The article discusses the most important provisions of comparative linguocultural studies which are the basis of the phraseology of unrelated languages: 1) identification of the universal and idioethnic features of the figurative semantics of phraseological units; 2) the study of the phraseological picture of the world, including its structure and constituent elements; 3) identification of the degree of semantic equivalence of phraseological units denoting similar realities (full and partial equivalents, equivalent units); 4) the study of the laws of transfer of figurative meanings of phraseological units into a foreign language / foreign cultural environment, etc. These provisions are studied on the Russian and Chinese collocations containing numeric components, in particular
Keywords: Phraseologyunrelated languageslinguoculturologysemanticsnumerical symbols
Currently, the study of the relationship between language and culture is one of the most relevant areas of extralinguistics, since its results are important for solving many controversial issues in linguoculturology, the theory of intercultural communication, translation studies, etc. (Álvarez de la Granja, 2008; Kramsch, 2004; Naciscione, 2010). An in-depth study of the issues allowed for identification of a number of independent areas within which the issue of relationship between language and culture was solved using methodological principles (Burger et al., 2007; Samata, 2014). They are ethnolinguistics and linguoculturology whose object is culturally marked language units reflecting the perception of the world by representatives of ethnic groups.
It can be assumed that comparative linguistic and cultural studies on phraseology of genetically unrelated languages are crucial, since they allow us to determine patterns of figurative interpretation of the world by their native speakers, establish the degree of similarity and differences in the encyclopedic knowledge behind the phraseological units. One of the promising areas of comparative linguoculturology is the study of ethnocultural originality of phraseological units which involves a number of issues:
1. Identification of universal and idioethnic features of the figurative semantics of phraseological units (FU), similarities and differences in their internal forms. The figurativeness is the most obvious basis for comparing phraseological systems of different languages, since it is inherent in most phraseological units. The study of the figurative basis of phraseological units of two or more languages involves the identification of patterns of reflection of cultural codes (anthropomorphic, zoomorphic, subject, numerical, etc.) in the internal form of FUs.
2. The study of the phraseological world picture (FWP), including its structure and constituent elements, is closely connected with this issue. One of the most important characteristics of FWP is the dominance of figurative-expressive components, which determines the nomination of realities by referring to life situations, attitudes, stereotypes, etc., which are of particular importance for representatives of ethnic groups. Therefore, studies of basic phraseological concepts that reflect the specifics of the ethnic worldview, its axiological priorities, psychological features, etc. are crucial.
3. Identification of the degree of semantic equivalence of phraseological units denoting similar realities, identification of full and partial equivalents and nonequivalent units. This issue has been studied within traditional linguistics, however, in terms of comparative linguoculturology, the equivalence of phraseological units is studied at the level of denotative meanings and figurative and connotative semantics. Special attention is paid to the coincidence of the internal form of phraseological units in different languages, primarily unrelated ones.
4. The study of the laws of transfer of figurative semantics of phraseological units into a foreign / foreign cultural environment. Researchers deal with translation. It is important to study the mechanisms of correlation of cultural codes and realities of different ethnic groups reflected in the internal form of phraseological units; identification of a “matrix” through which universal, typical cultural images and symbols can be explained. It is necessary to study this problem within linguodidactics and translation studies, find appropriate ways to translate figurative meanings of phraseological units.
The article focuses on a comparative analysis of Russian and Chinese phraseological units, including numerals, in particular
Purpose of the Study
The purpose is to identify possibilities of a comparative linguocultural study of phraseological systems of unrelated languages based on Russian and Chinese phraseological units, identify the universal and specific components of the cultural semantics of these units.
Linguistic methods aimed at identifying the ethnocultural specifics of Russian and Chinese phraseological units with a numerical component were used: the methods of comparative linguistics were used to identify interlanguage correspondences and formal and semantic similarities and differences: the methods of linguoculturology were used to analyze the internal form of phraseological units and describe cultural components of figurative semantics. The methods of systemic semantics were used to analyze definitions of linguistic units, the components of their meanings, etc.
The analysis identified general and specific linguocultural features of FUs. In Russian culture, the number is of particular importance: pre-Christian and Christian symbols and concepts are penetrated with trinity. The following religious ideas are the basis of the image “3”: 1) The Holy Trinity: God the Father, God the Son and the Holy Spirit; 2) three magicians brought gifts to the born Jesus in Nazareth; 3) Jesus Christ rose on the third day; 4) Apostle Peter denied Jesus three times; 5) The Three-Handed – the miraculous icon of the mother of God, etc. In Chinese culture, the number "3" is considered mysterious and sacred, because it is associated with the most important religious beliefs, such as 1）三教（san jiao) – three teachings: Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism (Fedorov, 2008; Telia, 2006); 2) 三藏 (san jiao) – the totality of all three sections of Buddhist canonical books: sutras, vinaya, sastra; 3) 三宝 (san bao) – three treasures: Buddha, his teaching – dharma, monastic community – sangha; 4) 三清 (san qing) – three supreme deities in Taoism: 元始天尊 (yuan shi tian zun), 太上老君 (tai shang lao jun), 灵宝天尊 (ling bao tian zun). In addition, the number "3" plays an exceptional role in the formation of ideas about the etiquette, natural forces, territorial-administrative units (provinces), etc.:礼让三分 (li rang san fen) be more polite than others three times, 三才者，天地人 “There are three forces in space: heaven, earth and humanity”, 三光者，日月星 “Three lights: the sun, moon and stars”,三纲者，君臣义，父子亲，夫妇顺 "Three principles of life" 三湘 (san xiang) Hunan Province 三晋 (san jin) "Shanxi Province" and others.
The analysis of Russian and Chinese phraseological units with the components
1. "Much." In Russian, this meaning is represented by such phraseological units as
2. "A little." In Russian, this meaning is represented by such phraseological units as
3. "Specific amount." The numeral
Phraseologisms with the
In addition, the numeral
1. Collocations with the numeral
2. Collocations with the numeral
3. Collocations with the numeral
4. Collocations with the numeral
5. Collocations with the numeral
6. Collocations with the numeral
7. Collocations with the numeral
8. Collocations with the numeral
9. Collocations with the numeral
10. Collocations with the numeral
As a result of the analysis, we can conclude that the symbolic semantics of the numerical code as a universal phenomenon is represented in Russian and Chinese linguocultures in a specific way. Numerative phraseological units express idioethnic properties of the national culture and similarities of different cultures; while the specificity is associated with the uniqueness of their meanings, the similarity indicates the coincidence of certain fragments of the world picture of unrelated languages. The Chinese numeral san (“three”) has a greater phrase-forming potential than its Russian equivalent; the corresponding Chinese phraseological units differ in semantics, indicating the most diverse realities. Chinese numerative phraseological units reflect ethnocultural features of the numerical code wider, including its symbolic meanings related to philosophical, religious, everyday and other areas.
- Álvarez de la Granja, M. (ed.) (2008). Fix Expressions in Cross-Linguistic Perspective. A Multilingual and Multidisciplinary Approach. Verlag, Dr. Kovac.
- Burger, H., Dobrovol′skij, D., Kuhn, P., & Norrick, N. (eds.) (2007). Phraseology: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, vols. 1–2. de Gruyter.
- Di, Y., & Kiseleva, L. A. (2016). Phraseologisms with a numerical component in Russian and Chinese: a linguocultural aspect. Philolog. sci. Quest. of theory and pract., 6(60), Part 2, 75–77.
- Fedorov, A. I. (2008). Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Literary Language: approx. 13,000 phraseological units (3rd ed.). AST.
- Juan, C. (2010). Sympathy and antipathy to the numbers in Russian and Chinese cultures. Bull. of Moscow State Reg. Univer. Ser. Linguistics, 3, 138–144.
- Kramsch, S. (2004). Language, thought and culture. In A. Davies, & C. Elder (Ed.), The Handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp. 235–265). Blackwell Publishers.
- Naciscione, A. (2010). Stylistic Use of Phraseological Units in Discourse. John Benjamins Publ. Company.
- Samata, S. (2014). Cultural Memory of Language. Bloomsbury Acad.
- Telia, V. N. (2006). The Great phraseological dictionary of the Russian language Meanings. Use. Cultural Commentary. AST-Press Book.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
31 October 2020
Print ISBN (optional)
Sociolinguistics, linguistics, semantics, discourse analysis, translation, interpretation
Cite this article as:
Kiseleva, L. A., & Di, Y. (2020). Linguocultural Basis Of Comparative Studies Of Phraseology Of Unrelated Languages. In & D. K. Bataev (Ed.), Social and Cultural Transformations in the Context of Modern Globalism» Dedicated to the 80th Anniversary of Turkayev Hassan Vakhitovich, vol 92. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 555-561). European Publisher. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2020.10.05.74