Russian Federation
The article examines the grammatical aspect of the living word in the context of Russian-Church Slavonic diglossia, focusing on the categories of tense (aorist, imperfect) and, primarily, the dual number. Two major approaches to understanding this grammatical form are analyzed: the classical (descriptive) approach, which treats the dual as an atavism and redundancy, and the comparative-historical approach (originating with W. von Humboldt), which reveals its “collective-unity” function – the expression of “unity in plurality”. It is shown that the classical approach, oriented toward usage and a materialistic paradigm, led to the loss of the philosophical content of these forms and their elimination from the literary language. The comparative-historical approach, by contrast, revealed the cognitive potential of the dual as a tool for shaping a collective-unified (soborny / conciliar) type of thinking. On the basis of these differences, the General Theory of the Living Word (GTLW) introduces the concept of a third (soborny / conciliar) form of the word, whose grammatical correlate is the dual number. Integrating both approaches, GTLW creates a metalanguage for analyzing and describing constructive and destructive speech practices. From a cognitive perspective, the article raises the question of the influence of integrating the grammatical category of the dual on the cognitive potential of language speakers. The cyberlinguistic aspect concerns the necessity of training national artificial intelligence systems to recognise the philosophical content of grammatical forms as a condition of technological sovereignty. It is concluded that a return to the linguo-philosophical heritage of Church Slavonic grammar through the metalanguage of GTLW opens new horizons for discourse diagnostics and the creation of ethical, culturally oriented speech models.
history of grammar, dual number, aorist, Russian-Church Slavonic diglossia, comparative linguistics, General Theory of the Living Word (GTLW), soborny / conciliar form of the word, metaphysical grammar, technological sovereignty, artificial intelligence
1. Adodurov V.E. Pervye osnovaniya rossiyskogo yazyka / otv. red. K.A. Filippov, S.S. Volkov. SPb.: Nauka; Nestor-Istoriya, 2014. 256 s.
2. Atnashev T., Velizhev M. Kembridzhskaya shkola. «Context is king»: Dzhon Pokok – istorik politicheskih yazykov // NLO, 2015. №134. S. 21-44.
3. Barsov A.A. Rossiyskaya grammatika / podgot. teksta i tekstol. komment. M.P. Tobolovoy; pod red. i s predisl. B.A. Uspenskogo. M.: Izd-vo MGU, 1981. S. 92.
4. Barsov A.A. O drevnosti i prevoshodstve Slavenskogo yazyka i sposobe vozvysit' onyy do pervonachal'nogo ego velichiya. «Novyy Sankt-Peterburgskiy vestnik», 1786, kn. 2, s. 131-144.
5. Bahtin M.M. Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva / Sost. S.G. Bocharov. M.: Is-vo, 1979. 423 s.
6. Bahtin M.M. Slovo v romane // Voprosy literatury i estetiki. M., 1975. S. 72–233.
7. Bezlepkin N.I. Filosofiya yazyka v Rossii. K istorii russkoy lingvofilosofii. SPb., 2002. 272 s.: «Eta mysl' o vklyuchenii v metafiziku idei Sofii byla podhvachena i prointerpretirovana V.S. Solov'evym v kontekste «filosofii vseedinstva».
8. Bekker K.F. Organizm yazyka // Filologicheskie zapiski, 1860. Vyp. 1–6. S. 3–72.
9. Boduen de Kurtene I.A. Izbrannye trudy po obschemu yazykoznaniyu. M.,1963. T.1. S. 37.
10. Bulahovskiy L.A. Istoricheskiy kommentariy k russkomu literaturnomu yazyku. Kiev, 1958. S. 317.
11. Vvedenskiy A.I. Protoierey Fedor Aleksandrovich Golubinskiy kak professor filosofii // Bogoslovskiy vestnik. Dekabr', 1897. № 12. S. 484.
12. Vinogradov V.V. Russkiy yazyk (Grammaticheskoe uchenie o slove): Ucheb, posobie dlya vuzov/Otv. red. G.A. Zolotova. 3-e izd., ispr. M.: Vysshaya shkola, 1986. 640 s.
13. Vitgenshteyn L.Logiko-filosofskiy traktat. M., 1958. 133 s.
14. Golubinskiy F.A. Lekcii filosofii. M., 1884. V. 1. S. 75.
15. Gorbachevich K.S. Izmenenie norm russkogo literaturnogo yazyka. L., 1971. S. 211.
16. Gumbol'dt fon, V.O razlichii stroeniya chelovecheskih yazykov i ego vliyanii na duhovnoe razvitie chelovechestva / per. P. Bilyarskogo. Sankt-Peterburg: Tip. Imp. Akad. nauk, 1859. 366 s.
17. Gumbol'dt fon, V. O dvoystvennom chisle // Yazyk i filosofiya kul'tury. M., 1985. S. 382-403.
18. Zhivov V.M. Yazyk Feofana Prokopovicha i rol' gibridnyh variantov cerkovnoslavyanskogo v istorii slavyanskih literaturnyh yazykov // Sovetskoe slavyanovedenie, 1985. № 3. S. 70-85.
19. Zhivov V.M., Uspenskiy B.A. Grammatica sub specie theologiae. Preteritnye formy glagola «byti» v russkom yazykovom soznanii XVI–XVIII vekov // Russian Linguistics, 1986. V. 10. № 3. S. 363-389. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02550510
20. Zalevskaya A.A. Interfeysnaya teoriya znacheniya slova: psiholingvisticheskiy podhod. Tver': Tverskoy gosudarstvennyy universitet, 2014. 222 s.
21. Zapol'skaya N.N. Ideosemantika i ideofunkcional'nost' v cerkovnoslavyanskoy grammaticheskoy tradicii (k postanovke problemy) // Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 2: Yazykoznanie. 2017. T. 16. № 1. S. 45–53.
22. Kaypert X. Grammatika i teologiya: po povodu yazyka-ob'ekta slavyanskogo «Traktata o vos'mi chastyah slova»// Russkiy yazyk v nauchnom osveschenii. M., 2008. S. 79-98.
23. Karamzin N.M. Rassuzhdenie o starom i novom sloge rossiyskogo yazyka // Izbrannye sochineniya: v 2 t. T. 2. M.: Hudozhestvennaya literatura, 1984. S. 17–46.
24. Karamzin N.M. Rech', proiznesennaya v torzhestvennom sobranii Imperatorskoy Rossiyskoy Akademii, 5 dekabrya 1818 goda. V kn.: Sochineniya, T. III. M., 1848, s. 646.
25. Kotlyarevskiy A.A. Sravnitel'noe yazykoznanie // Fil. zapiski, 1862. V. 4-5. S. 75-113.
26. Kubryakova E.S. Ob ustanovkah kognitivnoy nauki i aktual'nyh problemah kognitivnoy lingvistiki // Voprosy kognitivnoy lingvistiki, 2004. № 1. S. 6-17.
27. Kubryakova E.S. Yazyk i znanie: Na puti polucheniya znaniy o yazyke: Chasti rechi s kognitivnoy tochki zreniya. Rol' yazyka v poznanii mira. M.: Yazyki slavyanskoy kul'tury, 2004. 560 s.
28. Kuznecov P.S. U istokov russkoy grammaticheskoy mysli // Akad. nauk SSSR. M., 1958. 76 s.: «My znaem, chto dazhe sovremennye angliyskie shkol'nye grammatiki v svoey terminologii soderzhat mnogoe iz togo, chto voshodit k antichnym grammatikam, pol'zuyutsya takimi grammaticheskimi ponyatiyami, kotorye sovershenno ne svoystvenny grammaticheskomu stroyu zhivogo sovremennogo angliyskogo yazyka».
29. Kuz'minova E.A. Grammatika kak sredstvo postizheniya Bogootkrovennoy istiny // Slovo. Grammatika. Rech': Sb. nauchn.-metod. / Otv. red. O.V. Chagina. M., 2008. T.10. S. 79-90.
30. Lazarev A.I. Grammatica sub specie philosophia: vechnost' v filosofii i grammatike // Po sledam zhivogo slova: monogrfiya. Nauchno-pedagogicheskoe nasledie «Filologicheskih zapisok» v sovremennom kontekste. M.: Infra-M (Nauchnaya mysl'), 2024. S. 97-113.
31. Lomonosov M.V. Materialy k Rossiyskoy grammatike. M., 1952. S. 411.
32. Lopuhin A.D. Kliment ili Klim Smolyatich // Pravoslavnaya Bogoslovskaya enciklopediya ili Bogoslovskiy enciklopedicheskiy slovar'. Tom XI. S. 146-150.
33. Ludol'f G.V. Russkaya grammatika. Oksford, 1696 / pereizd., per., vstup. st. i primech. B.A. Larina. L.: Leningr. nauch.-issled. in-t yazykoznaniya, 1937. 165 s.
34. Merezhkovskiy K.S. Teoriya dvuh plazm kak osnova simbiogenezisa, novogo ucheniya o proishozhdenii organizmov, Kazan', 1909. 102 s.
35. Merkacheva E. Proekt zakona o regulirovanii II raskolol uchenyh: «konstrukciya rassypaetsya» // Moskovskiy komsomolec, 06.05.2026 https://www.mk.ru/social/ 2026/05/06/proekt-zakona-o-regulirovanii-ii-raskolol-uchenykh-konstrukciya-rassypaetsya.html
36. Piazhe Zh., Shemin'ska A. Genezis chisla u rebenka. M.: Progress, 1964. 196 s.
37. Platon. Timey // Platon. Sochineniya: v 4 t. T. 3. Ch. 1. M.: Mysl', 1971. S. 421–500.
38. Polovcov V.A. Tri napravleniya v teorii rodnogo yazyka // Fil. zapiski, 1860. V.1. S. 19-35.
39. Potebnya A.A. Mysl' i yazyk / Polnoe sobranie trudov // Podgotovka teksta Yu. S. Rasskazova i O. A. Sycheva. Kommentarii Yu. S. Rasskazova. M., 1999. 300 s.
40. RIB, XXXIX, stb. 547-548.: «Ne ischite ritoriki i filosofіi, ni krasnorѣchіya, no zdravym' istinnym' glagolom' poslѣduyusche, pozhivite. Ponezhe ritor' i filosof' ne mozhet' byta hristіyanin'... I vsi svyatіi nas' nauchayut', yako ritorstvo i filosoѳstvo – vnѣshnyaya blyad', svoystvenna ognyu negasimomu».
41. Sepir E. Izbrannye trudy po yazykoznaniyu i kul'turologii. M., 1993. 123 s.
42. Sternina M.A. Leksiko-grammaticheskaya polisemiya v sisteme yazyka: Opyt razrabotki integral'noy teorii polisemii // Dis. doktora filol. nauk. Voronezh, 1999. 253 s.
43. Studeneckiy V. Otnoshenie slova k mysli // Fil. zapiski, 1861. Vyp. 4. S. 214-218.
44. Toporov V.N. Mif. Ritual. Simvol. Obraz: Issledovaniya v oblasti mifopoeticheskogo. M.,1995. S. 432.
45. Trediakovskiy V.K. Razgovor mezhdu chuzhestrannym chelovekom i rossiyskim ob ortografii starinnoy i novoy i o vsem chto prinadlezhit k sey materii. SPb., 1748. S. 299-Z00.
46. Trubachev O.N. V poiskah edinstva: vzglyad filologa na problemu istokov Rusi. M.: Nauka, 2005. 286 s.
47. Uspenskiy B.A. Predislovie k «Rossiyskoy grammatike» A.A. Barsova. M., 1981 g. S. 16.
48. Shleyher A. Teoriya Darvina v primenenii k nauke o yazyke: Publ. poslanie d-ru Ernstu Gekkelyu, e. o. prof. zoologii i dir. Zool. muzeya pri Ien. un-te. SPb.: Tip. P.A. Kulisha, 1864. 14 s.
49. Shohin V.K. Teologiya kak sluzhanka filosofii, ili sovremennaya versiya tradicionnoy metafiziki // Oksfordskoe rukovodstvo po filosofskoy teologii. M., 2013. S. 9-29.
50. Engel's F. Anti-Dyuring: [per. s nem.]. M.: Izd-vo polit. literatury, 1950. S. 303.
51. Pedrazzini N. BERTislav. Baseline fill-mask model based on ruBERT and fine-tuned on a 10M-word corpus. — https://huggingface.co/npedrazzini/BERTislav.
52. Robertson A. Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research. Louisville, 1914. 848 r.
53. Nikolich A., Korolev K., Bratchikov S., Kiselev I., Shelmanov A. Vikhr: The Family of Open-Source Instruction-Tuned Large Language Models for Russian. arXiv:2405.13929, 2024. — https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.13929.
54. Salo P., Heikkinen H.L. Slow Science: Research and Teaching for Sustainable Praxis // Confero. 2018. Vol. 6, Iss. 1. P. 87-111.
55. Smyth H.W. Greek Grammar. NY., 1920. 784 r.: «The aorist may express a General Truth. The aorist simply states a past occurrence and leaves the reader to draw the inference from a concrete case that what has occurred once is typical of what often occurs: παθὼν δέ τε νήπιος ἔγνω a fool learns by experience».
56. Stengers I. Another Science is Possible: A Manifesto for Slow Science / translated by S. Muecke. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2018. 163 p.
57. Zamprogno G., Tiddi, I., & Verheij, B. (2025). Autonomous Research Assistants for Hybrid Intelligence: Landscape and Challenges. In R. Petrick, & C. Geib (editors), Proceedings of the 2025 AAAI Spring Symposium Series (1 uitgave, Vol. 5, blz. 350-358). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1609/aaaiss.v5i1.35611
