THE LINGUAXIOLOGICAL NATURE OF EVALUATIVE VOCABULARY (Based on the Works of Shakarim)
5 12
Anahtar Kelimeler:
evaluative vocabulary, evaluative category, value, axiological linguistics, poetry, national value, interpretation.Özet
The article examines the linguaxiological nature of evaluative vocabulary in Shakarim's works. Linguaxiology is an interdisciplinary field of knowledge that studies the representation of values in linguistic consciousness and communicative behavior. The purpose of the study is to analyze the transmission of values, which are the object of study of linguaxiology, through evaluative vocabulary. Evaluative vocabulary in language is one of the means of expressing values. Evaluative vocabulary reflects the axiological position of the speaker.
The author of the article provides an overview of the research of scientists on the category of evaluation, and dwells on the relationship between the category of evaluation and linguaxiology. Shakarim's works often contain a layer of vocabulary that reveals the moral face of a person, such as conscience, faith, humanity, ignorance, evil, anger, etc., expressing universal human values and national values. When describing values, the poet also often uses evaluative vocabulary.
The study used methods of generalization, linguaxiological, conceptual analysis and interpretation of materials. The findings of the study are of great theoretical and practical importance. The results of the study can contribute to research in the field of "Linguaxiology" and to the study of the language of Shakarim's works. The findings presented in the article can be used in special courses such as ―Shakarimtanu‖, ―Stylistics of the Kazakh language‖, ―Language of poetry‖, taught at the philological faculties of higher educational institutions.
Referanslar
Арутюнова Н.Д. Типы языковых значений: Оценка. Событие. Факт. – М.: Наука, 1988. – 341 с.
Карасик В.И. Культурные доминанты в языке. Языковой круг: личность, концепты, дискурс. – Волгоград: Перемена, 2002. – 477 с.
Бабаева Е.В. Культурно-языковые характеристики отношения к собственности (на материале немецкого и русского языков): автореф. … канд. филол. наук. – Волгоград, 1997. 21 с.
Гуревич П.С. Культурология. – М.: Проект. 2020. – 336 с.
Алефиренко Н.Ф. Лингвокультурология: ценностно-смысловое пространство языка. – М.: Наука, 2016. – 288 c.
Вебер М. Избранные произведения. – М.: Прогресс, 2018. – 808 с.
Вольф Е.М. Оценочное значение и соотношение признаков «хорошо / плохо» // Вопросы языкознания. – 2021. – №5. – С. 98–106.
Павлов С.Г. Лингвоаксиологическая модель человека: научно-методический аспект // Вестник Минского университета. – 2013. – №2. – С. 56–68.
Аксиология журналистики: опыт становления новой дисциплины / под общ. ред. В.А. Сидорова. – СПб., 2019. – 174 с.
Алтынбеков А., Мейрбеков Т.П., Абусейтов Б.З., Оразбекҧлы Қ. Шәкәрім шығармашылығындағы әлеуметтік-педагогикалық, тәлімдік ойлар // Ясауи университетінің хабаршысы. – 2019. – №2. – Б. 81–90.
Қҧдайбердіҧлы Ш. Шығармалар жинағы. – Алматы: Aна тілі, 1991. – 558 б.
Қҧдайбердіҧлы Ш. Тҥрік, қырғыз-қазақ һәм хандар шежіресі. – Алматы: Ана тілі, 1991. – 208 б.
Koilybayeva R., Zhunis M., Kusmanova K., Mirov M., Missyachenko S. Patterns of Interaction in Family Discourse: A Resilience Theory Perspective // International Journal of Society, Culture & Language. – 2023. – №11 (1). – Р. 76–90. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijscl.2022.1975742.2850
Arutiunova N.D. Tipy iazykovyh znacheni: Ocenka. Sobytie. Fakt [Types of English language knowledge: Ocenka. The story. Fact]. – M.: Nauka, 1988. – 341 s. [in Russian]
Karasik V.I. Kulturnye dominanty v iazyke. Iazykovoi krug: lichnost, koncepty, diskurs [Cultural dominants in the language. Language circle: personality, concept, discourse]. – Volgograd: Peremena, 2002. – S. 166–205. [in Russian]
Babaeva E.V. Kulturno-iazykovye harakteristiki otnoshenia k sobstvennosti (na materiale nemeckogo i russkogo iazykov): avtoref. ... kand. filol. nauk. [Cultural and language characteristics of relations (material on German and Russian languages): abstract]. – Volgograd, 1997. – 21 s. [in Russian]
Gurevich P.S. Kulturologia [Cultural studies]. – M.: Proekt, 2020. – 336 s. [in Russian]
Alefirenko N.F. Lingvokulturologia: cennostno-smyslovoe prostranstvo iazyka [Linguoculturology: the value-semantic space of language]. – M.: Nauka, 2016. – 288 s. [in Russian]
Weber M. Izbrannye proizvedenia [Selected works]. – M.: Progress, 2018. – 808 s. [in Russian]
Wolf E.M. Ocenochnoe znachenie i sootnoshenie priznakov «horosho / ploho» [The Great knowledge and respect of the priznakov ―good/bad‖] // Voprosy iazykoznania. – 2021. – №5. – S. 98–106. [in Russian]
Pavlov S.G. Lingvoaksiologicheskaia model cheloveka: nauchno-metodicheski aspekt [Linguoaxiological model of a person: scientific and methodological aspect] // Vestnik Minskogo universiteta. – 2013. – №2. – S. 56–68. [in Russian]
Sidorov V.A. Aksiologia zhurnalistiki: opyt stanovlenia novoi discipliny [Axiology of journalism: experience of new disciplines]. – SPb., 2019. – 174 s. [in Russian]
Altynbekov A., Meirbekov T.P., Abuseitov B.Z., Orazbekuly Q. Shakarіm shygarmashylygyndagy aleumettіk-pedagogikalyq, talіmdіk oilar [Social, pedagogical, educational thoughts in Shakarim‘s work] // Iasaui universitetіnіn habarshysy. – 2019. – №2. – B. 81–90. [in Kazakh]
Qudaiberdіuly Sh. Shygarmalar zhinagy [Collection of works by Kudaiberdiuly Sh.]. – Almaty: Ana tili, 1991. – 558 b. [in Kazakh]
Qudaiberdіuly Sh. Turіk, qyrgyz-qazaq һam handar shejіresі [The Genealogy of Turkish, Kirgiz Kazakh and their khans]. – Almaty: Ana tіlі, 1991. – 208 b. [in Kazakh]
Koilybayeva R., Zhunis M., Kusmanova K., Mirov M., Missyachenko S. Patterns of Interaction in Family Discourse: A Resilience Theory Perspective // International Journal of Society, Culture & Language. – 2023. – №11 (1). – Р. 76–90. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijscl.2022.1975742.2850
