CHAPTER 1. The history of the study of socio-political vocabulary and the principles of its selection and description.
§ one . The main approaches to the study of socio-political vocabulary in the linguistic tradition.
§2. theoretical apparatus.
§3. Principles of selection and description of socio-political vocabulary.
§4. Field structure of socio-political vocabulary and ways of its presentation and description.
§five. Possibilities of systemic (parametric) analysis of socio-political vocabulary.
CHAPTER 2. Conceptual dominants of socio-political vocabulary (key concepts).
§ 1. General remarks.
§2. Power: linguistic meaning and concept.
§3. State: linguistic meaning and concept.
§4. Society: linguistic meaning and concept.
§five. People and nation", correlation of concepts and concepts.
§6. Conclusions.
CHAPTER 3. Socio-political vocabulary in the narrow sense.
§one. The central descriptor is "power".
§2. The central descriptor is "state".
§3. The central descriptor is "society".
§4. Conclusions.
CHAPTER 4. Ideological vocabulary. Functional-pragmatic aspect.
§ 1. Irrelevant vocabulary.
§2. Current vocabulary.
2.1. Universal evaluative vocabulary.
2.2. Sovietisms.
§3. Conclusions.
CHAPTER 5. Thematic vocabulary.
§one. RIGHT.
§2. FOREIGN POLICY.
§3. MILITARY SPHERE (ARMY).
§4. ECONOMY.
§five. ADMINISTRATIVE SPHERE.
§6. PHILOSOPHY.
§7. RELIGION.
§8. Conclusions.
CHAPTER 6. Inappropriate socio-political vocabulary.
§one. General remarks.
§2. Subjects of power relations (A).
§3. Objects of power relations (B).
§4. Negative relationship between A and B.
§five. A positive attitude towards B.
§6. Negative relationship between B and A.
§7. Positive attitude of B towards A.
§8. Conclusions. 189 CONCLUSION. 191 BIBLIOGRAPHY. 201 APPENDIX.
This work is devoted to socio-political vocabulary (hereinafter referred to as SPL) - that part of the vocabulary of the Russian language, which is intended for verbalization of socio-political (SP) relations and their language modeling. Despite the large number of special studies, researches, the OPL is not defined in its composition, structural organization and dynamic potential.
The relevance of the work. Currently, the OPL is undergoing significant changes. The circle of its users is expanding, a new political language is being formed. The OPL has attracted the attention of linguists since the first post-revolutionary years, and it is of great interest even now. At present, there is a need for such a description of the NPL, which would make it possible to reveal its structural features and dynamic potential. The OPL reflects the ways of presenting socio-political relations and thinking about them given by the language. The study of the OPL is part of the actual problem in modern linguistics of constructing a "naive-linguistic" picture of the world.
The purpose of the study is to determine the composition of the GPL, to identify its structure and dynamic processes, to study the ideas about socio-political relations in the Russian language consciousness, in the "picture of the world" of native speakers, to develop approaches to building a thesaurus-type GPL dictionary.
Research methods. The work uses the methods adopted in lexicology, lexicographic practice and in the system-structural description of linguistic phenomena: component and distributional analysis, interpretation and interpretation, parametric (multidimensional) analysis by differentiating features and analysis through the field structure. Central is the method of conceptual analysis, corresponding to the purpose of the study.
The scientific novelty of the work lies in the fact that the work uses an onomasiological approach to identifying the OPL, defines its boundaries and composition, for the first time analyzes the key concepts "power", "state", "society", "people", "nation" that determine modeling socio-political relations in the Russian linguistic consciousness, a flexible field structure of the OPL has been identified with the center in the form of the OPL itself and three adjacent zones: ideological, thematic and non-proper OP vocabulary; the integral principles of the structural organization of the NPL as a whole and the specific principles inherent in the center and adjacent zones are revealed, the dynamic potencies of the NPL are revealed against the background of stability over time.
Empirical base of dissertation research. Approaches in linguistics to the study of OPL: content-thematic, connotative, functional-stylistic - proceed from the fact that the dictionary of OPL is predetermined. The empirical base of the study was formed on the basis of the onomasiological approach to the identification of APL. Based on the generally accepted definition of socio-political relations, we singled out the semantic dominant in it - the intersubjective relation ARB, where R is the power relation, A and B are the subject and object of the power relation. According to the four-volume Dictionary of the Russian Language (MAS), published in 1987, a sample was made of about 7,000 words, the meanings of which contain the semantics of the imperious intersubjective relation ARB. This sample was defined as the composition of the PPL for 1985 and as a reference point against which the development of the PPL is determined. The basis for the study of dynamic processes in the OPL was word usage in the texts of the periodical press of recent years. To analyze the conceptual dominants of the OPL, mass media texts and dictionaries were also used.
Scientific and practical value work. The scientific value of the work lies in the development of a new concept of the RPL, in a comprehensive description of the structural organization and dynamics of the RPL, in the application of the method of conceptual analysis and the identification of the key concepts of the RPL in the naive-linguistic "picture of the world".
The results of the work can be used in lexicology and lexicographic practice, in stylistics and sociolinguistics in the study of the media and the study of the role of language in shaping public opinion.
The obtained data can be used in the development of university courses, special courses and special seminars on vocabulary and lexical semantics, style and history of the Russian literary language of the 20th century, in teaching Russian as a foreign language.
Basic provisions and structure of the work. The dissertation consists of an introduction, six chapters, a conclusion, a bibliography and an appendix, which includes lists of words that are not included in the main body of the work.
§8. Conclusions.
1. In fact, the OPL is the vocabulary that one way or another describes the power relationship (either in a general way, or a specific - but not state-political - sphere of the implementation of the power relationship). Power, referring to predicate vocabulary, opens actant places for subject and object (A and B). Practically all OPL can be characterized from the point of view of the actant structure of power, correlation with one of the components of the ARB power relationship, but it is for the "peripheral" OPL that this correlation is the dominant principle of organization and can be traced most clearly. It is this lexical zone that provides an opportunity to identify and calculate the main types of relationships between the subject and object of power, which are presented implicitly (in a modified form) or incompletely in other zones of the OPL.
2. Being universal in nature, the non-proper OPL gravitates towards the conceptual dominant "power", in some of its sections it approaches the central group of the proper PPL (the key descriptor "power"): dominance, supremacy.
3. The relationship between A and B can be characterized as normative (neutral), positive and negative. In this regard, ideas about the norm of power, the rights and obligations of its owner are updated. The fulfillment of the power relation within the limits of the norm is not connoted, while the underfulfillment and, especially, the excess by the subject of power of their powers are assessed unambiguously negatively. Within the framework of the PLR itself, there are different types, "scenarios" of the relationship between the subject and object of power, and due to the predominant non-specificity of vocabulary, one can talk about power relations in general.
4. The improper OPL is predominantly predicative. All its lexical diversity can be reduced within the distinguished types of relationships A and B to a limited list of typical predicates that partially intersect with speech acts: "reward", "permission", "mercy", "patronage"; "punishment", "prohibition", "coercion", "oppression", "use"; "disinterested service", "benefit", "request", "denunciation", "praise"; "disobedience", "claim", "resistance", etc.
5. Attention is drawn to the quantitative predominance and greater "elaboration" (detailing of meanings) of the vocabulary describing the negative relationship between A and B, which indicates a certain antagonism between the object and subject of power at the level of linguistic consciousness. The analysis of the non-proper OPL shows the priority in the Russian linguistic consciousness of moral and ethical prescriptives over subordination, over relations of formal dependence (for example, do not consider disobedience or resistance to the authorities "reprehensible", unless it conflicts with the trust and faith on the part of the subject of power, denunciation is evaluated unequivocally negative, regardless of its causes).
6. From the point of view of linguistic characteristics proper, attention is drawn to the overwhelming advantage of the original vocabulary, mainly a derivative that has an internal form, and a small amount of irrelevant vocabulary, represented by a few stylistically marked words. Synonymy relations are presented in groups, less often - antonymy, hyperonymy, conversion. In the non-proper OPL there are words that have a pragmatic component of meaning, and in this respect it merges with the ideological vocabulary (zone 2).
dynamic aspect.
As noted above, the entire vocabulary of the 4th zone is stable in terms of time, it is all relevant, and is predominantly primordial. The PPL itself is the nomination fund for the PPL itself. Not the "first", not "adequate" signs are presented here, but it is they that make it possible to introduce new points of view on what already has a name, to name the phenomenon of social life, giving it intimacy, bringing it closer, humanizing it. This feature of the non-proper OPL is the most in demand recently, which is manifested in the active use of this vocabulary in relation to the phenomena of the LP of life in modern journalism and, accordingly, in the expansion of compatibility and the increase in the frequency of words.
Words that describe specific spheres of the implementation of power relations tend to metaphorical description of interpersonal relations, and also, together with the vocabulary of interpersonal relations, state-political relations.
CONCLUSION.
The Conclusion discusses the dynamic characteristics of the NPL, the relationship with the "picture of the world" of the language community, and also draws general conclusions about the structure of the NPL.
1. The analysis of socio-political vocabulary carried out in the dissertation work allows us to assert that this lexical group has a strict internal consistency and is clearly structured both at the lexical level and at the level of mental representations. The conceptual dominant of the entire OPL is the concept of power, which projects its features and characteristics onto the lexical community it organizes.
Power", being one of the global human concepts, organizes around itself lexical communities of a different order. Thus, power is the dominant of a group of words that in one way or another denote a power relationship (R in ARB): domination, rule, domination, sovereignty, omnipotence, supremacy, polyarchy, anarchy, autocracy, as well as the conceptual dominant of one of the blocks in the composition of the OPL itself, the entire OPL itself, as well as the OPL in a broad sense.
Power refers to predicate vocabulary and opens actant places that can be filled with different lexical content. Within the framework of the concept of power, typical situations can be modeled that generally reflect the structure of the entire PLO and provide a basis for its classification and analysis. So, in the OPL, lexical groups are distinguished, correlated with the subject or object of a power relationship, with the so-called. "intermediate" subject (in accordance with the "hierarchy" of power), as well as describing possible types of relationships between A and B (A has a positive effect on B, A has a negative effect on B, B is neutral / positive towards A, B is related to A negative.).
Thus, the paper proposes new criteria for the allocation and classification of a significant part of the lexical fund, which has the traditional name of socio-political vocabulary, for the definition of which external signs were used for the most part.
The semantic complex of power includes ideas about the right to power, about the "hierarchy" of power, about the norm of power, about its rights and obligations.
An analysis of the concept of power shows that individual fragments of the concept are of a universal nature and reflect the general worldview attitudes and system of values of the linguistic society, and, therefore, go beyond the scope of one concept and one lexico-semantic group and reflect the fundamental ideas of a person about the structure of the world around about his place in it.
2. On the basis of the relation of lexemes to the conceptual dominant "power", the classification of the OPL was made and approaches to the construction of the thesaurus of the OPL were developed, the conclusion was made about the structure of the lexical group under consideration: thematic, not actually OPL), remote from it to varying degrees, it is organized according to the principle of concentric inscription. Inclusion in the OPL so-called. "peripheral" (not actually OP) vocabulary is non-traditional and is motivated by the fact that it is here that the main "scenarios" of power relations are contained in a general form, typical predicates of power are distinguished that determine the semantic and conceptual organization of the entire OP as a whole.
2.1. Actually, the OPL reveals an attraction to conceptual dominants (in the thesaurus - descriptors "power", "state", "society"), significant for the entire OPL (for example, the vocabulary of the "power" group is approaching the "peripheral" OPL, the concept of the state is significant for the thematic vocabulary ). The structure of the OPL in a broad sense can be represented in the form of a figure.
Picture 1.
4 zone (improperly ^OPL) -^
2.2. The ideological vocabulary, having in some cases a similar denotative correlation with the OPL itself, is characterized by the presence of pragmatic meanings (evaluativeness and "engagement"). A significant part of the ideological vocabulary combines structural features proper with attachment to a specific historical era. The most formalized and embodying a specific "picture of the world" is the so-called. "Soviet" vocabulary. For the entire ideological lexicon, the determining factor is not integrality, but separation, the sign of "one's own / someone else's". Not always being an evaluation tool, an ideological lexeme is always an object of evaluation.
2.3. Despite the internal heterogeneity of the "thematic" vocabulary, the groups identified in its composition demonstrate a number of similar characteristics: the appeal to a relatively narrow fragment of reality is combined with a tendency to determinology, specific internal articulateness - with the representation in each of the groups of signs of the concept of power.
2.4. In fact, the OPL, describing the power relation in general, regardless of the specific area of implementation, clearly demonstrates those signs that, being significant for the entire OPL as a whole, are modified or incompletely presented in other areas of the OPL; typical predicates of power, the idea of the norm of power, the rights and obligations of participants in power relations, the complex relationship between the subject and object of power. Correlation of lexemes with one of the components of the ARB power relation determines the structuring of the entire non-proper OLP.
2.5. The structure of the PLR in terms of correlation with reality can be represented as follows:
4 zone (not actually OPL) - is able to describe any power relationship, regardless of the scope of its implementation, power appears as "power in general";
1 zone (actually OPL) - describes the state-political sphere of the implementation of power relations, power appears as "state power", the components of power relations A and B in relation to ARB correspond to the state and society;
3 zone (thematic vocabulary) - specific narrow areas of state-political or public life are described. The consequence of this is the terminology of the vocabulary and a smaller dynamic potential compared to the actual OPL.
Zone 2 (ideological vocabulary) - "internal" vocabulary of specific power systems. Like the OPL itself, it describes the state-political sphere of the implementation of power relations.
3. The lexico-semanic zones distinguished in the composition of the OPL demonstrate both isomorphism and specificity, determined by the dominance of any one feature in their internal organization ("ideological", "gravitation towards conceptual dominants", thematic principle, the correlation of lexemes with one of the components power relation ARB). The combination of strict internal consistency with freedom, the possibility of variation is inherent in the entire PPL. There are priority features of each of the zones that are specific only to it (in which "rigidity", disjunctivity is manifested), however, a significant "degree of freedom", diffuseness, variability are presented in the structure of the OPL: the specificity of dominant features is combined with the flexibility of the structure, the repetition of the same features in all zones of the OPL on the basis of integral rights. The different nature of the signs themselves takes into account different aspects of collective thinking (thematic principle, the presence of conceptual mental dominants, ideological dominant, connection with language as an action; intersection with speech acts of request, order, etc.).
4. The zones identified in the PSL are permeable, have a clear structure, but blurred boundaries (1st and 3rd, 2nd and 4th zones), demonstrate different ways divide the surrounding reality and think about it. The lexical groups singled out within the zones are conceived as a combination of rather heterogeneous lexical material, but nevertheless one that can and should be described.
Dynamic structure of the OPL.
The specific language processes that take place in the SPL are determined and, therefore, can be explained and described based on its structure.
Under the dynamic potential of the OP vocabulary is understood the arrival / departure of lexemes from actual use and the ability to move in the internal space of the OP.
The dynamic characteristics of the OPL are different both for different zones and for smaller lexical associations - groups within each of the zones.
At the level of dividing the OPL into four lexical zones, the most stable is the "peripheral" (not actually OP) vocabulary, which is universal both in synchrony (mostly non-specific, capable of describing any sphere and form of implementation of power relations) and in diachrony (stable on the time axis, passes through successive power systems with little or no change, there are few borrowings, neoplasms, and irrelevant vocabulary is minimally represented in comparison with other OPL zones - mainly in the form of "living archaisms" [Panov, 1963, p. 10], that is, stylistically marked vocabulary.) The stability of this vocabulary, its invariance over time, is apparently determined by the fact that it directly describes the universal role structure of power as such, in abstraction from specific forms of embodiment of power relations.
In contrast to the stable composition of the non-proper OPL, the 2nd zone (ideological vocabulary) has the greatest dynamic potential: being focused on a specific power system with its ideology, it can almost completely turn into an irrelevant composition with a radical change in the political situation (with the exception of universal evaluative vocabulary). At the present stage, the actual ideological vocabulary has not been formed as a system. A feature of the ideological vocabulary is its appeal to the past due to its attachment to a specific historical era and power system. The introduction of a diachronic axis is necessary to classify the ideological OPL. The unformedness of the actual part of this zone of the OP vocabulary in the present period is explained both by its specificity and non-linguistic factors. The formation of the ideological vocabulary of a particular power system is facilitated by the presence of a strong supreme power with a targeted ideological policy (cf. Sovietism), but at the present time this process is quite chaotic. Relationships between different zones in the composition
OPL are manifested, in particular, in the fact that the vocabulary of a specific state-political (power) system, during the existence of the latter qualified as the actual OPL, with the disappearance of the power system, passes into ideological vocabulary (district committee, general secretary).
So, the non-proper OPL and ideological vocabulary have opposite dynamic characteristics: universality and attachment to a specific power system, stable over time and great dynamic potential.
Thematic vocabulary, being terminological, is quite stable; in terms of dynamic characteristics, it approaches the GPL proper, but is more stable over time.
As part of the OPL itself, the "constant" (i.e., vocabulary that passes through all political power systems) are closed groups with a high degree of internal consistency, as a rule, including a limited list of words, reduced to several roots, correlating with the conceptual dominants of the OPL (" power", "people", "nation"). On the other hand, the OPL itself contains "weak links", places with "variable" lexical content (groups with the greatest dynamic potential, capable of completely updating their composition due to cardinal political changes). Basically, these are groups of lexical blocks "society" and "state": nomina locis, "parties", etc.
It can be argued that in this way linguistic consciousness offers certain priorities to the lexical system, shares linguistic ideas about power, personality and the relationship of the individual to power that are stable over time, and changing ideas about the forms of state power and stratification within society, associated with a particular era.
The question arises as to where the lexical material of such groups goes and where it comes from. The allocation of "irrelevant" vocabulary in the composition of the OPL allowed "" - to solve it, but only partially. The very fact of the functioning of the word within the framework of a particular power system leaves a “trace” of this system in it in the form of a pragmatic meaning.
1 See Chapter 2 about the timeless nature of power, the people, the nation, in contrast to the state and society that are not single in time. niya "engagement". It seems to us that a quantitative criterion should be taken into account here. Thus, the presence in the Russian language of a well-formed, structured and represented by a large number of lexemes of the system of "Sovietisms" makes it possible to include former units of the OPL proper (at one time "first", "adequate signs") in the "ideological" vocabulary (city committee, general secretary). At the same time, shah, monarch, etc., unique in this respect, were relegated to an irrelevant part of the OPL proper.
OPL zones are permeable both in terms of leaving the OP vocabulary from actual use, and for the reverse process (transition from an irrelevant composition to an actual one). The actual OP dictionary can be formed in different ways: firstly, irrelevant vocabulary within one zone is required in accordance with the political situation of the moment, and secondly, the vocabulary of other zones can be transposed in the OP itself, "involved vocabulary" systematically forms metaphorical transfers to refer to phenomena OP life. The first method is more inherent in the official language, political discourse, the second - near-political discourse (in particular, the language of the media).
The dynamic potential of the NPL is determined by its structure, and the dynamic changes that occur with a particular lexeme are largely determined by its status in the OPL.
OPL: parametric analysis.
The dynamic characteristics of each of the groups in the composition of the OPL correlate in a certain way with the proper linguistic ones (identified by parametric analysis). Thus, the stability of the composition is usually inherent in groups of a closed nature with non-specific vocabulary, usually native. On the contrary, groups of an open nature with predominantly borrowed specific vocabulary have a variable composition. The most stable is the improper OPL, which includes predominantly predicate vocabulary, the maximum change in composition is observed in groups that include lexemes with objective meaning. Noteworthy is the predominance of nominalization (nouns formed from verbs) common to the entire OPL1.
It is obvious that these generalizations reflect only general patterns, and in reality the connection between the proper linguistic features and the dynamic potential of the OP of the lexicon is more complicated and should be subjected to more thorough study.
OPL: "picture of the world".
OP vocabulary as a whole demonstrates the priority role of the concept of power, its structure as a way to think about the corresponding segment of reality. Linguistic consciousness presents the structure of power as stable, out of touch with a particular regime. State power is included in a broader context: OP life appears in the linguistic consciousness as a variant of life in general. The dynamic succession of power structures appears as knowledge and as language.
The meanings that are universal for the entire NPL, which can be verbalized in different ways, but are present in one way or another in each of the zones of the OPL, are a projection of ideas about power to the entire NPL. So, obligatory for OP vocabulary are ideas about the actant structure of power, about "hierarchy", gradation of the subject of power, ideas about the rights and obligations of the subject of power. The object of the power relationship appears as a patient, as a supporter, as an opponent of the subject (a contender for power), common to the entire OPL is the significance of the vertical axis, partly a metaphor for power.
These general, universal ideas about the structure of the concept of power and the OPL can be overlaid with various specifications, which, manifesting themselves at the lexical level, demonstrate the ideas of native speakers about a particular power system.
So, the universal way of representing power, including state power (in a "removed" form, presented in an improperly GPL) is supplemented in the minds of native speakers with ideas about a specific power system (cf. "picture of the world",
1 For an analysis of nominalization in political discourse, see [Seriot, 1985]; [Krasukhin, 1991]. demonstrated by the "Soviet" vocabulary) and about its individual fragments (thematic vocabulary).
Let us make a few remarks about the actual OP vocabulary and the "picture of the world" that it explicates, although the analysis of the actual OP vocabulary is a topic for a separate study and is not included in the immediate goals of this work.
It can be argued that the lack of formation of modern PPL in a narrow sense, that is, the fundamental impossibility of compiling a more or less exhaustive list of words, the eclecticism and instability of its composition, corresponds to vague, fuzzy ideas about modern political reality in the "picture of the world" of native speakers. Such fuzziness was facilitated by the destruction of the former strictly dichotomous opposition "us/them", a permanent change in value orientations, marks of evaluation (communism or democracy, totalitarianism or sovereignty). In connection with such ambiguity of political guidelines, the "specific weight" of universal human values, the significance of moral guidelines, and, accordingly, the predominance of universal evaluative vocabulary, increase. Thus, in the media addressed to the general population, for example, the following vocabulary is used to express a negative assessment: militant, bureaucrat, terrorist, corruption, etc. (communist press, extremist publications). We also note the tendency to blur the previously unambiguous assessment (patriot).
The current nomenclature of the names of state structures and political realities demonstrates its heterogeneity, inorganicity for the collective consciousness. With the departure of the former strictly regulated and "worked into" the corresponding ("Soviet") "picture of the world" nomenclature of names, the vacant place began to be filled within the framework of a general pro-Western orientation, but at the same time - chaotically and unsystematically (fragmentary). Wed: mayor of Moscow and head of administration of Mozhaisk, speaker in the Duma, governor in the absence of provinces; the mayor of the district center does not have to report to the governor.
The absence of a system in the names of the phenomena of state-political life entails the absence in the collective consciousness of ideas about the architectonics of a particular power system: vertical and horizontal connections between specific power subjects are not traced.
The predominantly borrowed nature of actual OP naming conventions, their "opacity", and heterogeneity cause rejection among modern native speakers (in speech-behavioral practice, it manifests itself, in particular, in the use of modifiers, the so-called, this one, as they say now and under. Compare also: At first they were afraid of God, then the authorities were afraid, and now who should we be afraid of.? The prefect, or what, we will be afraid? And why be afraid of him if he has such a stupid name. If you can say that, then you can steal. [AiF, No. 45, 1995 p. .8]). At the same time, such a rejection of the "variable", "transient" vocabulary of a particular power vocabulary actualizes deep ideas about power (increase in the role of orientational metaphor, increase in the frequency of the word t power for the "substitute" designation of specific power structures, a large number of metaphorical "infusions" from other OPL zones, etc.).
So, the OPL itself is currently in its infancy, which applies to both the lexical system and the ideological system, a specific "picture of the world" that stands behind the OPL as the vocabulary of a particular power system. At the same time, the process of “linguistic” and lexicalization of demanded meanings takes place against the background and on the basis of clear ideas about the structure of power as such in the collective consciousness, arising from the system of the entire OPL as a whole.
1. Apresyan Yu.D. The image of a person according to the language: an attempt at a systematic description // Questions of Linguistics. M.: "Nauka", 1995, No. 1 - S. 37-67.
2. Arutyunova N.D. "Proposition", "fact", "event" (the experience of conceptual analysis) // Izvestiya AN SSSR, Ser. lit. and yaz. M., 1987, v. 46, No. 6. - S. 529-546. Arutyunova N.D. The sentence and its meaning. Logical-semantic problems. -M.: "Science", 1976. - 383s.
3. Arutyunova N.D. Types of language meanings: Evaluation. Event. Fact. M.: "Science", 1988.- 338s.
4. Arutyunova N.D. Anomalies and language (to the problem of linguistic "picture of the world") // Questions of linguistics. 1987 - No. 3. - S. 75-91.
5. Arutyunova N.D. Axiology in the mechanisms of life and language // Problems of structural linguistics, 1982. -M., 1984.
6. Arutyunova N.D. Language metaphor (syntax and vocabulary) // Linguistics and poetics. M.: "Nauka", 1979. - S. 147-173.
7. Baranov A.N., Karaulov Yu.N. Russian political metaphor (materials for the dictionary). M .: Institute of the Russian language of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1991. - 193p.
8. Baranov A.N., Karaulov Yu.N. Russian political metaphor (experiment of a dictionary). -M.: Institute of the Russian language of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1993.
9. Vasiliev L.M. Types of predicate values // Studies in semantics. System-functional aspect and language teaching. Interuniversity. scientific Sat. Ufa, 1991.-S. 55-61.
10. Vezhbitska A. Speech acts // New in foreign linguistics. Issue. 16: Linguistic pragmatics. M.; "Progress 1985. - 251-275.
11. Wierzbicka A. Comparison of gradation - metaphor // Theory of Metaphor. - M.: "Progress", 1991.-S. 133-152.
12. Wolf E.M. Functional semantics of evaluation. M .: "Science", 1985. - 227s.g
13. Karaulov Yu.N. Linguistic construction and the thesaurus of the literary language. M.: "Science", 1981.- 366s.
14. Komlev N.G. Components of the content structure of the word. M.: Ed. Moscow State University, 1969. - 192p.
15. Conceptual analysis: methods, results, prospects: Abstracts of the conference reports. M.: IYA AN SSSR, 1990. - 94 p.
16. Lakoff J., Johnson M. Metaphors we live by // Language and modeling of social interaction. M.: "Progress", 1987. - S. 126-172. Lakoff J., Johnson M. Metaphors we live by // Theory of Metaphor. -M.: "Nauka", 1990. - S. 387-415.
17. Logical analysis of language: Pragmatics and problems of intensionality. M.: "Nauka", 1987.
18. Logical analysis of language: Knowledge and decision. M.: "Nauka", 1988. - 125p. Logical analysis of language: Problems of intensional and pragmatic contexts. - M.: "Nauka", 1989. - 286s.
19. Logical analysis of language: Inconsistency and anomaly of the text. M.: "Science", 1990.- 278s.
20. Nikitina S.E. On the thesaurus description of lexicographic terminology // National specific language and its reflection in the normative dictionary. M.: "Science", 1988. -p.111-113.
21. New in foreign linguistics. Issue. 23: Cognitive aspects of language. M .: "Progress", 1988. - Issue. 23. - 315 p.
22. Panov M.V. About pronunciation styles // Development of the modern Russian language. -M., 1963.
23. Peshkovsky A.M. Russian syntax in scientific coverage. M., 1926 Plisetskaya A.Yu. The concept of language in F. Saussure. Dipl. slave. cafe Russian language MSU. -M., 1995.
24. The concept of fate in the context of different cultures. M.: "Science", 1994. - 320s.
25. Pragmatics and semantics: Sat. scientific and analytical reviews / Ed. ed. Kuznetsov A.M. M.: AN SSSR INION, 1991.
26. Pragmatics and problems of intensionality: Sat. scientific works. M.: AN USSR INION, 1988.-301s.
27. Probst M.A. Thesaurus and information retrieval // NTI., Ser 2. - 1979. - No. 9. p. 14-20.
28. Revzina O.G. System-functional approach in poetics // Problems of structural linguistics, 1985-1987. - M.: "Nauka", 1989. - S. 134-151. Rosenthal D.E., Telenkova M.A. Dictionary-reference book of linguistic terms. -M.: "Enlightenment", 1985. - 399s.
29. Information retrieval thesaurus. General provisions. Presentation form. GOST 18383-73. M., 1974. - 7s.
30. Teliya V.N. The connotative aspect of the semantics of nominative units. M.: "Science", 1986. - 141s.
31. Teliya V.N. Types of language values. Related meaning words in the language. M.: "Science", 1981.- 269p.
32. Human factor in language: Language and the production of speech. M.: "Science%". 1991. -237p.
33. Cherneiko L.O. Gestalt structure of an abstract name // Philological Sciences, 1995. No. 4.-S. 73-83.
34. Chubaryan T.Yu. Semantics and pragmatics of speech genres of humor. Diss. cand. lol. nauk., M.: MGU, 1994. -221p.
35. Roget P.M. Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases. Toronto, 1947. - 705p. Seriot P. Analyze du discours politique sovietique. - Paris, Institute d "etudes slaves, 1985. -462p.1. Dictionaries.
36. Baranov O.S. Ideographic dictionary of the Russian language. M.: Ed. "Prometheus" MGPI im. V.I. Lenin, 1990. - 256s.
37. Dal V.I. Explanatory dictionary of the living Great Russian language. M., 1981. - vols. 1-4. The lexical basis of the Russian language Morkovkin V.V. and others. - M .: "Russian language", 1984.- 1167p.
38. Lexical minima of the modern Russian language Morkovkin V.V. and others. -M.: "Russian language", 1985. 608s.
39. Dictionary of the compatibility of words of the Russian language Denisov P.N. and others. M .: "Russian language", 1983. - 686s.
40. Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. M.: "Soviet Encyclopedia", 1983. Chernykh P.Ya. Historical and etymological dictionary of the Russian language. M .: "Russian language", 1993.-vols. 1.2.
41. Literature on the history of the issue.
42. Abbakumova G.A. On one of the aspects of the nomination in the field of socio-political terminology (on the material of terms with the meaning of a person) // Vest. Kyiv, un. Methods of teaching foreign students. - Kyiv, 1986, no. 10. -S. 7-10.
43. Akimova V.I. Socio-political vocabulary in the journalism of N.P. Ogareva. Diss. cand. philol. Sciences. Alma-Ata, 1978. - 170s.
44. Alekseev A.A. The history of the word "citizen" in the 18th century // Izvestiya AN SSSR, Ser. lit. and yaz. M., 1972, v. XXXI, issue 1. - S. 67-73.
45. Barannikov I.P. From observations on the development of the Russian language in recent years. The influence of war and revolution on the development of the Russian language. Uch. app. Samara University, Vol. 2. Samara, 1919. - S. 64-68.
46. Belaya A.S. Formation of the socio-political vocabulary of the Soviet era. Diss. cand. philol. Sciences. Dnepropetrovsk, 1977. - 248s.
47. Beloded I.K. Language and ideological struggle. Kyiv: "Naukova Dumka", 1974. - 86p. Belchikov Yu.A. Analysis of the language and style of journalistic works. - M.: MGU, 1962.-21s.
48. Belchikov Yu.A. Socio-political vocabulary in the works of V. G. Belinsky of the 40s. Abstract of diss. cand. philol. Sciences. M.: MGU, 1954. - 16s. Belchikov Yu.A. Socio-political vocabulary of VG Belinsky. - M.: MGU, 1962. - 132p.
49. Beus G. Whose field and will (notes on the language of the revolution) // Communist Revolution, 1928, No. 7.
50. Bogoslovskaya O.I., Zhichaeva E.M. To the problem of the specifics of the newspaper journalistic word // Functional varieties of speech in the communicative aspect. - Perm, 1988.
51. Baudouin de Courtenay I.F. On the word "patriot" // Afterword to the 3rd edition of the "Explanatory Dictionary" by V.I.Dal / Dal V.I. Explanatory dictionary of the living Great Russian language. SPb., 1909.
52. Borovoy J1. New words // Krasnaya nov, 1938, No. 2. S. 201-210. Bulavina M.A. Socio-political vocabulary in the journalism of revolutionary populists. Diss. cand. philol. Sciences. - M.: MOPI named after N.K. Krupskaya, 1987. - ^ p.
53. Bulygin K.N. On the origin of the word "prince" // Uchenye zapiski imp. Kazan University. Kazan, 1834, book 1. - S. 105 -133.
54. Buryachok A.A. Formation of the sawn fund is sooshchno1 vocabulary of the schshch-noslav "Jansky mov. - Kshv, 1983.
55. Veselitsky V.V. Antioch Kantemir and the development of the Russian literary language. -M.: "Nauka", 1974. 70s.
56. Veselitsky V.V. Abstract vocabulary in the Russian literary language of the XVIII beginning. 19th century - M.: "Nauka", 1972. -319s.
57. Vinnik S.V. Sociolinguistic interpretation of political neologisms of American origin. Abstract of diss. cand. philol. Sciences. Minsk, 1986.- 18s.
58. Vinogradov S.I. Discussions about the language of the first post-revolutionary years // Russian speech, 1977, M> 2.
59. Vinokur G.O. Revolutionary Phraseology //Lef, 1923, No. 2. P. 104-118. Virkovskaya A.M. Socio-political vocabulary of V.I. Lenin's book "What is to be done?" Diss. cand. philol. Sciences. - Minsk, 1961. - 242s.
60. Volodina V.D. Selection of cliched phrases for reading socio-political literature on German. Abstract of diss. cand. philol. Sciences. M., 1981. - 21s.
61. Goverdovsky V.I. Ideological connotation, speech practice and lexinography // Language and society. Saratov, 1986. - S. 58-69.
62. Golovanevsky A.JT. Metaphor as a means of creating vocabulary of social and political content // Linguistic disciplines at the Faculty of Russian Language and Literature. M., 1973. - S. 190-191.
63. Golovanevsky A.L. Socio-political vocabulary and phraseology of the Russian language 1900-1917 ir- "on the material of Bolshevik leaflets, press and proletarian poetry). Diss. Candidate of Philology. Sciences. M., 1974.
64. Golovanevsky A.L. Socio-political vocabulary as an object of description in educational dictionaries // Actual problems of educational lexicography. Materials of the All-Union Conference. M.: In-t of the Russian language. A.S. Pushkin, 1988. -S.: 29-30.
65. Golovanevsky A.L. The role of social ideological evaluative ™ in the development of socio-political vocabulary and phraseology of the Russian language // Language and Society. Saratov: Ed. Sarat. un-ta, 1989. - S. 9-22.
66. Golovanevsky A.L. Semantic shifts in socio-political vocabulary // Russian Linguistics, Vol. 2. Alma-Ata, 1973. - S. 41-45.
67. Golovanevsky A.L. Social and ideological differentiation and evaluation of the socio-political vocabulary of the Russian language // Questions of Linguistics. M., 1987, No. 4. - S. 35-42.
68. Golovanevsky A.L. Socio-evaluative vocabulary and phraseology of the Russian language at the beginning of the 20th century // Modern Russian language and issues of dialectology. M., 1972. -S. 190-217.
69. Golovanevsky A.L., Kondratov N.A. On the principles of the study of socio-political vocabulary // Problems of lexicology and word formation of the Russian language.-M., 1982.-S, 3-15.
70. Danilenko V.P. Russian terminology. Experience of linguistic description. M.: "Science", 1977. - 246s.
71. Danilov G.K. To the question of Marxist linguistics // Literature and Marxism. -1928, book. VI.-C. 115-136.
72. Derzhavin K.N. Struggle of classes and parties in the language of the Great French Revolution // Language and Literature. L., 1927, vol. II, issue. 1, pp. 1-62.
73. Deribas V.M. Stable verb-nominal phrases in social and political texts // From the experience of teaching the Russian language to non-Russians, vol. 4. -M., 1968. S. 23-33.
74. Dianova G.N., Shimanskaya P.N. From the experience of working with foreign students on socio-political vocabulary // From the experience of teaching the Russian language to non-Russians, vol. 4. - M., 1968.
75. Dubrovchenko P.M., Khripun V.N. Critical analysis of modern bourgeois political vocabulary // Philosophy and language. Kyiv, 1987. - S. 79-86.
76. Dubyago A.I. Socio-political and scientific text "Aesthetic Relations of Art to Reality" by N.G. Chernyshevsky. Diss. cand. philol. Sciences. -D., 1956.-391s.
77. To talk about the damage to the language // Bulletin of Literature, 1920, No. 3 (15).
78. Kaida L.G. Efficiency of publicistic text / Ed. Zasurskbgo Ya.M. - M.: MGU, 1989. 182p.
79. Kapralova S.G. Lexico-semantic groups as part of socio-political vocabulary // Functional and semantic aspects of the study of vocabulary. -Kuibyshev, 1985. S. 91-97.
80. Kogotkova T.S. From the history of the formation of socio-political vocabulary (based on the materials of the last decades of the 19th century) // Studies in Russian terminology. M.: "Nauka", 1971. S. 114-165.
81. Krysin L.P. Language and social reality / / Russian language at school, 1967, No. 3. pp. 3-9.
82. Kryuchkova T.B. On the question of the polysemy of "ideologically connected" vocabulary // Questions of linguistics. M., 1981, No. 2. - S.28-30.
83. Kryuchkova T.B. On the representation of socio-political vocabulary and terminology in explanatory dictionaries // Sociolinguistic studies of the terminology of the peoples of the USSR. M., 1988.
84. Kryuchkova T.B. Features of the formation and development of socio-political vocabulary and terminology. M.: "Science", 1989. - 152p.
85. Kryuchkova T.B. Language and ideology. On the question of the reflection of ideology in the language. Abstract diss. cand. philol. Sciences. M., 1976.
86. Leichik V.M. Features of the terminology of social sciences and the scope of its use // Language and style of scientific presentation. M., 1983.
87. Maksimova M.K. To the question of the development of socio-economic terminology in the 1st half of the 19th century // Uchenye zapiski LGPI im. A.I. Herzen. Leningrad: LGPI im. A.I. Herzen, v. 173, 1958.-S. 109-132.
88. Maksimova M.K. On the history of socio-political vocabulary based on materials from Kirillov's Pocket Dictionary of Foreign Words // Uch. app. LGPI them. Herzen, vol. 122, 1956.
89. Marov V.N., Marova N.D. Ideological component of the text // Text-forming properties language units. Alma-Ata, 1977.
90. Matveev B.I. The study of the texts of the works of V.I. Lenin // From the experience of teaching the Russian language to non-Russians. Issue. 4. M., 1968.
91. Mednikova E.M. Ideological component of word meanings in dictionary and non-dictionary texts // Methodological problems of social linguistics. M.: MSU, 1986.-S. 22-33.
92. Melerovich A.I. Socio-political vocabulary in "News about Russia". Diss. cand. philol. Sciences. Yaroslavl, 1964.
93. Melnik V.M. From the experience of working on a phrase in socio-political speech / / Questions of linguistics, No. 6, 1965. P. 74-76.
94. Novitskaya N.V. Socio-political vocabulary and phraseology of N.A. Nekrasova. Riga, 1953.
95. Ne ChsChrt A. On the subject and basic concepts of Marxist-Leninist sociolinguistics // Actual problems of linguistics of the GDR. The language of ideology is society. - M., 1979. - S. 61-63.
96. Nosov Yu.M. Language tools propaganda in the system of methods and techniques of indoctrination of American servicemen. Abstract of diss. cand. philol. Sciences. M.: MSU, 1985. - 18s.
97. Polivanov E.D. Revolution and literary languages of the USSR Union // Revolutionary East, 1927, No. 1.
98. Polivanov E.D. Russian language of today // Literature and Marxism, book. IV, 1928.-S. 167-180.
99. Polukarova E.A. Vocabulary and phraseology of literary-critical articles by NL Dobrolyubov "Dark people" and "Ray of light in the dark kingdom". Abstract diss. cand. philol. Sciences. L., 1953. - 16s.
100. Pribylovsky V. Dictionary of new political parties and organizations in Russia. -M.: "Panorama", 1993. 199s.
101. Protchenko I.F. Socio-political vocabulary of the Soviet era / Russian language. in the national School, 1965, No. 3.
102. Radchenko A.A. New phenomena in the vocabulary of modern newspaper journalism. Abstract of diss. cand. philol. Sciences. M.: UDN im. Patrice Lumubma, 1975. - 31s. Rosenthal D.E. Topical issues learning the language of the newspaper // Bulletin of Moscow State University, Journalism, 1975.
103. Rosenthal D.E., Solganik G.Ya. Studying the language and style of the media and propaganda / / Bulletin of Moscow State University, Journalism, 1977, No. 1. P. 6Ya-75. Rotunskaya M.S. Thematic groups of socially marked vocabulary in English language// S.22-32.
104. Russian language and Soviet society. Vocabulary of the modern Russian literary language I.P. Muchnik, M.V. Panov, D.I. Shmelev and others. M .: "Nauka", 1968. - 184 p.
105. Samkova V.M. From the history of the socio-political vocabulary of the Russian literary language in the 40-60s. 19th century (based on the works of A.I. Herzen). Abstract of diss. cand. philol. Sciences. JL: Leningrad State University, 1955. - 15p.
106. Selishchev A.M. Expressiveness and figurativeness of the language of the revolutionary era // Native language at school, 1927, No. 3. P. 72-84.
107. Selishchev A.M. Revolution and language // On the way to pedagogical self-education. -M., 1925.-S. 207-217.
108. Selishchev A.M. Review of Barannikov, 1919. // Kazan bibliophile, 1921, No. 1.- P. 66-70.
109. Sivko O.A. "Ideologized" vocabulary and its features // Lexical and grammatical semantics. Novosibirsk, 1986.
110. Dictionary of the language of V.I. Lenin. Project. M.: AN SSSR, 1971. - 66s.
111. Modern ideological struggle and problems of language / Otv. ed. Desheriev Yu.D.-M.: "Science", 1984. -240s.
112. Solganik G.Ya. Newspaper vocabulary. functional aspect. M .: "Higher School", 1981. - 112p.
113. Solganik G.Ya. Vocabulary of a modern newspaper // in the book: Language and style., 1980. Solganik G.Ya. On the peculiarities of the language of the newspaper // Russian. language abroad, 1988, No. 5.- S. 35-38.
114. Solonino M.A. On the study of the language of the revolutionary era // Russian language in the Soviet school, 1929, No. 4. P. 42-47.
115. Stepanova E.M. Lexico-semantic features of socio-political vocabulary in a journalistic text // Studies in the style of artistic speech. Alma-Ata, 1985. - S. 145-153.
116. Stepanova E.M. Educational dictionary of verbal compatibility of a socio-political nature. M.: MGU, 1963.
117. Strizhenko A.A., Rogozina I.V. Political Vocabulary of the English-Language Press (Tutorial for a Special Course). Barnaul, 1983.
118. Timoshenko N.L. Vocabulary of Soviet Political Treaties of 1917-1985: Functional and Stylistic Analysis. Abstract of diss. cand. philol. Sciences. - Kyiv, 1987.
119. Toshovich B. The language of perestroika and its reflection in the Yugoslav mass media // Russian. language abroad, 1988, No. 4, pp. 49-53.
120. Treskova S.I. Terminology in the sphere of mass communication // Sociolinguistic studies of the terminology of the peoples of the USSR. M., 1988. - S. 49-59. Trunev N.V. Revolution and language // Siberian fires. - Novosibirsk, 1928, book. 4. - S. 165-181.
121. Turkin V.N. To the study of social terms // Questions of linguistics, 1975, No. 2. pp. 62-67.
122. Uspensky L.V. Language of revolution // Five arts. L., 1928.
123. The functioning of the language as a means of ideological influence (collection of scientific papers). Krasnodar: KubGU, 1988. - 111p.
124. Chernykh P.Ya. 1. Modern trends in linguistics. 2. Russian language and revolution. Irkutsk, 1929. - 64p.
125. Chernykh P.Ya. About new words // Ethnographic Bulletin Irkutsk, 1923, No. 3. Shansky A.M. Words born in October. - M., 1980.
126. Shvedova N.Yu. Socio-political vocabulary and phraseology in "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow" by A.N. Radishchev // Materials and research, according to IR-LA, vol. II. M.-L., 1951. - S. 5-51.
127. Schmidt V. Correlation between language and politics as a subject of study of the social effectiveness of language from the standpoint of Marxism-Leninism // Actual Problems of Linguistics of the GDR. - M., 1979.
128. Shnaidrova G. Issues of selection and semantization of socio-political vocabulary for teachers of the Russian language in the Czech non-philological audience. Abstract of diss. cand. philol. Sciences. M., 1984. - 24p.
129. Shor E.N. On the history of French socio-political vocabulary. Abstract of diss. cand. philol. Sciences. M., 1954.
130. Epstein M.N. Ideology and language (building a model and comprehending discourse) // Questions of linguistics, 1991, No. 6. P. 19-33.
131. The language of the newspaper. Practical guide and a reference guide for newspaper workers / Ed. Kondakova N.I. M.-L., 1941. - 464 p.
1Socio-political vocabulary is specific, has a wide scope, and is of general use. The current political and economic situation strongly influences the language processes in society, forms the vectors for the development of the language as a social phenomenon. The article emphasizes that the identification of the national self-identity of the Kazakh language is a legitimate requirement of the time.
socio-political vocabulary
language processes in society
self-identity of the Kazakh language
1. Belchikov Yu.A. Social and political vocabulary of V.G. Belinsky. - M., 1962.
2. Desheriev Yu.D., Protchenko I.F. Development of the languages of the peoples of the USSR in the Soviet era. - M., 1968.
3. Momynova B. Socio-political vocabulary in the newspaper "Kazakh". -Almaty: Arys, 1998. (in Kazakh)
4. Dosmukhameduly H. Favorites. - Almaty: Ana tili, 1998. (in Kazakh).
6. Rustemov L.Z. Kazakh-Russian explanatory dictionary of Arabic-Iranian borrowed words - Al .: Mektep, 1989. (in Kazakh).
7. Momynova B. Socio-political vocabulary in the Kazakh language - Almaty: Kazakh University, 2005. - P.140. (in Kazakh).
8. Yeleukenov Sh., Shalgynbayeva Zh. History of the Kazakh book - Almaty: "Sanat", 1999. (in Kazakh).
9. Myrzabekten Niyazbekuly Saparkhan. Orthoepic dictionary of the Kazakh language - Almaty: Sozdik-dictionary, 2001. (in Kazakh).
10. Baitursynuly A. // Kazakh. 1913, no. 2, ch. article. (in Kazakh).
11. Baitursynuly A. The order of writing // Aiqap, N 9-10, 1912. (in Kazakh).
12. Baitursynuly A. Problems of writing // Kazakh, N 34-35, 1913. (in Kazakh).
13. Baitursynuly A. On the classification of sounds // Zhana mektep, No. 5. 1927 (in Kazakh language)..
16. Baitursynov A. Textbook (in Kazakh).
17. Syzdykova R., Baitursynov A. About life and creativity // About the greatness of the language. - Almaty, 1992. (in Kazakh).
18. Verbatim report of the scientific and orthographic conference convened on July 2-4, 1929 by the Scientific and Methodological Council of the NKP and the Central Committee of the Scientific and Technical Committee. -Almaty, 1930 - S. 58.
19. Amirzhanova N. The historical fate of the Latin alphabet in Kazakhstan. - Almaty: Institute for the Development of the State Language - 2012. -from. 300 (in Kazakh).
20. Sauranbaev N. Problems of Kazakh linguistics. - Almaty: "Gylym", 1988. (in Kazakh).
21. Islam Zhemeney. Persian-Kazakh and Kazakh-Persian dictionary. - Almaty: Sanat, 1994. (in Kazakh).
22. Amanzholov A. Turkic philology and history of writing. - Almaty: Sanat, 1996 (in Kazakh).
Linguists are unanimous in assessing the specifics of socio-political vocabulary, distinguishing it from other layers of the language, and determining its lexico-semantic orientation. Usually these include words that are directly related to the state-administrative system of government, politics and economics, the processes of development of society.
B. Momynova in her work “Socio-political vocabulary in the Kazakh newspaper” identifies the following groups of socio-political vocabulary: 1) the names of socio-historical categories and concepts; 2) the name of the political system; 3) the name of the administrative system; 4) names related to legislation, judicial system; 5) political names; 6) names of military affairs; 7) names of the sphere of culture, education, 8) religious vocabulary.
Socio-political vocabulary is specific, in contrast to the terms, has a wider scope, is of general use. With the terms they are brought together by the foreign nature of the origin, belonging to the international vocabulary. This identity is sometimes misleading beyond ordinary native speakers and linguists.
Undoubtedly, socio-political vocabulary serves economics, political science, philosophy, sociology, cultural studies, history and other social sciences and humanities, and they can be conditionally considered as terms of these industries. Also, socio-political vocabulary in a certain period is born as neologisms (for example, during the years of Soviet power, “collectivization”, “red yurt”, “electrification”, “industrialization”, “perestroika”, “acceleration”, etc.) a wide turn, then, as it leaves the language scene, it acquires the status of historicisms. In terms of scope and scope of application, the socio-political lexicon is the language of a certain circle of speakers. This is the common property of all members of society, which everyone uses to the best of their linguistic abilities and needs. The strengthening of the positions of this vocabulary in the national language, along with the fields of education and science, is facilitated by the mass media. Words as designations of new concepts, phenomena penetrate into the vocabulary through the language of the press, periodicals. By means of socio-political vocabulary is determined public policy and economic course of the country. For this reason, political scientists consider it (lexicon) as words that characterize the political and economic image of the state, linguists consider these words to be means of a journalistic style, therefore, an object of linguistics.
Thus, the vast scope of the borrowed socio-political vocabulary and the activity of its use sharply distinguishes it from internationalism terms. It is this property (prevalence and belonging to the active vocabulary) to a large extent contributes to the pollution of the language. At one time, Khalel Dosmukhameduly noted: “Among our Kazakh-Kyrgyz people, few people know European languages well, many do not. European languages penetrate to us through Russian. When borrowing European words, it is necessary to study the history of their origin and, as far as possible, adapt them to the pronunciation of the native language. The words of the scientist, spoken in the era of the rapid entry of borrowed vocabulary, accurately determined its nature and negative consequences for the native language. This means that the timely search for Kazakh equivalents and the replacement of foreign vocabulary or the pronunciation (writing) of borrowed names of socio-political phenomena in accordance with the phonetic system of the Kazakh language (as happened with the words “sayasat”, “kogam”, “memleket”, “ үkimet", "okіmet", "oyaz", "bolys", "uakіl", "okіl", etc.) are in demand in our time.
Socio-political vocabulary occupies huge layers of the language and has no less broad functional powers. Its development is inextricably linked with the historical and political stages of the formation of society, various socio-economic situations in the country, with the formation and improvement of written literature and the media. The strengthening of the function of socio-political vocabulary and the activity of its use are especially increasing due to written sources, incl. and media.
Each phase of social development leaves its mark on the history of the language. In a certain formation, other words relatively soon pass into the category of historicisms. Other "long-livers", being in the active circulation of the national language for a long time, become attributes of everyday speech. They are difficult to distinguish (without careful study) from common vocabulary. Usually these words are formed in accordance with the rules of word formation of the recipient language (“khan, karasha, kaganat, ұlys, taipa, ru, bai, kedei, sharua, sharuashhylyk”, etc.) or obey its sound-letter system (by analogy with “kogam, sayasat, patsha, sultan, myrza, bolys, oyaz, post office, post office, akim, akimshilik, mekeme, kense, kyzmet, martebe, derezhe”, etc.). The foreign nature of these words is difficult to predict without a preliminary etymological analysis. So, the newspaper "Alash Ainasy" in the heading "Unknown about famous name"Wrote:" Zhomart is a primordially Kazakh name, it can be interpreted as "generous, magnanimous". But if you believe the study of L.Z. Rustemova, this word is formed from the addition of the Persian "dzhavan" (young) and "mәrd" (bold, brave).
The composition of the socio-political vocabulary of prof. B. Momynova classifies as follows: “nominal combinations of native Kazakh words: ult kenesi, bilik dalizі, bilik tutqasy, zhogary bilik, etc. Combinations with one foreign language component: sayasi leader, sayasi kush, day confession, bilik Olimpi, sayasi baspana, til sayasaty, sayasi sheshim... Nominal combinations of foreign words: sayasi reform, etc.” . So, the word “daliz”, perceived as originally Kazakh, in fact comes from the Persian “dagliz”, and “sayasi”, “dini”, “sayasat” are of Arab-Persian origin.
From the VIII century on the Kazakh land under the influence Arab Caliphate Arabic writing is spreading, through it the Kazakh language space was enriched with words related to science, education, knowledge of the world, state-administrative system. Starting from the 15th century, a new era in the development of Arabic graphics among the Turks begins. Turkic-speaking tribal communities unite into separate states, nations are formed. From that time until the end of the 19th century, the Kazakhs used the common Turkic book language based on the Arabic script (Chagatai or Old Uzbek languages).
1870-1910 in the publishing houses of St. Petersburg, Kazan, books were published and widely distributed, preaching the principles of Islam; love dastans based on the Thousand and One Nights, epic, lyrical-epic, historical tales of the Kazakhs. A.V. Vasiliev wrote: “Traveling through the steppe, you rarely come across a yurt without books. The demand for books is so great that one book in the Kazakh language is published dozens of times in thousands of copies.” Prior to colonization by imperial Russia, the pan-Turkic bookstore was also business language period of the khan-administrative system of government.
Arab-Persian socio-political words, which penetrated into Kazakh through various written sources, undoubtedly enriched the language. Although in writing they retained a foreign language character (millәt, zhamiғiat, qizmat, hukmet, ғasker, maһkama, etc.), in the national oral speech, their sound composition adapted to the phonetics of the Kazakh language (қоғam, nәsіl, bodan, bolys, oyaz, sot , etc.). Subsequently, thanks to the release of the first Kazakh newspapers "Turkistan ualyaty" (1870-1883) and "Dala ualyaty" (1888-1902), this vocabulary also underwent graphic changes: words began to be written in accordance with the rules of Kazakh spelling.
Socially significant changes, news bring new concepts and ideas to life. A nation with a well-developed written culture promptly finds names for them in their native language or adapts foreign language expressions to the system of the recipient language. Among peoples with an unformed national alphabet and spelling, borrowed vocabulary undergoes only minor changes. Consequently, the preservation of the original spelling and pronunciation of foreign words is a sign of the unformed national graphic (spelling) system of the recipient language. Neither a language that has been historically formed, nor a language that is in its infancy, due to its natural laws, is able to accept an alien word in its original form. This trend is especially obvious when the vocabulary of the language is not yet so "filled" with borrowed vocabulary.
"The Kazakh language mainly developed orally: the Kazakh absorbed it with milk and mother's lullaby, the native language in the blood of the Kazakh, together with him he matured in the village, played on the horse's mane, on the back of a camel, spilled with a song, spread with rays" . For this reason, before the colonization by Russia, before the policy of Russification, foreign words were alien to the Kazakh language, it found their equivalents with amazing speed and accuracy.
Foreign vocabulary is accepted without changes by languages that are alien to their nature, i.e. borrowed graphics (spelling). Since they preserve the written version of the original source, these written norms are further fixed both in pronunciation and in reading, and become widespread. This fact was once noted by H. Dosmukhameduly.
New words are distributed, first of all, by the media. The popularization of these words, their acquisition of a nationwide character are directly related to the development of the periodical press. The end of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th centuries in connection with the publication of the newspapers "Dala ualyayati", "Turkistan ualyayati", "Serke", "Kazakh", "Kazakhstan" and the magazines "Aykap", "Shora", "Tan", "Sholpan" mark a period of flourishing of the Kazakh press. In the formative stage, the language of newspapers did not deviate from the canons of the Chagatai language. But the goal of the periodicals of that time was to become an ideological mouthpiece for the Kazakhs, for which it was necessary to write in Kazakh. Alash figures played a special role in the education of the people. So, Akhmet Baitursynuly wrote: “If lovers of the literary language do not like the colloquial Kazakh style of the newspaper, we ask you to excuse us. A thing for the people should be close to the people.
The merit of A. Baitursynuly is great in the creation of the national alphabet based on the Arabic script. He, a staunch supporter of the graphic reform in the Kazakh language, devoted a number of articles to this problem: “Zhazu tartibі” (“The order of writing”), “Zhazu maselesi” (“Problems of writing), “Dybystardy zhіkteu turaly” (“On the classification of sounds”), "Emle Turaly" ("On Spelling"), "Jokshyga Derek" ("Information to the Unknowing"). His first primer "Oku құraly" ("Tutorial") was published in 1912.
A. Baitursynuly, taking the original sound system of the Kazakhs as a basis, radically transformed the former writing system. Thus, the scientist contributed to the fact that Turkic words, Arabisms, Persianisms were now written in accordance with the phonetics of the Kazakh language. His new alphabet was recognized by many experts. “A. Baitursynov's variant of the Arabic graphics, adapted to the laws of the Kazakh language, was unanimously accepted by the Kazakhs, especially by the teachers. Because Baitursynov's graphic reform is based on the nature of the Kazakh language, developed on a scientific basis. His "tote zhazu" - "direct writing" was recognized and highly appreciated along with the domestic intelligentsia and world-famous linguists.
The great work of A. Baitursynuly - the Kazakh national alphabet and spelling was widely used until 1929. From that year until 1940, it was used along with the newly adopted Latin alphabet. Further, Baitursynov's alphabet was used selectively, he (the alphabet) retained its viability. Thus, the leading figures of Kazakh literature M. Auezov and G. Musrepov, although they knew both the Latin and Cyrillic alphabets, most of the manuscript was written by A. Baitursynuly “tote zhaz”. This writing is still in demand today. Over a million of our compatriots in China use it in many public areas.
In connection with the political suffering in the 20s of the twentieth century in 1928-29, the Kazakh alphabet was translated into the Latin alphabet of 29 letters. In the newspapers and various historical documents issued at that time, the foreign language “satsyalizm”, “satsyalist”, “kamunis”, “balshabek”, “reporma”, “sabet”, “pebyral”, “sabnarkom”, “purtakol” were written in accordance with orthoepy of the Kazakh language, since in the first decade of Soviet power, quite favorable conditions for development national languages. But this was a temporary measure to strengthen the positive image of the Soviets among the peoples of the USSR. As the period of repression approached, cutting off the entire intellectual color of the nations, the policy of Russification again came into force. In 1926-1927, during the discussion about whether to leave the A. Baitursynuly alphabet or switch to the Latin alphabet more efficiently, even public disputes were held under the guise of the Russification policy. The fact is that Russian writing itself is based on the Latin (Greek) alphabet, therefore, in the future, the Kazakh Latin alphabet can easily be replaced by Russian writing.
Nevertheless, in 1929, the spelling rules of the Kazakh language, already based on the Latin alphabet, officially fixed in Kyzyl-Orda, did not differ much from the results of Baitursynov's reform. The reason is the direct participation of Alash figures in the new reform, their ideological resistance to the introduction of sounds and letters alien to Kazakh into the Latinized "national" alphabet. After the repressions of scientists, in 1938, a set of new spelling rules was adopted, where the Russification policy was already clearly manifested: “previously, due to the lack of letters in the alphabet, words were distorted in the letter, but now they will be written correctly with consonants x, v, f. For example, now they will write hut, khan, chemistry, fazil, wagon, council. The alphabet of the Kazakh literary language includes 32 letters. The new document not only served as a starting point for ignoring the phonetic patterns of the language and borrowing vocabulary without adapting it in the recipient language, but also hindered the natural process of replenishing the vocabulary.
Since November 1940, the Kazakh alphabet, already translated into Cyrillic, included 41 letters, the rules were improved to allow the adoption of foreign vocabulary without phonetic changes. The last reform of the language accepted into the Kazakh alphabet all the sounds and letters inherent in Russian. Now there are already 42 letters in Kazakh, which serve as a graphic copy of Russian words. The paradox of the current situation is that the Kazakh society is so accustomed to the new script that now the very nature of the native language seems alien. “The striking difference between the pronunciation and spelling of words has been erased”, “In the Kazakh language, words are both written and read” - such “positive” reviews about the current state of the Kazakh literary language can sometimes be heard from linguists. And yet, the current political and economic situation strongly influences the language processes in society, forms the vectors for the development of the language as a social phenomenon. Therefore, the identification of the national self-identity of the Kazakh language is a legitimate phenomenon and the imperative of the times.
New vocabulary (neologisms) appears in the language to denote some new concept, phenomenon. Examples of neologisms of the twentieth century are the words junior, performance, PR, marketing, management, etc.
Most neologisms are associated with the development of science, technology, culture, economics, and industrial relations. Many of these words are firmly established in life, lose their novelty and become active. lexicon. For example, in the 1950s and 1970s, a large number of terms related to the development of astronautics appeared: cosmonaut, cosmodrome, cosmic vision, telemetry, spacecraft, etc.; most of these words, due to their relevance, very quickly became common and entered the active vocabulary.
Socio-political vocabulary was previously defined as a group of words characteristic of periodicals and functional journalistic style.
There are two main types of borrowed words according to the time of borrowing. The first type is relatively old borrowings, updated in recent years due to changes in the political and economic system of Russia. The second type is new borrowings made directly in recent years.
A typical example of the first type is, for example, the word "president". Recall that M. S. Gorbachev, still at the Congress of People's Deputies, corrected one of the speakers who addressed him with the words "Mr. President", calling for accuracy and explaining that "president" is a different position, a different reality, etc. . The borrowed word "president" was relevant, while the name of foreign political and social realities (for example: "President of the United States", "President of France"). Since then, the situation has changed, and extralinguistic factors have made the word "president" relevant for Russia as well ("President of the Russian Federation", "President of Tatarstan", etc.). The words mayor (fr. maire), prefect (lat. praefectus - head), prefecture, municipality have the same fate. If in the early eighties of the twentieth century the chairman of the city executive committee, for example, was called the mayor in private conversations, today the word mayor has become the official title of the head of executive power in some cities of Russia ("mayor of Moscow", "mayor's office of Moscow"). However, in some places the word mayor has retained its slang connotation: in some cities of Russia, the head of the executive city government bears the title of "head of the city", "chairman of the city government", etc., however, local media often call him the mayor, either setting the fashion, or or, on the contrary, following the already existing one. The same applies, for example, to the word municipality, which is often used in the sense of "city-level executive authority", although officially these bodies, as a rule, have other names: "administration of the head of the city", "mayor's office", "government of the city", "city administration" (an example of such use of the word "municipality" see // "Vecherny Stavropol", No. 35, February 23, 2001).
Borrowings made long before the October Revolution and lost their relevance with the establishment of Soviet power have also been updated again now. Such, for example, is the word governor (lat. gubernator - helmsman, ruler), which not only regained its relevance, but also acquired a new actual compatibility: the governor of the Stavropol Territory, for example.
Very often now the borrowed word oligarch (from the Greek oligarchia - the power of the few) is mentioned in the media and in the speech of public politicians, familiar to Soviet people from the textbooks of the history of the ancient world (cf. Spartan oligarchic union) and the works of the classics of Marxism-Leninism (cf. financial oligarchy). Today, this is the name given to large domestic capitalists who have great personal influence on the political process. As a rule, oligarchs are primarily called the owners of majority stakes in large media outlets.
How new are perceived today by mass consciousness and some borrowings, previously known only to specialists and recorded in dictionaries as related to "bourgeois" law and "bourgeois" reality, but which became widespread in the Russian language in the last decade of the twentieth century in connection with the actualization for Russian reality the concepts they represent.
These are the words legitimate (lat. legitimus - legal; for example: "Was the dissolution of the CPSU constitutional? No, but it was legitimate ..." // Novoye Vremya, No. 40, 1993, p. 11), electorate (lat. elector - elector, for example: "He has a stable electorate" (about Cherepkov) // Komsomolskaya Pravda, April 28, 2001, p. 5), etc.
Speaking about socio-political vocabulary today, we can divide it into the following groups according to the spheres of human activity, from where certain words are taken in political speech, according to the areas of predominant use:
Economic terms used in socio-political media discourse
Religious terms used in the socio-political discourse of the media
Let's consider the selected types of socio-political vocabulary using specific examples.
The words of the actual political discourse:
Nomenclature names of persons:
Terminology of electoral and related technologies (political marketing, etc.):
Names of political parties, movements, ideological currents and their members (participants):
Political jargon:
Among these words there are words that are quite old borrowings, but updated in the last decade of the twentieth century and acquired new meanings or shades of meanings. The word oligarch, for example, denotes a representative of big business that has a serious influence on the government, politics and economy of the country. Previously, this word was not used outside of works on the history of the ancient world, where it denoted each of the co-rulers of ancient Sparta separately. Let us assume that the word oligarch used in recent years in the press (for example: "The Communist Party of the Russian Federation spoke on behalf of not so much representatives of the communist ideology as the electorate who protested against the dominance of the oligarchs ..."; "Rossiyskaya Gazeta", 06/23/2000), strictly speaking , is not the result of the development of an additional meaning for the word oligarch, meaning a Spartan ruler, but is formed from the word oligarchy in the phrase financial oligarchy - the political and economic domination of a handful of exploiting financiers. This phrase was present in almost any Soviet textbook on new history, the foundations of the state and law, political economy, but there was no need to single out a special word to designate an individual representative of the financial oligarchy. We admit that this word could occur in some special works, but it was not a fact. public consciousness. In the last decade of the twentieth century, the existence of such individual representatives of the domestic financial oligarchy became a significant and noticeable fact for Russia and was immediately reflected in the language, primarily in the language of the press.
The situation is similar with the word electorate (the people as electors). In the old Soviet dictionaries of foreign words, this lexeme is not recorded, although the words elector (elector) and electoral (electoral, electoral) are already present in the dictionary of Lekhin and Petrov in 1949. It is easy to assume that in some special works the word electorate, which has the same root as the words elector and electoral, was already encountered then, but the indisputable fact remains that it entered the active vocabulary of literate Russian-speaking people precisely in the nineties of the twentieth century, when real elections and the electoral function of the population has become truly relevant. An example of a specific use of the word "electoral": "One of the main ratings is electoral; the situation is worse with electoral anti-rating ..."; // "Komsomolskaya Pravda", 04/28/2001).
It was in connection with the replacement of fictitious Soviet elections with a real electoral system, with the formation of democracy in Russia, that the words “run for office”, rating, populism were updated and acquired new meanings, shades of meanings and new compatibility. In Soviet times, it was unthinkable to talk about the rating of this or that politician, because. Soviet politicians and the politicians of the "fraternal" countries were revered almost like saints, and a saint cannot have a rating, while bourgeois politicians were perceived as enemies, which also did not imply that they had a rating. The current public competitiveness of Russian politicians and their dependence on voters (the electorate) made it possible to combine the word rating with the names of specific Russian politicians, updated the word populism ("But he does not need such populism ...; about Putin; "Stavropolskaya Pravda", 03/07/2000 ) and filled the word run (nominate one's candidacy in elections) with real meaning.
The word "federal" has long been formed from the borrowed basis of the word "federal" and has received a new meaning. The same can be said about the words region, regional. The federal-regional opposition has replaced the former union-republican (local) one. The word federal was previously used primarily when referring to the United States of America (federal law, Federal Bureau of Investigation, etc.). In connection with the new state structure of Russia, the word federal began to be used in relation to Russian realities (federal law, federal troops). The actualization of the word region occurred due to the need for a common short designation for territories (subjects of the federation) with different nomenclature names: republics, territories, regions, autonomous districts, etc.
The words legitimate and illegitimate were found in the works of Russian publicists of the early twentieth century, but after the establishment of Soviet power, they became the property of only a narrow circle of specialists. At the end of the twentieth century, in connection with the revival of political processes in Russia, these words appeared on the pages of Russian periodicals. The literal meaning of the word legitimate is legal, but in recent years in the press it is more often used in the sense of "supported by the majority of the politically active population." For example: "Was the dissolution of the CPSU constitutional? No, but it was legitimate..." (New time, no. 40, 1993). If we stick to the original meaning of the word legitimate, then it turns out that this statement contains an oxymoron.
The word separatists (supporters of the separation of any territory from the state of which this territory is officially included) could previously only be used if it was about Punjab, Kashmir, Ulster or, for example, the "State of Shan" in Myanmar. The events in Chechnya made this word one of the most used borrowed words in the Russian press in the nineties.
The word inauguration, denoting the official (often solemn) inauguration of the head of state, is also new to the socio-political vocabulary of the Russian media.
Economic terms used in the socio-political discourse of the media:
A special place among these terms is occupied by the words privatization (transfer to private ownership) and voucher (privatization check). The opposition press uses the first of them, as a rule, with the stable epithet predatory, and, interestingly, the loyal press often agrees with it, occasionally only replacing this epithet with clumsy, mediocre or wild.
Since August 1997, after a serious crisis of non-payments, the economic term default has firmly entered the Russian language (from the English default - failure to fulfill obligations, especially monetary ones).
The terms investment, inflation, emission, business, firm, commercialization have long been present in the Russian language, but have been updated in the last decade.
Completely new for the Russian language is the word brand (from the English brand - brand, stamp, factory mark) - a trademark. The word brand is used, including in political discourse. For example: "... Putin's name has become almost a trademark, a brand ..." (SGV)
Names of enterprises, organizations, trusts, associations of various forms of ownership, specializing in various fields of activity and management. For example: consulting, holding, these are new words for the Russian language that came from English. Consulting - consulting. Holding - a leased piece of land, shareholding.
The word dealer - commercial representative is also new.
Technical terms that denote realities of great social significance:
The Internet is a global non-centralized computer information network that has recently become a very important factor in social and political life.
480 rub. | 150 UAH | $7.5 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Thesis - 480 rubles, shipping 10 minutes 24 hours a day, seven days a week and holidays
240 rub. | 75 UAH | $3.75 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Abstract - 240 rubles, delivery 1-3 hours, from 10-19 (Moscow time), except Sunday
Zhdanova Larisa Alexandrovna Socio-political vocabulary: Structure and dynamics: dissertation... Candidate of Philology: 10.02.01. - Moscow, 1996. - 224 p. RSL OD,
Introduction
CHAPTER 1. The history of the study of socio-political vocabulary and the principles of its selection and description. 13
one . The main approaches to the study of socio-political vocabulary in the linguistic tradition. 13
2. Theoretical apparatus. 17
3. Principles of selection and description of socio-political vocabulary. eighteen
4. Field structure of socio-political vocabulary and ways of its presentation and description. 25
5. Possibilities of systemic (parametric) analysis of socio-political vocabulary. 29
CHAPTER 2. Conceptual dominants of socio-political vocabulary (key concepts). 36
1. General remarks. 36
2. Power: linguistic meaning and concept. 38
3. State: linguistic meaning and concept. 57
4. Society: linguistic meaning and concept. 65
5. People and nation: correlation of notions and concepts. 75
6. Conclusions. 86
CHAPTER 3. Socio-political vocabulary in the narrow sense. 88
1. Central descriptor "power". 88
2. Central descriptor "state". 91
3. Central descriptor "society"
CHAPTER 4. Ideological vocabulary. Functional-pragmatic aspect. 106
1. Irrelevant vocabulary. 108
2. Current vocabulary. 114
2.1. Universal evaluative vocabulary. 114
2.2. Sovietisms. 124
3. Conclusions. 135
CHAPTER 5. Thematic vocabulary. 138
1. RIGHT. 139
2. FOREIGN POLICY. 144
3. MILITARY SPHERE (ARMY). 147
4. ECONOMY. 149
5. ADMINISTRATIVE SPHERE. 150
6. PHILOSOPHY. 154
7. RELIGION. 155
8. Conclusions. 157
CHAPTER 6. Inappropriate socio-political vocabulary. 160
1. General remarks. 160
2. Subjects of power relations (A). 163
3. Objects of power relations (B). 168
4. Negative attitude of A towards B. 171
5. A positive attitude towards B. 178
6. Negative relationship B to A. 181
7. Positive attitude of B towards A. 185
8. Conclusions. 189
CONCLUSION. 191
BIBLIOGRAPHY. 201
APPENDIX. 220
Introduction to work
This work is devoted to socio-political vocabulary (hereinafter referred to as SPL) - that part of the vocabulary of the Russian language, which is intended for verbalization of socio-political (SP) relations and their language modeling. Despite a large number of special studies, the RPL is not defined in its composition, structural organization and dynamic potential.
The relevance of the work. Currently, the OPL is undergoing significant changes. The circle of its users is expanding, a new political language is being formed. The OPL has attracted the attention of linguists since the first post-revolutionary years, and it is of great interest even now. At present, there is a need for such a description of the NPL, which would make it possible to reveal its structural features and dynamic potential. The OPL reflects the ways of presenting socio-political relations and thinking about them given by the language. The study of the OPL is part of the actual problem in modern linguistics of constructing a "naive-linguistic" picture of the world.
Target research consists in determining the composition of the GPL, identifying its structure and dynamic processes, in studying the ideas about socio-political relations in the Russian language consciousness, in the "picture of the world" of native speakers, in developing approaches to building a thesaurus type GPL dictionary.
Research methods. IN The work uses methods adopted in lexicology, lexicographic practice and in the system-structural description of linguistic phenomena: component and distributive analysis, interpretation and interpretation, parametric (multidimensional) analysis by differentiating features and analysis through the field structure. Central is the method of conceptual analysis, corresponding to the purpose of the study.
Scientific novelty The work consists in the fact that the work applied an onomasiological approach to the allocation of the OPL, defined its boundaries and composition, for the first time analyzed the key concepts "power", "state", "society", "people", "nation",
determining the modeling of socio-political relations in the Russian language consciousness, a flexible field structure of the OPL has been identified with the center in the form of the OPL itself and three adjacent zones: ideological, thematic and improperly OP vocabulary; the integral principles of the structural organization of the NPL as a whole and the specific principles inherent in the center and adjacent zones are revealed, the dynamic potencies of the NPL are revealed against the background of stability over time.
Empirical base of dissertation research. The common linguistic approaches to the study of OPL: content-thematic, connotative, functional-stylistic - proceed from the fact that the vocabulary of OPL is predetermined. The empirical base of the study was formed on the basis of the onomasiological approach to the identification of APL. Based on the generally accepted definition of socio-political relations, we singled out the semantic dominant in it - the intersubjective relation ARB, where R is the power relation, A and B are the subject and object of the power relation. According to the four-volume Dictionary of the Russian Language (MAS), published in 1987, a sample was made of about 7,000 words, the meanings of which contain the semantics of the imperious intersubjective relation ARB. This sample was defined as the composition of the PPL for 1985 and as a reference point against which the development of the PPL is determined. The basis for the study of dynamic processes in the OPL was word usage in the texts of the periodical press of recent years. To analyze the conceptual dominants of the OPL, mass media texts and dictionaries were also used.
Scientific and practical value of the work. The scientific value of the work lies in the development of a new concept of the RPL, in a comprehensive description of the structural organization and dynamics of the RPL, in the application of the method of conceptual analysis and the identification of the key concepts of the RPL in the naive-linguistic "picture of the world".
The results of the work can be used in lexicology and lexicographic practice, in stylistics and sociolinguistics in the study of the media and the study of the role of language in shaping public opinion.
The data obtained can be used in the development of university courses, special courses and special seminars on vocabulary and lexical semantics, style and art.
torii of the Russian literary language of the XX century, in teaching Russian as a foreign language.
Basic provisions and structure of the work. The dissertation consists of an introduction, six chapters, a conclusion, a bibliography and an appendix, which includes lists of words that are not included in the main body of the work.
In Administered the choice of the topic is substantiated, the purpose and objectives of the study are formulated, the scientific novelty, theoretical and practical significance of the work is determined.
IN chapter 1 "History of the study of OPL and the principles of its identification and description" discusses the main approaches to the study of OPL put forward in the linguistic tradition, proposes an onomasiological approach to the allocation of OPL and gives general characteristics structure of the OPL, the conceptual apparatus used in the work is determined.
A full-meaning word refers to the OPL in a broad sense, if in its meaning in one form or another the authoritative intersubjective relation ARB is represented. The expression of meanings: power relation, subject of power, object of power - defines the external boundaries of the OPL in a broad sense and its internal stratification. The key concepts of the OPL are "power", "state", "society", the concepts of the people and the nation are significant for the structure of the OPL.
There are 4 zones in the PPL:
The 1st zone is the OPL itself (OPL in the narrow sense). Actually OPL is a political lexicon. The expression of a power relationship is associated in it with an indication of the sphere of its implementation - the state. The NPL in the narrow sense includes direct nominations of persons, places, phenomena, structures that shape the political life of society. (referendum, party, peasantry, president, decree, city hall and under.).
Zone 2 - ideological vocabulary. The expression of a power relationship is associated with axiological meanings (totalitarianism, regime, imperial) and the pragmatic component of the meaning, designated as "engagement", reflecting the attachment of the word to a specific historical era, the attachment of the word in the lexicon of a particular power system (district committee, secretary general, low-conscious, highly ideological
as elements of the "Soviet" language). Ideological vocabulary is a marker of the political position of the speaker and the ideological orientation of the text.
3rd zone - thematic vocabulary. This lexicon first of all denotes the spheres and forms of manifestation of public life (army, economy, administrative sphere, foreign policy, etc.), the implementation of which implies correlation with the ARB intersubjective relation.
4th zone - not actually OPL ("peripheral" OPL). In fact, the PLR describes power relations in general, regardless of the scope of implementation (subdue, oppress, obey, permission), or a specific (but not state-political) sphere of realization of power relations (drill, team, captain). By tradition, this vocabulary is not included in the OPL. But the semantics and systematic correlation of the non-proper GPL with the OP life, including metaphorical transfers, branched relationships between all words denoting a power relationship, are the basis for considering this vocabulary within the framework of the GLP.
Thus, the OPL in the broad sense is distinguished by a semantic criterion, has a field structure that can be represented as concentric circles inscribed into each other: in the center is the OPL in the narrow sense, then - the ideological, thematic and improperly OP vocabulary.
The structural organization of the NPL is determined by the presence of end-to-end, that is, characterizing features and dominant principles related to all zones of the NPL, inherent in each individual zone. Cross-cutting characteristics include: 1) distinction in each of the zones of actual / irrelevant vocabulary (for example, for 1985, city committee, general secretary, pioneer, and irrelevant - prince, Reichstag, scout, council). Irrelevant vocabulary is a reserve fund of names required if necessary (for example, at present - to create a new nomenclature of designations for subjects of state power: president, parliament, mayor, prefect, governor). 2) the degree of permeability (openness / closeness) of lexical layers. The four PPL zones have different ability to reduce, expand, change their composition, which determines their change over time.
The OPL zones and the groups identified in them also differ in the volume of the vocabulary, in the ratio of native and borrowed vocabulary, in part-of-speech ratio, in the volume of derivative and non-derivative words and the representativeness of word-formation series, in systemic lexical characteristics (polysemy, synonymy, antonymy, conversion).
Similarities and differences within the field structure of the NPL, revealed through a complex (parametric) analysis, make it possible to concretize the ideas about the structure of the NPL in a broad sense.
The flexibility and differentiation of the NPL is manifested in the identification of specific dominant principles of structural organization that are important for individual zones. OPL in a narrow sense is grouped around key concepts, for ideological vocabulary the functional-pragmatic aspect is important, for the thematic - nominative, and for improper OPL - what can be called the detailing of the actant structure, that is, the correlation of OP lexemes with one of the components of the power relation ARB and special "elaboration" of subjects, objects and typical predicates, in which the semantics of the power relation is presented.
Chapter 2 "Conceptual dominants of socio-political vocabulary (key concepts)" analyzes the conceptual dominants of the OPL (concepts "power", "state", "society", as well as "people" and "nation"), reveals their characteristics, significant for the entire LPL as a whole (the concept of power) or its fragments, the metaphors in terms of which they are structured, the features of the semantics and compatibility of the corresponding lexemes are studied.
Key concepts reflect the ideas of linguistic consciousness about the socio-political sphere of life. They represent the entire OPL in a "removed" form, because they verbalize the model of power relations, the subject and object of power. As a result, they are descriptors (semantic units that group words around themselves in the thesaurus) of the three main lexical blocks identified as part of the OPL itself.
In the 3rd chapter"Socio-political vocabulary in the narrow sense" is considered by the OPL itself. It is characteristic for the center of the OPL field structure that it is structured directly by the key concepts "power", "state" and "society", which act as descriptors of three lexical blocks. The block with the descriptor "power" includes lexical groups that convey the power relation (power, sovereignty, autocracy, dominance), naming forms of government (dictatorship, democracy, monarchy), conveying the attitude of the individual to power (loyal, dissident). The lexical block with the descriptor "state" is the most developed, segmentable. The names of the subjects of state power of different levels are highlighted here. (presidium, deputy, minister) and state attributes. authorities (coat of arms, anthem, flag), nomina locis (executive committee, city hall, prefecture), names of actions and statements of the state. authorities (reform, decree, decree), actions of the individual and society in relation to the state. authorities (rally, strike, overthrow, election, run), administrative and political division of the state (republic, autonomy), relationships between entities within the state (autonomy, colony, federation). In the lexical block with the descriptor "society" there are groups of words in which the dual division of society is conveyed: stratification ("classes": peasantry, proletariat, feudal lord) and division based on party affiliation (communist party, bolshevik, faction, labourist, socialist-revolutionary), as well as groups organized by the concepts of the people (national, referendum, popular) and nation (national, apartheid, ghetto, chauvinism).
IN 4th chapter"Ideological Vocabulary. Functional-Pragmatic Aspect" deals with words that include in their semantic co-av, in addition to descriptive pragmatic meanings ("engagement" and / or axiological meanings). Ideological vocabulary demonstrates a combination of structural features with attachment to a certain historical period, which is decisive for it. Being focused on a specific power system and its ideological
Guess what, this vocabulary can be optimally classified by pointing to such a system. Within the framework of the "ideological" vocabulary of four power systems is highlighted: "monarchy" (porphyry bearer, nobleman, complot, disgrace),"revolutionary dictatorship" (gathering, Budennovets, NEPman, Chekist),"Sovietisms" (Party committee, Octobrist, wrecking, ideological) and post-Soviet vocabulary (command, acceleration, red-brown). In the "Soviet" vocabulary, the designations of realia are distinguished (city committee, pioneer), evaluative sovietisms (pest, unprincipled), Sovietism stamps are presented (socialist camp, citadel of communism). Also, in the ideological one, a universal evaluative vocabulary is distinguished that can serve various power systems and, accordingly, has dynamic characteristics that are different from the "biased" vocabulary. (totalitarianism, coup, reaction, provocateur, occupier And liberator, motherland, freethinking).
In the 5th chapter"Thematic vocabulary" is divided into seven groups that describe the following areas of public life: law, foreign policy, economics, religion, philosophy, military and administrative spheres. All groups are formed according to the thematic principle, they are open structures, characterized by a high degree of consistency and terminology. Thus, the third PPL zone is classified according to the thematic principle and is heterogeneous in terms of its proximity to the center of the PPL.
In the 6th chapter"Improper socio-political vocabulary" considers those words that describe the power relation in general, regardless of the sphere of its implementation, or refer to a specific (but not state-political) sphere of the implementation of power relations. Almost all OPL can be characterized from the point of view of the main power relationship (correlation of words with one of its components), but it is in the improper OPL that this correlation can be traced most clearly. Therefore, it is this vocabulary that provides an opportunity to identify and calculate the main types of relationships between
between the subject and the object of power, in other areas of the NPL are presented implicitly (in a modified form) or incompletely. The relationship between A and B can be characterized as normative (neutral), positive and negative. In this regard, ideas about the norm of power, the rights and obligations of its owner are updated. The fulfillment of a power relationship within the norm is not connoted, while the failure to fulfill obligations and, especially, the excess of authority by the subject of power are assessed unambiguously negatively.
Various possible "scenarios" and conflicts of relations between the subject and the object of power are presented within the framework of the non-proper OPL, and due to the predominant non-specificity of lexemes, one can speak of power relations in general. The improper OPL is predominantly predicative. All its lexical diversity can be reduced within the framework of the identified types of relationships A and B to a limited list of typical predicates that partially intersect with speech acts.
The dynamic potential of the OPL, considered, on the one hand, as the transition of words from the actual composition to the irrelevant one and vice versa, and on the other hand, as the ability to move in the internal space of the OPL, to systematically form figurative meanings, to change the denotation, is discussed in parallel with the analysis of the structural features of the group , being determined by the latter. Sections on the dynamic aspect are embedded in the text of each of the chapters. The data obtained as a result of the study on the structural features and dynamic potential of the OPL are summarized in conclusion.
Bibliography consists of two parts: the literature directly used in the dissertation research, and the list of works that make up the history of the study of the OPL.
Approbation of the research results.
The main provisions of the dissertation were reflected in reports and reports at conferences, as well as in publications. Conferences:
Conceptual analysis: methods, results, prospects (May 28-30, 1990, Moscow, Institute of Linguistics of the USSR Academy of Sciences).
Semantics of language units (March 3-5, 1992, Moscow, 3rd Interuniversity Conference of the Russian Language Department of the Moscow State Institute of Physics and Technology).
Publications:
Mercy II Conceptual analysis: methods, results, perspectives. Conference abstracts. - M.: Institute of Linguistics of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, - 1990, - p.: 32-33.
Zhdanova L.A., Revzina O.G. "cultural word" Mercy II Logical analysis of language. cultural concepts. - M.: Nauka, - 1991, - p.: 56-61.
Zhdanova L.A., Revzina O.G. Power: linguistic meaning and concept // Semantics of language units. Materials Interuniversity Research Conference, ChL. Lexical semantics. - M., - 1992, pp. 44-47.
Zhdanova L.A. Experience in constructing a thesaurus of socio-political vocabulary. Dep. in INION RAS, No. 47424 dated 12/17/1992. - M., - 1992, 39s.
Society: Linguistic Meaning and Concept (in press).
A very large number of studies have been devoted to socio-political vocabulary (see the Bibliography for an approximate list of works), but their number does not reflect the real state of affairs in the study of this lexical subsystem. Despite n? the large number of works, the actual linguistic features of this group of vocabulary are given insufficient attention.
It should be noted that, due to its specificity, until recently, the OPL was often considered from such an angle that prevented proper linguistic analysis, the study of linguistic features was replaced in most cases with propaganda clichés.
The study of OPL in Russian linguistics has three aspects: synchronous-descriptive, diachronic, or historical, and typological. Most of the studies were carried out within the framework of the first approach. Socio-linguistic processes in the diachronic plan are the object of consideration mainly in relation to the period of revolutionary and post-revolutionary time, which is extremely important for this topic. Actually, the history of the OPL, one might say, remained out of sight of domestic linguists. There are few special studies on this topic, they are usually devoted to individual fragments of this lexical subsystem [Maksimova, 1956, 1958], [Kogotkova, 1971], [Patralova, 1986], [Samkova, 1955], the history of individual words [Alekseev, 1972], [Bash, 1981], [Protchenko, 1965], or (the largest number of studies) the place of OPL in various fiction and journalistic works [Shvedova, 1951], [Belchikov, 1954], [Veselitsky, 1972, 1974], [ Kolosova, 1986] and Dr.
As for the typological aspect, it is taken into account in the specialized literature in two Ivans: in connection with the comparative consideration of the OPL in Russian and other languages [Volodina, 1981], [Dubrovchenko, Khripun, 1987], [Toshovich, 1988] and in terms of teaching Russian language as a foreign language, the development of linguodidactics [Dianova, Shimanskaya, 1968], [Lobkov, 1987], [Melnik, 1964], [Prokhorova, Badin, Elizarov, 1988], etc.
Linguistic literature discusses the methods of lexicographic representations of OPL [Golovanevsky, 1974], [Kapralova, 1976, 1984], [Kryuchkova. 1988], [Pinchuk, Zvada, 1988], etc.
Two main periods can be distinguished in the history of the study of the OPL of the Russian language:
The first - from 1917 to the beginning of the 50s, when the OPL was not the object of special study, although it was in the center of attention of domestic linguists from the very first post-revolutionary years;
The second - from the beginning of the 50s, when this lexical-semantic subsystem became isolated as a separate subject of research and the very term "socio-political vocabulary" arose, and up to the present.
Currently, the OPL is once again returning to the sphere of interest of linguists, already at a qualitatively new level. Thus, much attention is now paid to political metaphor [Baranov, Karaulov, 1991, 1993].
In the works of Russian linguists devoted to the language of the revolutionary era [Barannikov, 1919], [Vinokur, 1923], [Gornfeld, 1927], [Kartsevsky, 1923], [Polivanov, 1928], [Selishchev, 1928], [Solonino, 1929] , [Shor, 1928, 1929] , [Shcherba, 1925], etc., contains many valuable observations that are now of particular interest. The grandiose changes caused by the revolution of 1917 made the stylistic system of the Russian language unstable for some time and included the phenomena associated with the OPL as the most important component. These processes are in many respects similar to what is currently happening, which explains the relevance of these works.
The study of OPL as a specific lexical subsystem (since the beginning of the 1950s) has its own problems, which have become traditional in a sense. The very nature of this issue indirectly reflects the specific phenomena associated with APL. Central to the study of the OPL has been and remains to this day the question of its definition, the essence of the concept, the composition of the group. Various criteria have been put forward for the selection of this lexical tasta, about chako, summarizing all the variety of criteria put forward in it, three main approaches can be distinguished:
1) nominative, or content-thematic - based on the nominative content [Belchikov, 1954], [Buryachok, 1983], [Kapralova, 1974], [Milshin, 1963], [Muradova, 1986], [Protchenko, 1965, 1985 ] and etc.
2) connotative - a sign of belonging to the OPL is a special seme of "ideological" and closely related assessments [Garbovsky, 1989], [Goverdovsky, 1986], [Golovanevsky, 1989], [Kryuchkova, 1983, 1985, 1989], [Marov , Marova, 1977], [Mednikova, 1986], [Turkin, 1975], [Sivko, 1986] and others. Within this approach, the method of component analysis was used [Nikolaev, 1971, 1979], [Kapralova, 1985] and others.
3) functional-stylistic - the basis is the use in certain types of texts, stylistic marking, belonging to a certain functional style. The largest number of studies is devoted to the existence and role of OPL in the journalistic style of speech, mainly in the language of the mass media [Dianova, Shimanskaya, 1968], [Kostomarov, 1971], [Lobkov, 1987], [Rozental, 1975], [Solganik, 1967, 1977, 1981, 1988], [Treskova, 1988], etc.
In several papers, OPL is considered in formal business style speeches [Patralova, 1986], [Timoshenko, 1987], there are a lot of works about OPL in the works of various authors (both journalistic and fiction) [Akimova, 1978], [Ermolaeva, 1953], [Vorobeva, Shvets, 1985], [Krivonkina, 1953], [Senin, 1955], [Yakubovskaya, 1987] and others.
Although each of the listed approaches is not self-sufficient, they reflect a certain linguistic reality, i.e. specific features of the OPL. The disadvantage of existing works devoted to this lexical group is that most researchers do not go beyond the chosen approach and, thus, are limited to its one-sided description.
Power is one of the universal concepts developed by mankind. According to the criterion of globality, power is comparable to the concepts of fate, life, time, etc. In the conceptual organization, power reflects the ideas of native speakers about interpersonal relationships, about the organization of the human community.
prototypical signs.
Power in a broad sense (power-1) is defined as the right and ability to dispose of someone, anything, to subordinate to one's will [Ozhegov, 1990, p.90]. This definition reflects ideas about the components of the concept1: power is an intersubjective relation of the ARB type, where A and B are connected in a special way (by a special, powerful relationship). A and B are initially unequal: in order to implement the ARB relationship, participant A must have the right and opportunity for this (the conflict of these two components is reflected in the statement: In fact, he has no power - that is, he has the right, but there is no opportunity), as well as the intention (cf. laconic definition of V. I. Dahl: power is the right, strength and will over what [Dal, v.1, p. additional prerequisites associated with A, but it does not matter the consent or readiness of B to obey A. Power is an abstract name, that is, denoting a phenomenon not sensually, but intelligible and, therefore, striving at the level of linguistic consciousness to "reification" and conceptualization. about power (and think about it), you need to use a certain language, model the situation of power. imperious are: the presence of two participants (subject and object of power), the relationship of non-equilibrium balance between them (inequality), the motivation of actions B by the desire and strength of A. The power relationship has a temporal duration (beginning and end).
Power: spheres of action.
Power relations extend both to the personal (family) sphere (cf. the power of parents), and to various organizations, social structures in which the life of society is carried out (the power of the boss, banker, monopolies). A special case of the implementation of power relations is state-political management. Thus, the right to power can be natural (the power of the father), regulated by social institutions (the boss), as well as some other factors (money - the power of the banker, etc.). The very nature of regulation modifies the general concept of power in a certain way. So, for example, parental authority has an enduring character, state - variable.
The most important sphere of action of power relations is the state-political management of society. This area is so significant that in explanatory dictionaries a separate meaning of the word power (power-2) is singled out: the right and opportunity to govern the state [SSRLYA, v.1, p.304]; political domination, public administration and its bodies [Ozhegov, 1990, p.90]. However, the mental texture of the concept largely coincides with power-1, a special case, the manifestation of which is power-2. The specificity of some characteristics of power-2 is due to the fact that power-2 correlates with a narrower fragment of reality than power-1, which denotes a power relationship, regardless of the scope of its implementation.
The pragmatic factor is also significant here: the area of state-political management is the most widespread and socially significant sphere of the implementation of power relations. The consequence of this is the attachment to the absolutive word usage political meanings- in the absence in the context of indications of the nature, scope of the exercise of power, power is understood as state power (To date, the power itself has not yet decided what to do ... [MP, April 26, 1995, p. 10] VS: Mother tried to approve his power over his son Each person acquires the experience of power from childhood to old age in everyday life [MP, 18 Jan. 1995, p. 14].
The words belonging to the OP vocabulary in the narrow sense (to the OP proper) are those words in the semantics of which the expression of a power relationship is associated with an indication of the sphere of its implementation - the state-political life of society, and power appears as state power.
Conceptual dominants power, state, society are significant for the entire PPL (PPL in the broad sense), but it is the PPL itself that is structured directly by key concepts. As a result, they are the central descriptors of the OPL itself (semantic units that group words around themselves in the thesaurus).
The descriptors power, state, society form three main lexical blocks within the OPL itself, each of which, in turn, is divided into smaller lexical associations (groups) indicated in the work by Arabic numerals. Both between the blocks and within them (between groups) there are various relationships that can be identified by parametric analysis.
Central descriptor power.
1. Relationship of power. The concept of power, structuring the entire GPL, simultaneously organizes lexical communities of a different order within it: it is one of the central descriptors, forming one of the three main lexical blocks in the GPL itself, it is also the dominant of a group of words, one way or another denoting a power relationship (R in ARB):
anarchy powerless
supremacy
domination dominate domineering power
lead lead lead
omnipotence omnipotent
headship
domination
dual power
autocracy autocratic
unity of command
polyarchy
polynomial
absolute power
A group of a closed nature, including native vocabulary, mostly non-specific, predicate. Many words have an internal form (WF) corresponding to the metaphorical representations of power (vertical orientation, power as a substance, etc.). The nature of derivativeness makes it possible to clarify "naive" assumptions about the concept of power. In the group, there is a wealth of derivatives with limited roots (power, head, top). The group is a rigid, low-permeability structure due to the close interconnection of all members (derivative, semantic, and metaphorical).
Being the conceptual center, the core of the entire OPL, this group at the same time has points of contact with the improper OPL (dominance, supremacy), since the words that make it up are mostly non-specific, capable of describing any sphere of implementation and power relations.
The irrelevant composition of the group is represented by the words monocracy and autocracy. The words of this group, expressing general, universal concepts, pass through all political systems and, accordingly, have remained unchanged until now.
