<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE root>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Russian Journal of Linguistics</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">Russian Journal of Linguistics</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Russian Journal of Linguistics</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">2687-0088</issn><issn publication-format="electronic">2686-8024</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="en">Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba (RUDN University)</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">26001</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.22363/2687-0088-2021-25-1-125-146</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>Статьи</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="zh"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="article-type"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">Kinship terms as indicators of identity and social reality: A case study of Syrian Arabic and Hindi</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Термины родства как индикаторы идентичности и социальной реальности: на материале сирийского диалекта арабского языка и хинди</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Suryanarayan</surname><given-names>Neelakshi</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Сурьянараян</surname><given-names>Нилакши</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Professor of Russian Language and Literature at the University of Delhi, Department of Slavonic and Finno-Ugrian Studies. Her research interests include language, culture and cognition, intercultural communication, cross-cultural pragmatics, address forms in different cultural contexts.</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>профессор кафедры славянских и финно-угорских языков Делийского университета. Ее исследовательские интересы включают взаимодействие языка, культуры и сознания, межкультурную коммуникацию, кросс-культурную прагматику, а также формы обращения в разных культурных контекстах.</p></bio><email>nsuryanarayan@sfus.du.ac.in</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Khalil</surname><given-names>Amr</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Халиль</surname><given-names>Амр</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="en"><p>postgraduate student at Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. His research interests include language, culture and communication, intercultural communication, (im)politeness theory, identity and address forms.</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>аспирант Российского университета дружбы народов. Его исследовательские интересы включают взаимосвязь языка, культуры и коммуникации, межкультурную коммуникацию, теорию (не)вежливости, идентичность, формы обращения.</p></bio><email>1042185145@pfur.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Delhi University</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Делийский yниверситет</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><aff-alternatives id="aff2"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Российский университет дружбы народов (РУДН)</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2021-03-22" publication-format="electronic"><day>22</day><month>03</month><year>2021</year></pub-date><volume>25</volume><issue>1</issue><issue-title xml:lang="en">VOL 25, NO1 (2021)</issue-title><issue-title xml:lang="ru">ТОМ 25, №1 (2021)</issue-title><fpage>125</fpage><lpage>146</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2021-03-22"><day>22</day><month>03</month><year>2021</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement xml:lang="en">Copyright ©; 2021, Suryanarayan N., Khalil A.</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="ru">Copyright ©; 2021, Сурьянараян Н., Халиль А.</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="zh">Copyright ©; 2021, Suryanarayan N., Khalil A.</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2021</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Suryanarayan N., Khalil A.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Сурьянараян Н., Халиль А.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="zh">Suryanarayan N., Khalil A.</copyright-holder><ali:free_to_read xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/"/><license><ali:license_ref xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0</ali:license_ref></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://journals.rudn.ru/linguistics/article/view/26001">https://journals.rudn.ru/linguistics/article/view/26001</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="en"><p style="text-align: justify;">By displaying a certain fragment of reality in the linguistic consciousness of a person, socio-cognitive categories convey important information about the social structure of society, the lingua-cultural identity of its representatives and the values they share. This study focuses on kinship terms in the Syrian Arabic and Hindi languages. It is aimed at identifying similarity and the cultural specificity of kinship terms in two linguistic cultures and explaining the identified features through types of cultures and cultural values. The research is based on kinship terms that name consanguineal (blood) and affinal (non-blood) relatives in Arabic and Hindi. The material was collected through analysis of terms in dictionaries as well as anonymous questionnaires and observation. The collected material was systematized and analyzed using comparative, definitional, semantic and lingua-cultural methods. The results showed that both languages have a rich system of kinship terms, in which the line of kinship (paternal or maternal), the type of kinship (relatives by blood or through marriage), and age are recorded. They testify to the We-identity of the representatives of the cultures under consideration for whom family relations are of great value, and to the importance of determining the place of each member in society in the social system. The revealed features showed that age differences are more important in Indian society than in Syrian, although respect for elders is one of the most important values of both cultures. The results obtained once again confirm the importance of an interdisciplinary approach to the analysis of language, which in turn provides new data for other areas of humanities.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p style="text-align: justify;">Отображая определенный фрагмент действительности в языковом сознании человека, социокогнитивные категории несут в себе важную информацию о социальном устройстве общества, лингвокультурной идентичности его представителей и разделяемых ими ценностях. Данное исследование посвящено терминам родства в сирийском диалекте арабского языка и в языке хинди. Оно нацелено на выявление культурной специфики терминов родства в двух лингвокультурах и объяснение выявленных особенностей через типы культур и культурные ценности. Материалом исследования послужили термины, называющие кровных и некровных родственников в арабском языке и в языке хинди, собранные в ходе анализа словарей, анонимного анкетирования, а также включенного наблюдения. Собранный материал был систематизирован и проанализирован с привлечением сопоставительного, дефиниционного, семантического и лингвокультурологического методов. Результаты показали, что оба языка обладают богатой системой терминов родства, в которых фиксируются линия родства (отцовская или материнская), тип родства (родственники по крови или закону), а также возраст. Они свидетельствуют о Мы-идентичности представителей рассматриваемых культур, для которых семейные отношения являются большой ценностью, и о важности определения места каждого члена общества в социальной системе. Выявленные особенности показали, что возрастные различия имеют большее значение в индийском обществе, чем в сирийском, хотя уважение к старшим является одной из важнейших ценностей обеих культур. Полученные результаты в очередной раз подтверждают важность междисциплинарного подхода к анализу языка, что, в свою очередь, дает новые данные для других гуманитарных наук.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>socio-cognitive category</kwd><kwd>kinship terms</kwd><kwd>lingua-cultural identity</kwd><kwd>Syrian dialect of the Arabic language</kwd><kwd>Hindi language</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>социокогнитивная категория</kwd><kwd>термины родства</kwd><kwd>лингвокультурная идентичность</kwd><kwd>сирийский диалект арабского языка</kwd><kwd>язык хинди</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group/></article-meta></front><body></body><back><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><mixed-citation>Ahn, Hyejeong. 2017. Seoul uncle: Cultural conceptualisations behind the use of address terms in Korean. Cultural Linguistics. 411-431. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-4056-6_19</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><mixed-citation>Besemeres, Mary &amp; Anna Wierzbicka (eds.). 2007. Translating lives: Living with two languages and cultures. Univ. of Queensland Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><mixed-citation>Bogdanova, Ludmila. 2017. The reflection of evaluation and values in Russian language dictionaries. Russian Journal of Linguistics 21 (4). 729-748. DOI: 10.22363/2312-9182-2017-21-4-729-748</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><mixed-citation>Bromhead, Helen &amp; Zhengdao Ye (eds.). 2020. Meaning, Life and Culture: In Conversation with Anna Wierzbicka. Canberra: Australian National University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><mixed-citation>Ember, Carol R. &amp; Melvin Ember. 2011. Cultural Anthropology. 13th edn. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><mixed-citation>Gaby, Alice. 2017. Kinship semantics: Culture in the lexicon. In Farzad Sharifian (ed.), Advances in cultural linguistics, 173-188. Singapore: Springer.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><mixed-citation>Geng, Chunling. 2015. Comparison between Chinese address terms and English address Terms. Higher Education of Social Science 9. 1-4.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><mixed-citation>Gladkova, Anna &amp; Tatiana Larina. 2018a. Anna Wierzbicka, Words and The World. Russian Journal of Linguistics 22 (3). 499-520. DOI: 10.22363/2312-9182-2018-22-3-499-520</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><mixed-citation>Gladkova, Anna &amp; Tatiana Larina. 2018b. Anna Wierzbicka, language, culture and communication. Russian Journal of Linguistics 22 (4). 717-748. DOI: 10.22363/2312-9182-2018-22-4-717-748</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><mixed-citation>Godelier, Maurice. 2012. The metamorphoses of kinship. Verso Books.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><mixed-citation>Hall, Edward. 1976. Beyond culture. New York: Anchor.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><mixed-citation>Holmes, Janet. 2013. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics, 4th edn. Routledge.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><mixed-citation>Hofstede, Geert H. 1984. Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Beverly Hills CA: Sage Publications.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><mixed-citation>Hofstede, Geert H. 1991. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: McGraw-Hill Book Company (UK) Limited.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><mixed-citation>Hughson, Jo-anne. 2009. Diversity and Changing Values in Address: Spanish Address Pronoun Usage in an Intercultural Immigrant Context. Peterlang: Frankfurt am Mein.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B16"><label>16.</label><mixed-citation>Jones, Doug. 2010. Human kinship, from conceptual structure to grammar. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (5). 367-381. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X10000890</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B17"><label>17.</label><mixed-citation>Khalil, Amr &amp; Tatiana Larina. 2018. Arabic forms of address: Sociolinguistic overview. The European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences EpSBS, Vol. XXXIX - WUT 2018: Word, Utterance, Text: Cognitive, Pragmatic and Cultural Aspects. Future Academy Publ. 229-309. DOI: 10.15405/epsbs.2018.04.02.44</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B18"><label>18.</label><mixed-citation>Khalil, Amr, Tatiana Larina &amp; Neelakshi Suryanarayan. 2018. Sociocultural competence in understanding forms of address: Case study of kinship terms in different cultural contexts. EDULEARN18 Proceedings. 10th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies. Palma de Mallorca. 3038-3045. DOI: 10.21125/edulearn.2018.0799</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B19"><label>19.</label><mixed-citation>Kronenfeld, David. 2009. Fanti Kinship and the Analysis of Kinship Terminologies. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B20"><label>20.</label><mixed-citation>Larina, Tatiana &amp; Vladimir Ozyumenko. 2016. Ethnic identity in language and communication. Cuadernos de Rusística Española 12. 57-68.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B21"><label>21.</label><mixed-citation>Larina, Tatiana, Vladimir Ozyumenko &amp; Svetlana Kurteš. 2017. I-identity vs we-identity in language and discourse: Anglo-Slavonic perspectives. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 13 (1). 195-215.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B22"><label>22.</label><mixed-citation>Larina, Tatiana &amp; Neelakshi Suryanarayan. 2013. Madam or aunty ji: Address forms in British and Indian English as a reflection of culture and cognition. In Monika Reif, Justina A. Robinson &amp; Martin Putz (eds.), Variation in Language and Language Use, 190-217. Frankfurt am Mein: Peter Lang.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B23"><label>23.</label><mixed-citation>Larina, Tatiana. 2015. Culture-specific communicative styles as a framework for interpreting linguistic and cultural idiosyncrasies. International Review of Pragmatics 7 (5). Special issue: Communicative Styles and Genres. 195-215.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B24"><label>24.</label><mixed-citation>Larina, Tatiana, Neelakshi Suryanarayan &amp; Julia Yuryeva. 2019. Socio-cultural context, address forms and communicative styles: A case study of British and Indian Englishes. Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 2. Yazykoznanie 18 (3). 39-51.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B25"><label>25.</label><mixed-citation>Leech, Geoffrey &amp; Tatiana Larina. 2014. Politeness: West and East. Russian Journal of Linguistics (4). 9-34.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B26"><label>26.</label><mixed-citation>Lewis, Richard D. 2019. The cultural imperative: Global trends in the 21st century. Training, Language and Culture 3 (3). 8-20. DOI: 10.29366/2019tlc.3.3.1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B27"><label>27.</label><mixed-citation>Malone, Martin. 2004. Structure and Affect: The Influence of Social Structure on Affective Meaning in American Kinship. Social Psychology Quarterly 67. 203-216.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B28"><label>28.</label><mixed-citation>Mehrotra, Raja R. 1985. Sociolinguistics in Hindi context. New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing Company. 39-79.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B29"><label>29.</label><mixed-citation>Passmore, Sam &amp; Fiona M. Jordan. 2020. No universals in the cultural evolution of kinship terminology. Evolutionary Human Sciences 2. 1-23. DOI: 10.1017/ehs.2020.41</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B30"><label>30.</label><mixed-citation>Rácz, Peter, Sam Passmore &amp; Fonia M. Jordan. 2020. Social practice and shared history, not social scale, structure cross-cultural complexity in kinship systems. Topics in Cognitive Science 12 (2). 744-765. DOI: 10.1111/tops.12430</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B31"><label>31.</label><mixed-citation>Sharifian, Farzad. 2017. Cultural Linguistics: Cultural Conceptualizations and Language. John Benjamins Publishing Company.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B32"><label>32.</label><mixed-citation>Smakman, Dick. 2019. Cultural bias and Sociolinguistics. Russian Journal of Linguistics 23 (1). 9-22. DOI: 10.22363/2312-9182-2019-23-1-9-22</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B33"><label>33.</label><mixed-citation>Stone, Linda. 2014. Kinship and Gender. 4th edn. Westview Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B34"><label>34.</label><mixed-citation>Suryanarayan, Neelakshi &amp; Larina Tatiana. 2012. English and Hindi address forms in a bilingual context. Cognitive Psycholinguistics: Bilingualism, Cognition and Communication: 35-th International LAUD Symposium. LAUD Linguistic Agency, University of Duisburg - Essen, Germany. 199-220.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B35"><label>35.</label><mixed-citation>Trask, Robert Lawrence. 2007. Language and linguistics: The key concepts. Taylor &amp; Francis.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B36"><label>36.</label><mixed-citation>Triandis, Harry C. &amp; Michele J. Gelfand. 2012. A theory of individualism and collectivism. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski &amp; E. T. Higgins (eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology, 498-520. Sage Publications Ltd. DOI: 10.4135/9781446249222.n51</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B37"><label>37.</label><mixed-citation>Wierzbicka, Anna. 1992. Semantics, culture, and cognition: Universal human concepts in culture-specific configurations. Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B38"><label>38.</label><mixed-citation>Wierzbicka, Anna. 2010. Lexical universals of kinship and social cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33. 403-404. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X10001433</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B39"><label>39.</label><mixed-citation>Wierzbicka, Anna. 2013. Kinship and social cognition in Australian languages: Kayardild and Pitjantjatjara. Australian Journal of Linguistics 33. 302-321. DOI: 10.1080/07268602.2013. 846458</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B40"><label>40.</label><mixed-citation>Wierzbicka, Anna. 2016. Back to “Mother” and “Father”: Overcoming the Eurocentrism of kinship studies through eight lexical universals. Current Anthropology 57. 408-429. DOI: 10.1086/687360</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B41"><label>41.</label><mixed-citation>Yoon, Kyung-Joo. 2007. My experience of living in a different culture: The life of a Korean migrant in Australia. In Besemeres, Mary &amp; Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Translating lives: Living with two languages and cultures, 114-127. Univ. of Queensland Press.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
