Designation of Ontological Space in Russian and English Folk Fairy-Tales from the Comparative Perspective

Abstract

The article reveals the linguocultural and comparative aspects of ontological space in English and Russian. The ontological space is viewed as a form of physical existence: the object of the world in fairy-tales exists in a certain environment (land, water, air) and lives in a particular place with geological specifics (depression, plain, mountain, peninsula, island) located in a certain direction (north, south, west or east). The investigation focuses on the comparative study of ontological space having the systemic organization of the lexical semantic field in English and Russian folktales. The structural parts of the field – its nucleus and periphery zone – are singled out by means of the comparative analysis. Isomorphic and allomorphic features are pinpointed. The nucleus is shaped by the “Geographical space” in English folktales and “Geological space” in Russian ones. The periphery of the lexical-semantic field “Ontological Space” in English and Russian linguocultures is presented identically: lexemes of “Natural Habitat” constitute the periphery. Such conclusions reflect the attitude of the English and Russians to the phenomenon analyzed. The investigation reveals the specifities of the ‘ontological space’ verbalized by nouns in both languages. A wide range of nomination variety is revealed. Resource data confirm the theoretical conclusions formed. Quantitative results are highlighted. The analysis of non-related languages permits to distinguish cross-linguistic specifics and outlines typological generalizations. This kind of approach is capable of producing further results in studying the folktales’ space within the world of unreality.

References

1. Bardamova E.A. 2012. Prostranstvo i vremja v jazykovoj kartine mira burjat [Space and Time in the Buryat Language Worldview]: Avtoref. … dis. d-ra filol. nauk. Moscow. (In Russ.)

2. Bogdanova S.Ju. 2011. Anglijskaja prostranstvennaja kartina mira: “vertikal’”, “vmeshhennost’” i “glubina” [Space Worldview in English: “vertical”, “placement” and “depth”]. Jazyk i prostranstvo: problemy ontologii i jepistemologii. Nezhin, Izd-vo NGU im. Nikolaja Gogolja, pp. 63–83. (In Russ.)

3. Boldyrev N.N. 2015. Antropocentricheskaja sushhnost’ jazyka v ego funkcijah, edinicah i kategorijah [Anthropological Essence of Language and Its Functions, Units and Categories]. Voprosy kognitivnoj lingvistiki, no. 1, pp. 5–12. (In Russ.)

4. Boldyrev N.N., Chistjakova E.V. 2015. Kategorizacija landshaftov i interpretacionnyj potencial landshaftnoj leksiki v sovremennom anglijskom jazyke [Categorization of Landscapes and Interpretation of Landscape Denoting Lexis Potencies in Present-day English]. Tambov, Izdatel’skij dom TGU im. G.R. Derzhavina. (In Russ.)

5. Dem’yankov V.Z. 2016. O kognitsii, kul’ture i tsivilizatsii v transfere znanii [On cognition, culture and civilization in knowledge transfer]. Voprosy kognitivnoi lingvistiki, no. 49, pp. 5–9. (In Russ.)

6. Kubryakova E.S. 2004. Yazyk i znanie. Na puti polucheniya znanii o yazyke: chasti rechi s kognitivnoi tochki zreniya. Rol’ yazyka v poznanii mira [Language and knowledge. Towards learning the language: parts of speech with cognitive point of view. The role of language in the knowledge of the world]. Moscow, Yazyki slavyanskoi kul’tury. (In Russ.)

7. Levitsky A.E. 2016. Antropotsentrizm kak osnova kognitivno-diskursivnogo analiza edinits yazyka [Anthropocentrism as the basis of cognitive-discursive analysis of language units]. Kognitivnye issledovaniya yazyka, no. XXVII, pp. 184–191. (In Russ.)

8. Levitsky A.E. 2012. Prostranstvo kak ob”ekt issledovaniya s pozitsii lingvokognitiologii [Space as an object of study in linguocognitive point of view]. Kognitivnye issledovaniya yazyka, no. 12, pp. 692–703. (In Russ.)

9. Molchanova G.G. 2004. Antroponimicheskaja paremija kak ikonicheskij znak i kul’turologicheskij priznak [Anthroponomical Paremiology as Iconic Sign and Cultural Token]. Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 19: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, no. 4, pp. 86–96. (In Russ.)

10. Nikul’shina T.N. 2014. Skazochnyi khronotop: sopostavitel’nyi aspekt izucheniya (na materiale angliiskogo i ukrainskogo yazykov) [Fairy-tale chronotope: a comparative aspect of learning (based on English and Ukrainian languages] In Kolesov V.V., Pimenova M.V., Terkulov V.I. Lingvistika XXI veka [Linguistics in 21st Century]. Moscow, FLINTA, pp. 534–544. (In Russ.)

11. Nikul’shina T.N. 2013. Leksiko-semanticheskoe pole “prostranstvo”: sopostavitel’nyi aspekt izucheniya (na materiale angliiskikh i ukrainskikh skazok) [The lexical-semantic field “space”: a comparative aspect of the study (based on English and Ukrainian fairy tales)]. Vestn. Novosibir. un-ta. Ser. Lingvistika i mezhkul’turnye kommunikatsii, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 39–46. (In Russ.)

12. Svoikina L.F. 2014. Vyrazhenie prostranstva v kitaiskoi yazykovoi kartine mira [The explication of space with the Chinese language worldview] In S.A. Moiseeva, L.G. Petrova Problemy lingvistiki i lingvodidaktiki. NIU “BelGU”, Belgorod. Vol. II, pp. 232–239. (In Russ.)

13. Skrynnikova I.V. 2004. Verbalizatsiya kontsepta “Prostranstvennaya lokalizatsiya” v angloyazychnoi lingvokul’ture [Verbalization of the concept of “Spatial Localization” in English-language linguistic culture]: avtoref. diss. …kand. filol. nauk. Volgograd. (In Russ.)

14. Shamne N.L. 2009. Universal’nye kharakteristiki kategorii prostranstva i yadernye sredstva ikh reprezentatsii v yazyke [Universal characteristics of the category of space and core means of their representation in the language]. Croatica et Slavica Iadertina. V. Zadar, pp. 265–279. (In Russ.)