COGNITIVE POTENTIAL OF VERBS OF SPEECH (on the Material of the Latin Language)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17072/2073-6681-2020-3-15-23Keywords:
semantics, cognitive potential, word family, verbs of speech, Latin language.Abstract
Тhe article aims to identify and compare the specific cognitive potential of prototypical verbs dicere, loqui, fari in the Latin language of the classical period, to determine its origins. Objects of analysis are semantic variants of the verbs and their derivatives. The research methods include semantic, cognitive, etymological analysis. The cognitive potential of a word family is determined by the etymological semantics of the base word. In the dicere word family, the semantics of speaking is secondary and develops in interaction with the etymological meaning ‘to show’. In some of the subfamilies, this meaning is implemented exclusively; members of these subfamilies represent social realities of the legal sphere. In the word family, there are many derivatives with mental or voluntary components of semantics dominating. The loqui word family stems from the base with the meaning ‘to make a sound’. It is dominated by derivatives with the meaning of speaking, speech is primarily revealed as a means of interpersonal contact. The etymological semantics of the verb fari combines the semantics of speaking with the idea of transpersonal nature of speech. As a result, some derivatives characterize speech as a process, others are concentrated in the cognitive sphere of the cult. The former direction is supported by secondary cognitive spheres associated with the unofficial use of speech (‘Rumor’, ‘Folklore’), the latter direction generates secondary cognitive spheres in which speech is interpreted as a means of communication between a person and higher powers (‘Fate’) or the state (‘Law’). The word families in question have areas of cognitive intersection: ‘Eloquence’ in loqui and fari (actualization of the semantics of speaking), ‘Speech as a means of regulating social relations’ in dicere and fari (actualization of voluntary components of semantics and the idea of transpersonal nature of speech).References
Список источников
Cic. Agr. – Cicero M. Tullius De lege agraria. Cicero M. Tullius. Scripta quae manserunt om-nia. Partis II Vol. II. Lipsiae: Teubner, 1896. P. 404–415.
Cic. De re publica. – Cicero M. Tullius. De re publica. Cicero M. Tullius. Scripta quae manse-runt omnia. Partis IV. Vol. II. Lipsiae: Teubner, 1898. P. 271–351.
Cic. Q. fr. – Cicero M. Tullius. Epistulae ad Quintum fratrem. Cicero M. Tullius. Epistulae. Vol. III. Oxonii: Clarendon, 1902.
Cicero M. T. Orationes / com. by G. Long. Vol. I: Verrinarum libri septem. London: Whit-taker & Co, 1851. P. 50–74.
Liv. – Livius Titus. Ab urbe condita. Bd. III. Buch VI–X. Berlin: Weidmann, 1869. 894 S.
Nep. Thr. – Nepos Cornelius. Thrasybulus. Nepos Cornelius. Vitae. Lipsiae: Teubner, 1886. 118 p.
Plautus T. Maccius. Comoediae / ex rec. et app. crit. F. Ritschelli. T. III. P. I: Persa. Londini: Elberfeldae R. L. Fridrichs, 1858. 118 p.
Plin. Ep. – Plinius C. Caecilius secundus. Epis-tularum libri decem. Oxonii: Clarendon, 1966. 349 p.
Quint. Inst. – Quintilianus M. Fabius. Institutio oratoria. Vol. I. Lipsiae: Teubner, 1854. 759 p.
Verg. Ecl. – Vergilius P. Maro. Ecloga V. Ver-gilius P. Maro. Opera. Vol. I. Bucolica et Georgi-ca. Lipsiae: Teubner, 1859. 267 S.
Список литературы
Антонова С. М. Глаголы говорения – дина-мическая модель языковой картины мира: опыт когнитивной интерпретации. Гродно: ГрГУ, 2003. 519 с.
Данилина Н. И. Когнитивное моделирова-ние корневого гнезда fari ‘говорить’ в латин-ском языке // Парадигмы культурной памяти и константы национальной идентичности. Н. Новгород: Изд-во ННГУ, 2020. С. 50–58.
Данилина Н. И. Синтаксические особенно-сти латинских глаголов речи // Вестник Ниже-городского университета им. Н. И. Лобачевского. 2016. № 4. С. 188–194.
Данилина Н. И. Речь в зеркале метафоры // Слово, высказывание, текст в когнитивном, прагматическом и культурологическом аспек-тах: материалы IX Междунар. науч. конф., Че-лябинск, 18–20 апр. 2018 г.: в 2 т. / отв. ред. Л. А. Нефедова. Челябинск: Изд-во Челяб. гос. ун-та, 2018а. Т. 1. С. 125–129.
Данилина Н. И. Словообразовательные гнёзда с вершиной имя в классических языках // Национальные коды европейской литерату-ры в диахроническом аспекте: античность – современность. Н. Новгород: Изд-во ННГУ; ДЕКОМ, 2018b. С. 35–45.
Ермолаева И. А. Семантическая классифи-кация глаголов речи в русском языке // Вест-ник СПбГУ. Язык и литература. 2017. Т. 14, вып. 3. С. 362–375.
Новодранова В. Ф. Именное словообразо-вание в латинском языке и его отражение в терминологии. Laterculi vocum latinarum et terminorum. М.: Языки слав. культур, 2008. 328 с.
Русская грамматика: в 2 т. М.: Наука, 1980. Т. 1. 783 с.
Соколовская Е. М. Функционально-семантическая сфера глаголов речи в русском языке: Проблема вербализации суперконцепта «говорить»: дис. … канд. филол. наук. Уфа, 2002. 176 с.
Чжан Л., Редькина О. В. Глаголы говорения в современном русском языке: подходы к классификации // На пересечении языков и культур. Актуальные вопросы гуманитарного знания. 2016. № 2–3 (8). С. 75–79.
Barbu X.-J. Verba dicendi, de la latină la lim-bile romanice: probleme semantice. Bucureşti: Editura Museului National al Literaturii Române, 2013. 257 p.
Bréal M., Bailly A. Dictionnaire étymologique latin. Paris: Librairie Hachette et Cie, 1906. 463 p.
Raible W. The Pitfalls of Subordination: Sub-ject and Object Clauses between Latin and Ro-mance // Historical Philology: Greek, Latin and Romance: Papers in Honor of Oswald Sze-merényi II. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: J. Benjamin Publ., 1992. P. 299–339.
Schmalfeld F. Lateinische Synonymik für die Schüler gelehrter Schulen. Altenburg: H.A. Pierer, 1869. 568 S. (Рус. изд.: Латинская синонимика Шмальфельда / пер. А. Страхова. М.: Универ-ситетская типография, 1890. 819 c.)
Schoof S. Impersonal and Personal Passivisa-tion of Latin Infinitive Constructions: A Scrutiny of the Structures Called AcI // Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Seul: Kyung Hee University; Jong-Bok Kim and Stephen Wechsler, 2003. CSLI Publications. P. 292–312. URL: http://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/HPSG/3/schoof.pdf (дата обраще-ния: 01.01.2020).
Walde A., Hofmann J. B. Lateinisches etymol-ogisches Wörterbuch. Bd. 1. Heidelberg: Carl Winter’suniversitätsbuchhandlung, 1938. 872 S.
References
Antonova S. M. Glagoly govoreniya – dinamicheskaya model’ yazykovoy kartiny mira: opyt kognitivnoy interpretatsii [Verbs of speech – a dynamic model of the language picture of the world: the experience of cognitive interpretation]. Grodno, Yanka Kupala State University of Grod-no Press, 2003. 519 p. (In Russ.)
Danilina N. I. Kognitivnoe modelirovanie kor-nevogo gnezda fari ‘govorit’’ v latinskom yazyke [Cognitive modeling of the word family fari ‘to speak’ in Latin]. Paradigmy kul’turnoy pamyati i konstanty natsional’noy identichnosti: kollektiv-naya monografiya [Paradigms of cultural memory and constants of national identity: Col-lective monograph]. Nizhny Novgorod, Loba-chevsky State University of Nizhni Novgorod Press, 2020, pp. 50–58. (In Russ.)
Danilina N. I. Sintaksicheskie osobennosti latinskikh glagolov rechi [Syntagmatic character-istics of Latin verbs of speech]. Vestnik Nizhego-rodskogo universiteta im. N. I. Lobachevskogo [Vestnik of Lobachevsky State University of Nizhni Novgorod], 2016, issue 4, pp. 188–194. (In Russ.)
Danilina N. I. Rech’ v zerkale metafory [Speech in the mirror of metaphor]. Slovo, vyskazyvanie, tekst v kognitivnom, pragmatich-eskom i kul’turologicheskom aspektakh: materi-aly IX Mezhdunarod. nauch. konf. Chelyabinsk, 18–20 apr. 2018 g.: v 2 t. [Word, utterance, text in cognitive, pragmatic and cultural aspects: Pro-ceedings of the 9th International Scientific Con-ference. Chelyabinsk, April 18-20, 2018: in 2 vols.]. Ed. by L. A. Nefedova. Chelyabinsk, Chelyabinsk State University Press, 2018, vol. 1, pp. 125–129. (In Russ.)
Danilina N. I. Slovoobrazovatel’nye gnezda s vershinoy imya v klassicheskikh yazykakh [Word family ‘name’ in classical languages]. Natsional’nye kody evropeyskoy literatury v di-akhronicheskom aspekte: antichnost’ – sov-remennost’ [National codes of European litera-ture in diachronic aspect: antiquity – modernity]. Nizhny Novgorod, Lobachevsky State University of Nizhni Novgorod Press, DEKOM Publ., 2018, pp. 35–45. (In Russ.)
Ermolaeva I. A. Semanticheskaya klassi-fikatsiya glagolov rechi v russkom yazyke [Se-mantic classification of the Russian speech act verbs]. Vestnik SPbGU. Yazyk i literatura [Vest-nik of Saint Petersburg University. Language and Literature], 2017, vol. 14, issue 3, pp. 362–375. DOI: 10.21638/11701/
spbu09.2017.306. (In Russ.)
Novodranova V. F. Imennoe slovoobra-zovanie v latinskom yazyke i ego otrazhenie v terminologii [Nominal word formation in the Lat-in language and its reflection in terminology]. Moscow, LRC Publishing House, 2008, 328 p. (In Russ.)
Russkaya grammatika: v 2 t. [Russian gram-mar: in 2 vols.]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1980, vol. 1. 783 p. (In Russ.)
Sokolovskaya E. M. Funktsyonal’no-semanticheskaya sfera glagolov rechi v russkom yazyke: Problema verbalizatsii superkontsepta ‘govoryt’. Diss. kand. filol. nauk [Functional-semantic sphere of verbs of speech in the Rus-sian language: the problem of verbalizing the su-per concept ‘to speak’. Cand. philol. sci. diss.]. Ufa, 2002. 176 p. (In Russ.)
Zhang L., Red’kina O. V. Glagoly govoreniya v sovremennom russkom yazyke: podkhody k klassifikatsii [Verbs of speech in the modern Russian language: approaches to classification]. Na peresechenii yazykov i kul’tur. Aktual’nye vo-prosy gumanitarnogo znaniya [At the Intersec-tion of Languages and Cultures. Current Issues of the Humanities Knowledge], 2016, issues 2–3 (8), pp. 75–79. (In Russ.)
Barbu X.-J. Verba dicendi, de la latină la limbile romanice: probleme semantice [Verba dicendi, from Latin to Romance languages: semantic problems]. Bucharest, Editura Museului National al Literaturii Române, 2013. 257 p. (In Rom.)
Bréal M., Bailly A. Dictionnaire étymologique latin [Latin Etymological Dictionary]. Paris, Librairie Hachette et Cie, 1906. 463 p. (In Fr.)
Raible W. The pitfalls of subordination: Sub-ject and object clauses between Latin and Ro-mance. Historical philology: Greek, Latin and Romance: papers in honor of Oswald Szemerényi II. Amsterdam, Philadelphia, J. Benjamin Publ., 1992, pp. 299–339. (In Eng.)
Schmalfeld F. Lateinische Synonymik für die Schüler gelehrter Schulen [Latin synonymy for school students]. Altenburg, H. A. Pierer, 1869. 568 p. (In Germ.). (Russ. ed.: Latinskaya si-nonimika Shmal’fel’da [Latin synonymy by Schmalfeld]. Transl. by A. Strakhov. Moscow, Universitetskaya Tipografiya Publ., 1890. 819 p. (In Russ.))
Schoof S. Impersonal and personal passivisa-tion of Latin infinitive constructions: A scrutiny of the structures called AcI. Proceedings of the 9th international conference on head-driven phrase structure grammar. CSLI Publications. Seoul, Kyung Hee University, Jong-Bok Kim and Stephen Wechsler Publ., 2003, pp. 292–312. Available at: http://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/HPSG/3/schoof.pdf (accessed 01.01.2020) (In Eng.)
Walde A., Hofmann J.B. Lateinisches etymol-ogisches Wörterbuch [Latin Etymological Dic-tionary]. Heidelberg, Carl Winter Universitäts-buchhandlung, 1938, vol. 1. 872 p. (In Germ.)
