FEATURES OF ZOOMORPHISMS IN THE COMPARATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS OF THE ENGLISH, RUSSIAN AND KAZAKH LANGUAGES
Anahtar Kelimeler:
zoomorphism, cultural linguistics, picture of the world, ethnocultural specificity, lexical and semantic variants, comparative structures.Özet
This article is devoted to the analysis of zoomorphisms in the composition of comparative constructions and their comparison in different system languages. The article analyzes the most common examples of the use of zoomorphisms in comparative constructions of the English, Russian and Kazakh languages. For linguistic research, the analysis of zoomorphisms in comparative constructions and their comparison in languages of different systems seems to be very relevant. The mysterious nature of zoomorphisms has attracted more and more researchers over time. Zoolexics, which is brighter than any other area of language, reflects the peculiarities of comprehending extra-linguistic reality, when images and names of animals in different languages are projected onto a person. These images go back to the depths of human consciousness and beliefs. The names of animals projected onto humans are often associated with folk and mythical symbols. The roots of this phenomenon go far back in centuries, when tribes worshiped images of animal totems. Zoomorphisms are characterized as comparative expressives with diffuse semantics, i.e. they represent speech forms with double correlation: they link the spheres “animal” (as a function of origin) and “man” (as functional means of creating a characteristic). The study of zoomorphisms in various languages contributes to a vivid description of linguistic imagery, and in the comparative aspect of the study it makes it possible to identify typical associations, recognize and describe the national-cultural specifics of each language. Zoomorphisms in comparative constructions reveal the originality of the historical development of the people, spiritual culture, the peculiarities of everyday life, the specificity of the associative-figurative thinking of native speakers. Zoomorphisms as an object of research deserve special attention also because, obeying the laws of language, they form a specific subsystem, within which their own laws arise that require a special description.
Referanslar
Лясота Ю.Л. Роль метафорических слов и выражений в развитии словарного состава языка: на материале современного английского языка: диссертация кандидата филологических наук. – Л., 1954. – 244 с. 2. Линко Т.В. Зооморфизмы в английском языке: диссертация кандидата филологических наук: 10.02.06; 10.02.01 / АН КазССР. Ин-т языкознания. – Алма-Ата, 1989. – 171 с.
Кайдар А. Тысяча метких и образных выражений: казахско-русский фразеологический словарь с этнолингвистическими пояснениями. – Астана: ТОО «Білге», 2003. – 368 с.
Черемисина М.И., Бродская Л.М. Структурные типы синтетических полипредикативных конструкций в языках разных систем. – Новосибирск, 1986. – 200 c.
Огдонова Ц.Ц. Зооморфные метафорические номинации в сопоставительном аспекте. Сборник научных трудов. Вып.4. – Екатеринбург, 2005. – С. 38.
Панфилов А.К. Предложенные способы выражения сравнения. – Москва, 1973. – 888 с.
Литвин Ф.А. Сопоставительный анализ зооморфных характеристик (на материале русского, английского языков). – М.: Наука, 1977. – 200 с. 8. Афанасьев А.В., Бажанов В.С. Звери Казахстана. – Алма-Ата: Изд-во АН Казахской ССР, 1953. – 535 с.
Сапожникова Л.М. Семантика референциально однозначных собственных имен и их адъективных дериватов. В кн.: Коннотативные аспекты семантики в немецкой лексике и фразеологии. – Калинин, 1987. – 250 с. 2. Тимошенко Е.И. К происхождению фразеологизмов. Кондрашка хватил / Русский язык. Межведомственный сборник. Вып 11. – Мн.: Университетское, 1991. – С. 144.
