Novgorod Birchbark Documents in Linguodidactic Issues of Teaching Russian as a Foreign Language

Tyumen State University Herald. Humanities Research. Humanitates


Release:

2016, Vol. 2. №4

Title: 
Novgorod Birchbark Documents in Linguodidactic Issues of Teaching Russian as a Foreign Language


About the authors:

Natalia V. Labunets, Dr. Sci. (Philol.), Professor, Department of General Linguistics, University of Tyumen; eLibrary AuthorID, n.v.labunec@utmn.ru

Aurore V. P. Schmitt, Master Degree Student, Lorraine University (Nancy, France); auroreschmitt@hotmail.fr

Abstract:

Introduction to the program of courses for foreign materials on the Russian contribution to the world cultural heritage is relevant and meaningful. Birch bark as part of the historical heritage of Novgorod is a part of the UNESCO World Heritage. The article raises the question of the need to include into the practice of teaching Russian as a foreign language a new linguistic and cultural power — the Novgorod birchbark documents (41 documents from XI-XIV centuries, the total amount: 164 sentences, 907 words). The study of ancient languages or individual codes — the Old Novgorod dialect — in a foreign audience has its own specifics. The Old Russian language, which is integrated into the general course of the Russian language for scholars, is taught in several universities in France, for example, Lorraine, TSU partner university. The article justifies the linguodidactic approach to use the Old Novgorod texts in teaching French philologists — specialists in the Russian philology.

References:

  1. Gasparov M. L. 2012. Filologiya kak nravstvennost [Philology as Morals]. Moscow. 
  2. Gippius A. A. Berestyanye gramoty obyedinyayut lyudey kak nikakoy drugoy istochnik [Birch Bark Documetns Bring People Together Like No Other Source]. http://russkiy-na5.ru/articles/812
  3. Le Feuvre C. 2002. “Deux exemples dinterférence linguistique dans les textes novgorodiens anciens: léglise et le maître.” Revue des études slaves, vol. 74, no 2. pp. 431-440.
  4. Le Feuvre C. 2004. “Le développement de la phrase nominale dans les écorces de bouleau de Novgorod: copules, auxiliaire et marque personnelle.” Revue des études slaves, vol. 75, no 3-4, pp. 381-401.
  5. Le Feuvre C. 2009. «Le Vieux Slave. Leuven-Paris: Peeters. 
  6. Likhachev D. S. 1966. “Novaya nauka — berestologiya” [Birchbark Studies — a New Science]. Novyy mir, no 2, pp. 271-274.
  7. Rostova E. G., Shamin S. M. 2012. “40 let Konventsii ob okhrane vsemirnogo kulturnogo i prirodnogo naslediya. K voprosu ob obnovlenii stranovedcheskogo soderzhaniya uchebnika RKI” [40 Years of the Convention of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. On the Question of Updating the Content of a Regional Geographic Textbook on Teaching Russian as a Foreign]. Russkiy yazyk za rubezhom, no 6, pp. 72-79.
  8. Vodoff W. 1966. “Les documents sur écorce de bouleau de Novgorod.” Journal des savants, no 4, pp. 193-233.
  9. Vodoff W. 1981. “Les documents sur écorce de bouleau de Novgorod, Découvertes et travaux récents.” Le Journal des savants, no 22.
  10. Zaliznyak A. A. 2004. Drevnenovgorodskiy dialekt [Old Novgorod dialect]. 2nd edition, revised. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoy kultury.