home
Developmental psychology
Phraseology as a manifestation of the linguocultural community of native speakers and the linguistic picture of the world. Linguistic and cultural community as an object of linguistic and cultural studies

Phraseology as a manifestation of the linguocultural community of native speakers and the linguistic picture of the world. Linguistic and cultural community as an object of linguistic and cultural studies

20.09.2019

Cultural-national. the originality of phraseological units serves as an object of study of comparative idioethnic. directions, cat. proceeds mainly from tracking in terms of expression of phraseological units that are close in meaning, differences in the composition of word components, especially culturally marked ones.

In r/ya, the concept “far away” is phraseologically embodied in such images as signs on horns (on the middle of nowhere), where Makar did not drive calves, far away. "Far" - space undeveloped by the brow + in Russian. mentality, this concept is associated with the "foreign" space, where the evil spirit lives. Linguoculturology is human-oriented. , or rather, on the cultural factor in the language and on the linguistic factor in the forehead. This means that the LHK property is actually anthropological. paradigms of the science of the forehead, the center of gravity of which is the phenomenon of K. Culture - a kind of historical. the memory of the people. And language, thanks to its cultural function. , keeps it, providing a diplog to the generation not only from the past to the present, but also from the present to the future. Postulate of cultural-conceptual correlation. Language system. meaning correlates in interpreted mode with the cultural competence of native speakers. Osbuyu role in broadcast K-nat. self-consciousness of the people plays phraseological. language composition. Idiom to beat the buckets. Baklushi - non-equivalent, nat. -marked vocabulary, in meaning. The words imprinted the subject K. Play the fool, spit on the ceiling, count the crows. Phrase-zm acquired the role of cult stereotypes. Designation of idleness through images of active labor, but unproductive. Actions become the stereotypical antipode of the specified K. installation. Presence of "-" connotation. "Imposition" by the language of K-nat. Self-consciousness. Fr. combinations: girlish memory, female logic. A woman has full hair, and her mind is short: the ordinary philosophy of R. people. It is precisely those figurative expressions that are associated with K-nat that are fixed and phraseologised in the language. standards, stereotypes, and which, when used in speech, reproduce character. mentality. Models reflecting modern. mentality of one or another linguocultural. community is not yet a noun. The repertoire of culturally significant landmarks is sometimes even contradictory. Husband in the house that the head/cross on the church. The husband is the head and the wife is the neck. Most units of phraseological. Holy Island has K-nat. originality. Characteristic d / myth of trichotomy. model of the structure of the cosmos of the predst-th concept of white light, to be in the seventh heaven, to fall into hell, the earthly world, the underworld and the underworld.

You can also find information of interest in the scientific search engine Otvety.Online. Use the search form:

Basic concepts of linguoculturology

Cultural linguistics as a special field of science has given rise to many productive concepts in modern linguistics. The most important concepts for this lecture course are those with which cultural information can be presented in linguistic units: linguocultureme, language of culture, cultural text, context of culture, subculture, linguocultural paradigm, precedent names of culture, key names of culture, cultural universal, cultural competence, cultural inheritance, cultural traditions, cultural process, cultural attitudes and others. The conceptual apparatus of science also includes such terms as mentality, mentality, ritual, custom, sphere of culture, type of culture, civilization, paganism and some others.

The most important concepts for this collective work are those with which cultural information can be represented in linguistic units: cultural semes, cultural background, cultural concepts and cultural connotations.

Culture constants(that is, stable and permanent (although not immutable) concepts that contain the special values of culture; the constants of Russian culture, by all accounts, are most fully represented in the dictionary of Yu. S. Stepanov ( soul, will, melancholy, Russian dance, etc.)

Cultural Semes- smaller and more universal than the word, semantic units, semantic features. For example, the words “samovar”, “bast shoes”, “schi” we can distinguish the following cultural semes: bast shoes - peasant shoes woven from bast; samovar - a vessel with a firebox inside, for Russian tea drinking; cabbage soup - a dish of chopped cabbage, Russian food.

cultural background- characteristics of nominative units (words and phraseological units) denoting the phenomena of social life and historical events - disappeared as a Swede near Poltava, red-brown(about the national patriots of Russia).

The two types of cultural information described above are localized in the denotation, they are relatively well studied by linguistic and regional studies.

cultural concepts- the names of abstract concepts, therefore, cultural information is attached here to the significat, i.e., the conceptual core (the most common and practically universally recognized is the definition of a cultural concept proposed by Yu. S. Stepanov: “A concept is like a clot of culture in the human mind; , in the form of which culture enters the mental world of a person.And, on the other hand, the concept is something through which a person - an ordinary, ordinary person, not a "creator of cultural values" - enters culture himself, and in some cases influences her"

cultural heritage- transfer of cultural values, information significant for culture.

cultural traditions- the totality of the most valuable elements of social and cultural heritage.

cultural process- interaction of elements belonging to the system of cultural phenomena.

cultural space- the form of existence of culture in the minds of its representatives. The cultural space is correlated with the cognitive space (individual and collective), because it is formed by the totality of all individual and collective spaces of all representatives of a given cultural-national community. For example, Russian cultural space, English cultural space, etc.

Linguocultural paradigm- this is a set of linguistic forms that reflect ethnically, socially, historically, scientifically, etc. deterministic categories of worldview. The linguocultural paradigm combines concepts, categorical words, precedent names of culture, etc. Language forms are the basis of the paradigm, which is, as it were, “stitched” with meaningful representations.

Linguoculturology distinguishes between the spheres of material and spiritual cultures. The area of material culture is the environment in which national personalities exist. One of the aspects of the study of Russian material culture is the cultural-historical commentary. Thus, the general paradigm of the names of the Russian monetary system can be represented as follows: penny, money, kopeck, penny, altyn, hryvnia, hryvnia, ruble, chervonets.

The aradigmatic linguoculturological value of units of the class "designation of monetary units" is manifested in proverbs and sayings that characterize the assessment of situations, behavior, certain character traits of a Russian person: Across the sea, a heifer is a half, but I’m transporting a ruble; The rich and the stingy ruble cries, and the thrifty and the wretched half jumps, The caftan is golden, and the darling is a half; A penny saves a ruble; A labor penny lives forever; His penny will burn through the beggar's hand; Not a penny, but fame is good; Altyn thief is hanged, honored with a half; There will be no mind - there will be no ruble. Through the paradigm of monetary relations, certain features of the Russian national personality, its spiritual world, its ethical, aesthetic and other aspects are revealed.

mentality(Russified version mentality - intellectual world of a person SIS);- this is a worldview in the categories and forms of the native language, which combine the intellectual, spiritual and volitional qualities of the national character in its typical manifestations. The concept of a given culture is recognized as a unit of mentality (see Dictionary of Concepts of Russian Culture by Yu. S. Stepanov).

According to A.Ya. Gurevich, mentality is a way of seeing the world, it is by no means identical to ideology, which deals with well-thought-out systems of thought, and in many ways, perhaps the main thing, remains unreflected and logically unidentified. Mentality is not philosophical, scientific or aesthetic systems, but that level of social consciousness at which thought is not separated from emotions, from latent habits and methods of consciousness. So, mentality is that invisible minimum of the spiritual unity of people, without which the organization of any society is impossible. The mentality of the people is actualized in the most important cultural concepts of the language.

The thought of mentality arises only when we meet something that is not like ourselves, and therefore the mentality can only be "tested" from the outside. Obviously, the question "What is your mentality?" - is meaningless, since the mentality cannot be reflected and formulated by its carrier. This mentality differs from "opinions", "teachings", "ideologies".

German mentality. (mindset, way of thinking, SIS) - a category that reflects the internal organization and differentiation of mentality, mentality, mentality of the people; mentalities are psycho-linguistic intellects of multi-scale linguo-cultural communities. As the analysis of scientific literature shows, mentality is understood as a certain deep structure of consciousness, depending on sociocultural, linguistic, geographical and other factors. Features of national mentalities are manifested only at the level of a linguistic, naive, but not a conceptual picture of the world (Yu.D. Apresyan, E.S. Yakovleva, O.A. Kornilov). Each of them is a unique subjective representation of reality, which includes objects of both direct and indirect reality, which includes such components of culture as myths, traditions, legends, religious beliefs, etc.

The so-called ethnic jokes about Russians, Germans, Ukrainians, Chukchi, etc. are based on taking into account the mental attitudes and stereotypes of peoples. In the notes of Acad. M.A.Gasparova has a curious observation of how representatives of different ethnic groups react to the language mistakes of a foreign interlocutor: joyfully begins to adopt your mistakes "

What is mentality or mentality? An unexpected answer was found in one of the newspaper notes - a letter from a reader to the editor. Our compatriot, while in Germany, once went into a cafe. After some time, an elderly German entered the same place. And although there were enough empty seats in the hall, the visitor, having cast an attentive look at the visitors, confidently approached the table where our citizen was sitting, and asked in Russian for permission to take a seat at his table. A conversation ensued. When it was time to say goodbye, the future author of the newspaper article asked the German why he had come exactly here and why did he speak Russian to the stranger? The German said that during the Second World War he served in the Abwehr, German military intelligence, and carefully studied the book for official use "Signs of Russians." One of these signs was that Russians, when cleaning shoes, usually pay all attention to the front of the boot or boot, forgetting about the back of the shoe. Since then, - the author of the note concludes, when I clean my shoes, I break my Russian mentality and with special zeal I lean with a brush on the heel of my boot. That unconscious force that makes the hand of a Russian person zealous over the toe of the boot and leaves its back in neglect, in science is called mentality, or mentality.

Let us recall the textbook episode from the novel "War and Peace" by Leo Tolstoy. Natasha Rostova, on her uncle's estate in Otradnoye, takes part in folk dance entertainment and joins the circle of dancers. The author, admiring his heroine, reflects: “Where, how, when she sucked into herself from that Russian air that she breathed - this countess, brought up by a French emigrant - this spirit, where did she get these techniques that pas de chale long ago should have been ousted? But these spirit and methods were the same, inimitable, not studied, Russian, which uncle expected from her ... "

cultural tradition- an integral phenomenon that expresses the socially stereotyped group experience that is accumulated and reproduced in society.

Cultural Foundation- this is a complex of knowledge, a certain outlook in the field of national and world culture, which a typical representative of a particular culture possesses. But this is not an affiliation of an individual, but a set of those basic units that are included in a given national culture.

Culture type- one of the first typologies of culture was proposed by Pitirim Sorokin, a Russian scientist who was expelled from Russia in 1922, settled in the USA and became an outstanding sociologist. He identified several types of cultures: idea culture, which is fundamentally religious; sensitive culture - the antipode of the ideational one (starting from the Renaissance, this is the dominant culture in Western Europe); idealistic culture, which is a culture of a mixed type, a transitional form from one type to another (this is the Golden Age of ancient culture, European culture of the XII-XIV centuries). The type of culture largely (although not always) determines the type of personality of each of its representatives.

language of culture- sign essence, more precisely, a system of signs and their relations, through which the coordination of value-semantic forms is established and existing or newly emerging representations, images, concepts and other semantic structures are organized. In relation to other ethnic cultures, its language is understood as a set of all sign methods of verbal and non-verbal communication that objectify the specifics of the culture of an ethnic group and reflect its interaction with the cultures of other ethnic groups.

Culture settings- these are a kind of ideals, according to which a person qualifies as “worthy / unworthy”. They are developed throughout the historical path traveled by the people, which is deposited in social memory and forms attitudes. Among other things, we are distinguished from animals by rules and regulations that we have agreed with each other. It is they that separate us from the abyss of chaos, streamline our lives, so they must be observed.

Attempts to identify the most important traditional attitudes of Russians were made by many domestic scientists. The concept of N. O. Lossky, a philosopher of the 20th century, became widely known. In his book The Character of the Russian People, published in 1957, he singles out the positive and negative attitudes of the Russian people ( collectivism, disinterestedness, spirituality, fetishization of state power, patriotism, maximalism, compassion, but at the same time cruelty, etc.).

Cultural attitudes, from the point of view of VN Teliya, cannot be as obligatory (mandatory) as, for example, language norms. National culture includes everything that is interpreted in terms of values, “prescriptions (expressions) of folk wisdom” (according to V.N. Teliya).

Cultural values perform a variety of functions in the mechanisms of human life: coordinating between a person and the natural world, stimulating, regulating, etc. In axiology, there are many classifications of values, among which absolute, or eternal, social, “personal, biological survival values, etc. . A person not only cognizes the world, but also evaluates it in terms of their significance for satisfying their needs. Linguistic information about the system of values testifies to the peculiarities of the worldview of the people.

Subculture- secondary, subordinate cultural system (for example, youth subculture, etc.).

Key concepts of culture we call the nuclear (basic) units of the picture of the world determined by it, which have existential significance both for an individual linguistic personality and for the linguocultural community as a whole. The key concepts of culture include such abstract names as conscience, fate, will, share, sin, law, freedom, intelligentsia, homeland etc. Concepts, according to D.S. Likhachev, arise in the mind of a person not only as hints of possible meanings, but also as responses to the previous language experience of a person as a whole - poetic, prosaic, scientific, social, historical, etc. .P.

The concepts of culture can be divided, according to A.Ya. Gurevich, into two groups: "cosmic", philosophical categories, which he calls universal categories of culture(time, space, cause, change, movement), and social categories, the so-called cultural categories(freedom, law, justice, labor, wealth, property). It seems appropriate to single out another group - categories of national culture(for Russian culture this is - will, share, intelligence, catholicity and so on.). Upon closer analysis of concepts, it turns out that there are much more culturally specific concepts in any language than it seems at first glance. For example, a culture-specific concept can be considered potato. For Russians, this is the standard of poor nutrition, hence the idiom sit on one potato for Belarusians, this is the usual national food, which is the second bread, which is even more important than the first. The key concepts of culture occupy an important position in the collective linguistic consciousness, and therefore their study becomes an extremely urgent problem. The proof of this is the emergence of dictionaries of the most important concepts of culture, one of the first works in this direction is the dictionary by Yu. S. Stepanov "Constants: Dictionary of Russian Culture" (M., 1997).

Cultural connotation is the interpretation of the denotative or figuratively motivated aspects of meaning in terms of culture. This term was introduced by V. N. Teliya in 1993.

Linguistic culture - a term introduced by V.V. Vorobyov. In the understanding of V. V. Vorobyov, A linguocultureme is a combination of the form of a linguistic sign, its content and the cultural meaning that accompanies this sign. He attaches great importance to the understanding of a linguocultureme to the deep meaning that is potentially present in the meaning as an element of its content.

Linguistic cultures include words, phrases (mainly of a phraseological nature) and texts that have ethnocultural value. As D. B. Gudkov emphasizes, “different levels of the language and the units belonging to them have different degrees of cultural “saturation” and cultural conditioning.”

Phraseological units are the most studied from this point of view, which is quite natural, since they have a bright originality and originality in all languages. In the national linguoculturology, V.N. Telia is a recognized authority in this area. Her fundamental work on Russian phraseology has become a precedent text for modern researchers, and not only within the linguoculturological paradigm. V. N. Telia notes that “it is precisely those figurative expressions that are associated with cultural and national standards, stereotypes, mythologemes, etc. that are fixed and phraseologized in the language. and which, when used in speech, reproduce the mentality characteristic of a particular linguocultural community.

Much attention, especially in recent times and especially within the framework of linguoculturology, is given to the word as a unit of cultural information storage. At the same time, not only “key words of culture” are studied. So, to illustrate the manifestation of the subject code in Russian culture using the word “thread” as an example, V.V. Krasnykh shows that the object denoted by this word for Russians can also act as a kind of standard of “ultimacy” (that is, “the maximum allowable measure of articulation / divisibility » material and clothes ("wet to the skin" ) or tangible property in general ("to drink to the thread" ), and as a "link".

The classification of linguistic cultures can also be carried out in terms of the area of their functioning. I. G. Olshansky identifies nine types of linguoculturological units and phenomena according to this principle. This and mythologized cultural and linguistic units (legends, beliefs, customs enshrined in phraseology), and a paremiological fund that stores stereotypes of folk consciousness, and features of speech behavior in stereotypical situations of communication, and the area of speech etiquette, and the interaction of religion and language, etc.

The most important source of cultural marking is the involvement of language units in a certain type of discourse (text). In this regard, those concepts that are directly related to the linguocultural analysis of the text are of interest. First of all, these are cultural universals. These are elements common to all cultures (the presence of a language, the manufacture of tools, sexual prohibitions, myths, dances, etc.), which we understand as fragments of reality, important for culture and tradition, presented in a literary text. As a rule, they form the basis of the ideological stamps of the era. (For example, in E. Zamyatin's story "The Catcher of Men", the cultural universal is the state of a typical hero. It is given by the following maxim: "The most beautiful thing in life is delirium, and the most beautiful delirium is falling in love.")

A special place in the composition of linguoculturological units is occupied by precedent phenomena(PF).

Precedent phenomena is a cultural phenomenon. They are included in the fund of historical memory of the society (ethnos). National-cultural memory is “a storehouse of information, emotions, facts, from which we draw data in our everyday life and everyday life to answer sacramental questions: who we are, where we are from and where we are going; what we are proud of in our past and present, and what we are ashamed of; why is it so and not otherwise; and even why all this. This is not history in its purest form, but how the past is represented in our current thought and how it fits into our knowledge of the modern world.. Knowledge of national precedent phenomena is an indicator of belonging to a given era and its culture, while their ignorance, on the contrary, is a prerequisite for rejection from the corresponding culture and incomplete inclusion in the culture.

(more on that in later lectures)

«NATIONAL-SPECIFIC COMPONENTS OF KINESICAL COMMUNICATION OF THE CHINESE LINGUO-CULTURAL COMMONITY IN THE LIGHT OF THE THEORY OF GAPS ON THE BACKGROUND OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND RUSSIAN...»

-- [ Page 1 ] --

BLAGOVESCHENSKY STATE

PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITY

As a manuscript

GLUSHCHENKO Tatyana Sergeevna

NATIONAL SPECIFIC COMPONENTS

KINESICAL COMMUNICATION CHINESE

LINGUOCULTURAL COMMONITY IN THE LIGHT OF THE THEORY OF LACUNES

ON THE BACKGROUND OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND RUSSIAN GESTURES

Specialty 10.02.19 - Theory of Language

THESIS

for the degree of candidate of philological sciences

Scientific director:

Doctor of Philology, Professor Yu.A. Sorokin Blagoveshchensk – 2006 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER NATIONAL AND CULTURAL SPECIFICITY

NON-VERBAL COMMUNICATION IN THE THEORY OF LACUNA …………………..14

1.1. Cognitive-psycholinguistic theory of gaps: basic concepts and areas of research ……………………………………..14 Non-verbal communication in the aspect of theory 1.2.

lacunarity……………….………………………………………31 1.2.1. Non-verbal means in a communicative act and their lacunae nature ………………………………………...31 1.2.2. Kinetic lacunology ………………………………...50 Basic categories and main directions 1.2.2.1.

research in kinesics. Gesture as a cinema …………………….52 1.2.2.2. Gesture as an accumulating link in the phenomenon of nonverbal lacunarity ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. …...80

OF CHINESE COMMUNICANTS ON THE BACKGROUND OF THE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND RUSSIAN GESTICON ……..……………..82

2.1. Lexicographic description of absolutely lacunar gestures of Chinese culture …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2.2. Systemic organization of partially lacunar gestures…....113

2.3. Functional types of partially lacunar gestures ....... 122

2.4. Gesture Components of the Lacunosphere of Chinese Culture as Determining Factors of the Specificity of the Nonverbal Communication Style of Chinese Communicators …………………………….... 138 Conclusions on Chapter 2 ……………………………………………… …..148 CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………...150 LIST SOURCES USED …….……………....156 APPENDIX ……………………………………………………………..183 INTRODUCTION Speech does not express the whole meaning.

Laozi At the present stage of development of linguistic knowledge, scientists are increasingly paying attention to various aspects of the study of communication processes, and the patterns of intercultural communication are phenomena that especially need scientific justification. Of exceptional interest is a detailed analysis of the non-verbal aspects of cross-cultural communication in the framework of the still little studied and all the more interesting for consideration ethnopsycholinguistic theory of lacunae. Yu.A. Sorokin notes that “research carried out within the framework of ethnopsycholinguistics has a double heuristic power: they make it possible to judge the constituents of ethnic “pictures of the world” and identify universal and local elements in them ...” Nashe [Sorokin 1994: 4].

the dissertation research is devoted specifically to the issues of local, national-specific elements of gestural behavior of a particular linguocultural community in the light of the theory of lacunarity.

The need for a detailed study of the kinesic, gestural, behavior of representatives of any linguistic culture is explained, first of all, by the fact that in the domestic and foreign research situation, many aspects of national-cultural non-verbal forms of communication are still insufficiently studied, while the point of view that communication process - a complex combination of verbal and non-verbal means of communication, is generally accepted.

Weak "development" of the description of the gesture-mimic system is associated with its assignment in the earlier studies of verbal interaction to the peripheral plane. Currently, domestic and foreign ethnopsycholinguists, experts in the field of intercultural communication, kinesiologists and scientists of related fields are trying to fill this gap in modern linguistics with a comprehensive study of the communicative behavior of ethnophores from the standpoint of various approaches. Considering communication as a synthesis of two channels of communication, verbal and non-verbal, researchers define the role of each of them in different ways, emphasizing the importance of non-verbal aspects of communication, the study of which requires both the development of general theoretical provisions and studies of national-specific features of a particular ethnotype. In our work, for the first time, an attempt is made to comprehensively comprehend the gestural components of non-verbal communication of local culture from the standpoint of the main provisions of the theory of lacunae.

Russian linguists E.M. insisted on the fact that the role of non-verbal means in a communicative act is independent and highly significant. Vereshchagin, I.N. Gorelov, N.V. Grigoriev, S.A. Grigorieva, G.V. Kolshansky, V.G. Kostomarov, G.E. Kreidlin, T.M. Nikolaev, R.K. Potapova, N.I. Smirnova, B.A. Ouspensky and foreign researchers Ray Birdwhistel , David McNeil , Desmond Morris , Beatty Butterworth , Edward T. Hall , Paul Ekman . These scientists have made the greatest contribution to the development of paralinguistics and continue to actively study the issues of this science. But a comprehensive study of non-verbal meaning expressions within the framework of the psycholinguistic theory of gaps was not reflected in the studies of the above founders of the description of non-speech forms of interaction. L.A.

Leonova once again emphasizes the reliability of this fact, saying that "the problem of identifying and describing lacunae ... itself is a white spot in linguistics" [Leonova 1980: 35].

Our study, focused on the issues of the lacunarity of the nationally specific in communication, namely, the sign communication of representatives of Chinese linguistic culture against the background of Anglo-American and Russian cultures, is an attempt to eliminate such a “stain” in linguistics. The study of non-verbal forms of communication of any ethnoculture implies the identification of their universal, general and local, nationally determined features of a lacunae character in order to use the results obtained in the practice of cross-cultural interactive interaction. Determining the lacunar components of verbal and non-verbal behavior is both of the greatest interest and no less difficult for analysis. Domestic linguists G.V.

Bykova, I.Yu. Markovina, L.A. Leonova, Yu.A. Sorokin and some other scientists have developed a theory of lacunarity, which allows you to identify these elements, and suggests possible ways of representing them in a culture that is not their own, someone else's. The verbal lacunae of a particular local culture are meaningfully described in the works of the aforementioned and some other linguists, but the non-verbal lacunae components of the communicative behavior of representatives of a particular linguoculture need a more detailed analysis. This explains our particular interest in describing the national and cultural specifics of the lacunae nature of the gestural behavior of native speakers of the Chinese language and culture against the background of the Anglo-American and Russian gestures.

Relevance work is determined by the studies actively conducted in recent decades on the influence of national and cultural characteristics of ethnophores on the success of cross-cultural interactions [Belyanin 2003, Bykova 2003, Greidina 1996, 1999, Grushevitskaya 2002, Gudkov 2003, Donets 2001, Krasnykh 2003, Leontovich 2005, Sternin 1997, Ter-M inasova 2000 , Khotinets 2002, (Lo

– – –

studies of the role of non-verbal means of communication in conveying the meaning of the message being sent [Belikov 1991, Blishunova 1994, Butovskaya 2004, Volovik 2001, Kreidlin 2002, Kulish 1991, Kumar 2005, Melnik 2005, Mudraya 1994, Nikolaeva 2005, Pakhar 1999, Reznikova 2004, Eibl–Eibesfeldt 1988 Givens 2005 Jones 2002 McNeill 2000 Yau Shun-chui 1992 directions [Vladimirova 2002, Sobolnikov 2001, Sorokin 2005, Tan Aoshuan An analysis of such studies proves 2004].

the need for a comprehensive understanding of the gestural components of non-verbal communication of local culture, and the insufficiently studied national-specific in gestural communication of representatives of Chinese linguistic culture against the background of the Anglo-American and Russian cultures in a special way emphasizes the relevance of this dissertation research in the sense of developing the main provisions of the theory of lacunarity in kinesics, rethinking the phenomenon of lacunarity as non-equivalence of non-verbal meaning expression in ethnopsycholinguistics.

All this led to the choice of the topic of the dissertation research.

studies are kinesthetic systems The object of representatives of Chinese, Anglo-American and Russian linguistic cultures, considered from the standpoint of the main provisions of the theory of lacunae.

Subject of study: National-Specific Components of Lacunar Gestures in the Kinetic System of Chinese Communicators.

The specifics of the object of study, the scientific description and interpretation of gestural gaps in the process of cross-cultural interaction, the lack of development of the problem predetermined the goal and the main tasks dissertation research.

is a theoretical understanding aim study of the phenomenon of non-verbal lacunarity in terms of the place and role of this phenomenon in the processes of coding and adequate decoding of the national-cultural components of communication of local cultures, involving the identification of lacunar gestures in the kinesic behavior of representatives of the Chinese ethnotype against the background of the Anglo-American and Russian gestures, the study of the features of the non-verbal communication style of representatives Chinese culture and systematic description of Chinese absolute gesture gaps.

The overall goal of the study necessitated consideration of the following specific tasks:

1) development of the basic conceptual and terminological apparatus for describing the phenomenon of non-verbal lacunarity;

2) identifying lacunar kinemas in Chinese, Anglo-American and Russian linguistic cultures;

3) descriptions based on the developed concepts of the phenomenology of the nonverbal lacunarity of Chinese absolutely lacunary gestures;

4) classification of partially lacunar gestures based on the kinesic potential of Chinese, Anglo-American and Russian ethnophores;

5) development of a possible way to eliminate gesture gaps in the process of interactive interaction of local cultures;

6) systematization of functional types of lacunar gestures;

7) determining the role and place of the phenomenon of non-verbal lacunarity in the system of intercultural contacts of representatives of the Chinese, Anglo-American and Russian linguistic and cultural communities.

The main hypothesis of the study: the national-specific features of kinems of various semiotic classes determine the presence of lacunary kinesic forms of communication in the non-verbal behavior of representatives of Chinese, Anglo-American and Russian linguistic cultures during their interactive interaction, which can be identified and described in the light of the cognitive-psycholinguistic theory of lacunae.

work is determined by a comprehensive Scientific novelty understanding the phenomenon of national-specific features of gestural behavior of representatives of Chinese (kinesic) culture against the background of Anglo-American and Russian linguistic cultures in the context of the main provisions of the psycholinguistic theory of lacunarity based on modern research in the field of ethnopsycholinguistics, kinesics, and communication theory. On the material of Chinese, Anglo-American and Russian gestural forms of communication, relative gestural lacunae are systematized. The concept of “non-verbal lacuna” is formulated and 24 absolutely lacunary Chinese gestures are systematically described against the background of the Anglo-American and Russian gestures. The process of elimination of gestural lacunae units of communication is analyzed and a way to fill in such lacunae is proposed – verbalization of kinecomes 1 of local cultures. The main features of the Chinese non-verbal style of communication are highlighted in terms of their lacunae nature.

The research material was:

b) personal visual observations;

c) results of a survey and interviews with 480 native Chinese speakers;

d) dictionary entries in Russian, Chinese, English and American reference books;

e) Chinese, Russian, American and English films and videos;

f) kinesic material collected as a result of studying Russian, Chinese, English and American scientific literature.

The following methods were used in the analysis of this material:

1) linguistic interviewing;

2) lexicographic;

3) typological;

4) descriptive;

5) contextual;

6) questioning.

The main methodology of the work is a system-structural approach in the study of lacunar semantic expressions of Chinese communicators' sign culture against the background of Anglo-American and Russian kinecoms.

Theoretical significance dissertation research is due to the positional approach to the study of various gestures The term "kinesic" is considered here and further in the work in the sense of a synonym for the concept of "gesture".

ethnophors, which allows you to more confidently describe the ethnic features of the communicative style of kinesic communication of representatives of local cultures. The study contributes to the general theory of non-verbal communication - in terms of the definition of the term "gesture" and the proposed method of describing absolutely lacunar gestures, in the development of the theory of gaps - in terms of introducing the concepts of "absolute gesture gap" and "relative gesture gap", systematization of relative lacunar gestures according to functional types. The results obtained, which can serve as a basis for further research on lacunar kinesic means of communication in the analysis of other language cultures, are a scientific contribution to the development of particular sections of paralinguistics that describe special kinesic paralinguisms - gestures.

results of the Practical significance research lies in their possible application within the framework of various special courses on intercultural communication, ethnopsycholinguistics, non-verbal semiotics, etc.

The research material can be used in compiling dictionaries of Chinese, Anglo-American and Russian sign gaps, as well as various textbooks for training specialists in the field of intercultural communication and in the practice of cross-cultural communication.

Basic provisions submitted for defense:

1) Culturally determined components of the non-verbal system of one or another ethnotype determine the immanence of the manifestation of the phenomenon of lacunarity at the level of kinesic communication of local cultures;

2) The phenomenon of kinesic lacunarity is determined by the asymmetry of the processes of encoding and decoding the text of a non-verbal message carried out by the sender and addressee, respectively;

National-specific features of the levels of 3) representation and perception of gestural lacunar forms of communication make it possible to classify kinesymes based on the ratio of the form and the set of non-verbal semantic components of a gesture of a particular linguocultural community;

Elimination of non-verbal gaps at the level of their 4) verbalization is one of the determining factors in the degree of success of intercultural interaction;

5) The national specificity of the non-verbal communication style of Chinese communicators, which is determined by a set of characteristic features, is determined by the gestural components of the lacunosphere of Chinese culture.

Approbation of work:

The main directions and conclusions of this dissertation research are presented in 7 publications, the volume of which is 2.3 pp. The provisions of the dissertation were discussed at meetings of the Department of English Philology of the Blagoveshchensk State Pedagogical University, the International Laboratory of Linguistics and Intercultural Communication at the Blagoveshchensk State Pedagogical University).

(2003-2006 Research results were presented at six conferences: in the Blagoveshchensk branch of the Moscow Academy of Entrepreneurship under the Government of Moscow on the problems of intercultural communication (2003, 2004, 2006), the Far Eastern Agrarian University at the 4th regional interuniversity scientific and practical conference of young scientists (2003 ), Blagoveshchensk branch of the Moscow Academy of Entrepreneurship under the Government of Moscow

Moscow at the 5th regional interuniversity scientific and practical conference of young scientists, Blagoveshchensk (2004 State Pedagogical University at the 7th regional interuniversity scientific and practical conference of young scientists (2006). In addition, a report was made at the international seminar dedicated to various aspects of teaching foreign languages (Blagoveshchensk State Pedagogical University, 2004) The author also made reports on the national and cultural specifics of non-verbal communication at the International Institute of Chinese Language and Culture at the Northeast University of Economics and Finance (China, Liaoning Province , Dalian, August 2004), at Heihei University (China, Heilongjiang Province,

Heihe, June 2005).

Work structure. The dissertation consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion, a list of references and an appendix.

In the introduction the laconized nature of non-verbal forms of communication is revealed, the main goals and objectives of the study are outlined, its relevance, scientific novelty, theoretical and practical significance are indicated, the main provisions submitted for defense are formulated.

In the first chapter the main concepts and areas of study of the theory of lacunae are considered, non-verbal means of communication are described from the standpoint of the main provisions of the theory of lacunarity.

In the second chapter Gesture gaps in the kinesic system of the Chinese linguocultural community are described against the background of the Anglo-American and Russian gestures: a description of 24 absolutely lacunary Chinese kinesicoms is proposed, partially lacunar gestures are systematized, their functional types are distinguished, and the main characteristics of the non-verbal communication style of Chinese communicators are considered.

In custody the main conclusions are formulated and the results of the study are presented.

Attached is a sample questionnaire used to interview Chinese respondents.

CHAPTER 1. NATIONAL AND CULTURAL SPECIFICITY

NON-VERBAL COMMUNICATION IN THE THEORY OF LACUNA

Cognitive-psycholinguistic theory of gaps: main 1.1.

concepts and areas of research The growth of research interest in the study of national-specific components of communication, observed in linguistics in recent years, is due to a significant increase in the number of intercultural contacts, both similar and distant from each other local cultures. Describing the issues of nationally determined components of communication between various ethnophores, scientists turn to the theory of lacunae and consider these components as lacunary phenomena of ethnic and cultural organisms1.

The term "lacuna" (from lat. lacuna - deepening, depression, failure, cavity; from the French.

lacune - emptiness, gap) means "a fragment of a message (verbal or non-verbal), in which there is something incomprehensible, strange, erroneous" [Text and translation 1988:

This concept was first introduced into science by Canadian scientists J.P. Vinay and J. Darbelier and defined by them as "a phenomenon that occurs whenever a word of one language does not have a match in another" .

In modern linguistics, lacunae are considered as elements of culture that have found “national-specific appropriate reflection in the language of the carriers of this culture, or the term “ethnic-cultural organism” is considered here in the sense of “a set of cultural features of the communicative activity of a particular ethnic group”, defined by Sorokin Yu. A. [Sorokin 2005: 4].

completely not understood or misunderstood by speakers of a different culture and language in the process of communication” [Tomasheva 1995: 58].

V.P. Belyanin explains lacunae as elements of “the basic national specifics of a linguocultural community that make it difficult for foreign recipients to understand certain fragments of texts” [Belyanin 2003: 154].

IN AND. Zelvis suggests the following wording: “Using the terminology of V. Doroshevsky, we can say that lacunae are what in some languages and cultures is designated as “separateness”, while in others it is not signaled, i.e. does not find a socially fixed expression” [Zelvis 1977: 136].

Lacunas can be understood more broadly, taking into account all the phenomena that require additional explanation in contact with another culture. I.Yu. Markovina, Yu.A. Sorokin consider gaps in a broad sense and propose to use this term not only when comparing languages, but also other cultural aspects.

Yu.A. Sorokin together with I.Yu. Markovina calls lacunae “everything that the recipient does not understand in a foreign cultural text, what is strange for him, requires interpretation, serves as a signal of the presence in the text of national-specific elements of the culture in which the text was created” [Sorokin, Markovina 1983: 37].

Along with the concept of “lacuna”, other terms are used that convey the same meaning: gar (space) (K. Hale), antiwords, white spots on the semantic map of the world (Yu.S. Stepanov), non-equivalent vocabulary (L.S. Barkhudarov , E.M. Vereshchagin, V.G. Kostomarov), dark places, non-translatable vocabulary, semantic well (V.N. Komissarov), enoeidema (V.P. Belyanin) and others. These concepts are not full synonyms, but the possibility of their interchangeability is acceptable. The term “well” is defined as “semantic” some fragment of the text, where the set (field) of denotations is “vague” due to: 1) the lack of representation of certain elements of the denotative structure of a certain phenomenon in the analyzed text, 2) the inadequacy of the images of denotations in the perceiver and communicator, 3) the quasi-identity of designants, which interferes with the identification of denotations as belonging to different conceptual and semantic fields” [Text and translation 1988: 77].

The term "non-equivalent vocabulary" is defined by E.M.

Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov: “Words whose content plan cannot be compared with any lexical concepts are called non-equivalent” [Vereshchagin, Kostomarov 1983: 56].

In the process of cross-cultural interactive interaction, gaps can cause the greatest problems, because they are perceived by representatives of another local culture as something not their own, someone else's.

The opposition of one's own and another's culture can also be comprehended as an opposition of signs of "natural - unnatural" (one's own is natural, someone else's unnatural). unnatural can

- it is considered that people express their emotions differently than is customary in the native culture of the recipient. For example, for a Russian person, the reaction of a representative of Chinese culture to what is happening in a situation of his or someone else's failure is incomprehensible and unnatural.

If, while parking his bicycle, a Chinese person drops it, then, as a rule, he and his friends smile and laugh, not taking what happened to heart and hinting that these are trifles, trifles of life that should not be paid attention to.

Understanding one’s own as natural, and someone else’s as unnatural, can also exist in a figurative form: “Why did you refuse to renew your contract in China? You've been offered so many times! - Because I'm Russian... I can't live without black bread! And in China there is only rice” (example of the author). In this case, black bread as one's own, familiar, Russian, natural food is opposed to the use in the daily diet of a large amount of unsalted rice, food that is unusual and non-Russian, and therefore unnatural.

Such situations indicate the inevitable identification of lacunar components of different linguistic cultures in their interactive interaction.

According to G.A. Antipova, O.A. Donskikh, I.Yu.

Markovina and Yu.A. Sorokin, which are presented in their collective monograph “Text as a phenomenon of culture”, the systematization of various types of gaps in accordance with the model of the structure of intercultural communication makes it possible to talk about the existence of four of their groups:

subjective gaps reflecting national-cultural 1) characteristics of communicants in various linguocultural communities;

2) activity-communicative gaps, reflecting the national and cultural specifics of various types of activities in their communicative aspect;

3) gaps in the cultural space (landscape), if we consider the process of communication in a broad sense, or gaps in the cultural interior, if we consider one or another specific communicative act;

4) textual gaps that arise due to the specifics of the text as a communication tool; the specifics of the text can be the content, the form of fixation and reproduction or perception of the material, the orientation towards a certain recipient, the poetics of the author, etc.

The first group of lacunae is classified as subjective or as national-psychological lacunae. These gaps arise as a result of a mismatch between the national psychological types of communication participants. In accordance with the components of national psychology, several subgroups of subjective gaps can be distinguished.

The existence of lacunae is due to "characterological"

specific features of the national mentality of the bearers of various local cultures. As a result of intercultural communication in some cultures, certain stereotypes are formed in relation to other cultures, in particular those that fix the most characteristic feature of a particular nation, which is less pronounced in other peoples. It is generally accepted, for example, that the main thing in the Chinese national character is restraint, in English

- - balance, in American - pragmatism, in Russian - good nature and hospitality [Arutyunova 1998, Humboldt 1985, Leontovich 2005, Pan Ying 1977, Sorokin 2001, Tan Aoshuan 2004,

– – –

Guangzhun) 1994, (Fan Minghua) 1997].

Restraint can be seen as a relative characterological gap for Russians and Americans in comparison with the bearers of Chinese culture:

restraint is highly valued by the Chinese, but means little to the Russians and even less to the Americans.

It should be noted that all characterological gaps are relative. By themselves, character traits are universal, collectively representing a kind of invariant of the character of the people, while in national variants of character, these universal traits occupy different places in the value system of the corresponding culture, differing in the degree of prevalence. This position is confirmed by the analysis of such a feature of the national character inherent in all peoples as diligence. The industriousness of the Chinese people, for example, is excessive zeal, a collectivist orientation, and a focus on achieving quick results regardless of the given conditions.

The industriousness of an American is initiative, scope, energetic assertiveness, inexhaustible business passion. Thus, for Americans, the content of such a feature as industriousness, in many respects, does not coincide with how the Chinese understand it: the pronounced ability to instantly navigate the situation, which is typical for representatives of Chinese culture, is lacunae for Americans.

The group of "self-reflexive" characterological gaps reflects the understanding and self-image of the bearers of certain cultures.

The "self-representation" of an ethnos is a gap in the sense that it reflects a deeper insight into the essence of the national character than the possible representation of the same ethnos that the bearers of another culture are capable of. It is difficult for a foreigner, for example, to grasp the meaning of the traditional Chinese nan, bai, expressing congratulations to the closest relatives and friends on the new year. If translated literally, it means "bye"

"bow", and "nyan" - a year. The Chinese, bowing, express their respect and wish happiness to the owners of the house in the new year, while for foreigners the expression "bai nian" often remains only the equivalent of the phrase "wish you a happy new year." Only the Chinese themselves are capable of fully imbuing the significance of the “bai nian” tradition, which leads to a certain lacunae nature of this rite for carriers of other cultures.

Thus, characterological gaps can be of three types:

Gaps reflecting the traditional and, to a certain extent, stereotyped perception of the national character of another people (for example, “the Chinese are reserved”);

Gaps reflecting discrepancies in how similar qualities are manifested in different peoples (for example, diligence);

Self-reflexive gaps that reflect how the bearers of a particular culture understand their national character (for example, the Chinese “bai nian”).

Among the national-psychological gaps, there are also those that are associated with discrepancies (national characteristics) of the “mindset” of carriers of different cultures - “syllogistic”

gaps. Researchers note more or less significant differences in this area of national psychology: Russian thinking is characterized by philosophical breadth and depth of abstraction, British thinking is characterized by the desire not to resort to abstractions;

American thinking commitment to concrete facts

– [Butovskaya 2004, Vasiliev 1976, Vezhbitskaya 1996, Kizin 2002,

Leontovich 2003, Melnik 2005, (Fan Minghua) 1997].

National-specific features of the thinking of representatives of different cultures can cause the emergence of "mental gaps", which belong to the second group - to the active-communicative gaps. The existence of mental lacunae is revealed when assessing humorous or ironic situations that are characteristic of a foreign linguocultural community. Such gaps arise, for example, in cases where the speakers of a certain culture are invited to listen to an anecdote or a humorous story translated from another language. In this case, recipients, as a rule, are unable to understand the meaning of a humorous or ironic situation that reflects the specifics of a different culture. The presence of gaps disrupts the process of intercultural communication. In order for this kind of intercultural communication to take place (that is, so that the recipient can laugh), it is necessary not only to translate texts of humorous content from one language to another, but also to build them in a form familiar to a native speaker of the TL (translating language), in accordance with the characteristics turn of his mind, to introduce cultural and ethnographic images and symbols traditional for the PJ.

A separate group of activity-communicative or behavioral lacunae is made up of "everyday" ("routine") lacunae, indicating the traditional way of life, habits, features of life - what is called the "everyday behavior" of the bearers of certain cultures. For example, it is customary for the British to drink tea at five o'clock in the evening, but other nations do not have such a custom. Many Chinese are surprised that Russians wash their faces using a running stream of water, while they themselves draw water into the sink to wash themselves.

The next group of gaps in the cultural space, which plays a significant role in non-verbal communication, is also significant: the interior design, the appearance of the home carry certain information about the material well-being, interests, preferences and tastes of the communicants. In the process of intercultural interaction between representatives of the English-speaking, Chinese and Russian cultures, for example, criteria for evaluating housing can be considered a lacunar phenomenon. Americans estimate the size of the dwelling by the number of bedrooms (two-, three-bedroom apartment), Russians - by the number of living rooms (two-, three-room apartment), and the Chinese, as a rule, exclude the kitchen, which occupies a separate room, since usually everything that need for cooking, they have it on the balcony. Such intercultural differences can cause certain difficulties in understanding and evaluating a foreign language culture, the features of which are also indicated by textual gaps that are of particular interest to us.

The group of text gaps is analyzed in detail in the works of G.V. Bykova, I.Yu. Markovina, V.L. Muravyova, O.A.

Ogurtsova, Yu.A. Sorokina, I.A. Sternina and others.

Researchers offer various classifications of textual lacunae that make up the lacunosphere1 of a particular ethnic group. G.V. Bykova identifies, first of all, intralinguistic and (intralinguistic) interlingual (interlingual) lacunae. Intralinguistic lacunae “detect discrepancies (gaps, gaps) between units (real and potential) within one language” [Bykova 2001: 7].

I.A. Sternin argues that "in every language there are a large number of intralinguistic lacunae, that is, empty, unfilled places in the lexico-phraseological system of the language, although lexemes of similar meaning may be present" [Sternin 1997: 3]. For example, in Russian there is the word "skating rink", but there is no designation for a strip of ice on the pavement on which children ride in winter; there is the word "high school student", but there is no usual unit for designating elementary school students.

Interlingual lacunae “reveal discrepancies (voids, gaps) between units of comparable languages” [Bykova 2001: 7]. According to V.G. Gak, interlingual gaps are “the absence of words to denote concepts that undoubtedly exist in a given society and which have a special verbal designation in another language” [Gak 1989: 133]. For example, in English there is no designation for Russian concepts represented by the words "nomenclature", The concept of "lacunosphere", introduced by Sorokin Yu.A. [Sorokin 2005: 3] is deciphered in our work as a set of linguistic and non-verbal gaps of various types, reflecting the national specifics of the local culture.

“samizdat”, “vignette”, “bowl”, “kvass”, etc. In Russian, when compared with English, there are no designations for the following concepts: “pudding with jam” - roly-poly, “descended person” - “innocent joke” – josh, “two-week period” – was-bird, fortnight, etc. An interlingual comparative analysis of the Chinese and Russian languages reveals that the following concepts are absent in the Chinese language when compared with Russian: “birch bark”, “dispossessed kulaks”, “tuesok” , "accordion", "birthday" and others. In Russian, there is no designation for the following Chinese concepts: yunxio (stuffed rice flour balls), hujun (curl-shaped pampushka), zhma jing (sesame seed puree), zhjin (bamboo writing board), mnshn (images of gods- guardians pasted on the gates), yunbo (50 liang silver ingot or 5-10 liang gold ingot), etc.

The presence of semantic gaps - intralingual and interlingual

It can be either motivated or unmotivated.

The intralinguistic lacunae of the Russian language given above as examples are unmotivated. An example of a motivated intralinguistic lacuna is the lexeme “koshatina”, which is not fixed in dictionaries to denote cat meat, which is formed according to the derivational model of veal, “calf – “ram – mutton” specially existing in the Russian language. These models are used to designate the meat of animals used for food. Since cat meat is not eaten in Russian everyday culture, the corresponding word is not recorded in the explanatory dictionary of the Russian language (G.V.

Bykova).

Interlingual gaps may or may not have a national-cultural conditionality. For example, the specialized names for fingers and toes (fingers, toes) in English and the one-word designation of the same concepts in Russian are not determined from the point of view of the compared cultures.

And the existence in the Russian language of such concepts as “good” and and to which in the English language “good”, “truth”, “truth”, corresponds to one equivalent (good, truth), is due to the Russian cultural and linguistic picture of the world, for which, according to In the opinion of many researchers of Russian culture [Krysin 2004, Leontovich 2005, Pocheptsov Stepanov Shchepanskaya 1990, 2001, 2004], the opposition between “ordinary” and “sublime”, “worldly” and “divine” is characteristic.

The divergences of local cultures can differ in their “degree of power”, therefore, different authors distinguish between confrontational lacunae, indicating deep divergences in language systems, and contrastive lacunae - weak, shallow. These gaps can also be called a certain coarsening of terms) (with absolute and relative, according to the classification of some authors, or complete and partial, according to the terminology of others.

“A complete (absolute) lacuna is considered if a certain set of semes included in the structure of the original message is completely absent in the linguistic culture of the person to whom this message is sent”

[Text and translation 1988: 78]. An absolute gap for representatives of Russian and Anglo-American cultures is, for example, the concept of Chinese culture "bone playing records" - mjing.

For speakers of the Chinese language and culture, the Russian word “paskha” (a sweet cottage cheese cake eaten during the Easter holiday) and the English word “haggis” (veal tripe with offal and seasoning) are absolutely lacunar.

Gaps are considered relative (partial) when a concept with a common meaning exists in both compared signs, but there is a discrepancy in the frequency of their use and prevalence, as well as a discrepancy in the phrasal environment of such words. For example, the following Russian words are partial gaps for Chinese culture: "cottage cheese" (nizh), "little finger" (xiozh). Relative (partial) gaps for

– – –

(the final number of the program), gn`n (to be grateful for a good deed) and the English words "brood" (to bear in the mind, in the soul), "livestock" (livestock). As examples of relative lacunae when comparing Chinese, Russian and English, one can cite the words "rice", "noodles", "shoes". In Chinese, the words mfn, mintio are used much more often than "rice" and "noodles"

in Russian and "rice" and "noodles" in English, since these words are national-specific concepts of Chinese culture, which reflect the features of the everyday life of the Chinese people. As for the word "shoe", in Russian and Chinese it is used more often than in "footwear"

English, where in similar situations preference is given to words and moreover, “shoes” “boots”, “footwear” are used

predominantly trade workers.

Absolute and relative (full and partial) gaps exist in all subsystems of the language, however, according to many scientists, the differences between languages, due to the difference in cultures, are most noticeable in vocabulary and phraseology. One of the varieties of lacunar vocabulary is realia (ethnographic lacunae).

Realities are culturemes peculiar only to a given society; they are completely lacunar when transferred to another linguocultural community. These are “concepts related to the life, traditions, history, material and spiritual culture of the people” [Breus 1998: 107]. Since the realities have a “cultural component of meaning”, in translation they create a national and cultural flavor, for example, AY (English) - RY (Russian): Mr.

Smith - Mr. Smith, Scotland Yard - Scotland Yard, pint - pint; RY - AY:

Federation Council - The Federation Council, STSI (State Traffic Safety Inspectorate) - SISI (The State Traffic

– – –

Tiananmen, Ggng - Gugong; RY - KY: Kremlin - Klmlngng, Putin - Pjng. According to N.B. Mechkovskaya, exoticisms and ethnographisms do not so much reveal or interpret a foreign culture as symbolize it [Mechkovskaya 2000: 52]. Thus, the words "shilling", "esquire", "cricket" are associated with the Anglo-Saxon culture; "wushu", "zongzi", "yin" and "yang" are signs of traditional Chinese culture.

An important section in lacunology (the science of lacunae) is the system of methods for the objective detection of lacunae in the language, developed by G.V. Bykova. In his monograph "Lacunarity as a Category of Lexical Systemology" G.V. Bykova describes in detail the following methods: a contrastive, historical-comparative, stylistic-paradigmatic method for identifying intersubsystem lacunae by comparison with limited vocabulary, a word-formation-paradigmatic method for identifying lacunae through complex word-formation units, a field method for identifying lacunae, a synonymic-antonymic method, an antonymic method, a method identifying gaps through analogy, the method of modeling potential words, the method of identifying gaps through analysis of restrictions, the oppositional method, the method of identifying gaps by component analysis, the detection of gaps by linguistic interviewing, the method of identifying emotive connotative) gaps (associative, nominative testing and the method of analyzing children's word usage [Bykova 2003 : 174-234]. Since our study is focused on non-verbal, non-verbal forms of communication, out of all the above methods, we should dwell on a detailed consideration of only one method for identifying gaps.

- linguistic interviewing, which was applied in the work to the description of non-verbal, or rather gestural gaps. This choice is explained by the peculiarities of the two communication systems, their fundamental differences, the identification of which is important for a comprehensive understanding of the kinesic system of communication and for determining the provisions of the cognitive-psycholinguistic theory of lacunae, which would be expedient and methodologically justified to apply to the study of gestural systems of local cultures. Based on the specifics of non-verbal means of communication, described in the next section of the dissertation research, we came to the conclusion that it is possible to identify gestural gaps by the method of linguistic interviewing, which implies:

1) presenting a questionnaire to respondents, receiving written answers;

2) identification of identical answers and their summation;

3) generalization of answers different in form, but similar in content, and bringing them into one;

4) determination of the type of identified gaps based on the answers of the informants.

This method is aimed at revealing the direct knowledge of the bearer of a particular culture about the meanings of words (or gestures for our study).

Since the identified lacunae are a significant obstacle in the mutual understanding of representatives of different cultures and those who communicate in their native language, the communicants seek to eliminate existing linguistic and cultural barriers by eliminating lacunae (from Latin eliminare - to exclude, eliminate), which is carried out in two main ways - filling and compensation.

Among domestic linguists there is no consensus in the interpretation of these ways to eliminate gaps. This question is little studied in science and is sometimes controversial. I.A. Sternin explains the terms "compensation" and "compensator". L.A. Leonova interchanges the concepts of "compensation" and "filling gaps". We adhere to the point of view of I.Yu. Markovina, and distinguish between these two fundamentally important linguistic terms.

Filling in a gap is “the process of revealing the meaning of a certain concept or fragment of a text belonging to a culture unfamiliar to the recipient” [Text and translation 1988: 80].

Filling can be of different depths: superficial or deeper, detailed, complete, depending on the nature of the gap being eliminated, on the type of message in which the gap exists, and also on the characteristics of the recipient to whom the message is addressed.

For example:

“This piece of land is called Nosy-Be, which means “big island” in Malagasy” (example of V.N. Komissarov).

The process of gap compensation in the course of intercultural communication is of particular interest. The essence of gap compensation is as follows: in order to remove national-specific barriers in a situation of contact between two cultures, that is, to facilitate understanding of one or another fragment of a foreign culture, a specific element of the recipient's culture is introduced. Thus, in the text of a certain ethnotype, elements of another culture appear - similar or close to the elements of the original culture, but not coinciding with them. At the same time, the understanding of the message by a foreign cultural recipient is facilitated, but to a certain extent, the national and cultural specificity of the original culture is lost. For example: "Performers received the Tony Award, which is as honorable in the American theater as an Oscar in the cinema."

(example of Yu.A. Sorokin and I.Yu. Markovina).

G.V. Bykova considers compensation as a means of fixing lacunae, the first stage of elimination. The next step is to fill in the gap.

It is also possible to completely eliminate nationally specific elements from the translation text. In this case, the lacunarity of the text is not realized by the recipients of the translation and is revealed only as a result of comparing the text of the translation with the original text.

Specific mechanisms for eliminating lacunae correlate with traditional translation techniques, such as transliteration, tracing, descriptive translation, metonymic translation, addition, omission, etc.

The elimination of gaps is caused by the need to overcome cultural barriers in order to successfully communicate. Since cultural barriers arise not only in the process of verbal, but also non-verbal communication, as evidenced by the results of our study, it can be argued that the non-verbal components of the message are also lacunar when comparing two linguistic cultures. The non-verbal experience of a particular linguocultural community can also be described using the terms of the lacunarity theory.

1.2. Non-verbal communication in the aspect of the theory of lacunarity 1.2.1. Non-verbal means in a communicative act and their lacunae nature Communication is a complex complex process, which includes not only speech messages, the national-specific elements of which are actively studied by linguists within the theory of lacunae.

Human communicative activity includes several subsystems of various types. According to N.M. Henley, "communication is a comprehensive process that takes place at several levels and through several channels at the same time" . R.K. Potapova considers verbal communication as a chain of states in which the production, transmission and reception of verbal messages are only part of the communication process as a whole. Along with the acoustic channel, the visual channel is also used to transmit a message [Potapova 1997: 4]. And although verbal (verbal) language has an unconditional priority in conveying content, many non-verbal aspects of human communication play a decisive role in interactive interaction.

Many researchers believe that non-verbal means of communication contain much more information than verbalisms.

The American researcher R. Birdwistel found that on average a person speaks 10-11 minutes a day, and the verbal component makes up only 35% of the semantic load, and the non-verbal component - 65% of the information (see Fig. 1.1.).

– – –

Albert Mehrabian claims that only 7% of the communicative impact is verbal, while the remaining 93% is provided by non-verbal means: facial expressions, postures, gestures, touch, smells make up to 55%, and the voice prosodic component accounts for up to 38% (see Fig. Fig.1.2.).

– – –

In the transfer of specific information, the unconditional priority of the verbal communication channel is maintained, however, in all linguistic cultures there is a certain set of non-verbal semantic expressions1 that replace words.

Thus, the system of human communication is a complex integrity, including verbal (speech, verbal) and non-verbal and vocal) channels (visual communication (Argyle 1977).

To describe the non-verbal communication channel, scientists use a different set of concepts. In our opinion, the most successful distinction between non-verbal terms is carried out by the researcher V.A.

Labunskaya, who proposes to use the following conceptual apparatus:

1. Non-verbal communication is the broadest abstract concept, which is a means of transmitting information, organizing interaction, forming one's own image, ideas about a partner, exercising influence on another person by non-verbal means.

2. Non-verbal behavior is included in the concept of non-verbal communication.

It is characterized by integrity, or continuity, involuntary and variability. An important characteristic is the involuntariness of non-verbal behavior, which implies the unconscious use of non-verbal symbols that form implicit communications.

3. Non-verbal communications are included in the concept of non-verbal behavior and are a system of non-verbal symbols, signs, codes used to convey a message with a high degree of accuracy, which has a fairly clear range of meanings and can be described as a linguistic sign system. The main phrase "non-verbal semantic expressions" is understood by us as a set of facial, gestural, proxemic, tactile and visual signals used by the communicant to convey the meaning of the message.

characteristics of non-verbal communications that distinguish them from non-verbal behavior are arbitrariness, discreteness and invariance.

4. Non-verbal interaction - a unit of non-verbal communication, a single interaction in the process of non-verbal communication, characterized by a length in time.

The most important concept of the terminological system of V.A.

Labunskaya, we define the concept of “non-verbal communication” for this study. When describing non-verbal material, we also use the terms "non-verbal communication" and "non-verbal interaction" in the meanings defined by V.A. Labunskaya.

Important for the study are also the concepts of communicative activity, non-verbal "non-verbal communicative style", "gesture", "kinesic paralinguisms", "kinesic", "kinema" and "gesticon".

These concepts are used in the work in the following meanings:

Non-verbal communicative activity is a set of conscious actions of a communicant to encode and decode non-verbal semantic expressions.

Non-verbal communicative style is a certain set of characteristics of non-speech activity of an ethnophore, which distinguishes it from representatives of other ethnic cultures.

Gesture is an arbitrary manual movement.

Kinetic paralinguisms are gestural units of nonverbal communication.

Kinesic is the same as a conscious gesture.

Kinema is a minimal completed gestural movement with a stable value.

fund of national gestures used in

- - Gesticon to the kinesic system of one or another ethnotype.

It should be noted that a strictly defined concept of "gesticon" has not yet been fixed in domestic science, but only indirectly mentioned by some researchers, for example, A.

Golyandin in the article "Etudes on the Palm" [Golyandin 2004: 65].

Based on the structure of the linguistic personality described by Yu.N.

Karaulov [Karaulov 1987: 86-90], we consider it acceptable to introduce the term “gesticon”. If the linguistic personality according to the theory of Yu.N.

Karaulov to consider as a three-level organization, which includes a lexicon (associative-semantic level), a thesaurus (cognitive level) and a pragmaticon (motivational level), then we supplement the first level of linguistic personality with the concept of “gesticon”. If in the most general form we understand the word "gesticon" as a set of gestures, then we can talk about broad and narrow approaches to its definition. Thus, a gesture can represent a set of national gestures, which allows using the phrase “Chinese (Anglo-American, Russian, etc.) gesture”. If we use the word “gesticon”, characterizing an individual, his individual characteristics of communicative activity, then it is advisable to talk about “the gesture of a colleague (friend, neighbor, etc.)”. In our study, the concept is used in its broad sense and "gesture"

is considered as a component of non-verbal communicative activity, as an inherent reality of the non-verbal communicative style of the ethnophore and as a substratum in relation to gesture, kinesic parallingualism, kinesymic and kinema.

The indicated terminological apparatus is used in the following system: the most abstract category "non-verbal communication is determined by non-verbal (communication)"

communicative activity of representatives of a particular linguistic culture, which consists of the number of non-verbal interactions carried out and is characterized by a certain style.

Non-verbal communication style includes the concept of a national gesture. The gesticon, in turn, is a fund of national gestures of paralingualisms (kinesic kinesicomes), the minimum link of which is the kinema (see Fig.

NON-VERBAL – KINEMA COMMUNICATION GESTURES, KINESICHES

ACTIVITY - KINESICOMES

NON-VERBAL -

INTERACTION GESTICON

CII

NONVERBAL COMMUNICATIVE

STYLE Fig. 1.3. Systematization of the conceptual apparatus of the theory of non-verbal communication Before describing the research material, using a certain conceptual apparatus of the theory of non-verbal communication and the theory of lacunae, it is necessary to address the question of the relationship between verbal and non-verbal means in a communicative act, which will highlight the main characteristics of non-verbal means of communication.

The most detailed analysis of the correlation of verbal and non-verbal means in a communicative act in the works of various researchers (primarily foreign ones) is presented in the monograph by M.G. Lebedko [Lebedko 1999: 84–89]. She singles out two main conflicting views on the problem of the relationship between verbal and non-verbal means of communication. According to the first point of view, the system of non-verbal means of communication is completely autonomous.

According to M. Ardzhil and P. Trower, “two separate languages are used in human society, each of which performs its own functions - a non-verbal channel of communication is used in a person’s social behavior to express a personal attitude towards someone, while a verbal channel of communication used primarily to convey information. According to G. Beatty, this approach assumes that the communication channel performs mainly “non-verbal social functions; the verbal channel of words and sentences conveys semantic information.

According to another approach, the system of non-verbal means of communication is considered in conjunction with the language, but for the convenience of studying it is “separated” from the flow of events and communication. This division is conditional. It is used to focus on the participants in the communication and their behavior. Without denying the importance of the non-verbal communication channel and its ability to convey semantic information (for example, the use of non-verbal signals by a lecturer in a noisy audience), G. Beatty says that “these advantages are not so noticeable due to the huge scope and mobility of verbal means of communication, which make up a system of complex rules for managing possible statements, a system of rules that includes a series

- universal principles considered innate in all representatives of the human race.

Most researchers recognize the importance of a systematic approach to the analysis of the communication process, which implies the parallel existence and interaction of verbal and non-verbal channels of communication, which is due to the deep processes underlying the speech and non-verbal activity of the individual. According to one of the leading experts in the study of domestic non-verbal semiotics G.E.

Kreidlin (Kreidlin 2000), the presence of common properties of the two modes of communication is confirmed by the following facts:

1) The expression of the meaning of the message can be motivated in specific conditions only by words, only by gestures (for example, the meaning of “not very, so-so” and the American gesture “perform oscillating movements from side to side with the palm of the hand with spread fingers”1), only by paralinguistic units or combination of both characters. Such meanings and gestures include the meanings “there” and “no money” and, accordingly, the gestures “point the thumb back over the shoulder” (a gesture used in Russian, Anglo-American, and Chinese cultures) and “turn out an empty pocket clothes outside” (a gesture characteristic of representatives of the Anglo-American and Russian linguistic cultures), often accompanied by a detailed description and photograph of the gesture are presented in the second chapter.

corresponding verbalisms. The meaning of "predicament" can be conveyed by the speech utterances "what to do?", "what to do?", the paralinguistic element "uh-uh" or the gesture "scratch the back of the head."

2) Each element of kinesic behavior, like an element of verbal language, can be a component of a conventional agreement, the meaning of which is contextually determined. For example, rubbing your palms together, snapping your fingers, running your hand over your forehead.

3) Gestures, like language units, are mostly symbolic signs: they are the facts of the gestural culture of communication, "filling" it in the same way as lexical units fill the vocabulary of a verbal language. The expression of various emotional states is possible both with the help of words and with the help of gestures.

Gesture units of communication, like verbalisms, can be:

a) addressed to a specific person or audience and not addressed to anyone (addressed to anyone);

b) instructive (for example, gestures of a person explaining how to close a door or use some device) and constative (for example, a gesture “arms crossed in front of the chest” with the meaning “no”);

c) calm and expressive character (taking into account the performed body movements);

d) soothing or threatening (for example, stroking the head in order to ease the excitement of a person and the “shake his fist” gesture, expressing the appropriate mood of the gesticulator);

e) warm and cold (for example, the Chinese friendly gesture “pat someone on the shoulder” as a sign of approval or a cordial greeting and the “go away” gesture (gesturing with an outstretched hand indicates the addressee to the door));

f) stylistically neutral and colored (for example, the “teaser” gesture).

Gesture sequences are nothing but semiotic acts analogous to speech utterances in speech acts.

For example, successively performed body movements “hit your forehead with your palm” and “snap your fingers” are a complete semiotic act, the meaning of which can be deciphered something like this: “How did I forget that ?! Here's an idea!"

4) The contexts of the use of gestural units can be quite strictly and fully described in a certain rigid format within the framework of the gestural dictionary. For example, the famous Swiss figure skater Stephane Lambiel, after successfully completing his short program at the Winter Olympics in Turin (2006), while waiting for the results of his performance, showed his fans the “ladybug” gesture (the author’s version of the name of the kinecom).

Performing the gesture, Stephane Lambiel put the closed index and middle fingers of both hands to the temples (the rest are clenched into a fist) and bent them several times, imitating the antennae of a ladybug. The skater's passion for all kinds of soft toys and souvenirs in the form of a ladybug prompted him to use his own gesture, expressing greetings to the fans and warm relations with S.

Lambiel to them. The use of such a kinesic form of communication is strictly specified by the context, which makes it impossible to use a gesture as a non-verbal sign of expressing some other attitude towards someone.

5) Gesture behavior of people, like speech behavior, changes in space and time, as well as under the influence of changing socio-economic and cultural conditions. For example, in China during the reign of the Qin dynasty, there was a special gestural ritual of greetings, which is described by the Chinese researcher Zhang

Zhangyi [1990: 27]. Men of the same social status

meeting with each other, they made bows, in which it was supposed to lay the right hand behind the back. Noble female persons, greeting each other, folded their hands one on top of the other on their left thigh. The Chinese greeted the emperor in a special way: first they swiped the open right hand along the entire length of the left (from the shoulder to the fingertips), then vice versa - the palm of the left hand was swiped along the length of the right. The greeting of the emperor ended with kneeling, during which the knee of the left leg and the palm of the left hand were to touch the ground, and the right hand was behind the back. Currently, such traditions of non-verbal greetings are not observed in China.

In the first half of the 18th century, the British made extensive use of gesticulation, while the Americans of that era were distinguished by restraint of gesticulation. In modern times, the nature of the kinesic behavior of representatives of these linguistic cultures has changed dramatically: now it is the British who are characterized by greater restraint of gestures than the Americans [Issues of optimizing natural communication systems: 45].

6) Many gestures can be translated both into the corresponding verbal language and into another, “foreign” sign language, and the corpus of questions of translating kinesic signs into the sign system of another culture and from one semiotic system to another is reminiscent of the classical questions of translating verbal languages.

For example, the gesture “waving your hand” as a sign of negation can be conveyed in the written text in the following ways: move your hand from side to side, negatively wave your palm in front of you at shoulder level, wave your hand in disagreement.

But when translating the Russian non-verbal meaning of negation into the kinesthetic system of the Chinese linguistic and cultural community, it is necessary to use the gesture form adopted in this culture to convey a negative meaning - to put your hand across.

American researcher of non-verbal means of communication D.

McNeil adheres to the theory of the cumulative functioning of the system of speech and non-verbal components of communication, substantiating his point of view with the following facts:

1) A person uses gestures when he is involved in the communication process. 90% of gestural forms accompany speech.

2) At the semantic and pragmatic levels, gestures complement verbalisms.

3) Words and gestures tend to be synchronized: the gesture phase emphasizes the linguistic equivalent of the utterance (McNeill 1992).

Despite the presence of important common properties between verbal and non-verbal languages, fundamental differences are also fixed between them, which do not allow us to consider these languages as isomorphic semiotic codes or as phenomena of the same order.

The distinction between verbal and non-verbal aspects of communication is carried out for a number of reasons. R.

Harrison believes that non-verbal and verbal communication should be distinguished into the following four categories:

According to the code used;

Through the channel of production and transmission of information;

According to the mechanism of information transfer;

According to the function performed.

Kreidlin identifies three most obvious criteria for the differences between the two semiotic systems in his opinion:

1) the principle of stability and discreteness.

The carriers of one or another linguistic culture confidently determine the belonging of verbalisms to the language and describe their functioning in a given language system. If there may be slight differences in the description of the semantics of linguistic units and the formulation of the rules for their use, then the reaction to a change in the forms and meanings of units, both central and peripheral, is approximately the same for all representatives of the local culture.

In the non-verbal communication system, compliance with such patterns is not observed:

it is more unstable and variable, which is manifested both in the vocabulary units themselves), and in their rules (gestural combination. Only the center of the non-verbal system is more or less outlined, while the periphery remains poorly described and poorly mastered.

2) the mechanism of reference of verbal and non-verbal units.

A significant number of signs take part in non-verbal communication, which either directly indicate their denotation, what is the object and its features - shape, size, etc. (in this case, the parts of the body themselves are used to directly indicate the object or are its substitute), or designate entire situations or fragments of situations, acting in the act of communication as analogues of speech statements. For example, the gesture “the index and thumb fingers are parallel to each other, the rest are closed into a fist” (an analogue of the verbal statement of the measure is “a little bit”). Non-verbal reference is always concrete: it deals with recognizable objects and situations.

3) a set of functions performed.

Gesture signs, unlike verbalisms, are perceived visually for the most part. Basically, these are visual signs (in rare cases - tactile), endowed with special functions of depicting phenomena, situations, objects and properties of the real world and pointing to them.

The units of the non-verbal semiotic system perform not only informative, expressive, regulatory, etc., but also a visual function in a communicative act (Kreidlin 2000).

Chinese Explorer (Wang Hong) (:

1996) distinguishes between verbal and non-verbal languages according to five main criteria (see Table 1).

– – –

Kinetic science (kinesics) studies everything related to gestural communication. This is a separate area of scientific knowledge, the laws and main provisions of which are described below. Lacunology, in turn, is an independent research direction that describes the problem of linguistic non-equivalence of a particular linguistic culture. In science, it seems to us, there is a need for detailed studies of the nationally specific in kinesics, so the question arises of the place for considering this problem in linguistics. If the theory of lacunae is included in the problematic range of issues of ethnopsycholinguistics and, accordingly, psycholinguistics, and kinesics is a separate branch of the theory of non-verbal communication, then a new “free niche” in linguistics is needed to study nationally determined kinesicoms. Such a “free niche” for a detailed study of the identified problem could, in our opinion, be an interdisciplinary science – kinesic lacu- nology. Within the framework of this science, the creation of which in the future is indicated by a number of prerequisites, it will be possible to develop a separate methodology for identifying and studying gestures that reflect the national and cultural characteristics of communication of a particular ethnic group, which is absolutely necessary, since “the theory of gaps allows us to outline an approach to identifying discrepancies in system of "cultural signs", but does not consider in any way the ways of describing and presenting the signs of one culture for a representative" [Gudkov 2003: 80].

This state of affairs in modern science has become the main factor that prompted us to consider the kinesic signs of local culture in terms of the theory of gaps. The allocation of kinesic lacunology into the field of independent scientific knowledge, the formation and description of its conceptual and terminological apparatus and methodology is seen by us as a future scientific discovery in linguistics and a promising topic for doctoral research.

As part of our study, an attempt is made to study national-cultural gestural forms of communication in the light of the theory of lacunae, therefore it is advisable to turn to the consideration of the basic categories of kinesics, and then consider them using the terms and basic provisions of the theory of lacunae.

1.2.2.1. Basic categories and main directions of research in kinesics. Gesture as kinema American kinesiologist R. Birdwhistell, one of the founders of kinesics, believes that this science studies the communicative aspects of structured body movements as part of human behavior (Birdwhistell 1970).

In the English-Russian Dictionary of Linguistics and Semiotics, kinesics is defined as “a science that studies the totality of body movements involved in human communication” [English-Russian Dictionary of Linguistics and Semiotics 2002: 202].

A.P. Sadokhin interprets this term as "a set of gestures, body postures used in communication as additional expressive means of communication" [Sadokhin 2005: 169].

In Russian linguistics, kinesics is a special discipline that studies the semiotics of body movements [Issues of optimization of natural communication systems 1971: 39];

visually perceived range of movements that perform an expressive-regulatory function in communication [Labunskaya 1986: 8];

communication through facial expressions and body movements [Leontovich 2005:

We adhere to the definition fixed in the Big Encyclopedic Dictionary, ed. V.N. Yartseva: kinesics (from the Greek.

Kinesis - movement) - "a set of kinems - significant gestures, mimic and pantomic movements included in communication as non-verbal components in the direct communication of communicants" [YaBES 1998: 221].

According to most kinesiologists, Charles Darwin's research is the first attempt at a "communicative" analysis of body movements, which marked the beginning of modern kinesics. The beginning of the formation of kinesic science as an independent direction of research is associated with the work of Franz Boas (Boas 1911), who studied the gestures of the Indian tribes of the northwest coast of the United States. However, the anthropological-linguistic method of E. Sapir, who considered gestures as a code that must be learned in order to successfully communicate, had a decisive influence on the development of modern kinesics (Sapir 1949).

A particularly strong impetus to the development of kinesic teachings was given, according to Yu. Kristeva, by “microcultural analysis”, presented primarily in the studies of Margaret Mead, a follower of F. Boas, who paid special attention to the cultural determinants of behavior (Kristeva 2004).

This kind of scientific research necessitated the emergence in the 50s of the twentieth century of a separate discipline dealing with the study of the gestural code of communication - kinesics.

laid the foundation for the structural analysis of body movements. In it, the scientist presented the results of many years of research in the field of kinesics and his own (the original notation for recording musical gestures), and his colleagues. But nevertheless, the concept of speech activity by E. Sapir became the basis of kinesic methods of research, suggesting its study as a series of “levels” analyzed separately. Psycholinguistic studies of B. Whorf (Whorf

1956) and C. Osgood (Osgood 1954) oriented kinesics to the study of the problem of the relationship of communication with other cultural systems as carriers of cultural and personal characteristics.

Modern kinesics, which is in its infancy, explores the main problem situations:

1) possible ways of using linguistic models;

2) defining your own units and combinations.

The task of kinesics is to search for "repetitive elements" in the communicative flow, in their abstraction and in the study of their structural role (Kristeva 2004), which implies the need to distinguish between levels of gestural code. Foreign kinesiologists F. Poyatos, R. Birdwhistell, W. Stokoe, W. La Barre, C. Voegelin, A. Hayes believe that these may be levels corresponding to levels identified in linguistics, or levels that explore the relationship between speech and gesture . In this regard, it is interesting to analyze the concepts of R.

Birdwistel, K. Wöglin and W. Stokow.

K. Voeglin identified a number of distinctive features in sign speech, approximately equal to the number of phonemes in the language, and came to the conclusion that sign speech can be analyzed at two levels, similar to phonemic and morphological (Voegelin 1958).

V. Stokow proposed to call the basic elements of gestures "herems". The theory of the American researcher says that each gesture morpheme, which is the smallest meaningful unit, consists of three heremes - structural points of posture (tabula), configuration (designatum) and movement (signation) (see Fig. 1.4.).

– – –

Rice. 1.4. Structural organization of gesture according to the theory of K. Stokow According to the main provisions of the theory of V.

Stokow's analysis of gestures occurs at three levels:

Cherem analysis (cherology);

Analysis of the combination of heremes (morphocheremics);

Morphology and syntax (morphemics).

Some researchers (Kroeber 1958) hold the view that in sign speech it is impossible to distinguish units corresponding to phonemes, and therefore the analysis should be limited to the level of units corresponding to morphemes.

One of the leading experts in the field of research on non-verbal means of communication, Pierre Oleran, proved the impossibility of applying grammatical, syntactic and logical categories to gesture1, since they are based on rigid subdivisions (Olron 1952).

The theory of the American scientist R. Birdwhistel is one of the most developed in kinesics. In 1959, R. Birdwhistel proposed a catalog of some of the simplest human movements and static postures - kinesic atoms and molecules. He called the elementary acts of bodily human behavior kines, which he defined as “the smallest, further indivisible, least noticeable movements that have an extremely short duration of about a second.” According to 1/50.

definition of R. Birdwistel, kinems are “larger units with the help of which real communication between people takes place”; “kinemas form a structure and combine into larger units - kinemorphs and kinesyntagmas” (see Fig. 1.4).

The concept of "gestural" should be understood as a system of consciously reproduced manual forms of conveying the meaning of the message.

– – –

Rice. 1.5. Structural organization of gesture according to the theory of Ray Birdwhistel Elementary units of motor behavior are linear, motor expressive, referring to neurophysiological mechanisms in which each moment of movement is both an inhibitory factor (in relation to the previous moment) and an excitatory factor (in relation to the next one). Kinema, therefore, is a dialectical unity of opposites - inhibition and excitation (Chesnov 1989).

A. Leroy-Gourhan devoted a special study to the genesis of kinem, which also emphasizes their dialectical qualities. The body must be in balance with the external and internal environment. The bringing together of these conflicting impulses A. Leroy-Gourhan calls confrontation, which is observed even on the lower levels of the nervous system, especially the sympathetic one, which transmits the regulatory commands of elementary behavior. In his opinion, the whole block of operational chains (gestures, manners, actions) creates the foundation of individual behavior aimed at maintaining ties with society. The specificity of operational chains stored in the memory of society and established in the early period of life imitatively, is determined by their functioning within a particular linguistic culture and is realized only in comparison with the rules of a foreign society (Leroi-Gourhan 1974).

Along with the concepts of “kina” and “kinema”, the concept of “allocine” proposed by R. Birdwhistel is also important in kinesics.

Kinema is "the name of a class of similar allokines, that is, movements that are contextually interchangeable without changing the meaning." R. Birdwhistel determined the differential value of kines by interviewing informants. He described individual gestures in different cultures and among different peoples, and, in particular, found that in American culture people regularly use 50-60 kinems in communication, of which more than half correspond to the head. These are three types of nods: a single nod, a double and a triple nod, two types of head turns to the side (lateral head sweeps): a single and a double turn of the head; one kinema: head cock kineme; one kineme: head tilt kineme; three types of ligaments (connectives), or movements with the whole head (whole head motion kinemes): “the head is raised, and for some time is in this position”, “the head is lowered and is in this position for some time”, “the head takes some some other situation” and a number of others will be thrown.

R. Birdwhistel also proposed a convenient system for recording gestures.

To indicate an open eye, he used the sign "", and the sign "-"

signifies a closed eye. He called such conventional signs kinegraphs (see Fig. 1.6.).

Rice. 1.6. Kinegraphs of the lips according to the theory of R. Birdwhistel

According to the scientist, the body can be divided into eight spheres, and the movements of each of them are described by a special kind of kinegraphic symbols.

Kinetic variables he called "various characteristics of gestures and gestural activity" . Examples of kinesic variables are the time of the movement, the method of its implementation, the amount of movement, the degree of muscle tension, etc. Subsequently, the concept of a kinesic variable in non-verbal semiotics was expanded, and some parameters of the context of its use were also referred to kinesic variables: the social status of communication partners , their age, gender, attitude to each other, type of communication situation and others.

Kinesics can be understood more broadly and less broadly.

According to a broad approach, the term "kinesics" is used to refer to the science of the language of the body and its parts, identifying "body language"

with “body technique”, which also includes unsigned (involuntary) movements [Grigorieva, Grigoriev, Kreidlin 2001: 166].

In view of the need to accurately define the boundaries of the research area, kinesicists distinguish between instinctive movements, actions and codes "based on" kinesic of a certain cultural tradition and realized along with other arbitrary conventional semiotic systems (Issues of optimization of natural communication systems 1971).

According to N.B. Mechkovskaya body movements are divided into:

Movements that are not signs are psychologically insignificant physical movements and physiological processes;

Signs-symptoms - psychologically significant postures, gestures, facial expressions that are not conditional, directed from the addresser to the addressee;

Signs-kinemas are communicatively significant body movements, gestures and mimic movements used as ordinary behavioral acts [Mechkovskaya 2004: 137].

Psychologically insignificant physical movements differ from communicatively significant ones in that they unintentionally accompany someone's speech or actions and carry an emotional load, expressing joy, delight, pain, grief, etc. If a person grabs his head with his hands in horror, then he makes an involuntary movement. When, several centuries ago, an athlete first raised his hands up in commemoration of victory, he made an involuntary movement.

Such a movement began to be often repeated in similar situations, received the status of a symbol accepted in this community and became arbitrary. At present, the "raised arms of the athlete"

are a conventional sign. In other words, any arbitrary movement is significant. For example, the gesture "scratch the back of the head" means bewilderment.

Communicatively significant movements form a system of signs that are the subject of semiotics. This science explores the general principles underlying the structure of all signs, taking into account their use as part of messages and the nature of these messages, as well as the features of various sign systems and messages using these different types of signs [Jakobson 1998: 320]. True, even the ancient Stoics determined the essence of linguistic signs, which lies in their two-sided structure, in the unity of the directly perceived signans (signifier) and the implied signatum (signified). For example, a gesture in which the middle and index fingers of the hand are straightened and form a semblance of the Latin letter V, and the remaining fingers are bent, is significant, as it has a certain shape and meaning: “I am looking for a person with whom I would like to drink and share the money necessary for this expenses". It is the sign character that distinguishes voluntary body movements, which are studied by kinesics, from physiological, involuntary ones.

There is no doubt that research in the field of kinesics needs further expansion and deepening. Therefore, the research boom associated with attempts to make some clarifications in the science of body language can be considered quite natural.

Modern kinesic research is being conducted in various directions.

The main directions are the following:

anthropological, biomorphological, linguistic, 1.

neurophysiological and psychological descriptions of gestures;

2. typology of gestures and gestural behavior within the gestural system on the basis of their morphological, structural or semantic features (on features, from the point of view of functioning, areal and social contexts of use, correlation with speech, etc.);

3. cross-cultural comparative analysis of gesture systems of various types;

study of linguistic, psychological, social and 4.

cultural aspects of gestural communication both in itself and in relation to verbal communication;

therapeutic and clinical studies of pathology 5.

kinesic behavior;

6. study of the origin, patterns of historical and cultural evolution of gestures and gesture systems;

applied aspects of gestural kinesics 7. (modeling of communication on a computer, the use of gestures in raising children and in teaching, the role and functions of gestures in rhetoric, analysis of theatrical and film gestures, kinesic geography and dialectology, and much more).

In the work of M. Knapp "Non-verbal communication in human communication" (Knapp 1972), all kinesic studies were conditionally divided into three large groups. The first - prekinesics - deals with the analysis of the physiology and morphological structure of gesture movements, as well as the possibilities and conditions for the transition of one gesture to another. The second, microkinesics, studies the minimal units of sign language, kines and kinemas. In addition, its subject is the semantics, syntax and pragmatics of sign words and sign phraseological units. The third group of studies is called macrokinesics, or sociokinesics. It is devoted to describing the functioning of gestures in a social context, that is, in such conditions where the functions of gestures are quite clearly outlined and defined.

We consider kinema to be the most important kinesic concept in the sense of “an expressive finished (having a certain structure, a way of performing and an equally stable meaning) and an independent mimic or gestural movement” [Akhmanova 1966: 105]. Kinemas are explored in the structure of gestures.

The word goes back to the Latin word "gesture" "gerere", meaning to be responsible, to control, "to carry, perform, perform." The immediate "ancestor" of the word "gesture"

(more precisely, the English equivalent of the word "gesture") is "gestura", a medieval Latin word, the meaning of which can be described as "a way of wearing something or a way of acting." According to the first English monuments, where the word “gesture” occurs, it had the meaning “the way a person stands or walks” at that time.

As A. Kendon notes, later this word was used only to refer to “the correct bodily behavior of the speaker, that is, how the speaker should use the capabilities of his body to influence listeners”.

Despite the fact that gestures have attracted the attention of prominent thinkers since antiquity (Celsus, Cicero, Quintilian, Laozi, Aristotle and even Pythagoras (according to some scientists)), their interpretation in modern linguistics is rather ambiguous.

For example, David Givens offers two options for defining the term "gesture":

1) body movement, posture, or material artifact that encodes or influences concept, motivation, or mood; gesture is not a material reality or energy, but information;

2) a sign, signal or key used in the communication process in combination with verbal speech or separately (Givens 2005).

G. Gibsch and M. Forverg interpret the word as "gestures"

more or less clearly perceived and “certain described properties of general motor skills, mainly the surface of the body (face - facial expressions, the whole body - pantomime, arms and hands - gestures)" [Gibsh, Forverg 1972: 126].

A. Kendon considers a gesture as any visual action that is performed for the purpose of communication.

Usually this action is addressed to another participant in the communicative act, who perceives it as intentional, arbitrary and conveying a certain meaning, regardless of the action itself.

O.S. Akhmanova defines gestures as a system of various kinds of body movements, especially hand movements, as part of a communicative act and as a subject of kinesics [Akhmanova 1969: 149].

EAT. Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov consider all body movements as gestures, except for the movement of the eyes and facial muscles [Vereshchagin, Kostomarov 1981: 36].

G.E. Kreidlin refers to gestures as movements of the arms, legs or head [Kreidlin 2002: 10].

R. Birdwhistel clarifies that “a gesture is a bound morph, which means that gesture forms are deprived of autonomy and their identification requires taking into account kinesic behavior acting as an infix, suffix, prefix or transfix. Gestures are something like "transfixes", because they are inseparable from verbal communication.

Thus, a narrow and broad interpretation of the term "gesture" is possible. In a broad sense, a “gesture” accumulates all body movements (even the smallest ones), as well as postures and distances between communicants. In a narrow sense, this definition is interpreted as a movement of hands with a communicative intention. We adhere to the point of view of O.S. Akhmanova and limit ourselves to the study of manual gestures.

In the second half of the 20th century, dozens of major works in foreign and domestic linguistics and kinesics were devoted to the study of various types of gestures. R. Birdwhistel, A.

Kendon , D. McNeil , D. Morris , A. Pease , F.

Poyatos, J. Fast, P. Ekman, D. Efron and some other scientists have made a significant contribution to the development of foreign kinesics. Researchers V.I. Anadakova, R.P. Volos, Z.M.

Volotskaya, N.V. Glagolev, I.N. Gorelov, G.E.

Kreidlin, V.A. Labunskaya, M.G. Lebedko , T.M.

Nikolaev, N.I. Smirnova, Yu.Yu. Chernyavichyute, R.I. Shlapakov also made a significant contribution to the study of gestural forms of communication.

In the modern research situation, a philosophical approach to the study of gestures is being cultivated, the purpose of which is to consider kinesics as a science independent of linguistic schemes proper. Yu. Kristeva insists on the need for this kind of research and points to a possible non-traditional direction in the development of the science of gestures using the construction of kinesic models based on the analysis of a new body of data (Kristeva 2004). She proposes to consider a gesture as some kind of practice, then the problem of meaning recedes into the background, and the problem of considering “meaning” as “indication”, and “sign” as “anaphora” comes to the fore (taking into account the etymology of this term and its meaning in structural syntax). “An anaphoric (relational) function is a function of transgression in relation to the verbal structure, having as a connotation “disclosure”, “distribution”. The anaphoric function of a semiotic text as a whole constitutes the background against which a certain process of semiotic production takes place. Interesting [Kristeva 2004: 119].

It should be noted that the Chinese researcher Chang Chengming managed to prove the existence of a connection between the hieroglyph and the gesture. In his doctoral dissertation, he lists six principles of ancient Chinese Lishu writing (403-247 B.C.):

1) pictorial representation of objects;

2) an indication of the action;

3) combination of ideas;

4) a combination of figurative and phonetic elements;

5) shift of meaning;

6) borrowing; this also includes the division of Chinese characters into “wen” (hieroglyphs striving for figurativeness) and “tseng”

(complex characters with a tendency to indicate) (Tchang TchengMing 1937).

The principles of ancient Chinese writing named by Chang Chengming point to the precedence of gesture as a "sign" and "indication of action" in relation to "consciousness" (an idea).

Yu. Kristeva believes that the use of linguistic methodology is only one of the possible options for the study of sign language, and the future of kinesics is associated with the study of sign language as a semiotic text that is not blocked by closed languages.

Thinking about gestures, one cannot exclude the question of the definition of "gesture language" ("body language"), which is still debatable.

The phrase "body language" ("body language") appeared in the 70s of the twentieth century with the publication of J. Fast's monograph "Body Language".

The scientist noted that “body language and kinesics are based on behavioral models of non-verbal communication, but kinesics is still such a young science that its authoritative researchers can be counted on the fingers of one hand.”

Currently, “body language” refers to body movements, postures and facial expressions through which people communicate (Givens 2005).

In the English-Russian dictionary of linguistics and semiotics "body language"

(“body language”) is defined as “a non-verbal communicative system, the signs of which are various gestures, postures, mutual physical arrangement of communicants, and, with a broader understanding, also semiotically significant temporary and permanent modifications of the physical appearance: features of hairstyles and cosmetics, body coloring, various mutations (tattoo, scarification, piercing, etc.)" [English-Russian Dictionary of Linguistics and Semiotics:

In the Big Encyclopedic Dictionary, sign languages are defined as communicative systems, the plan of expression of which is built not on an acoustic, as in sound languages, but on a kinesic (gestural-mimic) basis [YaBES 1998: 153].

O.S. Akhmanova uses several terms to designate sign language and calls it pasimology, kinesic language, linear language, manual language. She considers sign language as "a set of expressive gestures, various body movements (with the exception of the movement of the speech apparatus) used as a means of communication" [Akhmanova 1969: 534].

Kreidlin believes that sign language is a system that has the following four qualities:

1. sign languages have their own history and the structure of units that develops in the course of historical development - a network of elements and relationships between them;

2. each sign language has its own language and grammar;

3. all sign languages present their units, as well as the rules for their combination and use in a well-organized way;

4. units of sign languages can be interpreted in natural language and in most cases "translated" into it [Kreidlin 1999: 173].

The most significant differences between sign languages and spoken languages relate to the plane of expression. Gesture, the smallest bilateral unit of sign language, is made up of herem (from the Greek.

hejr, hejros "hand"), combined into three classes. The chaerems of one of them indicate the place of the gesture, the second - the configuration of the hand, the third - the nature of the movement [YBES 1998: 153]. The number of heremes can be compared with the number of phonemes in a spoken language. The objects of study of kinesics do not include artificial sign languages (that is, languages that do not correlate with speech). These are, first of all, languages created for the deaf and dumb, professional sign languages and dialects, for example, the language of millers in British Columbia, the signs of sports judges, trading and stock sign systems, the sign language of truck drivers, the sign languages of relatively narrow social groups like the language of the Trappist monks. or Transiscan monks and special ritual sign languages that are common among the Australian Aborigines. The use of the latter is caused by the need to communicate during the ritual silence of young men during the initiation rite or in a situation of mourning (for example, the language of widow women from the Australian Warlpiri tribe). The scope of all these special sign languages, in contrast to ordinary gestures, is very narrow.

In order to clearly distinguish between gestures studied in kinesics and other types of gestures, D. MacNeil developed the concept of a gesture continuum, which is based on the original idea of A. Kendon, proposed in 1988. In 1992, D. McNeill presented the first version of this continuum, which analyzes various manual movements on two measuring segments: the verbal accompaniment phase and the conventionality phase (McNeill 1992). In the 2000 version, D. McNeil added two more measuring levels: the volume of linguistic properties that manual movements possess, and their semiotic content. He proposed to distinguish four types of manual movements: gesticulation itself, pantomime, emblems, and sign languages, which are located within the continuum as follows (see Fig.

Fig.1.7.):

– – –

global/synthetic global/analytic segmented/synthetic segmented/analytic general/synthetic general/analytical segmental/synthetic segmental/analytical 1.7. Manual movements in D. McNeil's continuum The first level corresponds to the degree of verbal accompaniment of manual movements. The second level, the degree of language conditionality, reflects how much manual movements can be systematically organized (whether they represent a sufficiently formed way of producing movements). The third level, the degree of conventionality, is related to the degree of consistency of manual forms between their users.

The fourth level corresponds to the semantic differentiation of manual movements. According to these four levels, sign languages occupy the same position at the level of speech accompaniment, the degree of linguistic coherence and the level of conventionality. The next type of manual movements in the continuum - emblems, is high-context, culturally determined and often replaces speech. Next comes pantomime, which is not as conventional as an emblem, but whose degree of verbal analogy is still high. The essential difference between emblems and pantomime movements is the lack of standardized packaging required by pantomime. On the opposite side of sign languages is gesticulation, which is non-conventional manual movements almost always accompanied by speech.

The most important characteristics of these movements are:

Visual demonstration of values (expression is not linear, but dynamic);

Lack of "correct application" rules (that could apply to them);

Syntheticity (complex manual movement is not a combination of the smallest units, unlike speech utterances) (McNeill 2000).

All gestures, the minimal units of the sign language, go through three phases (stages) - excursion, implementation (reproduction) and recursion.

The excursion prepares the movement, giving it the desired shape.

Central to each of the gesture forms is the stage of implementation, especially its culmination (peak). Recursion is the stage that releases energy (out of motion).

Gesture phases may have different durations for different gestures. For example, after performing the gesture - moving the skirt to her knees, the woman's hands for a moment, "pull on, linger on her leg. In this gesture, the phase-excursion is the “position of the hands on the skirt”, the implementation is the “pulling the skirt” phase, and the recursion is the “abduction of hands” phase, and the second and third stages are slower than the first. After the central phase of the “beckon to oneself with a hand” gesture, the hand can take a different position, the initial one for performing another gesture.

The phases of a gesture correlate with such kinesic parameters as the intensity of movement, directions and trajectory of movement, and the degree of muscular tension. They are associated with an amplitude, or breadth, of movement, reminiscent of the length of a spoken syllable, with a speed or temporal duration of movement, similar to the tempo of speech. S.A. Grigoryeva focuses on the fact that “when describing the phases of a gesture, it is necessary to take into account communicative behavior that has a significant impact on the nature of the performance of a gesture” [Grigorieva, Grigoriev, Kreidlin 2001: 179-180].

EAT. Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov put forward the idea that "communicative behavior either involuntarily brings out the inner state of mind of a person, or with its help, communicants consciously transmit information to each other"

[Vereshchagin, Kostomarov 1981: 36]. From the point of view of these researchers, communicative behavior is fundamentally different from self-sufficient behavior, from those actions and deeds that are performed for their own sake, to achieve immediate goals.

Along with everyday everyday gestures, which form the center of the kinesic system, there are various sign dialects.

The southern provinces of China form a special geographical area for Chinese gestures. For example, the Chinese use two different gesture forms for the number "four". Southerners show this figure with the help of straightened thumb, middle, ring fingers and little finger (bend the index finger). In the north of China, a variant of the kinesicom “four” is widespread, which is formed with the help of straightened index, middle, ring fingers and little finger (tuck the thumb), and, according to our experimental data, this version of the gesture is recognized by most Chinese. However, what are all the significant differences between the gestures of the north and south of China has not yet been fully clarified.

Interesting for analysis is also the fact that, according to preliminary results obtained in 1998 by a group of scientists from the Technical University of Berlin, headed by prof. R. Posner, there are obvious lexical discrepancies in kinesic systems even in areas within the same city - East and West Berlin.

As for professional, social and other dialects, according to S.A. Grigoryeva, N.V. Grigorieva and G.E. Kreidlin, are found in all developed cultures. For example, in Australia, a special sign language is noted among hunters of a number of tribes, and in England, football fans use special sign signs. The article by M. Yampolsky tells about the unusual gestures of executioners, orators and actors that existed in different parts of the world since the most ancient times (Yampolsky 1994), and in the report by S. Kwei at the XII International Symposium on Sociolinguistics, which was held in London in March 1998 , it was about the amazing language of the Trappist monks from the Notre Dame de Fair monastery in Hokkaido [Grigorieva, Grigoriev, Kreidlin 2001: 187].

Social, professional, and religious differentiation is also characteristic of the gestural systems of Chinese, Anglo-American, and Russian linguistic cultures. Examples of such gestural systems are the gestures of sports judges in various national sports, special sign languages of climbers and divers, religious gestures performed during Orthodox or Catholic services in the church, gestures of Old Believers or Christian Baptists, gestures of Chinese monks of the monastery From non-verbal "Shaolin" .

Neologisms include individual gestures of the so-called "new Russians" and elements of youth gesture slang of Chinese, American and Russian communicators.

So, one of the properties of a gestural sign, like any other semiotic sign, is asymmetric dualism, which determines possible variants of the divergence of the form and meaning of a gesture both in the gestures of different cultures and within the gestures of one culture. Since we are studying gestures in the context of intercultural non-verbal interactions, we analyze the differences in the gesture systems of different cultures, which signal national-specific gesture elements of the non-verbal communication styles of ethnophores. The national cultural components of the gesture icon of local culture should be considered from the standpoint of the main provisions of the theory of lacunarity.

1.2.2.2. Gesture as an accumulating link of the phenomenon of non-verbal lacunarity In Russian linguistics, the phenomenon of non-verbal communication is not described by researchers in a comprehensive manner, which, as we see it, is explained by the still insufficiently well-developed provisions of the science of linguistic lacunarity, its presence at the stage of actively ongoing research on the formation of its own conceptual scientific apparatus and a relatively short the period of existence of this science as a separate research search.

As for the research situation in the field of kinesic descriptions of nationally specific meaning expressions, only the very first steps are being taken here, and there are very few full-fledged studies of this kind, both in domestic and foreign science, and even extremely insufficient. Such works include the studies of G.E. Blishunova, A.V. Pakhar, T.B.

Reznikova, N.I. Smirnova.

The above facts testify to the research vacuum in the study of non-verbal lacunarity, the accumulating link of which is gesture. To a certain extent, some linguistic categories are applicable to the gestural units of non-verbal communication systems of a particular ethnic culture, one of which is the non-equivalence of the concept.

When identifying the national-specific components of the gestural system of a particular linguistic and cultural community, one should rely on the method of establishing gaps as one of the ways to identify the specifics of local cultures. Yu.A. Sorokin, the author of this method, proposes to consider it in terms of an invariant and a variant of some verbal behavior inherent in a particular local culture. An invariant should be understood as the totality of the verbal behavior of Homo sapiens, which has both differences and certain correspondences with respect to any linguocultural variant of behavior. Within each variant, complex correlations arise at the level of invariant and variant [Sorokin 1977: 122].

Turning to the study of non-verbal components of communicative behavior, we use the method of establishing gaps, taking into account the totality of non-verbal behavior of Homo sapiens. Then we define a non-verbal lacuna as some fragment of a kinesic message, in which there is something incomprehensible or strange for the addressee [Glushchenko 2003: 33].

Describing the non-verbal experience of communication of a local culture, we propose to classify kinesic lacunae, by analogy with verbal ones, as either complete and partial absolute and relative.

Such non-verbal lacunae, the number of which is large in all cultures, are of particular interest for intercultural comparative studies, as they fully reflect the national and cultural specifics of the people, the communicative practice of their everyday communication.

Comparison of the kinesic communication systems of Chinese and Russian, Chinese and Anglo-American and Russian and Anglo-American linguistic cultures gives us reason to talk about the presence of a large number of absolute non-verbal gaps that are found during the interactive interaction of the above local cultures. The description of the semantics of the following Anglo-American sign lacunae was carried out on the basis of the results of studies conducted by I. Zhukova in collaboration with M.G. Lebedko M.G. Lebedko, I.A. Sternin.

The absolute non-verbal gap for the sign systems of Chinese and Russian linguistic cultures is the American kinesic with the meaning "I love you" ("I love you") of the American communicative [Essay on performance behavior 2001: 172-173], which the bearer of American culture raises his clenched fist to the level head and then extends the thumb, index and little fingers. When this gesture is addressed to a representative of Chinese or Russian local culture, he may not guess the meaning of such kinesic behavior, it may even mislead him. Therefore, this gestural form of communication acts as an absolutely lacunar for the Chinese and Russian linguocultural communities. American gesture "rub index fingers together"

(“using one forefinger brush over the back of the other forefinger”), which expresses dissatisfaction with the behavior of someone (underlying), is not used in Russian and Chinese cultures even as a loanword and, therefore, is also an example of an absolute non-verbal lacuna, which is confirmed by the results Russian researchers I. Zhukova and M.G. Lebedko, the Chinese scientist Liu Runqin [1991: 267] and the data of our own experimental

– – –

1. In the theory of lacunarity, broad and narrow approaches are considered to explain its main concept - “lacunae”. In defining the term “lacuna”, we adhere to its broad understanding, which is fundamentally important for our ethnopsycholinguistic research, and consider gaps from the standpoint of Yu.A. Sorokin and I.Yu. Markovina as incomprehensible and strange elements of a foreign cultural text for the recipient, requiring interpretation and signaling the national-specific elements of a particular linguistic culture.

2. To identify linguistic gaps in linguistics, various methods are used, among which we single out the method of identifying gaps by linguistic interviewing, which, in our opinion, allows us to conduct comprehensive full-fledged research to identify non-verbal gaps by obtaining direct knowledge of representatives of a particular ethno-cultural community about the meanings of gestures .

3. The methods of eliminating lacunae identified in the theory of lacunarity - compensation and filling - are options for eliminating spots, which, taking into account the characteristics of "white communication with the help of non-verbal semantic expressions, can be applied in some rethought form to the elimination of lacunar gestural units of communication.

4. The conceptual and terminological apparatus of the theory of lacunae, which, in addition to the main concept of "lacunae", includes the definitions of "absolute lacunae", "relative lacunae", "lacunosphere" and "lacunology", we consider it appropriate to apply to describe the phenomenology of non-verbal lacunarity.

5. If we consider communication as a comprehensive process of conveying the meaning of a message through two channels simultaneously - verbal and non-verbal, then a comprehensive understanding of both verbal and non-verbal forms of communication is necessary.

6. Non-verbal forms of communication can be described using a certain conceptual and terminological apparatus of the theory of non-verbal communication, in which we include the terms communication, communication, non-verbal, non-verbal interaction, communicative, non-verbal, non-verbal activity, non-verbal communicative style, "gesticon", "gesture", "kinesic paralinguisms", "kinesic" and "kinema".

7. The specificity of non-verbal contact in the context of intercultural communication determines the presence of national and cultural characteristics of non-verbal semantic expressions, which, we believe, should be studied in the framework of a future independent scientific search - kinesic lacuology.

Property of asymmetric dualism of a gesture sign 8.

determines its national-cultural conditionality, signaling the presence of lacunar components in the system of gestures of the local culture.

Local culture gestures can be seen as 9.

accumulating link of the phenomenon of non-verbal lacunarity and distinguish them into categories of absolute and partial non-verbal lacunae.

10. Lacunarity is an immanent property of the sign of the Anglo-American, Chinese and Russian linguistic and cultural communities, which is found when comparing three cultures distant from each other.

A detailed description and systematization of relative gesture gaps is considered in the next chapter.

CHAPTER 2. GESTURE GAPS IN THE KINESICAL SYSTEM

CHINESE COMMUNICANTS AGAINST THE BACKGROUND OF THE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND RUSSIAN GESTER

2.1. Lexicographic description of absolutely lacunar gestures of Chinese culture This section describes Chinese complete kinesic lacunae (gestures that are absent in both Russian and Anglo-American linguistic cultures (or only in Russian) if they are present in the non-verbal system of communication of the Chinese) based on the method of linguistic interviewing used by lacunologists to identify lacunar cultural units of a particular ethnic group.

The data for describing Chinese gestures were obtained from interviews and questionnaires of 480 native speakers of the Chinese language and culture. Research was carried out in the provinces of Liaoning (Dalian) in 2004 and Heilongjiang (Heihe) in 2005. The respondents were students, staff and teachers of the Heihei Institute () and the International Institute of Chinese Language and Culture at the Northeast University of Finance and Economics (age of respondents - from 18 to 60).

Since the chosen aspect of the study is only partially studied and its systematic description is not reflected in both Russian and Chinese linguistic research areas, and it is hardly possible to speak about the formation of kinesics as a separate field of scientific knowledge in China at all, then the supporting materials for our practical studies could not serve any dictionary entries from encyclopedias or dictionaries of Chinese gestures, since there are none yet. Chinese lacunar gestural forms of communication were recorded when comparing Russian and Anglo-American gestures with Chinese and when comparing Chinese gestures with kinesic units of non-verbal systems of representatives of Russian and Anglo-American local cultures. The method of associative experimental research served as a starting point in compiling a questionnaire, which included 21 questions and 22 gestures common in Russian and Anglo-American cultures of kinesic behavior; the quantitative sample of Russian and Anglo-American gestures is 1:1. The interview included questions that specified the experimental data obtained during the survey and questions that made it possible to find out the existence of other possible ways of gestural communication among representatives of Chinese local culture. If the form of the survey was the same for all respondents who took part in the study, then in the interview the number of questions varied depending on the degree of interest shown by the respondent in the problem under discussion, the time factor, the level of the intellectual base of the participants and some other conditions.

The reference source for the structural organization of the kinesic material was the form of gesture description proposed by the authors of the Dictionary of the Russian Sign Language (Grigorieva, Grigoriev, Kreidlin Structure of Gesture Description used by the authors 2001).

of the aforementioned dictionary edition, has been transformed into the following version of the necessary components of Chinese kinesicoms and includes:

main nomination;

– – –

“ - ” “ - ” Index finger and middle finger move up and down continuously, imitating bowing, not with heads down to the ground but with fingers to the table.

Accompanying Gestures: Sometimes the gesture is accompanied by an approving smile.

– – –

Sometimes people say: "Thank you for serving me!"

Explanation: This gesture originated during the Qing Dynasty.

Emperor Qianlong went to travel around South China in the clothes of a commoner (a secret from his subjects). One day in the tearoom he poured tea into his dignitary's cup with his own hands. He was horrified, for according to the palace ceremonial, such a favor granted to him by the emperor was to be received on his knees. However, to kneel means to attract attention to yourself and reveal the incognito of the emperor. So, he came up with a more subtle gesture of respect and reverence. The quick-witted courtier flexed his fingers several times, depicting repeated bowing, but not his head to the ground, but his fingers to the table. Since then, this gesture began to spread from generation to generation.

Knowing the meaning of the meaning conveyed by a gesture is an important component in the interpretation of some intercultural contexts, since, for example, in Russia and English-speaking countries, such finger movements on the table indicate a nervous state and lack of patience in a person.

() “ - ”“ - ” This gesture appeared during the Qing Dynasty. Emperor Qianlong visited South China in civil clothes (in secret from the common people). Once in a tea-restaurant emperor served tea to his dignitary himself. That dignitary was shocked as according to the palace ceremonial he was to accept such a favor given to him by emperor standing on the knees. But to stand on the knees was equal to betraying the emperor. Thus, he invented a more discreet gesture of showing respect and subordination. The quick-witted officer moved his fingers up and down continuously, metaphorically depicting repeated bowing, not with heads down to the ground but with fingers to the table. From that time, the gesture was spread generation by generation.

Being conscious of the meaning of this gesture is very important in some intercultural contexts since the same sequence of finger movements on the table expresses nervousness and impatience in Russia and English-speaking countries.

Main nomination: Greeting wnhu Greeting kinesikoma: Hands are Motor skills in front of the chest. The fist of the right hand wraps around the fist of the left.

Hands are before the chest. Right hand fist embraces left hand fist.

– – –

This traditional Chinese gesture is used in unofficial situations as well as in official ones.

Verbal accompaniment: "Hello!", "Congratulations!"

“Good morning (good afternoon, good evening)!”, “Congratulations!”

Explanations: This gesture was once adopted in the circles of martial arts, which put its own symbolism on it. According to one historical version, the open palm of one hand and the clenched fist of the other hand clasped by it symbolize two opposite principles of Chinese natural philosophy - yin and yang. According to other sources, this position of the hands, showing the reluctance to strike the first blow, is a tribute to the opponent. Currently, this gesture is an established element of the greeting with which a wushu sports participant addresses judges and spectators.

With this gesture, the Chinese also congratulate their relatives and acquaintances on the coming of the Spring Festival, happy birthday, promotion, moving to a new apartment, etc.

– – –

Accompanying Gestures: Often the gesticulator bows his head and/or closes his eyes.

/ Gesticulator often bends his head or closes his eyes.

Interpretative meaning: The gesticulator turns to the Buddha with the hope of fulfilling his request.

Gesticulator appeals to Buddha with a hope.

Conditions of use: The gesture is used by generations of all ages in a situation where a person needs help and hope for a positive outcome in any case.

The gesture is used by generations of all age when man needs help and a hope for a positive result of some action.

Verbal accompaniment: Any prayer text

– – –

Hands are before the chest. Left hand fist rests on the right open palm.

Accompanying gestures: As a rule, the gesticulator bows his head.

As a rule, gesticulator bends his head.

Interpretative meaning: The gesticulator demonstrates a respectful attitude towards the addressee.

Gesticulator expresses his respect towards addressee.

Traditional Chinese gesture, a fighting art symbol, is used as a greeting of an opponent.

Verbal accompaniment: Any interjections, combat calls

– – –

To look down on somebody Kinesicoma motor skills: Arms bent at the elbows, placed in front of the chest. The index fingers of both hands are extended forward, the thumbs are in a horizontal position and look at each other (forming two capital English letters “L”), the remaining fingers are gathered into a fist.

“L” Folded arms are before the chest. Left and right forefingers and thumbs make two capital English letters “L”. Other fingers are closed in the fist.

Interpretation meaning: The gesticulator expresses his arrogant attitude towards the addressee.

Gesticulator expresses his haughty attitude towards the addressee.

Terms of use: Used in an informal setting, clearly demonstrating a negative attitude towards the addressee and unwillingness to maintain any relationship with him. This gesture is common among young people.

The gesture is used in unofficial situation to express the negative attitude towards the addressee and no wish to have any relations with him. It is widely spread among the youth.

Perhaps the gesture was once borrowed from

Explanations:

Western European culture of kinesic communication. At present, it is a complete gestural gap for both Russian and Anglo-American linguistic cultures.

– – –

Forefinger of one hand extended, tip touches one's own face several times quickly; similar to scratching, but with the forefinger straight.

Associated Gestures: The gesture can take on a humorous or serious form. In the first case, he is accompanied by a smile, and in the second - by a strict, condemning look, his lips are extended into a tube.

– – –

As a rule, verbal corresponding phrases "Shame on you!", "You ought to be ashamed!" are used.

Explanations: Adults often use it as a playful gesture towards children.

– – –

(), Left hand or right hand little finger is upraised. Other fingers are closed in fist. Palm can be facing in or facing out.

Associated gestures: Usually performed with a serious look, without a smile. Eyebrows can be raised up, lips compressed.

, ] [, This gesture is usually accompanied by a serious look. One can raise his or her eyebrows and squeeze the lips.

Gesturing expresses

Interpretive meaning:

insult to the addressee.

Gesticulator expresses some insult towards addressee.

Gesture is used in situations

Terms of use:

informal daily communication.

The gesture is used in unofficial situations of everyday communication.

Verbal accompaniment: usually absent.

– – –

Fingers of the left hand folded in the fist are before the chest. One rotates right over the fist with his palm facing the ground.

It can be often demonstrated with a smile or a little bit confused look.

Interpretive meaning: The gesticulator hints to the addressee about love feelings.

– – –

It is used in every day communication by men as well as by women when its verbal corresponding element “love” can’t be used (pronounced) due to some circumstances.

Verbal accompaniment: usually absent.

As a rule, no verbal expression is used when demonstrating the gesture.

Clarifications: The gesticulator does not necessarily communicate his feelings to the addressee. He can use this concept in a broad context, taking into account the content of the communicative message.

“” “ Gesticulator does not obligatory communicates the addressee about his own feelings. He can use this notion “love” in a wide context according to the content of the message.

Main category: Loving heart

– – –

Thumbs and middle fingers of both hands join with each other forming heart.

Other fingers are closed in the fist.

Associated Gestures: Often accompanied by a smile or slightly embarrassed facial expression.

It can be often demonstrated with a smile or a little confused look.

Meaning: The gesticulator confesses Interpretational love to the addressee, giving his heart.

Gesticulator declares about his love towards the addressee, giving heart to him.

It is used by young people as a symbol of love in unofficial communication.

– – –

Upraised forefinger of each hand is coming together in front of the body until the two touch each other.

The gesticulator can smile and

Related gestures:

nod.

Gesticulator can smile and nod.

Interpretation meaning: Gesticulating hints to the addressee that there is a love relationship between a guy and a girl.

Gesticulator hints the addressee about boy and girl's love relations.

This gesture is widely spread among the youth, but it's also used by elder generation.

Verbal accompaniment: “There is definitely something between them!”

"There is something between them for sure!"

Explanations: The gesture is used in an informal setting.

– – –

Hands are put to the temples. Forefingers and middle fingers are spread making two English letters "V". Other fingers are closed in the fist.

The fingers, forming "hare ears", can be bent several times.

The head can be tilted to the right or left.

As a rule, this gesture is accompanied with a smile. The finger, making "rabbit's ears", can be crooked for several times. Gesticulator's head may be bent right or left.

Interpretive meaning: Gesticulating, depicting a bunny, expresses his good and cheerful mood.

Gesticulator, imitating hare (rabbit), expresses his being in good mood and his kind feelings.

Terms of use: Often used as a humorous gesture in various situations of everyday communication between children or when children communicate with adults.

It can often become a semi-joking gesture in different situations of every day communication between children or between children and grown-ups.

Verbal accompaniment: usually absent.

As a rule, no verbal expression is used when demonstrating the gesture.

Explanations: The gesture is not used by older people.

– – –

Hands are before the chest. The right palm is laid over the left palm. Thumbs ajar rotate right or left or crook for several times.

Accompanying gestures: As a rule, the gesture is accompanied by a smile.

As a rule, this gesture is accompanied with a smile.

Interpretative meaning: The gesticulator wishes 1) happiness,

2) longevity to the addressee, or 3) alludes to a deceived cuckold husband.

– – –

As a rule, no verbal expression is used when demonstrating the gesture.

Explanations: In the third meaning, the gesture takes on a comic form, which is usually used in adult communication.

Teachers of the Russian language working according to the textbook ... "Semkova FEATURES OF PSYCHOSOMATIC SYMPTOMS AND EXPERIENCE OF THE IMAGE OF I IN MEN AND WOMEN TEACHERS A study was made of the features of psychosomatic symptoms and experiences ... "

"2. The present and future of professional orientation of student youth: theory and practice / ed. S. N. Chistyakova. St. Petersburg: Publishing house of FGNU IPO OV RAO, 2012. 404 p.3. Psychology of professional consulting: textbook / ed. E. F. Zeera. Ekaterinburg: Publishing house Ros. state prof.-ped. un-ta, 2009. 246 p. AND..."

«Watercolor №6 (18) June '16 magazine for parents Absolutely Children online summer Let's secure the child's hangouts on the Internet How not to get bored in the city this summer? Family budget Six ideas for saving money Dob mat Urfo MI Z VO OBOY SS advertisement advertisement A A

Primary school teacher Baryshnikova T.A. EXPLANATORY NOTE The working program of the course "The World Around" was developed on the basis of the author's program N. F. Vinograd ... "APPLICANTS FOR THE 2015/16 ACADEMIC YEAR IN THE DIRECTION OF PREPARATION 37.04.01 PSYCHOLOGY profile: Pedago ... "13.00.02 - theory and methodology of training and education (physics) DISSERT for competition...» Russian version: Kornienko D.S., Derish F.V. The Dark triad and chronotype Perm State National Research University,...» training of scientific and pedagogical staff in postgraduate studies 35.06.01 Agriculture, training profile "General farming, crop production..."

"State budgetary educational institution GYMNASIUM No. 205 of the Frunzensky district 192239 St. Petersburg, st. Dimitrova, 10, building 3, tel. 361-19-11 Adopted Approved At a meeting of the pedagogical ... "

2017 www.site - "Free electronic library - various documents"

The materials of this site are posted for review, all rights belong to their authors.
If you do not agree that your material is posted on this site, please write to us, we will remove it within 1-2 business days.

The article analyzes the linguistic meaning as a sign component in the cognitive essence of human life. Of particular interest to the article is the substantive aspect of the linguocultural predetermination of linguistic meaning. Meaning as a sign component is currently assigned the role of a central position in the cognitive essence of human life. In the process of development of linguistic thought, the most important linguistic category "meaning" received various interpretations, was studied in a variety of aspects, and underwent significant changes in its essential understanding. The modern concept of linguistic meaning includes all the diversity of its manifestation, including the linguistic and cultural meaning of human life. The theory proposed by the authors of the article is based on the concept of a culturological component, which is understood as cultural and value information contained within a language unit.

culture

linguocultural world

meaning

linguistic meaning.

1. Avanesova G. A., Kuptsova I. A. Codes of culture: essence and purpose // Social and humanitarian knowledge. - 2008. - No. 1. - P. 30–33.

2. Berger P., Luckmann T. Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise on the Sociology of Knowledge. – M.: Medium, 1995. – S. 85–89.

3. Bitokova S. Kh. Paradigmality of metaphor as a cognitive mechanism (based on the Kabardian, Russian and English languages): Abstract of the thesis. dis. … doc. philol. Sciences. - M., 2009. - S. 17.

4. Kudakova E. E. Intersubjectivity and dialogue: Experience of the existential-phenomenological characteristics of the relationship I-Other: Avtoref. dis. … cand. philosopher. Sciences. – Rostov-on-Don, 2002. – P.14–15.

5. Lotman Yu. M. Inside the thinking worlds. - M.: Languages of Russian culture, 1999. - S. 217-219.

6. Maystrenko V. I. Social and philosophical analysis of education as a cultural phenomenon: Abstract of the thesis. dis. … cand. philosopher. Sciences. - Rostov-on-Don, 2009. - 24 p.

7. Prokhorov Yu. E. National socio-cultural stereotypes of speech communication and their role in teaching Russian to foreigners. - M .: Pedagogy-Press, 1996. - 237 p.

Introduction

In the second half of the 20th century, the linguistic features of a linguistic and cultural community become a linguistic target for multidirectional semiotic research flows. Meaning is one of the central concepts in linguistics, studied in a wide variety of aspects - from formal linguistic analysis to broader research in the field of social semiotics (Apresyan Yu. D. 1999, Arutyunova N. D. 1988, Vasiliev L. G. 1999). According to these studies, the meaning is not “located” in a specific text, but stems from mutually constructive relationships between texts and levels of context (local and global). These relations mark not only the national identity of the representatives of the linguocultural community, but also the originality of the interpretation of objective reality, revealed within the framework of this community.

Linguistic modeling and interpretation of linguistic meaning are among the most frequent human activities. Man, as an "explaining" rational being, makes conclusions about objective reality, cultural situations, and about himself, thus producing concepts about the world in which he lives and of which he is an integral part.

The cultural revolution that took place in the last century can best be described as the disintegration of the bonds that traditionally united people and certain sociocultural communities. We can talk about the disappearance of the traditional system of values. It seems that it is not a coincidence that the issue of identity - including linguistic and cultural identity - appears to be one of the most discussed in the 1980-1990s. linguistic problems (Bogin G. I. 1999, Vezhbitskaya A. 1996, Gerd A. S. 2001, Grishaeva L. I. 2007). These multi-vector trends reflect the protracted crisis of the concept of linguistic meaning, which functions in its finished form and has relative speech stability. Meaning begins to be considered in all its diversity as the linguocultural meaning of human life.

Cultural phenomena are characterized from an intersubjective point of view. They involve the cognitive consciousness of more than one subject of culture. Cultural symbols are transmitted to representatives of the socio-cultural community by combining them with each other through a certain content of meanings. Intersubjectivity appears to be a decisive factor in the fact that meanings acquire material dimensions, begin to exist in a material form outside the cognitive consciousness of representatives of a linguocultural community.

However, the intersubjective nature of linguistic meaning does not mean that it is a universal concept for all people and at all times. Different value maps do not carry the same weight in every culture. Each such map manifests the position and point of view of the linguistic and cultural community that gave birth to it. The organization of the world of meanings constructs the daily life of entire linguocultural communities, the concepts of their linguistic self-identity.

In this regard, research aimed at analyzing the language as a practical consciousness of representatives of a linguocultural community is being updated in linguistic science (Berestnev G. I. 2000, Zhol K. K. 1990, Kis G. 2002).

Perhaps due to the complexity of the structure of the language, many linguistic theories have attempted to consider it in a one-dimensional dimension. The most common view of language in modern linguistics is its representation as a tool through which the speaker initiates various messages.

Linguistics recognizes that language is not only a means that is involved in the process of transmitting a message, but also an immanent linguocultural characteristic of interlocutors. Language is born in the process of interaction between interlocutors, i.e. appears as practical and intersubjective consciousness. The language and the meanings realized through the language "grasp" the objective reality and its cultural component.

Yu. M. Lotman in this regard recognizes the functional dualism of texts in the system of culture. In the cultural dimension of society, texts serve to adequately convey existing meanings and generate new meanings. The first function is implemented in the most optimal way, when the codes of the speaker and the listener coincide and, therefore, when the texts have the maximum degree of unambiguity and unambiguity. The second function stems from polyphony.

In this respect, the text ceases to be a passive link in the transfer of some permanent information between input (addresser) and output (addressee). Yu. Lotman notes that it is the second function of texts that appears to be the most fruitful for studying the space of culture. A place of focus on the process of conveying meaning, this function sheds light on the understanding of the process of generating meaning both intra- and intermentally.

The analysis of the second function reveals the main structural characteristic of the text, its internal heterogeneity, which reflects the corresponding characteristic of the national language. The meaning generated by the text becomes a product not only of textual evolution, but also, to a large extent, of the interaction between linguistic structures, which in the closed world of texts is an active cultural factor, a working semiotic system.

Language participates in the formation of the linguocultural concept of reality in a centralized way. It functions in all areas and levels of the linguistic and cultural community - from the simplest to the most complex. It determines the conditions of linguocultural activity and is self-determined by the conditions of this activity. Speaking as such, language simultaneously appears as a producer, an instrument and a product of meaning.

Thus, language is an active element of people's interaction, setting limits on meanings, defining the life of representatives of the linguocultural community by sorting speech facts participating in the nominations of objects of reality. The production of the new in language corresponds to what already exists in the linguistic matter: the modeling of a new meaning is interconnected with already existing meanings. P. Berger and T. Lukman emphasize the fact that people see reality through the categories that each culture uses to make it possible to perceive reality. In this respect, symbolic systems occupy a central position. The language produces labels for objects that are meaningful in every culture. Along with the different language generates like.

In addition to the fact that language imposes restrictions on the speech activity of a speaking person, it is a production system within which new categories and a new vision of cultural reality are generated. Metaphor plays a central role in this process, which is a linguistic image that produces meanings through analogy, by explaining or interpreting one entity through another. In the linguoculturological dimension of language, metaphor is considered as a fundamental means of meaning objects of reality. In metaphor, the previously unknown is explained through the modeling of a parallel between that unknown and what is already known. The new linguocultural reality receives meaning through the "old" vocabulary fund of the language.

So, the linguocultural world of meanings does not consist of distinctly distinguished objects, but is a combination of hybrids that change their form of expression diachronically. In this respect, meanings are not so much completed products as they are the production of changes determined by many factors. However, in the temporal perspective, there is a tendency for the meaning to stabilize.

Reviewers:

Kitanina E. A., Doctor of Philology, Professor of the Department of Theoretical and Applied Communication Science of the State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education of the Rostov State Economic University "RINH", Rostov-on-Don.

Kudryashov I. A., Doctor of Philology, Professor of the Department of Russian Language and Theory of Language, PI SFedU, Rostov-on-Don.

Bibliographic link

Loktionova N.M., Kuzminova I.A. LINGUOCULTURAL WORLD OF MEANINGS // Modern problems of science and education. - 2013. - No. 1.;
URL: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=7746 (date of access: 02/27/2019). We bring to your attention the journals published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural History"