The characteristics of any hero from the composition are undergrown. "Minor" (main characters)

Article menu:

“The Minor” is a play in five acts written by Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin. A cult dramatic work of the 18th century and one of the most striking examples of classicism. It was included in the school curriculum, was repeatedly staged on the theater stage, received a screen embodiment, and its lines were disassembled into quotes, which today live independently of the original source, becoming aphorisms of the Russian language.

Plot: summary of the play “Minor”

The plot of “The Minor” is well known to everyone since school years, but we will still recall a brief summary of the play in order to restore the sequence of events in our memory.

The action takes place in the village of Prostakovs. Its owners - Mrs. and Mr. Prostakov and their son Mitrofanushka - live the quiet life of provincial nobles. Also living on the estate is the orphan Sofyushka, whom the lady sheltered in her house, but, as it turns out, not out of compassion, but because of the inheritance, which she freely disposes of as a self-proclaimed guardian. In the near future, they plan to give Sophia to Prostakova’s brother Taras Skotinin.

The mistress's plans collapse when Sophia receives a letter from her uncle Starodum, who was still considered dead. Stradum is alive and well and is going on a date with his niece, and he also reports a fortune of 10 thousand in income, which he passes on as an inheritance to his beloved relative. After such news, Prostakova begins to court Sophia, whom she has hitherto given little favor to, because now she wants to marry her to her beloved Mitrofan, and leave Skotinin with nothing.

Fortunately, Starodum turned out to be a noble and honest man who wished well for his niece. Moreover, Sophia already had a betrothed - officer Milon, who had just stopped with his regiment in the village of Prostakov. Starodub knew Milon and gave the young man his blessing.

In desperation, Prostakova tries to organize the kidnapping of Sophia and forcibly marry her to her son. However, even here the treacherous mistress suffers a fiasco - Milo saves his beloved on the night of the kidnapping.

Prostakova is generously forgiven and not put on trial, although her estate, which has long been a source of suspicion, is transferred to a state guardian. Everyone leaves and even Mitrofanushka leaves his mother, because he doesn’t love her, like, in general, no one else in the world.

Characteristics of heroes: positive and negative characters

As in any classic work, the characters in “The Minor” are clearly divided into positive and negative.

Negative heroes:

• Mrs. Prostakova is the mistress of the village;
• Mr. Prostakov is her husband;
• Mitrofanushka is the son of the Prostakovs, an undergrowth;
• Taras Skotinin is the brother of the Prostakovs.

Positive heroes:

• Sophia is an orphan, lives with the Prostakovs;
• Starodum is her uncle;
• Milon - officer, Sophia's lover;
• Pravdin is a government official who came to monitor affairs in the Prostakov village.

Minor characters:

• Tsyfirkin – arithmetic teacher;
• Kuteikin – teacher, former seminarian;
• Vralman is a former coachman, posing as a teacher;
• Eremevna is Mitrofan’s nanny.

Mrs. Prostakova

Prostakova is the most striking negative character, and indeed the most outstanding character in the play. She is the mistress of the Prostakov village and it is the mistress, who has completely suppressed her weak-willed husband, who establishes the lordly order and makes decisions.

At the same time, she is absolutely ignorant, has no manners, and is often rude. Prostakova, like other members of the family, cannot read and despises science. Mitrofanushka’s mother is involved in education only because this is how it is supposed to be in New World society, but she does not understand the true value of knowledge.

In addition to ignorance, Prostakova is distinguished by cruelty, deceit, hypocrisy, and envy.

The only creature she loves is her son Mitrofanushka. However, the mother’s blind, absurd love only spoils the child, turning him into a copy of himself in a man’s dress.

Mr. Prostakov

The figurative owner of the Prostakov estate. In fact, everything is controlled by his domineering wife, of whom he is terribly afraid and does not dare say a word. Prostakov has long lost his own opinion and dignity. He cannot even say whether the caftan sewn by the tailor Trishka for Mitrofan is good or bad, because he is afraid to say something that is not what his mistress expects.

Mitrofan

Son of the Prostakovs, an undergrowth. His family lovingly calls him Mitrofanushka. Meanwhile, it’s time for this young man to enter adulthood, but he has absolutely no idea about it. Mitrofan is spoiled by his mother's love, he is capricious, cruel to servants and teachers, pompous, and lazy. Despite many years of lessons with teachers, the young master is hopelessly stupid, he does not show the slightest desire for learning and knowledge.

And the worst thing is that Mitrofanushka is a terrible egoist; nothing matters to him except his own interests. At the end of the play, he easily leaves his mother, who loved him so unrequitedly. Even she is nothing to him.

Skotinin

Brother of Mrs. Prostakova. Narcissistic, narrow-minded, ignorant, cruel and greedy. Taras Skotinin has a great passion for pigs; the rest is of little interest to this narrow-minded person. He has no idea of ​​family ties, heartfelt affection and love. Describing how well his future wife will heal, Skotinin only says that he will give her the best light. In his system of coordinates, this is precisely what marital happiness consists of.

Sophia

Positive female image of the work. A very well-mannered, kind, meek and compassionate girl. Sophia received a good education, she has an inquisitive mind and a thirst for knowledge. Even in the poisonous atmosphere of the Prostakovs’ house, the girl does not become like the owners, but continues to lead the lifestyle that she likes - she reads a lot, thinks, is friendly and polite to everyone.

Starodum

Sophia's uncle and guardian. Starodum is the voice of the author in the play. His speeches are very aphoristic, he talks a lot about life, virtues, intelligence, law, government, modern society, marriage, love and other pressing issues. Starodum is incredibly wise and noble. Despite the fact that he clearly has a negative attitude towards Prostakova and others like her, Starodum does not allow himself to stoop to rudeness and outright criticism, and as for light sarcasm, his narrow-minded “relatives” cannot recognize it.

Milo

Officer, Sophia's lover. The image of a hero-protector, an ideal young man, a husband. He is very fair and does not tolerate meanness and lies. Milo was brave, not only in battle, but also in his speeches. He is devoid of vanity and low-minded prudence. All of Sophia’s “suitors” talked only about her condition, but Milon never mentioned that his betrothed was rich. He sincerely loved Sophia even before she had an inheritance, and therefore in his choice the young man was not guided by the size of the bride’s annual income.

“I don’t want to study, but I want to get married”: the problem of education in the story

The key problem of the work is the theme of provincial noble upbringing and education. The main character Mitrofanushka receives an education only because it is fashionable and “just the way it is.” In fact, neither he nor his ignorant mother understands the true purpose of knowledge. They should make a person smarter, better, serve him throughout his life and benefit society. Knowledge is gained through hard work and can never be forced into someone's head.

Mitrofan's home education is a dummy, a fiction, a provincial theater. For several years, the unfortunate student did not master either reading or writing. Mitrofan fails the comic test that Pravdin arranges with a bang, but because of his stupidity he cannot even understand this. He calls the word door an adjective, because it is supposedly attached to the opening, he confuses science history with the stories that Vralman tells him in abundance, and Mitrofanushka can’t even pronounce the word “geography”... it’s too tricky.

To show the grotesqueness of Mitrofan’s education, Fonvizin introduces the image of Vralman, who teaches “French and all sciences.” In fact, Vralman (that’s a telling name!) is not a teacher at all, but Starodum’s former coachman. He easily deceives the ignorant Prostakova and even becomes her favorite, because he professes his own teaching methodology - not to force the student to do anything through force. With such zeal as Mitrofan’s, the teacher and student are simply idle.

Education goes hand in hand with acquiring knowledge and skills. Mrs. Prostakova is mostly responsible for him. She methodically imposes her rotten morality on Mitrofan, who (here he is diligent here!) perfectly absorbs his mother’s advice. So, while solving a division problem, Prostakova advises her son not to share with anyone, but to take everything for himself. When talking about marriage, mother speaks only about the bride’s wealth, never mentioning spiritual affection and love. Such concepts as courage, boldness, and valor are not familiar to the undersized Mitrofan. Despite the fact that he is no longer a baby, he is still looked after in everything. The boy cannot even stand up for himself during a clash with his uncle; he immediately begins to call his mother, and the old nanny Eremeevna rushes at the offender with her fists.

The meaning of the name: two sides of the coin

The title of the play has a literal and figurative meaning.

Direct meaning of the name
In the old days, minors were called teenagers, young men who had not yet reached adulthood and had not entered the public service.

The figurative meaning of the name
A fool, an ignoramus, a narrow-minded and uneducated person was also called a minor, regardless of his age. With the light hand of Fonvizin, it was precisely this negative connotation that became attached to the word in the modern Russian language.

Every person is reborn from a minor youth into an adult man. This is growing up, a law of nature. However, not everyone transforms from a dark, half-educated child into an educated, self-sufficient person. This transformation requires effort and perseverance.

Place in literature: Russian literature of the 18th century → Russian drama of the 18th century → The work of Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin → 1782 → The play “The Minor”.

Let's look at the features of the comedy created by Fonvizin ("Minor"). Analysis of this work is the topic of this article. This play is a masterpiece of Russian literature of the 18th century. This work is included today in the collection of Russian classical literature. It touches on a number of “eternal problems.” And the beauty of the high style still attracts many readers today. The name of this play is associated with the decree issued by Peter I, according to which “minors” (young nobles) are prohibited from entering the service and getting married without education.

History of the play

Back in 1778, the idea of ​​this comedy arose from its author, who was Fonvizin. “The Minor,” the analysis of which interests us, was written in 1782 and presented to the public in the same year. We should briefly highlight the time of creation of the play that interests us.

During the reign of Catherine II, Fonvizin wrote “The Minor.” The analysis of the heroes presented below proves that they were heroes of their time. The period in the development of our country is associated with the dominance of ideas. They were borrowed by the Russians from the French enlighteners. The dissemination of these ideas and their great popularity among the educated philistines and nobility was largely facilitated by the empress herself. She is known to have corresponded with Diderot, Voltaire, and d'Alembert. In addition, Catherine II opened libraries and schools, and supported the development of art and culture in Russia through various means.

Continuing to describe the comedy created by D.I. Fonvizin (“The Minor”), analyzing its features, it should be noted that, as a representative of his era, the author certainly shared the ideas that dominated the noble society at that time. He tried to reflect them in his work, exposing not only the positive aspects to readers and viewers, but also pointing out misconceptions and shortcomings.

"Minor" - an example of classicism

An analysis of Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor" requires considering this play as part of a cultural era and literary tradition. This work is considered one of the best examples of classicism. There is unity of action in the play (there are no secondary plot lines in it, only the struggle for Sophia’s hand and her property is described), place (the characters do not move long distances, all events take place either near the Prostakovs’ house or inside it), and time ( All events take no more than a day). In addition, he used “speaking” surnames, which are traditional for the classic play, Fonvizin (“Minor”). Analysis shows that, following tradition, he divided his characters into positive and negative. Positive ones are Pravdin, Starodum, Milon, Sophia. They are contrasted with Prostakov, Mitrofan, Skotinin by D.I. Fonvizin (play "The Minor"). An analysis of their names shows that they make it clear to the reader which features in the image of a particular character are prevalent. For example, Pravdin is the personification of morality and truth in the work.

A new genre of comedy, its features

At the time of its creation, “Minor” became an important step forward in the development of literature in our country, in particular drama. Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin created a new socio-political. It harmoniously combines a number of realistic scenes depicted with sarcasm, irony, and laughter from the life of some ordinary representatives of high society (nobility) with sermons about morality, virtue, and the need to cultivate human qualities that were characteristic of the Enlightenment. Instructive monologues do not burden the perception of the play. They complement this work, as a result of which it becomes deeper.

First action

The play, the author of which is Fonvizin (“Minor”), is divided into 5 acts. Analysis of a work involves a description of the organization of the text. In the first act we meet the Prostakovs, Pravdin, Sophia, Mitrofan, Skotinin. The characters' personalities emerge immediately, and the reader understands that Skotinin and the Prostakovs - and Sophia and Pravdin - are positive. In the first act there is an exposition and plot of this work. In the exhibition we get to know the characters, we learn that Sophia lives in the care of the Prostakovs, who is going to be married off to Skotinin. Reading the letter from Starodum is the beginning of the play. Sophia now turns out to be a rich heiress. Any day now, her uncle is returning to take the girl to his place.

Development of events in the play created by Fonvizin (“Minor”)

We will continue the analysis of the work with a description of how events developed. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th acts are their development. We meet Starodum and Milon. Prostakova and Skotinin are trying to please Starodum, but their flattery, falsity, lack of education and enormous thirst for profit only repels them. They look stupid and funny. The funniest scene in this work is the questioning of Mitrofan, during which the stupidity of not only this young man, but also his mother is revealed.

Climax and denouement

Act 5 - climax and denouement. It should be noted that researchers have different opinions about what moment should be considered the climax. There are 3 most popular versions. According to the first, this is the kidnapping of Sophia Prostakova, according to the second, Pravdin’s reading of a letter, which says that Prostakova’s estate is coming under his care, and, finally, the third version is Prostakova’s rage after she realizes her own powerlessness and tries to “get back "on his servants. Each of these versions is fair, since it examines the work of interest to us from different points of view. The first, for example, highlights the storyline dedicated to Sophia’s marriage. An analysis of the episode of Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor,” connected with marriage, indeed allows us to consider it key in the work. The second version examines the play from a socio-political point of view, highlighting the moment when justice prevails on the estate. The third focuses on the historical one, according to which Prostakova is the personification of the weakened principles and ideals of the old nobility that have become a thing of the past, who, however, do not yet believe in their own defeat. This nobility, according to the author, is based on lack of enlightenment, lack of education, as well as low moral principles. During the denouement, everyone leaves Prostakova. She has nothing left. Pointing to it, Starodum says that these are “worthy fruits” of “evil morality.”

Negative characters

As we have already noted, the main characters are clearly divided into negative and positive. Mitrofan, Skotinin and Prostakovs are negative heroes. Prostakova is a woman seeking profit, uneducated, rude, and domineering. She knows how to flatter to gain benefits. However, Prostakova loves her son. Prostakov appears as the “shadow” of his wife. This is a weak-willed character. His word means little. Skotinin is the brother of Mrs. Prostakova. This is an equally uneducated and stupid person, quite cruel, like his sister, greedy for money. For him, going to the pigs in the barnyard is the best activity. Mitrofan is a typical son of his mother. This is a spoiled young man of 16 who inherited a love of pigs from his uncle.

Issues and heredity

In the play, it should be noted that Fonvizin (“The Minor”) devotes an important place to the issue of family ties and heredity. Analyzing this question, let's say, for example, that Prostakova is only married to her husband (a “simple” man who does not want much). However, she is actually Skotinina, akin to her brother. Her son absorbed the qualities of both his parents - “animal” qualities and stupidity from his mother and weak-willedness from his father.

Similar family ties can be traced between Sophia and Starodum. Both of them are honest, virtuous, educated. The girl listens to her uncle attentively, respects him, and “absorbs” science. Pairs of opposites are created by negative and positive heroes. The children are the spoiled, stupid Mitrofan and the meek, smart Sophia. Parents love their children, but they approach their upbringing in different ways - Starodub talks about truth, honor, morality, and Prostakova only pampers Mitrofan and says that he will not need education. A pair of suitors - Milon, who sees an ideal and his friend in Sophia, who loves her, and Skotinin, who calculates the fortune that he will receive after marrying this girl. At the same time, he is not interested in Sophia as a person. Skotinin does not even try to provide his bride with comfortable housing. Prostakov and Pravdin are in fact the “voice of truth”, a kind of “auditors”. But in the person of the official we find active strength, help and real action, while Prostakov is a passive character. The only thing this hero could say was to reproach Mitrofan at the end of the play.

Issues raised by the author

Analyzing, it becomes clear that each of the above-described pairs of characters reflects a separate problem that is revealed in the work. This is a problem of education (which is complemented by the example of half-educated teachers like Kuteikin, as well as impostors such as Vralman), upbringing, fathers and children, family life, relationships between spouses, the attitude of nobles to servants. Each of these problems is examined through the prism of educational ideas. Fonvizin, sharpening his attention to the shortcomings of the era through the use of comic techniques, places emphasis on the need to change outdated, traditional foundations that have become irrelevant. They drag people into the swamp of stupidity and evil, and liken people to animals.

As our analysis of Fonvizin’s play “The Minor” showed, the main idea and theme of the work is the need to educate the nobility in accordance with educational ideals, the foundations of which are still relevant today.

"Written in the best traditions of Russian classicism. In accordance with the classic canons, the characters in the work are clearly divided into positive and negative, and their names and surnames succinctly characterize and reveal the main features of the characters. However, in contrast to the traditional images of classic plays, the heroes of “The Minor” are devoid of stereotypes, which is what attracts modern readers and viewers.

Positive actors include Pravdin, Sophia, Starodum And Milo. Each of them supports the ideas of the Enlightenment, considering virtue, honesty, love of country, high morality and education to be the main human values. The negative heroes are depicted as their complete opposite - Prostakovs, Skotinin And Mitrofan. They are representatives of the “old” nobility, which with all its might clings to outdated ideas of serfdom and feudalism. Their core values ​​are money, position in the social hierarchy and physical strength.

In Fonvizin’s play “The Minor,” the main characters are divided into peculiar dual pairs, in which the author portrays people with similar social roles, but depicting them in a mirror distortion. So, in addition to a couple of “children” - Sophia and Mitrofan, we can distinguish “educators” - Starodum and Prostakov, “suitors” - Milon and Skotinin, as well as “owners” - Prostakov and Pravdin.

Mitrofan- a teenager and the main character of the comedy - a spoiled, stupid young man of sixteen, for whom his mother, nanny or servants always did everything. Having adopted from his mother a love of money, rudeness and disrespect for his family (Prostakova is ready to deceive her brother in order to arrange a marriage that is profitable for her), and from his father complete lack of will, he behaves like a small child - he does not want to study, while he finds marriage fun fun. The complete opposite of Mitrofan is Sophia. This is an educated, smart and serious girl with a difficult fate. Having lost her parents at an early age and living in the care of the Prostakovs, Sophia does not adopt their values, but, in fact, becomes a “black sheep” in their society (Prostakova is even indignant that the girl can read).

Prostakova appears before readers, on the one hand, as an uneducated, cunning woman who is ready to do almost anything for the sake of profit, and on the other hand, as a practical housewife and loving mother, for whom the happiness and carefree future of her son comes above all else. Prostakova raised Mitrofan the way she was raised, and therefore was able to convey and show by her own example outdated, long-exhausted ideas and values.

U Staroduma a completely different approach to education - he does not treat Sophia like a small child, talking with her as an equal, instructing her and advising her based on his own experience. In the matter of marriage, a man does not undertake to make final decisions for a girl, because he does not know whether her heart is free.
In the image of Starodum, Fonvizin portrays his ideal of a parent and educator - an authoritative, strong personality who herself has walked a worthy path. However, analyzing the system of characters in “The Minor” from the point of view of a modern reader, it is worth noting that the image of Starodum as a teacher is also not ideal. The entire time he was away, Sophia was deprived of parental care and left to her own devices. The fact that the girl learned to read, values ​​morality and virtue is most likely the merit of her parents, who instilled this in her at a young age.

In general, the theme of kinship is important both for the positive characters of the play “The Minor” and for the negative ones. Sophia- daughter of worthy people, Milo- the son of a good friend Starodum. Prostakova received this surname only after marriage; in fact, she is Skotinina. Brother and sister are very similar, they are both driven by a thirst for profit and cunning, they are uneducated and cruel. Mitrofan is depicted as the real son of his parents and his uncle’s pupil, who inherited all their negative traits, including his love for pigs.

Characters whose relationship is not mentioned in the play - Prostakov and Pravdin. Prostakov is radically different from his wife; compared to the active and active Prostakova, he looks weak-willed and passive. In a situation where he must show himself as the owner of the village, the man is lost against the background of his wife. This leads to the fact that the more active Pravdin, who was able to pacify Prostakova, becomes the owner of the estate. In addition, Prostakov and Pravdin act as some kind of “auditors” of what is happening. Pravdin is the voice of the law, while Prostakov is the opinion of the simple (remember the “talking” names of the play) people who do not like how the “old” nobility behave in the person of his wife and brother-in-law, but is afraid of their anger, therefore he speaks only aside and not negotiating.

The last couple of characters are Skotinin and Milon. Men represent outdated and new ideas about marriage and family life. Milon has known Sophia since childhood, they love each other, and therefore their relationship is built on mutual respect and friendship. Skotinin does not even try to get to know the girl better, he is only concerned about his dowry, and he is not even going to arrange good conditions for her after marriage.

In addition to the main characters, the play contains secondary characters - teachers and educators of Mitrofan the underage. Characteristics of the supporting characters – Eremeevna, Tsyfirkina, Kuteikina And Vralman– is connected with their social role in the play. The nanny is an example of a serf who faithfully serves his mistress all his life, enduring beatings and injustice. Using the example of images of teachers, the author exposes all the problems of education in Russia in the 18th century, when children were taught by retired military men, those who had not graduated from the seminary, or even grooms.

For the 18th century, Fonvizin’s innovation was that the author depicted the characters in “The Minor” without excessive pathos and stereotypes inherent in many works of classicism. Each comedy hero is undoubtedly a composite image, but created not according to a ready-made “stencil”, but with its own individual traits. That is why the characters in the work “The Minor”, ​​even today, remain the brightest images of Russian literature.

The main characters of “The Minor” - characteristics of the heroes of Fonvizin’s play |

Article menu:

“The Minor” is a play in five acts written by Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin. A cult dramatic work of the 18th century and one of the most striking examples of classicism. It was included in the school curriculum, was repeatedly staged on the theater stage, received a screen embodiment, and its lines were disassembled into quotes, which today live independently of the original source, becoming aphorisms of the Russian language.

Plot: summary of the play “Minor”

The plot of “The Minor” is well known to everyone since school years, but we will still recall a brief summary of the play in order to restore the sequence of events in our memory.

The action takes place in the village of Prostakovs. Its owners - Mrs. and Mr. Prostakov and their son Mitrofanushka - live the quiet life of provincial nobles. Also living on the estate is the orphan Sofyushka, whom the lady sheltered in her house, but, as it turns out, not out of compassion, but because of the inheritance, which she freely disposes of as a self-proclaimed guardian. In the near future, they plan to give Sophia to Prostakova’s brother Taras Skotinin.

The mistress's plans collapse when Sophia receives a letter from her uncle Starodum, who was still considered dead. Stradum is alive and well and is going on a date with his niece, and he also reports a fortune of 10 thousand in income, which he passes on as an inheritance to his beloved relative. After such news, Prostakova begins to court Sophia, whom she has hitherto given little favor to, because now she wants to marry her to her beloved Mitrofan, and leave Skotinin with nothing.

Fortunately, Starodum turned out to be a noble and honest man who wished well for his niece. Moreover, Sophia already had a betrothed - officer Milon, who had just stopped with his regiment in the village of Prostakov. Starodub knew Milon and gave the young man his blessing.

In desperation, Prostakova tries to organize the kidnapping of Sophia and forcibly marry her to her son. However, even here the treacherous mistress suffers a fiasco - Milo saves his beloved on the night of the kidnapping.

Prostakova is generously forgiven and not put on trial, although her estate, which has long been a source of suspicion, is transferred to a state guardian. Everyone leaves and even Mitrofanushka leaves his mother, because he doesn’t love her, like, in general, no one else in the world.

Characteristics of heroes: positive and negative characters

As in any classic work, the characters in “The Minor” are clearly divided into positive and negative.

Negative heroes:

• Mrs. Prostakova is the mistress of the village;
• Mr. Prostakov is her husband;
• Mitrofanushka is the son of the Prostakovs, an undergrowth;
• Taras Skotinin is the brother of the Prostakovs.

Positive heroes:

• Sophia is an orphan, lives with the Prostakovs;
• Starodum is her uncle;
• Milon - officer, Sophia's lover;
• Pravdin is a government official who came to monitor affairs in the Prostakov village.

Minor characters:

• Tsyfirkin – arithmetic teacher;
• Kuteikin – teacher, former seminarian;
• Vralman is a former coachman, posing as a teacher;
• Eremevna is Mitrofan’s nanny.

Mrs. Prostakova

Prostakova is the most striking negative character, and indeed the most outstanding character in the play. She is the mistress of the Prostakov village and it is the mistress, who has completely suppressed her weak-willed husband, who establishes the lordly order and makes decisions.

At the same time, she is absolutely ignorant, has no manners, and is often rude. Prostakova, like other members of the family, cannot read and despises science. Mitrofanushka’s mother is involved in education only because this is how it is supposed to be in New World society, but she does not understand the true value of knowledge.

In addition to ignorance, Prostakova is distinguished by cruelty, deceit, hypocrisy, and envy.

The only creature she loves is her son Mitrofanushka. However, the mother’s blind, absurd love only spoils the child, turning him into a copy of himself in a man’s dress.

Mr. Prostakov

The figurative owner of the Prostakov estate. In fact, everything is controlled by his domineering wife, of whom he is terribly afraid and does not dare say a word. Prostakov has long lost his own opinion and dignity. He cannot even say whether the caftan sewn by the tailor Trishka for Mitrofan is good or bad, because he is afraid to say something that is not what his mistress expects.

Mitrofan

Son of the Prostakovs, an undergrowth. His family lovingly calls him Mitrofanushka. Meanwhile, it’s time for this young man to enter adulthood, but he has absolutely no idea about it. Mitrofan is spoiled by his mother's love, he is capricious, cruel to servants and teachers, pompous, and lazy. Despite many years of lessons with teachers, the young master is hopelessly stupid, he does not show the slightest desire for learning and knowledge.

And the worst thing is that Mitrofanushka is a terrible egoist; nothing matters to him except his own interests. At the end of the play, he easily leaves his mother, who loved him so unrequitedly. Even she is nothing to him.

Skotinin

Brother of Mrs. Prostakova. Narcissistic, narrow-minded, ignorant, cruel and greedy. Taras Skotinin has a great passion for pigs; the rest is of little interest to this narrow-minded person. He has no idea of ​​family ties, heartfelt affection and love. Describing how well his future wife will heal, Skotinin only says that he will give her the best light. In his system of coordinates, this is precisely what marital happiness consists of.

Sophia

Positive female image of the work. A very well-mannered, kind, meek and compassionate girl. Sophia received a good education, she has an inquisitive mind and a thirst for knowledge. Even in the poisonous atmosphere of the Prostakovs’ house, the girl does not become like the owners, but continues to lead the lifestyle that she likes - she reads a lot, thinks, is friendly and polite to everyone.

Starodum

Sophia's uncle and guardian. Starodum is the voice of the author in the play. His speeches are very aphoristic, he talks a lot about life, virtues, intelligence, law, government, modern society, marriage, love and other pressing issues. Starodum is incredibly wise and noble. Despite the fact that he clearly has a negative attitude towards Prostakova and others like her, Starodum does not allow himself to stoop to rudeness and outright criticism, and as for light sarcasm, his narrow-minded “relatives” cannot recognize it.

Milo

Officer, Sophia's lover. The image of a hero-protector, an ideal young man, a husband. He is very fair and does not tolerate meanness and lies. Milo was brave, not only in battle, but also in his speeches. He is devoid of vanity and low-minded prudence. All of Sophia’s “suitors” talked only about her condition, but Milon never mentioned that his betrothed was rich. He sincerely loved Sophia even before she had an inheritance, and therefore in his choice the young man was not guided by the size of the bride’s annual income.

“I don’t want to study, but I want to get married”: the problem of education in the story

The key problem of the work is the theme of provincial noble upbringing and education. The main character Mitrofanushka receives an education only because it is fashionable and “just the way it is.” In fact, neither he nor his ignorant mother understands the true purpose of knowledge. They should make a person smarter, better, serve him throughout his life and benefit society. Knowledge is gained through hard work and can never be forced into someone's head.

Mitrofan's home education is a dummy, a fiction, a provincial theater. For several years, the unfortunate student did not master either reading or writing. Mitrofan fails the comic test that Pravdin arranges with a bang, but because of his stupidity he cannot even understand this. He calls the word door an adjective, because it is supposedly attached to the opening, he confuses science history with the stories that Vralman tells him in abundance, and Mitrofanushka can’t even pronounce the word “geography”... it’s too tricky.

To show the grotesqueness of Mitrofan’s education, Fonvizin introduces the image of Vralman, who teaches “French and all sciences.” In fact, Vralman (that’s a telling name!) is not a teacher at all, but Starodum’s former coachman. He easily deceives the ignorant Prostakova and even becomes her favorite, because he professes his own teaching methodology - not to force the student to do anything through force. With such zeal as Mitrofan’s, the teacher and student are simply idle.

Education goes hand in hand with acquiring knowledge and skills. Mrs. Prostakova is mostly responsible for him. She methodically imposes her rotten morality on Mitrofan, who (here he is diligent here!) perfectly absorbs his mother’s advice. So, while solving a division problem, Prostakova advises her son not to share with anyone, but to take everything for himself. When talking about marriage, mother speaks only about the bride’s wealth, never mentioning spiritual affection and love. Such concepts as courage, boldness, and valor are not familiar to the undersized Mitrofan. Despite the fact that he is no longer a baby, he is still looked after in everything. The boy cannot even stand up for himself during a clash with his uncle; he immediately begins to call his mother, and the old nanny Eremeevna rushes at the offender with her fists.

The meaning of the name: two sides of the coin

The title of the play has a literal and figurative meaning.

Direct meaning of the name
In the old days, minors were called teenagers, young men who had not yet reached adulthood and had not entered the public service.

The figurative meaning of the name
A fool, an ignoramus, a narrow-minded and uneducated person was also called a minor, regardless of his age. With the light hand of Fonvizin, it was precisely this negative connotation that became attached to the word in the modern Russian language.

Every person is reborn from a minor youth into an adult man. This is growing up, a law of nature. However, not everyone transforms from a dark, half-educated child into an educated, self-sufficient person. This transformation requires effort and perseverance.

Place in literature: Russian literature of the 18th century → Russian drama of the 18th century → The work of Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin → 1782 → The play “The Minor”.

Semakova Anastasia

Characteristics of Mrs. Prostakova, Mitrofanushka, Skotinin through the speech of the heroes

Download:

Preview:

MBOU "Selmenga Secondary School"
branch "Topetskaya Basic School"

Research work on Russian language

8th grade students

Semakova Anastasia

Swear words are a means of speech characterization of the characters in the play.
DI. Fonvizin "Minor"

Head of work – Fedoseeva S.V.

October, 2013

Introduction

Target - explore swear words in the speech of the characters in the play by D.I. Fonvizin "Undergrowth".

Tasks :

• Determine what swear words are and what marks they have in dictionaries.
• Extract from the text of the play by D.I. Fonvizin vocabulary that can be classified as abusive, and analyze the etymology and lexical meaning of these words.
• Determine how the swear words of the characters in the play characterize them.
• Draw conclusions about how abusive language characterizes the characters in the play.

This paper examines the use of swear words by the characters in the play by D.I. Fonvizin “Undergrowth”, with the aim of characterizing the characters.

Speech always characterizes the speaker:

Study

“Dictionary of the Russian Language of the USSR Academy of Sciences” (MAS), edited by A.P. Evgenieva indicates that the adjective abusive refers to the word swearing, and the interpretation of swearing gives as “offensive, abusive words, swearing” and notes the connotation of this word “condemnation, censure, reproaches.”

Let's try to characterize the heroes of the work by D.I. Fonvizin “Undergrown”, using abusive language in their speech. To do this, we wrote out lines containing abusive language from the text of the play, and based on this we compiled a table:

For the etymological analysis of words, we used the dictionary of N.M. Shansky. All words from the list we compiled are marked “Obshcheslav.” and “Original”, except for words fury , borrowed from the Polish language, which got there from the Greek language, and canine , which refers to the word dog, borrowed from the Iranian language.Based on their origin, all the swear words from the play “The Minor” can be divided into groups:

1. Animal origin:

1. Livestock = wealth, money. This is explained by the fact that cattle served as bargaining chips.
2. Mug. Origin unclear. Presumably a contraction of Khavrya Sow. In this case, mug literally means “pig snout.”
3. Bestia. From the argot of seminarians.Is a rethinking of lat. bestia “beast, animal”, Bestia “animal” literally means “breathing”. Dictionary V.I. Dalia points to the Latin origin of this word.
4. Chushka is a suffixal derivative of chukha “pig”, derived from “imitative” chug-chug . Chukha → pig (alternating x//sh). Dictionary V.I. Dalia gives an explanation of the word chukha as "snout, nose, pig's grunt."
5. Canine is an adjective formed from the noun dog.
6. Snout is the front part of the head in some animals.

1. Borrowed from Greek mythology – Fury.
2. Devil / Devil - origin unclear. Presumably "he who digs lives in the earth" and further - "underground spirit."
3. Blockhead - origin unclear. Presumably a suffixal derivative oflost balls, balls "log".

Let's consider the lexical meaning (LZ) of swear words (according to the dictionaries of V. I. Dahl and S. I. Ozhegov)

Most of the words that the characters in the play “The Minor” swear at refer to colloquial and colloquial vocabulary and are labeled “abusive.”

conclusions

So, abusive language as an address is most often present in the speech of Mrs. Prostakova (“And you, cattle, come closer”, “Didn’t I tell you, you thieving mug, to let your caftan widen”, “Get out, you cattle” , “Well... and you, beast, were dumbfounded, and you didn’t dig into your brother’s mug, and you didn’t tear his snout to the ears,” “Tell me, idiot, how will you justify yourself?”). Addressing her maids, Prostakova most often calls them beasts and the servants brutes, while when she wants to achieve something from influential people, she begins to humiliate herself in front of them, for example: “Oh, I’m an incredible fool! Father! I'm sorry. I'm a fool". Since she always uses rude words from colloquial vocabulary, which are not diverse and are related in origin to the animal world, it can be argued that Prostakova is uneducated, ignorant, rude, and cruel to those who cannot protect themselves from her rudeness. Prostakova uses abusive language when communicating with her servants, brother and husband or talking about them, for example: “Don’t be angry, my father, that my freak missed you. I was born so young, my father.” The same applies to her son Mitrofan and brother Skotinin, who use abusive words of animal origin as addresses, for example: “Oh, you damn pig!”

Throughout the entire play, the author constantly plays with words of animal origin in the speech of the characters, thereby trying to expose the bestial behavior of some characters, even though they are people of noble noble origin. For example, the word livestock appears in the play in different meanings. “When only cattle can be happy in our country, then your wife will have bad peace from them and from us,” - in Pravdin’s speech, the word cattle can be understood in different ways: “the general name for domestic farm animals” or “a person similar to cattle " Cattle is the root of the surname of the hero of the play Skotinin. And Prostakova herself, although she now bears the same surname, was also originally Skotinina. It is no coincidence that Kuteikin dictates the words to Mitrofan: “I am cattle” (I am cattle). With the help of these words, Fonvizin constantly ridicules the lack of education and rudeness of the Prostakov and Skotinin family, showing their true essence. The author is trying to convince the reader that, no matter how noble a person’s origin may be, with bestial behavior he will be worse than the cattle itself.

Three teachers, Tsyfirkin, Kuteikin and Vralman, although they are teachers, behave very hostilely towards each other, using the same words of animal origin when meeting. As Prostakova herself is, she chose such teachers for her son: rude and uneducated.

Consequently, abusive language characterizes the heroes of Fonvizin’s play “The Minor” as rude, vicious, uneducated, ignorant people.

Bibliography

1. Emelyanenko E. M. Predicate nouns with the meaning of a negative evaluation // RYASh, 1990, No. 5, pp. 73 - 76.
2. Kimyagarova R. S., Bash L. M., Ilyushina L. A. Dictionary of the language of comedy by D. I. Fonvizin “The Minor.” -http://www.philol.msu.ru/~slavmir2009/sections/?secid=9- International scientific symposium “Slavic languages ​​and cultures in the modern world.” - Moscow, Faculty of Philology, Moscow State University. M. V. Lomonosov, March 24–26, 2009
3. Krysin L.P. Relationships between modern literary language and vernacular // RYASh, 1988, No. 2, pp. 81 - 88.
4. The full text of the “Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language” by Vladimir Ivanovich Dahl (vols. 1-4, 1863-66) in accordance with modern spelling rules.http://slovari.yandex.ru/dict/dal
5. Dictionary of the Russian language S.I. Ozhegova. 10th edition, stereotypical. Ed. Doctor of Philological Sciences, Professor N.Yu. Shvedova. Publishing house "Soviet Encyclopedia", Moscow - 1973.http://www.ozhegov.org
6. Dictionary of the Russian language: In 4 volumes /AS USSR, Institute of the Russian Language; Ed. A.P. Evgenieva. - 3rd ed., stereotype. - M.: Russian language, 1985 -1988. T.1. A - J. 1985. - 696 p. T.2. K-O. 1986. - 736 p.
7. Shansky. N. M. School etymological dictionary of the Russian language. Origin of words / N. M. Shansky, T. A. Bobrova. - 7th ed., stereotype. - M.: Bustard, 2004. - 398, p.http://slovari.yandex.ru/dict/shansky/
8. Fonvizin D.I. Minor //Fonvizin D.I., Griboedov A.S., Ostrovsky A.N. Selected works / Editorial Board: G. Belenky, P. Nikolaev, A. Puzikov; Comp. And entry. Article by V. Turbin; Comp. section "Applications" and notes. Yu. Dvinskaya. - M.: Artist. Lit., 1989. - 608 p.