Учебное пособие 1782

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 2 (21), 2018 ISSN 2587-8093

78; 12, p. 14]) which allows, without giving any inappropriate in the realistic art work direct author's appreciations, to demonstrate his negative attitude, i.e. the writer's rejection of the created art image and the type in literature.

The importance of the figure of Homais is also emphasized by the fact that through the extraordinary personal names of the numerous offsprings of the pharmacist there are multiple stylistic semantic directions of the text which lead the reader somewhat beyond the history of the eponym character, giving some reason to suppose the special significance of this character as a type for the author himself:

«Ainsi, Napol éon représentait la gloire et Franklin la libert é; Irma, peut-être, était une concession au romantisme; mais Athalie, un hommage au plus immortel chef- d'oeuvre de la scène fran çaise » / «Thus Napoleon represented glory and Franklin liberty; Irma was perhaps a concession to romanticism, but Athalie was a homage to the greatest masterpiece of the French sta ge » [1*, P. II, Ch. 3].

Along with this, for the art works of G. Flaubert, the repetition in using the characters’ names is characteristic: thus, the name Félicité/Felicite for an insignificant secondary character of Emma's maidservant in the novel «Madame Bovary» occurs as the name of the main character in the autobiographical short story «A Simple Heart»/«Un cœur simple» [4*].

Thus, the realistic novel text analysis with the use of the method based on the aesthetic name-based text analysis methodology of a literary text on the material of the onyms of the key characters made it possible to identify a number of the author’s stylistic devices and patterns of the art images creating and to reveal that the synergic effect of aesthetic onymy as a means of creating and characterizing the character represents one of the key factors in perceiving the art images and the types in literature.

Moreover, it should be noted a different degree of expressiveness of aesthetic onyms in the novel in terms of their use as a stylistic device for creating and characterizing the characters.

Table 1.

The Use of Aesthetic Onyms (AO)

as a Stylistic Device for Creating and Characterizing the Character of the Novel (based on G. Flaubert's realistic works)

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 2 (21), 2018 ISSN 2587-8093

Conclusion.

Thus, from the above, it can be argued that the character of the novel, on the one hand, is created through the writer's methods and techniques of creating the name, on the other hand, the nature of the character and the essence of the art image are often based on this name.

As a rule, the onomastic identification is realized in the reader's perception due to the multiple repetitions of the name, which designates the character. Thus, a certain reference appears which leads the recipient to perceive a proper name as a symbol of one or another character (or an art image) or an example of a biography.

Even in the case of unstable naming (only by personal name, by last name or its part or by nickname with the use of various substitutes, etc.), there is inevitably an indication of a certain character in the novel. Such pluralism in the nomination aims to introduce new stylistic nuances into the characterization of the art image.

In some contexts, the function of identifying of aesthetic onyms is ambiguous, because the stylistic devices of the characteristics are based on the intentional overthrow of the generally accepted patterns and connotations, which contributes to the realism of the novel as a genre.

Often proper names with extensive extra-textual connotations (historical, cultural, philosophical, religious, etc.) can be treated as initial symbols, formal conditionally significant units (Emma, Charles, Léon/Leon, Marie, Jacques and so forth). In the space of a literary text, such associative connections and symbolic connotations of the aesthetic onyms are capable of preserving their aesthetic and semantic characteristics in the synchronic and the diachronic aspects, but the extra-textual meaning is transformed depending on the context and the author's intention expressed through the writer's entire stylistic repertoire.

In contrast to the real proper names, identifying and classifying objects of the surrounding reality (like common nouns for designating objects), the aesthetic onyms acquire the conceptuality of the entire author's text. Thus, the placement of any onym in the text of an art work presupposes some kind of individually-authored marked remotivation of the symbol, of the symbolic essence of the character («Madame Bovary», la Maréchale/the Maréchale, etc.). Created by a writer-onomaturg or selected from the existing onomastic corpus, the aesthetic proper name in the novel's literary text inevitably acquires a motivated character from the point of view of aesthetics, phonetics, graphics, etymology, symbolism, semantics, etc., producing a powerful synergic effect as a stylistic device for creating and characterizing of the character and the art image.

Thus, the semantic-and-onomastic corpus with its own effect of synergy inherent to the proper names in the space of the art text is not a simple reflection of the real language system of nomination, but it is a powerful means of expressiveness that contributes to the author's stylistic creativity in the creation of characters, art images and types in literature which are an attribute of the individual creativity of the writer.

In connection with this a perspective direction of the research on aesthetic onomastics is the consideration of the question of the art text poetics, together with the poetics of aesthetic proper names within the text aiming to establish the relationship between the onomastic sign and the text, and also the qualitative characteristics of the aesthetic onymy as a structural semantic sign of the art text.

References

[1]Nicole E. L’onomastique littéraire / E. Nicole // Poétique. - №54. - Paris, 1993. -

Р. 233-235.

[2]Barthes R. Noms de personne (dans 20 mots-clefs… interview Magazine Littéraire, février 1975) // Œuvres Complètes. - Paris : Éditions du Seuil, 1974-1980. - T. III.

37

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 2 (21), 2018 ISSN 2587-8093

[3]Vaxelaire J.-L. Les noms propres: Une analyse lexicologique et historique. - Paris :

Honoré Champion, 2005. – 952 p.

[4]Legros Chapuis E. Le jeu des noms: de l’onomastique chez Roger Vailland, URL: roger-vailland.com›Le-jeu-des-noms…l-onomastique (data obrashcheniya: 12.04.2018)

[5]Jouve V. Poétique du roman, éd. Armand Colin, 2007, 256 p, URL: Vincent Jouve | Armand Colin armand-colin.com›vincent-jouve (data obrashcheniya: 12.04.2018)

[6]Lejeune Ph. Moi aussi. - Paris : Éditions du Seuil, 1986. – 346 р.

[7]Kozlova V.V. Metatext in the French Translations of the Works of M.A. Bulgakov. [Text]: dis... kand. filolog. nauk. – Voronezh : VGU, 2013. – 194 р.

[8]Bakhtine M.M. Esthétique et théorie du roman. Trans. Daria Olivier. Paris : Gallimard,

1978.

[9]Merkulova N.V. Synegic Effect of Aesthetic Onomastics in the Onomaturgy of the French Novel / N.V. Merkulova // Scientific Newsletter. Series: Modern linguistic and me- thodical-and-didactic research. - 2017. - Vyp. 1 (16). – P. 68-84.

[10]Merkulova N.V. Aesthetic Name-Based Text Analysis Methodology of a Literary

Text (on the Material of the Novel «Madame Bovary» by G. Flaubert) / N.V. Merkulova // Scientific Newsletter. Series: Modern linguistic and methodical-and-didactic research. - 2015. - Vyp. 4 (11). – P. 93-106.

[11]Fomina Z.Ye. Types of Hermeneutical Models of „Faith“ as the Means of Linguistic Determination in Martin Luther’s Religious-and-philosophical Texts // Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-didactic Researches”. – 2017. - №4 (19). – P. 45-60.

[12]Merkulova N.V. Hermeneutic Analysis of the Art Text in the Aspect of Synergy of

Aesthetic Onyms (based on the material of the novel «Sentimental Education» by G. Flaubert) /

N.V. Меrkulovа // Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-didactic Researches”. – 2018. - №1 (20). – P. 9-27.

[13]Thouard D. Qu’est-ce qu’une «herméneutique critique»?», Methodos [En ligne], 2 | 2002, mis en ligne le 05 avril 2004, consulté le 28 novembre 2016, URL: http://methodos.revues.org/100; DOI: 10.4000/methodos.100. (data obrashcheniya: 12.04.2018)

[14]Istrate М. Numele propriu în textul narativ– aspecte ale onomasticii literare. - ClujNapoca: Editura Napoca Star, 2000. - 196 p, URL: http://www.dacoromania.inst- puscariu.ro/articole/2000-2001_29.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 15.04.2018)

[15]Vlad C., Tamâian E. Numele propriu în dimensiunea sintactica a textului poetic // «Cercetari Lingvistice». - 2/1990. - P. 153-159.

[16]Iliescu A. La relation nom propre – nom litteraire. ... La science qui s’occupe de l’étude des noms propres s’appelle onomastique littéraire, URL: cis01.central.ucv.ro›revista_scol/site_ro/2013/… (data obrashcheniya: 15.04.2018)

Analysed sources

[1*] Flaubert G. / Flober G. Madame Bovary / Gospozha Bovari, URL: lingvo.asu.ru/france/texts/bovary/00index.html (data obrashcheniya: 15.04.2018)

[2*] Flaubert G. L’éducation sentimentale, URL: ebooksgratuits.com/ebooksfrance/...

(data obrashcheniya: 15.04.2018) / Flober G. Vospitanie chuvstv, URL: librebook.me/l__ducation_... (data obrashcheniya: 15.04.2018)

[3*] Syu E. / Sue E. Parizhskie tajny / Les Mystères de Paris. – M.: EHksmo, 2014, URL: https://advodka.com/.../ehzhen%20syu%20parizhskie%20tajny%20skachat'... (data obrashcheniya: 15.04.2018)

[4*] Flaubert G. Un coeur simple Gustave Flaubert - Un coeur simple - na francuzskom – WebLitera, URL: weblitera.com/title?id=223&l=ru&... (data obrashcheniya: 15.04.2018)

38

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 2 (21), 2018 ISSN 2587-8093

UDC 808. 2-3

COMPOSITION AND STRUCTURE OF THE PHRASEOSEMANTIC FIELD OF THE

CONCEPT "LOVE" IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE

Y. Liu

Pushkin State Russian Language Institute

Post-graduate student of the Department of General and Russian Linguistics Liu Yu

e-mail: liuyu2026@gmail.com

Statement of the problem. Being the highest value in the axiological system of the human person, the concept of "love" appears as an important element in an attempt to solve a large-scale linguistic problem about the relationship between language and man. The methods of its investigation are being improved, but there is a certain aesystem. We refer to the field approach as an effective one to the systematic study of this concept. In the article we will present Russian phraseological units c with the seme "love" in the form of a phraseosemantic field, we will define the composition and the structure of the field.

Results. The phraseological semantic field "love" as a fragment of the language macrosystem "Sense of Man" is a multilevel, polycentric, open formation with suband microfields. It includes four subfields: "Positive attitude towards love", "Negative attitude", "Neutral relationship" and "Ambivalent attitude". The subfields "Positive" and "Negative Attitude" are distinguished by microfields. Each field formation of a smaller size is structured as a nucleus and a periphery. The nucleus includes units that express the value of the arhiseme neutrally, and to the periphery - units with differential and intensification semes. In this case, the boundaries between the zones are blurred and the field elements interact with the zones of other fields.

Conclusions. The method of constructing the phraseosemantic field serves as an effective tool for the systematic study of the linguistic phenomenon. It will allow to investigate the relationship of the constituents of the field. The method of grouping language units according to the field principle can be applied in studying the cultural concepts of Russian linguoculturology and in teaching Russian to students in a foreign audience.

Key words: phraseosemantic field, the concept of "love", phraseological units, subfield, microfield, nucleus, periphery, integrative semes, differential semes.

For citation: Liu Y. Composition and structure of the phraseosemantic field of the concept "Love" in the Russian language / Y. Liu // Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-didactic Researches”. – 2018. - №2 (21). – P. 39-47.

Introduction.

One of the main trends of Russian linguistics of the XXI century is the study of the language in the framework of the anthropocentric paradigm of science. The concept of "love" and its linguistic expressions, especially phraseological, represent an important part of the national universe. It was presented as an important cultural concept in the following aspects: conceptual analysis (L.E. Vilms, 1997), cognitive analysis (A.V. Yaskova, 2017), from the point of view of contrastive linguistics (L.N. Lepikhina, 2009; M. Kalita, N.A. Mishankina, 2015), the antonymic method (E.Y. Balashova, 2004, E.R. Khutova, 2008, P.N. Kononova, 2012), the psycholinguistic approach (L.E. Kuznetsova, 2005). Important significance have the works of S.G. Vorkacheva [1]. Having examined the existing approaches to the study of linguistic representations of the concept of "love" in modern Russian language, we were convinced that this concept is explored in two main directions: lexico-semantic and linguocultural. At the same time, the concept is often considered in a comparative aspect. However, there is a nonsystematic aspect in its study in the Russian language. The multidimensionality of the linguocultural concept "love" determines the need to use a comprehensive system approach to its study, which determines the relevance of our investigation.

______________

© Liu Y., 2018

39

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 2 (21), 2018 ISSN 2587-8093

The article is devoted to the systematization of phraseological units (PU) with the seme of "love" in the Russian language. The scientific novelty of the article is due to the fact that the work is the first attempt to integrally and comprehensively systematize the PU with the seme of "love" in the form of a phraseosemantic field (PSF). The aim of the work is to simulate the PU with the seme of "love" in the form of a PSF, determine the composition, structure, and characteristics of the field, describe the relationships between the field components. Consequently, in the theoretical part of the paper the main features of the field are considered, determined by the PSF as a fragment of the general lexical-phraseological semantic field. In practical terms, a specific description of the composition and structure of the PSF is given.

The object of the study are the semantic characteristics of the state of feelings of "love", which are verbalizing in the Russian PU. As the subject of the study, the relationship of the PU with the seme of "love" in a semantic field with the corresponding title were chosen. The study was carried out on the material of PU, selected by the method of continuous sampling. The main sources were the works of V.I. Zimin (1994; 2008), V.I. Dal (1989), V.M. Mokienko (2010; 2007), A.M. Zhigulev (1986), A.N. Baranov and D.O. Dobrovolsky (2009), V.N. Telia (1995). As the examples of the use of PU, we use data from the Russian National Corpus (RNC).

In the work under the term "phraseosemantic field" we mean the union of phraseological units with a common integrative semantic feature [2, p. 82]. The structure of the field can include field formations of a smaller size – subfields and microfields. Inside the field, the nuclear and peripheral zones are delimited with respect to the identifying value of the field. The method of modeling the PSF based on the keyword of the concept "allows to significantly expand the representation of the content and structure of the concept" [3, p. 128].

Methodology.

The methodological basis of the study was the work of such scientists as S.G. Vorkachev, Yu.S. Stepanov, V.I. Karasik, Z.E. Fomina, E.P. Ilyin (in the field of linguoculturology and concepts); V.N. Telia, V.M. Mokienko, E.F. Kirov, A.M. Emirova (in the field of phraseology); J. Trier, L.M. Vasiliev, Yu.N. Karaulov, G.S. Schur, A. Birikh, A.V. Bondarko, Z.D. Popova, I.A. Sternin, I.M. Kobozeva, Yu.D. Apresyan, N.A. Saburova, I.I. Sinelnikov (the field theory).

The work is based on the technology of describing the semantic of the PU by modeling a PSF. The term "field" is introduced into linguistics under the influence of the application of this concept in the natural sciences. In linguistics it denotes the aggregate of language units (in our case, phraseological ones) with a common semantic seme (integral seme). Linguists share several types of fields: lexical-semantic (Z.D. Popova), associative (Sh. Bally), nominativefunctional (M.I. Lazaridi), word-formative (O.G. Revzina), functional-semantic (A.V. Bondarko), linguocultural (V.V. Vorobiev), grammar-lexical (E.V. Gulig, E.I. Shendels), and some other fields, the most developed of which is lexico-semantic. We emphasize that the basis of our work is a semantic field, which is understood as a structure from the core, the central part and the periphery (perhaps a more fractional division of the field components).

In the opinion of J. Trier, the founder of the theory of the semantic field, the word acquires meaning only because it interacts with neighboring words. One of the sources of field theory in Russian linguistics is considered to be A.V. Bondarko. In the study of the functionalsemantic field, he crosses out the main features of the field: 1) the generality of the semantic functions of the elements; 2) interaction of grammatical and lexical elements; 3) the division "center (core) – periphery", gradual transitions between zones, partial intersections [4, p. 2225]. In addition, there are signs of attractiveness, inter-levelness, the presence of a configuration (Z.D. Popova, E.L. Lyapicheva), relative autonomy (I.M. Kobozeva). The units of different parts of speech can be connected to the field structure.

According to G.S. Shchur, there are several directions in the field approach, the predominant of which are paradigmatic (J. Trier, L. Weissgerber), syntagmatic (V. Porzig, J. Katz). Paradigmatic fields entice into their composition units with a common lexical paradigmatic

40

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 2 (21), 2018 ISSN 2587-8093

seme. In syntagmatic fields, components are linked together through associations, on the basis of formal or semantic links. Combined fields are groupings of words that have paradigmatic and syntagmatic links.

Along with the lexical and semantic field, there is a phraseological semantic field for the denotation of the aggregate of PU, united by a common semantic feature. There is disagreement about the relationship of lexical and phraseological language systems. Some scholars consider the phraseological foundation of the language as an independent system. Others consider it as part of the general lexical-semantic system. In our work, PU are adjoining to lexemes and form together with it a single lexical-phraseological system. Thus, the phraseosemantic field is a fragment of the lexico-phraseological and semantic field, which conditionally one can call the general semantic field.

Z.D. Popova and I.A. Sternin in the study of field theory, and the theory of PSF in particular, believe that the nuclear units of the field have a diachronic singularity, they rarely change; and peripheral units, on the contrary, can change due to occasionalism, borrowing, etc. The typical nature of the PSF is the blurriness between the field zones. In view of the fact that the separation of units into a particular group depends on the selection of the most urgent seme, fixed in the PU, and more often – by means of vocabulary definitions, their classification is conditional. "The constituents of the field can belong to the core of one field and the periphery of another field or fields" [5, p. 27].

The method of constructing the phraseosemantic field served as the basis in the work of N.A. Saburova in the study the concept of space. To determine the seme of the units, the author applied the method of component analysis. The phraseosemantic field investigated by the author consists of microfields that are combined by an integral feature and delimited by differential semes [2, p. 85]. In the author's opinion, the fields can be monocentric or polycentric. The structure of any field includes the core and the periphery. Units of the nuclear zone uniquely fulfill the function of the field, and peripheral units are complicated by additional values. In the peripheral zones "there is a qualitative and quantitative expansion of the field under consideration" [2, p. 86].

Component analysis plays an important role in the technology of the structural organization of the PU and the study of their semantic features, the essence of which lies in the study of the minimal component of the PSF – phraseoseme. It is the phraseosemes that determine the semantic content of the PU. There are different kinds of seme in linguistic units. In the lexical plan, V.G. Gak distinguishes the following types of seme: integral semes (generic integrating semes), differential semes (denoting species values), and potential semes (manifested in a specific text). Considering the problems of typology seme, Z.D. Popova and I.A. Sternin share such types as denotative, connotative, and functional. As part of the denotative component, more generalized semes are called integral semes (arhisemes, classeme), and more specific semes that distinguish the meaning of units as its individual essence from other meanings are called differential (individualizing). Connotative semes include emotional and evaluative components. And a number of types of components enter into the composition of functional seeds, the main one of which is functional-stylistic [6, p. 47-61]. In the structure of the field "nuclear can be both denotative and connotative semes. Functional semes are usually peripheral. <...> The core of the kernel is the denotative component of the meaning" [6, p. 69-70].

Thus, the analysis of the theoretical material allowed us to define the PSF as a structural organization of the set of PU, united by an integral seme. The necessary components of the field structure are the core and the periphery. The main features of the PSF are the blurriness of the zones and its intersection with other fields. In the opinion of V.V. Vorobyova, modern linguistics under the anthropocentric paradigm of the humanities field approach is considered important in the comprehensive study of language in relation to culture, i.e. in linguoculturology. The field model is actively developed in dissertational works about human activity (communication, speaking, speech), about emotional states of a person (stupidity, joy, peace, fear). This

41

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 2 (21), 2018 ISSN 2587-8093

approach is a way of system analysis of semantic relationships and the hierarchical organization of the PU of the field under investigation, "will allow us to trace the dynamics of the phraseological nomination, to show the main features of the phraseological system of the language of a certain epoch in comparison with modern language, and to give a broad picture of changes in the internal form of phraseological units" [7, p. 14-15].

Results.

We define the phraseosemantic field of concept of "love" as a set of PU, united by the integral seme, which experiences a love feeling. As E. Benveniste notes, "treating language as a system means analyzing its structure" [8, p. 64]. In this paper, the construction of the structure of the phraseosemantic field is realized in three stages: 1) extraction of PU belonging to a single semantic field; 2) their classification and distribution by sub-, microfields; 3) the separation of the nucleus and the periphery within the microfield.

To determine the composition of the field under investigation, it is necessary to distinguish the main characteristics of Russian PU. In the work under the term "phraseological" we mean "a figurative stable (stamped) phrase or sentence, in the form of an integral representation, embodying in its semantics a topos (something common, generally accepted and wellknown) or a concept of a national mentality that has a stylistic function and an emotionally appraising load" [9, p. 90-91]. Thus, in the work phraseology is considered in the broadest sense as a phraseological unit (PU), including all types of phraseological units (proverbs, sayings, stable battles, aphorisms, winged expressions, idioms, etc.) in it. The study of phraseological units as a means of expressing thoughts and feelings allows a person to realize his/her role in the world around him/her.

The structure of the field includes PU, containing components, one way or another associated with a sense of love. Our interest is, first, focused on the PU, denoting love relationships between people by blood ties (mother's love, brotherly love, parents' love for children, etc.). The relations between people who are not bound by blood ties (love for friends, "loveromance") come to the fore. To these principles one can add a one-pointed attitude to something that a person likes and what he/she means by the word love: to art, to the homeland, to life, to a certain sport, etc.

Attention is drawn to the presence of a significant amount of PU, which includes somatism: heart (soul), eyes, head, hand, neck, ears, blood. Of particular interest is the cultural connotation associated with the heart. In a romantic relationship: a) The heart loves: A heart can feel another; b) The heart suffers: One heart suffers, but the other does not know; c) The heart chooses the one to love: It's not the nice one, who is good, but the one, who came to the heart

[10, p. 47]. And on a special antonymous plan come out words-antiquity: hatred, dislike, jealousy, etc.

Practical material has shown that the units of the paremic type (proverbs and sayings) predominate in the field which is studied. Of great importance are metaphorical, comparative and ironic units. Phraseologized expressions of the concept of "love" as a linguistic phenomenon have great axiology, expressiveness, but also ambivalence. Most of the phraseological units include an evaluation element. They are closely related to the different values and antivalues of the axiological system of the Russian language picture of the world.

Thus, the feeling of love, verbalized in Russian PU, possessing a multitude of signs of the linguistic category of expression of a state, is a valuable object for analysis. And PU, containing in their internal form rich extralinguistic information and a reflection of the human naive picture of the world, are the most convenient means for studying the content and structure of the cultural concept against the backdrop of the mentality of the ethnos. A high degree of representation of this concept in the fund of Russian PU allowed us to model its structure in the form of a phraseosemantic field.

On the basis of the composition signs of the field, its structure is formed. In view of the fact that the feeling of love in Russian linguistics is a heterogeneous phenomenon, for a more

42

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 2 (21), 2018 ISSN 2587-8093

successful analysis, we will divide the material on the topic of valuation relations to love. It was revealed that the phraseosemantic field of the concept of "love" includes four subfields (SF). There are "Positive attitude towards love" ("Love +"), "Negative attitude" ("Love –"),

"Neutral relationship" ("Love Ø"), and "Ambivalent attitude" ("Love +–").

The subfield "Love +" singles out the microfields (MF) "Value nuclearity", "Durability", and "Mightiness". Subfield "Love –" has in its composition microfields "Uncontrollability",

"Variability", and "Unhappy Love". The subfield "Love Ø" includes phraseological units, objectively describing a love relationship or process: Love at first sight [1**, p. 298]. There are no microfields in it, since it is a small field formation. A feature of the studied PSF is the presence of subfield "Love +–", characterizing the feeling of love as a dual moral state. In this group, a number of comparative phraseological units are found: Without a sweet heart one cannot live, but with a darling it’s also impossible to live [2**, p. 536].

So, the material that we collected allowed us to arrange a three-level structure of the phraseosemantic field of the concept of "love":

Scheme 1.

The structure of the phraseosemantic field of the concept of "love"

Phraseosemantic field of the concept of "love"

Each microfield (or subfield) has its own hierarchical structure, which includes a core (with a central part) and an extensive periphery. The basic principle of the distribution of the units from the nucleus to the center and the periphery is the degree of closeness in meaning to the integral semantic attribute of the field.

Important concepts for distinguishing between nuclear and peripheral units in the structure of the phraseosemantic field are integral and differential semes, which are fixed in the phraseological units. "Integral semes are the most common and serve as the basis for combining phraseological units in certain phraseosemantic groups and subgroups, differential semes are additional semantic features, reflect the secondary properties and characteristics of the designated object and perform a distinctive function" [11, p. 28]. One unit can have more than one differential seme. The more the quantities of the differential semes are in one unit, the further it moves away from the core of the field. In addition, the analysis showed that the structure of the field under investigation is particularly influenced by connotative and functional semes (emotionally intense and functional-stylistic) on the diversity of the PU by the core and periphery. Thus, the phraseological units of peripheral zones have more additional meanings and a higher degree of emotional state.

Special interest of the phraseological corps are PU, verbalizing one of the most distinctive signs of love – a sign of "non-control," which is the main one for our analysis. On the basis of the general semantic feature, the analysis results in the formation of a phraseosemantic microfield with the corresponding name. MF "Uncontrollability of love" is structured as a core

43