MODUS CATEGORIZATION OF ERRONEOUS COGNITIONS IN THE ENGLISH WORLDVIEW
https://doi.org/10.51955/2312-1327_2023_3_90
Abstract
The study discusses linguistic categorization of erroneous cognitions verbalizedby linguistic units like mistake, make a mistake, error, blunder, make a blunder, gaffe, make agaffe, wrong, get something wrong, make a wrongdoing, wrongness. Of central concern in theresearch is the issue of the modus (interpretative) character of the concept MISTAKE that servesas the conceptual basis of the modus category of erroneous cognitions. The paper highlights theissue that the concept MISTAKE as a conceptually complex knowledge structure activates twotypes of knowledge representation: the primary knowledge representation of the events in thephysical world (Тelling him the truth)) and the secondary evaluative representation of theknowledge once verbalized (was a mistake). The paper focuses on the interpretative function ofnegative evaluative interpretation that serves as the conceptual basis of the modus category oferroneous cognitions. The author comes to the conclusion that the modus category of erroneouscognitions serves to interpret the secondary representation of knowledge from the perspective ofthe negative evaluation conceptualized as ‘an action that produces a result that is not intended.’
The modus function of the negative evaluative interpretation serves as the conceptual basis of the modus category of erroneous cognitions. The findings obtained may be helpful for further study of the processes of evaluative interpretation and evaluative categorization as an integral part of human cognition.
About the Author
T. I. Semenova
Irkutsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Tatiana I. Semenova, Doctor of Sciences (Philology), Professor
1, Karl Marx Street Irkutsk, 664003
References
1. Apresyan Yu. D. (2004). Interpretatsionnye glagoly: semanticheskaya struktura i svoistva. Russkii yazyk v nauchnom osveshchenii. 2004. 1(7): 5-22. (in Russian)
2. Apresyan Yu. D., Apresyan V. Yu., Babaeva E. E. [et al]. (2004). Novyi ob"yasnitel'nyi slovar' sinonimov russkogo yazyka. 2-e izd., ispr. i dop. Moscow; Vena: Yazyki slavyanskoi kul'tury, 2004. 1488 p. (in Russian)
3. Arutyunova N. D. (1999). Yazyk i mir cheloveka. 2-e izd., ispr. Moscow: Yazyki russkoi kul'tury, 1999. 896 p. (in Russian)
4. BNC – British National Corpus. Available at: http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.u (accessed 13 April.2023).
5. Boldyrev N. N. (2011). Interpretiruyushchaya funktsiya yazyka. Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 33(248): 11-16. (in Russian)
6. Boldyrev N. N. (2019). Yazyk i sistema znanii. Kognitivnaya teoriya yazyka. Moscow: Izdatel'skii Dom YASK, 2019. 480 p. (in Russian)
7. Borisenko T. V. (2022). Organizatsiya struktury kontseptual'noi kategorii. Kazanskii lingvisticheskii zhurnal. 5(4): 523–534. (in Russian)
8. Chase H. S. (2003). Come easy – Go easy. Moscow: Airis-press, 2003. 384 p.
9. Cheever J. (2003). Selected Prose. Moscow: Izd-vo «MenedzheR», 2003. 304 p.
10. Cheif U. L. (1983). Pamyat' i verbalizatsiya proshlogo opyta. Novoe v zarubezhnoi lingvistike. Vyp. XII. Prikladnaya lingvistika. 35-73. (in Russian)
11. Dem'yankov V. Z. (1994). Kognitivnaya lingvistika kak raznovidnost' interpretiruyushchego podkhoda. Voprosy yazykoznaniya. 4: 17-33. (in Russian)
12. Kövecses Z. (2006). Language, Mind and Culture. Oxford, 2006. 397 p.
13. Kubryakova E. S. (2004). Yazyk i znanie. Na puti polucheniya znanii o yazyke: chasti rechi s kognitivnoi tochki zreniya. Rol' yazyka v poznanii mira. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoi kul'tury, 2004. 556 p. (in Russian)
14. Kubryakova E. S. (2012). V poiskakh sushchnosti yazyka: Kognitivnye issledovaniya. Moscow: Znak, 2012. 203 p. (in Russian)
15. Kustova G. I. (2004). Tipy proizvodnykh znachenii i mekhanizmy yazykovogo rasshireniya. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoi kul'tury, 2004. 472 p. (in Russian)
16. Lakoff G. (1987). Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1987. 614 p.
17. Langacker R. W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. 562 p.
18. Lee D. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Oxford, New York: OUP, 2004. 223 p.
19. LLA – Longman Language Activator. Harlow: Longman Group UK Limited, 1997. 1587 p.
20. Losev A. F. (1981). O ponyatii yazykovoi valentnosti. Izvestiya Akademii nauk SSSR. Seriya literatury i yazyka. 40(5):
21. 403-412. (in Russian)
22. MEDAL – Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners. Available at: http://www.macmillandictionary.com/ (accessed 08 October 2022).
23. Paducheva E. V. (2004). Dinamicheskie modeli v semantike leksiki. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoi kul'tury, 2004. 609 p. (in Russian)
24. Pavilenis R. I. (1983). Problema smysla: sovremennyi logiko-filosofskii analiz yazyka. Moscow: Mysl', 1983. 286 p. (in Russian)
25. Ryabtseva N. K. (2005). Yazyk i estestvennyi intellekt. Moscow: Academia, 2005. 639 p. (in Russian)
26. Semenova T. I. (2007). Lingvisticheskii fenomen kazhimosti: monografiya. Irkutsk: IGLU, 2007. 237 p. (in Russian)
27. Shatunovskii I. B. (1996). Semantika predlozheniya i nereferentnye slova (znachenie, kommunikativnaya perspektiva, pragmatika). Moscow: Yazyki russkoi kul'tury, 1996. 400 p. (in Russian)
28. Shaw I. (2005). Nightwork. Saint Petersburg: Antologiya, KARO, 2005. 448 p.
29. Trub V. M. (2003). O raznoobraznykh tipakh otkloneniya ot istiny (shutka, oshibka, sensornye deviatsii, umolchanie). Mezhdu lozh'yu i fantaziei. 426-441. (in Russian)
30. Zaliznyak A. A. (2006). Mnogoznachnost' v yazyke i sposoby ee predstavleniya. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskikh kul'tur, 2006. 671 p. (in Russian)
31. Zolotova G. A., Onipenko N. K., Sidorova M. Yu. (2004). Kommunikativnaya grammatika russkogo yazyka. 2-e izd. Moscow: IRYA RAN: MGU, 2004. 544 p. (in Russian)
Review
For citations:
Semenova T.I. MODUS CATEGORIZATION OF ERRONEOUS COGNITIONS IN THE ENGLISH WORLDVIEW. Crede Experto: transport, society, education, language. 2023;(3):90-102. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.51955/2312-1327_2023_3_90
Views:
39
JATS XML
Email this article 