Summary
In order to study and establish the similarities and differences of both related and unrelated languages, in comparative linguistics a special place is given to linguistic semantics, since it contains the picture of the world of a particular ethnic group or nation. In the course of such a study, as a rule, the general and the special (national) are revealed. The manifestation of national-specific features is observed at all levels of the language, namely in phraseosemantics, including in stable comparisons. The presence of nationally labeled components in the composition of the CSS (stable comparisons) is associated with various extralinguistic factors. The meaning of such lexical units is focused on the person and his essence, thus giving the originality of linguistic semantics.
Резюме
С целью изучения и установления сходств и различий как родственных, так и неродственных языков, в сопоставительном языкознании особое место отводится языковой семантике, так как именно в ней содержится картина мира определенного этноса или нации. В ходе такого исследования, как правило, выявляется общее и особенное (национальное). Проявление признаков национально-специфического наблюдается на всех уровнях языка, а именно во фразеосемантике, в том числе и в устойчивых сравнениях. Присутствие национально-маркированных компонентов в составе УС (устойчивые сравнения) связано с различными внелингвистическими факторами. Значение таких лексических единиц ориентировано на человека и его сущность, придающую таким образом своеобразие языковой семантики.
Keywords:figurative-expressive, representatives of English culture, practical consciousness estimates, expressive-evaluative.
Cognition of the surrounding reality begins with observations and with actions on objective reality through thinking, which reflects it in consciousness. The means of cognizing the world is thinking, and language serves as a means of materializing our thoughts, acting as a secondary objectified form of the existence of consciousness. The question of how a person sees the surrounding reality, how their interaction occurs and what is primarily fixed in the language, more and more acquires its relevance and requires its solution.
Thinking and language belong to the processes of the “higher order” of such cognitive activity of a person as cognition. “Cognition is a bizarre combination of the meanings of two Latin terms - cognitio and cogitatio, it conveys the meanings of“ cognition ”,“ cognition ”(that is, recording both the process of acquiring knowledge and experience and its results), as well as“ thinking, thinking. "
A comprehensive and in-depth study of this problem directly affects such issues as the role of language in the process of cognition, the degree of subjective and objective in a language, “how are language forms (and any manifestations of the language in general) related to the structures of human knowledge and experience, as well as as both are represented (represented) in the human head. ”
It is impossible to solve these issues within the framework of one discipline; all this requires a comprehensive approach, close interconnection with other branches of science, such as psychology, philosophy, neuroscience, anthropology and linguistics. The single object for all these sciences is cognition. The unification of sciences within the framework of cognitivism is dictated primarily by the understanding that its study cannot be limited to the framework of one discipline, even one that was specially studied by it - psychology. It should be noted that it was psychology that was at the origins of the emergence of cognitive science.
In cognitive science, there has been a tendency to study human cognition through language, not because knowledge exists in a linguistic form, but because with the advent of language it has become possible to preserve and transmit all human experience and knowledge to a subsequent generation. Therefore, it is believed that cognition is best studied through language. The cognitive approach, namely cognitive linguistics, has changed our understanding of the importance of language not so much because of the recognition of its cognitive function, “but due to a deeper awareness of the importance of language data for inference about the work of human intelligence aimed at understanding the world and at intelligent human interaction with his environment. "
On the complexity of the language E.Benvenist wrote at the end of the last century: "The properties of the language is so distinctive that you can essentially talk about the presence of AI have I the tongue is not one, but several structures, each of which could serve as the basis for the emergence of an integrated linguistics." “Language is a multidimensional phenomenon that has arisen in human society: it is both a system and an antisystem, and an activity and a product of this activity, and spirit and matter.”
Behind a simple human experience is far from a simple knowledge structure that requires decoding and reconstruction. “The totality of an individual’s knowledge is considered not as a passive storage (library or, worse, dumps), but as an active system, structured according to certain fields of application.” These areas are called blocks (N. Lindsay, D. Norman, W. Neisser), which sequentially receive and sequentially process information, i.e. have a linear-sequential nature. This process involves the interaction between the blocks, the transfer of knowledge from one subject area to another. In cognitive science, two types of knowledge are distinguished - declarative and procedural.
As a "processor" involved in the processing and processing of knowledge, the human cognitive system acts. The study of knowledge in cognitive science makes it possible to determine which procedures, mechanisms lead to the emergence of knowledge, in what form, in what structures knowledge is represented in the human mind.
In English and Kazakh languages, practical consciousness estimates the maximum number of objects and realities as uncountable, and they are objectified in natural phenomena, in the animal and plant world.
Wed kaz. herring aғyp reaping “letters. to flood like a sel ”= a huge number of people; қасқыртигенқойдақырылу "letters. die like rams attacked by a wolf ”= mass deaths of people; balғa қonғan aradai. “Letters .k ak bees flying to honey” = gather around something, crowd; judge the shasha, judge the tөgu "letters. spill (blood) like water. ”
Wed English to shed blood like water "letters . n to pour blood like water ”= to shed a lot of blood; to spend money like water "letters. spend money like water ”= overspend; to die like flies "letters. they die like flies ”= mass deaths of people; packed like sardines "letters. packed like sardines ”= like herring in a barrel.
The idea of complete or partial absence is expressed in English comparisons. (as) bare as the palm of one's hand "letters . n tired like the palm of a hand = at least a ball of rolling, completely empty; (as) rare (or scarce) as hen's teeth “letters. rare, like chicken teeth = very scarce, the cat cried. Kaz zұrday - indicates the absence of anything.
We perceive objects and objects filling the space at the same time with their external properties and, first of all, with their sizes . Kazakh nomads were in close connection with wildlife, in contact with various objects of the surrounding reality, evaluated, comparing one object with another. Many objects of Kazakhs' traditional life are the standards of the concept of "big, huge ." The standard is that figuratively measures the properties, qualities of objects, objects and phenomena of the world.
According to A.K. Bayburin, “The very concept of“ etiquette ”has been isolated relatively recently. Defining its borders is not as easy as it might seem at first glance. Usually, etiquette means a set of rules of conduct regarding the external manifestation of attitudes toward people (forms of treatment and greetings, behavior in public places, manners and clothes). ”
This point of view is developing and has a detailed character in the works of N.I. Formanovskaya, T.V. Tsivyan, R. Syzdykova, N. Uali, A. Kobylanova, G. Alimzhanova and Z. Shadkam. All of the above works emphasize the socio-regulatory function of etiquette, aimed at solving communicative problems and regulating human communication.
In the process of life, man began to distinguish between the properties of things and natural phenomena. His mental activity showed the ability to establish elements of similarity between objects of different orders and differences in two completely identical things, which, undoubtedly, was the evolution of human consciousness. Mentally operate on existing data, draw an analogy between objects, establish, on the one hand, identity, similarity, and on the other hand, distinction - all this is called an act of comparison. This ability was inherent in ancient man. Therefore, it is not in vain that they consider a comparison of one of the oldest forms of cognition. It seems that many scientists are absolutely right when they say that thinking in general is essentially an activity that compares and compares, because comparison is involved at all levels of education and the development of human knowledge (concepts).
So a symbol was born that indicates the external and internal similarities between cultural objects. Sometimes this convergence can actually exist in nature, but sometimes it can be absent. It simply arises on a mental level, has specific traits determined by history and culture. By virtue of these qualities, symbols are universal and specific. At the heart of many universal symbols are experiences that are inherent in every person. For example, a symbol associated with fire. At the sight of fire, carriers of different cultures can observe the same picture, but not all signs or properties of fire are included in the comparison. In the minds of representatives of English culture, fire is most associated with mobility, speed, and strength: like a smoke “fast, instant”; like a house on fire "fast, easy"; to spread like wildfire “to spread with supernatural speed” (about rumors, gossip), while representatives of the Kazakh culture use the sensation of warmth, energy of fire most often when describing a person’s internal state: narttay genu “blush”; o ttai jean “blush”; ottay yystқ “hot as fire”.
In many cultures, including English and Kazakh, a flower is a symbol of youth, beauty and spring. It should be noted that a certain kind of flower in different cultures may have the same traditionally symbolic meaning. A rose in the space of two cultures causes similar associations - beauty. English as fair as rose " beautiful as a rose"; as red as rose "like a red rose." Kaz Jazdyң Raushan Gulіndey "like a summer rose." Also, the names of other colors are found, each of them connotes a certain sign. For example, purity: as pure as a lily “pure as a lily”, youth: zhaynaғan zhauқazindai “like a saffron blossomed” , beauty: g үlday aru қyz “beautiful, like a flower, girl”. These images, which are the fruits of a collective association, create the basis for the birth of new figurative expressions, they are also called normal, contextual or free. Being born directly in the creative laboratory of the writer, they participate in the creation of individual author's visions of the world. The writer, as a member of a certain society, in his work, in addition to expressing his purely individual vision of the world, expresses public consciousness and social experience. Therefore, contextual comparisons are formed on the basis of already having a c i in the language of images and thus update their value and enhance their functional activity.
Between stable and contextual comparisons there are no differences either in the laws of their occurrence or in comparative semantics, but there are a number of certain features. “Firstly, stable comparisons, getting into the context, retain their traditional images and foundations, but characterize various objects and phenomena not previously characterized. Secondly, only the image of stable comparisons is preserved, and the basis and subject matter are changing. ” Thirdly, not all contextual comparisons arising as a result of the writer's creative intent fall into the category of commonly used ones . They remain within the framework of private use, expressing a purely personal vision of the world, which in turn allows us to explore the individual author’s picture of the world of a writer, while stable comparisons express the collective consciousness of an entire nation or ethnic group.
Interest in a symbol in linguistics is caused by the fact that in a language a symbol does not arise spontaneously and not suddenly, but in accordance with the worldview of the people. A symbol is a sign, but a sign of a special kind. The existing commonality between them is that they both are information carriers and are built according to a three-component model, “consisting of a signified, signifier and semantic connective - a constitutive element of the structure that establishes a relationship sign“ under a contract ”between the parties.
A symbol is a sign whose content is a form for a secondary nomination, "objects used as symbols themselves must have the property that they are intended to embody and express." C characters are created on a mental level and are understood as basic concepts in which whole texts are stored in a collapsed form. This is a kind of coding factor for cultural information and at the same time a way of transmitting this information.
However, the symbol is addressless and non-communicative. He is closer to thinking - artistic, mythological, religious, a sign - to communication. Although both the sign and the symbol are formed by a three-component model, their use and, above all, their syntax are fundamentally different. “This difference can be deduced from the difference in their purpose: the symbol taken in its relation to the personal and social spheres determines the program of action and creates a model of behavior; he is always raised above a man. The sign, in the hands of man, serves as an instrument of communication and regulation of practical actions. ”
The category of color, along with other categories, such as space and time, is capable of giving a certain “coloring” and setting the “tone” for a particular language picture of an ethnic group. It is inherent to create order in the chaos that takes place in the surrounding reality, and thanks to its color scheme the world appears not colorless, but polyphonic. Although “color is a common phenomenon for all peoples, regardless of the cultural level and other features,” nevertheless, A. Vezhbitskaya believes that this is not a universal human concept. In all cultures, visual perception is important for people and a description of what they see is important, but they do not have to have a special “color” as a separate designation of one of the sides of their visual experience. All languages have a word for the concept of "see," but do not necessarily have a word for "color."
Usually people see objects and objects that are present on some background. In this regard, English words such as view (view, appearance), scenery (scene, scenery) or landscape (landscape) are of most interest , because they connect the idea of "vision" with the idea of "place".
“In addition to nominative, figurative (figurative-expressive) and expressive-evaluative, metaphors perform a conceptual function in the language, which is based on their ability to form new concepts, based on already formed concepts.” One of the basic a priori concepts of any culture is the constants “good” and “evil”. They appear in the opposition "light" and "dark." A constant in culture is a concept that has existed continuously, or at least for a very long time. ”
A rather active participation of the metaphor in creating a linguistic picture is possible due to the presence of a factor in which a person models an inconspicuous world in the image and likeness of the objective world.
Cognition of the world is presented as an active-passive action between a person and the world that surrounds him. The result of information processing, knowledge about the world and man forms a kind of special picture of the world. The peculiarity lies in the fact that this is not a picture that we imagine as a reflection of something, but as M. Heidegger writes, “a picture of the world, essentially understood, does not mean a picture depicting the world,” and not an “open” window in the world, namely the picture, i.e. interpretation, an act of understanding of the world that it depends on the prism through which the worldview is made. ”
The picture of the world is the very foundation on which human communication and mutual understanding are built. A person acts in accordance with the rules and regulations of his picture of the world, which establishes a rigid framework for his behavior (for example, a taboo and a totem). In connection with this, the object of study of ethnolinguistics and linguoculturology is the study of the role of the picture of the world in human society of various types and the role of the subjective factor in the picture of the world.
List of sources used:
1. Polozova I.V. The role of metaphor in philosophical knowledge. - M.: Thought, 1993 .-- 230 p.
2. Erimbetova A.M. From identity to opposites: linguistic forms of expression. - Moscow – Almaty, 2001. - 233 p.
3. Referovskaya EA The role of language in the formation of the concept // Logic and language (Sat. scientific. Tr.). - M.: Thought, 1985. - S. 78–85.
4. Plotnikov A.M. The role of language in the formation of the basic logical forms // Logic and language (Sat. Scientific tr.). - Moscow: Thought, 1985 .-- 138 p.
5. Potebnya A.A. Thought and language. - Kiev: Shinto, 1993 .-- 192 p.
6. Konyrov T.K. Structural and semantic nature of comparison in the Kazakh language. - Alma-Ata: Mektep, 1985 .-- 215 p.
7. Isina G.I. Phraseological comparisons of the English language (integrated approach): Diss. Cand. filol. sciences. - Almaty, 2001 .-- 136 s.
8. Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M .: INFRA, 2001 .-- 576 p.
9. Arutyunova N.D. Language and the world of man. - M .: Languages of Russian culture, 1999. - 895 p.
10. Telia V.N. The connotative aspect of the semantics of nominative units / Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Institute of Linguistics. - M .: Nauka, 1986 .-- 192 p.
