Reflection of personality self-identification process by the standards of Russian linguoculture
DOI: 10.23951/1609-624X-2024-6-26-35
The article is devoted to determining the peculiarities of self-identification, i.e. self-understanding, by the standards of the Russian linguoculture. To achieve the goal, the author uses onomasiological, component, conceptual analysis, linguocultural interpretation techniques. A standard is a sign of culture, expressing in verbal form stereotypical ideas about the typical features and qualities of a person. Standards have been proved to be the main means for selfidentification of the subject of culture. They objectify various aspects of a person’s inner world, his/her appearance, social interaction. The article establishes that a standard is an element of people’s identity, the result of the identification process, which is accompanied by the characterization of the subject of culture. These processes are embodied in the internal form of the standard, which is considered as a verbal stereotype reflecting the prototypical representation of the denoted phenomenon. The article reveals that all major cultural codes are involved in the formation of standards. The study identifies productive cultural codes that are used in the identification process. They include anthropomorphic, biomorphic, actional. The standards are represented by the units identifying a person as a kind and on certain aspects of his/her life activity. The formation of standards is carried out on the basis of linguocultural types, archetypal representations or practical human observations of reality phenomena. One verbal stereotype can be the basis of different standards. A standard can fix a deviation from the norm, indicating the norm for good or bad. The majority of standards are characterized by pejorative evaluativeness. The research discovers that the standards of anthropomorphic code of culture serve to objectify ideas about types of people oriented towards the inner world or material values. Anthropomorphic stereotypes pointing to social attributes identify features of a person in the context of social relations. Biomorphic stereotypes are based on archetypal knowledge or practical observations. The majority of units of this group record a deviation from the norm or pattern and include a negative evaluation in their meaning, which is explained by the interpretation of the animal as an ersatz human being. Units with positive evaluation dominate among the standards with the image “Bird”. Verbal stereotypes of plants are unproductive and are used mainly to objectify negative aspects. In fetish standards, value and functional characteristics of the object, as well as feelings from contact with it, become significant. Human standards formed on the basis of actional attributes embody ideas about the behavioural norms accepted in the Russian culture. The standards of the animic code reflect the immersion of a person in the context of nature, the feeling of being a part of it.
Keywords: language, culture, identification, standard, stereotype, internal form
References:
1. Teliya V. N. Russkaya frazeologiya: semantiko-pragmaticheskiy i lingvokul’turologicheskiy aspekty [Russian phraseology: semantic-pragmatic and linguistic-cultural aspects]. Moscow, Shkola “Yazyki russkoy kul’tury” Publ., 1996. 287 p. (in Russian).
2. Tokarev G. V. Chelovek: stereotipy russkoy lingvokul’tury [Man: stereotypes of Russian linguistic culture]. Tula, S-Print Publ., 2013. 92 p. (in Russian).
3. Krasnych V. V. Slovar’ i grammatika lingvokul’tury [Dictionary and grammar of linguoculture]. Moscow, Gnozis Publ., 2016. 496 p. (in Russian).
4. Tokarev G. V. Problemy izucheniya simbolariya regional’noy identichnosti [Problems of studying the symbolary of regional identity]. Tula, TPPO Publ., 2023. 168 p. (in Russian).
5. Kubryakova E. S. et al. Kratkiy slovar’ kognitivnykh terminov [A concise dictionary of cognitive terms]. Moscow, Moscow state university Publ., 1996. 245 p. (in Russian).
6. Lappo M. A. Samoidentifikatsiya: semantika, pragmatika, yazykovye resursy [Self-identification: semantics, pragmatics, language resources]. Novosibirsk, NGPU Publ., 2013. 180 p. (in Russian).
7. Teliya V. N. Konnotativnyy aspekt semantiki nominativnykh edinits [The connotative aspect of the semantics of nominative units]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1986. 141 p. (in Russian).
8. Potebnya A. A. Mysl’ i yazyk [Thought and language]. Moscow, Labirint Publ., 1999. 199 p. (in Russian).
9. Teliya V. N. Pervoocherednye zadachi i metodologicheskie problemy issledovaniya frazeologicheskogo sostava yazyka v kontekste kultury [The primary tasks and methodological problems of the study of the phraseological composition of language in the context of culture]. Frazeologiya v kontekste kul’tury [Phraseology in the context of culture]. Moscow, Shkola “Yazyki russkoy kul’tury” Publ., 1999. Pp. 13–24 (in Russian).
10. Tokarev G. V. Kratkiy slovar’ russkikh lingvokul’turnykh edinits [A short dictionary of Russian linguistic and cultural units]. Tula, TPPO Publ., 2020. 273 p. (in Russian).
11. Gudkov D., Kovshova M. Telesnyy kod russkoy kul’tury: materialy k slovaryu [The body code of Russian culture: materials for the dictionary]. Moscow, Gnozis Publ., 2007. 288 p. (in Russian).
12. Karasik V. I., Dmitrieva O. A. Lingvokul’turnyy tipazh: k opredeleniyu ponyatiya [Linguistic and cultural type: towards the definition of the concept]. Aksiologicheskaya lingvistika: lingvokul’turnye tipazhi [Axiological linguistics: linguacultural types]. Volgograd, Paradigma Publ., 2005. Pp. 5–25 (in Russian).
13. Kosharnaya S. A. Mif i yazyk [Myth and language]. Belgorod, BGU Publ., 2002. 287 p. (in Russian).
14. Mechkovskaya N. B. Semiotika. Yazyk. Priroda. Kul’tura [Semiotics. Language. Nature. Culture]. Moscow, Akademiya Publ., 2004. 432 p. (in Russian).
15. Dal’ V. I. Tolkovyy slovar’ zhivogo velikorusskogo yazyka: v 4 tomakh [Explanatory dictionary of the living Great Russian language: 4 volumes]. Moscow, Terra Publ., 1995 (in Russian).
16. Afanas’ev A. A. Mify, pover’ya i sueveriya slavyan. Poeticheskiye vozzreniya slavyan na prirodu: v 3 tomakh [Myths, beliefs and superstitions of the Slavs. The poetic views of the Slavs on nature: 3 volumes]. Moscow, EKSMO Publ., 2002. 768 p. (in Russian).
17. Sheynina E. Ya. Entsiklopediya simvolov [Encyclopedia of Symbols]. Moscow, AST Publ.; Khar’kov, Torsing Publ., 2006. 592 p. (in Russian).
18. Potebnya A. A. Simvol i mif v narodnoy kul’ture [Symbol and myth in popular culture]. Moscow, Labirint Publ., 2000. 184 p. (in Russian).
19. Tareva E. G., Troynikova E. V. Kul’turnaya identichnost sub’’ekta: vektory informatsionnoy transformatsii [Cultural identity of the subject: vectors of information transformation]. Yazyk i kul’tura – Language and Culture, 2023, no. 64, pp. 45–64 (in Russian).
20. Arutyunova N. D. Yazyk i mir cheloveka [Language and the human world]. Moscow, Shkola “Yazyki russkoy kul’tury”, 1999. 896 p. (in Russian).
21. Savchuk S. O., Arkhangel’skiy T. A., Bonch-Osmolovskaya A. A., Donina O. V., Kuznetsova Yu. N., Lyashevskaya O. N., Orekhov B. V., Podryadchikova M. V. Natsional’nyy korpus russkogo yazyka 2.0: novye vozmozhnosti i perspektivy razvitiya [National Corpus of the Russian Language 2.0: new opportunities and development prospects]. Voprosy yazykoznaniya – Topics in the study of language, 2024, no. 2, pp. 7–34 (in Russian).
( 508.49 kB ) 
( 503.96 kB )
Issue: 6, 2024
Series of issue: Issue 6
Rubric: THEORETICAL AND APPLIED LINGUISTICS
Pages: 26 — 35
Downloads: 1041