Thesaurus of linguistic personality. Modern problems of science and education

05.03.2021

L. A. Dolbunova

The globalization of the information space has put the problem of intercultural communication at the center of attention of specialists in various scientific fields (linguists, sociologists, psychologists, culturologists). Under intercultural communication one can understand "communication of carriers of different cultures" verbalized in different languages.

The effectiveness of communication depends, first of all, on the general fund of knowledge of communicants. The knowledge fund, or thesaurus (defined by I. V. Arnold as “memory content”), includes a set of concepts (conceptual structures) various levels: linguistic, mental, cultural. The core of the thesaurus is made up of national-cultural concepts expressed in the specifics of the content and forms of the national language.

In the field of philology, intercultural communication is reduced to the dialogic of texts from different cultures, a special case of which is translation. “The very concept of the interaction of cultures, texts as substitutes for cultures, suggests the presence of common elements and inconsistencies that allow us to distinguish one cultural and linguistic formation from another (one linguistic and cultural community from another)” . To achieve mutual understanding, it is necessary that the communicants (author and translator) have a common knowledge about the language used, about the world in the form of images of consciousness, i.e., have a common cognitive base. The latter is formed by invariant images of consciousness with respect to certain phenomena, allowing the linguistic personality to navigate in the space of a particular national culture. At the same time, on the periphery of the cognitive space there are individual concepts that develop in a linguistic personality in the course of its life experience. This part of the cognitive space is more dynamic and associative.

Naturally, the center of the structure of a linguistic personality is the features of its national character, emotional make-up, thinking, and speech behavior. However, failures in communication occur not only in the sphere of national-specific, but also in the individual (subjective-author's) content of the text and its individual perception based on the cognitive structures of the translator's linguistic personality. In linguistics, the concept of “ethnopsycholinguistic type” of a communicant has been introduced, which includes the above factors: “The personality of a communicator determines his speech behavior, perception and interpretation of the statements of the interlocutor, it is the personality as the subject of discourse that gives a certain illocutionary force to the speech act and speech course” . It is the ethnopsycholinguistic type of the communicant that explains the peculiarities of the perception and generation of the text. Having one source text of the original (TO), we will get different translated texts (TP) of different linguistic personalities-translators. When transferring foreign text the national-individual cognitive spaces of the author and the translator must coincide to some extent. Their coincidence is due to the anthropocentric properties of the language, the universality of human thinking, i.e., the presence of universal conceptual categories. Greater combination of these spaces gives a greater "percentage" of approaching the understanding of the author's intention and content of TO. The translator, as a co-author of the text, needs to freely navigate in the space of the author's national-cultural-cognitive base. It is an indisputable fact that the perception of a different culture (and text) occurs through the prism mother tongue and culture, since the translator, no matter how deep knowledge of another culture he possesses, remains a representative of his “own” culture. Moreover, the purpose of translation is not only to convey the intention of the author of the text to the addressee, who speaks only his native language, but also to inform him about the concepts of another culture, thereby forming his involvement in world culture, where the translator has a prominent place.

National-specific concepts create gaps in translation, which are compensated by the concepts of the native language and culture. Namely, such gaps present special difficulties and lead to inevitable losses, since translation is, first of all, the translation of cultural concepts from one language to another. An adequate translation with absolute accuracy in conveying the volume of meanings is impossible due to the deep difference between cultures and languages. As the great Humboldt said, one cannot fully comprehend the “spirit of the people”, its language.

The two texts (TO and TP) should become as interchangeable as possible. As for the translation of a literary text, the semantic and stylistic levels of the two texts must first of all be correlated in the translation, since they form the aesthetic value of the work. In general, the translation should be "perceived as an original work in "one's own" language, and at the same time be a work of a "foreign"" . Approximation to the original gives not only knowledge of the language and culture, but also knowledge of the extralinguistic factors behind artistic text- knowledge of the linguistic personality of the author: his thesaurus, features of the worldview, style, era.

Assuming creative co-authorship, translation, however, is given by the original, its author. Because of this, the translator needs to have a comprehensive cultural and linguistic base, both in receptive and productive terms in both languages. An extensive cognitive base affects the translator's ability to infer the meanings of TO, the ability to project the cognitive base onto TO. This means that translation is comparatively dynamic in nature.

Thus, the process of literary translation acts as a desire to understand another culture, and since the semantics and cultural richness of concepts in different languages is different, then literary translation is a subjective interpretation of the text, close to the original; interpretation, depending on the amount of combination of the cognitive bases of the native and target languages in the mind of the translator's linguistic personality.

Literature

1. Tarasov E. F. Intercultural communication - a new ontology for the analysis of linguistic consciousness. // Ethnocultural specificity of linguistic consciousness. M, 1996. P.7.

2. Sorokin Yu. A. Psycholinguistic aspects of text study. M.; Nauka, 1985, p.137.

Z. Pospelova A. G., Kozmina V. L. Unconscious and conscious violations of the postulates of speech communication associated with the personality of the communicant // Cognitive linguistics of the end of the 20th century. Materials of the international conf. At 3 o'clock 4.2. Minsk, 1997. P.45. 4. Prokopovich S. S. Adequate translation or interpretation of the text? // Translator's notebooks. Issue. 17. M., 1980. S. 40. Article imprint// Tradition and innovation in humanities studies: Sat. scientific tr. dedicated 50th Anniversary of the Faculty of Foreign lang. Mordov. state un-ta im. N. P. Ogareva / Editorial board: Yu. M. Trofimova (responsible editor) and others - Saransk: Mordov Publishing House. un-ta, 2002. - S. 116-118.

Language personality

there is a personality expressed in language (texts) and through language, a personality reconstructed in its main features on the basis of linguistic means. In linguistics Ya. l. is a concept related to the study language picture of the world(YKM), which is the result of the interaction of a person's value system with his life goals, behavioral motives, attitudes and is manifested in texts created by this person. Full description language personality for the purpose of its analysis or synthesis, according to Yu.N. Karaulova, suggests: a) a characterization of the semantic-structure level of its organization (that is, either an exhaustive description of it, or a differential one, fixing only individual differences and carried out against the background of an average representation of a given language system); b) reconstruction of the language model of the world, or the thesaurus of a given person (on the basis of texts produced by him or on the basis of special testing); c) identification of its vital or situational dominants, attitudes, motives, which are reflected in the processes of generating texts and their content, as well as in the peculiarities of the perception of other people's texts. I. l. - a multi-level concept, characterized by the inconsistency of the ratio of stable and changeable elements, the stability of motivational predispositions and the ability to be subjected to external influences and self-influence - inconsistency that manifests itself at every level of I. l .: semantic, cognitive and motivational. A stable, timeless, invariant part in the structure of Ya. l. correlates at the semantic level with the general Russian language type and a stable part of verbal-semantic associations, at the linguo-cognitive level - with the basic, invariant part of the ICM, at the motivational level - with stable communicative needs and communicative features, or readinesses, informing about internal attitudes, goals and personal motives. T. n. timeless part in the structure of I. l. is such only on the scale of the personality itself, in relation to its temporary changes, turning out to be the product of a rather long historical development. Temporary, changeable, statistically variable parts of the structure Ya. l. are based on system-structural data on the state of the language in the corresponding period, on the social and sociolinguistic characteristics of the linguistic community, as well as psychological information that determines those value-setting criteria that create a unique, inimitable aesthetic and emotional-rhetorical flavor of its discourse (or its speech, all texts, its "language").

Connection and interaction of levels in the structure of Ya. l. is carried out on the basis of extralinguistic information: it is easy to move from the verbal-semantic level to the linguistic-cognitive one and reconstruct the thesaurus of personality. To move to the motivational-pragmatic level, you need Additional Information about the social functioning of Ya. l., her conscious roles. Since the personality is not only social, but also individual, the transition to its pragmatic level requires a psychological component, namely, an emotional component that characterizes its specificity in the communicative and activity sphere.

Lit.: Dridze T.M. Interpretive characteristics and classification of texts (taking into account the specifics of interpretative shifts // Semantic perception of a speech message. - M., 1976; Zimnyaya I.A. Psychological scheme of semantic perception // Semantic perception of a speech message. - M., 1976; Bogin G.I. The model of linguistic personality in its relation to the varieties of texts. Abstract dis.… Dr. Philol. Sciences. - L., 1984. Research of speech thinking in psycholinguistics. - M., 1985; Karaulov Yu.N. Russian language and linguistic personality. - M., 1987; His own: Metatextual elements as a means of explication of a linguistic personality (on the example of the scientific works of V.V. Vinogradov) // Postgraduate collection of the National State Pedagogical University - 2001. Part 6. - Novosibirsk, 2001; Vinokur T.G. To characterize the speaker. Intention and reaction // Language and personality. - M., 1989; Fedorchenko I.A. Metaphorical and metatextual constants of the linguistic personality of academician V.V. Vinogradov. Abstract dis.… cand. philol. Sciences. - Barnaul, 2002.

M.P. Kotyurova

Stylistic encyclopedic dictionary of the Russian language. - M:. "Flint", "Science". Edited by M.N. Kozhina. 2003 .

See what "Language Personality" is in other dictionaries:

LANGUAGE PERSONALITY- LANGUAGE PERSONALITY. Any native speaker of a particular language, characterized on the basis of the analysis of the texts produced by him in terms of using the means of this language to reflect the surrounding reality (picture of the world). The term I. l. ... ...

Language personality- the subject of communication, a person who creates a linguistic text, comprehends it, uses it in oral or written form. This is a person who has a certain influence on other people through language: this is a person who speaks, eloquent, writes, ... ... Fundamentals of spiritual culture (encyclopedic dictionary of a teacher)

language personality- The concept of a linguistic personality in Russian linguistics was once developed by Acad. V.V. Vinogradov. Then it was reflected in the most detail by Yu.N. Karaulov. (See: Karaulov Yu.N. Russian language and linguistic personality. / Editor-in-chief member ... ... Dictionary of linguistic terms T.V. Foal

Language personality- (eng. linguistic personality) cognitively communicative invariant, a generalized image of the bearer of cultural, linguistic and communicative activity values, knowledge, attitudes and behaviors. Prerequisites for the concept of I. l. laid down by the ideas of L. ... ...

language personality- and. I. Any native speaker of a particular language, characterized on the basis of an analysis of the texts produced by him in terms of using the system tools of this language in them to reflect his vision of the surrounding reality (picture of the world) and ... ... Educational dictionary of stylistic terms

SECONDARY LANGUAGE PERSONALITY- SECONDARY LANGUAGE PERSONALITY. A person attached to the culture of the people whose language is being studied. The term was introduced into scientific circulation by Yu. N. Karaulov (1989) and goes back to the concept of a linguistic personality (that is, a native speaker), first used by V. V. ... ... New dictionary methodological terms and concepts (theory and practice of teaching languages)

- - see Linguistic personality ... Stylistic encyclopedic dictionary of the Russian language

LANGUAGE ENVIRONMENT- LANGUAGE ENVIRONMENT. Historically formed association of people based on common language and cultures living in a particular area. From a linguodidactic point of view, one can speak of Ya. as an environment in which language learning takes place. A new dictionary of methodological terms and concepts (theory and practice of teaching languages)

Internet: linguistic specificity of communication- Today, in fact, a new form of linguistic interaction has arisen - written colloquial speech. Rus. language exists on the Internet in the main. in written form, but in the conditions of interactive network communication, the rate of speech is close to its oral ... ... Psychology of communication. encyclopedic Dictionary

LINGUISTIC FOUNDATIONS OF THE METHOD- abbreviation, paragraph, automatic text processing, automatic translation, autonomous speech, speech adaptation, text adaptation, addresser, addressee, alphabet, speech act, active grammar, active vocabulary, active speech, active possession ... ... A new dictionary of methodological terms and concepts (theory and practice of teaching languages)

Books

linguistic personality. Modeling, typology, portraiture. Siberian linguopersonology. Part 1 , . The focus of the monograph is on the study of the phenomenon of linguistic personality in the mental and psychological aspect. The book presents the results of research by Siberian linguopersonologists in…

Content
Introduction
1 .
1.1 Dichotomy language / speech F.de Saussure
1.2 The study of speech in modern linguistics
2. The concept of language and speech personalities
3. Speech portrait as a form of linguistic research

4.2 Thesaurus of Russian and English lyceum students

Conclusion
Bibliography
Annex 1
Appendix 2

Introduction

This study is devoted to the problem of a comparative study of the generalized speech personalities of a Russian and an English lyceum student.
Relevance of this study due to both linguistic and extralinguistic factors: 1) the development of various new forms and varieties of secondary educational institutions, such as lyceums, for example, is the cause of some "stratification" of the social and age category of schoolchildren - lyceum students, gymnasium students, students of ordinary secondary schools, colleges differ from each other not only in the manner of behavior, but also in the manner of communication; 2) the features of the speech behavior of lyceum students have not been sufficiently studied, although such knowledge is necessary for successful communication and educational work with this category of students; 3) the expansion of the boundaries of international communication creates the need to study the characteristics of the speech behavior of Russian and English lyceum students in order to reduce the risk of communication failures.
Research novelty consists in the fact that, as our analysis of modern linguistic literature shows, the attention of researchers is mainly focused on studying the characteristics of the speech personalities of Russian schoolchildren in grades 5-7 of secondary schools, or students, and the characteristics of the speech behavior of lyceum students have not been analyzed. Thus, in this work, for the first time, the features of the speech behavior of Russian and English lyceum students become the object of linguistic analysis in a comparative aspect.
Object of study - speech personalities of Russian and English schoolchildren. Subject of study - features of the speech personalities of Russian and English lyceum students at the verbal-semantic, cognitive and pragmatic levels.
Targetcourse work - to identify the features of the lexicon, thesaurus and pragmaticon of speech personalities of Russian and English lyceum students. The goal is to solve the following tasks:
1) consider the content of the linguistic terms "language" and "speech";
2) to generalize the understanding in linguistics of the phenomena "linguistic personality" and "linguistic personality";
3) analyze modern studies of various types of speech portraits;
4) to identify the features of the generalized speech personalities of Russian and English lyceum students;
5) compare the identified features.
Material: interviews, recordings of conversations, materials direct observations for Russian lyceum students, fragments of English feature film Peter Weir "Dead Poets Society"
Methods: d To solve the tasks set, the work uses a descriptive method (namely: observation, interpretation, generalization), as well as questioning, interviewing, statistical analysis methods, and contextual analysis methods.

1 . The content of the terms "language" and "speech"

1.1 Dichotomy language / speech F. de Saussure

For Saussure (Saussure 1998), three concepts are correlated: speech activity, language and speech. Saussure's definition of "speech activity" is the least clear. “In our opinion, the concept of language does not coincide with the concept of speech activity in general; language is only a certain part, the truth is the most important, of speech activity"

“Speech” is also determined from the relationship with language, but more specifically: “... speech is an individual act of the will of understanding, in which it is necessary to distinguish: 1) combinations with which the speaking subject uses the language code in order to express his personal thought; 2) a psychophysical mechanism that allows him to objectify these combinations”; Saussure defines “language” most fully and definitely: “language ... is a system of signs in which the only essential thing is the combination of meaning and acoustic image, and both of these elements of the sign are equally mental.”

1.2 The study of speech in modern linguistics

Discourse analysis is a modern direction of linguistic research. The concept of discourse has many definitions: 1) a coherent text; 2) oral-colloquial form of the text; 3) dialogue; 4) a group of statements related to each other in meaning; 5) a speech work as a given - written or oral ”(Nikolaeva 1978); 6) the equivalent of the concept of “speech” in the Saussurean sense, i.e. any particular utterance; 7) within the framework of theories of utterance or pragmatics, “discourse” refers to the impact of the utterance on its recipient and its introduction into the “utterance” situation (which implies the subject of the utterance, the addressee, the moment and the specific place of the utterance) (Serio 2001).

One of the objects of study of modern linguistics is various speech genres of communication. One of these genres is urban communication (Kitaigorodskaya, Rozanova 1996). The radical political and socio-economic transformations that have taken place in recent years have significantly affected the structure and nature of urban communication.

Engaged in the study of speech and psycholinguistics (Frumkina 2000). One of the main objects of its study is colloquial speech - spontaneous, unconstrained oral speech of educated speakers of the modern Russian literary language. The most important thing is that RR is considered as a special, separate language system.

After analyzing the theoretical literature, we can conclude that the phenomenon of speech as an individual, situational and, at the same time, verbal aspect of communication is in the focus of attention of modern linguists.

2 . The concept of language and speech personalities

In linguistics, individual aspects of language use have been summarized in terms of speech personality ( Krasnykh 1998) is a person who realizes himself in communication, choosing and implementing one or another strategy and tactics of communication, choosing and using this or that repertoire of means (both linguistic and extralinguistic), communicative personality- a specific participant in a specific act, actually acting in real communication, and languagesoh personality(Karaulov 1989) - a person who manifests himself in speech activity, possessing a certain set of knowledge and ideas.

A number of scientists (M.V. Kitaygorodskaya and N.N. Rozanova) believe that “a functional model of a linguistic personality (i.e. its speech portrait)” should include the following three levels:

1) The lexicon of a linguistic personality is a level that reflects a person's possession of the lexical and grammatical fund of the language. That is, when creating a speech portrait of a given level of a linguistic personality, it is necessary to analyze the vocabulary and phrases used by a particular linguistic personality.

2) Thesaurus of a linguistic personality is a linguistic picture of the world, which, when describing a speech portrait of this level, is reflected in the use of favorite colloquial formulas, speech turns, special vocabulary, by which we recognize a person.

3) The pragmaticon of a linguistic personality is a system of communicative roles, motives, goals, intentions that guide the personality in the process of communication.

Based on this functional model, we will attempt to describe the speech portrait of English and Russian lyceum students.

3 . Speech portrait as a form of linguistic research

The creation of speech portraits is a fairly new direction in linguistic research. However, over the past few years, linguists have created an extensive gallery of such portraits of various speech / language personalities.

Rspeech portraits represent a certain individual set of speech signals of hidden influence strategies (Matveeva 2003). At the same time, each text sender has its own unique and inimitable set of speech signals. This set of signals is inherent in a particular person and represents his individual speech experience. The interpretation of even fragments of speech portraits of various types allows us to diagnose the individual qualities of the authors that have developed in them as a result of socially and psychologically conditioned speech experience, and which in each case are determined by specific situational conditions and are limited by the scope of speech genres.

The basic principles of creating and describing a holistic speech portrait are based on a comprehensive analysis of various aspects of his linguistic personality: linguistic, speech, age, social, psychological. It is the collective speech portrait that makes it possible to synthesize individual speech portraits and different types group speech portraits. A holistic speech portrait of a linguistic personality can only give a detailed description of her speech and speech behavior over a significant period of time. This is practically not feasible, therefore, research searches in studying the problem of a linguistic personality and creating its speech portrait are aimed at such moments of speech behavior that carry essential (typical) features that can become parameters for creating a typology of linguistic personalities.

The speech portrait of various linguistic personalities (individual and collective) has repeatedly become the subject of linguistic research.

So, for example, S.V. Mamaeva (Mamaeva 2007), considering the speech portrait of a schoolchild in grades 5-7, found that the verb, in comparison with other parts of speech, has the most developed system of categories and forms. Apparently, this fact is one of the reasons for the frequency of the use of the verb in the speech of schoolchildren. A small number of adjectives in the oral statements of schoolchildren in grades 5-7 (in comparison with other parts of speech) is associated with a fairly large number of pronouns they use in speech.

V.D. Chernyak (Chernyak 2007), describing the speech portrait of a contemporary, revealed that the language preferences of a modern linguistic personality are associated with the psychological status of the word, with its perception. The keywords of the titles of the most "popular" genre - the detective - are clearly correlated with the conceptual fields that are relevant for the corresponding genre. Such, for example, are the names of detectives: "Death", "The name is death", "In bed with death", etc.
L.V. Sretenskaya, N. Turgen, studied the communicative speech self-portrait of the Finns (Sretenskaya, Turgen 2007.), and M.V. Koltunov studied the speech portraits of American and Russian managers (Koltunov 2007).
S.V. Leorda (Leorda 2007), while describing the speech portrait of a Russian student, came to the conclusion that a feature of the written form of communication between modern students is correspondence on various surfaces (tables in educational buildings, walls of toilets and educational buildings). Graffiti of this kind testifies to many things: about the priorities in the life of modern students, about their attitude to life, teachers and to each other. In the opinion of the researcher, this tradition should disappear, because very often such inscriptions are evidence of a person's low general culture, offending the aesthetic feelings of others.
Thus, we saw that the speech portrait was actively studied in linguistics. But it should be noted that the comparative speech portrait of the American and Russian lyceum student has not been studied.

4. Comparative analysis of speech portraits of Russian and English lyceum students

4.1 Lexicon of Russian and English lyceum students

As the analysis of the interviews we took with students of Lyceum No. 104 in Novokuznetsk, as well as observations of their speech behavior, shows, the thematic range of vocabulary actively used by lyceum students is quite wide. The following dominant lexical groups of words can be noted: feelings, personality and society, creativity, friends, interests and hobbies, future, opposite sex, studies, sports. The most numerous lexico-semantic group is the group "Personality and Society", which is represented by the following language units: question, meaning, person, truth, image, veins, company, rag, pride,life, people, color, goal, means, lies, benefits, joke, understanding, sides, mirror, mood, occasion, religion, answer, say, relate, express, like, feel, cut, behave, humiliate, think, ask , want, be, need, complex, double, bad, each, important, stupid, extremely, negative, especially, in general, me, me, myself, you, they.

From the point of view of grammatical categories, it should be noted that in the speech of Russian lyceum students in terms of frequency of use, the leader is such a morphological category of words as verbs, the number of which in each lexico-semantic group is several units higher than the number of nouns and adverbs, which rank second in terms of frequency of use. The least frequent morphological classes of words are adjectives and pronouns.

The grammatical category of time in the speech of Russian lyceum students is most often realized through the future and present tenses (Ex. 1):

(1) Think ... well, how ... I don’t know ... now, anyway, the main problem is still at the expense of love and friendship,we will become grown up is still the main planwill another question ... although still problemswill The same.

As for the category of mood, the most common is the indicative mood (ex. 1) and the subjunctive (ex. 2):

(2) I used towould answer whatwould have honored a book, but now ... take a walk!

The syntactic features are that elliptic constructions (ex. 3), incomplete sentences (ex. 4) and anakulufa phenomena are frequent, i.e. violation of the order of the started syntactic construction for the transition to another, and as a result - a non-normative, hybrid construction (Ex. 5):

(3) Friends - many, few best;

(4) That's how, mutual respect here, I don't know, I still feel...;

(5) Does inspiration happen?

Yes, but usually then I feel sad ... .. well, not sad, but dreamy, more ...

As the analysis of the speech behavior of English lyceum students (based on the feature film "Society of Dead Poets") shows, the range of lexical-semantic groups used by them is narrower than that of Russian lyceum students. The following groups can be distinguished: study and life of the lyceum, feelings, social relations. The most numerous is the group "study and life of the lyceum": group, school, specialty, roommate, trig, seat,activities, semester, guys, to study, to know, to listen, to think, to ask, new. The smallest group is “feelings/social relations”: bootlicking, fault. However, it is important to note the abundance of various interjections in the speech of English lyceum students, which is not typical for Russian lyceum students: Oh, hey, Yeah, Sure, Oops, Huh, Yep, Ok, um, Oh, wow.

2) the widespread use of specific vocabulary to refer to everyday events and things, formed from the commonly used normative lexical units of the Russian literary language, or with the help of abbreviation ( lit-ra, physical-ra), or by adding specific colloquial suffixes ( canteen, classroom, teacher), or by way of metaphorical rethinking and indirect nomination ( botanist"excellent student"), or through the reception of sound rapprochement (schizo (physics))

3) the nominations of people used reflect different situations social communication: Sir (appeal to a person with a higher, dominant social status) ; gentlemen ( addressing males present in a situation of business or official communication) ; guys, boys(appeal to interlocutors with equal social status in a situation of informal friendly communication);

4) rather rare use of nicknames ( stiff; genius) ;

5) the use of foreign words, slang, computer terms is not noted;

7) the absence of famous quotes from films, books.

4.3 Pragmaticon of Russian and English lyceum students

In linguistics, there is the concept of a communicative role - the dominant functions performed by a given speech personality in the process of communication (Issers 1996). There are several types of communicative roles (staff): "WATCHMAN"- this is a person who controls the flow of messages in a social group; "CONNECTED"- one who connects two or more groups in the system on an interpersonal basis, is at the intersection of information flows circulating between groups; "OPINION LEADER"- this is a person whose judgments and assessments are listened to by colleagues, whose opinion is authoritative for decision-making, they have more frequent communication with competent sources of information, and they are accessible to group members and are more committed to group values; "COSMOPOLITAN"- this is a person who, more often than other members of the organization, is in contact with the external environment, he is a supplier fresh ideas. The basis for assigning the communicative behavior of a speech personality to a particular communicative role is the analysis of the most frequent communication strategies.

Having examined the speech portraits of an English and a Russian lyceum student, we came to the conclusion that in the communication of lyceum students some of the above communicative roles are realized, as well as some of the roles that we have identified independently.

So, in the speech communication of Russian lyceum students, such communicative roles as "THINKER" - a person who expresses his opinion without imposing it on others; reflecting on life and having his own views on any things (…Well, love, like, it's a big, big feeling. That's how, mutual respect…); "ROMANTIC" - one who sees things through, etc....................

CHAPTER 1. LANGUAGE PERSONALITY AND INTERTEXTUAL

THESAURUS IN THE MODERN SCIENTIFIC CONTEXT.

1.1. Linguistic personality as an object of study

1.1.1. Cognitive structures of the linguistic personality and the precedent phenomenon.211.1.2. Precedent phenomenon and stereotype.

1.1.3. Competence. Pragmatic component in the structure of linguistic personality.

1.2. Intertextual thesaurus and intertextual competence.

1.2.1. On the definition of the term intertextual thesaurus. Intertextual thesaurus and speech culture language personality

1.2.2. Intertextual thesaurus and intertextual competence of a native speaker.

1.2.3. The structure of the intertextual thesaurus.

CONCLUSIONS TO CHAPTER 1.

CHAPTER 2. RECONSTRUCTION OF THE INTERTEXTUAL THESAURUS OF THE MEDIA LITERARY TYPE OF SPEECH CULTURE.

2.1. The composition of the IT thesaurus and the features of the functioning of citations in media texts.

2.1.1. Classification of intertextual signs according to the source text.

2.1.2. Features of the functioning of intertextual signs.

2.2. The composition of the IT thesaurus and the features of the functioning of citations in the texts of KVN.

2.2.1. Classification of intertextual signs according to the source text

2.2.2. Features of the functioning of intertextual signs.

CONCLUSIONS TO CHAPTER 2.

CHAPTER 3. RECONSTRUCTION OF THE INTERTEXTUAL THESAURUS OF THE MEDIA OF THE ELITE TYPE OF SPEECH CULTURE.

3.1. Classification of intertextual signs according to the source text.

3.2. Features of the functioning of intertextual signs in the game discourse.

Oleinik Roman Valerievich

assistant, Bashkir State Pedagogical University

them. M. Akmulla, Ufa

Modern linguistics as a whole develops as anthropological, when a person, being the subject of speech, is associated with linguistic processes and is actively involved in the description and study of linguistic mechanisms. “A speaking person” is the most complex phenomenon, because it is in the language and only through the language that the system of his worldview and understanding is reflected.

In the late 80s of the last century, Russian linguistics, largely due to the efforts of Yu.N. Karaulov and his followers, opened a new, pragmatic direction in the analysis of the relationship between man and language. On the banner of pragmalinguistics, the slogan “Behind every text stands a linguistic personality” was inscribed, revealing a wide range of studies of human speech activity, which began in the works of W. Humboldt, neogrammarists, Baudouin de Courtenay and L. V. Shcherba.

The Latin saying “What a man is, such are his speeches” in a simplified form conveys the essence of the relationship between a person and a language. “... not only language comes into direct connection with the components of culture, but also speech molded into genre forms” . On the one hand, personal characteristics find their expression in the corresponding language structures and speech forms, which are more or less preferable for this particular person; on the other hand, this relationship is by no means exhausted by the opposition: good man- correct (correct, normative) speech, bad person- incorrect (abnormal) speech.

“The social nature of language, the connection of language with thinking, and communicative purpose as a global function of language indicate its undoubted psychological character, that is, its humanity.”

Thesaurus is a means of systematizing the vocabulary of a particular field, which allows it to be used for automatic information search, automatic indexing or abstracting of texts in the relevant field of knowledge. The experience of building a thesaurus in psychology, jurisprudence, management and many others is known natural sciences. Any thesaurus is called upon “to be a representative of the entire vocabulary, i.e. to contain an adequate reflection of the “linguistic model of the world”, to reflect the collective experience of speakers ... of a language, and therefore, to be the basis for the implementation of its language main function-communicative and serve the purposes of communication and mutual understanding.

Thesaurus has two inputs: 1) systematic (embodiing the relation concept-sign); 2) alphabetical (ratio sign-concept).

All types of ideographic dictionaries - thematic, analogous and, in fact, ideographic, according to the classification of V.V. Morkovkin, fit the definition of thesaurus. Moreover, there is no fundamental difference between the general language and information-search thesaurus. "Thesaurus is a lexical information tool - search engines. It consists of a controlled but modifiable vocabulary of terms, between which are specified semantic connections. Such a dictionary is a list of descriptors and non-descriptors (auxiliary terms), which is ordered according to systematic and alphabetical principles and contains indications of the semantic relationships between them - both hierarchical (genus-species) and non-hierarchical type.

Thesauri explicitly reflect certain ideas about the world. “For example, by introducing into the structure of the thesaurus such traditional headings (taxa) as “animals”, “plants”, “artifacts”, we fix the idea of the separate and independent existence of these three classes of entities” .

The thesaurus of a linguistic personality is understood as one of the three levels of organization of the language ability of a native speaker, that is, one of the levels of language proficiency. This refers to the linguo-cognitive (thesaurus) level, in the center of which there are generalized concepts, ideas and concepts that have a descriptor status. “Stereotypes at this level are stable standard connections between descriptors, which are expressed in generalized statements, definitions, aphorisms, popular expressions, proverbs and sayings ... ".

Of particular interest is the task of constructing idiomatic thesauri, since idiomatics reveals a number of semantic and structural features (multiple composition, figurativeness, cultural significance, etc.) that should somehow influence the structure of the thesaurus, making it more complex and non-one-dimensional. Neither from the point of view of everyday consciousness, nor from the point of view of scientific knowledge, there is no doubt about the legitimacy of the thesaurus structured into traditional headings (taxa). It is much more difficult to make classification decisions where we are talking about non-objective entities such as human emotions, interpersonal relationships, mental categories, etc.

Consistent identification of the meaning of phraseological units puts forward the need to study the paradigmatic series of phraseological units and its expression in the language. The selection of taxa is not accidental, "since it makes it possible, on the one hand, to bring together into a certain system a set of units that name certain phenomena of reality, on the other hand, to show the patterns of semantic relations of phraseological units depending on their structure and semantics" . It cannot be said that there are such and such a number of idiomatic taxa in the language. "Language is an open system, and it is hardly possible to achieve such an equilibrium in it."

There are two difficulties in constructing a thesaurus (in our case, we will mainly deal with phraseological units with components expressing human speech in English): 1) The presence of descriptors in an idiom. At first glance, it seems that each PU needs only one (“vertex”) descriptor. Consider a few examples in English and Russian, tobeallmouthandtrousers-"boasting",tochatterlikeamagpie-"chatter", togivetheword-"Promise", towagone’ stongue-"gossip", ring [ring] / ring all the bells, shout at all intersections, breed turuses<на колесах> ,breed antimony. However, what descriptor to attribute, for example, PU in Russian pour from empty to empty and in English noton speaking terms (withsb) ? In the first idiomatic expression, it is equally important that we are talking about "chatter", and what is meant by the situation "idleness", another example speaks of bad relationships between people and their ignorance of each other. Different descriptors are combined into clusters if behind the imaginary ambiguity of the idiom there is some basically unified conceptual structure that relates this idiom to a holistic prototypical representation. For example, the idiom thelastword can mean depending on the situation or "last, decisive word" or "the latest in fashion". 2) The problem of multiple interpretations of thesaurus taxa. Which hypertaxon should, for example, include a terminal "prototypical" taxon « talk"("Chatter") in English, represented by idioms such as talltales, idletalk, empty words,talk(run) nineteentothedozen etc.? V "astonishment" ("surprise») (when an individual has an increase in the emotional background, in connection with which his speech becomes fluent and less coherent)? Or in "nonsense"nonsense») (when the speech is reckless)? There are many such FEs. In principle, a way out of this situation can be found by constructing complex multidimensional systems of conceptual systems that reflect all possible interpretations. This means that in our example the taxon « talk» must be placed in all of the listed (and possibly in some more not included here) taxa at the same time.

A. I. Alekhina identifies the following minitaxonomic paradigms within the idiomatic thesaurus "Linguistic Personality" (the table, in our opinion, presents the most basic ones):

Table 1.

The most basic minitaxonomic paradigms within the idiomatic thesaurus "Linguistic Personality"

*PU in Russian*		*PU in English*
Characteristic person:	Mind chamber, the head [bowler] cooks, the hand does not flinch, the sea is knee-deep, etc.	big boy(important person)big noise(owner, boss)smallfry(small fry),aballoffire(active man),etc.
Age Human:	The nose has not matured, yellow-mouthed chick, young - green,<и>did not sniff (- a, - and), etc.	To be long in the toothbe old), the evening of life (sunsetdays), stricken in years (aged), the awkward age (transitional age), etc.
Properties and qualities of a person's character:	The soul is wide open, with an open mind, go / go the straight road [straight path], do not<из>cowardly [timid] ten, etc.	Soft in the headsilly), a long head (shrewd), (as) sharp as a needle (resourceful), a bird/pea – brain (chicken brains), etc.
Mental state of a person:	He is not his own (not his own), cats scratch in the soul [on the heart], hang / hang the head (head), hang / hang the nose<на квинту>etc.	To take offence(take offense), (as) black as sin (darker clouds), to have kittens (get nervous), like a dog with two tails (glad – radeshenek), etc.

Thus, certain phrase-forming groups of vocabulary are singled out, which differ both in their semantic form and in their place in the structure of the language, as well as in the nature of their functioning. "Such thematic groups (taxons) will be a system of units united by a common semantic feature ... and can be a method of analysis in phraseological studies as a means of revealing not only a separate phraseological unit, but also a whole group against the background of hypo-hyperonymic connections" .

Idiomatic taxa were formed as a result of the mutual systemic nature of lexical and phraseological compounds that arose, function and develop as a whole, despite their autonomy and the obvious originality of each separately. "An important step towards the creation of a unified lexical-phraseological system of the language is the in-depth development of possible (in various aspects) classifications of phraseological units systematizations (a lot has already been done in the lexicon in this direction)" .

It should be noted that the possibility of identifying a system in vocabulary and phraseology has been and is denied by many linguists. Thus, V. M. Nikitin speaks of "the non-systemic nature of phraseological units and their non-systemic entry into the structure of the language." “Phraseologisms are not an organic part of the language system, but secondary material of an additional nature,” he writes. And further: “Phraseologisms do not create and do not hold together the structure of the language, but are generated by it. Phraseologism in the language system is a side material that dissolves in the system. Phraseologisms do not create either a level or a tier in the language.

Nevertheless, despite the "pessimism" of some linguists regarding the possibility of creating phraseological taxa and the extraordinary complexity and diversity of linguistic realities, the phraseology of Russian and English is already quite systemic. The lexical system of a language and phraseology, in particular, provide a person with the widest opportunities for revealing linguistic individuality.

Bibliography:

1. Alekhina A. I. Idioms of modern in English. - Mn.: Vysh. school, 1982. - 279 p.

2. Gavrin S. G. Phraseology of the modern Russian language. - Perm, 1974.

3. Dobrovolsky D. O., Karaulov Yu. N. Idiomatics in the thesaurus of a linguistic personality // Problems of Linguistics. 1993. No. 2.

4. Karaulov Yu. N. Russian language and linguistic personality. Moscow: Nauka, 1987.

5. Karaulov Yu. N. Linguistic construction and the thesaurus of the literary language. Moscow: Nauka, 1981.

6. Koltunova M. V. Conventions as a pragmatic factor in dialogic communication // Problems of Linguistics. 2004. No. 6.

7. Nikitin V. M. The problem of classification of phraseological units and their relative stability and variation // Problems of stability and variance of phraseological units. - Tula, 1968.

8. Shakhovsky V. I. Linguistic personality in an emotional communicative situation // Philological Sciences. 1998. No. 2.