CC BY
4
ЯЗЫКОЗНАНИЕ LINGUISTICS
УДК 811'373
DOI 10.52575/2712-7451-2023-42-2-290-300
The Linguocognitive Paradigm for the Study of Biblical Phraseology
Anna D. Bakina
I.S. Turgenev Oryol State University, 95 Komsomolskaya St, Oryol 302026, Russia E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract. The relevance of the research is due to the insufficient study of the conceptual space of biblical phraseology, on the one hand, and the growing interest in the Biblical phraseological vocabulary in terms of its semantic interpretation and functioning, on the other hand. The authors present the study of the biblical picture of the world by means of the phraseology of the national language in the light of linguocognitive and linguocultural approaches. The application of these approaches expands the understanding of the peculiarities of the conceptualization of phraseological space in general and the biblical space in particular. The results of the study showed that the biblical conceptosphere is a complexly organized construct, which is a fragment of a picture of the world formed on the basis of biblical texts. Based on the developed thematic rubric of phraseological units of biblical etymology, the structure of the biblical conceptual sphere, actualized by phraseological units, is presented. The scientific novelty of the research lies in the fact that for the first time an attempt has been made to describe the biblical picture of the world by phraseological means and to group phraseological units in accordance with the selected biblical concepts that they verbalize.
Keywords: linguocognitive research, biblical phraseology, concept, biblical world picture, biblical conceptosphere
For citation: Bakina A.D. 2023. The Linguocognitive Paradigm for the Study of Biblical Phraseology. Issues in Journalism, Education, Linguistics, 42(2): 290-300 (in Russian). DOI: 10.52575/2712-74512023-42-2-290-300
Лингвокогнитивная парадигма исследования библейской фразеологии
Бакина А.Д.
Орловский государственный университет им. И.С. Тургенева, Россия, 302026, г. Орёл, ул. Комсомольская, д. 95 E-mail: [email protected]
Аннотация. Актуальность исследования обусловлена, с одной стороны, недостаточной изученностью концептуального пространства библейской фразеологии, с другой, неугасаемым интересом к библейской фразеологической лексике в аспекте ее семантической интерпретации и функционирования. До сих пор библейские концепты не подвергались тщательному анализу, были проведены лишь единичные научные исследования, посвященные описанию таких культурных концептов, как «истина», «свет/тьма», «рай/ад» и т.д. В качестве методов исследования были избраны следующие: метод фразеологической идентификации, метод лексико-семантического
анализа, метод компонентного анализа, методы концептуального анализа, контекстуальный метод, поисковый корпусный метод. Научная новизна исследования состоит в том, что впервые предпринимается попытка описать библейскую картину мира фразеологическими средствами и сгруппировать фразеологизмы согласно выделенным библейским концептам, которые они вербализуют. Одним из фундаментальных понятий, которым мы оперируем в рамках данного исследования, является понятие концепта, которое помогает нам установить, что представляет собой библейский концепт, и найти различия между культурными и библейскими концептами. Многообразие библейских концептов требует их организации в упорядоченную структуру, которую можно представить в виде концептосферы. Результаты исследования позволили заключить, что библейская концептосфера - это сложно-организованный конструкт, представляющий собой фрагмент картины мира, сформированной на основе библейских текстов. На основе разработанной тематической рубрикации фразеологических единиц библейской этимологии представлена структура библейской концептосферы, актуализированная фразеологическими единицами.
Ключевые слова: лингвокогнитивные исследования, библейская фразеология, концепт, библейская картина мира, библейская концептосфера
Для цитирования: Bakina A.D. 2023. The linguocognitive paradigm for the study of biblical phraseology. Issues in Journalism, Education, Linguistics, 42(2): 290-300 (in Russian). DOI: 10.52575/2712-74512023-42-2-290-300
Introduction
The popularisation of linguocognitive researches has allowed us to focus on the study of various aspects of phraseology within a cognitive approach (see, i.e., N.F. Alefirenko [Alefirenko, 2010, 2016]; A.N. Baranov, D.O. Dobrovolsky [Baranov, Dobrovol'skiy, 1990, 2008]; N.N. Boldyrev [Boldyrev, 2019]; V.I. Karasik [Karasik, 2002]; Yu.S. Stepanov [Степанов, 1997], V.N. Telia [Teliya, 1996], I.V. Zykova [Zykova, 2015]; J.-P. Colson [Colson, 2008], S. Fiedler [Fiedler, 2013], R.W. Gibbs [Gibbs, 1990], R. Langacker [Langacker, 1988], A. Langlotz [Langlotz, 2006], W. Mieder [Mieder, 2018], etc.). Of tremendous scientific interest are the studies related to the consideration of biblical concepts, namely their formation, development, transformation, typology; the description of the frame specificity of phraseological units of biblical origin, perception and interpretation of the conceptual picture of the Bible, mutual influence of general cultural concepts and biblical ones (see, i.e., [Orlova, 2008; Mzhel'skaya, 2008]).
In the course of our study of biblical phraseology from the position of linguocognitive approach the following notions are considered: cognition; categorization; concept; cultural constants; conceptosphere; script; frame; language picture of the world.
We proceed from the premise that in the basis of conceptual system there are primary/fundamental concepts from which the secondary/subsequent concepts of the national conceptosphere were formed and thus developed. Concepts are subjected to constant refinement and modification. They are a part of the system and can be influenced by other concepts, as well as change themselves.
The biblical conceptosphere is a complexly organised construct, which is a fragment of the world picture, formed on the basis of biblical texts, namely, of Hebrew and Greek origin, and consists of a set of concepts, which can be connected by relations of interrelation, opposition, hierarchical relations, and also be thematically grouped. The conceptual fabric, woven into the set of concepts, forms the united conceptosphere, capable to reflect a picture of the world by means of using biblical phraseological units, verbalising biblical concepts.
Materials and Methods
The material for the study of the conceptosphere of biblical phraseology included 400 biblical phraseological units (English, German and Russian equivalents and analogues) extracted from the modern biblical dictionaries (see, [Адамия, 2019a, 2019б; Федуленкова и др., 2008]). The material of the contextual use of phraseological units, verbalising the basic conceptts, amounts to 500 contexts.
The following research methods were used in the study: one of the fundamental methods of cognitive linguistics - the method of conceptual analysis; the method of phraseological identification, developed by A.V. Kunin [Kunin, 1986], which we used to separate biblical phraseological units from stable word combinations of non-phraseological character, and the method of phraseological description applied to describe the phraseological system and its inherent asymmetry, covering a number of procedures such as componential analysis of phraseological units and analysis of phraseological meaning. The method of componential analysis made it possible to analyse in detail the semantic structure of the phraseological units under study. The search corpus method [Bakina, 2022] was used to detect all types of the phraseological variants.
Besides, comparative method, which allowed to compare phraseological units of biblical etymology in English and German, and lexico-semantic analysis were additionally used in the study.
Discussion
The study of phraseology in the linguocognitive aspect allows us to define phraseological units as "microtexts, in the nominative basis of which, associated with the situational nature of the denoted, are drawn during its conceptualization all types of information characteristic of the display of the situation in the text, but presented in phraseological units as a 'convolution', ready for use as text in text" [Teliya, 1996, p. 8].
Unlike the language picture of the world which is a composition of the world picture fragments in some semantic space, able to determine the volume of the units included in them, evaluate the connections and relations between individual fragments, the conceptual picture of the world, formed on the basis of knowledge as a reflection of human cognitive activity, is understood as a set of models that allow structuring knowledge about the world. General cultural conceptosphere includes a whole bulk of biblical concepts, the main part of which forms an independent conceptosphere of biblical phraseology.
In view of the specificity of the object, namely phraseological units originating from biblical texts and stories, defining the boundaries of the conceptual field as well as the variety of concepts of biblical phraseology is one of the primary objectives. Defining a concept is not an easy task due to the ambiguous interpretation of the term and concept by various linguists.
Thus, the concept is richer in content than the notion and "is inextricably connected with the world of culture, as it represents as if a clot of culture in human consciousness; a way of representation of culture in human mental world..." [Степанов, 1997, с. 45].
Within the framework of the logical approach to the study of concepts, the latter can be defined as concepts of practical philosophy arising "...as a result of the interaction of such factors as national tradition and folklore, religion and ideology, life experience and images of art, feelings and value systems" [Arutyunova, 1998, p. 3], then they form "...a cultural layer mediating between the individual and the world" [Ibid.]
The predominant part of modern researchers consider the most important in understanding the phenomenon of the concept to be that the concept contains the 'imprint' of culture. It is important to understand that the concept is first of all "a unit of collective knowledge/consciousness (referring to the highest spiritual values)", it is a unit "having linguistic expression and marked by linguocultural specificity. It is a culturally marked verbalised meaning represented in terms of expression by a number of its realisations" [Кубрякова и др., 1997, с. 102].
V.I. Karasik defines a cultural concept as a multi-dimensional semantic formation, in which the value, image and conceptual side are distinguished" [Karasik, 2002, p. 91]. An important property of the concept is its high degree of abstraction, which, in particular, is pointed out by V.V. Krasnykh who defines it as "a maximally abstracted idea of a cultural object that has no visual prototypical image", "a kind of coiled deep 'meaning' of the object" [Krasnykh, 2003, p. 272].
The concept is a component of the cultural code. This thesis is explained in detail in the work of A. V. Papsheva. The author points out that "the system of linguocultural concepts (con-ceptosphere) is presented as a linguocultural code; concepts, which are brought down by language units, act as signs-units of the linguocultural code" [Papsheva, 2010, p. 49].
Thus, the definition of the 'concept' should include such characteristics as relevance to the mental sphere of a person, connection with national culture, discreteness, linguistic (verbal) expression.
Results
We define a biblical phraseological unit after prof. T.N. Fedulenkova, as a "stable, reproducible word combination or a sentence with a fully or partially reinterpreted meaning derived from a biblical prototype and borrowed from a biblical text or a biblical story/plot" [Fedulenkova, 2016, p. 23]. Thus, we applied this definition to single out at least 400 phraseological units of biblical origin that serve to verbalise biblical concepts which can form a conceptual sphere of the Bible.
Initially, we hypothesised that the biblical conceptosphere is theocentric and one of the core clusters will be the cluster GOD and DIVINE POWERS which is represented by the elements: God, Divine nature, Divine powers. Nevertheless, this hypothesis was disproved in the process of practical analysis. Thus, the anthropocentrism of the biblical conceptosphere has been revealed.
As we know, anthropocentrism implies that man becomes a point of reference in the study of certain phenomena. The principle of anthropocentrism applied in phraseology is constituted in the idea that phraseological units are studied in relation to humans. The human factor is fundamental. The centre of the biblical picture of the world is also a HUMAN being.
One of the most actual problems of modern cognitive linguistics is the identification and comparison of key concepts of different cultures in the aspect of allocation and distribution of their features, taking into account their further structuring in the semantic spaces of the lexemes, serving for objectification of concepts in the language pictures of the world.
Key concepts of culture are nuclear (basic) units of the world picture, which have existential significance both for an individual linguist and for the linguistic and cultural community as a whole. Key culture concepts include such abstract names as conscience, fate, will, share, sin, law, freedom, intelligentsia, homeland, etc.
There are many ways of grouping concepts (see, i.e., [Степанов, 1997], [Teliya, 1996], [Maslova, 2004], [Karasik, 2002]), which are composed according to the sphere of the value content reflected in them: by meanings, by cultural features. For example, there is the philosophical category, which includes concepts such as space, time, fact, cause, movement, etc. There is also the social category, in which we can find justice, freedom, right, faith, wealth and many other concepts, which, as we can judge from their purpose, are directly related to society, the individual. The group of concepts, which was identified by V.A. Maslova represent the category of national culture (for example, in Russian culture - intelligentsia, sobornost, etc.) and culturally specific category (potato - «картошка») [Maslova, 2004]. The category of world order and world outlook was singled out by the famous Russian philologist T.B. Radbil. It includes such concepts as God, the world and other concepts of mythological and religious nature. The scientist also distinguished anthropological concepts describing human attributes - individual, gender, family, social, production (man / woman, clan /family); ethical concepts (crime /punishment, sin, exploit); aesthetic concepts (harmony, beauty); psychological concepts reflecting different aspects of the inner world of man and ethnicity (daring, longing), etc. [Radbil', 2010].
Biblical concepts, given this grouping of concepts, constitute a separate conceptual layer. The biblical source concepts are formed within the corresponding precedent situation, forming its cognitive matrix, i.e. the system of interrelated cognitive contexts or areas of object conceptualisation. The cognitive, or as it is also called, conceptual matrix also reflects the plot and key
cognitive lines of the Bible text in the minds of native speakers, as well as contributes to their use in various types of discourse.
Biblical concepts are based on constant reference to biblical situations. Even at significant distortions, the biblical text, unlike, say, any other precedent text, preserves its conceptual connections with the original text and the universal interlingual character of the key concepts. The abundance and heterogeneity of the whole mass of biblical concepts allows organising them into a separate conceptual space.
In order to come close to the potential allocation of all the concepts forming the biblical conceptosphere, it is necessary to identify the classes, separate thematic groups of the vocabulary of the biblical texts. Based on a clear thematic rubrication, one can identify the phraseological units of biblical origin, with the help of which biblical concepts are verbalised.
The problem of biblical anthropocentrism, as well as questions of the relationship between man and nature, remains very topical today. According to the Christian faith, the cosmos is arranged hierarchically and the head of this cosmos was the first man on earth created by God, Adam. It is considered, that all visible and invisible set of plants and animals was created by God for the sake of the Man. The original mission of man, created by God, was to have dominion over creation: "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and possess it..." [King James ..., 2022, Genesis 1: 28].
No matter how small and weak MAN is, he is "God's creation from the dust of the earth" -the only creation capable of thinking, which radically distinguishes him from all other created things. Being created "in the image and likeness of God", the MAN becomes "the crown of creation". The Bible puts a MAN at the head of all created things. Though greatness and size of the universe are huge, they cannot be an argument against anthropocentrism of the Bible. The 'Biblical history' itself is all about the MAN.
As a result of our analysis of biblical phraseology on the basis of semantic features we have identified two large thematic groups:
1.Man and his relations with the outer world;
2.Outer animate and inanimate world.
Each rubric includes a number of groups, which in turn will be divided into subgroups. We are mostly sure that the number of groups and subgroups highlighted and presented as an illustrative example is not finite. In this case, we limited ourselves to the most common groups. For example, the rubric "Man and his relations with the surrounding world" would include such groups as: Man as a representative of the human race; Man's character, his feelings and emotions; Zoosemisms, i.e. comparisons of man with an animal with positive or negative colouring; Group of phraseological expressions containing biblical names (anthroponyms and toponyms); Social characteristics of Man and his attitude to the surrounding world; Inevitability of fate, sufferings of Man on his earthly way. The rubric "Living and non-living world surrounding Man" includes the following thematic groups: Phenomena and states of the external world; Abstract concepts with subgroups Wealth/Power and Poverty; Labour/Work and Sloth; Faith; Love; Time; Life and Death; Sins and Vices, Punishment for Sins/Heaven and Hell; Truth/Truth; Subgroup Objects and Objects includes, for example, Bread/Food; Weapons.
In the frames of anthropocentrism of the Bible and the biblical conceptosphere the fundamental and central concept MAN with a branched structure of the concepts, verbalized by phraseological units of biblical origin, is put forward. The core concept Man is represented by the interrelated concepts: human nature; human character; man as a part of society; human deeds, human fate. See the biblical phraseological units in English, German and Russian:
1. Human nature/die menschliche Natur: the old Adam/der alte Adam/«ветхий» Адам; a man born of woman/der Mensch, vom Weibe geboren/рожденный женщиной, смертный; the weaker vessel/das schwächere Geschlecht/«слабый пол»; lord of creation/der Herr von dem Schaffen (des Schaffens)/«венец творения», мужчина; David and Jonathan/David und Jonathan/Давид и Ионафан, неразлучные друзья; etc.
2. Human character/der menschliche Charakter: Balaam's ass/Bileams (Balaams, Walaams) Eselin; Bileams (Balaams, Walaams) störrischer Esel/ «Валаамова ослица», упрямый человек (который вдруг запротестовал); clay in smb's hands (or in the hands of smb)/(Der) Ton in j-s Hand/«глина в чьих-либо руках», мягкий, податливый человек; have itching ears/die Ohren jücken/быть любителем новостей, быть падким на сплетни;
3. Man as part of society/das Individuum als Teil der Gesellschaft: a brand from (out of) the fire (a brand plucked out of the fire, a brandfrom the burning)/ein Brandscheit, das aus dem Feuer gerettet ist/человек, спасенный от грозящей ему опасности; a citizen of no mean city/ein Bürger einer namhaften Stadt/достопочтенный гражданин; Do as you would be done/Tue den anderen Leuten, wie du willst, daß sie dir tun sollen/Поступай с другими так, как хочешь, чтобы поступали с тобой;
4. Human destiny, fate, trials/Prüfungen und menschliche Schicksale: drain the cup of bitterness to the dregs/den bitteren Kelch (Becher) des Leidens bis auf den Grund (bis zur Neige, bis auf den Grund, bis zum Ende, bis zur Hefe) leeren (trinken)/испить горькую чашу до дна; let this cup pass from me; make the cup run over/j-m voll einschenken/да минует меня чаша сия; etc.
Slightly further from the core is the multi-level concept the outer world and man 's relations with the outer world, represented by a group of concepts such as:
5. God, divine forces:(God is) all in all/alles in allem/Бог есть все во всем; the holy of holies/Allerheiligster/святая святых; the wrath of God/das Zorn Gottes/гнев Божий; to call down the wrath of God on smd's head/das Zorn Gottesrufen/призывать кару Господню на чью-либо голову; every creature of God/всякое творение Божие; the Rock of Ages /ein Fels ewiglich/«твердыня вечная», Христос; the Kingdom of God/das Reich Gottes/Царствие Божие;
6. Natural forces: earth, fire, water, wind: a land flowing with milk and honey (a land of milk and honey)/Ein Land, darin Milch und Honig fließt/страна изобилия, «молочные реки, кисельные берега»; the land of promise (the promised land)/das verheißene Land/земля обетованная; the four corners of the earth (or world)/ die vier Enden der Erde/четыре стороны света, весь мир; abomination of desolation/der Greuel der Verwüstung/мерзость запустения; on the face of the earth/auf dem ganzen Erdboden/в целом мире, на «белом» свете; heap coals of fire on smb's head/Feurige Kohlen aufj-s Haupt häufen/пристыдить кого-либо, отплатив добром за зло; fire and brimstone/Schwefel und Feuer/die Ängste der Hölle/адские муки; go through fire and water (go through (the) fire/in Feuer und Wasser geraten/пройти сквозь огонь и воду, выдержать любые испытания; be in deep water(s)/in tiefen Wassern sein/находиться в трудном или опасном положении; (as) unstable as water/Wie Wasser aufwallen/неустойчивый, непостоянный; (as) weak as water/weich/слабохарактерный, малодушный; hell and high water (without a German equivalent)/тяжкие испытания; etc.
7. A conceptual cluster abstract concepts with the concepts:
7.1 Time: one's hour has come (or struck; one's hour is come)/j-s Stunde war (ist) gekommen/час настал, пробил; for everything there is a season; there is a time for all things/Alles hat seine Zeit, Alles (Jegliches, jedes Ding) zu seiner Zeit/Всему свое время; Alpha and Omega/das A und O; (auch:) das A und das O (ugs.); von A bis Z (ugs.)/Альфа и Омега, начало и конец; to sleep a perpetual sleep/ in die Ewigkeit einzugehen/заснуть вечным сном; as old as Methuselah/so alt wie Methuschelach/стар как Мафусаил; smb's days are numbered/jmds. Tage sind gezählt/чьи-либо дни сочтены; in season and out of season/zur Zeit oder zu Unzeit/постоянно, все время; etc.
7.2 Wealth/power and poverty: the golden calf/das goldene Kalb/«золотой телец»; worship the golden calf/das goldene Kalb anbeten/поклоняться «золотому тельцу»; the crumbs which fellfrom the rich man's table/das, was von des Reichen Tische fiel/крохи с барского стола; have nowhere to lay one's head/[nicht wissen, wo man] sein [müdes] Haupt betten [soll (kann)]/негде голову преклонить; the mammon of unrighteousness/der ungerechte
Mammon/«Мамона неправедности»; loaves and fishes/Gerstenbrote (Brote) und Fische/земные блага; the flesh-pots of Egypt/die Fleischtöpfe in (aus/von) Ägypten/материальные блага;
7.3 Labour/laziness and work: the labour of one's hands/die Mühe/труд чьих-либо рук; a labour of love/(die) Arbeit in der Liebe/бескорыстный труд; eat the bread of idleness/(sein) Brot mit Faulheit essen/вести праздную жизнь; reap where one has not sown/Schneiden, wo du nicht gesät hast/пожинать плоды чужого труда; the labourer is worthy of his hire/der Arbeiter ist seines Lohnes wert/трудящийся достоин награды за труды свои.
7.4 Faith: faith moves mountains /der Glaube versetzt Berge (kann Berge verset-ze^/Вера горами движет; fall from grace/aus der Gnade fallen/отойти от истинной веры; a fisher of men/Menschenfischer/проповедник, миссионер; spiritual father/der geistliche Vater/духовный отец.
7.5 Love: Love your neighbour as yourself /Liebe deinen Nächsten wie dich selbst/Возлюби ближнего своего как самого себя; the voice of the turtle/die Stimme der Turteltaube/зов любви; Thou shalt not make into thee any graven image / not to make a graven image/make for oneself a graven image / to bow the knee to Baal/jmdn (etw.) vergöttern; jmdn (etw.) anbeten/Не сотвори себе кумира; God is Love/Gott ist die Liebe (und wer in der Liebe bleibt, der bleibt in Gott und Gott in ihm)/Бог есть Любовь; etc.
7.6 Life and death: the breath of (one 's) life (the breath of one's or the nostrils)/der Oden des Lebens/смысл жизни; give (or lay down) one's life; the life of one's countenance/пожертвовать жизнью; the staff of life/der Vorrat an Brot/хлеб насущный; the tree of life/der Baum des Lebens/древо жизни; a living dog is better than a dead lion/Ein lebender Hund ist besser als ein toter Löwe/Живая собака лучше мертвого льва; in the land of the living/im Lande der Lebendigen/на этом свете; the valley of the shadow (of death; тж. the valley of the shadows)/das finstere Tal/«долина смертной тени», гибель; the wages of sin is death/der Sünde Sold ist Tod/Возмездие за грех - смерть; dead and buried (dead and gone)/gestorben und begraben/умер и погребен; let the dead bury their dead/die Toten ihre Toten begraben lassen/пусть мертвые хоронят мертвых; etc.
7.7 Sins and vices, punishment for sins: the Whore of Babylon/die Hure von Baby-lon/«вавилонская блудница»; lusts of the flesh/des Fleisches Lust/похоти плоти; The wages of sin is death/der Sünde Sold ist Tod/Возмездие на грех - смерть; forbidden fruit (is sweetest)/eine verbotene Frucht; Verbotene Früchte sind süß/запретный плод (сладок); Sodom and Gomorrah/Sodom und Gomorra/Содом и Гоморра; the curse of Cain/Der Fluch, die Verwünschung, die Verdammnis von Kain/проклятие Каина; etc.
7.8 Heaven and hell: the Judgment day/Dies irae/Судный день; the Old Ser-pent/Schlangen-Versucher/змей-искуситель; fire and brimstone/Schwefel und Feuer/die Ängste derHölle/адскж муки; manna from heaven/Manna vom Himmel/манна небесная; garden of Eden/der Garten Eden/райский уголок; evil communications corrupt good manners/Böse Geschwätze verderben gute Sitten/Худые сообщества развращают добрые нравы; the dog returns to his vomit/Der Hundfrißt wieder, was er gespien hat/Человек снова предается прежним порокам; the Father of lies/der Vater der Lüge/«отец лжи»; fall from grace/aus der Gnade fallen/сойти с праведного пути.
7.9 Truth: What is the truth?/Was ist die Wahrhe^/Что есть истина?; Truth will set you free/Правда вас освободит; sift the grain (or wheat) from the chaff/die Spreu von Weizen sondern (trennen, scheiden/отделять зерна от плевел; the scales fell from smb's eyes/Es fiel von j-s Augen wie Schuppen/пелена с глаз упала; open one's eyes to smth/j-m die Augen öffnen/открыть глаза на что-либо; etc.
Thus, with the help of the thematic rubrication of phraseological units we managed to identify the core and peripheral concepts which fill the conceptosphere of biblical phraseology, confirming its anthropocentrism. The concept MAN occupies the central position in the conceptual space of the Bible (man as a representative of the human race; man as a part of society; character
and inner world of man; deeds and destiny of MAN) and unites several near-core concepts. Biblical phraseological units, verbalising these concepts, reflect 'man', namely, his inner world, habits, attitudes, intentions, activities and ways of achievement). In most cases, the meaning of biblical phraseological units of this group is entirely based on metaphorical transfer and associations, the transfer of a set of features of the biblical image to the corresponding object of reality. Here we are dealing with a multi-stage nomination, a constant reinterpretation of meaning.
Slightly further from the core is the multilevel concept "Outside world and man's relations with the outside world", represented by a cluster of concepts such as God, divine forces, natural forces/spheres; including such concepts as earth, fire, water and wind; conceptual cluster abstract concepts, with the concepts time, wealth / power and poverty, labour / laziness and work, faith, love, life, death, sins and vices, punishment for sins / heaven and hell, truth.
As it may have been noticed, some of the phraseological units enter several conceptual groups because concepts they represent are interconnected, on the one hand. On the other hand, these biblical units may be interpreted as having a complicated semantic structure, thus being able to reflect more than one concept.
Conclusion
Based on the above, we conclude that biblical phraseology of a particular national language is represented by a number of concepts, which are formed into a kind of conceptosphere, which determines the specificity of refraction and reflection of information about the world through the use of phraseological units of biblical etymology.
Linguocognitive analysis of biblical phraseological units allowed us to identify biblical concepts on the basis of cognitive features of these concepts. The lexico-semantic and conceptual analysis revealed an anthropocentric orientation of conceptual space of biblical phraseology.
It is the preliminary thematic rubrication of biblical phraseological units that contributed to the structuring of the conceptual space of biblical phraseology.
The prospect of research of phraseological units of biblical etymology in the framework of linguocognitive approach is seen in further revealing of structural and content filling of biblical conceptosphere, detailed analysis and description of biblical concepts in their connection with each other by relations of synonymy, antonymy, hyperonymy, and also comparing conceptospheres of biblical phraseology in different languages with regard to revealing of national specific and universal in interpretation of biblical picture of the world by means of phraseology of different languages.
Thus, taking into account the above conclusions and the example of the conceptual field of the Bible, represented by biblical phraseological units, we can speak about the objective possibility of organising information and knowledge in the form of biblical concepts, formed into a single whole, i.e. the conceptosphere of biblical phraseology.
Список источников
Адамия З.К. 2019a. Лепта библейской мудрости: русско-славянский словарь библейских крылатых выражений и афоризмов с соответствиями в германских, романских, армянском и грузинском языках: в 2 т. Т. 1: А-О. Под ред. Е.Е. Иванова [и др.]. Могилев, МГУ имени А.А. Кулешова, 288 с.
Адамия З.К. 2019б. Лепта библейской мудрости: русско-славянский словарь библейских крылатых выражений и афоризмов с соответствиями в германских, романских, армянском и грузинском языках: в 2 т. Т. 2: П-Я. Под ред. Е.Е. Иванова [и др.]. Могилев, МГУ имени А.А. Кулешова, 308 с.
Кубрякова Е.С., Демьянков В.З., Панкрац Ю.Т., Лузина Л.Г. 1997. Краткий словарь когнитивных
терминов. Под ред. Е.С. Кубряковой. М., Филол. ф-т МГУ им. М. В. Ломоносова, 245 с. Степанов Ю.С. 1997. Константы. Словарь русской культуры. Опыт исследования. М., Языки русской культуры, 824 с.
Федуленкова Т.Н., Мартюшова Е.В., Боннемарк М. 2008. Англо-немецко-шведский словарь библейской фразеологии. Архангельск, Поморский гос. ун-т им. М.В. Ломоносова, 166 с.
King James Bible. The Preserved and Living Word of God. 2022. King James Bible online. Available at: www.kingjamesbibleonline.org (accessed: November 26, 2022).
Список литературы
Алефиренко Н.Ф. 2010. Лингвокультурология: ценностно-смысловое пространство языка. Москва, Флинта, 288 с.
Алефиренко Н.Ф. 2016. Живое слово дороже мертвой буквы: Язык в свете лингвистического постмодернизма. В кн.: Когнитивно-дискурсивные стратегии развития языка. Сборник научных трудов по итогам Международной научной конференции, приуроченной к юбилею Заслуженного деятеля науки Российской Федерации, доктора филологических наук, профессора Белгородского государственного университета Николая Федоровича Алефиренко (Белгород, 11-12 января 2016 г.). Белгород, Эпицентр: 31-38.
Арутюнова Н.Д. 1998. Язык и мир человека. М., Языки русской культуры, 895 с.
Бакина А.Д. 2022. Технология применения поискового корпусного метода в исследовании библейской фразеологии английского, немецкого и русского языков. В кн.: INTERLINGUA-2022. Сборник научных трудов II Международной научно-практической конференции, (Липецк, 18-19 мая 2022 г.). Липецк, Издательство Липецкого государственного технического университета: 12-18.
Баранов А.Н., Добровольский Д.О. 1990. Структуры знаний и их лингвистическая онтологизация в значении идиомы. В кн.: Исследования по когнитивным аспектам языка. Труды по искусственному интеллекту. Серия: Tartu Ülikooli toimetised, 903: 20-36.
Баранов А.Н., Добровольский Д.О. 2008. Аспекты теории фразеологии. Москва, Знак, 656 с.
Болдырев Н.Н. 2019. Доминантный принцип организации языкового сознания. Когнитивные исследования языка, 37: 37-44.
Зыкова И.В. 2015. Концептосфера культуры и фразеология: теория и методы лингвокультурологического изучения. М., Ленанд, 380 с.
Карасик В.И. 2002. Языковой круг: личность, концепты, дискурс. Волгоград, Перемена, 477 с.
Красных В.В. 2003. «Свой» среди «чужих»: миф или реальность? М., ИТДГК Гнозис, 375 с.
Кунин А.В. 1986. Курс фразеологии современного английского языка. Москва, Высшая школа, 336 с.
Маслова В.А. 2004. Лингвокультурология. М., Academia, 202 c.
Мжельская О.К. 2008. Семантическая специализация и концептуализация заимствований: на материале ономастических компонентов библейской фразеологии. Дис. ... канд. филол. наук. Омск, 151 с.
Орлова Н.М. 2008. Библейский текст как прецедентный феномен. Под ред. Л. В. Балашовой. Саратов, Саратовский гос. социально-экономический ун-т, 350 с.
Папшева А.В. 2010. Применение категории «код» в лингвокультурологии. Известия Самарского научного центра Российской академии наук, 12(3-2): 492-494.
Радбиль Т.Б. 2010. Основы изучения языкового менталитета. М., Флинта, Наука, 328 с.
Телия В.Н. 1996. Русская фразеология. Семантический, прагматический и лингвокультурологический аспекты. М., Школа «Языки русской культуры», 288 с.
Федуленкова Т.Н. 2016. Лекции по английской фразеологии библейского происхождения. Москва, ИД Академии Естествознания, 146 с.
Colson J.-P. 2008. Cross-linguistic phraseologucal studies: an overview. In: Phraseology. An interdisciplinary perspective. Eds. S. Granger, F. Meunier. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins Publishing Company: 191-206. DOI: 10.1075/z.139.19col
Fiedler S. 2013. Phraseological Units of Biblical Origin in English and German. In: Research on Phraseology Across Continents. Intercontinental dialogue on phraseology. Vol. 2. Eds. J. Szerszunowicz, B. Nowowiejski & K. Yagi, T. Kanzaki. Bialystok, University of Bialystok Publishing House: 228-247.
Gibbs R.W. 1990. Psycholinguistic studies on the conceptual basis of idiomaticity. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(4): 417-451. DOI: 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.4.417
Langacker R.W. 1988. A view of linguistic semantics. In: Topics in cognitive linguistics. Ed. B. Rudzka-Ostyn. Amsterdam, John Benjamins: 49-90. DOI: 10.1075/cilt.50.04lan
Langlotz A. 2006. Idiomatic creativity: A cognitive-linguistic model of idiom-representation and idiomvariation in English. Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing, 325 p.
Mieder W. 2018. "It's a Small World": From Widespread Idioms to Widespread Proverbs. In: Modern Phraseology Issues: Monograph in Memory of Elisabeth Piirainen. Ed. T. Fedulenkova. Arkhangelsk, München: 74-97.
References
Alefirenko N.F. 2010. Lingvokul'turologiya: tsennostno-smyslovoe prostranstvo yazyka [Linguoculturology: value-semantic space of language]. Moscow, Publ. Flinta, 288 p.
Alefirenko N.F. 2016. Zhivoe slovo dorozhe mertvoy bukvy: Yazyk v svete lingvisticheskogo postmodernizma [A living word is more precious than a dead letter: Language in the light of linguistic postmodernism]. In: Kognitivno-diskursivnye strategii razvitiya yazyka [Cognitive-Discursive Strategies for Language Development]. Collection of scientific papers on the results of the International Scientific Conference dedicated to the anniversary of the Honored Scientist of the Russian Federation, Doctor of Philology, Professor of the Belgorod State University Nikolai Fedorovich Alefirenko (Belgorod, January 11-12, 2016). Belgorod, Publ. Epitsentr: 31-38.
Arutyunova N.D. 1998. Yazyk i mir cheloveka [Language and the human world]. M., Publ. Yazyki russkoy kul'tury, 895 p.
Bakina A.D. 2022. Tekhnologiya primeneniya poiskovogo korpusnogo metoda v issledova-nii bibleyskoy frazeologii angliyskogo, nemetskogo i russkogo yazykov [Technology of applying the corpus search method in the study of biblical phraseology in English, German and Russian]. In: INTERLINGUA-2022. Collection of scientific papers of the II International Scientific and Practical Conference, (Lipetsk, May 18-19, 2022(. Lipetsk, Publ. Izdatel'stvo Lipetskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta: 12-18.
Baranov A.N., Dobrovol'skiy D.O. 1990. Struktury znaniy i ikh lingvisticheskaya ontologizatsiya v znachenii idiomy [Structures of knowledge and their linguistic ontologization in the meaning of idiom]. In: Issledovaniya po kognitivnym as-pektam yazyka. Trudy po iskusstvennomu intellektu [Research on the Cognitive Aspects of Language. Works on artificial intelligence.]. Seriya: Acta et commentationes Universitatis Tartuensis, 903: 20-36.
Baranov A.N., Dobrovol'skiy D.O. 2008. Aspekty teorii frazeologii [Aspects of the theory of phraseology]. Moskva, Publ. Znak, 656 p.
Boldyrev N.N. 2019. Dominant principle of linguistic cognition organization. Cognitive studies of language, 37: 37-44 (in Russian).
Zykova I.V. 2015. Kontseptosfera kul'tury i frazeologiya: teoriya i metody lingvo-kul'turologicheskogo izucheniya [Concept sphere of culture and phraseology: theory and methods of linguo-culturological study]. M., Publ. Lenand, 380 p.
Karasik V.I. 2002. Yazykovoy krug: lichnost', kontsepty, diskurs [Language Circle: Personality, Concepts, Discourse]. Volgograd, Publ. Peremena, 477 p.
Krasnykh V.V. 2003. «Svoy» sredi «chuzhikh»: mif ili real'nost' ["Own" among "strangers": myth or reality]? M., Publ. ITDGK Gnozis, 375 p.
Kunin A.V. 1986. Kurs frazeologii sovremennogo angliyskogo yazyka [Modern English Phraseology Course]. Moscow, Publ. Vysshaya shkola, 336 p.
Maslova V.A. 2004. Lingvokul'turologiya [Linguistics]. Moscow, Publ. Academia, 202 p.
Mzhel'skaya O.K. 2008. Semanticheskaya spetsializatsiya i kontseptualizatsiya zaimstvovaniy: na materiale onomasticheskikh komponentov bibleyskoy frazeologii [Semantic Specialization and Conceptualization of Borrowings: Based on Onomastic Components of Biblical Phraseology]. Dis. ... cand. philol. Sciences. Omsk, 151 p.
Orlova N.M. 2008. Bibleyskiy tekst kak pretsedentnyy fenomen [The Biblical Text as a Precedent Phenomenon]. Ed. L.V. Balashov. Saratov, Publ. Saratovskiy gos. sotsial'no-ekonomicheskiy un-t, 350 p.
Papsheva A.V. 2010. The use of "code" category in linguoculturology. Izvestiya of Samara scientific center of the russian academy of sciences, 12(3-2): 492-494 (in Russian).
Radbil' T.B. 2010. Osnovy izucheniya yazykovogo mentaliteta [Fundamentals of the study of language mentality]. M., Publ. Flinta, Nauka, 328 p.
Teliya V.N. 1996. Russkaya frazeologiya. Semanticheskiy, pragmaticheskiy i lingvokul'turologicheskiy aspekty [Russian phraseology. Semantic, pragmatic and linguoculturological aspects]. M., Publ. Shkola «Yazyki russkoy kul'tury», 288 p. Fedulenkova T.N. 2016. Lektsii po angliyskoy frazeologii bibleyskogo proiskhozhdeniya [Lectures on
English phraseology of biblical origin]. Moscow, Publ. ID Akademii Estestvoznaniya, 146 p. Colson J.-P. 2008. Cross-linguistic phraseologucal studies: an overview. In: Phraseology. An interdisciplinary perspective. Eds. S. Granger, F. Meunier. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins Publishing Company: 191-206. DOI: 10.1075/z.139.19col Fiedler S. 2013. Phraseological Units of Biblical Origin in English and German. In: Research on Phraseology Across Continents. Intercontinental dialogue on phraseology. Vol. 2. Eds. J. Szerszunowicz, B. Nowowiejski & K. Yagi, T. Kanzaki. Bialystok, University of Bialystok Publishing House: 228-247. Gibbs R.W. 1990. Psycholinguistic studies on the conceptual basis of idiomaticity. Cognitive Linguistics,
1(4): 417-451. DOI: 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.4.417 Langacker R.W. 1988. A view of linguistic semantics. In: Topics in cognitive linguistics. Ed. B. Rudzka-
Ostyn. Amsterdam, John Benjamins: 49-90. DOI: 10.1075/cilt.50.04lan Langlotz A. 2006. Idiomatic creativity: A cognitive-linguistic model of idiom-representation and idiomvariation in English. Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing, 325 p. Mieder W. 2018. "It's a Small World": From Widespread Idioms to Widespread Proverbs. In: Modern Phraseology Issues: Monograph in Memory of Elisabeth Piirainen. Ed. T. Fedulenkova. Arkhangelsk, München: 74-97.
Конфликт интересов: о потенциальном конфликте интересов не сообщалось. Conflict of interest: no potential conflict of interest related to this article was reported.
Поступила в редакцию 19.01.2023 Received January 19, 2023
Поступила после рецензирования 13.03.2023 Revised March 13, 2023
Принята к публикации 10.06.2023 Accepted June 10, 2023
ИНФОРМАЦИЯ ОБ АВТОРЕ
Бакина Анна Дмитриевна, кандидат филологических наук, доцент, заведующая кафедрой английской филологии Орловского государственного университета им. И.С. Тургенева, г. Орёл, Россия
INFORMATION ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Anna D. Bakina, Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor, head of the Department of English philology, I.S. Turgenev Oryol State University Oryol, Russia
