Учебное пособие 1773

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

In the notional words all 24 models detected in the text are presented, while the pronouns and the functional words have only 5 models each. In the notional words the most frequent is R-FAf (21,0%– хγбγγн-иинь ‘his boy’). The rooted model R ranks number two in the order of frequency and accounts for less than one fifth of all the notional words (17,9% хада ‘knock’; эндэ ‘here’), while in the pronominal and functional words such model is presented in more than half of the all the words - 52,1% and 60,8% correspondingly (энэ ‘this’, соо ‘in – ‘postposition’). The other difference between denominative and nondenominative words concerns the presence of all detected models of rooted and suffixal structures among denominatives.

Basic parts of speech are also contrast to each other. Verbs, the bearers of predicate function, are more synthetical parts of speech, thus they are characterized by greater level of synthesis (2,34 morphemes) than nouns that accomplish nominative functions. The degree of synthesis of the nouns is 1.4 less and accounts for 1,69 morphemes. The verbs have bigger variety of suffixal models – with inflectional suffix, combination of inflectional and formbuilding suffixes (R- IAf - IAf / шиидэ-бэ-д ‘they decided’, R- FAf - FAf / хэбтэ-тэр-ни

‘while I was lying’, R- FAf - IAf - FAf / ерэ-хэ-дэ-нь ‘when he was back’) –, that are presented very rarely or are not found among the nouns.

1.3. The Chinese language.

In the Chinese language, as in all more or less developed isolating languages, disyllabic words (and therefore two-morphemic words in conditions of equivalence of syllable and morpheme) are a dominant standard [14, p. 152]. E.D. Polivanov said that disyllabic word is “statistically dominant norm of the word of modern Chinese language”. Chinese scientist Lu Shuxiang wrote that “in the Chinese language majority of the words consists of two syllables” [15, с. 29].

Word formation in the Chinese language is realized through compounding, affixation and conversion (morphological transposition).

The models of rooted structure all together compose seven eights of all the words in the text (89,1%). Only 10,1% are accounted for suffixal structure; the prefixal structure is represented with only one model and is very low frequent (only 0,8%).

Notional words can include up to four morphemes. One-morphemic and twomorphemic word forms comprise 48,5% and 40,0% correspondingly. Three-morphemic word forms account for 10,4%. Four-morphemic models are very rare to find and comprise only 1,0% of the words. The average depth of the notional word is 1,64 morphemes.

In comparison with the notional words, the pronouns and the functional words have smaller depth and include no more than two morphemes. One-morphemic word forms represent the majority both for the pronouns (81,8%) and the functional words (84,0%); twomorphemic words comprise 18,2% and 16,0% correspondingly. The degree of synthesis of the pronominal word accounts for 1,18 morphemes, the degree of synthesis of the functional word – 1,16 morphemes.

Rooted models comprise the majority of the notional words – 85,0%, as well as of the pronominal and functional words - 90,9% and 97,7% correspondingly. Nevertheless the notional words have also suffixal models (13,7%) and one prefixal model (1,3%). For the pronominal and the functional words the frequency of suffixal models equals to 9,1% and 2,3% correspondingly.

There are 11 morpheme models emphasized in the notional words. The most frequent among them are rooted models R (48,5% / jiaо4 ‘call’) and R-R (32,4% / hao3- chu4‘benefit’). Model R-R-FS (6,6% / cong1-ming2-de ‘clever’) took the third place. Model R-FS (5,3% / ging1-guо ‘invited’) comes last among the most frequently used models. The frequency of the models used gets lower with the extension of the length of the

34

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 4 (11), 2015

word up to three and four morphemes, that is why the frequency of the other models is less than 5%.

The pronominal words and the functional words have three models: two rooted models R (81,8% and 84,0%; ta1‘he’, cong2 ‘from’) и R-R (9,1% и 13,7% / wo3nar4 ‘at my place’, sui1ran2 ‘though’) and one suffixal model R-FS (9,1% и 2,3% / ni3de0‘your’, wei4le0 ‘for’).

The basic parts of speech differ from the other parts of speech because of variety of their models. In addition, only nouns have a prefixal model and only verbs have a model with half-affix and suffix. Therefore, there is definite differentiation of noun and verb traced in the Chinese language. Such differentiation is performed in accordance with their level of lexicality/grammaticality. Nouns are more lexical and verbs are more grammatical. Furthermore, it is well known that in isolated language, particularly in the Chinese language, “word-formative elements reside more in nouns, while form-building elements are more presented in verbs” [16, p. 162].

The main classes of words (notional, pronominal and functional) are very evidently distinguished in order of complexity of their morphemic structure, number and frequency of the models of the morphemic structure. Thus, the notional words can include up to four models, while the pronominal and functional words can include only up to two models. In the notional words there are four times more models of morphemic structure are used as compared with the pronominal and functional words (11 to 3). In all three classes, models of rooted structure dominate over suffixal models. Usage of rooted structure gets more frequent with the grammaticality intensifying from the notional words to the pronominal and functional words: 84,8% → 90,9% → 97,7%. However, presence of all types of rooted models – R, R-R, R-R-R, R-R-R-R – is typical only for the notional words, but not for the pronominal and functional words. Consequently notional words show the lowest frequency of the elementary rooted model R (48,5% against 81,8% for pronouns and 84,0% for functional words) and highest frequency of two-morphemic rooted model R-R (32,4% against 9,1% and 13,7%). Compared to the notional words the pronouns and the functional words don’t have three-morphemic and four-morphemic rooted models at all. Models of suffixal structure are assigned to the notional words. The only exception is R-FS model that has been fixed in all three classes. It is particularly remarkable that R-FS model is the most frequently used one amongst the pronouns that, obviously, is connected with the small number of the total amount of the models used among the pronouns.

2. Phonemic structure.

2.1. The length of the words in phonemes.

The research has shown that in all the languages denominative signs (notional words) are longer than non-denominative signs (pronominal and functional words).

In the English language denominative words have length from one to nine phonemes. In the Buryat and Chinese languages the length of notional words varies within the range from 2 to 10 phonemes (in Buryat fairytale) and from 1 to 11 (in Chinese fairytale).

Non-denominative words (pronominal and functional) show a bit smaller length: in the English language such word classes contain from 1 to 6 phonemes, in the Buryat fairytale the range of length of the function words and the pronouns is from 2 to 8/7 phonemes and in the Chinese fairytale – from 1 to 5/6 phonemes.

2.2. Frequency of the words of specific length.

35

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

Words of specific length show more selectability in the English text. Thus, frequent three-phonemic words in the English fairytale account for 36,5% of words. In the Chinese fairytale selectability of two-phonemes words (the most frequent ones) is a little bit lower – 28,1%. The most usual words in the Buryat fairytale have four phonemes and the frequency of 23,2%.

In all the languages frequency of the larger words being used rise up with the elevation of the level of significance. The most frequent notional words in the English fairytale can have length up to three or four phonemes and comprise a little less than a half (46,8%) and a little more than a quarter (26,6%) of all the notional words correspondingly. In the Chinese fairytale amongst notional words four-phonemic and five-phonemic words were shown with the frequency of 20,4% and 19,0% correspondingly. In the Buryat language the most frequent notional words have the length of four, five and six phonemes (20,6%, 21,6% and 24,0% correspondingly).

The English pronouns and functional words are characterized mostly by two-phonemic structure (in 78,5% and 50,5% cases). In the Chinese language amongst the functional words the most frequently used are two-phonemic (52,9%), a little less used are threephonemic (23,2%) word formations, amongst the pronouns only two-phonemic (58,2%) words are used more. In the Buryat fairytale among the functional words the most represented are twophonemic and four-phonemic words (38,3% and 32,0%), for the pronouns the most represented are four-phonemic ones (41,3%).

Firstly, the identified differences are stipulated with the function of the present word classes. Diapason of the length consistently narrows with the fall in the level of significance. Nominative function of the notional words requires sufficient quantity of phonological recourses to distinguish variety of signs, more than deictic and copular functions of numerically constrained pronouns and functional words that are characterized by the minimum set of phonological recourses and with the laconism of sound forms of linguistic sign.

Contradistinction of nouns and verbs, that composes basic part-of-speech contradistinction, is reflected in the frequency of the words of specific phonemic length. In the English and Buryat languages in both parts of the speech the words of the same length are prevailing in mostly the same way, however, verbs still have a little higher frequency: in English – three-phonemic nouns accounts for 50,5%, three-phonemic verbs – for 57,7%, in Buryat – sixphonemic nouns and verbs are presented by 25,9% and 29,3% correspondingly. In the Chinese language – three-phonemic nouns are the most frequent ones (23,2%), among the verbs more frequently presented (25,0%) four-phonemic word formations.

2.3. Average length of the word in phonemes.

The word in the agglutinative Buryat language has more average length in the phonemes than the word in the analytical English language and the isolated Chinese language due to higher degree of grammaticality and of synthesis of the language on the whole. In the Buryat text average length of the word amounts to 5,30 phonemes, in the English text – 2,90 phonemes, in the Chinese text – 3,71 phonemes.

The average length of the notional words in all three languages is bigger than the length of the pronouns and functional words. Thus, in the English language average the notional words’ length accounts to 3,55 phonemes, the pronouns have the length of 2,12 phonemes, the functional words – 2,13 phonemes. In the Buryat fairytale the notional words’ length is also averagely bigger than the length of the pronouns and functional words (5,56 phonemes in average against 4,28 phonemes and 3,58 phonemes correspondingly). In the Chinese language the pronouns have minimal average length in phonemes (2,44 phonemes), the functional words have a bit bigger length (2,58 phonemes), the notional words have maximum average length (4,37 phonemes).

36

In all three languages basic opposition of nouns and verbs is verified in the average length of the word in the phonemes. In the Buryat and Chinese texts verbs have bigger average length in phonemes than nouns (6,12 and 4,65 phonemes against 5,39 and 4,30 phonemes correspondingly), while in the English language the average length of nouns accounts to 3,66 phonemes against 3,24 phonemes for verbs.

Thereby, the analysis of the morphemic and phonemic structure of word in the analytical English language, the agglutinative Buryat language and the isolated Chinese language confirms their typological differences. From the phonemic structure’s perspective the opposition of basic semiological word classes – notional, pronominal and functional – is basically binary, because the pronouns and the function words are not very contradistinguished to each other.

The notional words are more complex than the pronouns and the functional words. This difference correlates to the nature of the performed functions: nominative function of the notional words, deictic function of the pronominal words and copular function of the functional words. Nominative function’s implementation requires more linguistic means that is why the nominative words of all the three languages have four-morphemic structures, while the English and Buryat words have even five-morphemic structures. The depth of nondenominative signs – pronouns and functional words – cannot be more than two morphemes in English and Chinese, three morphemes in Buryat.

The mentioned hierarchy of word classes and level of their diversification with all evidence show up in frequency of one-morphemic words with R-model. It is presented in minimum in all three languages among the notion words and more used in the pronouns and functional words. In the English and Buryat fairytales R-model’s frequency in the pronominal words in comparison with the notional words is three and more times higher; in the Chinese language this difference is a bit smaller, but still significant (approximately 1,7 times higher). R-model has highest frequency in the isolated Chinese language notional words, a bit lower in the analytical English language and even lower in the agglutinative Buryat language. The Buryat language differs from both Chinese and English in the less frequency of rooted pronouns and function words (refer to table), that can be obviously explained by the synthetism – the main grammatical tendency of the Buryat language.

The frequency of R-model in semiological word classes (As a percentage of the total number of words of given class)

By comparison of the selected parts of speech some interesting tendencies in contradistinction between nouns and verbs have been discovered. Thus, in the English language different morphological structures are attached to nouns and verbs (with word-formative and inflectional formants correspondingly). In the Buryat language verbs are characterized by the most complexity as a basic part of speech that fulfills predicate function. The list of most frequently used verb models includes one four-morphemic suffixal model. In the Chinese language three-morphemic structures are presented amongst frequent verb models, among them there are two suffixal and two rooted models.

The comparison of the phonemic structure of the word in the three languages has shown that in all the languages the diapason of the length of the denominative (notional)

37

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

words is 1,5-2 times larger than the diapason of the non-denominative (pronouns and functional words). Correspondingly their average length is bigger than the average length of the non-denominative words (in 1.3 – 1.5 – 1.7 times).

In all the languages when the level of significance gets higher the frequency of more long words (up to 6 phonemes) gets higher as well. In the pronominal parts of speech structures with the length of 2 or 3 phonemes are mainly established (refer to table).

The extent of word in different semiological classes

Basic parts of speech are contradicted to one another in all the languages under the study. Thus, amongst the verbs there are either longer formations (like in the Chinese language); or the frequency of the phonemic structures of the same length is higher (like in the English and Buryat languages) than amongst nouns. Besides, in the Buryat and Chinese texts verbs are averagely longer than nouns; in the English text the tendency is the opposite.

Consequently, as it follows from the present research, the notional words (denominative signs) have more complex morphological structure of the word, distinguishable variety of the models of the morphemic structure and bigger depth of the word (higher degree of synthesis) than the pronouns and the functional words (non-denominative signs) in all the languages. When morphological structure gets more complicated the tendency to contradistinguish and demarcate basic semiliogical word classes by the extent of phonemes is revealed, or otherwise notional, pronominal and functional words, and also nouns and verbs, which compound basic part-of-speech contradistinction, in other words there is distinction of denominative and non-denominative, identifying and predicative signs.

As is evident, cohesive typological analysis of language cannot be limited with the characteristic of the ‘word in general’ without reference to semiological word classes and parts of speech, because the relationship between meaning and sounding has categorial character [4]. That is why in the analysis of correlation of ambilateral units functional-semantical characteristic of morphemes and of the whole in which they are represented – words and word classes – should be taken into consideration. In general fundamental significance of contradistinction of lexical and grammatical in language as its typological determinant for morphemic structure and sound form of different word classes has been confirmed. Dependence of differentiation of the present word classes on grammatical tendency that prevails in every present language – analytism in the English and Chinese languages and synthetism in the Buryat language – is evident. In the languages which take different positions on the scale of lexicality/grammaticality, in spite of sufficient diversities, there are some common patterns of phonemic and morphemic segmentation.

Bibliographic list

1.Boduen de Kurtene I. A. Izbrannye trudy po obshchemu iazykoznaniiu. – M.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1963. T. I. – 382 s.

2.Gumbol'dt V. fon. Izbrannye trudy po iazykoznaniiu. – M.: Progress, 1984. – 398 s.

3.Reformatskii A.A. Aggliutinatsiia i fuziia kak dve tendentsii grammaticheskogo stroeniia slova // Morfologicheskaia tipologiia i problema klassifikatsii iazykov. M. – L.: Nauka, 1965. – S.64-92.

38

4.Zubkova L. G. Iazyk kak forma. Teoriia i istoriia iazykoznaniia. – M.: Izd-vo RUDN, 1999. – 237 s.

5.Rima S. A. Dvoiakoe chlenenie chastei rechi v iazykakh s razvitym morfologicheskim stroem: Na materiale arabskogo i russkogo iazykov. diss. . kand. filol. nauk. – Moskva, 2001. – 246 s.

6.Sarkisian L. V. Morfemnoe stroenie slova i zvukovaia forma angliiskogo i armianskogo slova v kategorial'nom aspekte. diss. . kand. filol. nauk. – Moskva, 2002. – 370 s.

7.Ivanova A. G. Tipologicheskaia kharakteristika klassov slov v aspekte morfologicheskogo i foneticheskogo chleneniia: na materiale angliiskogo, buriatskogo i kitaiskogo iazykov: diss. … kand. filol. nauk. – Moskva, 2008 – 349 s.

8.Kostrzewa Frank. Linguistic Typologies / Sprachtypologisierungen / F. Kostrzewa // Nauchnyiy vestnik Voronezh. gos. arh.-stroit. un-ta. Sovremennyie lingvisticheskie i metodiko-didakticheskie issledovaniya. – 2015. – Vyp. 1 (8). – S. 38-48.

9.Kostrzewa Frank. Relative Subordinate Clause in Linguistic Contrast / F. Kostrzewa

//Nauchnyiy vestnik Voronezh. gos. arh.-stroit.un-ta. Sovremennyie lingvisticheskie i metodiko-didakticheskie issledovaniya. – 2015. – Vyp. 3 (10). – S. 50-57.

10.Sossiur F. de. Trudy po iazykoznaniiu. – M.: Progress, 1977. – 696 s.

11.Zubkova L. G. Lineinyi kharakter oznachaiushchego kak ogranichitel' proizvol'nosti iazykovogo znaka // Grammaticheskie kategorii i edinitsy: sintagmaticheskii aspekt. Materialy VII Mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii. – Vladimir, 2007. – S. 110-114.

12.Zubkova L. G. Printsip znaka v sisteme iazyka. – M.: Iazyki slavianskoi kul'tury, 2010. – 752 s.

13.Iazyki mira: Mongol'skie iazyki. Tunguso-man'chzhurskie iazyki. Iaponskii iazyk. Koreiskii iazyk. – M.: Izd-vo «Indrik», 1997. – 408 s.

14.Solntsev V.M. Vvedenie v teoriiu izoliruiushchikh iazykov. – M.: Vost. lit., 1995. –

352 s.

15.Liui Shusian. Ocherk grammatiki kitaiskogo iazyka. I. Slovo i predlozhenie / Per. s kit. – M.: Izd. vost. lit., 1961. – 266 s.

16.Solntseva N.V. Problemy tipologii izoliruiushchikh iazykov. – M.: Nauka, 1985. –

253 s.

39

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

UDC 81-139

Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Post-Graduate of the department of foreign languages

Russian Air Force Military Educational and Scientific Center “Air Force Acade-

teacher of the department of foreign languages

Liudmila Vladimirovna Korobko e-mail: l.v.ledeneva@mail.ru

L.V. Korobko

MUSIC VOCABULARY IN L.N. TOLSTOY’S STORY «THE KREUTZER

SONATA»: LINGUOCULTUROLOGICAL ASPECT

The article explores the most frequency linguistic means 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; the lexical-semantic analysis of the keywords of the lexical-semantic field «Music» is carried out. It is established that the lexical-semantic field «Music» includes three microfields: «The names of musical instruments and things»; «The names of the places and actions connected with playing music»; «The names of music professions», which, in turn, are subdivided into lexical-semantic groups.

Key words: music, L.N. Tolstoy, cultural linguistics, world image, concept, lexical-semantic field, microfield, lexical-semantic group.

L.N. Tolstoy received the noble education which included a culture studying. Since his childhood Tolstoy was engaged in playing a grand piano, he had the wide knowledge of music, he composed miniatures for a piano. Among Lev Nikolaevich’s friends there were such well-known figures as composers P.I. Tchaikovsky and S. Taneev, the composer and the pianist A.B. Goldenveyzer, the founder of the Moscow conservatory N.G. Rubenstein, the musical and theatrical critic V. Stasov [1].

At the end of the 1860th years L.N. Tolstoy got acquainted with Schopenhauer’s “music metaphysics”, however, before having read his composition “The world as will and representation”, he was in accord with his point of view, and having recognized it, he called Schopenhauer “the most ingenious of people”.

In Schopenhauer’s philosophical system Tolstoy found ideas close to his views – pessimistic thought of illusoriness of individual life and feeling of the metaphysical nature and self-sufficiency of music in the world [2, p. 1818]. The philosopher claims that “…music is the language of feeling and passion just as words is the language of reason: already Platon determines it as “melodiarum motus, animi affectus imitans” (“the movement of melodies imitating disorders of soul”), and Aristotle says: ““Cur numeri musici et modi, qui voces sunt, moribus si-miles esse exhibent?” (“Why are rhythms and melodies, being simple sounds, nevertheless similar to states of mind?”)” [3, p. 226].

____________________

© Korobko L.V., 2015

40

According to Schopenhauer, music does not express specific feelings with reference to certain events: “…music does not have direct relation to them, it has only the indirect relation as it expresses not the phenomenon, but exclusively internal essence, all phenomena in itself, the will as it is. It does not express therefore this or that separate pleasure, this or that grief, torment, horror, triumph, fun or a peace of mind: no, it expresses pleasure, grief, flour, horror, triumph, fun, peace of mind in general as they are, to a certain extent in abstracto, expresses their essence without any collateral addition and without motives to them. Nevertheless, we understand it in this drawn quintessence in perfection” [3, p. 227].

Schopenhauer gives the following definition of music: “Musica est exercitium metaphysices occultum nesdentis se philosophari animi” (“Music is the unconscious metaphysical exercise of the soul which does not know that she philosophizes”) [3, p. 230].

According to L.N. Tolstoy “the lyrical poetry and music have nearly one purpose which is to make mood, and the moods made by lyrical poetry and music can more or less coincide” [4]. Therefore musical images in his works of art are one of the ways of mood creation, transfer of feelings and experiences of characters.

The relevance of this research is caused by the insufficient study of the musical component of the ambiguous story of L.N. Tolstoy “The Kreutzer Sonata” considered in aspect of its language categorization.

The purpose of the present article is the identification of the language means of an explication of a phenomenon “Music” on the basis of the lexical-semantic analysis of the keywords of the cognominal lexical-semantic field in L.N. Tolstoy’s story “The Kreutzer Sonata” and their studying in the linguoculturological aspect.

Linguoculturology is, as we know, a branch of the linguistics which arose on a joint of the linguistics and culturology studying culturally significant realities of these or those nation which were reflected and fixated in a language. The linguoculturology subject matter is the language as a culture phenomenon [5, p. 8‒9].

Linguoculturology is connected with many related subjects; there are numerous various concepts and categories in the field of its study. One of the major concepts is the concept of “a world image” which is defined as “the complete set of reality images in the collective consciousness” [6, p. 88]. A world image sometimes is designated a conceptual world image, since it is made of concepts and links between them as the mosaic [7, p. 11].

Concepts, according to A.T. Khrolenko, are ideal and “are coded in consciousness by units of a universal subject code which are based on the individual sensual images which are formed on the basis of personal sensual experience. The images are certain, however they can abstract and transform from the sensual into a cogitative image” [7, p. 11].

The set of concepts forms a sphere of concepts of a certain nation and its language. The sphere of concepts, according to D.S. Likhachev, is “the set of concepts of the nation, it is formed by all potentialities of native speakers concepts. The sphere of concepts of the nation is wider than the semantic sphere presented by linguistic word meanings. The richer is culture of the nation, its folklore, literature, science, the fine arts, historical experience, religion, the richer is the sphere of concepts of the nation” [8, p. 5].

Concepts possess the national specifics, that is the subject of numerous studies in the Russian language and culture-science material [9; 10 and many others].

The national sphere of concepts represents the set of the processed and standardized concepts in the consciousness of the nation. Concepts are verbalized by means of a wide and heterogeneous range of language resources. “The language projections of concepts allow to find not only a world image and linguistically developed world, but also an originality of a way of the world acquisition” [11, p. 7].

In this article we will consider the most frequency language means of representation of musical lexis in L.N. Tolstoy’s story “The Kreutzer Sonata”, objectifying “Music” as the

41

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

most important component of the Russian linguistic world image and reflecting the universal and individually marked culturally significant meanings.

The analysis of lexical means is carried out on the basis of a method of a lexicalsemantic field which allows reflecting features of the empirical material which we study.

According to M.A. Krongauz, “a semantic field is the set of the words united by a contents community … having the general uncommon part in interpretation” [12, p. 130]. E.I. Dibrova understands a lexical-semantic field as “the hierarchical organization of words united by one patrimonial meaning and representing a certain semantic sphere in a language” [13, p. 88].

Unlike a field the theme group represents “the combination of words which is based not on the language lexical-semantic links, but on the extra language, i.e. on the classification of subjects and phenomena of the outside world”, “the lexical-semantic group (LSG) is the most extensive words organization by the number of the members which is united by the general (basic) semantic component” [14, p. 175‒176].

In this research a lexical-semantic field we understand as “a set of linguistic (mainly lexical) items united by a contents community (sometimes also a community of formal indicators) and reflecting the conceptual, subject similarity of designated phenomena” [1**, p. 380].

Music, according to “The Small Academic Dictionary of the Russian Language”, is “the art reflecting reality in sound artistic images” [2**].

Music is a mysterious phenomenon of human life. People always have a need for selfexpression, creativity and emotional impressions. In this process the essential role belongs to performing musicians because they are “the translators of ideas”, having essential impact on tastes of people. “Having listened to a great piece of art, we do not leave it, it continues to live in us and form our inner world, transforming it and undergoing metamorphoses” [15, p. 149].

In culture of various ethnoses music has the sacral value as “the knowledge of ancestors” is put in it [16, p. 228], and also plays a special role, “being not only the art value satisfying especially esthetic requirements of ethnos, but being the structuring culture core, the mental core of society harmonizing a universum core” [17, p. 7].

The world image created by the nation defines the ethnic culture identification. Music represents “the creative, form-building national comprehension of the world” [16, p. 229]. Music is a valuable culture learning tool as the cultural features of ethnos are reflected in it.

The consideration of the set of units of the lexical-semantic field (LSF) “Music” in Tolstoy’s story “The Kreutzer Sonata” allows allocating 3 microfields with the subsequent division into lexical-semantic groups of a fragment of LSF “Music”:

1.the nominations of musical instruments and subjects;

2.the nominations of the places and actions connected with playing pieces of music;

3.the nominations of the people concerning music.

The quantitative ratio of the specified microfields is reflected in the following chart.

42

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 4 (11), 2015

Figure 1. A quantitative ratio of the microfields participating in the representation of LSF “Music”

We will address to the consideration of the first microfield “The nominations of Musical Instruments and Subjects” (47%).

1. The nominations of musical instruments and subjects.

This microfield consists of two LSG: 1) “Musical instruments”; 2) “The details of musical instruments and subjects connected with musical instruments”. The nominations of the musical instruments and subjects connected with music have special cultural value as they serve as means of a language objectification of ideas of equipment of musicians.

1.1. Musical instruments. The lexical-semantic group “Musical instruments” includes the general designations of instruments and the subgroup of the nominations of the instruments united on a way of sound extraction: wind, string, percussion [18, p. 98].

The names of string musical instruments are presented in Tolstoy’s story by 4 items: violin, piano, grand piano, harp. The names of string instruments from semantic-cognitive positions, as D.D. Droshnev specifies, are divided into:

“string bowed (their strings are given to sounding by friction of a string by means of

a bow);

string plucked (the sound from which is elicited by plucking of strings by fingers or a plate);

string percussions (the sound from which is elicited by blows of hammers to strings);

string percussions-and-keyboard (from which the sound is elicited at blow of hammers to strings by means of pressing keys);

string plucked-and-keyboard (the sound from which is elicited by plucking for a string at blow to a key)” [18, p. 103].

Defining for the semantics formation and its representation is a cognitive sign “nature of sound extraction” [18, p. 103].

The name violin belongs to string bowed instruments and represents “a four-string musical instrument” [1**]. The mention of a violin is observed in 9 tokens. We will learn some examples:

…she was delighted that she will have pleasure to play a violin that she loved very much [1*, p. 57];

”Do not even think that I am jealous of you, – I mentally told her, – or that I am afraid of you”, – I mentally told him and invited him to bring a violin sometime in the evening to play with my wife [1*, p. 58];

43