2019, Vol. 10, No. 4. - go to content...

Permanent address of this page - https://sfk-mn.ru/en/17flsk419.html

Метаданные этой статьи так же доступны на русском языке

Full article in PDF format (file size: 313.8 KB)

For citation:

Nagaeva K.E. [Concept «Republic» in Russian linguoculture] World of Science. Series: Sociology, Philology, Cultural Studies, 2019, Vol. 10, No. 4. Available at: https://sfk-mn.ru/PDF/17FLSK419.pdf (in Russian).

Concept «Republic» in Russian linguoculture

Nagaeva Ksenia Eduardovna
Moscow state linguistic university, Moscow, Russia
E-mail: mglu@list.ru

Abstract. The article analyses concept “Republic” in terms of its content, structure and importance in Russian linguoculture. The study is based on materials of explanatory and linguistic-cultural dictionaries and data of the National Corpus of Russian language and psycholinguistic experiment. The research applies methods of concept and cultural analysis as well as psycholinguistic experiment. The author singles out etymological element, historical and modern layers of concept. Each of the layers includes notional, figurative, evaluative and value components.

The research’s results are the following: Russian Federation’s formal name doesn’t contain the word republic, that’s why the name of concept “Republic” isn’t associated with this country. When the component republic is a part of countries’ name or of subjects of the Russian Federation, it is partly desemantised. The value component is also absent in the modern layer of the concept. The evaluative component is implicit, it is revealed only during informant survey. The historical layer of national concept generally contains information about the country-predecessor of Russian Federation, which had a specific form of government – Soviet republic. It also contains the information about republican period of Russia and about medieval republics in the country’s territory. Value component of the concept is implicitly expressed and evaluative component isn’t unequivocally marked. National and historical content is most fully represented in figurative component of the concept. Etymological element is not transparent for the majority of interviewed. Low frequency of occurrence and little productiveness of word and phraseological formation of the concept’s name confirm unimportance of the concept for Russian linguoculture.
The author concludes that the concept has national peculiarity only in its historical layer and possesses little importance for Russian linguoculture.

Keywords: concept; modern layer; historical layer; notional component: figurative component; evaluative component; value component; etymological element; concept’s name; concept’s representants

Download article in PDF format