CC BY
125
Section 5. Linguistics
Section 5. Linguistics
Kadeyeva Maira, Eurasian National University, Docent, Theoretical Applied Linguistics Department E-mail: kadmi_ru@mail.ru
Bekturova Zhanat, Eurasian National University, Docent, Theoretical Applied Linguistics Department E-mail: bekturova.z@mail.ru
Actual problems of the analysis of language consciousness
Abstract: The article analyses the main theoretical statements of the cognitive linguistics in respect of the conceptualization and categorization processes. Taking the “norm" notion as an example we suggest the lingua philosophical and ethnic cultural description of this notion in the language consciousness of the native speakers. Theoretical significance of the study is in the further development of the completely new functionally — active approach, itemizing the mechanism of the “norm" concept study category notion and the linguistic means of its presentation.
Keywords: language consciousness, anomaly, conceptualization, categorizatio.
Theoretical foundations of the language and thinking, language thinking, language and consciousness problems from the positions of the cultural-historical and active approaches, being extremely developing nowadays spread into still new fields of investigation of the reality and consequently — scientific knowledge [4; 5; 9; 11 and others]. The norm problems as a basic of the human behavior and its subject — human person is the subject matter of psychology, sociology, culture study, anthropology, biology, medicine, social ethology. Some specific sciences such as management, ergonomics, medical deontology, criminalistics, criminology, legal psychology, delictology and others also are interested in studying the norm as a cultural phenomenon. As a whole we may distinguish between the sciences which study the norm into two parts — normol-ogy, general theoretical discipline of norms and normo study, which is aiming at the norm study from the point of view of its cultural specifically historical and regional content.
Inspite of the fact that norm, “correct" speech, have been realized centuries ago (norm realization history is very antique, when the ancient thinkers started to develop their doctrine of analogy and anomaly) the general notion of the norm is rather definite, though very briefly it was characterized in the E. Alman’s article «Das normative Moment im Bedeutugsbe-griff» [1], published in the Annals of the Finnish Academy of sciences. The most important notion of the article is the understanding of the language system not only as the abstraction of the definite “speaking”, but as some kind of the “normative ideology", which consciously or unconsciously regulates the speaking. In this very general understanding, the norm, according to E. Alman, is inherent to any language idiom and is
treated by him as one of the forms of the habit normativity in the human society [1, 7]. However, in spite of existing important language norm characteristics in the E. Alman’s article, the norm notion is presented in detail in the works of the Czech linguists V Matezius, B. Gavrank, B. Trnk, I. Vahk and others.
While further constructing the general normology theory we should firstly pay attention to the dubious norm characteristics. Besides, we should take into consideration the whole previous historical experience of the norm category study and systematization, of the personal and social-historical practice, world practical development. On one hand the norm may be treated in its objective-real content, i. e. in its relation to the objective reality, on the other hand — the norm possesses its practical evaluation, because in its content the human evaluation oriented relation to the world is specifically interpreted. The norm being the thinking category, i. e. the class of the definite concepts, forms a concept system inside itself, which are either antagonists to the other category, or the intermediary, or a synthesis of the opposite categorical definitions. The principle of pairing (dyad) and trinity (triad) provides for the norm description not in isolation, but in a complex of the nearest, hierarchically correlated categorical blocks (subsystems). Such “norm" image as of the polymorph formation is characterized by the bulkiness and multivariate, possessing the complex logical structure, and is the result of the reality understanding in the limits of the socially elaborated cognitive models. Norm is not only the totality of the definite principles and statements but a set of plots as well. A person facing a new situation is trying to include it into the previously familiar data structure — a frame. The norm penetrates into
56
Actual problems of the analysis of language consciousness
the sub consciousness, which has “sufficiently automatized and because of these unconscious skills and motivational conflicts displaced from the sphere of consciousness", “social norms absolutely acquired by the person”, “those intuitive manifestations, not related to the generation of the new information” [10]. As a result, the norm as a rule, possesses the null semiotic value: it is well-known, an individual does not have to solve the intellectual problem facing the standard familiar situation, because thanks to his previous experience he has developed the automated actions, thinking inertia, ability to reproduce the norm on the action level. And in contrast, the norm is interpreted every time, de — automation of perception takes place to such an extent, in which their automatic usage is stopped, and when an old fit doesn’t work and a new fit is necessary. The norm is transferred into the presupposition, into the phone knowledge, which doesn’t demand explication and verbalization, general knowledge of the society. They are aiming at the consolidation of the mandatory, typical, general. This is an invariant of knowledge of the corresponding phenomenon, shared by the community members. This provides for its usage in different situations, typical included. The norm is used for the realizing of the current situation, its development modeling. Thus we may predict, construct the awaiting system if we know the norm. “Common knowledge — are the statements and stable stereotypes dominating in the ordinary consciousness and dictating the evaluation system and determining the world outlook, i. e. everything that the ordinary people take for granted and predetermined in relation to the routine of things” [8].
According to [2], the processes of the human classifying activity, allowing him to “select and compare (identify and distinguish) the objects and events” is the base for the norm conceptualization and categorization. Decisive factors of conceptualization, preceding the categorization, are the knowledge (prevailing world view), ways of the world outlook and understanding of the world by the perceiver, i. e. the “prism”, through which all information comes. Conceptualization process, which is mediated by the linguistic consciousness, is the understanding of the information acquired by a man, and as a result “conceptual system in the brain (psycho) is formed” [2]; structuring and ordering of the system is performed in the process of the categorization. In the narrow sense the process of categorization is the structuring of a phenomenon, object or process into the definite categories of the human experience (the so called profiling according to R. Langacker [7], and recognition it as the member of the category; in a broad sense — it’s the formation and distinguishing of the categories themselves, division of the outer and inner world of man according to the essential characteristics of its being through minimizing the number of bits and sets. Conceptualization is aiming at the distinguishing of some “minimal units of the human experience” in their ideal content presentation, categorization is focused on the unification of the units, which in some cases reveal likeness or are characterized as identical, into the more large divisions [6].
The norms should be acquired by the individual as his own, they should be “brought out”. Only in this case they will be the basis for the reality perception. Besides availability of the opposition between due and thing there exist an opposition between the formal norms, which are due to their formality extremely seldom cover the individual completely, and the other norm system, which is true for a certain individual. Consequently, we may speak about declarative and procedure norms, which difference is conditioned by the fact, that the “brought about” norm is based on the explicit knowledge, i. e. personal experience knowledge. This field of knowledge is considered to be more important and valuable (consequently the norms based on it), in comparison with the inexplicit knowledge, which are based on some external source.
The main norm function is an evaluation of the certain phenomena, i. e. their comparison with a base. This common function is carried out by private functions of reflection, measuring, classification,prediction, and control [3]. Performance of these functions by the norm is confirmed by the results of the logical and philosophical studies and is reflected in the various facts of the language.
Thus, the study of norm in the whole complex of fundamental problems of lingua philosophy, logics, semantics, stylistics, esthetics, psychology and others allows to the following conclusion:
1) concept “norm” as a reflection unit and interpretation of reality (physical and mental) by the human consciousness is a dynamic functional forming, determined by the worldview and cultural factors;
2) the norm category, ontologically associated with the sheer and due categories has been developing in the process of the human cognition of the reality and has been obtaining the logical, morphology-syntactical, semantic and cognitive interpretations (conception) in the modern integrated theory of language;
3) at the present stage the norm category is a complex cogniolinguistic forming, which special cognitive status is due to the dialectal ambiguity of the interaction between the thinking individual and the reality;
4) norm as a multifaceted phenomenon, differing in the source of formation and in the way of generalizing creates a conceptual space providing possibilities to distinguish the certain regularities in the scientific and ordinary forms of the language consciousness; understanding of the norm is based on the principles of analogy, reproducibility, motivation, and coherence;
5) norm in itself contains a value paradigm, continuity which is the basis of the strength of the world, and the behaviors which are forbidden or recommended to follow; normal functioning of any society requires compliance with a specific set of rules, regulating different spheres of society; general, pri-vate/his and others in the norm are intertwined;
6) methods of forming ideas of norm are fixed in the semantics of words and in the cognitive models, which
57
Section 5. Linguistics
correlated with the superficial and deep layers of the content plane; semantic and cognitive plane layers of the “norm” concept are available to the descriptions in the form of models: semantic structures and cognitive models, containing the explicit and implicit interrelated components;
7) reflected notions of the norm is in the meaning of individual words, phraseological units, language cliches, and it is also embodied on the level of syntax constructions; in addition, language units semantic connotations, accompanying the main value are important.
References:
1. Ahlmann E. Das normative Moment im Bedeutugsbegriff. Annales Academiae scienciarum fennicae. Ser. B, V. X. Helsinki, 7. - 1926.
2. Boldyrev N. N. Cognitive semantics [Когнитивная семантика]. - Tambov, 2000. - 112.
3. Fedyaeva N. D. Norma vs Nenorma = Expected vs Unexpected [Норма vs HeHopMa = Ожидаемое vs Неожиданное].// The Siberian philological magazine. - Vol. 2. - 2009. - Р. 136-143.
4. Krongauz M. A. Norma: semantic and pragmatical aspects [Норма: семантический и прагматический аспекты]. Intimate meanings: Word. Text. Culture: Collections in honor of N. D. Arutyunova. - Moscow, 2004. - Р. 137-141.
5. Krysin L. P. Language norm and speech practice [Языковая норма и речевая практика^/ZDomestic notes. - 2005. -Vol. 2 (23).//[Electronic resource]. - Available from: http://www.classes.ru/philiology/krysin-0,5htm (08.08.2011).
6. Kubryakova E. S. Concept. Short dictionary of cognitive terms. In E. S. Kubryakova, V Z. Demyankov, Ue. G. Pankraz, L. G. Luzina. - Moscow, 1996. - Р. 90-93.
7. Langacker R. Concept, Image, and Symbol. The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. - N.-Y., 1991. - 395.
8. Piaget Ge. Speech and thinking of the child [Речь и мышление ребенка]. Moscow-Leningrad, 1932. - 360.
9. Radbil T. B. Norma and anomaly in a paradigm «reality - the text» [Норма и аномалия в парадигме «реальность -текс^^У/Philological sciences. - Vol. 1. - 2005. -Р. 53-63.
10. Simonov V P. Motivated brain. Higher nervous activity and natural-science fundamentals of the general psychology [Мотивированный мозг. Высшая нервная деятельность и естественнонаучные основы общей психологии]. - Moscow, 1987. - 180.
11. Uryson E. V Norma, sample, standard, standard, template: notes about polysemanticism [Норма, образец, стандарт, эталон, шаблон: заметки о полисемии]. The Word and language: сб. articles to Yu. D. Apresyan’s 80 anniversary. - Moscow, 2011. - Р347-358.
Korepina Natalia Alexeevna, Candidate of Philological sciences, Associate Professor, assistant professor of the Foreign Languages Department for Technical Specialities No. 2, Irkutsk National Research Technical University, Irkutsk (Russia)
E-mail: cosmir@yandex.ru
The semantics of the word (One)self
Abstract: The semantics of the word (One)self in the Russian language is examined in the article. The word (One)self is analyzed as a core component of the functional and semantic category of Self in various contexts.
Keywords: semantics, Self, Oneself, the functional and semantic category of Self, meaning, a pronominal noun.
Корепина Наталья Алексеевна, к. фил. н., доцент, доцент кафедры иностранных языков для технических специальностей № 2, Иркутский Национальный Исследовательский Технический Университет, Иркутск (Россия)
E-mail: cosmir@yandex.ru
Семантика слова сам
Аннотация: В статье рассматривается семантика слова сам в русском языке. Проводится анализ слова сам как ядерного компонента функционально-семантической категории самости в разных контекстах.
Ключевые слова: семантика, самость, сам, функционально-семантическая категория самости, значение, местоименное существительное.
58
