Cognitive and onomasiological analyses of occasionality in English

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Cognitive and onomasiological analyses of occasionality in English

Марія Цонинець

Abstract

In the article the cognitive and onomasiological analyses of occasionality in English are implemented. The topicality of the research lies in the cognitive features of the emergence of individual authors' neologisms, including “intentional speech and mental activity. The purpose of the article is to determine the processes of forming an occasional unit as a consequence of cognitive and mental activities of human mind. The objectives of the study include: the definition of the term concept, clarifying the structure of the occasional unit, considering cognitive and onomasiological analyses of the author's innovation developing and stages of their generation in terms of cognitive onomasiology. Language and thinking are special and highly complex phenomena, a result of language and speech interaction. This is, first of all, a counteraction of two tendencies - the development of language and its preservation. To represent, reproduce and fix new ideas and concepts, language has to be replenished with new components. Occasionalisms play an important role in the language system, formed mainly for the purpose of artistic and stylistic nomination operating within a certain context. Cognitive and onomasiological analyses consider nonce-words in the process of conception, that makes it possible to dive into their mental depth. It is meant that the person who created a new word has an individual lexicon, which is the conceptual basis of any nomination in speech. A person chooses a certain unit of nomination depending on the extent to which his/her semantics satisfies the conceptualization that is being verbalized. Cognitive determinants for the emergence of neologism are associated primarily with the receipt, processing, storage and transmission of information. This approach enables revealing the cognitive factors that contribute the formation of occasionalisms. In this case, we proceed from the recognition of the role of a human being as the creator of the communication process and, ultimately, as the main subjective factor that determines the main trends in the language system. Thus, cognitive and onomasiological analyses are combined, as they involve the identification of motivational bases during the nomination and aims to establish the relationship between the name and the denoted object and contributes to a better understanding of occasionalisms.

Keywords: occasionalism, concept, cognitive linguistics, onomasiology, word-formation.

Анотація

.У статті здійснено когнітивно-ономасіологічний аналіз оказіональності в англійській мові. Актуальність дослідження полягає в когнітивних особливостях появи індивідуально-авторських неологізмів. Адже «авторське новоутворення» передбачає «інтенційність мовленнєво-мисленнєвої діяльності». Метою статті є визначення процесів утворення оказіоналізму як наслідку пізнавально-мисленнєвих процесів у свідомості людини. Завдання дослідження - визначення терміна концепт, висвітлення структури оказіональної одиниці, розгляд результатів когнітивно-ономасіологічного аналізу продукування авторських інновацій та етапи породження цих новотворів із точки зору когнітивної ономасіології. Мова і мислення - це особливі і дуже складні явища, внаслідок взаємодії яких відбувається породження мовної або мовленнєвої одиниці. Це передусім протидія двох тенденцій - розвитку мови та її збереження. Для відображення, відтворення й закріплення нових понять та ідей мова змушена поповнюватися новими одиницями. Оказіоналізми відіграють важливу роль у системі мови, створені переважно з метою художньо- стилістичної номінації для функціонування в межах певного контексту. Когнітивно-ономасіологічний аналіз розглядає новотвори ще в процесі зародження концепту, що дає змогу зрозуміти ментальну глибину новотвору. Адже особистість, яка створила нове слово, володіє індивідуальним лексиконом, який складає концептуальну основу будь-якої номінації в мовленні. Людина вибирає ту або ту одиницю номінації залежно від того, якою мірою її семантика задовольняє концептуалізацію, що вербалізується. Когнітивні передумови виникнення неологізму пов'язані, насамперед, з отриманням, опрацюванням, збереженням і передаванням інформації. Такий підхід уможливлює розкриття когнітивних чинників, що сприяють утворенню оказіоналізмів. Водночас ми виходимо з визнання ролі людини як творця процесу комунікації і, зрештою, як головного суб'єктивного чинника, що визначає основні тенденції змін у системі мови. Отже, когнітивно-ономасіологічний аналіз є комбінованим, оскільки містить виявлення мотиваційних баз під час номінації і спрямований на встановлення взаємозв'язків між найменуванням і позначуваним предметом та сприяє адекватному розумінню оказіоналізмів.

The problem statement

cognitive-onomasiological occasionality english language neologism

The human factor with its components becomes key in linguistics dating back to the late 20^th - early 21^st century, thus occasionality and occasional units as the author's developments have become the research subject of many scholars. The author of occasionality provides the cognitive activity by means of concepts and forms new words by the process of nomination, so it is obvious that their study from cognitive and onomasiological point of view helps to understand the meaning of the occasional units.

The analysis of the studies. The essence of the research is based on the following modern promising areas of linguistics: cognitology (O.S. Kubriako- va, O.O. Selivanova, M.M. Chetina, M.F. Alefirenko, M.M. Poluzhyn, M.M. Boldyrev etc.), functional onomasiology (O.O. Selivanova, A.M. Arkhanhelska etc.), theory of nomination (O.S. Kubriakova, M.M. Poluzhyn, VM. Telia, S.V Dmytriiev etc.).

The aim of the article is the analysis of occa- sionality and meaning of occasional units from cognitive and onomasiological points of view.

Methods and methodology of the research. In this study: information seeking and descriptive methods; componential, cognitive as well as onomasiologi- cal analyses are used.

The statement of the basic material. In an age when the anthropocentric scholastic paradigm becomes leading in the humanities, there is a need for scientific study of everything that forms the basis of a human being: thinking, language, behaviour etc. By examining the nomination process as well as individual naming units we can characterize person's history, culture, habits, social behaviour, physiology, and so on.

Anthropocentric principle of study in linguistics assumes, that a person forms a world in his/her consciousness by using language but does not depict it in the language system, only in speech. It means that nonce-words are verbalized by means of the existing language.

Language interpretation of such phenomena is realized by cognitive schemes. These schemes are related to human consciousness, language structure and have interpretational nature. It explains that a human can use different schemes of collective and individual knowledge in order to gain individual experience of the interaction with a real world.

Nonce words mainly occur in artistic, conversational and (rarely) journalistic style. Here occasional units are used as expressive means to influence the addressee of the text. They implement: a) expression of individual author's speech; b) providing it with expressiveness, emotional colour, imagery; c) creating the concept of an artistic work [Selivanova 2006, p. 244].

Occasional words are mainly secondary to the words from which they are formed. In addition, occasional units are non-normative formations. The occasional word, in contrast to the canonical one, depends on the context in which it operates, sometimes losing its meaning out of the context. Performing an artistic function in the text, nonce-words do not extend beyond this text, do not become systemic units and forever retain the properties of freshness and novelty precisely in their context. Therefore, their interpretation in most cases depends entirely on this context. But, despite this feature, occasionalisms are always “expressive” even out of context.

Occasional units reflect a person's perception of the world, formed in terms of a particular nation. The way of forming an opinion through language is unique for each person, and the appearance of an occasional unit depends on it. After all, a person who creates a new word (originator), strives for individualization and originality.

It should be noted that “author's ocassional unit” is a cognitive phenomenon, because its creation involves “intentional speech and mental activity” [Ale- firenko 2011, p. 21].

The features associated with the receipt, processing, storage and transmission of information, as well as those that reflect the individualized nature of human communicative activity are highlighted among the cognitive prerequisites for the emergence of occasional units. This approach reveals the cognitive factors that contribute to the formation of occasional units. Thus, a human being is a creator of the communication process and, ultimately, the main subjective factor that determines the main changes in the language system. The reflective activity of human thinking is one of the most important cognitive prerequisites for the emergence of nonee-words, especially its ability to categorize/recat- egorize. The work of human memory is the associative basis of figurative reflection of the world.

Considering that the author creates concepts before producing nonce-words, thus it is obvious that the study of occasional units from cognitive point of view helps to clarify their meanings.

Cognitive linguistic analyses of nominative units is focused on the subject or subjects of nomination. The process of creating names is considered as a pragmatic human activity, which thus integrates the amount of knowledge and represents it in the form of a nominative unit.

One of the types of such an activity is the representation of both current and new lexical units or the reconceptualization of the existing one. In other words, in the process of reconceptualization, new concepts develop for already existing lexical units.

The problems of secondary nomination are of great interest in modern linguistics. As pointed out by B.A. Serebrennikov, “secondary lexical nomination is the use of nominative means already available in the language in a new naming function” [Serebrennikov 1997, p. 129]. The linguistic means arising as a result of the secondary nomination are considered as secondary, since during their creation already existing linguistic means are used, the content of which is reconceptualized.

Metacognition is also impossible to ignore. It is defined by M. Minsky as a special structure of thinking. “In order to avoid complete chaos in thinking, we need a structure that would provide general guidance and record what the mind does and why” [Minsky 1988, p. 286-287].

At present, it is clearly realized that along with the traditional processes of information processing, there are metacognitive processes responsible for managing the course of current intellectual activity.

Metacognitive human activity is the ability to manage knowledge within their cognitive system and build concepts that are implemented in the nomination process. The peculiarity of metacognitive process lies in the fact that language performs an instrument and at the same time subject of the study.

The cognitive activity of a native speaker is developed especially intensively in the field of the unknown, not fully mastered. So, occasional units fall into this category.

According to M.M. Poluzhyn, the term `concept' is derived from Latin word `conceptus' and means `conception', `fertilization', i.e. the origin of the word. Concepts are characterized by vague semantic features. The concept is the result of reproduction and reconstruction of the intended. To name something a concept is used to reproduce its inner meaning [Poluzhyn 2015, p. 217]. Considering the concept is a mental unit of consciousness, it is the prerequisite for the emergence of any occasional unit.

Concept includes estimation, conceptual and figurative components. After all, it indicates something that has a certain value for a person. A conceptual element is formed by the available information about the real or imaginary object, which is the basis for the concept formation. “Concept is a holistic set of judgements maintaining the distinctive features of the object under study. The core of the object is expressed by judgements about its general and at the same time essential features” [Poluzhyn 2015, p. 218].

The concepts are developed by people on the basis of their thoughts, ideas, knowledge about the objects in the world [Poluzhyn 2017, p. 170].

A variety of cognition forms determines different ways of forming concepts in human consciousness: on the basis of sensory experience, i.e. as a result of the of the world perception directly by the senses: through sight, hearing, smell, touch and taste; on the basis of substantive and practical activity; on the basis of experimental and cognitive activity; on the basis of mental activity (as a result of judgements, conclusions); based on verbal and non-verbal communication [Boldyrev 2014, p. 121].

So, conceptual system of a particular author is different, because a person has various national values and worldviews. And the importance of concept study lies in its role of mediator between a person and reality in which he/she lives. This interpretation of concepts brings us closer to the cognitive understanding of occasional units, developing as a result of person's experience and his/her interaction with the world.

People percept in different ways and a particular person is a bearer of cognition. Its impact on the formation and understanding of occasional units is significant. Mental image or mental understanding of the world of different people varies, thus the same nonceword can be interpreted in different ways.

Modern researchers pay great attention to the study of the interpreting function of language. According to M.M. Boldyrev's interpretation, is understood as a cognitive activity directly related to cognition [Boldyrev 2011, p. 14]

Thus, interpretation of nonce-words is vital in the process of their analysis. It is language perceptive activity of a particular person that discovers his or her understanding of a word. There are two major types of interpretation: primary and secondary. Primary interpretation is the formation of primary concepts and categories about the world, events, objects. It is the result of collective knowledge of the world, and, therefore, it can be called objective. Secondary interpretation is based on already existing concepts in the language and represents their individual interpretation, that is, we can say that the secondary interpretation is subjective [Boldyrev 2011, p. 14].

It should be noted that interpretation is objecti- fled in three types, which are associated with its three main functions: selection, classification and estimation [Boldyrev 2011, p. 12]. If the selective function is manifested in the processes of conceptualization of the phenomena of the physical world, and the classifying function is realized when abstract concepts arise and serves for the linguistic actualization of the phenomena of the mental world, then the evaluative function involves mental activity. Since interpretation is based on cognitive models and correlates with cognitive, well-structured activity, it is also clearly structured and at the same time individual, subjective [Kubriakova 2009, p. 10].

Thus, we understand interpretation as an individual treatment of a particular linguistic unit, based on collective schemes, which are presented in the form of conceptual and thematic areas.

The use of cognitive tools in the analysis of nominative units expands the study. Thus, it becomes possible to penetrate into psycholinguistic and mental depths of creating mechanism of nominative language subsystem, structurization and systematization of processes that directly or indirectly affect this process [Selivanova 2000, p. 57].

In contrast to traditional word-formation that is focused on the study of the systemic structure of derivatives, the subject of cognitive word-formation is the development of occasionalism as a consequence of cognitive and mental processes in human consciousness.

The process of studying ocassional units includes analyzing by the author as the bearer of cognition, his/ her nationality and defining the structure of a nonceword.

Cognition of a person is an open system and can be influenced by different languages, cultures, social surroundings etc. O.S. Kubriakova states that language influences person's perception and knowledge as well as processes of classification and categorization his/her experience [Kubriakova 2004, p. 57]. So, native speakers of different languages have different worldviews, values etc.

Each occasional unit represents collective and individual knowledge about an object and any newly coined word is a result of language development. The emergence of nonce-words is influenced by social role of the author in the society, his/her individual experience, activity, mental state, temper, level of knowledge about the world and language and the ability to transform collective and individual experience into instant associative link. It should also be noted that the ability to assess new objects that appear in the world or our imagination depends on the previous knowledge.

Both semantic and lexical derivation are related to the process of conceptualization, which implies the existence of the purpose and source of conceptualization. To understand the relationship between a concept-aim, a concept- source, and a unit called a concept-goal, it is necessary to develop a semantic typology for all types of semantic innovations [Blank 1999, p. 89]. Recent research [Blank 1999, p. 111] has shown that, despite the formal differences between such authors' innovations, they semantically rely on a number of associative relationships between the source-concept and the aim-concept. In the process of nomination, the speaker at the first stage analyses the concept that requires the name, dividing it into a number of the most important elements, i.e. subconcepts. The most significant subconcept associated with this word serves as the semantic basis for word-formation.

Cognitive study of occasional word-formation allows to determine “sets of concepts; the reason of their verbalization in a language; specific form that is chosen to solve the problems of nomination” [Selivanova 2000, p. 105].

Human perception of the world has been changed significantly and it is called “cognitive environment” that was formed outside linguistics. The problem is that people do not have access to all knowledge of the world, but only to a particular part of it. Language performs as a tool to implement this knowledge.

According to V.M. Telia, the process of nomination is the formation of speech units that perform a nominative function, that are used to name and highlight fragments of extralinguistic reality and to develop concepts about them in the form of words, phrases and sentences [Telia 1981, p.170]. One of the main functions of the nomination is to differentiate the world of language from the world of reality, to establish direct and indirect connections between designated and denoted.

O.S. Kubriakova believes that only that mental structure, which is organized in human consciousness and acts as its operational unit, becomes relevant in the process of nomination [Kubriakova 1995, p. 151].

Cognitive and onomasiological analyses consider ocassional unit in the period of concept development, before the creation of the word itself. This method allows to investigate the motivation of the objects nominated by the author and the emergence of occasional units.

Nomination process is a product of human linguistic creativity. It is extremely difficult to determine its patterns, but it is possible to analyse the main elements and motivations of such processes. Any language establishes the most important nominative units in its lexical system. They determine biological culture or social value of the units represented in the ethnic consciousness of native speakers. The nomination process organizes substantive language scope, choosing the most important features and characteristics in order to achieve appropriate connections between them and the denotation. The processes of perception, assimilation and integration of knowledge about the denoted covers all the stages in human consciousness. According to the needs and frequency of usage in certain conceptual spheres, it is confirmed or not confirmed by human experience. The author perceives information and develops their own language creations in the nominations, depending on linguistic, education and intralinguistic factors.

The study of the onomasiological process of nomination expands linguistic analysis of language units. This makes it possible to determine not only the patterns of the naming process, but also the processes of selecting subjects for nomination of certain motivators from the conceptual sphere of ideas about the world and to correlate the motivational basis of secondary denotation with direct primary meaning.

Thus, the formation of nonce-words in terms of cognitive and onomasiological analyses can be divided into the following stages:

1. The concept that requires a name.

2. Categorization of the concept.

3. The speaker's choice of means to denote the concept.

This means that the speaker chooses the potential basis and a semantic feature. Different groups in language communities can choose different associations/ aspects and use different methods of representation [Dmytriiev 2015, p. 51]. This explains the difference between the author's innovations created by speakers of different variants of the English language. One of the ways to denote a concept is a combination of pre-existing linguistic material. The speaker forms his or her statements according to the prototype models already presented in a language. That is, before a new nominative unit is formed, a speaker must analyse the existing units of language (at the onomasiological level). Then a search for a model occurs that expresses similar semantic relationships/associations with those present in the concept requiring a name. This process is completed by the concrete implementation of the nomination in accordance with the existing phonological and morphological rules. However, development of the concept is influenced not only by existing lexical units and mental structures, but also by unconscious components related to mental and language creations.

Lexical unit is a non-constant phenomenon, it is enriched with meaning via its dynamic is that allows them to obtain new meanings from the entire context. However, it should be noted, that occasional units are speech phenomena that exist and can be understood only within a particular context.

In contrast to traditional structuralist approaches, by determining the onomasiological structure and cognitive grounds, the development and bases of occasional units can be observed.

The latest linguistic researches make it possible to define the main features of the cognitive occasional unit nature: 1) the designation of a “fragment of information”, accumulating, storing and systematizing the knowledge perceived by the author; 2) appeal to previous experience, which forms the ontological and axiological image of the author's world; 3) sustaining the result of the cognitive process and the establishment of unusual associative connections; 4) conceptual integration of mental “input spaces”, as a result of which emerges a “scope-blend” or “mental construct”; 5) the presence of communicative and pragmatic intentions, formed as a result of the “quintessence of impressions”; 6) reduced level of motivation and iconicity [Nykytch- enko 2017, p. 178].

M. Chetina [Chetina 2010, p. 156] operates with the term “sense generation of occasional units”, which takes place with the participation of: output space 1 (recipient - language unit), input space 2 (donor: token-donor -complex words, affix - derivatives of the grammatical concept), sense-generating operator (syntactic compounds in the syntagm) [Chetina 2010, p. 157].

Occasional word-formation requires newer approaches to the study, because the relationship between the creative basis and the derived unit does not always reveal the meaning of the latter. “The production of an occasional unit is not so simple, because it is not an instant qualitative transformation, but the result of analytical and synthetic operations that take place in the mind of the author, whose will and mind give incen- five to the appropriate derivation mechanism” [Koloiz 2015, p. 101].

Cognitive and onomasiological analyses [Selivanova 2011, p. 64] are considered “combined” because it includes the identification of motivational bases in the process of nomination [Selivanova 2011, p. 65] and aims to establish relationships between the denotation and the “determinants of the nomination process”.

Cognitive and onomasiological analyses are implemented in two stages:

1) modeling the structure of knowledge about the marked or its fragment;

2) interpretation of onomasiological structure [Selivanova 2000, p. 153].

The interpretation of the onomasiological structure for derivatives involves the establishment of the onomasiological basis (the formants of the previous stages of derivation). In the absence of a word-forming formant, the basis of the word is reconstructed according to part-of-speech status and word-forming type of the name [Selivanova 2000, p. 171].

Thus, in cognitive onomasiology there are five main principles of researching nominative mechanisms: 1) the principle of anthropocentrism, which is aimed at studying the processes of nomination as a linguistic expression of human experience, and cultural achievements of the nation; 2) the principle of axiology, which mediates cognitive and onomasiological research processes as an evaluative analysis of language codes, symbolizing a certain human interaction with the objective world, because humans give the world their own assessments; 3) the principle of mentalism, the mechanism of action [Ulukhanov 1992, p. 79].

Nomination provides a mechanism of interaction between human thinking and the environment. Types of word formation are determined on the basis of the “motivator” of the onomasiological structure. This is illustrated by the appearance of a word that occurs with the appearance of the object itself, which did not exist before. Therefore, more occasional vocabulary is found in fiction. Unreal world is a generator of nonce words. There is a need to name objects that do not exist in reality, but appear in the author's consciousness. According to L.S. Vyhotskyi any “fantastic objects or phenomena”, developed in fairy tales, myths, legends, fiction, are just new combinations of the elements existing in reality [Vyhotskyi 2011, p. 201]. Most of such lexemes are called “conceptual blends” - of two or more concepts mixed together, e. conceptual spaces developed by these concepts. [Umerenkova 2017, p. 198].

“Motivational base” is formed by the definition of onomasiological structure. Motivation establishes the relationship between the motivator and the derivative unit [Selivanova 2000, p. 180].

The related characteristics of the subject are transferred to the verbal word in the process of nomination (onomasiological structure).

For example, to denote the innovation romm- which-is-also-my-bedroom [Niffenegger A., 2003], the author used a combination of several words, which conveys the full meaning of this innovation with its the external feature of the room, namely its versatility. Objects constitute people's lives and determine a level of their comfort and, accordingly, find their conceptual expression in English literary texts. Depending on certain life situations, a person actively projects the external, functional and other characteristics of some objects onto the behavior, destiny, appearance, people's surrounding etc., that evaluate the person through the value of objects.

In English literary texts there are objects representing collective knowledge about the world as well as individual. It is obvious that the results of individual author's conceptualization and categorization of the developed world occurs mostly in the text.

Nominative analysis of the nonce-words highlights the process of nomination realized by linguistic or non-linguistic means and sense of which is interpreted by the author. For example, occasional unit Lizardface [Niffenegger A., 2003] indicates a person who has a rash on his/her face. The motivator is the visual correlation of the nomination with the obtained nonce-word. The word Lizardface acquires a new meaning, reconceptualization of which is caused by the author his/her associative link. This allows to nominate an object with the usage of already existing lexical unit.

Author's innovation artbabe [Niffenegger A., 2003] denotes `a woman who works in the field of art'. By adding the base babe, the word obtains a loving meaning and is used by the author as a gentle address to the be loved.

Considering occasional unit artbabe, it is obvious that not only cognition and language are vital, but also author's emotions, feelings and the ways they are mentally processed and verbally expressed.

When the generation of a new lexical unit is preceded by a word-forming act, then an expansion of onomasiological boundaries occurs. As it develops, word-formation aims to expand “into onomasiology and the theory of nomination, and through them into other fields of knowledge” [Selivanova 2000, p. 185]. Word-formation is called one of the links in the language system, which is “responsible” for internal human experience [Kubriakova 1977, p. 225]. According to E.S. Kubriakova, all the means of word formation and even just formal operations of word transformation are closely connected with onomasiological aspects of derivation [Kubriakova 1977, p. 229].

The process of nomination, as noted by A.M. Arkhangelska, is influenced by various factors: the characteristics of the object itself, as well as features of the nominator (intellectual (the nominator is the bearer of knowledge about the relevant class of objects), cultural (a class representative is always formed on the background of material and spiritual culture), social (nominator is the bearer of public opinion of the language community), biological (nominator is the bearer not only of social but also individual assessments, emotions, experiences ) and language (the nominator is the bearer of linguo-creative thinking, knowledge of linguistic patterns and linguistic intuition)) [Arkhanhelska 2007, p. 25].

The nominative process in language is the most dynamic and productive. Occasional units appear by using typical basic formants and it is difficult to reveal their internal form and semantic branching.

Conclusions

The study of occasional units from cognitive and onomasiological point of view makes it possible to penetrate into the psycholinguistic and mental depths of the creation mechanism of the nominative unit. Therefore, an ocassional unit is considered in the period of concept development, before the creation of the word itself. The study of concepts brings us closer to the cognitive understanding of occasional units, developing as a result of person's experience and his/her interaction with the world. The importance of concept study lies in its role of mediator between a person and reality in which he/she lives. By using these approaches, the motivation of the objects nominated by the author and the emergence of occasional units can be investigated.

Література

1. Алефиренко Н.Ф. Когнитивно-прагматическая субпарадигма науки о языке. Когнитивно-прагматические векторы современного языкознания: Сб. науч. трудов. Москва: Флинта; Наука, 2011. С. 16--27.

2. Архангельська А.М. До питання про засади побудови загальної ономасіологічної моделі номінації. Мовознавство. 2007. № 4-5. С. 20-35.

3. Болдырев Н.Н. Интерпретирующая функция языка. Вестник Челябинского государственного университета. № 33. 2011. С. 11-16.

4. Болдырев Н.Н. Роль когнитивного контекста в интерпретации мира и знаний о мире. Вестник Челябинского государственного университета. № 6. 2014. С. 118-122.

5. Дмитрієв С.В. Когнітивно-ономасіологічний аналіз номінацій особи в сучасних українських соціолектах: : дис. канд. філолог, наук.: 10.02.01 / Одеський національний університет імені І.І. Мечникова. Одеса, 2015. 327 с.

6. Колоїз Ж.В. Неузуальне словотворення: монографія. Кривий Ріг: НИИ Астерікс, 2015. 158 с.

7. Кубрякова Е.С. Теория номинации и словообразование. Языковая номинация. Виды наименований. Москва: Наука, 1977. С. 222-303.

8. Кубрякова Е.С. Эволюция лингвистических идей во второй половине ХХ века (опыт парадигмального анализа). Язык и наука конца 20 века. Москва: Рос. гос. гуманит. ун-т, 1995. С. 144-238.

9. Кубрякова Е.С. В поисках сущности языка. Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. ИЯ РАН, Тамбов. №1. 2009. С. 5-12.

10. Кубрякова Е.С. Язык и знание. На пути получения знаний о языке: части речи с когнитивной точки зрения. Роль языка в познании мира. Москва: Языки славянской культуры, 2004. 560 с.

11. Никитченко К.И. Лінгвокогнітивна природа способів оказіонального словотворення в англомовному постмодерністському художньому тексті: дис. канд. філолог, наук: 10.02.04 / Одеський національний університет ім. І.І. Мечнікова. Одеса, 2017. 274 с.

12. Иолюжин М.М. Поняття, концепт та його структура. Науковий вісник Східноєвропейського національного університету імені Лесі Українки. Філологічні науки. Мовознавство. 2015. № 4. С. 214-224.

13. Иолюжин М.М. Об основных направлениях и процедурах лингвоконцептуального исследования. Материалы Международного конгресса по когнитивной лингвистике: сборник научных статей. Москва: Ин-т языкознания РАН; Тамбов: Издательский дом ТГУ им. Г.Р. Державина, 2017. С. 170-173.

14. Селиванова Е.А. Когнитивная ономасиология: монография. К.: Изд-во украинского фитосоциологического центра, 2000. 248 с.

15. Селиванова Е.А. Ономасиологическая связность как фактор концептуализации художественного текста. Уч. зап. Таврического национального университета им. В.И. Вернадского. Сер. «Филология». Симферополь, 2006. Т 19 (58). С. 242-246.

16. Селиванова Е.А. Номинация и когниция: новая типология мотивации языковых единиц. Когниция, коммуникация, дискурс. Филология. 2011. № 3. С. 64-85.

17. Серебренников Б.А. Языковая номинация. Общие вопросы: монография Москва: Наука, 1977. 358 с.

18. Телия В.Н. Типы языковых значений. Связанное значение в языке: дис. д. филол. наук: 10.02.19 / Москва: Наука, 1981. 269 с.

19. Улуханов И.С. О степенях словообразовательной мотивированности слов. Вопросы языкознания. 1992. № 5. С. 74-89.

20. Умеренкова А.В. Концептуальная интеграция как когнитивная база мифотворческой деятельности. Когнитивные исследования языка. 2017. № 30. С. 196-198.

21.Четина М.М. Когнитивный анализ окказиональной номинации (на материале прозы Дж. Фаулза). Творчество молодых ученых. 2010. C. 155-158.

22. Blank A. Historical semantics and cognition. Berlin, New York: Mouton De Gruyter. 1999. 312 p.

23. Minsky M. Society of mind. New York: Simon and Schuster. 1988. 336 p.

24. Niffenegger A. The Time Traveler's Wife: A Novel. Orlando: Harvest Book. 2003. 546 p.

25. Vygotsky L.S. The dynamics of the schoolchild's mental development in relation to teaching and learning. Journal of cognitive education and psychology. Vols. 10-2. 2011. P 198-211.

References

1. Alefirenko N.F. (2011) Kognitivno-pragmaticheskaya subparadigma nauki o yazyke [Cognitive Lingvo- pragmatika in the Language of Modern Science]. Kognitivno-pragmaticheskie vektory sovremennogo yazykoznani- ya: collection of scientific papers. Moskva: Flinta; Nauka. S. 16-27 [in Russian].

2. Arkhanhelska A.M. (2007) Do pytannia pro zasady pobudovy zahalnoi onomasiolohichnoi mode- li nominatsii [Considering the Principles of Constructing the General Onomasiological Model of Nomination]. Movoznavstvo. No. 4-5. S. 20-35 [in Ukrainian].

3. Boldyrev N.N. (2011) Interpretiruyushchaya funktsiya yazyka [The Interpretive Function of Language]. The Journal of Cheliabinsk state university. No. 33. S. 11-16 [in Russian].

4. Boldyrev N.N. (2014) Rol kognitivnogo konteksta v interpretatsii mira i znanii o mire [The role of the Cognitive Context in the Interpretation of the World and Knowledge About the World.]. The Journal of Cheliabinsk state university. No. 6. S. 118-122 [in Russian].

5. Dmytriyev S.V (2015) Kohnityvno-onomasiolohichnyi analiz nominatsii osoby v suchasnykh ukrain- skykh sotsiolektakh [Cognitive and Onomasiological Analyses of Personality Nominations in Modern Ukrainian Sociolects]: PhD thesis: 10.02.01 / Odesa I.I. Mechnikov National University. Odesa. 327 s. [in Ukrainian].

6. Koloiz Zh.V (2015) Neuzualne slovotvorennia [Unusual Word-formation]: monograph. Kryvyi Rih: NPP Asteriks, 158 s. [in Ukrainian].

7. Kubriakova E.S. (1977) Teoriya nominatsii i slovoobrazovanie [Nomination Theory and Word-formation]. Yazykovaya nominatsiya. Vidy naimenovanyi. Moskva: Nauka. S. 222-303 [in Russian].

8. Kubriakova E.S. (1995) Evoliutsiya lingvisticheskikh idey vo vtoroy polovine ХХ veka (opyt paradig- malnogo analiza) [Evolution of Linguistic Ideas in the Late 20^th Century (Experience of Paradigmatic Analysis).]. Yazyk i nauka kontsa 20 veka. Moskva: Russian State University for the Humanities. S. 144-238 [in Russian].

9. Kubriakova E.S. (2009) V poiskakh sushchnosti yazyka [In Search of the Essence of Language]. Voprosy kognitivnoi lingvistiki. Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Tambov. No.1. S. 5-12 [in Russian].

10. Kubriakova E.S. (2004) Yazyk i znanie. Na puti polucheniya znaniy o yazyke: chasti rechi s kognitivnoy tochki zreniya. Rol yazyka v poznanii mira [Language and Knowledge. Towards Knowledge of the Language: Parts of Speech from a Cognitive Point of View. The Role of Language in the Cognition of the World]. Moskva: Yazyki slavianskoy kultury. 560 s. [in Russian].

11. Nykytchenko K.P. (2017) Linhvokohnityvna pryroda sposobiv okazionalnoho slovotvorennia v anhlo- movnomu postmodernistskomu khudozhnomu teksti [Linguocognitive Nature of Occasional Word-formation Methods in English Postmodernist Artistic Text]: PhD thesis: 10.02.04 / I.I. Mechnikov Odesa National University. Odesa. 274 s. [in Ukrainian].

12. Poluzhyn M.M. (2015) Poniattia, kontsept ta yoho struktura [The Notion, Concept and Its Structure]. The Scientific Journal of Lesya Ukrainka Eastern European National University. Filolohichni nauky. Movoznavstvo. No 4. S. 214-224 [in Ukrainian].

13. Poluzhyn M.M. (2017) Ob osnovnykh napravleniyakh i protsedurakh lingvokontseptualnogo issledo- vaniya [On Basic Directions and Procedures of Linguoconceptual Research]. Material of International Cognitive Linguistics Congress: collection of scientific papers. Moskva: Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Tambov Publishing House of TSU named after G.R. Derzhavin. S. 170-173 [in Russian].

14.Selivanova E.A. (2000) Kognitivnaia onomasiologiia [Cognitive Onomasiology]: monograph. Kiev: Publishing house of the Ukrainian phytosociological center. 248 s. [in Russian].

15.Selivanova E.A. (2006) Onomasiologicheskaya sviaznost kak faktor kontseptualizatsii khudozhestven- nogo teksta [Onomasiological Coherence as a Factor of Conceptualization of an Artistic Text]. Scientific Notes of V.I. Vernadsky Taurida National University «Ostrozska akademiia». Series «Philology». Simferopol. Vol. 19 (58). S. 242-246 [in Russian].

16. Selivanova E.A. (2011). Nominatsiya i kognitsiya: novaya tipologiya motivatsii yazykovykh edinits [Nomination and Cognition: a New Typology of Linguistic Units Motivation]. Kognitsiya, kommunikatsyia, diskurs. Filologiya. No. 3. S. 64-85 [in Russian].

17. Serebrennikov B.A. (1977) Yazykovaya nominatsiya [Language Nomination]. General issues: monograph. Moskva: Nauka. 358 s. [in Russian].

18. Teliia V.N. (1981) Tipy yazykovykh znacheniy. Sviazannoe znachenie v yazyke [Types of Language Meanings. Related Meaning in Language]: doctoral dissertation in philology: 10.02.19. Moskva: Nauka. 269 s. [in Russian].

19. Ulukhanov I.S. (1992) O stepeniakh slovoobrazovatelnoy motivirovannosti slov [On the Degrees of Word-formation Motivation of Words]. Voprosyyazykoznaniia. No. 5. S. 74-89 [in Russian].

20. Umerenkova A.V (2017) Kontseptualnaya integratsiya kak kognitivnaya baza mifotvorcheskoy deyatel- nosti [Conceptual Integration as a Cognitive Basis of Myth-making Activity.]. Kognitivnye issledovaniyayazyka. No. 30. S. 196-198 [in Russian].

21. Chetina M.M. (2010) Kognitivnyi analiz okkazionalnoy nominatsii (na materiale prozy Dzh. Faulza) [Cognitive Analysis of the Occasional Nomination (based on the prose of J. Fowles)]. Tvorchestvo molodykh uchenykh. S. 155-158 [in Russian].

22. Blank A. (1999) Historical semantics and cognition. Berlin, New York: Mouton De Gruyter. 312 p. [in English].

23. Minsky M. (1988) Society of mind. New York: Simon and Schuster. 336 p. [in English].

24. Niffenegger A. (2003) The Time Traveler's Wife: A Novel. Orlando: Harvest Book. 546 p. [in English].

25. Vygotsky L.S. (2011) The dynamics of the schoolchild's mental development in relation to teaching and learning. Journal of cognitive education and psychology. Vols. 10-2. P. 198-211 [in English].

Размещено на Allbest.ru