Yarovikova, Yu., Far Eastern State University of Humanities

A LINGUOAESTHETIC COMPONENT OF EMOTIONS

Specialists of various scientific areas have always been focusing on emotions. Having deeply analyzed this phenomenon, philosophers used to define them as passion, affects, derived from pleasure / displeasure, strength / weakness, etc. (Aristotle, Descartes, Spinoza, Hume, Kant, Goethe, Nietzsche, etc.). Psychologists have still been trying to penetrate into specific nature of emotions, comprising such components as human needs, desires, attitudes, evaluation, etc. (Leontiev, Rubinstein, Keltner, Lerner, etc.). Linguists deal with a language aspect of emotions, i.e. possible ways of their manifestation on lexical, syntactical and other levels of language (Wierzbicka, Babenko, Shakhovsky, Lazaridi, Myagkova, Philimonova, etc.). Aestheticians hypothesize the idea that objects of art are able to arouse people’s aesthetic emotions (Borev).

Nowadays rather a booming tendency can be traced in modern linguistics. It deals with a linguoaesthetic way of interpretation, dated back to linguopoetics and hermeneutics. For instance, from a linguoaesthetic angle have already viewed: word-formation (Karpukhina), colloquial speech (Kharchenko), a piece of art, particularly Pushkin’s works (Danilenko), colour naming (Umetbayeva), etc. Objects for some linguistic researches have become: aesthetic semantics (Florya), aesthetic concepts (Stepanov), aesthetic evaluation (Arskaya), aesthetic symbolism (Snezhko), etc.

As far as emotions are concerned, besides their extralinguistic components, a linguoaesthetic one can also be distinguished.

According to V.P. Danilenko, linguoaesthetics focuses on the relation between form and content [Danilenko, 2010]. A great part of researches are those dedicated to the content. The article presented is no exception. Its data for study is Frankenstein by M. Shelley.

Being able to convey emotions, any piece of art possesses an aesthetic mode, consequently arousing readers’ aesthetic emotions of the exalted, tragic, comic, etc. (Tyupa, Rubinstein). Below is a brief analysis of examples illustrating aesthetic category of the tragic which prevails the novel under study, thus, determining its aesthetic mode.

The aesthetic category of the tragic is based upon people’s ordeals, broken fates and unresolved conflicts (Borev, Khalizev). Tragic character Victor Frankenstein dedicates his whole life to the struggle with the monster, the fatal creature. The opposition arouses mixed feelings: When I thought of what had passed, a real insanity possessed me; sometimes I was furious, and burnt with rage, sometimes low and despondent [Shelley, p.140]. The character’s anger in its highest degree of intensity is represented by two synonymic lexemes (fury, rage); despair – as well (low spirits, despondence). The mixture of these exceedingly negative emotions makes Frankenstein insane. It follows that the tragic of his fate is conveyed by cognitive metaphor emotions (anger, despair) – insanity.

It is obvious from the following example that Victor Frankenstein feels emotional pain, emotional stress, burning in his heart: Anguish and despair had penetrated into the core of my heart; I bore a hell within me which nothing could extinguish [Shelley, p.59].

Refer to word hell, a remarkable example which emphasizes its aesthetic semantics of the tragic. Firstly, it should be pointed out, that hell denotes state of misery, torment, or wickedness [Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary]. According to Macmillan Online Dictionary, hell is the place where bad people are sent to suffer for ever when they die. Therefore, Frankenstein has been suffering burning torment. Epithet burning is proper due to verb extinguish which means to make a fire stop burning [Macmillan Online Dictionary]. Another cognitive metaphor can be distinguished here: emotions (anguish, despair, misery) – hellfire.

It is also worth highlighting the convergence of cognitive metaphors in this very example. Besides the above mentioned metaphor, two more can be singled out. Taking the first syntagm <Anguish and despair had penetrated into the core of my heart>, one can distinguish the following cognitive metaphors. The first one is emotions (anguish, despair) – liquid. The ground for such a comparison is an ability of emotions to drain like water, or penetrate as far this microcontext is concerned. See its definition: get through something and get in [Macmillan Online Dictionary].

The second cognitive metaphor is emotions (anguish, despair) – substance in a container. Frankenstein’s anguish and despair are compared to a certain substance lying at the very bottom of the container, i.e. his heart. The stylistic convergence of these metaphors emphasizes the intensity of the character’s emotions, the tragic of his being.

The tragic of Victor Frankenstein’s existence is also traced in the given example: Little did I then expect the calamity that was in a few moments to overwhelm me, and extinguish in horror and despair all fear of ignominy or death [Shelley, p. 127]. Again, we deal with the character’s emotional sufferings – so many names of emotions that overflow and burn within Frankenstein.

Summing it all up, a linguoaesthetic component of emotions is a key factor determining an aesthetic mode of the novel analyzed. The aesthetic category of the tragic is presented in the text both implicitly (aesthetic semantics), and explicitly (names of negative emotions, cognitive metaphors).

References:

1. Danilenko V.P. A.S. Pushkin’s linguistic and culturological viewpoints // Вестник Иркутского государственного лингвистического университета. Сер. Филология. – Иркутск: Изд-во ИГЛУ, 2010. – № 4. – С. 58–63.

2. Macmillan Online Dictionary

3. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

4. Shelley M. Frankenstein – N.Y.: Dover Publications, Inc., 1994. – 166 р.