NATIONAL CULTURAL ASPECT OF STUDYING FUND ONYMICON AS A LINGUOCULTURAL PHENOMENON IN POSTMODERN LITERARY DISCOURSE

Svitlana O. Hurbanska, sgurbanska@yahoo.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1242-5896

Ph. D. in Philology, Associate Professor,

Kyiv National University of Culture and Arts

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/StudLing2024.25.46-56

PDF (UKRAINIAN)

ABSTRACT

The article studies theoretical and methodological principles of researching national cultural semantics of onyms in the structure of set expressions of postmodern discourse using the example of English fiction by A. Carter; presents theoretical and methodological bases on which the study of the national cultural peculiarities of set expressions with onym components is grounded; outlines national cultural features of set expressions with onym components; determines origin sources of onyms in the composition of set expressions; identifies types of assessment reflected in phraseological units with onym components; offers a linguocultural approach to the study of phraseology through the prism of linguistic and cultural interaction; highlights the role of set expressions with onym components in the linguage model of the world; identifies functions of onyms in the semantic structure of phraseological signs (creating expressive imagery, ensuring conciseness of information presentation, enhancing clearness/expressiveness of the statement, conveying attitude/evaluation, giving connotative shades to the statement, expanding the boundaries of the language game, etc.).

The relevance of the study grounds on the increased emphasis of modern anthropocentric linguistics on researching the interaction of language, environment, and culture. Therefore, it is the linguocultural aspect of studying phraseologisms in connection with the fund onymicon that contributes to identifying the spiritual and moral values ​​of the national cultural community, establishing the language and culture interaction, determining the national cultural specifics of set expressions as signs of speech, which contain in their semantic structure the value heritage of the national culture with all its inherent universal phenomena.

A promising aspect of further research is an in-depth study of implementing linguocultural concepts using the fund onymicon in postmodern literary discourse.

Key words: linguocultural aspect of the study, fund onymicon, onymic component, phraseology, linguocultural concepts.

References:

  1. Azhniuk, B. M. (1999). Anhliiska frazeolohiia u kulturno-etnichnomu vysvitlenni [English phraseology in cultural and ethnic highlighting]. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka. (In Ukr.).
  2. Baiun, K. Y. (2007). Natsionalno-kulturnyi aspekt doslidzhen frazeolohichnykh odynyts v suchasnii nimetskii movi [National and cultural aspect of research on phraseological units in modern German]. Visnyk Instytutu pidpryiemnytstva ta suchasnykh tekhnolohii [Bulletin of the Institute of Entrepreneurship and Modern Technologies], 1(1), 105–108. (In Ukr.).
  3. Halynska, O. M. (2012). Linhvokulturna informatsiia anhliiskykh ta ukrainskykh intertekstualnykh frazeolohizmiv [Linguocultural information of English and Ukrainian intertextual phraseology] (PhD dissertation abstract). Natsionalnyi pedahohichnyi universytet imeni M. P. Drahomanova [National Pedagogical Drahomanov University]. (In Ukr.).
  4. Golubovska, I. O. (2004). Etnichni osoblyvosti movnykh kartyn svitu [Ethnic features of the linguistic world pictures]. Kyiv: Logos. (In Ukr.).
  5. Kosmeda, T. A. (2000). Aksiolohichni aspekty prahmalinhvistyky: formuvannia i rozvytok katehorii otsinky [Axiological aspects of pragmalinguistics: Formation and development of the category of evaluation]. Lviv: Vyd-vo LNU imeni Ivana Franka [Lviv National University of Ivan Franko]. (In Ukr.).
  6. Mizin, K. I. (2011). Ustaleni porivniannia kriz pryzmu artefaktnoho kodu kultury: zistavno-linhvokulturolohichnyi analiz (na materiali anhliiskoi, nimetskoi, ukrainskoi ta rosiiskoi mov) [Established comparisons through the prism of the artifact code of culture: Comparative linguocultural analysis (based on the material of the English, German, Ukrainian, and Russian languages)]. Naukovyi Visnyk Volynskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Lesi Ukrainky [The Scientific Journal of Lesya Ukrainka Volyn National University], 2, 24–27. (In Ukr.).
  7. Tyshchenko, K. M. (2012). Henetychna aprobatsiia studii slovnykovykh kontaktiv i toponimii Ukrainy [Genetic approbation of studies of dictionary contacts and toponymy of Ukraine]. Kyiv: Vyd-vo NTUU «KPI» [National Technical University of Ukraine “Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”]. (In Ukr.).
  8. Duranti, A. (1997). Universal and culture-specific properties of greeting. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 7, 63–97.
  9. Hurbanska, S. (2014). Multifunctionality of phraseological units in postmodern literary discourse. Language, Individual and Society: International Scientific Publications, 8, 344–351.
  10. Kellermann, K. (1992). Communication: Inherently strategic and primarily automatic. Communication Monographs, 59, 288–300.
  11. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (6th ed.). (2012). China.
  12. Wierzbicka, A. (1994). “Culture scripts”: A semantic approach to cultural analysis and cross-cultural communication. Pragmatic and Language Learning: Monograph Series, 5, 1–24.

Source base:

  1. Carter, A. (1993). Heroes and villains. New York: Penguin Books.
  2. Carter, A. (1996). The magic toyshop. New York: Penguin Books.
  3. Carter, A. (2007). Wise children. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
  4. Carter, A. (2011). The bloody chamber and other stories. New York: Penguin Books.