Учебное пособие 1773

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

5

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

Z. Ye. Fomina: Inroductory Remarks of Editor-in chief of the Scientific Newsletter

«Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-didactic Researches»

Issue 4 (11) of the linguistic Series of Scientific Newsletter contains the following sections: ”Linguistics”, “Methods and Didactics of Teaching Foreign Languages”, “Intercultural Communication”, “Theory and Practice of Translation”. The 11-th Series involves 13 papers.

THE LINGUISTIC SECTION reflects theoretically and practically important results of the researches of scientists on the up-to-date problems of paremiology, studying of metaphorics in the philosophical discourse, study of semiological classes of words in the different types of languages, esthetic onomastics. Certain works are accomplished in the scope of cultural studies, in the context of theatrical discourse studies, lexicography, and others.

A significant fact for this issue of Scientific Newsletter is the publication of the article of Bhuvaneswar Chilukuri, a famous Indian scientist, Doctor of Philological Sciences, Professor of Hyderabad University. Scientific interests of Professor B. Chilukuri are accomplished in the range of the karmic linguistics, represented in his works. In the article of the Indian scientist on the big empirical material paremies representing different national cultures of the world are analyzed from the position of the up-to-date trends of karmic linguistics.

The article of Z.Ye. Fomina (Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering) concerns the analysis of the poetic text of Friedrich Nietzsche “To Mistral”, premised the writing of “The”. The researcher`s attention is focused on 12 conceptuallyparcellied paradigms, correlating with the two system-forming epistems: “Wind-Mistral” and “Man”, which are analyzed in interaction with such mental-and-gnoseological constructs as “Art”, “Mind”, “Spirit”, “Gay Science”. The semiotics of “WIND-MISTRAL” as metaphoric symbol of mind and spirit of man is analyzed.

The object of investigation of PhD in Philology, Associate Professor A.G. Ivanova and magister N.V. Litrovnik (Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia) is peculiarities of morphemic and phonemic structure of semiological classes of words in the typologically various languages. The research of Aryuna Gomboevna Ivanova and Natalya Vladimirovna Litrovnik is focused on genetically, areally and typologically different languages - analytical English, agglutinative Buryat and isolating Chinese. Morphemic and phonemic structure of semiological classes and basic parts of speech in these languages are defined and analyzed.

The research of the Post-Graduate L.V. Korobko (Russian Air Force Military Educational and Scientific Center “Air Force Academy named after Professor N.E. Zhukovsky and Y.A. Gagarin”, Voronezh) is based on music vocabulary in the story of L.N. Tolstoy «The Kreutzer Sonata», considered in linguo-and-cultural aspect. The article reveals the dominant linguistic means of represenataion of music vocabulary representation in the story of L.N. Tolstoy «The Kreutzer Sonata», which objectify «Music» as the most important component of the Russian linguistic world image and reflect the universal and individually marked culturally significant meanings.

Of scientific interest is research material in the work of PhD in Philology L.A. Borbotko (Moscow City Teacher Training University) which considers the typographic features of the author`s metatext in the printed dramatic work. Theatrical text, in the author`s opinion, is composed of characters’ monologues and dialogues and the author's metatext. It is found out that significant function of the graphical highlighting of the metatext (italics, spacing, capitalization, graphemes) is representation of gender, social and professional status of the characters.

6

Post-graduate V.G. Pertseva (Ivanovo State University) addresses the problem of the peculiarities of political discourse in dictionaries of political quotations. The author of the article gives the definition of political discourse, its main peculiarities, analyzes the dictionaries of political quotations. Special attention is paid to the definition and functions of a quotation.

The results of the actual methods-and-didactic researches are represented in the section of the similar name “METHODS AND DIDACTICS OF TEACHING FOREIGN LANGUAGES”. The section contains the article of PhD in Philology Dr. Nicole BachorPfeff (Germany, Karlsrue, Pedagogical University of Karlsrue).

The article of Dr. Nicole Bachor-Pfeff proves the methods-and-didactic effectiveness of lexical approach to the language (“Give the students vocabulary, they will learn grammar themselves!”). The German colleague analyses the basis and the categories of the Lexical Approach by Michael Lewis and then demonstrated how the Lexical Approach could be applied in German second language and foreign language classes.

The problem of text-analysis of a literary text on the basis of aesthetic onomastics is revealed in the article of PhD in Philology, Associate Professor N.V. Merkulova (Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering). Key-Anthroponyms of the linguosystem of G. Flaubert «Madame Bovary» as one of the conceptual creation of French and

European literature served the empirical material of the article. The up-to-date approaches to the study of aesthetic onyms in terms of their semantic and symbolic meaning are presented in the article.

The section "INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION" presents three articles: by E. V. Dolgova (Orel State Institute of Culture), Ph.D. in Philology, Associate Professor, a postgraduate student A. I. Gushchina (Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering), a postgraduate student Т.А. Veldyaeva (People’s Friendship University of Russia).

The article by Associate Professor E. V. Dolgova presents the results of the research aimed at studies of image features of the linguocultural type of a successful «Businessman».

The author gives consideration to the most typical cases of the use of image-making techniques in the materials of the press as well as the interaction of personal, social and symbolic characteristics of the image. Much attention is paid to such a method as the introduction of mythological structures in narrative information.

Postgraduate A. I. Gushchina analyses in her article dendromorphine metaphors in the German artistic discourse as signs of culture. The image of a "Tree" in art perception of modern German writers is presented polysyllabic that is reflected in the cognitive metaphors correlating with various spheres sources. The concept "Tree" act as foundation of modern German writers' attitude: the tree reflects contemporary values, German sentimentality, pragmatism, the importance of century traditions for the German nation, acts as a standard of force and power, serves as the instrument of measurement and comparison.

Т.А. Veldyaeva focuses her attention on professional intercultural strategic competency alongside development of its content. Script is considered as a didactic phenomenon used for cross-cultural analysis.

The Section "THEORY AND PRACTICE OF TRANSLATION" contains the articles by Doctor in Philology, Professor N.A. Fenenko in collaboration with S. Yu. Bulgakova, Ph.D. in Philology, Associate Professor (Voronezh State University) and by PhD in Philology, Associate Professor, E. A. Protsenko (Voronezh Institute of the Russian Ministry of the Interior).

Professor N.A. Fenenko and Associate Professor S. Yu. Bulgakova emphasize the problem of investigation of vernacular elements in French translations of short stories and novels by I. Bunin. The researchers examine the ways to transfer vernacular elements of a literary text from Russian into French. The comparative analysis of the source text and the target text shows that the vernacular elements’ translation is based on the principles of com-

7

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

pensation (inside one level of the language system or via the inter-level means). Compensation helps to overcome the asymmetry of the stylistic differentiation of Russian and French languages and to find an equivalent means of translating a text with a rich national color.

The research problematic of PhD in Philology, Associate Professor E. A. Protsenko (Voronezh Institute of the Russian Ministry of the Interior) is connected with consideration of Russian as a sourse of interlanguage recoding in modern French newspapers. On the basis of the analysis of recoded from Russian lexical items used in modern French newspapers the author concludes that they are necessary to be distinguished from lexical borrowings.

The Section "SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION" presents information by Doctor in Philology, Professor Z.Ye. Fomina on her participation in the 13th Congress of the IATRLL "Russian Language and Literature in the Space of World Culture" (September 13-20, 2015, Granada, Spain). As a participant of the XIII Congress IATRLL, Z. Ye. Fomina (Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering) summarized the work of the Congress and shares personal impressions of this world forum of teachers of Russian language and literature.

This issue includes scientific works both of native scientists working at different universities and cities of our country, in particular, in Moscow (People’s Friendship University of Russia, The State Educational Government-Financed Institution of Higher Professional Education of the City of Moscow), Orel (Orel State Institute of Culture), Ivanovo (Ivanovo State University), Voronezh (Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Voronezh State University, Voronezh Institute of the Russian Ministry of the Interior,

Russian Air Force Military Educational and Scientific Center “Air Force Academy named after Professor N.E. Zhukovsky and Y.A. Gagarin”), and foreign scientists (Germany, Karlsruhe Pedagogical Institute, India, Hyderabad University).

It is important to stress that the research results presented in the articles of this Newsletter are based on the material of many languages of the world, in particular, in English, German, French, Russian, Chinese and others. Extended studies of scientific issues are demonstrated by various trends such as modern linguistics, methodology and didactics, intercultural communication, theory and practice of translation.

We believe that this Series (11-th) will be interesting and useful for a great number of philologists, teachers of foreign languages, specialists in study of literature and culture, philosophers, post-graduate students, as well as for all our respected native and foreign readers.

8

LINGUISTICS

UDC 81:231.74

Hyderabad University (India) Doctor in Philology, Professor of the Institute of

the English and Foreign languages Bhuvaneswar Chilukuri

e-mail: bhuvanesvarc@yahoo.com

Chilukuri Bhuvaneswar

THE PROVERBS AND ITS DEFINITION:

A KA:RMIK LINGUISTIC APPROACH1

The article was accomplished within the work of the Proverbial Linguistics Groupof the leading linguists of Hyderabad University (India), carring ut the researches of proverbs. The work concerns the problem of description onthologcal organization of proverbs and defining their characteristics. The proverbs are studied in the aspect of unified theory, named ka:rmic linguistic theory. The characteristic of paremies are defiened as secondary, essential, uncommon, and impossible.

Lingual actions of proverb is analysed. Proverb is described as resourse for ka:rmic, dispositional, socioculturalspiritual, cognitive, contextual actional and lingual actional realities. Secondary and essential (primary) characteristics of proverbs in the

aspect of ka:rmic linguistic approach are described.

The author comes to the comclusion that the uncommon characteristic of a proverb is a dispositional cognitional prototypical representational action of categorial action in a culturally frozen text.

Key words: proverbs, secondary, essential, uncommon, impossible characteristics, ka:rmic linguistic theory, lingual actions, ka:rmic, dispositional, socioculturalspiritual, cognitive, contextual actional and lingual actional reality, types of Lakshana, ka:rmic linguistic approach.

I. Introduction

Proverbs are language and as such they inherit the properties of language. As language, they are created through the medium of sound in patterned structures at the level of phonology, morphology, and syntax to semiotically represent meaning, also, in definite patterns to perform certain functions. These patterned structures representing meaning and performing functions are products of cognitions of individuals (Vyashti) generalized at the collective (Samashti) level of the society or culture. Furthermore, these cognitions themselves are patterned and are derived a:nushangikally from the svabhavam (disposition) of the individuals as the society – a:nushangikally means that in a set, each following member inherits the properties of the former member in addition to its own property; it can also be a causeeffect constituting set in which A is the cause of B and so on). What is more, the svabhavam which is the cause (ka:raNam) for the impressionality or internalized habituation (va:sana) in cognitions is the result of the karma the individuals as constituting the society performed.

_________________

© Chilukuri B., 2015

1 This article has earlier been published. But we cite it hereby to demonstrate the original text of the B. Chilukuri article, translated into Russian and published in a Russian version of the Newsletter.

9

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

Hence, the properties of proverbs as language span across the formal (structural), functional, cognitive, sva:bha:vik, and ka:rmik levels of action. Proverbs are also a genre of language and as such they will have their own generic properties. These properties can be secondary, essential, uncommon, and impossible. The secondary properties are differentially distributed among the same genre and can equally be found in other genres also in the same way; the essential properties are universally found within the same genre but can equally be found in other genres also either as secondary or essential properties; the uncommon properties are the essential characteristics which are genre specific and absent in other genres; and the impossible properties are the negative properties which cannot be obtained within a genre. Hence, the properties of proverbs as a genre can be secondary, essential, uncommon and impossible under the properties of proverbs as language which are, as already pointed out, formal, functional, cognitive, sva:bha:vik and ka:rmik.

For the definition of proverbs as a genre to be made correctly, its linguistic and generic properties have to be not only understood intuitively but must also be identified and classified empirically. Only then can we incorporate the most essential ingredient, which is the uncommon characteristic, into the definition. Inability to do so will result in mere descriptions in the garb of definitions, as it happened in the history of paremiology (see Section II for such 44 references).

Right from the time of Aristotle, many critics have made attempts to describe the properties of proverbs and define them in terms of these properties. Some described the secondary properties and some described one or two essential properties but none the uncommon characteristic. Hence they could not hit the nail of the proverb on the top of its uncommon characteristic and fix it solidly on the definition plane.

Such a failure can be attributed to a number of factors. First, research on proverbs is lopsided. Proverbs have been subjected to extensive analysis in the field of meaning and aetiology on the one hand and collection and compilation of individual proverbs on the other hand. Very little research has been done in the most important and vital area of discourse analysis of proverbs, be it their collection or interpretation. Second, mainstream linguists have not focused their attention on proverbs to a considerable extent. None of the pioneers of linguistic theories have written research articles on proverbs, be it Bloomfield, Chomsky, or Halliday. Third, pragmatics and discourse analysis are relatively recent phenomena in the long history of paremiology. As such, the earlier paremiologists have been deprived of the necessary tools to handle proverbs. It is true that a bad workman quarrels with his tools but it is equally true that a good workman cannot succeed without good tools. Adding fuel to fire, most of the paremiologists are not thoroughbred linguists. In spite of their outstanding dedication and immense erudition, they have been turned into great archers without the powerful linguistic arrows to hit the bull’s eye. Such is the case with giants like Archer

Taylor and even Wolfang Mieder who is virtually an encyclopedia of proverbiological bibliography! Fourth, proverbs belong to a complex genre whose properties cut across formal, functional, and cognitive linguistics and beyond into social psychology and ka:rmatics (experiential pragmatics). As a result, an inter-disciplinary approach is needed to grasp the overall nature of proverbs. Very surprisingly, no such overall attempts have been made and all research is piecemeal, scattered and tattered; until today, no such attempts have been made to comprehensively record the overall formal, functional, cognitive, and cultural anthropological linguistic properties at one place. So the interpretation of proverbs for a definition has become a wild goose chase without a centrally coordinated orientation.

What is more, the mainstream linguists are all partially blind. Formal linguists are functionally myopic; functional linguists are formally hypermetropic; cognitive linguists are formally and functionally astigmatic; and anthropological linguists are culturally jaundiced. Finally, all the linguists are ka:rmikally blind, thus turning the whole dialectics of linguistics

10

into a tangled choreography of fission, diffusion, fusion and confusion, making confusion worse confounded! In such a scenario, the proverbiologist has impaired his sense of vision, and in turn his description of the elephant proverb has become a:nushangikally and proverbially blind – fitting the properties of the cause into the properties of the effect as in jaundiced vision. Finally, he is not in a position to comprehensively pinpoint the characteristics of proverbs at all levels under an overall framework as this and that to be so and so in such and such manner.

In the late 1990s, Bhuvaneswar attempted to study proverbs from such an overall perspective under a unified theory called the ka:rmik linguistic theory and identify their characteristics as secondary, essential and uncommon. From that perspective it is possible to look afresh at the definitions in this paper. But before that, let us make a comprehensive review of the definitions of proverbs made so far by the learned critics.

II. Literature Review.

Mieder (1993, 2004) and others reviewed many definitions of proverbs by critics. I collected 44 such definitions from their works. They are not given here for want of space [see Bhuvaneswar for these 44 definitions and their critical review in a separate Scribd paper

“The Proverb and Its Definition (Part I): A Ka:rmik Linguistic Review with a Check List”].

The 44 critics are:

1.Aristotle (4c. B.C.), 2. Goethe, 3. Mathien De Vendome (12 C), 4. Lord John Russell (1792-1878), 5.Richard Chenevix Trench (1953), 6.Archer Taylor (1931), 7. Bartlett Jere Whiting (1932), 8. G. L. Apperson (1935), 9. Kenneth Burke (1941), 10. Marjorie Kimmerle (1947), 11. Anonymous (1961), 12. Matti Kuusi (1957), 13. Horace Reynolds (1959), 14. Stuart A. Gallacher (1906-1977), 15. Mario Pei (1964), 16. F.L. Lucas (1965),

17.Peter Seitel (1969 and 1976), 18. George B. Milner (1969), 19. Gyuala Paczolay (1970), 20.Roger D. Abrahams (1972), 21. Barbara Kirshenblatt – Gimblett (1973), 22.Alan Dundes (1975), 23. Nigel Barley (1972), 24. Harald Burger (1977), 25.O. Nagy (1979), 26. Galit Hasan-Rokem (1982), 27. Oxford Dictionary, 28.Wolfgand Mieder (1993), 29.Hugh Kenner (1983), 30. Stephan Kanfer (1983), 31. Peter Grzybek (1994), 32.Jan Harold Brunvand (1986), 33.Paul Hernadi and Francis Steen (1999), 34.Voo (1989), 35. English Proverbs about Proverbs, 36. Stevenson (1969), 37. Champion (1928), 38. Erasmus, 39. Better Eifelein, 40. James Howell (17c), 41. Lord Bacon, 42. Cervantes, 43. Samuel Palmer, 44. John Ray.

All these definitions can be divided into two types: Those who believe that the proverb can be defined (Pro-definition); and those who do not (Anti-definition). Except Charles Taylor and a few others, the majority of these proverbiologists believe that the proverb can be defined. However, they could only describe it in their attempts!

These definitions can be analyzed under a systematic classification of definitions according to:

1.Lingual Action: i. Form-oriented; ii. Function-oriented; iii. Meaning-oriented;

2.Dispositional Action; and

3.Ka:rmik (Cause-Effect Experiential) Action. Let us briefly discuss these definitions under these headings.

2.1. Lingual Action:

When the proverb is defined in terms of its formal properties such as its phonological, lexical, and syntactic properties, such a definition is a formal definition; if it is defined in terms of its functions, it is a functional definition; and if it is defined in terms of its meaning or content, it is a semantic definition. If these properties are mixed, it becomes a mixed definition with these properties. Such definitions give rise to formal or functional or semantic or mixed linguistic definitions. From the perspective of lingual action, language itself becomes

11

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

the ultimate cause, which is empirically found to be wrong, since the ultimate goal of language is not the construction of lingual reality but its use for the (dispositional) coordination of action as well as the coordination of coordination of action and its experience.

If we consider the proverb as a resource for the construction of social reality as in functional linguistics, we get a sociolinguistic or functional linguistic definition. Again, this view is also defective – even though it is one step better than lingual reality since it includes the social function via the formal function – since language ultimately aims to construct the individual’s experience of the results of action and not merely the social construction of action: social construction of action is only a means for the ultimate goal of construction of ka:rmik via dispositional reality.

So also is the case with the view that the proverb is a product of the cognitive reality as in cognitive linguistics. Even though cognition is critical in the creation or use of a proverb in a context, it is only a means like the social reality but not the goal in itself.

2. 2. Dispositional Action:

When the proverb is considered a resource for the construction of dispositional reality (i.e., the view that language is not only used dispositionally for living in a context by living in it but it is also created dispositionally by living in it for living in it), it is generated- specified-directed-materialized by disposition via its socioculturalspiritual, contextual cognition. Hence, when the proverb is defined as dispositional action, we get a dispositional actional definition. From the perspective of dispositional (lingual) action, disposition itself becomes the ultimate cause which is also empirically found to be wrong, since the ultimate goal of language is not the construction of dispositional reality but its construction for coordination of action and its experience – disposition is a product of previous activity which is ka:rmik and is a means for the experience of the results of action by the human being (ji:va) and hence the ultimate goal is the construction of ka:rmik reality for the ji:va as a ka:rmik actor who apparently transforms (vivartam) into a dispositional, socioculturalspiritual, cognitive, contextual actional, lingual actional, proverbial ka:rmik actor in a top down a:nushangik process. After the use of the proverb in a context, he experiences the results of proverbial action by spontaneous superimposition of ka:rmik action on to lingual proverbial action via his disposition and springs back into a ka:rmik actor. A similar process takes place in the case of the hearer also.

In this connection, it should be noted that in the set of ka:rmik (K), dispositional (D), socioculturalspiritual (SCS), cognitive (C), contextual actional (CA), and lingual actional (LA) realities (Rs), the following level(s) of reality become(s) means for the previous level: dispositional reality is the means for ka:rmik reality; socioculturalspiritual (SCS) reality becomes the means for dispositional (D) reality and SCS, D reality the means for ka:rmik reality and so on; and cognitive (C) reality is the medium through which all realities are construed.

(1) {Experience [(((LA R ((CA R (SCS R (D R))))] KR}

Cognitive Reality

2. 3. Ka:rmik (Cause-Effect Experiential) Action:

When the proverb is considered a resource for the construction of ka:rmik reality (i.e., the view that language is not only used but also created to coordinate the coordination of action for the fulfillment of desires and the experience of the results of contextual action according to one’s disposition), dispositional action becomes the means and the experience of proverbial action becomes the effect for the ka:rmik proverbial action which is the cause. From the perspective of ka:rmik action, ka:rmik reality itself becomes the ultimate cause for the use and creation of language which is empirically observable: if the ultimate goal of the creation and use of language is language per se (formalism), then its main function should be the use of language for the sake of language only, but we find it to be not so; in a similar

12

way, construction of social reality per se (functionalism) cannot be the main function because we construct social reality as a means to fulfill a higher function of individual experience of living; so also, use of cognitive structures (cognitivism) is a means for the creation of language but not the end in itself; on the other hand, we use and create language for the coordination of coordination of action for the fulfillment of desires and the experience of the results of action, which is ka:rmik.

By looking at proverbs as a resource for the construction of proverbial ka:rmik reality, our understanding of what proverbs are changes from the formal or functional or cognitive perspectives into the ka:rmik perspective and so too its definition. And such a definition becomes the most comprehensive of all as will be seen in the next section.

III. Towards a definition of the proverb: a ka:rmik linguistic approach.

In this section, we will first know what a definition should be in terms of its characteristics and what characteristics of the defined term (definiendum) should be taken into consideration in formulating the definition; second, we will analyze the secondary, and essential (primary) characteristics of the proverb and resolve the uncommon characteristic of the proverb from among them by problem solving strategies; and finally formulate the definition of the proverb and establish it by troubleshooting.

3. 1. Definition and Its Characteristics.

3. 1. 1. Ways of Understanding Things.

Three important ways for understanding a thing are popular in the Indian philosophical tradition. They are: i. Udde:sam: mere naming of a thing (pointing out the properties); ii. LakshaNam: the grasping of the form or nature of a thing (understanding the properties); iii. Pariksha: thinking again and again over the form and nature of a thing.

In the case of proverbs, even the udde:sam has not been comprehensively described. All the properties of proverbs have not been identified, for example, the prototype – categorial instantiation. In the case of lakshaNa, some of the properties of proverbs have been identified and described but again the properties for a definition of the proverb have NOT been identified and incorporated without the three following defects:

1.Ativya:pti is under extension of a defining characteristic. For example, if a cow is defined as a black animal, such a definition is defective, since the property of ‘black animalness’ is not universally present among all cows – it excludes a white or brown cow from the species.

2.Ativya:pti is over extension of a defining characteristic. For example, if a cow is defined as a four legged animal, such a definition is defective, since the property of

‘four-legged-animalness’ is not only shared by all the cows but also equally shared by other animals such as a dog, a cat, and a horse which belong to different specie.

3.Asambhava is the impossible presence of a defining characteristic. For example, if a cow is defined as a one hoofed animal, such a definition is defective, since the prop-

erty of ‘one-hoofedness’ is not present in any cow.

In addition, there should be the uncommon characteristic (asa:dharana ka:raNa) of the proverb, which distinguishes the proverb from the other non-proverbial expressions, and it should be incorporated into the definition to make it error proof.

4. Asa:dha:raNa Ka:raNa, the uncommon characteristic is a characteristic which is universally present among all the members of the concerned species (genre) and absent in other specie (genres).

So far all the definitions that have been attempted – as far as I know – suffer from one or more of these defects, especially those of Avya:pti or Ativya:pti. Furthermore, all these 44

13