondence, etc. -- all that is in Ancient Russian, not in any form of Church Slavonic.

From:

Well, grammar rules are based on usage. If everybody or virtually everybody is ignoring a rule, there is no reason to keep it on the books. Especially in cases when ignoring the rule doesn't create any uncertainty in the meaning of the word or phrase.
This process is not unique to Russian. English has its own list of outdated, largely ignored, and sometimes stupid rules. "Never end a sentence with a preposition", "Do not break the infinitive", "Data is always plural", and so on.

From:

and still, in an argument "tradition vs simplification" i'd stand for tradition))

i wouldn't call all those rules stupid..))

of course, we abandon loads of things in the internet, in everyday communication, but i believe this new simplified slanguage should replace normal literary language.

From:

Well, the process doesn't really depend on what we want. Pretty soon the question will be: do you want your children to spend an extra year in school studying outdated rules?
Not all of these rules are stupid, but many are.

An American English joke on the subject.

A Southern lady is attending a high-society party. A man approaches her and says:
"Good evening, ma'am! Where are you from?"
"Where I am from, we do not end sentences with prepositions!" she answers.
"Oh, I am terribly sorry! Where are you from, bitch?"

From:

there's no need to spend en extra year to learn the rules of your own language. it depends on the education that you get at home. if you're used to reading - you won't have any problems with the language. unfortunately, my generations isn't generally used to spending their free time with a book... =(

thanx, that's a really nice joke))

From:

It's not that simple. You can write without many errors if you have enough reading practice, but to pass a written exam with its artificially complicated constructs you have to memorize the rules.
Cultures that get too conservative about their written language pay a heavy price. Written language might become completely disconnected from spoken language, such as in French, or writing gets so complex that it takes children a few extra years to master, such as in Japanese.
Besides, relaxing grammatical rules are not the main problem Russian language is facing. It has a relatively limited vocabulary (English is estimated to have 3 times more words at the moment), and is becoming increasingly inadequate for communication on scientific, technical and business-related topics.

From:

i am a person who never (i tell you: NEVER) memorized any grammar rules at school (and was usually critisized for that by teachers =) ) - and still, i never got a mark different from "5" and easily entered two.. let's say.. not worst universities of Moscow))

than, i'm a person who studies both French and Japanese, so i know a bit about these languages too. and i wouldn't say it's so extremely difficult to learn them. French is quite simple, and as for Japanese - yes, it's completely different from what we are used to, but still "learnable".. and i like the feeling of getting deeper and deeper into a tradition of a different nation..))

i've nothing about these figures (i mean, English being 3 times richer than Russian; it even sounds strange to me).. Russian is just absorbing more and more foreign words. yes, nearly the whole of scientific and business Russian is based on Latin, German and - now - English roots. probably it's a bit sad.. but it's even better now because Russian is becoming kinda international in the areas where international communication is vital..

From:

oops, it should've been "thEn" instead of "than" in the 2nd paragraph, sorry))

From:

freedomcry.livejournal.com

English hasn't changed that much since Dickens' time either.

From:

Well, I had to memorize those rules because it was required, but I almost never have to use them while writing, and I usually write without grammatical errors, and got a 5 for composition. But our example doesn't prove much because for many people it doesn't work that way.
French isn't difficult, but you have to write 2-4 letters for each simple sound. As for Japanese, the estimate that Japanese children have to spend about 2 more years in school to learn all writing systems isn't mine - it's frequently mentioned in literature.
The problem is not that the language has to absorb English words, it's that there's too many of them, and they are often absorbed with changes in meaning. The language has no time to russify them or develop less foreign-sounding alternatives, even when it would be easy. And still there's not enough. After a few more years we might have the same situation as in Pakistan, where all scientific subjects are taught in English and people switch to it every time they need to talk about science or computers. But, of course, linguistic processes of such scale can't be controlled, and I'm not aware of a better alternative anyway.

From:

when i was at school - it was required too. but with my character - they could do nothing but but make an exception for me))

yep, French is.. hm.. peculiar in its spelling..))

i know that it's abosultely correct - about learning Japanese. the problem is that - yes, kids there can't do without it, while foreigners who learn the language aren't required to learn the same amount of hyeroglifics as the Japanese; we, Japanese-learners, just don't need them, even if we're planning to stay in the country for several years..
but the Japanese themselves stick to traditions so much that they won't leave their children without all that..))

wow.. didn't know that about Pakistan..(( i don't what the same thing in Russia.. on the one hand.. but on the other hand - probably that would be the only was to make Russians learn English?.. now the average level of English is very poor in Russia, unfortunately..

From:

I see. Maybe it is my native language that is the exception, as edricsson remarked above, it is probably a question of how far from the spoken language the written language is.

Any way Raskol'nikov just murdered the protsentnitsa Alena Ivanovna. I listened to that part on a bus stop (on my way to ikea to buy o sofa in wich i will listen to the rest of the novel), and I couldent stand still, I had to walk back and forth, back and forth - the suspense, oh my good! My nerves won't make it if the whole book is like that.

From:

When I first read it (being 15) I got a real fever when Raskolnikov became sick in the book.
After that, I swallowed all Dostoyesky I could get (which ended up to be his Complete Collected Works, except Correspondence section ;-)
After two years of extreme admiration, I dumped Dostoyevsky and went on with Chekhov, Bulgakov and others of that [easier, ha-ha] line, which never failed me since :)

From:

Intressting. When you say so, I realize that the "funny" expressions, that I find "old" are mostly when the caracters are quoted. So it is colloquial rather than literary, I guess. I guess the people round sennaya plochshad' weren't speaking spoken literary Russian.

From:

I love Chekhovs Vishnevyy Sad, and Bulgakovs Zojkina kvartira. I don't know that much about literature and theatre, but they are very dostupnye (accessible?), if one just knows a little history.

From:

Absolutely. They spoke their native rustic regional dialects which they brought with them to St.Pete. At that time, the dialects differed dramatically, both in phonetics and in vocabulary, and were mutually mocked by their respective bearers. Like, people from Pskov region were called скобские (after the way they pronounced "псковские"), while people from around Moscow were nicknamed "тоё коё моё" (after their way to say "то, что моё", "that what is mine.") Their grammar also differed from the educated class's speech.

From: