As you know, in modern Russian, adjectives with the ending-1 sometimes form one short form (inviolable - inviolable), and sometimes two: not truncated and truncated (immoral - immoral and immoral, daring - daring and (high) daring)However, there are quite a few controversial cases. Thus, the four-volume "Dictionary of the Russian Language" edited by A. P. Evgenieva (Moscow, 1985-1988. Vol. 4) and "Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language" by S. I. Ozhegov and N. Yu. Shvedova (Moscow, 1994) fix only one variant of the short form of the adjective explicit-truncated: yavestv, and the " Big explanatory Dictionary of the Russian language "(St. Petersburg, 1998) gives two options: yavestv and yavestven.
Is there a rule governing the formation of truncated and non-truncated variants? In which cases are both options possible, and in which cases only one is possible? In the manual of B. N. Golovin " How to speak correctly. Notes on the culture of speech" (Moscow, 1988. pp. 51-52) we read: "If the short form of the feminine adjective has nn, then in the short form of the masculine adjective it should be at the end of the combination-nen (bold - bold, inflexible - inflexible, desert - desert, etc.); if the short form of the feminine adjective has nn, then in the short form of the masculine adjective it should be at the end of the combination-nen (bold-bold, inflexible-inflexible, desolate-desolate, etc.); the feminine adjective form has h, then in the short masculine form there should be only one h sound at the end: out - out, provided - provided, called - called.
However, the variability of short forms is observed only for adjectives in -1, so the rule should not apply to words with other endings - such as inflexible, deserted. Since there is no variation in the forms of participles (such as left out, provided for, called) and participial adjectives-
page 34
This rule should also not apply to those who are corrupt (such as exalted, measured, despicable, corrupt, etc.). ...
Read more