Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences / Comparative Constructions as a Mechanism for Secondary Interpretation of World Knowledge

Full text (.pdf)
Issue
Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences. 2022 15 (11)
Authors
Boldyrev, Nikolay N.; Blokhina, Helen D.
Contact information
Boldyrev, Nikolay N.: Center for Cognitive Studies Derzhavin Tambov State University Tambov, Russian Federation; ; ORCID: 0000-0001-6864-9859; Blokhina, Helen D.: Center for Cognitive Studies Derzhavin Tambov State University Tambov, Russian Federation; ORCID: 0000-0002-5761-5183
Keywords
comparison; comparative constructions; secondary language interpretation; cognitive and language mechanisms
Abstract

The article addresses the problem of comparison in language from the perspective of a cognitive approach, that helps to elucidate the essence of comparison, its conceptual basis and multicomponent structure, also taking into account the anthropocentric nature of language. The latter manifests in speaker’s interpretation of the world and his/her knowledge of the world that represents their own worldview. This interpretation can be of two basic types: primary or secondary. The object of primary language interpretation is the world itself and the changes taking place in it. Secondary language interpretation presents the results of rethinking knowledge about the world from new points of view and within different knowledge systems of a collective or individual level, including different evaluative systems and scales. One of the means of secondary interpretation of the world in language is comparison. The paper examines comparative constructions in Russian and French as a cognitive mechanism for secondary interpretation, as well as their functions in mental construction of the world and the formation of a knowledge system about the world. The results of analysis of the conceptual basis of comparison reveals the following types of similarities between mapped objects – physical, structural, associative, functional. These types prove typical of comparative mapping of objects and their concepts within one and the same or between different conceptual and thematic domains: HUMAN BEING, ARTIFACT, NATURE, ANIMAL WORLD

Pages
1713–1722
DOI
10.17516/1997-1370-0946
Paper at repository of SibFU
https://elib.sfu-kras.ru/handle/2311/148787

Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).