Article
Article name Zoomorphic Metaphors in the Kyrgyz Language
Authors Akmatova A.B. Postgraduate Student, nazik131090@gmail.com
Bibliographic description
Section LINGUISTIC AND CONCEPTUAL WORLDVIEW
UDK 811.512.154
DOI 10.21209/1996-7853-2020-15-1-79-83
Article type
Annotation This article provides a linguistic analysis of zoomorphisms of the Kyrgyz language. The modern anthropological paradigm of language knowledge involves an appeal to metaphorical models that describe a person on the basis of different types of figurative assimilation, comparisons and identities. A universal method of nomination, a metaphor based on a stereotypical association of similarity, at the same time includes subjective and objective factors: collective and individual assessments of the signified. The object of the study is zoomorphisms that characterize a person in the Kyrgyz language. The subject of the study is zoomorphic metaphors, which serve as one of the ways to express the estimated characteristics of a person in the aspect of the Kyrgyz linguistic world view. The relevance of the study is to appeal to zoomorphisms – assimilations and comparisons based on the material of the Kyrgyz language. A comprehensive description of zoomorphisms is carried out for the first time in the Kyrgyz language, and the specificity of their use in various types of text is determined, which is the scientific novelty of the work. The article uses the method of component analysis when dividing into connotative semes and the values of metaphorical names; an interpretative method in identifying the peculiarities of zoomorphisms, when revealing the symbolism of a particular zoomorphic image based on metaphorical names; descriptive research method. By determining the connotative value (positive/negative rating) in the name of the animals and transmitting the characteristics of the person (positive, negative), they can be divided into lexical and semantic groups, their center is formed by the external actions and internal states of the person: his behavior, character, relationships in society, communicative ability, physical ability, etc. Zoomorphic code is manifested in vocabulary, phraseology, proverbs, language sayings; zoomorphisms contain a connotative meaning associated with the conceptualization of the inner and outer world of man. The study of connotative meaning makes it possible to determine their national specificity.
Key words zoomorphism, figurative comparison, linguistic culture code, animalistic code, connotative meaning, symbol
Article information
References 1. Akmatova, A. B. Zoomorphic comparisons in the works by T. Kasymbekov “Syngan kylych” (“Broken sword”). Humanitarian vector, pp. 81–85, no. 1, 2019. (In Rus.) 2. Akmatova, A. B. The connotative meanings of zoomorphisms in the Kyrgyz language. Conceptual studies in the aspect of linguoculture: on the 55th anniversary of the Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences Bolotbek Mekenovich Akmatov / ed. by M. V. Pimenova. St. Petersburg, 2018: 93–98. (Series “Conceptual research”, Issue 22). (In Rus.) 3. Arutyunova, N. D. Language metaphor (syntax and vocabulary). Linguistics and poetics. M: Science, 1979: 147–173. (In Rus.) 4. Vinogradov, V. V. Pushkin’s style. M: Hud. literatura, 1945. (In Rus.) 5. Gak, V. G. Metaphor: universal and specific. Metaphor in language and text: Sat. articles. M: Nauka, 1988: 11–26. (In Rus.) 6. Gachev, G. D. About national pictures of the world. M: Nauka, 1967. (In Rus.) 7. Ilyukhina, N. A. Image in the lexical-semantic aspect. Samara: SamSU, 1998. (In Rus.) 8. Kamenskaya, V. M. Axiological aspect of stable zoomorphic comparisons and zoomorphic paremias of the Spanish language: dis. ... cand. filol. sciences. Voronezh, 2008. (In Rus.) 9. Lakoff, J., Johnson, M. Metaphors we live by. M.: LCI, 2008. (In Rus.) 10. Lapshina, M. N. Cognitive-derived semantic derivation (based on English): dis. ... doctor. filol. sciences. St. Petersburg, 1996. (In Rus.) 11. MANAS: Kyrgyz heroic epic. According to options by Sagymbaya Orozbak uulu and Sayakbay Karalaev. Bektenov, Z., Nanaev, K., comp. Bishkek, 1999. (In Kyrg.) 12. Maslova, V. A., Pimenova, M. V. Codes of linguistic culture. 3rd ed. M: Flint, Nauka, 2018. (In Rus.) 13. Moldobaev, I. B. The epos “Manas” as a source of studying the spiritual culture of the Kyrgyz people. Frunze, 1989. (in Rus.) 14. Musaev, K. M. Turkic vocabulary in comparative coverage. АN SSSR. In-t yazykoznaniya. M: Nauka, 1975. (In Rus.) 15. Ogdonova, Ts. Ts. Zoomorphic vocabulary as a fragment of the Russian linguistic picture of the world: author. Cand. sci. diss. abstr.Irkutsk, 2000. (In Rus.) 16. Pavlovich, N. V. Language of images: paradigms of images in Russian poetic language. M: RAN, In-t r.ya, 1995. (In Rus.) 17. Peybonen, R. Zoomorphic metaphor that characterizes a person in Russian and Estonian colloquial speech. Tartu, 2013. (In Rus.) 18. Ryzhkina, O. A. Systemic study of zoomorphisms in the Russian language (in comparison with English). Cand. sci. dis. Novosibirsk, 1979. (In Rus.) 19. Sviontkovskaya, S. V. The functions of zoomorphisms in the formation of the pragmatic potential of a literary text (based on the material of Spanish and English). Cand. sci. diss. abstr. Pyatigorsk, 2000. (In Rus.) 20. Sklyarevskaya, G. N. Metaphor in the language system. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1993. (In Rus.) 21. Telia, V. N. Secondary nomination and its types. Language nomination. M: Nauka, 1977: 129–221. (In Rus.)
Full articleZoomorphic Metaphors in the Kyrgyz Language
0
30