Role Of Metaphors In Development Of Communicative And Cultural Competence Of Schoolchildren

Only in the late 1970s such scientists as A. Richards, M. Black, M. Erickson and others considered the metaphor from the point of view of the phenomenon of thought metaphoricity (Richards, 1990).

Modern science considers metaphor from linguistic and cultural points of view. Even Cicero in his early writings defined metaphors as “such words that due to their similarity can be transferred from one object to the other (Cicero, 1996, p.231). Metaphor helps to define the features of specific object, phenomenon or action, to individualize it by distinguishing from the class to which it belongs.

There are a lot of definitions of the term “metaphor” in modern linguistics. The definition of metaphor from the Lingvisticheskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar (Linguistic encyclopaedical dictionary (LED)) (1990) is the following:

The metaphor is a trope or speech mechanism, which is to use the word specifying a certain class of items, phenomena, etc. for characterization or designation of object from the other class, or designation of another class of objects, similarly to this one in some way. (p.29)

Let’s get focused on the problem of metaphor correlation with different semantic types of words. According to Kozhina (1977), it could be argued that there is no such a language where each word would have only one meaning, and universality of the metaphor covers all types of human activity.

Linguists have developed several classifications, where the metaphors are distributed on the basis of various principles. Moskvin (2006), taking into account the diversity principle of plane of content and expression, heavy dependence on context and functional specifics of metaphorical unit, distinguishes three main types of classifications: semantic, structural and functional .

Semantic classification considers grouping of metaphors according to the theme-based belonging of the subject, i.e. in accordance with underlying theme-based correlation of comparison. It includes zoomorphic, anthropomorphic and spatial metaphors.

Structural classification is based on the principle of metaphor’s plane of expression, on the level belonging of the unit. It includes lexical metaphors, divided according to the part-of-speech belonging -- nominal, adjectival and verbal; according to the syntactic function -- predicative metaphors, according to the grammatical form of word-argument – genetive ones; according to the quantity of carriers of metaphorical image-- simple metaphor (single, one-segmented, isolated), where the plan of expression is represented by one unit, and extended metaphor , where the group of associatively connected units is a carrier of image.

Functional metaphor takes into account the teleological aspect, i.e. the purpose of usage in speech. Qualification of functional figurative units is determined by performing of expressive ( razmaznya (Russian: sap, tryapka (Russian: mush-head ) and aesthetic role in the context. Most often the metaphors are expressed by comparative phrases, phraseological units. This group includes nominatives (names of new concepts and phenomena); evaluative (for evaluation of human appearance or certain qualities) and decorative (aesthetic reflection of reality and tool for ornamentation of speech) metaphors (Moskvin, 2006);

Arutyunova (1990) distinguishes the following types of metaphors:

- nominative metaphor, used to name some class of items, and formed by replacing one lexical meaning with another one (zhuravl (Russian: Grus) – a bird, zhuravl (Russian: a swipe) – pole for raising water from the well).

- figurative metaphor , used to estimate an item or an image, relates to the reflection of figurative vision of a world by a person, who is a native speaker ( shlyapa (Russian: hat) – headgear, shlyapa (Russian: lubber) – a person ). Items, phenomena and terms represented by the figuratively used word are related to the physical characteristics of human with direct connection to human activity, or to one or other part of the body: ruki (Russian: hands) – diligence, golova (Russian: head) – intelligence, serdtse (Russian: heart) – kindness . Other linguistic units can be also characterized by figurativeness: two-component nominations ( kukushkiny slezy (Russian: Job's-tears) – Iris (plant) ), comparative and other phraseological units ( kak kaplya v more (Russian: as a drop in the ocean) – about a small amount of something ), comparative phrases ( poyet kak solovey (Russian: sings like a nightingale) ). All these units have two planes of content in semantics and associative way of expression.

The figurative-metaphorical vocabulary actively participates in development of linguistic view of the world.

Cognitive metaphor , which is formed as a result of conformation and object’s assignment of “unfamiliar” characteristics, features, states, discovered in another class of items. Cognitive metaphorization also helps to form vocabulary of person spirituality ( svetlaya golova (Russian: clear mind, solotoye serdtse (Russian: heart of gold ) (Arutyunova, 1990).

A human being perceives the world through his/her self-perception and his/her activity in it. As a result, such metaphorical expressions as goryachee setdtse (Russian: warm heart), ogon v grudi (Russian: fire in the blood, chuvstva vspyknuli (Russian: feelings burst into flame), fontan lyubvi (Russian: geyser of love, besserdechny chelovek (Russian: heartless person, etc. have appeared.

Classification of Gak (1988) has the principle of complete metaphorical transfer:

- two-sided metaphor, which entails both polysemy of source and synonymy of object metaphorization ( golova (Russian: head) -chimney );

- one-sided semasiological metaphor performs the nominative function in the language, and it is the only denomination of one or other realia ( nozhka stula (Russian: chair leg)) ;

-one-sided onomaseological metaphor, which is used only if the source of metaphorization is disambiguated ( volynit (Russian: to dawdle)) ;

- partial metaphorical transfer, when the forming of a new meaning is connected to the morphological changes of a word with addition of affixes ( zubets vilki (Russian: prong of fork)) .

According to Gak (1988), the process of formal metaphorization can occur on the level of morphology (word formation) and syntax (phrases). This demonstrates that the metaphor is directly related to the human cognitive activity. The results of subjective cognition of the world view are reflected in words and phrases. Which means that the process of metaphorization starts from the level of word (about people: lisa (Russian: fox), zayats (Russian: hare)) , then the level of phrases ( goryashchaya putevka (Russian: flaming tour)) in the meaning of “last minute tour”, acute issue ).

 Sklyarevskaya (1993) distinguishes motivated, syncretic and associative metaphors in the area of language metaphors.

Motivated metaphor is defined as “such language metaphor which has a semantic element, explicitly connecting the metaphorical meaning with the initial one” “introduction, the beginning of something” (p. 49).

Syncretic metaphor, in her view, is a language metaphor, formed as a result of mixing of sense perceptions. For example, blestyashchiy predmet (Russian: brilliant object) - blestyashchiy um (Russian: brilliant mind (visual image); gromkiy (Russian: loud ) zvuk (Russian: noize ) - gromkoe (Russian : loud , in the meaning of “big”) imya (Russian: name ) (acoustic image) ; sladky chai (Russian: sweet tea) – sladky golos (Russian: sweet voice) (taste image) ; aromat tsvetov (Russian: scent of flowers) – aromat proshlogo (Russian: scent of the past) (olfactive image) ; rykhly sneg (Russian: unstable snow) – rykhly roman (Russian: unstable affair) ; and in the area of physical processes, natural phenomena, different kinds of of natural forces: iskry plameny (Russian: sparks of flame) – iskry talanta (Russian: sparks of talent); struya vody (Russian: jet of water) – svezhaya struya (Russian: fresh jet of water, in the meaning of “fresh air”)in the literature.

Associative metaphor is another type of language metaphor, formed on the basis of ability of the mind to find similarities between any objects of reality. Sklyarevskaya (1993) thinks that associative metaphor takes a leading position in lexical system both quantitatively and in its influence on the ongoing semantic processes: For example, volynka (Russian : bagpipes) – troublesome, tiresome matter . Prolixity, monotony of sounding which characterize this musical instrument is the basis for metaphorical transfer in this example.

Thus, by analysing the works of scientists, the following conclusion can be made. First of all, the metaphorization comes down to the replacing of one descriptive (with many features) meaning by another: nozhka cheloveka (Russian: leg of person) and nozhka stula (Russian: leg of table, chair) ; list dereva (Russian: leaf of a tree and list bumagi (Russian : sheet of paper), etc. Basically we see the transfer of the name of one subject to another due to its similarity in function, appearance, feature, leading to the ambiguity. After metaphorization, the initial meaning of subject disappears, the newly-formed word obtains the independent meaning and is used as an established collocation. Thus, the metaphor is formed during the assignment of characteristics, features, states of one object to define another one from other class. For example, goryachii chai (Russian: hot tea) – liquid at the state of high temperature. Metaphors of this word-feature take the other meaning: goryachaya (silnaya) lybov ( (Russian: hot (passionate) love, goryachii (legkovozbuzhdaushchiysya) chelovek (Russian: hot-tempered (quickly provoked) person), goryachyee vremya (vremya napryazhennoy raboty) (Russian: hot minute (long time) , etc.

Figurative metaphor has a hidden comparison, a characterizing feature, and it arises as a result of understanding (vision) of objects belonging to reality by a person. The metaphor can be derived from the comparative phrase. Lines from Pushkin’s poem can be performed as an example:

(Burya) … to kak zver ona zavoyet, to zaplachet kak ditya ((Russian: (Storm) … Now they are like beasts a-growling, Now a-wailing like a child. Storm is wailing, growling. The metaphorical expression eliminates the identifying of the alive subject and is used as an established collocation, designating the features of noises of winter: ston, plach, ukanye, ropot, svist (Russian: groaning, wailing, hooting, grumbling, hissing). According to the conclusion of Bessarabova (1987), such metaphor’s conformation happens due to one specific explicated feature. The effect of similarity extends the area of application for predicative words: on the one side, the notion of the feature extends and depletes semantically, and on the other side, a much more subtle differentiation of features of another realia category occurs.

The action words, verb of motions are used to characterize non-subject entities. For example, in characteristic of the mental activity: mysl prishla, poyavilas, uvlekla, natolknula, vyskochila, uskolznula, vyletela, privela, pozvolila, zastyla (Russian: a thought came, appeared, drew attention, gave an idea, jumped out, slipped out), etc.; while expressing the feelings, emotions: lybov prishla, proshla, okutala, uvlekla, podvela (Russian: love came, flew, smothered, failed), etc.

The figurative metaphor performs an aesthetic function, however, the combining in it is irrational, but allowable – the combining creates the psychological tension, causes pleasure or disgust.

So, the metaphor is not only the means of language, seasoning the speech and giving the opportunity to make an image more understandable, but also it is a form of thinking, thinking figuratively, abstractly.

The metaphor in language education relates to the terms from the Speech Studies, consideration of which is an essential condition for the development of communicative and linguocultural competences of schoolchildren in process of teaching Russian as a foreign language. Metaphor, as a result of thinking, language and speech in general, has a limitless potential to be included in the linguistic view of the world of people, who represent the native speakers. Metaphor is functioning at different language levels studied at school: vocabulary, morphology, syntax, stylistics. Acquisition of the diversity of metaphor meanings helps schoolchildren to understand the unity of language and culture of people, who represent the native speakers, to ensure that there are many variants to create figurativeness. Metaphorized units with their illogical combination become clear for schoolchildren when they use them consciously in direct and figurative meanings while communicating. Conscious using of figurative units in speech will give the opportunity to form the new ones on the basis of initial understanding of semantics and grammar norms, which will undoubtedly help schoolchildren to develop their creativity.

The process of metaphorization by transfer of meanings requires seeking and defining of general essential features of objects, phenomena, actions, characterized by unusual perception. In order to define the essential features, it is necessary to understand the logics of similarity correlation in reality and determination of similarity, essential for it (subject) in creation of personally seasoned metaphor. The process of metaphorization of word, phrase intensifies the work of memory, imagination, logics, figurative thinking and perception. The metaphor seasons the speech, helps to instil caring attitude to a word, a language, it helps to develop communicative and linguocultural competences and develops the creative abilities of the language individual.

The creative potential of metaphor is particularly significant in the context of pedagogic and developing goals for the formation of the competent language individual, whose speech fully reflects his/her vision and feeling of linguistic and conceptual view of the world of people, who represent the native speakers.

From the methodological point of view, first of all the metaphor should be considered as basic means of speech development, forming the ability to conduct mental operation during cognition and familiarization with the world around and inside, as a result allowing the individual idea for specific situation to happen in the speech. The metaphor due to its figurativeness also acts as expressive means of speech for schoolchildren. It is well known that the expressiveness is determined by logic, accuracy and figurativeness.

A textbook is the primary means of teaching the Russian language. It is a model for implementation of one or other methodological system of teaching the second language. The textbook has the fundamental role in teaching of any discipline due to the fact that it regulates the content of studied discipline, outlines the ways of its digestion and usage in practical activities, guides joint work of the teacher and the taught. Any educational methodological system has its implementation in the textbook. The degree of knowledge depth and its firmness among schoolchildren, their manners depend also on their textbooks quality.

The content of textbook should help to develop schoolchildren’s skills to compare, analyse, compile language facts and phenomena; it should teach how to understand, analyse and create texts, to be mobile in different social groups; it should teach how to process information. The textbook should be focused on a new system of cultural values put forward by a new thinking and modern life of society on a complete objective interpretation of facts and phenomena, and on information on different areas of cultural life of people, who represent the native speakers. Classic texts of different styles and genres will play a positive role in achieving these goals, they provide not only the factual information, but also certain national culture, peculiarities of national world view, national mindset, in which the elements of national way of life, material and spiritual culture of a nation in its specific historical era are reflected; tasks assigned to the work with terms from the Speech Studies, with metaphorical linguistic units which are the basis for the development of communicative and linguocultural competences. A schoolchild with the textbook should get a systemic view of the nation culture in its language, of their dialectical interaction and development, which will help to form a modern cultural thought of schoolchildren.

The analysis of modern Russian language textbooks for the fifth grade

1. Authors T. Ladyzhenskaya, M. Baranov, L. Trostintsova et al. under the editorship of N. Shanskiy; 2. Authors M. Razumovskaya, S. Lvov, V. Kaspinos et al.; 3. Authors S. Lvova, V. Lvov has shown that mentioned textbooks do not quite correspond to the requirements of the Russian Federal Educational Standard (RFSS), the ethnicity of children is not taken into account. The development of modern language individual with tolerant mindset and respectful attitude towards languages and cultures of all nations living in the Russian Federation should become a strategic aspect of educational and methodological course for teaching Russian language starting from the first form. It is impossible to form a tolerant modern language individual without texts on national customs, traditions of Russians and the schoolchild’s own nation and representatives of other nationalities, integration of lessons on the Russian and native languages which help to understand the existing differences not only in language systems, but also in national cultures.

To enhance the implementation of communicative and linguocultural trends in teaching Russian language at school, it is necessary to make significant changes in human resources training, to develop general and special courses focused on culture, although this problem was partially solved when preparing learning kits for students.

The improvement and further development of linguocultural trends in Russian language, creation of complete and well-founded methodological system of interrelated study of language and culture, dialogue of cultures in order to form a modern language individual involve all stages of education including primary school and preschool education.