Учебное пособие 1703

components of a steam engine [11, p. 280]. In support of this idea, we will give an example of a more complex device:

Дрель – «ручной инструмент для сверления отверстий» [8*, p. 175] - (Drill – a hand tool for drilling holes).

In this definition, only the purpose of the mechanism is noted, while the definitions of technical primitives fix them with all their inherent details.

In English, as in Russian, dictionary definitions of the simplest tools describe in detail their structure, purpose, and principle of operation. We can note the differences between languages. The presented dictionary definitions differ in the amount of information they contain. Russian interpretations are more concise than English ones, which describe in detail the principle of tools operations, which is not presented in their Russian version. So, in English definitions, it is specified that a spade is "used with both hands", "for pushing into the ground with the foot ". The English description of the saw is supplemented by its movement during operation: "It is moved backwards and forwards by hand". Such clarifications are not typical for Russian definitions, for example: «Лопата - деревянное или металлическое орудие с рукояткой и нижним широким плоским концом, предназначенное для копания, сгребания чего-либо и т. п.» - (a spade is a wooden or metal tool with a handle and a lower wide flat end, designed for digging, raking something, etc.).

We can talk about the existence of different lexicographic traditions in the description of primitives. Native speakers of both languages are well aware of spades, saws, axes, and everyone is well aware of the specifics of their use. However, in English definitions, the principle of working tools is verbalized (used with both hands), and in Russian it is implicated (a spade is a wooden or metal tool with a handle), which is a reason to assume that lexicography traditions of Russian and English – speaking people are different.

Confirmation of the position that the dictionary records only significant moments for people can also serve as the fact that once relevant details are lost in the description of obsolete tools. Comparing the definitions of tools in lexicographic sources of various years, starting with the dictionary Of V. I. Dahl, dating from the middle of the 19th century [9*], and ending with dictionaries of our days, [8*], [11*] it is possible to trace the dynamics of how tools definitions are simplified as they go out of widespread use.

For example, a comprehensive view of the harrow, once an indispensable tool of arable land, is set out in the dictionary definition Of V. I. Dahl:

«земледельческое орудие труда для бороньбы, разбиения комьев после вспашки, скороженья, для выравнивания вспаханного поля и зарывания посева; крестьянская борона, из тройных поперечных и двойных продольных грядок, решеткою в 15 клеток, связана вязками, витнями в кои заклинены зубья. Наиболее простая борона у нас, по северной, легкой почве - суковатка: еловые жерди, на них кидаются сучья в две четверти длиною (смычьё), или же расколотые суковатые лесины связываются закрутками, вицами, и ими же привертываются к оглоблям. На плужной, глубокой пахоте используют тяжелую борону, со стальными зубьями; на жесткой, кочковатой или же неровной - коленчатую, во все сторо-

ны перегибающуюся звеньями» [9*, p. 116-117] – (agricultural tools for harrowing, breaking clods after plowing, speed, for leveling the plowed field and burying crops; peasant harrow, from triple transverse and double longitudinal beds, a grid of 15 cells, bound by bundles, rods in which the teeth are jammed. The simplest harrow we have, on the Northern, light soil - sukovatka: spruce poles, they throw twigs twoquarters of the length (bow), or split gnarled woods are connected with twists, whips, and they are also screwed to the shafts. On ploughing, deep plowing, a heavy harrow

44

with steel teeth is used; on hard, hummocky or uneven, a knee - shaped harrow that bends in all directions with links).

If in the dictionary of V. I. Dahl we see a detailed description of the tool function, scope, features of functioning and design of the harrow, Then in the dictionary of S. D. Ushakov, published in the 30s of the last century [8*], individual details of the harrow, which has lost its former relevance, are not reflected largely. Only certain details of the device of this tool are partially preserved, such as the general configuration, part of the mechanism, and purpose:

«земледельческое орудие в виде рамы с вертикально насаженными зубьями, предназначенное для мелкого рыхления почвы» [8*, p. 136] – (an agricultural tool in the form of a frame with vertically impaled teeth, designed for fine loosening of the soil).

Nowadays the harrow is almost out of use. Today, the absolute archaism has become a number of dictionary designations of structural tool parts. Speaking about the characteristics mentioned earlier, only the purpose of the instrument is recorded in modern interpretations. Lexicographic sources present it as «сельскохозяйственное орудие для рыхления вспа-

ханной земли» [11*, p. 108] - an agricultural tool for loosening plowed land.

All of the above allows us to confirm the idea that the degree of detail in the description of an artifact in the dictionary reflects the level of people's understanding of it. The simplier and more understandable and at the same time significant and important the subject is in people's lives, the more detailed its description is presented both in dictionary definitions and in other written sources.

The information presented in dictionary interpretations is duplicated in a certain way by contextual uses. In one case, it appears to be a "collapsed" definition, in the other – a common one. The analysis of literary texts allows, in particular, to reveal a detailed idea of people about tools.

Examples with the word spade verbalize its structural elements:

У него с собой была железная лопата без черенка [1**] – (He had with him an iron spade without a handle ).

Из середины сугроба торчала лопата с длинной ручкой [2**] – (A longhandled spade protruded from the middle of the snowdrift).

If dictionary definitions are limited to a "stingy" indication of the purpose, then in the selected examples there is a detailed, more common description of the spade technology:

Лопата аккуратно вонзилась в землю и встала, ушла глубоко, воткнув-

шись холодным железом [3**] – (The spade sank neatly into the ground and stood up, going deep, sticking a cold iron ).

The authors mention parts of the axe device, the butt with the axe handle, describing every element of working with the tool as swinging it:

Замахивайся поровней, а то топор соскочит с топорища [4**] – (Swing evenly, or the axe will jump off the handle).

И в этом полумраке человек заносит над ним обухом топор [5**] – (And in this semi-darkness, a man raises an axe over him with the butt ).

45

Everyone knows the simple technology of using an axe:

Он перестал рубить и, замахнувшись двумя руками , уставился на мои сапо-

ги [6**] - He stopped chopping and, swinging both hands, stared at my boots

[6**].

The following passage speaks of the state of the saw, in which its operation may be complicated:

Пила заржавела , она была ни на что не годной [7**] – (The saw was rusty and useless.

Artistic texts also highlight its purpose, and attention is drawn to the procedure for working with it:

Держи крепче ручку , чтоб пила не вихлялась [8**] – (Hold the handle tight so that the saw doesn't wobble).

So, in context the uses of the tools presented in the following way. They have structural elements: handle, handle, ax handle, butt; material of manufacture-iron; size-long. Their purpose is indicated: to cut. The principle of operation of the tool is revealed: it stuck into the ground and got up, went deep, stuck with a cold iron, swung with two hands. The peculiarity of its use is emphasized: you need to hold your hand tighter.

To illustrate the similarities and differences in the ideas of tools among Russians and English, we will give examples of tools definitions from English-language sources.

In the description of the spade, English authors note the presence of two components, such as the blade and the wooden end:

They got across the treacherous spot, Norm holding the blade end of the spade with Maurine clutching the wooden end [9**].

The spade handle is its second mandatory element:

He could only do holding onto the shaft of the spade with the crook of his left elbow

[10**].

There are indications of the principle of tool operation, which consists of pressing the spade with your foot:

This tread is less damaging to your boots or shoes when pushing the spade in with your foot, but the soil tends to pack beneath it [11**].

Contexts reveal such a detail of the axe, as the butt, by which it is easily recognizable:

Caleb put the butt of the axe on the floor and used the tool as a crutch to pull himself up [12**].

The principle of tool operation is traced. It should be raised high and swung:

He raised the axe high and swung it through the air towards the wardrobe

[13**].

46

The saw teeth are an integral part of the tool, as the following example illustrates:

Maddie then asked how his father had lost his two fingers, and Clyde said that it was simple: the saw blade was very sharp [14**].

The feature of the performed movements is shown: forward-backward:

Andrew would move his saw forward -backward. He started his work [15**].

Contextual use of English lexemes reveals such components of the tools meaning as the presence of their structural elements: blade, wooden end, butt, shaft; material of manufacture - wooden end, sharpness - sharp. The principle of working with the tool is emphasized: push the spade in with your foot, raise the axe high and swing, move the saw forwardbackward.

Knowledge of the device and purpose of tools also formed the basis for metaphorical reinterpretations and figurative comparisons. Likening the appearance of a person, his anatomical constitution, as well as his actions can be considered one of the aspects of metaphorical modeling of a person. The external world of mechanical devices can be understood as an extension of the body, and the signs inherent in the human body, its movements, by metaphorical transfer are transformed into the area of signs of tools. Devices are so deeply related to the human being that they can be perceived as projections of human organs.

E. Kapp reasoned about this as follows: developing devices to simplify their work, people made them in their own image and likeness, as if repeating and continuing their own "I". He gives a number of tools examples, which served as the prototype of the organs of the human body. So, a hammer is like a clenched fist. The model of a plow, a spade, a rake could well be the palms, hands with nails, quite suitable for agricultural work. The extended finger with its sharp nail was equivalent to a drill. A significant role was assigned to teeth suitable for sawing, cutting, planning and peeling the bark. The ability of the jaws to hold pieces of food produced contributed to the invention of ticks and vises, and to crumble-saws.

There is also a reverse process. Man, intuitively recreating in all invention’s parts of his own body, knows himself, based on these devices created by himself. The artificial world created by man later becomes a means of understanding himself [12, p. 95-104].

All the above statements are confirmed in our days, being verbalized in contexts. Here are examples taken from them that illustrate how the functioning of tools is likened to the image of a person.

Such names of tool parts as handle (axe), prongs or teeth (saw) are somatic in their primary meaning, but they are so widely known and commonly used that they have long been erased metaphors and do not need to be presented in detail. Not so well-known comparisons are interesting.

So, the characteristic silhouette of a leg can be associated with a spade:

Другой человек с одноногой лопатой чего-то сажает [16**] – (Another man with a one-legged spade is planting something).

The similarity of external outlines of the nose shape is seen in axe:

Топор зло косил блестящим кривым носом [17**] – (The axe was angrily mowing its shiny crooked nose.

Tools can be assigned with the peoples’ functions: 47

Ненасытная зубастая пила только ела, только ела - не пила [18**] – (The insatiable toothy saw only ate, only ate - did not drink ).

Let's look at examples based on the English language material.

A spade is associated with a nose:

Choose a spade with a pointy nose without rust [19**].

The similarity of the axe and the head was noticed:

A hundred and fifty miles south of the Yir Yoront one such spear may be exchanged for one stone axe head [20**].

The saw is endowed with teeth:

A teethed saw was lying behind him [21**].

As it can be seen from the examples, native Russian speakers believe that a spade looks like a leg, an axe - like a nose, and a saw can eat. Examples from English-language sources show that the nose looks like a spade, an axe is shaped like a head, and a saw has teeth.

No less interesting is the reverse process, which consists in seeing parallels between the tools people know and their own "device" and movements. The "mechanism" created from an organic sample serves to explain and understand the "organism" that created it [11, p. 95-104].

So, the external configuration of a spade is guessed in the appearance of a person:

Первым взял слово Василий Полтев, крепко сбитый, как лопата,

детина [22*] – (Vasily Poltev was the first to take the floor, a burly fellow like a spade).

Что ж ты, как лопата, тощая [23**] – (What are you, like a spade, skin - ny).

The image of the tool is associated with the face:

Он весь такой нескладный, грубоватый, лицо, точно лопата [24**] – (He's all clumsy, rough, and has a face like a spade).

Facial features are seen as a spade:

У Михея нос был широченный, будто лопата [25**] – (Micah's nose was as broad as a spade .

Его могучие плечи немного согнулись, в широкой, как лопата, черной ассирийской бороде появились седые клочки [26**] - His powerful shoulders bent a little, and his black Assyrian beard, as broad as a spade , was streaked with gray.

There are also such comparisons that capture the similarity between parts of the human body and the tool:

48

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 3 (30), 2020 ISSN 2587-8093

Она своим большим , как лопата , языком облизала стоявшую кружку

[27**] – (She licked the mug with her spade-sized tongue.

Мне нравится его уверенное спокойствие здорового человека, какая-то компактная слаженность атлетической фигуры, и широкие, как лопата, ла -

дони [28**] – (I like his confident calmness of a healthy person, some compact coherence of an athletic figure, and wide, like a spade, hands ).

The sharp movements of the spade are reinterpreted in the following passage:

Она рвалась в бой, как лопата в землю [29**] – (She was eager to fight like a spade in the ground).

Contexts in which common features of an axe and a person are traced are revealed:

Вера – как топор гильотины, также проста и крепко сбита [30**] – (Vera is like the axe of the guillotine, and is also simple and well-made).

The shape of the axe is transferred to the facial features:

Плоское и острое, как топор, лицо с бескровными щёками и длинным под-

бородком дышало такой злобой [31**] – (The face, flat and sharp as an axe , with bloodless cheeks and a long chin, breathed such malice).

An accidentally dropped word is likened to the movement of an axe:

Голос бабушки был резким и тяжелым, как топор [32**] – (My grandmother's voice was harsh and heavy as an axe ).

Rough behavior is correlated with the ability to hack:

А затем резкий голос взлетает, как топор , и бьет уже наотмашь [33**] – (And then a sharp voice takes off like an axe and hits backhand).

Он уничтожал на своем пути все препятствия , как топор [34**] – (He destroyed all obstacles in his path like an axe).

The appearance of a saw is also projected onto the person's facial and body features:

Маруся вся была такая ж тонкая и звонкая, как словно пила [35**] – (Marusya was all so thin and sonorous, like a saw ).

Спина его была неестественно искривлена, тонкая острая, как пила [36**]

– (His back was unnaturally curved, thin and sharp as a saw ).

The surface of the saw is compared to the skin:

Он с ужасом и дрожью в теле ощутил прикосновение кожи прокаженного к себе, она была холоднее змеиной кожи и шероховата, как пила [37**] – (He felt the leper's skin touch him with horror and trembling, it was colder than a snake's skin and rough as a saw ).

49

Saw-so they will say about a grumpy person who torments others with quibbles and reproaches, often for small things. The comparison of a wife with a saw has become a classic:

У него, вишь, жена как пила . С такой немудрено запить [38**] – (He's got a wife like a saw . With such it is not surprising to begin drinking).

The monotonous, measured movements of the saw are reinterpreted in the following examples, taking on a new meaning:

Он вечно ворчит, брюзжит, словно пилой ржавой пилит нежное сердце мое [39**] – (He always grumbles like a rusty saw , sawing my tender heart).

The principle of operation of the saw is based on the following expressions:

Он, как пила, отрезал Корнеева от тепляка [40**] – (He cut Korneev off from teplyak like a saw ).

Двигайте локтями вверх-вниз, как пилой, удерживая при этом спину прямой [41**] – (Move your elbows up and down like a saw, keeping your back straight).

In the examples we have chosen for the analysis of lexemes, people draw analogies of the tools they know with their own appearance. The similarity of the external outlines of a person and a tool is captured: like a spade, you can be hard-built, skinny. You can be hardhit like an axe. Like a saw, people look thin and sonorous. The face is compared to the tool. It can be flat and sharp, like an axe, or just like a shovel, wide. The face features are seen as similar to the tools: His nose was as wide as a shovel, and his tongue was as big as a shovel. The comparison of a beard like a spade has become classical. Parts of the body, in turn, are like tools: broad, like a spade, palms, thin and sharp, like a saw, back. The observed similarity between the movement of angry people and the weapon is verbalized: it was eager to fight like a spade. The voice is compared to the instrument. It is sharp and heavy, like an axe, takes off and hits already backhand. The manner of speech correlates with the saw: grumbles, grumbles, like a rusty saw.

Let's turn to English-language sources to compare how the principle of imaginative reinterpretation of tools in English differs from the one presented in the Russian part of the study. Let's look at how a person "tries on" the characteristics of tools created by himself.

He sees himself as a spade. Its outline is associated with the appearance of a thin per-

son:

James was very much like the narrow spade [42**].

The external outline of the spade is seen in various parts of the body. People notice the similarity of a spade and a back:

My back is still stiff as a spade [43**].

The head is compared to a spade:

He was a man with a tiny head, flat and flared like a spade [44**].

The shape of the shovel gives reason to compare it with a smile: 50

Sam is a balding man in his sixties, with a wide smile like a spade on his face [45**].

The Association of a spade with a beard has become traditional:

Will you have your beard like a spade, or a bodkin? [46**].

His characteristic features include large fleshy lips and spade -like hands [47**].

You can see the similarity in the actions of the fingers and the spade:

He plunged his strong fingers into the dirt like a spade [48**].

The external outline of the hammer is seen in the image of people:

Her head lengthened out on each side like a hammer, convex above and below

[49**].

Something in common is guessed in the shape of hands and a hammer:

I saw a gigantic man with hands like a hammer [50**].

When the word hammer is used in comparative terms, it often refers to the principle of operation of the hammer and the force of impact:

Look at his right-hand finger, which moves like a hammer , striking the strings

[51**].

God says that His Word is like fire and like a hammer [52**].

The following comparative turn uses the external characteristics of the saw:

She smiled with her mouth, toothed like a saw [53**].

People's actions back and forth are like the movements of a gun:

Richard was moving forward and backward like a saw [54**].

These examples show that native English speakers also see themselves similar to tools. The external configuration is compared: he is like the narrow spade (similar to a narrow spade). A smile is likened to a spade: smile like a spade. Human teeth are comparable to the teeth of a saw: toothed like a saw. A beard is usually associated with a spade: beard like a spade. The similarity of the outlines of body parts and tools was noticed: head flat and flared like a spade, head lengthened out on each side like a hammer, spade-like hands, neck stiff as a spade, reinterpret the movements of the guns: moving forward and backward like a saw, finger moves like a hammer, plunge fingers into the dirt like a spade.

Tools are so close and understandable to people that they become objects of riddles that actualize knowledge about their structure and functional purpose. Those parts of the body that long ago served as a model for the idea and reconstruction of technical primitives can become a hint when decoding them. This fact is supported by the following examples.

The appearance of a spade is as follows:

51

Рук а есть, а не человек, землю роет, а не плуг – (The hand is there, not the man, the earth digs, not the plow) [55**].

In the following example, the guesser's attention is focused not only on the device of the tool, but also on its dig function, which is a hint in this case:

Замечательный дружище, деревянная ручища, все время что-то ковыряет,

вскопать все поле успевает – (A wonderful friend, a wooden hand, always picking something, has time to dig up the entire field) [55**].

The device of the human body is also transferred to the hammer:

Сам худ, а башка с пуд. Сам с локоток, а бородка с веник – (Slim himself, and the head with pood. Himself with an elbow, and a beard with a broom [55**].

The saw in riddles is seen as a living creature with hands and teeth:

Одна рука, во все брюхо зубы – (One hand, teeth all over the belly) [55**].

Железная сестрица зубаста и шустра: её и клен боится, и тополь, и сосна. И даже дуб боится попасться той сестрице – (The iron sister is toothy and quick: the maple is afraid of her, and the poplar, and the pine. And even the oak tree is afraid of getting caught by that sister) [55**].

Древесину ест дедок, сто зубов в один рядок. Все он пробует на зуб: грушу,

яблоню и дуб – (Wood eats an old man, a hundred teeth in one row. He tries everything: pear, Apple, and oak) [55**].

In the following cases, the sequence of movements is encoded:

Принялась она за дело, завизжала и запела. Ела, ела, дуб, дуб, поломала зуб, зуб

– (She set to work, screeching and singing. Ate, ate, oak, oak, broke a tooth, a tooth)

[55**].

Туда-сюда снует, что в зубы возьмет, на две части разжует – (Back and forth scurries that in the teeth will take, in two parts chew) [55**].

As the examples show, the "tool" nominations in riddles are transferred to the person and his parts. Tools are seen with hands, heads, teeth and beards, they can eat, chew.

Let us turn to the sources of English riddles in order to compare whether there are differences in the imaginative reinterpretation of tools based on the material of the two languages under consideration.

Allegorically objectifies the device of a spade:

Plump body, straight leg [56**].

An imaginative description of the device of a spade and its functioning are the keys to the following riddle:

Big head, slim body, I go deep into the ground, and go out not a sound [56**].

52

In the riddle of the hammer, it is suggested that it might have possessed human body

parts:

My body is very long and then butt head is big and heavy. Who am I? [56**].

The function of a tool can be expressed without allegory:

What has a big head, can’t think, but beats? [56**].

In the riddle of the saw, the addressee's attention is focused on knowing the features of the device of the tool:

A big man has a hundred teeth but can't eat [56**].

Based on the considered examples, we note that in English riddles, tools get imagery through association with a living being: they are endowed with a body, legs, head. However, it is specific to the representation of devices in English riddles that their function is given without imaginative reinterpretation: go deep into the ground, and go out enter, beat.

Conclusion.

The above research shows that tools can be considered as one of the components of people's knowledge about the world and themselves. They contribute to the transmission of survival experience from one generation to another, which includes knowledge of the simplest devices and the set of actions required to handle them, such as ideas about how to dig, saw, and pound. This information is reflected in explanatory dictionaries, in contexts and in folk art.

In this case, we can talk about the existence of an inversely proportional relationship between the complexity of the device and the detail of its dictionary definition. The simpler and more mundane the tools, the more detailed they are spelled out in the definitions. In addition, the dictionary reflects information about the tools of the era in which it was created. As the device goes out of use, the number of noticed details decreases, which is confirmed by the analysis of lexicographic sources of various years. So, if in the dictionary of V. I. Dal detailed information is given about the device and design of the tool, the method and scope of its use, then from the number of characteristics mentioned earlier, later sources retain partial details of the design and its purpose. Modern interpretations are even less differentiated, limited to a single description of the purpose of the instrument.

Knowledge about the technical primitives and their functions are specified in the contexts in which we find a detailed description of structural elements and features of their functioning: technology and principle of operation, character of use.

The anthropocentric tools nature is revealed, which consists in drawing an analogy between the devices created by a person and himself. Constructing various devices in their own image and likeness, there is an external similarity between the tools of labor and the person's own structure, as well as the actions performed by him.

Analysis of the tools characteristics presented in English categories confirmed the results obtained when considering similar material in Russian.

The prospect of further work may be the creation of a dictionary of metaphors and figurative comparisons dedicated to the "tool" fragment of the language.

References

[1] Koul M. Kul'turno-istoricheskaya psihologiya / M. Koul. - Nauka budushchego. M., Kogitocentr. 1997. – 432 s.

53