Article 11415

Title of the article



Sadrieva Guzel Abelkhasanovna, Candidate of philological sciences, associate professor, sub-department of foreign languages, Naberezhnye Chelny Institute of Social and Pedagogical Technologies and Resources (28 Nizametdinova street, Naberezhnye Chelny, Russia),

Index UDK

[802+808.2+809.432.1] – 3


Background. The relevance of the research is caused by the prospects of studying figurative paradigms as ways to open people’s outlook. The purpose of the work is to compare the English, Russian and Tatar figurative means realizing positive esthetic assessment from the point of view of identification of the general and unique in their semantics, structure and functioning.
Materials and methods. The considered lexical units are presented in fiction examples for an illustration of semantic specifics. To achieve the purpose the following methods of investigation were used: the method of semantic definition, the method of correlation of language and social phenomena, the comparative method and the descriptive method.
Results. As a result, the universal and specific features of aesthetic estimation of face in three languages have been revealed. The unity of laws of thinking predetermines the universal character of figurative paradigms with the minimum of cultural divergences.
Conclusions. Creation of the figurative paradigms, realizing positive esthetic assessment in considered languages, is prospective from the point of view of the language and culture problem study, and the display of a certain fragment of a valuable picture of the world in the language.

Key words

figure, figurative paradigm, simile, metaphor.

Download PDF

1. Arnol'd I. V. Stilistika sovremennogo angliyskogo yazyka [Contemporary English language stylistics]. Moscow, 1990, 300 p.
2. Mezenin S. M. Obraznye sredstva yazyka (na materiale proizvedeniy Shekspira) [Figurative language means (by the example of Shakespear’s works)]. Moscow, 1984, 100 p.
3. Yurina E. A. Obraznost' kak kategoriya leksikologii [Figurativeness as a lexicological category]. Tomsk, 1994, 249 p.
4. Blinova O. I. Slovar' obraznykh slov i vyrazheniy narodnogo govora [Dictionary of colloqiual figurative words and phrases]. Tomsk, 1997, 208 p.
5. Yung K. G. Arkhetip i simvol [Archetype and symbol]. Moscow, 1991, 304 p.
6. Veselovskiy A. N. Istoricheskaya poetika [Historical poetics]. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola, 1989, 408 p.
7. Pavlovich N. V. Yazyk obrazov: Paradigmy obrazov v russkom poeticheskom yazyke [Language of images: Image paradigm in Russian poetic language]. Moscow, 1995, 491 p.
8. Boguslavskiy V. M. Slovar' otsenok vneshnosti cheloveka [Dictionary of human appearance descriptions]. Moscow, 1994, 335 p.
9. Longman Dictionary of English Language and Culture. Ed. by D. Summers. London:New Addison Wesley Longman, 1998, 1568 p.
10. Arutyunova N. D. Logicheskiy analiz yazyka. Yazyki estetiki: Kontseptual'nye polya prekrasnogo i bezobraznogo: sb. nauch. tr. [Language logical analysis. Languages of aesthetics: conceptual fields of the beautiful and ugly: collected papers]. Moscow:Indrik, 2004, pp. 5–29.


Дата создания: 06.05.2016 11:25
Дата обновления: 11.05.2016 10:30