Филологические науки/3. Теоретические и методологические проблемы исследования языка

 

К.ф.н. Косицына И.Б.

Амурский гуманитарно-педагогический государственный университет, Россия

 

Emotional Lexis Classifications

 

The emotional sphere of a person is one of the most important components of his\her internal kernel which forms the language picture of the world, therefore emotions can be expressed with a language more or less adequately and by that are included into communication process.

The emotions-language relationships can be considered from two points of view: the first one is that language in broad sense is believed to be emotive; secondly, a language creates a reflection or a construct of that is usually understood as “emotions”, gives an affective meaning or defines any emotion by means of its conceptual, connotative or stylistic contents or association. Emotions can be manifested with the help of various linguistic means, the special and considerable significance in the reflection of emotions belonging to the lexical level of the language system.

There already exists some experience of studying emotional lexicon with preference to the study of separate emotive lexemes (linguistic properties of different parts of speech mostly), analyzing the role of metaphor in semantic representation of emotions, studying synonymic / antonymic relations, lexical-semantic groups and semantic/thematic fields of emotional lexicon.

It should be noted that the very term "emotional lexicon" is defined very differently. For many researchers (Shakhovsky; Shmelyov; Zvegintsev; Fomina; Vansyatskaya and others) it is typical to exclude the emotional states nominating units from the emotive sphere. They believe that the lexicon designating emotions, unlike emotional (emotive) lexicon, is not emotive as its contents forms the denotative word meaning. In semantics of such words there is no obvious expression of emotional relation and, therefore, they just transfer logical thought of it.

However, most of linguists (Adamchuk, Antropova, Asten, Ezhova, Kvasyuk, Klobukov, Omelichkina, Zhanalina, Tsoller, Krasavsky and others) stick to the opposite viewpoint. They assume that emotive signs (emotives) include all lexical units displaying emotions, i.e. it is offered to understand emotional lexicon as the set of all lexical means which usually designate different aspects of emotiveness as language representation of emotions. In their opinion, language has two main ways of transferring the content of emotional activity – interpretative when it is fixed as an object of knowledge in concepts, and expressive when language meaning expresses emotion directly and is equivalent to it. The emotiveness as semantic category, thus, can be realized in semes of various rank: denotative (category and differential), connotative (additional and constituting) and potential.

We believe that the nomination of emotional states falls within the scope of emotiveness and, therefore, the emotional lexicon includes the following groups of words: lexical units naming emotions and feelings of the person; lexical units describing various manifestations of emotions and feelings of a person (the words-estimates qualifying objects, subjects and phenomena; the words characterizing features of a subject behavior in a situation typical for this or that emotion, etc.);   the words gaining emotional coloring by means of word-formation; words which get emotional coloring within some context. Thus, any lexical unit of a language can be assumed as emotional as the emotional estimation is potentially put in any word.

Due to complexity and variety of the emotional lexicon it is very difficult to analyze and classify emotions. From the psychological point of view all emotional lexical units can be divided into affects, emotions, feelings etc., moreover the contents of these concepts don't coincide in the works of different authors.

We don't find it necessary to differentiate the concepts "emotion" and "feeling" because it is impossible to create indisputable definition and to allocate criteria of the concepts "emotion" and "feeling" according to which we could attach concrete words to this or that group. We use these terms as synonyms, though the preference is given to the term "emotion" which is understood as all mental experiences of a person.

The general feature typical for most approaches to studying of emotions is the allocation of a small number of basic emotions and derived emotions (or sentiments). Basic emotions are understood as the experiences conditioned by human biology [8]; derived emotions are more complex.

Some linguists divide emotions into "emotional states", "emotional relations", "emotional processes" and "emotional phenomena".

According to their nature emotional lexical units can be divided into universal (put in the person genetically and based on world perception) and not universal (cultural caused, socialized) [6, 33; 3, 348]. They are sometimes called the lowest and the highest feelings. Due to the intensity criterion it is possible to subdivide emotions into weak, moderate and strong.

The next classification is more complex and represents the division based on the general phases, forming the development of emotion and being to a greater or lesser extent reflected in a lexical meaning:

1) the emotion prime cause – physical perception or mental contemplation of something;

2) immediate cause of emotion – our assessment of this;

3) emotion proper (positive or negative feelings, state of mind, as the result of  our assessment of the situation);

4) the desire of change or extension of the situation caused by an assessment or an emotion;

5) the external manifestations of emotion having the following forms: a) uncontrollable physiological reactions of a body and b) controlled action and speech reactions of the subject [1, 368; 5, 55].

There are also the classifications based first and foremost on the estimation component. So G.H. von Wright offered [9] the classification based on types of objects and semantics of combinations to the word "good". It postulates following six "good forms": 1) instrumental; 2) technical, 3) medical (including such objects as eyes, heart, memory); 4) utilitarian (meaning suitability, usefulness for a definite purpose); 5) hedonistic, 6) good of the person.

The interaction of the subject and the object of estimation is the basis of the classification offered by N.D.Arutyunova [2]. It allocates three groups of values which include seven categories:

1) sensory estimates: touch and flavoring (hedonistic) estimates and psychological (intellectual and emotional) estimates;

2) sublimated or absolute estimates: the esthetic estimates based on synthesis of touch and psychology, and ethical estimates, meaning norms;

3) rationalistic estimates connected with practical activity of a person, including: utilitarian, standard, teleologic estimates.

The simplified variant of such classification is the division of emotions into ethical feelings connected with moral values, esthetic senses which arise at beauty experience, intellectual feelings as "experience of cognition of the truth" and practical feelings connected with the activity of a person [4, 7, etc.].

Trying to sum up the existing points of view N.A.Krasavsky [6] offers to single out the following groups of differential meaning components (semes): “emotional state”, “emotional reaction, mood, perception”, “feelings and emotions”, “the cause\ pointlessness of emotion”, “conditions of emotions emergence”, “form of manifestation of emotions”, “object of emotion”, “process of emotion, duration of emotion experiencing”, “illegibility, vagueness of experiences”, “qualitative properties of emotions”, “sensibleness of emotions”, “control ability\disability”, “intensity of emotions”, “positive\negative emotions”

Despite their variety, most of the approaches listed are rather functional, than semantic. We believe that the extensiveness, diversity and some instability of the classified material makes it impossible to create the universal classification reflecting all possible discrepancies of separate groups of lexical units. At the same time, the presented points of view can form the base for classification, appropriate and correct for the emotional lexical units used in a certain text to be analyzed.

 

Sources:

1.     Апресян Ю.Д. Интегральное описание языка и системная лексикография. – М.: Школа "Языки русской культуры", 1995.

2.     Арутюнова Н.Д. Аксиология в механизмах жизни и языка. // Проблемы структурной лингвистики, 1982. – М.: Наука, 1984. С. 5-23

3.     Вежбицкая А. Язык. Культура. Познание. - М.: Русские словари, 1996.

4.     Гридин В.Н. Семантика эмоционально-экспрессивных средств языка. // Психолингвистические проблемы семантики. – М.: Наука, 1983. С. 113-119

5.     Клобуков П.Е. Историко-семантическое исследование ЛСП «отрицательные эмоции» в нидерландском языке (на материале переводных библейских текстов). Дис…к.ф.н. – М., 1998.

6.     Красавский И.А. Эмоциональные концепты в немецкой и русской лингвокультурах. – Волгоград, 2001.

7.     Фабианова Н. Методическое основание сопоставительно-типологического исследования эквивалентности лексико-семантических групп (на материале глаголов положительных эмоций в русском, словацком и английском языках). Диск.ф.н. –М., 1981.

8.     Ungerer F. Emotions and Emotional Language in English and German news stories. // The Language of Emotions: Conceptualization, Expression and Theoretical Foundation. Ed. By Susanne Niemeier, Rene Dirver. – 1997. P. 307-328

9.     Wright G.H. von The Varieties of Goodness. – L., 1963.