Cover Page


Nowadays anthropocentric approach is widely used in the study of national culture in the Russian and foreign linguistics. It proves the emergence of linguistic and cultural trends in modern science, in which there is an interest in the issues of conceptualization and linguistic world view. Linguistic world view is a fundamental object of many modern scientists’ research, which is a complex process, the study of which is dictated by the development of linguistics and its individual areas in particular linguoculturology. The concept as a carrier of cultural information of a particular nation and an integral component of the national conceptual sphere unites the whole range of conceptual concepts and scientific views. The concept is a conceptual formation containing individual judgments and generally recognized standard values, i.e. the possible conceptual content of the object study or a linguistic phenomenon. The article considers the main results of the comparative study of the concepts “war” and “peace” and their representation in the linguistic world view of the Russian, English and Japanese languages. The result of the study of these concepts is the modeling of their field organization in the form of verbal and graphical representations, i.e. the content of concepts in the form of their field structures. This modeling allows us to confirm that the field organization of concepts in the implementation of their comparative analysis reveals the relationship of language with the existing reality, as well as reveals the national and specific characteristics of the linguistic consciousness of the ethnic group. The respondents’ reactions to the concepts “war” and “peace” directly depend on their linguistic identity and the type of culture they belong to. The modeling of the field organization provides a complete picture of the national and specific nature of the concepts. It is the concept “war” rather than “peace” that has a higher level of frequency and expressiveness in the native speakers’ minds of all three analyzed languages, that is not surprising, since respondents regardless of their cultural differences constantly face the outside world phenomena and experience the same basic emotions.

About the authors

Elena A Golubenko

Federal State-Owned Budgetary Establishment “The 3rd Central Research Institute of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation”

Author for correspondence.
Krasnaya St., 85, Bronnitsy, Moscow region, Russia, 140170

Junior researcher


  1. Kubryakova, E.S. (1996). Short dictionary of cognitive terms. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo MGU publ. (In Russ.).
  2. Fillmore, C.J. (1976). Frame Semantics and the Nature of Language. Origins and Evolution of Language and Speech. New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
  3. Popova, Z.D. & Sternin, I.A. (2007). Cognitive linguistics. Moscow: AST: Vostok-Zapad publ. (In Russ.).
  4. Sternin, I.A. (2001). Research methodology of concept structure. Voronezh: Izdatel’stvo Voronezhskogo Universiteta publ. (In Russ.).
  5. Millon, Th. & Lerner, M.J. (2003). Developmental Psychology. In: Handbook of Psychology, 6, 616—628.
  6. Stepanov, Yu.S. (1997). Constants. Dictionary of the Russian culture. Research experience. Moscow: Yazyki russkoj kul’tury publ. (In Russ.).
  7. Luthra, S., Fox, N.P. & Blumstein, S.E. (2018). Speaker Information Affects False Recognition of Unstudied Lexical-Semantic Associates. In: Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 80 (4), 894—912.
  8. Vasil’ev, L.M. (2006). Theoretical problems of general linguistics, Slavic studies, Russian studies. Ufa: RIO BashGU publ. (In Russ.).
  9. Gak, V.G. (1999). Human in the language. In: Logical analysis of language. Human image in culture and language. Moscow: Indrik publ. (In Russ.).
  10. Sternin, I.A. (2007). Contrastive linguistics. The issues of theory and research methodology. Moscow: AST: Vostok-Zapad publ. (In Russ.).
  11. Shmelyov, D.N. (1973). The issue of semantic analysis of the vocabulary (by the example of the Russian language). Moscow: Librikom, LKI, Komkniga. (In Russ.).
  12. Dal', V.I. (1999). Explanatory dictionary of the living Great Russian language. Moscow: Nauka publ. (In Russ.).
  13. Dmitriev, D.V. (2003). Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. Moscow: Astrel': AST publ. (In Russ.).
  14. Kuznetsov, S.A. (2008). Big explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. St. Petersburg: Norint publ. (In Russ.).
  15. Ozhegov, S.I. & Shvedova, N.Yu. (1992). Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. Moscow: Az” publ. (In Russ.).
  16. Ushakov, D.N. (2000). Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. Moscow: Astrel', AST publ. (In Russ.).
  17. Cambridge Dictionary [Electronic resource]. URL: (accessed: 09.07.18)
  18. Longman Advanced American Dictionary [Electronic resource]. URL: (accessed: 10.07.2018).
  19. Macmillan English Dictionary [Electronic resource]. URL: (accessed: 10.07.18).
  20. Merriam-Webster Dictionary [Electronic resource]. URL: (accessed: 10.07.18).
  21. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary [Electronic resource]. URL: https://www.oxford (accessed: 10.07.18).
  22. 三省堂 Web Dictionary (Word-Wise Web Dictionary) [Electronic resource]. URL: (accessed: 11.07.18).
  23. デジタル大辞泉 (Japan knowledge) [Electronic resource]. URL: (accessed: 11.07.18).
  24. 大辞林 第三版 (Sanseido daijirin) [Electronic resource]. URL: (accessed: 11.07.18).
  25. Stepanov, Yu.S. (2007). Concepts. Thin film of civilization. Moscow: Languages of the Slavic cultures publ. (In Russ.).
  26. Inghilleri, M. (2012). Interpreting Justice: Ethics, Politics and Language (Routledge Advances in Translation and Interpreting Studies). Routledge: Taylor & Francis.
  27. Iokibe, K. (2017). Political Musings by the Waterside: Examining Linkage between Politics and Society. In: Social Science Japan, 37, 9—13.
  28. Dickson, P. (2003). War Slang: American Fighting Words & Phrases since the Civil War. D.C.: Brassey.
  29. Mitsugi, S. (2017). Incremental Comprehension of Japanese Passives: Evidence from the VisualWorld Paradigm. In: Applied Psycholinguistics, 38(2), 953—983.
  30. Sternin, I.A. & Rudakova, A.V. (2011). Psycholinguistic meaning and its description: theoretical problems. Saarbrücken: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publ. (In Russ.).
  31. Griffiths, T.L., Daniels, D., Austerweil, J.L. & Tenenbaum, J.B. (2018). Subjective Randomness as Statistical Inference. In: Cognitive Psychology, 103, 85—109.
  32. Popova, Z.D. & Sternin, I.A. (2002). Language and national consciousness. Issues of theory and methodology. Voronezh: Istoki publ. (In Russ.).
  33. Rákosi, C. (2017). Replication of Psycholinguistic Experiments and the Resolution of Inconsistencies. In: Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 46(5), 1249—1271.



Abstract - 564

PDF (Russian) - 376




Copyright (c) 2019 Golubenko E.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies