Borrowed vocabulary as a fragment of the Russian language picture of the world: linguoculturological description

Cover Page

Cite item

Abstract

The relevance of the study is determined by the need for further study of the modern Russian language picture of the world, including by considering borrowed lexical units that explicate the conceptual meanings in the minds of Russian speakers precepting their own national culture. Of particular scientific interest are the results of the associative experiment, which demonstrate the specifics of Russian-speaking informants’ interpretation of subject-conceptual, connotative, primarily axiological, components of the borrowed units meaning, in our case, Sinicisms. The purpose of the study is to identify and describe the universal and nationally determined components in the semantics of the associates obtained during the experiment, which mark a fragment of the Russian picture of the world associated with understanding Chinese culture. The materials included the works of scientists on the problem of lexical borrowings, data from lexicographic sources, as well as the results of a survey and an associative experiment in a group of Russian-speaking students studying at Tomsk State Pedagogical University. A comprehensive research methodology was used, including methods of theoretical, introspective and experimental analysis. The results of the experiment made it possible to draw a conclusion about the role, place and content of fragments of the worldview of Russian-speaking informants related to the idea of the history, culture and language of China and based on the reception of different thematic borrowed lexical units. The authors proved that, despite the influence of the native linguistic culture on interpreting Sinicisms by Russian language native speakers, they understand the core subject-conceptual components of the meaning of all stimulus words. This fact testifies to the presence of a general idea on the original Chinese culture, imprinted in the national language and in the minds of the informants. We revealed that the degree of success and completeness of interpreting the borrowings depends on a certain thematic category of the unit: the most diverse and numerous reactions were received to words denoting philosophical concepts, the socio-political vocabulary has the least limited range of reactions. In general, the results of the experiment demonstrated the positive value meanings conveying respect and interest to Chinese language and culture in the minds of the representatives of modern Russian linguistic culture. The prospects of the research involve further study of Russian linguistic culture involving borrowed words from different source languages, as well as expanding the audience of recipients depending on their status indicators.

About the authors

Lingxia Meng

Mudanjiang Pedagogical University

Email: mdjmlx@163.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2166-5971

Doctor of Philology, Professor, Deputy Director of the Institute of Oriental Languages

191 Wenhua St, Mudanjiang, 157011, People's Republic of China

Anna V. Kurjanovich

Tomsk State Pedagogical University; Jilin University of Foreign Studies

Author for correspondence.
Email: kurjanovich.anna@rambler.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3247-3975

Doctor of Philology, Professor, Honorary Professor, Jilin University of Foreign Studies; Head of the Department of Theory of Language and Methods of Teaching the Russian Language, Tomsk State Pedagogical University

60 Kievskaya St, Tomsk, 634061, Russian Federation; 3658 Jing Yue St, Changchun, 130117, People's Republic of China

Ran Cao

Jilin University of Foreign Studies

Email: inna.ran@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2302-4270

assistant

3658 Jing Yue St, Changchun, 130117, People's Republic of China

References

  1. Alefirenko, N.F. (2006). Cognitive-semiological aspects of linguoculturology. Issues of Cognitive Linguistics, (1), 36‒44. (In Russ.)
  2. Ansimova, O.K. (2015). Language ability: Theoretical foundations of learning. Nauka i Obrazovanie: Sovremennye Trendy, (2), 7‒29. (In Russ.)
  3. Bakhtin, M.M. (1979). To the methodology of the humanities. Aesthetics of Verbal Creativity. Moscow: Iskusstvo Publ. (In Russ.)
  4. Butakova, L.O. (2011). Dynamics of development of language ability and speech compe-tence of Russian speakers. Moscow: Flinta Publ. (In Russ.)
  5. Chernyavskaya, V.E. (2017). Methodological possibilities of discursive analysis in cor-pus linguistics. Tomsk State University Journal of Philology, (50), 135‒148. (In Russ.)
  6. Chubaeva, L.V. (2014). Sinisms through the prism of the language picture of the world. At the Crossroads of Philological Roads: Collection of Articles (рр. 250‒254). Vla-divostok: FEFU Publ. (In Russ.)
  7. Gusakova, Yu.O. (2010). Cross-cultural analysis of French borrowings (based on the Russian language). [Author’s abstr. cand. philol. diss.]. Belgorod. (In Russ.)
  8. Humboldt, V. (1985). Language and philosophy of culture. Moscow: Progress Publ. (In Russ.)
  9. Krasnykh, V.V. (2012). Culture, cultural memory and linguistic culture: their main functions and role in cultural identification. Vestnik TsMO MGU. Filologiya. Kul'turologiya. Pedagogika. Metodika, (3), 67‒74. (In Russ.)
  10. Krysin, L.P. (2004). Russian word, own and alien: Studies in the modern Russian lan-guage and sociolinguistics. Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskoi Kul'tury Publ. (In Russ.)
  11. Kuryanovich, A.V., & Li, Х. (2018). On the specifics of the associative perception of Sinicisms by native speakers of Russian and Chinese (based on experimental da-ta). Word, Statement, Text in Cognitive, Pragmatic and Cultural Aspects: Proceed-ings of IX International Scientific Conference, (1), 154‒158. Chelyabinsk: ChelSU Publ. (In Russ.)
  12. Li, S. (2019). Features of the adaptation of sinisms denoting cultural and everyday reali-ties in Russian. Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki, 161(5‒6), 89‒104. (In Russ.)
  13. Maslova, V.A. (2018). The main trends and principles of modern linguistics. RUDN Journal of Russian and Foreign Languages Research and Teaching, 16(2), 172‒190. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2264-2018-16-2-172-190
  14. Maslova, V.A. (2019). The role of the Russian language in the conceptualization of the world: Linguistic and cultural aspect. Russian Language Studies, 17(2), 184‒197. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22363/2618-8163-2019-17-2-184-197
  15. Murdoch, J.P. (2005). Common denominator of cultures. Culturology: Digest, (1), 202‒226. (In Russ.)
  16. Prokopenya, G.V. (2008). The genesis of the cross-cultural approach in the study of cul-tures. [Author’s abstr. cand. ped. diss.]. St. Petersburg. (In Russ.)
  17. Roerich, N.K. (1997). Culture and civilization. Moscow: Mezhdunarodnyi Tsentr Re-rikhov Publ. (In Russ.)
  18. Rozova, O.G., & Aleksandrova, E.A. (2010). On the issue of lexical borrowing as a lin-guocultural phenomenon. Word is Deed: Anniversary Collection of Scientific Pa-pers in Honor of Professor I.P. Lysakova, (1), 277‒281. St. Petersburg: Sudarynya Publ. (In Russ.)
  19. Sadokhin, A.P. (2008). Intercultural competence and competence in modern communi-cation (the experience of system analysis). Social Sciences and Contemporary World, (3), 156‒166. (In Russ.)
  20. Sapir, E. (2011). The status of linguistics as a science. Language, 5(4), 207‒214.
  21. Shi, S. (2007). “Honghuzi” and “Hongweibing”: The History of two Sinicisms in Rus-sian. Sovremennye Gumanitarnye Issledovaniya, (5), 153‒157. (In Russ.)
  22. Ter-Minasova, S.G. (2005). Language and intercultural communication. Moscow: Lo-monosov Moscow State University. (In Russ.)
  23. Van, S., & Kuryanovich, A.V. (2021). Russian youth jargon in the aspect of interpreta-tion by a secondary linguistic personality. Tomsk: Tomskii TsNTI Publ. (In Russ.)
  24. Vygotsky, L.S. (2017). Psychology of art. Moscow: RIPOL-klassik Publ. (In Russ.)
  25. Wang, X., Meng, L., Li, X., & Kuryanovich, A.V. (2022). Сross-cultural research as a methodological resource of modern linguodidactics. Education & Pedagogy Journal, (2), 98‒113.
  26. Wei, Yu., & Proshchenkova, N.V. (2017). Features of borrowings from Chinese in the Russian lexical system. Russia and China: History and Prospects for Cooperation: Proceedings of the VII International Scientific-Practical Conference (рр. 577‒580). Blagoveshchensk: BGPU Publ. (In Russ.)
  27. Wissler, C. (1960). Man and culture. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  28. Yan, Ts. (2013). Formation of linguoculturological competence of Chinese students on the basis of Russian vocabulary included in the Chinese language. (Candidate dis-sertation, St. Petersburg). (In Russ.)
  29. Yang, S. (2016). The concept of sinism “feng shui” in the minds of native speakers of the Russian language (based on psycholinguistic experiments). Proceedings of Southern Federal University. Philology, (4), 144‒152. (In Russ.)
  30. Zhu, Sh., & Tian, S. (2003). Russian words in Chinese. Russian Word in World Culture: Proceedings of X Congress of the International Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature. Russian Language and Russian Speech Today: Old ‒ New ‒ Borrowed (рр. 203‒206). St. Petersburg: Politekhnika Publ. (In Russ.)

Copyright (c) 2023 Meng L., Kurjanovich A.V., Cao R.

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

This website uses cookies

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

About Cookies