: pp. 129-135
Lviv Polytechnic National University
Lviv Polytechnic National University

In our time, television has become an integral part of everyday life. That is why the speech that sounds from the screen can be called the model of everyday speech communication. In the lexicon the separation between different categories of words is destroing. The structure of the text has changed considerably, narrators does not limit itself to certain frames. In their speech, TV channel employees use vernacular, jargon, and, in general, vocabulary inherent in certain social groups that were once considered inadmissible to use on the air. During the study of TV broadcasting problems for analysis, the most popular TV channels were selected: “1 + 1”, “STB”, “Inter” on the example of “TSN”, “Window-news” and “News” news releases for literacy, observance of norms and the rules of the Ukrainian language. Most errors are typical. For the most part, it’s felt that everyday speakers use the Russian language, and so they are often mistaken when they speak Ukrainian. As a result, we have identified the most common groups of errors in the leading analysis channels, the most common of which are phonetic and grammatical. Not having a good command of Ukrainian, TV hosts and invited guests on the TV-news resort to rubbing create artificial termsreplacing the analogous long-established matches in the normative Ukrainian language with such fakes. The employees of TV channels “1+1” and “Inter” demonstrate insufficient knowledge of the Ukrainian vocabulary from the screen, they lack Ukrainian words, and they replace to them by familiar Russian. Ignorance of Ukrainian phraseologisms and consistent phrases is also one of the problems for Ukrainian TV presenter. Since television broadens not only the ideas but also the culture of the language, the serious demands are put forward both by the broadcasters on TV channels and on the correctness of pronunciation. We must not forget that television is broadcast to television as a model, a standard.

1. BabychN. D. Praktychna stylistyka i kulʹtura ukrayinsʹkoyi movy: navch. posibnyk / N. D. Babych. – Lʹviv: Svit, 2003. – 432 s.

2. Bilyansʹka O. Movna ahresiyay akanty podkulʹtury movlennya / O. Bilyansʹka // Televiziynay radiozhurnalistyka: zb. nauk.-metod. pratsʹ. Lʹviv, 2003. – S. 35–42.

3.Dmytrovsʹkyy Z. Ye. Televiziyna zhurnalistyka. navch. posibnyk / Z. Ye. Dmytrovsʹkyy. – Lʹviv: Vydavnychyy tsentrLʹvivsʹkoho natsionalʹnoho universytetu imeni Ivana Franka, 2006. – 208 s.

4. Yelisovenko Yu. P. Kulʹtura i tekhnika movlennya v tele-radiozhurnalistytsi / Yu. P. Yelisovenko // Stylʹ I tekst. – K., 2001.– S. 45–52.

5.Kapelyushnyy A. Rosiyanizmy v televiziynomu movlennii v hazetnomu teksti / A. Kapelyushnyy // Televiziynay radiozhurnalistyka: zb. nauk.-metod. pratsʹ. – Lʹviv, 2002. – S. 21–26.

6. Matsyuk Z. O. Ukrayinsʹka mova profesiynoho spilkuvannya: navch. posibnyk dlya fak. zhurnalistyky / Z. O. Matsyuk, A. P. Kovalʹ, H. Ya. Solhanyk, O. F. Pinchuk ta in. – K.: Vyshcha shk., 1983. – 151 s.

7. Mitchuk O. Nova suspilʹno-politychna leksyka suchasnykh ZMI / O. Mitchuk // Televiziyna y radiozhurnalistyka: zb. nauk.- metod. pratsʹ. –Lʹviv, 2003.– S. 43–51.

8. Nikitina N. Ukrayinsʹka mova na telebachenni: sʹohochasna sytuatsiya / N. Nikitina // Dyvoslovo. – 2004. – № 12.

9. Ponomariv O. D. Kulʹtura slova: Movnostylistychni porady: navch. posibnyk / O. D. Ponomariv. – 2-he vyd., stereotyp. – K.: Lybidʹ, 2001. – 240 s.

10.Serbensʹka O. A. Efirne movlennya u vzayemynakh z usnoyu movoyu / O. Serbensʹka // Televiziyna y radiozhurnalistyka: zb. nauk-metod. hratsʹ. – Lʹviv, 2002. – S. 32–37.

11. Serbensʹka O. A. Kulʹtura usnoho movlennya. Praktykum: navch. posibnyk / O. A. Serbensʹka. – K.: Tsentr navchalʹnoyi literatury, 2004. – 216 s.

12. Serbensʹka O. Surzhyk: “nyzʹka mova” bezlad chy movna patolohiya / O. Serbensʹka // Televiziyna y radiozhurnalistyka: zb. nauk.-metod. pratsʹ. Lʹviv, 2001. – S. 23–28

. 13. Shturnak O. Porushennya movnykh norm na ukrayinsʹkykh telekanalakh (UT-1, 1+1, INTER) / O. Shturnak // Televiziyna y radiozhurnalistyka: zb. nauk.-metod. pratsʹ. – Lʹviv, 2003. – S. 51–57.

14. Shturnak O. Movni kontakty yak obʺyekt vyvchennya / O. Shturnak // Televiziyna y radiozhurnalistyka: zb. nauk.-metod. pratsʹ. – Lʹviv, 2009. – Vyp. 8. – S. 119–130.

15.Shturnak O. Intonatsiyna vyraznistʹ – vazhlyvyy element televiziynoho tekstu / O. Shturnak // Visnyk Lʹviv. nats. un-tu: Seriya: zhurnalistyka. – Lʹviv, 2007. – Vyp. 7. – S. 154–160.