CC BY
68
UDC 332.1
LANGUAGE CONSCIOUSNESS AS THE PECULIARITY OF CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
Yu.A. Petrova
Rostov state university of economics, Rostov-on-Don, Russia science-almanac@mail. ru
Different words can create various contextual considerations because language forms our thoughts, the nature of our communication^ choices, and the relations, identity, and evaluative outcomes of this choice. From the twentieth century language came to be regarded as an "intermediate world" between thought and reality, individual consciousness and culture, a world in which an unstructured stream of impressions and unrelated messages got a conceptual form. The culture of the North Caucasus is not only a spatio-temporal boundaries of existence of separate ethnic groups living in this territory, but also reflects the vital functions of the individual, group and society as a whole. The ethnolinguistic view of the North Caucasus is a complex, dynamic, secondary formation, which has invariant ethno-linguistic constants, providing communication not only within the framework of the ethno-linguistic culture but also between cultures, due to the fact that language and culture are interconnected with each other.
Key words: North Caucasus, language, consciousness, culture, semiotization, ethnolinguistic identity, lingua-
culture.
Our language reflects our culture, psyche and mode of thought. We all differ not only according to our geographical position, pronunciation and different meaning of words in our communication, but also in grammatical system (gender, case, tenses etc.) of our language. For many centuries philosophers from different edge of our earth have lined up to announce that each language reflects the qualities of the nation that speaks it. In the 17th century F. Bacon explained that one can infer "significant marks of the genius and manners of people and nations from their language". In the 18th century F. E. de Condillac pointed out that "each language expresses the character of the people who speak it". Another prominent figure as G. J. G. Herder said that "the intellect and the character of every nation are stamped in its language" [1, p.3].
We try to comprehend the fact that to talk about the world «out there» will of necessity involve not only propositions to be judged for truth, but something more - communicative intentions. The meanings carried by our words must thus depend not just on what we say, but who we are and what we hope our interlocutors to know. Yet in focusing on the ways «intentions» are embodied in all acts of speech, constrained by the relationships and expectations that define our local world [3]. We are all different and unique and we shouldn't forget about the peculiarities of language, consciousness and culture of North Caucasian's population.
"Linguistic turn" in the humanities in the beginning of the twentieth century led to the establishment and development of hermeneutics, analytical philosophy, structuralism and other humanitarian areas, according to J. Derrida "our historical and metaphysical epoch must determine the integrity of its problematic horizon through language" [7, p. 119]. Language came to be regarded as an "intermediate world" between thought and reality, individual consciousness and culture, a world in which an unstructured stream of impressions and unrelated messages got a conceptual form [10, p. 52].
Caucasus Mountains create ideal conditions for the functioning of various national languages, so the language situation in the North Caucasus is characterized by the coexistence of diverse forms of language. This region is a home for more than hundred nationalities with their own language consciousness and cultural peculiarities [11, p. 36]. Our process of thinking involves the use of language as a system. In this case, language is a mirror of the mind. The structure of our sentences is overwhelmingly similar to the structure of thoughts, taking it for granted that thoughts have structure. For example, the phrase - ^mptf^p (Arminian language), qirmizi gul (Azeri
language), ^ootq^o 356^360 (Georgian), which means «red roses» is structurally related in different ways to «blue delphiniums», which means that «flowers are colored» and our knowledge
46
consists of many aspects of mental structure on the relation between logic and language. The structure of formal logical languages is simplified compared to the exuberance characteristic of natural languages, but that simplification is itself only expressible in natural language [5, p. 43].
Language represents the way of our understanding of others feel about us or what we are doing, a concurrently opportunity for us to consciously reflect and shape our own unique personality of self [2, p. 335]. To perform the experiences and ideas clearly we have to select the proper words for the proper situations. As society and language reflect one another, so it is essential for the speakers to respect and understand the changing in the words meaning.
The choice of words can show the bias in how people perceive the world. Generally speaking, different words can create various contextual considerations because language forms our thoughts, the nature of our communicational choices, and the relations, identity, and evaluative outcomes of this choice. Language reflects the way we express ourselves during our communicative process, in both its written and verbal forms. Language is an important channel, which transfers the way of our thinking and feeling [4]. Our language is not only as a basic definition of features and tools through which we enter into communication processes, but also as a mechanism of the formation of thought and the reflection of our consciousness, that makes us active individuals of language production.
The culture of the North Caucasus is not only a spatio-temporal boundaries of existence of separate ethnic groups living in this territory, but also reflects the vital functions of the individual, group and society as a whole. The North Caucasus is rich in different nationalities with its own specific behavior, consciousness and activity, expressed in works of art, tools, symbols, signs, and forms of language, reflected in the acts of communication.
During the acts of communication, it is necessary to overlap the communicant's codes, at the same time, non-overlapping parts of the code compose the area, which deforms or rearranges in the process of changing from one addresser to another [9, p.38]. It means that all information in the human's consciousness is organized in a specified hierarchy.
Thus, ethnolinguistic view of the North Caucasus is a complex, dynamic, secondary formation, which has invariant ethno-linguistic constants, providing communication not only within the framework of the ethno-linguistic culture but also between cultures, due to the fact that language and culture are interconnected with each other: "Outside world in which a person exists, becoming a cultural factor, is exposed by semiotization and is divided into the area of objects, which mean, symbolize and indicate something, that have meaning, and objects that represent only themselves" [8, p. 260]. This approach allowed us to examine the interconnection of language, consciousness and culture in the context of language model of the North Caucasus, where ethnic and cultural consciousness in general can be defined as a mode of existence concept-sphere of language - at different levels of consciousness of ethnoculture "produced by those meanings and ideas, on the basis of which formed the cultural concepts" [6, p. 77].
The world view of a certain ethnic group living in the North Caucasus is characterized by the most important cultural and meaning dominants for this ethnicity, which is defined in linguocul-ture as "concepts". Language consciousness of a person operates his conceptual experience that gives us access to the hidden meaning of linguistic signs.
The world view of the North Caucasus as a subjective view of objective reality is exposed by semiotization, objectified in different subsystems of signs in language and turns into ethnolin-guistic view of a certain nationality, because different ethnic groups use different "means of internalization and semiotization open for themselves the whole world of knowledge", relying on their own, already existing perception of the world system.
References
1. Deutscher G. Through the Language Glass: Why the World Looks Different in Other Languages. Metropolitan books, Henry Holt & Company, Ney York, 2010.
2. Kessel F.S. The Development of Language and Language Researchers: Essays in Honor of Roger Brown. Psychology Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2013.
3. Petrova Y.A. Ethnography of communication // Humanitarian and socio-economic sciences. No 2. 2016.
4. Petrova Y.A., Podporina A.A. The main theories in the field of communication and the selection of words in our language, according to our cultural background // News of Science & Education, England, in 2016.
5. Smith N. Chomsky: Ideas and Ideals. Cambridge University Press, 1999.
6. Alefirenko N.F. Linguaculture: value-semantic space of language. Moscow, 2010.
7. Jacques Derrida Grammatology. Moscow, 2000.
8. Lotman Y.M. Semiosphere. St. Petersburg, 2001.
9. Lotman Y.M. The structure of the art text // Lotman Y.M. On the art. SPb., 1998.
10. Rezhabek E.Y., Filatov A.A. Cognitive Cultural. SPb., 2010.
11. Shleyvis P.I. Nekotorye problemy sinkhronnogo i diakhronnogo opisaniiaT iazykov: mezhvuzovskii sbornik nauchnykh trudov. Pyatigorsk State. Linguistic university, 1998.
12. Kamalova O.N., Andramonova V. V. Network society: problems of development and new forms of identity // Actual problems of science: from theory to practice, Materials III All-Russian scientific-practical conference. 2016.
13. Kolosova O.Y., Goncharov V.N. Economic and ecological safety of the region: strategy choice // Science almanac of Black Sea region countries. 2015. No 3. http://science-almanac.ru
Литература
1. Deutscher G. Through the Language Glass: Why the World Looks Different in Other Languages. Metropolitan books, Henry Holt & Company, Ney York, 2010.
2. Kessel F.S. The Development of Language and Language Researchers: Essays in Honor of Roger Brown. Psychology Press, Taylor& Francis Group, 2013.
3. Petrova Y.A. Ethnography of communication // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. № 2. 2016.
4. Petrova Y.A., Podporina A.A. The main theories in the field of communication and the selection of words in our language, according to our cultural background // News of Science & Education, England, 2016.
5. Smith N. Chomsky: Ideas and Ideals. Cambridge University Press, 1999.
6. Алефиренко Н.Ф. Лингвокультурология: ценностно-смысловое пространство языка. М., 2010.
7. ДерридаЖ. О грамматологии. М., 2000.
8. Лотман Ю.М. Семиосфера. С.-Петербург, 2001.
9. Лотман Ю.М. Структура художественного текста // Лотман Ю.М. Об искусстве. - СПб., 1998.
10. Режабек Е.Я., Филатова А.А. Когнитивная культурология. СПб., 2010.
11. Шлейвис П.И. Nekotorye 48roblem sinkhronnogo i diakhronnogo opisaniiéT iazykov: mezhvuzovskii sbornik nauchnykh trudov. Пятигорский гос. Лингвистический университет, 1998.
12. Kamalova O.N., Andramonova V.V. Network society: problems of development and new forms of identity // Актуальные проблемы науки: от теории к практике Материалы III Всероссийской научно-практической конференции. 2016.
13. Kolosova O.Y., Goncharov V.N. Economic and ecological safety of the region: strategy choice // Научный альманах стран Причерноморья. 2015. № 3. http://science-almanac.ru
June, 5, 2016
