THE ANALYSIS OF SEMIOTICS OF THE FAMILY LANGUAGE AS A VERBALIZED AREA OF FAMILY DISCOURSE
Abstract
The article deals with the discursive symbolism of elements of the language system which determines the specificity of family discourse semiotics. The symbolism of the „family" sign is predetermined by the case-interpretation. Family language is a set of secondary symbols created by a group and associated with emotional rituals. Integration of family language sign in the area of their functioning – family discourse – is based on the mutual determinism. From the perspective of Charles Peirce’s theory of sign (classifying into three main trychotomies – the sign by itself, the meaning of the sign and its syntagmatic functioning in interaction with others), the research shows the whole complex of characteristics of semiotic entities in intra-familial nominations. The article proves that the "family" precedent is based on the experience within a collective cognitive space – common (recognizable, used and cited by other members of the group – family) memories that determine the identity of a man as a representative of the family recognizing its values, norms, ideas, priorities, tastes and traditions. Family images as archetype and culturally socialized symbols, are the "messengers" of ancient times, and, correlating with contemporary cultural context, are transformed under its influence. The family discourse symbolic meanings are genuinely represented by a set of specific nominative actsDownloads
References
Jackendorff, R. (1995). Languages of the Mind. Essays on Mental Representation. Cambridge, 216.
Leibnyts, H. V. (1983). Sochynenyia. Vol. 2. Moscow, 686.
Kant, I. (2006). Kritika sposobnosti suzhdenyia. Saint Petersburg, 512.
Karmadonov, O. A. (2017). Mir, napolnennyy smyslom: simvolicheskoe modelirovanie real'nosti. Simvol v psikhologii i psikhoterapii. Moscow, 88.
Uaitkhed, A. N. (1999). Simvolizm, ego smysl i vozdeystvie. Tomsk, 64.
Ulybyna, E. V. (2002). Soznanie i bessoznatel'noe. Problemy znakovogo oposredovaniya. Stavropol, 228.
Vyhotskyi, L. S. (2007). Myshlenie i rech. Moscow, 504.
Yunh, K. (1991). Arkhetip i simvol. Moscow, 300.
Assadzhioli, R. (1994). Psikhosintez. Izlozhenie printsipov i rukovodstvo po tekhnike. Moscow, 286.
Lotman, Yu. M. (2004). Semiosfera. Saint Petersburg, 704.
Vezhbytskaia, A. (1983). Iz knihi «Semanticheskie primitivy». Moscow.
Halutskykh, Y. A. (2008). Yadro leksicheskoy sistemy angliyskogo yazyka: zavisimost' intensivnosti uchastiya v evolyutsionnykh protsessakh ot etimologicheskikh pokazateley. Moscow.
Pirs, Ch. S. (2000). Izbrannye filosofskie proizvedeniya. Moscow, 448.
Fraser, B. (1996). Pragmatic markers. Pragmatics, 6 (2), 167–190. doi: 10.1075/prag.6.2.03fra
Bogdanov, V. V. (1989). Klassifikatsiya rechevykh aktov. Lichnostnye aspekty yazykovogo obshheniya, 25–37.
Laclau, E. (1993). Discourse. A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell, 431–437.
Lanher, S. (2000). Filosofiya v novom klyuche: Issledovanie simvoliki razuma, rituala i iskusstva. Moscow, 287.
Zanadvorova, A. V. (2001). Prozvishhe i obrashhenie v semeynom rechevom obshhenii. Russkiy yazyk segodnya. Moscow: Azbukovnik, 260–267.
Makarov, M. L. (2003). Osnovy teorii diskursa. Moscow, 280.
Batsevych, F. S. (2004). Osnovy komunikatyvnoi linhvistyky. Kyiv, 344.
Dementev, V. V. (2001). Osnovy teoryi nepriamoi kommunikatsii. Saratov, 440.
Hurevych, L. S. (2011). Kognitivnoe prostranstvo metakommunikatsii: osnovy pragmasemanticheskogo izucheniya. Moscow, 400.
Afanasieva, O. M. (2018). Ontohnoseolohiia rytualu v linhvosemiotychnomu i komunikatyvnomu aspektakh (na materiali anhlomovnoi linhvokultury). Science and Education a New Dimension. Philology, VI (44 (151)), 8.
Copyright (c) 2018 Iryna Osovska
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Our journal abides by the Creative Commons CC BY copyright rights and permissions for open access journals.
Authors, who are published in this journal, agree to the following conditions:
1. The authors reserve the right to authorship of the work and pass the first publication right of this work to the journal under the terms of a Creative Commons CC BY, which allows others to freely distribute the published research with the obligatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication of the work in this journal.
2. The authors have the right to conclude separate supplement agreements that relate to non-exclusive work distribution in the form in which it has been published by the journal (for example, to upload the work to the online storage of the journal or publish it as part of a monograph), provided that the reference to the first publication of the work in this journal is included.
