Concept ‘Father’ In Linguistic Consciousness Of Russian, Kazakh And English People

Abstract

This research is sequel to the earlier research of universal basic concepts as exemplified in association experiment. Association experiment as a psycholinguistic method makes it possible to consider the concept constituents in multi-structural languages, to describe the field structure thereof and to bring light to the most cognitive attributes relevant to the modern consciousness and thereby to broaden knowledge about peculiarities of ethnic mentality. This paper presents the ‘father’ concept in Russian/Kazakh/English languages that is one of the most significant concepts. Goal of this article consists in the study of said concept content in linguistic consciousness of the Russians, Kazakhs and Englishmen. The tasks set to achieve this goal are as follows: conduct the association experiment on the given stimulus word, identify core and peripheral criteria of the concept, collate the fragments of linguistic consciousness core and describe the macro-component structure of the concept. In the popular mind, the ‘father’ concept is associated with the kinship, procreation, parenting process, and the model for father dominance in a family as well. It is traditional to attribute to a man the role of a family head, a breadwinner who provides his wife and children with everything necessary. In modern society, the great attention is paid to the father’s role in family because a father is the personality who should be an ideal of conduct and without whom the full-fledged parenting is impossible.

Keywords: Ethnic mentalitylinguistic consiousnessasassociation experimentconceptcoreperiphery

Introduction

In view of the fact that the concept constitutes the mental attitude toward reality and, as information structure, becomes localized in the human conscience often having linguistic objectivation, it is associated with the notion of linguistic consciousness. At the present stage of linguistics development such word combination as ‘linguistic consciousness’ sounds habitually enough and is perceived as a single complete notion, regardless of the fact that language and consciousness refer to different fields: language relates to linguistics, consciousness relates to psychology, and one cannot conflate them. Nevertheless, the existence of ‘linguistic consciousness’ term is indicative of the close interrelation between language and consciousness that is under discussion by the scientists within long period of time.

Scientists give different definitions to the concept of ‘linguistic consciousness’: as a part of conscience, image of the world (Ufimtzeva, 2017, p.7); combination of conscience images dementalised using the linguistic means (Tarasov, 2015, p.12); verbal-and-notional construct; thought fulfilling itself in the linguistic forms (Gudkov, 2017, p.64); combination of mental mechanisms for originating and understanding of speech, and keeping the language in conscience (Babushkin & Sternin, 2018, p. 32). In our research we consider the linguistic consciousness as a part of ethnic consciousness, method of verbal perception and the world image reflection by means of mental processes of the speech origination and perception, as well as the form of ethnos life activity intermediated by language, mechanism of its adaptation the outside world.

There exist different methods for study of the linguistic consciousness but one of the most widely used methods is the association experiment. Babushkin and Sternin (2018), considers association experiment as the only possible and objective method for study of the linguistic consciousness whereby it is possible to reconstruct the links of linguistic units in the conscience and to detect the nature of their interaction in the processes of functioning thereof (understanding, keeping etc.) Shapilova (2015) also believes that association experiment is “the effective method for access to the human linguistic consciousness”, it “helps to detect the concept content in the cognitive consciousness of the language speakers and range the concept – forming attributes by the brightness thereof” (p. 252). Theoretical basics of the linguistic consciousness study by the method of association experiment have been formed by Deese (1965), Osgood (1988), Bondarko (1996), Krongauz (2001), Kobozeva (2019). In their scientific works they have developed the main issues related to the content of a word not only as a unit of language and speech but also the element of various associative groups. Zalevskaya (1980), Zolotova (2005) have formed the bases for linguistic-and-cultural analysis of associative norms, developed the association models as exemplified in Russian, German, Kazakh, Kirgiz and Uzbek languages. Conceptual study based on the method of association experiment were conducted by Kubryakova and Demyankov (2018). Results of her research have proved that the human mental lexicon is based on associations.

Problem Statement

Though the linguistic consciousness was many times treated as a scientific subject, and it has already become possible to say that the substantial methodological base is formed to study thereof, psycholinguistic methods for conduct of association experiments including those on study of core and periphery of linguistic consciousness, have been described, and scientifically grounded approaches and ways to study thereof have been formed, however, the proper attention to issue on linguistic consciousness study in ethnic aspect, considering thereof as a source for study of mentality has not been paid yet neither in foreign nor in domestic linguistics. Ethnic mentality issue requires broadening of knowledge about collective linguistic consciousness, that reflects the memory of historical past of the ethnos, behavioral patterns, norms, links with culture and ethnic identity.

Research Questions

In the research course, it was assumed to get answers to following questions:

• What responses does the stimulus word ‘father’ cause in the conscience of Russians, Kazakhs and Englishmen?

• What responses, among those pointed, are core and peripheral?

• What responses are common for Russian, Kazakh and English respondents, and what of them are ethnos-specific ones peculiar only to a particular nation?

What cognitive attributes has the concept in Russian, Kazakh and English languages?

Purpose of the Study

Purpose of this paper is to study the content of concept in the linguistic consciousness of Russians, Kazakhs and Englishmen. The tasks set to achieve this goal are as follows: conduct association experiment on the given stimulus word, identify core and peripheral criteria of the concept, collate the fragments of linguistic consciousness core and describe the macro-component structure of the concept.

Research Methods

Research methods are conditional upon the specific nature of the language material object, and upon the research goal and objectives as well. Methodological procedures are based on general-linguistic postulate considering the language as communication tool and means. Methods and techniques used in the work include common scientific methods for benchmarking and generalization; statistical methods, as well as properly linguistic (componential and conceptual analysis) methods and techniques.

Research was based on the methods of psycholinguistic analysis of the linguistic consciousness core developed in the works of Zalevskaya (1980), Zolotova (2005), Ufimtzeva (2017), Dmitryuk, Cherkasova, and Artykbayeva (2016), and also based on methods of semantic-and-cognitive analysis proposed by Babushkin and Sternin (2018). At the first stage of lingual-and-cognitive analysis serving as the stimulus word we studied the concept content by performing the field stratification of concept, that is, detection of the core, close, far and extreme periphery. At the second stage we analyzed the macro-structure of concept with simultaneous distinguishing the classification attributes thereof.

Findings

This research is sequel to the earlier research of universal basic concepts as exemplified in association experiment (Abildinova, 2019). Let us now proceed to consider the results of our research. Students, candidates for master’s degree and doctoral students of Tambov state university and Moscow state university (Russia), Pavlodar state university and Pavlodar state pedagogical institute (Kazakhstan), and Swansea University (Great Britain) took part in the experiment. 300 Russian people (147 men and 153 women), 300 Kazakh people (149 men and 151 women), 300 English people (135 men and 165 women) were involved in the enquiry. In the course of experiment, it was suggested to the Russian-speaking, Kazakh-speaking and English-speaking respondents to respond to the stimulus word ‘father’ spontaneously, uttering the first words, phrases or sentences that had come to their mind.

1050 responds to the stimulus word ‘father (in Russian)’ were received from Russian-speaking respondents. Among those responds there were 993 various and 57 individual responds (with frequency of 1), and 9 refusals. Core part is formed by following responds: protection, care, closed person, love, life, he who granted the gift of life, my support and dependence, mother, strength, head of family, bringing up, teacher, happiness, respect, work, best friend, family, master in the house, trust, inspirational person (51% of all attributes). Close periphery include following attributes: loving person, meaning and purpose of life, a man who conceived and brought up a child, a man who provides reliable back land, very dear to me, tenderness, child, confidence, earnestness, blood, internal ramrod, a man, advisor, breadwinner (27,5%). Far and extreme periphery cover 20,5 %. From Kazak-speaking respondents there were received 1094 responds to the stimulus word ‘father (in Kazakh)’. Those responds include 1081 various and 13 individual responds, 3 refusals. Core part consists of such responds in Kazakh as: love, dear man who granted the gift of life, mountaintop , life, inspirational person, protection, happiness , the dearest person , part of my soul , head of family, respect , proud, generosity, teacher , justice, security, support, uppermost member of family, best friend, a man who grants the life to a child (49% of all cognitive attributes). Close periphery is formed of such responds as: support, the most reliable person, a man who guides you in life way, closed person, family head, one who brought you up, dear father, a person who grants the warmth, the best person, harsh, industrious, mother, one who works for the sake of children, responsibility (27.3%). Far and extreme periphery cover 23,7%. 1134 responds to the stimulus word ‘ father (in English)’ were received/ Those responds include 1100 various and 34 individual responds, 8 refusals. Notional core of the concept is represented by following responds: love, family, upbringing, male parent, family protector, the most important person in my life, the first role models, first friend, children, dad, mother, handsome, keeps the family safe, provider, job, very special person, clan, parental responsibility, example, respect (48,5% of total number of responds). Close periphery includes following attributes: child, teaches me, supported me financially and morally, a man very dear to me, someone you can trust, football, head of my family, money, happy, wonderful, has a very crucial role (24, 5%). Far and extreme periphery amount to 18,55%.

Comparison of the results obtained from association experiment conducted among Russians, Kazakhs and Englishmen shows the similarity of the ‘father’ concept core content in Russian/Kazakh/ English languages by following responds: closed person, love, family, inspirational person, respect, and best friend. Quantitative constituent of these responds differs. For example, the father’s image as the most important and closed person in life is in different positions: Russians have it in position 2, Kazakhs in position 8, and English people in position 9. Kazakh and English people place such life value as ‘love’ is in the 1^st position but Russians have it in position 4. Englishmen respond to ‘family’ is in position 2, Kazakhs place it at position 10 while Russians have it in 17^th place. Father’s role in the upbringing of children has been expressed via response to ‘ inspirational person ’ and obtained position 5 among responses of Kazakhs, position 19 among responses of English people and 20^th place among responses of Russians. Deference to the father has been expressed via response to ‘respect’ and obtained position 11 among responses of Kazakhs, position 14 among responses of Russians and the 20^th place among responses of Englishmen. Response ‘best friend’ that reflects the attitude to a father as the faithful devoted person who is always ready to give a helping hand is in position 16 among responses of Russians, in position 19 among responses of Kazakhs and in position 8 among responses of Englishmen.

Cognitive-and-contrastive analysis of responses has shown, on the one hand, the identity of meanings of the analyzed ‘father’ concept in Russian/Kazakh/English languages, and, on the other hand, it makes it possible to detect some differences. So, the ‘father’ concept is perceived by the Russian conscience as ‘ a man who granted the gift of life ’, i.e. father has the same biologically predefined “natural function” as a mother, that is to give life to a child. Notion of a father as the strong person, head of family, master in his house (position 18) is ethnos-specific for Russian linguistic consciousness but not obtained in the core of linguistic consciousness of Kazakh and English people. From this it follows that father as a man in contrast with a mother-woman is represented through psycho-physiological characteristics (strength as the impact and as fortitude, bravery) and social role (master in his house). Therefore, in the mentality of Russian people the father is very important member of the family: he is the family support shouldering all burden of the family wellbeing. In the linguistic world view of Russians, father, due to his life experience, is represented as a teacher upbringing his children.

In the linguistic world view of Kazakhs ‘father’ is, first of all, a man who deserves respect and worship, and is characterized via such euphemisms as: dearest soul, part of soul, support. Father for Kazakhs means a man who granted the gift of life , he also is the inspirational person, incontestable authority, teacher and advisor (sounds as ‘ Ustaz ’ in Kazakh), inaccessible mountain (sounds as ‘ askhar tauym ’ in Kazakh); Tasibekov (2015) explains the father image existing in conscience of Kazakhs as follows: “If for Kazakhs the steppe is that surrounds them, and mountains are the symbol of greatness and distinct landmark in their way then the father means a peak, stable and inviolable” (p. 24) . Tradition of father veneration is associated with formation of the ancestor deification based on the strengthening of dominant role of the man who was the family breadwinner, appreciated the spiritual values, venerated and observed the traditions and took care of timely settling down to married life by his children. Father inspires not only the deep love feeling but he also is the source of proud (sounds as ‘ makhtanysh ’ in Kazakh) for his children because he is inspirational person, wise advisor who teaches to protect own interests and achieve the set goals. Children get their first upbringing lessons in the family, that is why in understanding of Kazakhs the father also means justice (sounds as ‘ adildik ’ in Kazakh).

In the linguistic world view of Englishmen, the gender attribute turned out to be weighty, since the father is male parent and, thus, he performs his social role. For English people, father is a family defender, he keeps the family safe . At the same time, father has similar rights and obligations as the mother; he bears parental responsibility that indicates predominance of gender equality between a woman as the mother and a man as the father in English society. Material component also constitutes the integral part of the consciousness of Englishmen as the Western type people for whom the money build the basis of family budget. From the above said it follows that the father provides the family wellbeing, he is a breadwinner. Important peculiarity of the Englishman mentality also consists in the psychological component in the child upbringing, so father for English peoples is the first role model .

Macro-component structure is interpreted as listing of the detected cognitive attributes belonging to each of the components: imaginative, information layer and interpretation field. Imaginative content of the concept is represented by perceptive and cognitive components. Imaginative sensory component is represented in the languages with insignificant quantity of attributes. Among the perceptive attributes of the ‘father (in Russian)’ concept there were separated following visual: the grey in hair , and tactil images: warmth,embraces,tenderness. In Kazakh language, the ‘father’ concept is expressed by means of tactile images: a man giving warmth, hot feeling, embraces, care. In English language the ‘father’ concept is represented by means of visual images: face, sight, and tactile images: warmth, voice . Cognitive image constitutes the result of metaphorical and metonymical rethinking of conschience and reflects the links of concept content with other concepts. In Russian language, the cognitive image is represented by such units as: reliable shoulder, stonewall, firm hand; in Kazakh language: inaccessible mountain; in English language: the sculptor of the child, is like umbrella in rain which don't let wet the person under it.

As the analysis of experiment results has shown, the language-speakers do not make attempts to formulate the concept content in their conscience, it is perceived automatically at the level of images and associations. Information content of the ‘father’ concept in Russian consists of such attributes as: protection, care, closed person, love, life, he who granted the gift of life, my support and dependence, mother, strength, head of family, bringing up, teacher, happiness, respect, work, best friend, family, master in the house, trust, inspirational person . Information content of the ‘father’ concept in Kazakh includes such attributes as: love, dear person who granted the gift of life, inspirational person, protection , happiness, the dearest person, a part of soul, head of family, respect, proud, generosity , teacher , justice ,security, support, uppermost member of family, a man who gives life to a child. Information content of the ‘father concept in English is formed by such cognitive attributes as: love, family, upbringing, male parent, family defender, the most important person in my life, the first role models, first friend, children, dad, mother, handsome, keeps the family safe, provider, job, very special person, clan, parental responsibility, inspirational person, respect.

Interpretation field of the concept discloses the information content in details and supplements it as well. It includes peripheral attributes and is divided into evaluation, encyclopedic, identification, symbolic, mythological, utilitarian, regulative, social-and-cultural, paroemiological areas. Evaluation area includes cognitive attributes that reflect axiological component of the concept. In Russian language the evaluation area is represented by following cognitive attributes: very dear to me, the only one in the world, proud, funny, merry, sometimes is angry, sometimes scolds, and sometimes is wrathful . In Kazakh language evaluation area includes following attributes: generous, priceless wealth, dear to all, clever person, dear colt. In English language evaluation area includes such attributes as: handsome, strong, proud, funny, is the best, hardworking, a kind guy, wonderful, a smart man, brave, dear, is very brilliant.

Encyclopedic area integrates multiple cognitive attributes that reflect background knowledge acquired on the basis of life experience and interaction with the concept denotation. In Russian language this area is characterized by following set of attributes: parent, husband, defender, most responsible, proactive attitude, childhood, car, daddy’s girl, advice, authority, fishing trip, catch, hunter, race, ancestor, brother, grandfather, great grandfather, always right even if it is not so, nothing is frightful with him, will always defend, firmness, kindest man for daughters, dialog partner, reliability, closed person who always see that no harm comes to you, my family, means much, papa, old man, biological, relative, office, military man, engineer, father-in-law, parent, real, TV-set, godfather, football. In Kazakh language this area is represented by such attributes as: a person feeling deeply for you, head of family, understanding, help, most reliable person, indulges me, support for his children, breadwinner, a distinguished person, anniversary, roof over the warm corner, fondness, one who understands you, your adviser, protection of family, blood, car, dear, my life, fishing, driver, support of his home, grandfather, head of family, hero, keen, game, a man inspiring you to be a real man, dombyra, aul. In English language this area is represented by such attributes as: money, happy, has a very crucial role, fatherhood, car, grandfather, strong arms, dear childhood, BBQ, walking, gentle, watching television together, reading books, paternal behaviors, playing football, encourages competition, biological father, missed, ill, safari, figure, dam, electricity, building, friend, a dad teaches kids to human values and knowledge, basketball, golf club. Attributes represented in this area reflect encyclopedic information about biological relationship, value orientation associated with image of father and childhood time.

Identification area, according to its content, represents the set of attributes what individualize the concept, illustrate typical tangible embodiment of the concept in real life. In the Russian linguistic consciousness the ‘father’ concept is identified by such lexical items as: my father, husband of my mother, dad, daddykins, pappy, beloved. This concept in Kazakh and English languages has similar attributes: my dad, my husband, dear.

Symbolic area, as it is seen from the name thereof, integrate the attributes reflecting information about sumbolyc perception of the object or phenomenon conceived by the conscience. Symbolic area in Russian, Kazakh and English languages is represented by not large set of attributes. Attributes entered the symbolic area composition in Russian language are: Alexander Pushkin , Michael Lermontov, in Kazakh language: Akhmet Baitursynuly, Khazhymukhan Munaitpasuly; in English language: Geoffrey Chaucer, George Byron.

Mythological area constitutes the set of cognitive attributes which have been formed under influence of mythological beliefs concerning phenomena and objects. This group of attributes is also insignificant. In Russian language it is represented by such attributes as: Patriarch of Rome, Holy Father. In Kazakh language: Aulie ata. In English this area contains attributes: Patriarch of Rome, Holy Father.

Utilitarian area reflects knowledge comparable to possibility of using them for some practical purposes. In Russian language the utilitarian area contains following attributes: earns money, stokes a furnace, keeps the house, provides his family with all necessary things. In Kazakh language this area reflects following attributes: makes money, helps mom around the house, cooking delicious food. In English it is represented by such attributes as: cooking delicious food, makes money.

Regulative area integrates the attributes prescribing what has to be done and what not to be done with the object or phenomenon under conceptualization in the field covered by this concept. Regulative area in the languages under consideration is represented by insignificant set of attributes. In Russian: shall be sustainable, a man who should love and support. In Kazakh: he must protect me, be stick to his word. In English: must participate in the upbringing of children.

Social-and-cultural area integrates cognitive attributes containing data on history, literature, art, workers of literature and culture, way of everyday life of the people, as well customs, traditions and festivals thereof. Social-and-cultural area of ‘father’ concept includes such attributes as: I.S. Turgenev, “Fathers and Sons”, “Father is not mother...”, “Father can, and father can do everything possible and impossible”, February 23. Social-and-cultural area of ‘father’ concept in Kazakh integrates such attributes as: “My father fills my heart with love…” (Kazakh song), “My father is the best man in the world”, April 7. Social-and-cultural area of ‘father’ concept in English integrates following attributes: “Father in my life I seeˮ, fatherʼs day.

As a component of interpretation field the ‘father’ concepts explicates amalgamation of folk observations, reasoning and ideas about the objects and phenomena through the units of paremiological fund. Proverbs (paroemia) attributed to the ‘father’ concept are as follows: Like tree, like wedge; like father, like son, Where the father is good there the son is fine fellow, Father is fisherman and children look at water, As God for people so father for children (Russian proverbs). In ‘father’ concept in Kazakh there were separated following paroemia : Grandfather is a faultfinder for the children, Who was brought up by father would be able to make an arrow by himself (Kazakh proverbs). This area of ‘father’ concept in English is represented by following attributes: One father is more than a handred schoolmasters, Like father, like son, A miserly father makes a prodigal son (English proverbs).

Conclusion

As it is seen from the above, analysis of the results obtained from association experiment on identification of ‘father’ concept in Russian/Kazakh/English linguistic consciousness made it possible to come to following conclusions:

The ‘father’ concept in Russian/Kazakh/English languages constitutes the complex mental formation in which it is possible to distinguish universal and ethnos-specific attributes. Attributes that coincided in Russian, Kazakh and English languages are as follows: closed person, love, family, inspirational person, respect, best friend. It is obvious that these perceptions are the constant universal components of the ‘father’ concept.

Study of cognitive structure of ‘mother’ concept in Russian/Kazakh/English allowed to detect following differences: in the Russian linguistic world view, father is represented as a man who granted the gift of life, strong person, head of family, master in his house, prop and stay of the home, teacher, upbringing his child; in Kazakh linguistic world view, father is represented as a well-regarded man who deserves respect and worship, support, inaccessible mountain, teacher and advisor, just and inspiring.

References

• Abildinova, Zh. B. (2019). Reprezentatsiya sotsiobiologicheskogo konsepta “mat'/ana/mother” v russkom, kazakhskom I anglijskom yazykakh (na materiale assotsiativnogo ehksperimenta) [Representation of sociobiological ‘mother’ concept in Russian/Kazakh/English languages (as exemplified in association experiment)]. Molodoj uchenyj, 50, 303-308. https:moluch.ru\archive\288\65314
• Babushkin, A. P., & Sternin, I. A. (2018). Kognitivnaya lingvistika i semaseologiya [Cognitive linguistics and semasiology]. Monografiya. Voronezh: Ritm.
• Bondarko, A. V. (1996). Teoriya funktsional'noj grammatiki: lokativnost', bytijnost', posessivnost', obuslovlenost' [Theory of functional grammar: locality, beingness, possessiveness, conditionality], Sankt Peterburg: Nauka.
• Deese, J. (1965). The structure of associations in language and thought. Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press.
• Dmitryuk, N. V., & Cherkasova, G. A., & Artykbayeva, V. I. (2016). Ehtnomental'nyi fenomen yadra yazykovogo soznaniya: assotsiativnye issledovaniya v Kazakhstane [Etnic mental phenomenon of linguistic consciousness core: associacion research in Kazakhstan]. Voprosy psikholingvistiki, 2(28), 132-149.
• Gudkov, D. B. (2017). Kody kul'tury i sistema estestvennogo yazyka [Culture codes and the natural language system]. Rusistika bez granits, 1, 64-74.
• Kobozeva, I. M. (2019). Lingvisticheskaya semantika [Linguistic semantics]. Moskva: URSS editorial.
• Krongauz, M. A. (2001). Semantika [Semantics]. Moskva: Rossijskij gosudarstvennyj gumanitarnyj universitet.
• Kubryakova, E. S., & Demyankov, V. Z. (2018). Kognitivnaya lingvistika [Cognitive linguistics]. Moscva: Moskovskij gosudarstvennyj universitet mezhdunarodnykh otnoshenij.
• Osgood, Ch. E. (1988). Psycholinguistics, Cross-cultural Universals, and Prospects for Mankind. Praeger Publishers.
• Shapilova, N. I. (2015). Integrativnoe kontseptual'noe issledovanie kak osnova sozdaniya kognitivnoj karty leksicheskoj edinitsy [Integrative conceptual analysis as a basis for the formation of cognitive map of a lexical unit]. Bulletin of Kemerovo State University, 4, 251-253.
• Tarasov, Ye. F. (2015). Jazyki soznanija [Language of consciousness]. Voprosy psikholingvistiki, 2(24), 12-19.
• Tasibekov, K. (2015). Situativnyj kazakhskij (Mir kazakhov) [Situational Kazakh (World of Kazakhs)], Almaty: Takeeva.
• Ufimtzeva, N. V. (2017). Regional'noe yazykovoe soznanie komi, russkikh, tatar: problemy vzaimovliyaniya [Regional language consciousness of Komi, Russians, Tatars: problems of mutual influence]. Monografiya. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo Kantsler.
• Zalevskaya, A. A. (1980). Slovo v leksikone cheloveka. Psikholingvisticheskoe issledovanie [A word in a person's vocabulary. Psycholinguistic research]. Voronezh: Izdatel'stvo Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta.
• Zolotova, N. O. (2005). Yadro mental'nogo leksikona cheloveka kak estestvennyj metayazyk [Core of human mental lexicon as natural metalanguage]. Аvtoreferat dissertatsii na soiskanie uchenoj stepeni doktora filologicheskikh nauk. Tver': Liliya Print.