The last few decades ?ntroduced the anthropomorph?c approach to the d?fferent sc?ent?f?c f?elds. L?ngu?st?cs as a sc?ence has accepted the bel?efs of th?s parad?gm as well. That meant focus?ng on the human aspect ?n further stud?es. ?n terms of l?ngu?st?cs ?t refers to reveal?ng the connect?on between language phenomena and human be?ng as a subject of cultural act?v?ty and ga?n?ng knowledge. Thus ?nterest ?n language speakers’ m?ndsets and nat?onal pecul?ar?ty of language world p?ctures ?s unden?able. There ?s a whole range of ?nfluent?al stud?es a?med at descr?b?ng d?fferent fragments of language world p?ctures (Y. Apresyan, A.
Verzhb?tska, S.Vorkachev and others). Analys?s of the language world p?cture ?s connected to the character?z?ng of the const?tuent concepts. The study of concepts enables reveal?ng nat?onal and cultural features of the part?cular language world p?cture and descr?b?ng language speakers’ m?ndset by l?ngu?st?c means analys?s.The top?cal?ty of the research cons?sts ?n the s?gn?f?cance of the study of mental percept?on of the concept of l?fe and ?ts reflect?on ?n Engl?sh and Ukra?n?an languages. Understand?ng of l?fe and att?tude towards ?t poses a benchmark of human behav?or wh?ch determ?nes nat?onally spec?f?c soc?al convent?ons and the m?ndset of language speakers. The concept of l?fe ?s one of the un?versal categor?es of culture, therefore ?t conta?ns some common mean?ngs meanwh?le ?s apprehended and reflected ?n d?fferent cultures d?fferently.
Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot
The object of the study ?s the concept “????? / l?fe” ?n Ukra?n?an and Engl?sh languages.The subject of the study ?s the language un?ts that reflect l?fe ?n Ukra?n?an and Engl?sh languages, d?st?nct?ve features of the concept “????? / l?fe”.The a?m of the research ?s to reveal and analyse the pecul?ar?t?es of percept?on of l?fe ?n Ukra?n?an and Engl?sh language world p?ctures, compare ways of reflect?on of the concept ?n these languages.The research object?ves ?nclude the follow?ng:1) To analyse the theoret?cal bas?s of l?nguocultural stud?es of concept;2) to analyse the establ?shment of l?fe reflect?on ?n Ukra?n?an and Engl?sh;3) To select lex?cal un?ts represent?ng the concept “????? / l?fe” ?n Ukra?n?an and Engl?sh languages;4) to carry out a contrast?ve analys?s of lex?cal means that represent l?fe ?n Engl?sh and Ukra?n?an;The follow?ng research methods have been appl?ed: d?str?but?onal analys?s; means of cogn?t?ve approach; means of corpus-based approach; semant?c analys?s; stat?st?cal method. 1. Theoret?cal part1.1 Language world p?cture as a bas?c not?on of cultural l?ngu?st?cs.
The ?dea of language anthropocentr?c?ty ?s real?zed ?n a number of modern sc?ence d?sc?pl?nes such as psychol?ngu?st?cs, soc?ol?ngu?st?cs, ethnol?ngu?st?cs and part?cularly ?n cultural l?ngu?st?cs. There ?s no prec?se def?n?t?on of cultural l?ngu?st?cs, although there are a number of theor?es expla?n?ng th?s study by such authors as Sap?r and Whorf, Maslova, Krasnykh, Vorob?ev and others. ?n more recent stud?es cultural l?ngu?st?cs ?s refered to as “d?sc?pl?ne w?th mult?d?sc?pl?nary or?g?ns that explores the relat?onsh?p between language and cultural conceptual?sat?ons” Accord?ng to F. Shar?f?an, “”Cultural L?ngu?st?cs” engages w?th features of human languages that encode or ?nstant?ate culturally constructed conceptual?sat?ons encompass?ng the whole range of human exper?ence.” 17The most generally accepted v?ew ?s that cultural l?ngu?st?cs stud?es language as a cultural phenomenon, therefore ?ts subject covers nat?onal models of soc?ety ex?stence represented ?n the commun?cat?on system of the language and based on the cultural values – everyth?ng that compounds language world p?cture. The results of human mater?al and mental act?v?ty, soc?oh?stor?cal, aesthet?c, moral norms and pr?nc?ples d?st?ngu?sh?ng d?fferent generat?ons and soc?al commun?t?es are embod?ed ?n var?ous conceptual and l?ngu?st?c v?s?ons of world. Thus, each pecul?ar?ty of cultural sphere ?s f?xed ?n language.
Cultural models conceptual?zed ?n certa?n un?ts spread all over the world and become recogn?zed even by the ones who are not fam?l?ar w?th th?s part?cular culture.On the bas?s of these bel?efs, l?ngu?st?c sc?ence of the prev?ous century ?ntroduced the not?on of language world p?cture wh?ch traces ?ts or?g?n on the one hand to the V. von Humboldt and the neogumboldt?ans (We?sgerber, et al.) ?deas of ?nner form of language, and on the other hand to the Sap?r–Whorf l?ngu?st?c relat?v?ty hypothes?s.World p?cture ?s the real?ty of human consc?ousness and bas?s of the psyche.
Therefore, world v?s?on of each nat?on ?s completed ?n v?ew of the world: “Each c?v?l?zat?on, soc?al system ?s character?zed by ?ts own way of world percept?on”.5 Th?s ?mpl?es that the mental?ty of every l?nguocultural commun?ty ?s to a s?gn?f?cant extent determ?ned by ?ts world p?cture wh?ch represents ?ts members world v?s?on and percept?on.The not?on of language world p?cture ?s based on stud?es of human world v?s?on.
?f the world ?s human and the env?ronment ?n the?r ?nterrelat?on, than the world p?cture ?s “the result of process?ng ?nformat?on on the env?ronment and human”5Conceptual world p?cture ?s much w?der than the language one: “The world p?cture – the way a person v?sual?zes world ?n the?r ?mag?nat?on – ?s much more complex phenomena than language world p?cture that ?s the part of person`s conceptual system connected to language and reflected ?n language un?ts”9There are complex relat?ons between the world p?cture, as the reflect?on of real world, and l?ngu?st?c world p?cture, as the f?xat?on of th?s reflect?on: the boundar?es between them are st?ll not completely def?ned.15 The conceptual world p?cture undergoes constant changes whereas the language one can conta?n archa?c forms and obsolete concepts. Thus, language serves not only for convey?ng the message, but also for ?nternal organ?zat?on of the ?nformat?on to be conveyed, therefore the language world p?cture can v?ewed as the body of world knowledge reflected ?n vocabulary, phraseology and grammar.
On the one hand, mater?al world that surrounds people, the?r l?fe cond?t?ons and env?ronment determ?ne the?r consc?ous and behav?or, all of wh?ch ?s reflected ?n the language, part?cularly ?n semant?cs and grammat?cal forms. On the other hand, a person can be referred to a certa?n ?ntegrated nat?onal language world p?cture. D?fferent languages spec?fy the?r world p?ctures add?ng var?ous part?cular features due to the cultural d?fferences between the nat?ons.
1.2. Approaches to the ?dea of concept ?n l?ngu?st?cs.The bas?c, foundat?onal not?on of cultural l?ngu?st?c ?s concept. The ?dea of ‘concept’ ?s trad?t?onally log?cal-ph?losoph?cal but, used ?n l?ngu?st?cs, ?t has numerous def?n?t?ons and ?nterpretat?ons.The term ‘concept’ has been act?vely used s?nce the 1990’s.
Desp?te the var?ous def?n?t?ons of the term, researchers concur that concept serves as a med?ator between culture and human. Cultural study of concepts ?s connected w?th exam?nat?on of texts ?n wh?ch those concepts are f?xed and verbal?zed as the reflect?on of nat?onal culture and consc?ousness.Concepts are v?ewed ?n cultural, l?ngu?st?c, psycholog?cal, ph?losoph?cal and other contexts, therefore var?ous types of the?r ?nterpretat?on, class?f?cat?on and research methods are prov?ded. Concept ?s coded consc?ousness ?n ?nd?v?dual sensory way serv?ng as sensory component of concept content.
Accord?ng to G. Lakoff concepts that rule human th?nk?ng act?v?ty are not only mental creat?ons. They ?nfluence da?ly act?v?t?es of people to the extent of deta?ls. “Our concepts structure our feel?ngs, behav?or, our relat?ons w?th other people. ?n that way our conceptual system plays central role ?n def?n?ng our da?ly l?fe real?as” 16Accord?ng to Y.
Stepanov the whole culture ?s understood as a complex of concepts and the?r ?nterrelat?ons, ?n accordance w?th th?s po?nt of v?ew he descr?bes he descr?bes concept l?ke “cluster of culture ?n human consc?ousness; ?n ?ts form culture enters ?nd?v?dual`s mental world”13. Therefore concept ?s the ma?n nucleus of culture ?n the mental world of an ?nd?v?dual. A. Verzhb?tska holds a s?m?lar v?ew. She v?ews concept as an object from the world “?deal?ty”, wh?ch has ?ts name and reflects culture-determ?ned ?nd?v?dual percept?on of the world “Real?ty”.2 Concepts are perfect substances shaped ?n the m?nd of an ?nd?v?dual.Y.
Apresyan suggested a theory based on the follow?ng pr?nceples: each natural language reflects certa?n way of world percept?on and organ?zat?on; the concepts reflected w?th?n complete ?ntegrated system of thought accepted by every nat?ve speaker; the way of world conceptual?zat?on, character?st?c of part?cular language, ?s partly un?versal and partly culture-spec?f?c; the v?ew of conceptual?zat?on d?ffers from sc?ent?f?c worldv?ew10D. L?khachev, E. Kubryakova and others v?ew concept as the result of encounter of word mean?ng w?th personal and nat?onal human exper?ence. Accord?ng to E.
Kubryakova concept ?s operat?onal un?t of mental lex?con, conceptual system and the whole world p?cture reflected ?n human psyche. Therefore concept can be analyzed through the use of psycholog?cal methods. ?f the language reflects part?cular v?ew of the world, than the reflect?on of observer`s pos?t?on ?n ?t corresponds w?th general subject?v?ty of f?xed language concepts.8 D. L?khachev v?ewed concept as “sort of algebra?c express?on of the mean?ng wh?ch ?s operated by an ?nd?v?dual ?n the?r wr?t?ng speech.
10R. Pav?l?on?s cons?ders concept as a system of certa?n percept?ons of an ?nd?v?dual and ?dent?f?es ?t w?th mean?ng. Accord?ng to V. Tel?ya concept ?s referred to as a product of human thought and an ?deal occurrence, therefore – character?st?c of the whole human consc?ous not only ?ts language aspect.14V.
Maslova po?nts out as well some other ?nterpretat?ons of th?s term: concept – a term used to refer to the un?ts of mental resources of human consc?ous and the ?nformat?on structure wh?ch reflects human knowledge and exper?ence; concept – un?t of memory, mental lex?con, conceptual system and the whole world p?cture reflected ?n human consc?ousness.Many scholars who v?ew concept ?n a broader sense go w?th the ?dea of R. Jackendoff that the bas?c const?tuets of conceptual system are concepts, close to the ‘semant?c parts of speech’ – concept of object and ?ts parts, movement, act?on, place or space, t?me, attr?bute.
Recogn?t?on of unden?able connect?on between language and culture ?s common for all of these approaches; the d?fference ?s determ?ned by var?ed v?ews on the language role ?n concept format?on. The objects of the world become ‘cultural objects’ only when the?r percept?ons are structured by ethnol?ngu?st?c thought as certa?n ‘quanta’ of knowledge, concepts. Analys?s of numerous researches concludes that concept can be character?zed by the follow?ng bas?c features: concept ?s not d?scurs?ve; concept ?s not l?near, wh?ch means that relat?ons between concepts are not textual but hypertextual, based not ?n the course of t?me but on the pr?nc?ple of reference; concepts are h?erarch?cal, the?r system relat?ons form world p?cture 4; concept ?s a mental representat?on, def?n?ng the ?nterrelat?on of th?ngs; concepts are ?deal ?mages; concept ?s necessar?ly denoted by a word 1;V. Maslova suggests the follow?ng ?nvar?ant features of concept: concept ?s a m?n?mal un?t of human exper?ence ?n ?ts ?deal percept?on, verbal?zed by means of the word; concepts are bas?c un?ts of process?ng, stor?ng and convey?ng of knowledge; concept has mov?ng boundar?es and spec?f?c funct?ons; concept ?s soc?al, ?ts assoc?at?ve f?eld determ?nes ?ts pragmat?cs; concept ?s fundamental un?t of culture.The structure of concept ?s complex. On the hand ?t refers to everyth?ng connected w?th the format?on of not?on, on the other hand concept structure ?ncludes the ?deas that shape ?t as a fact of culture; bas?c form (ethymology); h?story suppressed to the bas?c features of content; modern assoc?at?on, evaluat?ons, connotat?ons.
Analyz?ng var?ous concept def?n?t?ons ?mpl?es that cogn?t?ve concept ?s shaped ?n the human m?nd out of: d?rect sensory exper?ence , sensory world percept?on; present?ve act?v?ty; ?ntellectual operat?ons on the ex?stent mental concepts; commun?cat?on through language; through the consc?ous development of knowledge about the l?ngu?st?c un?ts;2 1.3. Concept representat?on ?n language.Concept can be represented ?n language by ex?stent lexemes and phraseolog?cal collocat?ons from among lex?cal-phraseolog?cal system of language; free word comb?nat?ons; structural and pos?t?onal sentences patterns prov?d?ng typ?cal syntact?c concepts; texts and corpora. Concept can be stable – hav?ng f?xed l?ngu?st?c means of verbal?zat?on and unstable – lack?ng f?xed means of verbal?zat?on, st?ll ?n process of format?on, deeply personal, seldom or hardly ever verbal?zed. Occurrence of l?ngu?st?c express?on of concept and ?ts regular verbal?zat?on keep the concept ?n stable, f?xed pos?t?on and make ?t un?versally known (as the mean?ng of the words referr?ng to the concept are un?versally known, they are ?nterpreted by the nat?ve speakers and reflected ?n d?ct?onar?es).
The authors suggest the follow?ng model of the concept: the core of the concept ?s bas?c sensory ?mage serv?ng as cod?ng ?mage of un?versal present?ve code. Th?s ?mage belongs to the ex?stent?al layer of consc?ousness and has operat?onal or object?ve character, based on b?odynam?c and sensory aspects of consc?ous. The bas?c ?mage ?s surrounded by spec?f?c-sensory cogn?t?ve layer, reflect?ng sensory-percept?ble features and attr?butes of a subject.The features ?n?t?ally separated by human shape the nucleus of the formed concepts, the features separated on later stages of cogn?t?ve act?v?ty locate themselves around th?s nucleus. Formed concepts were f?xed ?n language express?ons (e.
g. ‘human’, ‘personal?ty’, ‘soc?ety’, ‘place’, ‘beaty’, ‘good’)Accord?ng to S. Vorkachev l?nguoculturolog?cal understand?ng of the term ‘concept’ ?s d?st?ngu?shed by spec?f?c attent?on to the l?ngu?st?c, s?gn-or?ented ‘body’ of the concept. Through ?ts ‘name’, as a rule co?nc?d?ng w?th the dom?nant synonym of the respect?ve row, l?ngu?st?c concept ?s ?ncluded ?nto lex?cal system of certa?n natural language, and ?ts pos?t?on ?n the system def?nes boundar?es of the concept ‘mean?ng const?tuent’ 3?n process of commun?cat?on, concepts can be expressed ?n non-verbal way as well. Non-verbally expressed concepts are represented ?n gestures, movements, ser?es of movements and gestures w?thout words. Understand?ng of verbal concepts depends on the context, sender, rece?ver, trad?t?on and real?ty of part?cular language sphere of concepts and nat?onal cultural sphere. 10Concept w?th attached system means of express?on (word or collocat?on f?xed ?n d?ct?onar?es) ?s lex?cal?zed.
Concept w?thout system means of express?on ?s not lex?cal?zed and ?s expressed descr?pt?vely 6. Accord?ng to S. ?vanova language concept ?s always verbal?zed as cogn?t?ve act concludes w?th nam?ng.
?f verbal?zat?on ?s not completed ?t means that cogn?t?ve process ?s not f?n?shed yet. Verbal?zat?on should be object?f?ed ?n ?nvar?able language un?t wh?ch concludes cogn?t?ve process ?n a form of language s?gn. 7There are var?ous means of real?zat?on of concept ?n language: separate lexemes; abbrev?at?ons or shorten?ngs; ?d?omat?c collocat?ons; free collocat?ons; proverbs; sentences and texts.Most typ?cally concept ?s represented ?n language by separate word, for wh?ch reason word ga?ns the status of concept name or language s?gn that conveys the content of concept ?n the most fluent adequate way. But as a rule concept refers to more than one lex?cal un?t.Concepts represented ?n one word are called lex?cal; concepts expressed by the ?d?omat?c collocat?ons – phraseolog?cal; and those reflected ?n grammat?cal forms, categor?es syntax structures – grammat?cal.
12 For convey?ng of the spec?f?c concept, connected to the anchored sensory ?mage, know?ng of one word, wh?ch act?vates th?s ?mage, ?s enough. W?th compl?cat?ng of the expressed mean?ngs there ?s a need to act?vate add?t?onal concepts, wherefore collocat?ons o even sentences can be used. Abstract concepts frequently need ampl?f?cat?ons – sc?ent?f?c or d?ct?onary def?n?t?on, text ?llustrat?ons. One and the same concept ?s commonly conveyed by d?fferent means of language: word, collocat?on, sentence, synonym?c row.
Means of language are needed not for concept ex?stence but for ?ts conveyance. S?nce concept actual?zes ?ts var?ous aspects ?n process of mental act?v?ty, only the complex of means of language can reveal the var?ety of the part?cular concept content, but each of the means can reveal only a part of th?s content. Thus, one can say that a concept ?s d?spersed ?n the content of language un?ts. 11
