Атты халықаралық ғылыми-тәжірибелік конференцияның материалдары
жүктеу/скачать 1,89 Mb.
|
| Кілт сөздер: аксиология, лингвистика, құндылық, бағалау, пайымдау.
In the new era of the 21st century, science and civilization, oriented towards absolute truth, having made a turn towards spiritual values, set themselves the goal of relying on language and culture, which are strong keepers of the inner spirit of the people. Currently, science does not disregard the issue of language perception of the truth of the world, area and space. In addition, now it is possible to comprehend the picture of the world as a form of individual subjective opinion and human mental abilities through the mechanisms of an integral cognitive process. The process of transition of linguistics in recent periods to the anthropocentric paradigm opened the way to close inter-sectoral ties of humanitarian scientific research, based on the trinity of "man- world-language", "man-language-thinking", "man-language-culture" and "man-language -value". In connection with the acquisition of the country's independence and the development of international, political, economic, cultural ties, giving the Kazakh language the status of a state language, as well as expanding its social role, the problem of studying the significance of the picture of the world in the Kazakh-speaking society becomes urgent. The new scientific paradigm, which aims to characterize the manifestation in the language of worldview concepts that serve as the most important achievements of human civilization, has become the basis for the formation of branches of knowledge of an anthropocentric orientation. An axiological picture is a system of knowledge formed on the basis of basic concepts with a value basis, therefore, they represent an important component of socio-cultural significance. The relevance of this work defines the problem of cognition of the axiological image of the world with the help of the category of value concept. Also this article is devoted to the concept of evaluation of the English and Kazakh national character in comparison. In philosophical science, values are defined as “specifically social definitions of objects of the surrounding world that represent their positive or negative significance for a person and society”. Values ensure the integration of society and form the inner core of culture. A value can be a phenomenon of the external world (an object, an event, etc.) or a fact of thought (an idea, an image, a scientific concept). Value manifests itself as the desire of the subject to the object of his need. Values reflect needs – ideas about how a person wants to see the world for himself, norms and a view of how the world should be arranged and what qualities people should have. At present, we are experiencing a "crisis of the value system", which manifests itself "in the loss of former goals, existential meanings, and often in the change of the axiological sign". The main condition for the restoration of cultural identity is the re - creation of the spiritual values that make up the core of culture, and the reproduction of basic value orientations. Therefore, in our opinion, the study of moral and ethical values is of particular practical importance. A positive or negative moral and ethical value acts as an object of moral judgment, since in such a judgment something is approved or rejected from the point of view of existing moral norms. On the one hand, moral and ethical values determine the dignity of a person (or groups of people), characterize actions and individual personality traits. On the other hand, moral and ethical values can be understood as value representations about good and evil, related to the field of moral conscious. Values are an integral part of the picture of the human world, an extremely significant social phenomenon, as well as the basis for both unity and disunity of people and societies. It is thus natural that the problem of values is of increasing interest among linguists today. The axiological side of oral and written communication is becoming one of the most important factors in the study of various phenomena in linguistics. Values have, in recent decades, become the subject of modern lingua-axiological studies and are considered within the anthropocentric paradigm that has been established in linguistics as a linguistic category [A.Kozhakhmetova and oth. 225p]. At the end of the XX century, evaluation became the object of close attention of linguists. The interest of linguists in the problem of evaluativeness is reflected in numerous fundamental studies. Thanks to the numerous works of scientists (N. D. Arutyunova, E. M. Wolf, G. von Wright, V. V. Vinogradov, V. A. Zvegintsev, N. M. Razinkin, V. I. Shakhovsky, V. N. Teliya, T. I. Vendin, S. D. Pogorelov, Z. K. Temirgazin, R. A. Vafeev, L. K. Zhanalin, etc.), a new approach has emerged in linguistics that recognizes evaluation as an independent category of language. We will call the semantic category of evaluation, since this term has, first, a sufficient degree of abstractness, second, the necessary brevity and, therefore, convenient to use, and third, allows us to distinguish evaluation as a semantic category from logical and ontological interpretations. The logical and linguistic features of the evaluation category have attracted the attention of scientists in many areas of human communication since ancient times (Plato, Aristotle, B. Spinoza). Modern research in this category was continued by the works of T. Hobbes, J. Locke, J. Moore, G. von Wright, N. D. Arutyunova, M. M. Bakhtin, T. V. Boguslavsky, A. Vezhbitskaya, T. I. Venina, E. M. Wolf, A. A. Ivin, Yu. N. Karaulov, T. V. Markelova, Yu. G. Stepanov, V. N. Teliya, Z. K. Temirgazina, and others. The attention of scientists is focused not only on the general issues of the status of the evaluation category, its functioning in the language, but also on more specific issues: methods of expressing certain types of evaluation, belonging of language utterances with the meaning of evaluation by parts of speech, etc. The question of the relationship between evaluation and emotions is still relevant in the works of scientists: E. M. Galkina-Fedoruk, I. V. Arnold, I. A. Sternin, O. S. Akhmanova, R. A. Vafeev, L. G. Babenko, M. B. Amalbekova, A. A. Kiyasheva, S. A. Turbekova, etc. Studies of their relations are conducted both from the standpoint of emotions (their role and place in evaluative statements) and from the standpoint of evaluation (the structure and essence of the evaluative value of emotive vocabulary). It should be noted that among linguists there is no single point of view on the nature of their relationship. Thus, a number of researchers consider emotions and assessments as an indissoluble unity (N. A. Lukyanova, V. I. Shakhovsky, etc.). E.M.Wolf, on the contrary, considers the components "emotionality" and "evaluation" as a part and a whole. The question of the primacy of the emotional or rational factor in the assessment is crucial in determining subjectivity/objectivity in the theory of assessments. Current research focus mostly the universal and more narrow-subject definition of "national character" (S. M. Harutyunyan N. Dzhangildin, A. Inkeles, A. Kardiner, K. Kasyanov, etc.); the allocation of this phenomenon from the circle of related phenomena (mentality, stereotype, mentality, etc.) (A. Y. Gurevich, P. A. Dodonov, W. Lippmann, Pantin I. K., N. With. Galina, etc.); description of the matrices of the national the nature of the particular ethnic group (I. A. Ilyin, V. Z. Sikevich, K. Fox, M. Sasaki etc.). British national identity as a highly specialized research category is characterized by a hybrid character and a symbiotic coexistence of elements of cultural heritage brought to the British Isles from outside. Scientists have made repeated attempts of systematization and illustrations dominant elements of 'Englishness' (J. Barnes, John. O Driscoll, P., Langford, E. Miell, D. Milsted, K. Fox, K. Hewitt, M. V. Tsvetkova, etc.), however, until now it was not proposed simulation methods and peripheral components of the British national character through the prism of the products of the nation's life creation - in particular, its linguistic layer[Gorokhova A.M 470p.]. The value plan of a communicative personality is manifested in the norms of behavior fixed in the language. Norms of behavior generalize and regulate many specific situations of communication and therefore relate to particularly important knowledge recorded in the meanings of words and phraseological units. These norms are heterogeneous, and their linguistic study is of interest both in practical terms (for understanding foreign cultural values and teaching adequate behavior in the language). Norms of behavior have a prototypical character, i.e. we store in memory knowledge about typical attitudes, actions, expectations of responses and evaluative reactions in relation to certain situations. At the same time, we allow possible deviations from the behavioral norm, and such deviations always contain an additional characteristic of the participants in the communication. Finally, there are behavioral taboos, the violation of which causes a negative reaction of participants in communication and stops communication. For example, in an English-speaking environment, there are various ways to complete in particular, several typical speech cliches are presented for the informal end of communication. The specificity of English-language communication is, as you know, in the choice of regional behavior: what is acceptable to the British, may be unacceptable to the Americans, and vice versa. In the USA, you can often hear the phrase: "Have a nice (good) day!" At the same time, the British dictionary contains a note that such a phrase is appropriate primarily when communicating between the seller and the buyer: the seller wishes the buyer all the best, saying goodbye to him: «When you are leaving someone, the most normal thing to say is ‘Goodbye’, but there are more informal alternatives like ‘See you’, ‘Bye’ and, most informal of all, ‘Cheers’. In the USA, shop assistants often add ‘Have a nice day’, but this is not common in Britain» (OALED). Thus, we can conclude that this speech formula contains additional status-role information about the participants of communication for the British [ Karasik V.I. 22p]. In Kazakh languages there are some important evaluative notions as “obal and sauap” which means a figurative meaning of evaluation. They use these notions in order not to waste valuable things. For instance “Сүтті төкпе, обал болады”,(tr. Don’t spill your milk) “Нанды үзіп тастама, обал болады” (Don’t scatter the bread), and the notion “sauap” is used in the meaning of doing good things for others. “Балам, анау қарияның жүгін көтерісіп, батасын алшы сауабы тисін” (tr. Sonny, help that old man with a bag). This example shows a great appreciation of Kazakh people to older generation. Normative situations are reflected in the language and are presented in the most explicit form in proverbs, which in a concise form contain the most significant prescriptions and assessments of people's behavior. Of course, the proverb as a genre of verbal creativity is peculiar primarily to the peasant class and therefore in modern culture reflects the values of the entire population. It is no accident, in particular, that in English-speaking communication there is a tendency to avoid the proverb in communication, since the proverb contains an element of teaching and puts the addressee in the position of the guilty or not enough experienced people. A characteristic feature of proverbs is that the rules of behavior in them are expressed not directly, but indirectly. V. I. Karasik considers values from various рoints of view, including as an integral part of the discourse, representing values, along with other parameters, the fundamental characteristics of institutional discourse [4].Norms of behavior are actualized primarily when there is a choice between a particular behavioral strategy. The most important contrast between behavioral strategies is the contrast between ethical (moral) and utilitarian norms of behavior. In the first case, the interests of other people are emphasized, in the second case, the interests of the individual.[4, 28p] These interests are interrelated and to a certain extent are in harmonious unity, but a conflict of such interests is possible, which, repeating itself, finds a typical solution formulated in typical value judgments, for example: “Су ішетін құдығыңа түкірме” (tr. Don’t split into the well you may have to drink from it one day). The spiritual part of culture is all spheres of spiritual production: art, philosophy, science, norms, values, human aspirations, and emotional and sensory experiences. Any component of spiritual culture must be objectified, find its material expression. The concept of a linguistic picture of the world as an image of everything that exists, as an integral and multi-part world that represents the material and spiritual life of a person and everything that surrounds it. The linguistic picture of the world acquires epistemological value, since it can be considered as a database on the basis of which it is possible to draw conclusions about the features of the worldview. The analysis of the world picture in terms of cultural communities allows us to understand how they differ, and how they harmonize the space of world culture. Culture is seen as the result of mentality and is understood as a spiritual attitude of a person or group of people, without which the organization of society is impossible. The culture of humanity is a collection of ethnic cultures. The mentality reflects the internal organization and differentiation of the mentality. It affects the perception of the world and understanding: the same objects and phenomena can be perceived from different points of view. The peculiarities of the mentality are reflected in the paremiological fund, which is the transmitter and keeper of the information accumulated by humanity. The units of this fund are paremia (proverbs, sayings), phraseological units, wise sayings, slogans that function in the paremiological space. The paremiological space is an environment of functioning and education It is a fragment of the Kazakh and English language picture of the world and is a complex, multi- layered formation characterized by dynamic and open borders. Consideration of the issues of linguoaxiology, being a priority in determining the linguistic picture of the world and the nature of the national mentality and being, affects the optimization of the processes of intercultural communication and an increase in the level of its communicative function. жүктеу/скачать 1,89 Mb. Достарыңызбен бөлісу:
|