# На маты изойдется



## wheelrunner

> Ноги буквально приросли к земле. … Надо ж так глупо влететь, стоишь с тяжеленной дурой на плече, никак не прикинешься, что не имеешь к ней отношения…
> – Семен! – браво рявкнул Боцман у него за спиной. – Чего встал? Волоки херовину, а то бригадир *на маты изойдется*…


Скажите, пожалуйста, что значит «на маты изойдется»? что такое маты?


----------



## Maroseika

Маты is colloquial Plural form of мат - dirty language. In literal language мат cannot have Plural form.
Изойтись is also colloquial Reflexive form of the verb изойти - to shed or to drip with (usually blood, tears, cry). In literal language it cannot be reflexive.


----------



## SamSim-18

В дополнение к* Maroseika*. "На маты изойдется" следует понимать как "очень сильно будет ругаться матом" или просто:  "будет сильно ругаться"


----------



## gvozd

Maroseika said:


> Маты is colloquial Plural form of мат - dirty language. In literal language мат cannot have Plural form.



It definitely can because the word _itself_ is colloquial.

http://ru.wiktionary.org/wiki/мат


----------



## Maroseika

gvozd said:


> It definitely can because the word _itself_ is colloquial.
> 
> http://ru.wiktionary.org/wiki/мат



Do you mean your link somehow confirms your idea? I'm afraid I cannot notice there anything about colloquial character of the word мат. 
Anyway, of whatever character be, мат means 'obscene swearing'. Swearing cannot be Plural. When saying маты they actually mean матерные слова. But this is incorrect.


----------



## learnerr

gvozd said:


> It definitely can because the word _itself_ is colloquial.


Let us suppose you're right with the second statement, in this case:
1. Does the colloquial character of the word make it to be not part of the "литературный язык" (which in English is not "literary language", but "standard language"; yes, the Russian name is unhappy)?
2. If it does not make, then what relevance does your statement have to Maroseika's statement?
3. If it does make, then how can _any_ form of the word, including plural, be part of the standard language?
Thank you.


----------



## gvozd

Maroseika said:


> I'm afraid I cannot notice there anything about colloquial character of the word мат.


There is a synonim for мат in that article - матерщина (it is clickable, and is marked as colloquial).

http://www.gramota.ru/slovari/dic/?word=%EC%E0%F2&all=x



> *5. МАТ,* -а;_ м.__ Разг._
> Неприличная, оскорбительная брань; сквернословие.



The 'literary word' would be "обсценная лексика".

The link in my previous post confirms that the word can have the plural form.

By the way, you said that swearing can't be in plural, but both Russian equivalents that I know have plural forms according to Викисловарь. I mean ругань and брань.


----------



## Maroseika

gvozd said:


> There is a synonim for мат in that article - матерщина (it is clickable, and is marked as colloquial).
> http://www.gramota.ru/slovari/dic/?word=%EC%E0%F2&all=x


Right, the dictionary at gramota.ru says it's colloquial, however there was not such a mark at your previous link. Thank you for the correct link.



> By the way, you said that swearing can't be in plural, but both Russian equivalents that I know have plural forms according to Викисловарь. I mean ругань and брань.


Wictionary is not very reliable source. In particular, in other dictionaries such forms like *ругани are shown with asterisk, i.e. like formally possible but not used forms. In live language such words as ругань and брань are hardly ever used in Plural - because already the Single form means a generic notion.

By the way, here is the answer about *маты at Грамота.ру.


----------



## learnerr

to gvozd
Okay, we supposed you're right with the second statement; the question remains. You said that the word маты can be used in the standard language (whether its singular form, the word мат, can be used there, you did not say). What made you think so? Do note, you and I meant the standard language, not the Russian language.


----------



## gvozd

learnerr said:


> to gvozd
> Okay, we supposed you're right with the second statement; the question remains. You said that the word маты can be used in the standard language (whether its singular form, the word мат, can be used there, you did not say). What made you think so? Do note, you and I meant the standard language, not the Russian language.



I don't understand what you want from me. Sorry. Both мат and маты would sound inappropriate in breaking news, for example. Instead обсценная лексика would be used. Nevertheless, if a word is colloquial, it can be used occasionally in less formal speech, why not? Does this automatically make the language of the participants 'non-standard'?


----------



## Maroseika

gvozd said:


> Both мат and маты would sound inappropriate in breaking news, for example. Instead обсценная лексика would be used. Nevertheless, if a word is colloquial, it can be used occasionally in less formal speech, why not? Does this automatically make the language of the participants 'non-standard'?



I believe we should distinguish between colloquialisms and the faults of speech. Мат is quite literary word, although some dictionaries consider it as informal (colloquial). Маты is just the fault of speech, it is not recordered in any dictionary as possible Plural form of мат in the sense of 'obscenities', this is confirmed also by Грамота.ру.
Therefore such words as маты (or матный - one more popular fault, instead of матерный) really make the speech non-standard or better say substandard.


----------



## wheelrunner

> Маты is the colloquial Plural form of мат - dirty language. In the literary (или -кмк learner прав - standard)
> language мат cannot have Plural form.





> 1. Does the colloquial character of the word make it to be notprevent it from being part of the "литературный язык" (which in English is not "literary language", but "standard language"; yes, the Russian name is unhappy* infelicitous)?
> 2. If it does not make it so, then what relevance does your statement have to Maroseika's statement?


*В принципе unhappy тоже возможно, но по-моему это архаичный вариант.



> There is a synonym for мат in that article


----------



## igusarov

Maroseika said:


> [...] in other dictionaries such forms like *ругани are shown with asterisk, i.e. like formally possible but not used forms. In live language such words as ругань and брань are hardly ever used in Plural - because already the Single form means a generic notion.


I would venture that "маты" here may have been used as a simplified form of "матюки", which definitely has the plural form.


----------



## Maroseika

igusarov said:


> I would venture that "маты" here may have been used as a simplified form of "матюки", which definitely has the plural form.


Actually I also wrote in the post # 5, that it meant separate obscene words, (although I'm not sure about exact etymology of "маты", which might be just a widening of the sense of "мат" like swearing > swearing word). 
Anyway, this is the substandard word.


----------



## learnerr

gvozd said:


> I don't understand what you want from me.


I think that in the quote that you were citing Maroseika used a different definition of what means for a language to be "standard"; his definition was technical, "one that is prescribed by dictionaries and textbooks", your definition was personal, "one that is appropriate in formal contexts". Maroseika has already said that he was meaning the dictionary labels. In dictionaries appear, among others labelled as "correct", words of the colloquial register, so they are part of the standard language, too (I feel something is wrong with my word order, but cannot think how to fix it); also, however you are using your wordstock in an occasional situation, the records in the dictionaries do not change.

I disagree with Maroseika, though, that using the super-standard language is automatically a "fault" of the speaker. But this leads very far. As for the plural word itself, I have heard it for the first time in wheelrunner's quote (wheelrunner, thank you for your corrections!), and I have liked it very much.


----------



## Primomattino

Употребление слова "мат" во множественном числе в значении "ругательства" характерно больше для просторечия юго- и западнорусского. Лет 30 назад это можно было услышать на Дону, на Украине, в Белоруссии. Сейчас, в связи с миграциями, подобные обороты распространяются и в средней России.


----------

