俄语词汇语义场“pol’za”的结构与俄语文学语言的比较

IF 0.3 Q2 HISTORY
Rusin Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.17223/18572685/68/10
L. Dronova, Liu Yanchun
{"title":"俄语词汇语义场“pol’za”的结构与俄语文学语言的比较","authors":"L. Dronova, Liu Yanchun","doi":"10.17223/18572685/68/10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article analyses the lexico-semantic field “pol’za” (Eng. benefit) in terms of their structure in the Rusin and Russian literary language to identify similarities/differences in the structuring of the concept in native speakers' minds. The composition of two lexico-semantic fields was determined based on the lexicographic sources. The analysis of the functional and semantic features and the evaluative spectrum of vocabulary identified two subfields in each field, based on a historically determined change in the understanding of the concept “benefit” by native speakers: a change in the attitude to the interests of the subject (individual or collective). The authors conclude that the vocabulary of the two fields retain traces of the general development of the concept “benefit”, associated in an early and undeveloped consciousness of values with vital needs and common (public) interest, as well as with the consequences of changed production relations that have formed other values correlating with the personal interests and benefits of the subject. The “benefit” for personal interest is interpreted by the public mind as self-interest. Both lexico-semantic fields have borrowed lexemes in their cores, which is associated not only with the significant influence of another cultural and linguistic environment, but also with the general tendency to assign unambiguous linguistic signs, “labels” to complex concepts. The fundamental difference is the absence of the segment “health/healing (of soul and body)” in the Rusin semantic field, while in Russian it is the result of Old Slavonic influence. The revealed differences in the considered lexico-semantic fields are the result of different degrees of their functional load, status, and degree of codification.","PeriodicalId":54120,"journal":{"name":"Rusin","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The structure of the lexico-semantic field “pol’za” in the Rusin language compared to the Russian literary language\",\"authors\":\"L. Dronova, Liu Yanchun\",\"doi\":\"10.17223/18572685/68/10\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article analyses the lexico-semantic field “pol’za” (Eng. benefit) in terms of their structure in the Rusin and Russian literary language to identify similarities/differences in the structuring of the concept in native speakers' minds. The composition of two lexico-semantic fields was determined based on the lexicographic sources. The analysis of the functional and semantic features and the evaluative spectrum of vocabulary identified two subfields in each field, based on a historically determined change in the understanding of the concept “benefit” by native speakers: a change in the attitude to the interests of the subject (individual or collective). The authors conclude that the vocabulary of the two fields retain traces of the general development of the concept “benefit”, associated in an early and undeveloped consciousness of values with vital needs and common (public) interest, as well as with the consequences of changed production relations that have formed other values correlating with the personal interests and benefits of the subject. The “benefit” for personal interest is interpreted by the public mind as self-interest. Both lexico-semantic fields have borrowed lexemes in their cores, which is associated not only with the significant influence of another cultural and linguistic environment, but also with the general tendency to assign unambiguous linguistic signs, “labels” to complex concepts. The fundamental difference is the absence of the segment “health/healing (of soul and body)” in the Rusin semantic field, while in Russian it is the result of Old Slavonic influence. The revealed differences in the considered lexico-semantic fields are the result of different degrees of their functional load, status, and degree of codification.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54120,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rusin\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rusin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17223/18572685/68/10\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rusin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17223/18572685/68/10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文分析了词汇语义场“pol’za”(英文)。在俄语和俄语文学语言中的结构方面,以识别母语人士头脑中概念结构的异同。根据词典来源确定了两个词典语义场的组成。对功能和语义特征的分析以及词汇的评估谱确定了每个领域的两个子领域,这是基于母语人士对“利益”概念理解的历史决定的变化:对主体(个人或集体)利益的态度的变化。作者的结论是,这两个领域的词汇保留了“利益”概念总体发展的痕迹,在早期和未发展的价值意识中,与重要需求和共同(公共)利益联系在一起,以及与生产关系变化的后果,这些变化形成了与个人利益和主体利益相关的其他价值观。个人利益的“利益”被公众心理解释为自利。这两个词汇语义领域的核心都有借来的词汇,这不仅与另一种文化和语言环境的重大影响有关,而且与为复杂概念分配明确的语言符号“标签”的普遍趋势有关。根本的区别在于俄语语义场中没有“健康/治疗(灵魂和身体)”这一段,而在俄语中,这是受古斯拉夫语影响的结果。所考虑的词汇语义领域的差异是它们的功能负荷、状态和编码程度不同的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The structure of the lexico-semantic field “pol’za” in the Rusin language compared to the Russian literary language
The article analyses the lexico-semantic field “pol’za” (Eng. benefit) in terms of their structure in the Rusin and Russian literary language to identify similarities/differences in the structuring of the concept in native speakers' minds. The composition of two lexico-semantic fields was determined based on the lexicographic sources. The analysis of the functional and semantic features and the evaluative spectrum of vocabulary identified two subfields in each field, based on a historically determined change in the understanding of the concept “benefit” by native speakers: a change in the attitude to the interests of the subject (individual or collective). The authors conclude that the vocabulary of the two fields retain traces of the general development of the concept “benefit”, associated in an early and undeveloped consciousness of values with vital needs and common (public) interest, as well as with the consequences of changed production relations that have formed other values correlating with the personal interests and benefits of the subject. The “benefit” for personal interest is interpreted by the public mind as self-interest. Both lexico-semantic fields have borrowed lexemes in their cores, which is associated not only with the significant influence of another cultural and linguistic environment, but also with the general tendency to assign unambiguous linguistic signs, “labels” to complex concepts. The fundamental difference is the absence of the segment “health/healing (of soul and body)” in the Rusin semantic field, while in Russian it is the result of Old Slavonic influence. The revealed differences in the considered lexico-semantic fields are the result of different degrees of their functional load, status, and degree of codification.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Rusin
Rusin HISTORY-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
75.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信