EXPLICATION OF EPISTEMIC SENSE IN THE STRUCTURE OF A POLYNOMIAL PREDICATE
DOI: 10.23951/1609-624X-2018-4-70-74
The paper deals with the question of formation, explication, and implication of epistemic meanings in the structure of a predicate polynomial, language means of its expression for determination the truthfulness of a statement and its value from the speaker’s point of view. The meaning of an epistemic statement is analyzed, the explicit and the implicit forms of realization the modality are determined, as well as mechanisms of the formation of epistemic senses implied in speech by the polynomial construction. The exchange of information in the communication process involves the determination of the intention of a statement, the interpretation of its motives, the ability to explicate the implicit meaning of the utterance, which, in turn, reveals the degree and nature of the interpretation that speaks of objective reality from the point of view of its conception of the object of a judgment. The analysis of the language factology confirms the importance of expanding the structure of the predicate polynomial by introducing the modal component and makes it possible to demonstrate its leading role in a number of other different-level linguistic forms of meaning within the framework of logical predicates “know-consider”. The general theoretical basis of analysis is made up of logical concepts of intentionality and truthfulness of statement.
Keywords: epistemic modality, evaluation, predication, polynomial structure, modal verbs
References:
1. Arutyunova N. D. Tipy yazykovykh znacheniy. Otsenka. Sobytiye. Fakt [Types of language values. Evaluation. Event. Fact]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1988. 341 p. (in Russian).
2. Shvets V. M. Usvoeniye rebenkom epistemicheskoy modal‘nosti. Detskaya rech’ kak predmet lingvisticheskogo issledovaniya [Child’s assimilation of epistemic modality. Children’s speech as a subject of linguistic research]. Materialy Mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii [Materials of the Interregional Scientific and Practical Conference]. Saint Petersburg, 2004. Pp. 294–297 (in Russian).
3. Aristotel. Analitiki. Pervaya i vtoraya [Analysts. The first and second]. Leningrad, Gosudarstvennoye izdatel’stvo politicheskoy literatury Publ., 1953. 449 p. (in Russian).
4. Uorf B. L. Otnosheniye norm povedeniya i myshleniya k yazyku [The ratio of norms of behavior and thinking to language]. Novoye v lingvistike [New in linguistics]. Moscow, 1960. Issue 1 (in Russian).
5. Deutscher G. Through the Language Glass: Why the World Looks Different in Other Languages. Arrow Books, 2011. 309 р.
6. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [Criticism of Pure Reason]. Moscow, Mysl’ Publ., 1964. 591p. (in Russian).
7. Trunova O. V. Semanticheskiye konstanty i diskursnaya divergentnost’ form kategorii modal’nosti v angliyskom yazyke. Avtoref. dis. dokt. fil. nauk [Semantic constants and discourse divergence of forms of the category of modality in English. Abstract of thesis doct. philol. sci.]. Saint Petersburg, 1995. 31 p. (in Russian).
8. Lyons J. Semantics. Cambridge University Press, 1977. 385 p.
9. Panfilov V. Z. Kategoriya modal’nosti i eye rol’ v konstruirovanii struktury predlozheniya i suzhdeniya [The modality category and its role in constructing sentence structure and judgments]. Voprosy yazykoznaniya –- Voprosy Jazykoznanija,1977, no. 4, pp. 37–49 (in Russian).
10. Mezheritskaya M. I. K voprosu o sootnoshenii epistemicheskoy modal’nosti i kategorii evidentsial’nosti [The interrelation between the epistemic modality and the category of evidentiality]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Seriya 9. Filologiya, vostokovedeniye, zhurnalistika, 2009, no. 4, pp. 105–109 (in Russian).
11. Trunova O. V. Chelovek vosprinimayushchiy i polagayushchiy: priroda soderzhatel’nogo dualiza kategorii modal’nosti. Antropologicheskaya lingvistika: Kontsepty. Kategorii [A person who perceives and believes: the nature of a meaningful dualism of the category of modality. Anthropological linguistics: Concepts. Categories]. Moscow, 2003. Pp. 29–56 (in Russian).
12. Zelenshchikov A.V. Propozitsiya i modal’nost’ [Proposition and modality]. Moscow, Knizhnyy dom «LIBROKOM» Publ., 2010. 216 p. (in Russian).
13. Rozhkova T. N. Kontsept «osoznaniye» v kognitsii i yazykovoy kartine mira: na primere verbal’nykh reprezentantov to be (byt’), to seem (kazat’sya), to turn out (okazat’sya). Avtoref. dis. kand. filol. nauk [The concept of “awareness” in the cognition and linguistic picture of the world: on the example of verbal representatives to be, to seem, to turn out. Abstract of thesis diss. cand. philol. sci.]. Barnaul, 2004, 119 p. (in Russian).
14. Johns B.H. Using an Educator’s Skills to Advocate for Senior Relatives or Friends in the Medical World. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 2014, p. 38-40.
15. Deb G. Collegial Administrative Support: Reflections from a Principal at an At-Risk Public High School. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, Fall 2014, voluem 81-1, pp. 40–44.
16. Amicucci A. N. How They Really Talk. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 2015. Pp. 483–491.
17. Mayle P. A Gods Year: The Portrait of the Film. Hardcover, 2006.
( 399.41 kB ) 
( 392.16 kB )
Issue: 4, 2018
Series of issue: Issue 4
Rubric: GERMANIC LANGUAGES
Pages: 70 — 74
Downloads: 1292