Come or come: how to spell this word correctly?

To the credit of many visitors to Internet sites, they are interested not only in the personal life of movie stars, but also in literacy issues. "How to write:" come "or" come "?" - this is a question often asked by users of the World Wide Web. Let's try to understand.

What are we arguing about?

From the point of view of elementary logic, there are no problems in solving this issue. Both these words are verbs in an indefinite form (infinitive), since they answer the question: "What to do?" The infinitive is exactly what defines the verb in the dictionary. So what's easier? Open the dictionary, and check: come or come?

All modern dictionaries are unanimous: the correct variant is "to come". But for some reason, the doubt arose, and it is this verb that provokes fierce controversy?

Let's turn to the classics. Pushkin's play "The Stone Guest", 1948 edition: "Ask the statue tomorrow to Dona Anna to come later in the evening and stand by the door on the clock." What is this? The light of Russian poetry did not know the spelling of the word "come", and the Soviet correctors known for their meticulousness did not correct the text before the press?

Leo Tolstoy: "We must come to the state of the child" (from thinking about religion). "You see, I came, therefore, I could come" (from private correspondence). These texts were also published in the Soviet years. Is it really a mistake?

Let's listen to specialists

There is no mistake. For many years in the choice between the words "to come" or "to come" there was no present unambiguousness, and the second option was even more preferable.

Turning to the luminaries of the Russian language, living in the past centuries, you can see the following. In the dictionary of Vladimir Dal, in fact, there is no dilemma: come or come? As written in the publication, both are correct. In the explanatory dictionary of Efremova and in the orthographic Ozhegova, only the verb "to come" is present. In Ushakov we find the same variant as the main one, but also the words "come" and "come" are considered acceptable. As for the conjugations of this verb, then along with modern "come, come" are allowed - with the mark "outdated" - and the options "come, come".

This discrepancy in spelling can be explained only by a special variety of forms of the Russian language and the traditions existing in it. With this, a large number of people interested in the problem are connected: how is it proper to come or to come? Faced with old books or other sources with the option of "coming", many still consider it to be true.

Cunning?

Someone, so as not to puzzle over writing, suggests simply replacing controversial verbs with their synonyms: to come, to come, to come. But, of course, such a recommendation can be regarded only as a joke. Any word carries its own meaning, and its replacement with a synonym may turn out to be either inappropriate or unquantifiable due to a number of representations. We can say "come to a consensus", but we never use the verb "to come" in this situation. In principle, in the expression "come on a date" this alternative option can be used, and the meaning of what was said will not be affected in the process. But I would like to look at the reaction of a young girl, whose lover (especially if he is not a military one) would say that he asks her to come on a date ...

And if so?

Even the use of the infinitive infinitive "come" will not save the situation. To come is the perfect form of the verb, which indicates a certain concrete result of the action: come to consciousness, come to a stop. And to come is an imperfect kind, it does not presuppose a mandatory result. To come to a stop - does not mean to be there, to come to consciousness - it's not necessary to wake up.

Maybe you should not be cunning. Is not it better to just remember how to spell correctly? Come, according to the rules adopted in 1956 - the only currently acceptable option,

The population is against!

It is interesting that even a specific answer in this matter does not save us from new doubts and even objections. Why from two variants - to come or to come - the first one was chosen? In addition, there is a similar verb without a prefix - "go," but there is no word "go" or "go" in Russian. There is also a "d" in other forms: come, come. Where is the logic in choosing the infinitive to "come"?

Many people pay attention to the pronunciation of this word. In colloquial speech, the sounding of the "i" is usually lost, most of the time it is heard "come" - why not make such and a written form?

Individual Internet users, not understanding the logic of choice, even consider the option of "coming" by the typical tyranny of some official from the education that accepted these rules. Who knows, maybe so. This version is all the more interesting if you look at the year the rules come into force. 1956: the country is headed by N. Khrushchev. Was there a lot of voluntaristic decisions made in those years?

And philologists - for!

The choice of the form "come" is controversial not only for amateurs, but also for a number of qualified specialists. And yet some philologists consider this decision to be fully justified. With reference to Kozma Prutkova ("Look at the root!"), A specialist on the Internet simply offers a detailed analysis of these words. In the infinitive "come" and in its various word forms (go, go, go, etc.), it is very difficult to single out the root. The only significant part can be considered only "and", which can also be omitted (went, gone) or go to the "i" (go, go). For the Old Slavonic language, to which the verb "to go" belongs, this state of affairs is not uncommon. The analysis of the word "go" will give us the root "and", the infix "d", the verbal suffix "ty." From this point of view, the "come" option is quite logical: "when" is a prefix, "d" is the root and all the same suffix.

Will everyone answer such questions? Even his author, trying to tell and prove how to correctly write "come", how to correctly disassemble other word forms of this verb, still does not forget to refer to complex language processes and their hard-to-explain results. Maybe this is just the point?

About Russian

Users of the Network, within the framework of the dispute: "to come" or "to come", the spelling of many other words was also questioned. Why, for example, do we write "Bolshevik" and at the same time "stupid", "kulak", if according to the logic of things all 3 words should have the same suffix? The author of the question is trying to argue. The pier, the variant "Bolshevik" is formed from "Bolshevism", and not from "Bolshevik", and therefore is not written through "ts", as "kulak". But this answer is not very convincing, because the word "Bolshevik", although it is present in dictionaries, is usually not used in practice. No matter what formative noun it was, the second variant is usually used as an adjective.

The word "Bolshevik" and everything related to it, are no longer relevant, and one can not puzzle over their spelling. But how many other words in the Russian language, the writing of which makes you think deeply!

How to write: "victory" or "victory"? - are interested in comrades. But in any way! There are no such words! For the verb "to win" in the 1st person of the singular number of the future tense, there simply is no form. Quite suitable options - "I can win", "I can win".

"Do not lay a mirror on the desk" - the classic version of the error, which caused the conflict in the remarkable film "We'll Live To Monday". Two common misunderstandings: "lie down" and "poklast." It is important to remember: the verb "to lie down" without prefixes does not exist. The correct option is to "lay". The same verb, in turn, is also not used with prefixes; Here, only the words "put", "invest", etc. can be true.

How to form the imperative mood of the verb "to go"? Well, certainly not "ehe" or "ride"! "Go", "come", "call" - these are the appropriate options.

About borrowed words

If it is sometimes so difficult to determine the spelling of Russian words, then what about foreign terms? Refuse to use them, as suggested by some zealous heads, is not worth it - more expensive! Which is easier: say "air conditioning" or come up with some new definition like "air-purifier-cooler"? It's too complicated!

So, you just need to remember. For example, your favorite coffee is espresso, not expresso; At a fast train and a drink a spelling different.

About the Leninist Covenants

"Learn, learn and study again!" - once called Ulyanov-Lenin, and with this testament the main Bolshevik really should agree. Study is the only option to make your letter and speech more or less literate. Wherever it turns out, you need to dig yourself to the point. Where it does not work - just remember. To learn grammar, finally, to look through the dictionaries.

On the Internet, they are sometimes interested in the derivatives of the verbs that we are studying. They ask how it is written: "prishol" or "came"? This question somehow answering is embarrassing - the situation is thoroughly understood in school lessons. Well, of course, I have come! The letter "o" after sizzling is still possible in the case of a few nouns (seam, burn), but in the case of verbal endings it can not be. Here, even a head over the spelling is not necessary to break, it is enough to take a textbook and learn the rules.

What for?

But is it important to write correctly? After all, without the reading and writing, whole nations and generations, and nothing! Communication on the Internet now reveals blatant illiteracy, but this does not prevent people from talking and finding a common language. And if they do not, then because of political or other differences, but not because of errors in the letter.

To some extent, talking about the need to express yourself beautifully and without errors is pointless. Who feels the need to be literate, he seeks every opportunity to improve their knowledge and replenish the vocabulary. To whom the presence of errors and a miserable syllable do not interfere with life in the world, he will continue to live, not listening to any admonitions.

That's just ... Educated people mistakes in someone else's letters extremely cut eyes, and immediately lost respect for their author. Someone compares an illiterate text with the dirty neck of its owner, for someone, spelling errors are akin to spots on clothes. Does someone want to be seen as a slob in someone else's eyes?