Article
Article name	The Concept of “Dog” in Proverbs and Phraseological Units of the Russian and Persian Languages
Authors	Abdyramanova A.S. Candidate of Philology, Associate Professor, a.abdyramanova@yandex.ru Ashtiani Majdabadi Kohneh N.. Candidate of Philology, ashtianinarges60@gmail.com
Bibliographic description	Abdolmaleki K. S., Ashtiani Majdabadi Kohneh N. The Concept of “Dog” in Proverbs and Phraseological Units of the Russian and Persian Languages // Humanitarian Vector. 2020. Vol. 15, No. 5. PP. 62–69. DOI: 10.21209/1996-7853-2020-15-5-62-70.
Section	LINGUISTIC AND CONCEPTUAL WORLDVIEW
UDK	1751
DOI	10.21209/1996-7853-2020-15-5-62-69
Article type
Annotation	This study examines some ways to actualize the concept of “dog” in Russian and Persian language pictures of the world, including the aspects of lexical, cultural, metaphorical and religious relevance of zoomorphism “dog” in Russian and Iranian linguistic cultures. The goal of investigation is to compare the features of the concept of “dog” in Russian and Persian language pictures of the world. Research objectives: 1) to summarize data on the representation and interpretation of the word “dog” in the explanatory dictionaries of the languages studied; 2) to analyze the images of the dog in Russian and Persian proverbs and phraseological units. The relevance of the work consists in referring to this zoomorphic concept from the standpoint of comparing and defining the principles of updating the cognitive characteristics of the concept of “dog” in proverbs and phraseologisms in Russian and Persian, examining the general and specific characteristics of this concept, as well as the views of Russian and Iranian people in relation to this animal in two linguistic cultures. Chosen proverbs and phraseological units of the Russian and Persian languages with the “dog” component are the subject of the study. The object of study is the concept of “dog” in Russian and Persian. The language material for the study was compiled from explanatory dictionaries and collections of paroemias. Each proverb and phraseological unit is subjected to careful analysis, their classification is carried out. The scientific novelty of the study is a comparative study of the concept of “dog” in two linguistic cultures: Russian and Persian. Such studies have not yet been conducted in modern linguistic literature. As a result of the analysis, both a positive and negative attitude towards dogs was noted in both linguistic cultures. On the one hand, a person endows the dog with the positive qualities of fidelity and devotion, on the other hand, with aggressiveness and low value. In two cultures ‒ Russian and Iranian ‒ there are different superstitions, beliefs and prejudices associated with this animal. The obtained research results are of applied value. They can find application in linguodidactics, in particular, when teaching Russian as a foreign language at Iranian universities, as well as in lexicology and linguocultural courses.
Key words	concept, proverb, phraseologism, linguistic culture, comparative studies, linguistic picture of the world
Article information
References	1. Askoldov-Alekseev, S. A. Concept and word. Russian speech. New episode, issue II, pp.28–34, 1928. (In Rus.) 2. Alefirenko, N. F. Theory of language. Introductory course. M: Academia, 2006. (In Rus.) 3. Apresyan, U. D. Integral language description and systemic lexicography. Izbrannie trudi: in 2 vol. Vol. 2. M: Shkola “Yaziki russkoi kulturi”, 1995. (In Rus.) 4. Vang Zan R. Animals in Persian and Chinese Proverbs. Journal of Critical Literature Studies, issue 2, pp. 11–30, 2014. (In Persian) 5. Vorob’eva L. B. Russian stable comparisons in comparison with Lithuanian (specificity of imagery). Cand. sci. diss. Pskov, 2002. (In Rus.) 6. Gimadeyeva, A. A. Phraseological units with a component-names of animals in the Tatar and Russian languages and their lexicography. Cand. sci. diss. Kazan, 2011. (In Rus.) 7. Go Sin E. The corporal code in Chinese phraseology and its Russian correspondence. Cand. sci. diss. Moscow, 2004. (In Rus.) 8. Karasik, V. E. Language circle: personality, concepts, discourse. M: Gnozis, 2004. (In Rus.) 9. Kliuchevski V. O. Notebooks. Saint Peterburg: Propaganda, 2003. (In Rus.) 10. Moienoddini, M. Analysis of social themes of proverbs in Kerman. Kerman: Kerman Studies Center, 2002. (In Persian) 11. Mokienko, V. M. Stories about the origin of winged words and figurative expressions. M: ABC-classic; Avalon, 2005. (In Rus.) 12. Sun E. The synonymy of Russian phraseological units in comparison with the semantic analogues of the Chinese language. Cand. sci. diss. Moscow, 1998. (in Rus.) 13. Taukova, E. L. Comparative analysis of phraseological units of the Russian and English languages in functional-parametric mapping (based on animalistic phraseology). Cand. sci. diss. Moscow, 2004. (In Rus.) 14. Telia, V. N. Russian phraseology. Semantic, pragmatic and linguocultural aspects. M: Shkola “Yaziki russkoi kulturi’, 1996. (In Rus.) 15. Trubachev, O. N. The origin of the names of pets in Slavic languages. M: AN SSSR, 1960. (In Rus.) 16. Tian, Ts. Structural and semantic features of somatic phraseological units in Russian and Chinese. Cand. sci. diss. Volgograd, 2013. (In Rus.) 17. Zheng, G. Phraseology of the body in Russian through the eyes of a carrier of the Chinese linguistic culture. Cand. sci. diss. Moscow, 2013. (In Rus.) 18. Yakovleva, E. C. To the description of the Russian language picture of the world. Russian language abroad, no. 1/3, pp. 34–48, 1996. (In Rus.) 19. Sharifimogaddam, A., Nadimi, N. Semantic analysis of the use of animal names in the proverbs of the Lar dialect. Academic letter, issue 2, pp. 137–159, 2013. (In Persian) 20. Sharifimoghaddam, A., Nazari Robati F. Comparison of the semantic role of animals in the sacred books of the Koran and the Gospel of Matthew and John with an emphasis on “significance” and “subjectivity”. Knowledge of religions, no. 4, pp. 25–41, 2018. (In Persian)
Full article	The Concept of “Dog” in Proverbs and Phraseological Units of the Russian and Persian Languages
	0
	38