PhD (philology) Samarin A.V.

Voronesh State University (Stary Oskol branch)

CONCERNING DERIVATIVES OF THE CONCEPT “CROWD” AND THEIR COGNITIVE CLASSIFIERS

The ability to categorize and, hence, to classify and distribute the phenomena perceived as identical or similar in something, in one groupings, and also the ability to define whether some found again reality concerns to groupings established before, is shown at the person at the very early age. We shall notice, however, that it changes with the years and gets more perfect character with accumulation of experience, and, first of all, with mastering of language by a person.

In the paper the author offers a number of cognitive attributes which describe concepts-frames that are verbalized with terms - collective nouns multitude, populace, rout, hoi polloi and some other lexemes incorporated by common concept "crowd" in Russian and English languages.

In semantics of represented terms the general idea supposing the artificial organization (or self-organization of people) is incorporated within the framework of certain sets in connection with a generality of social status and, probably, purposes.

Before sorting out cognitive classifiers of the concept "crowd", we shall examine definitions of derivatives of the given concept from thesauruses of Russian and English languages:

Multitude - the common people; the ordinary people who have no power or influence, masses;

Rout - a noisy rabble;

Hoi polloi - ordinary people who are not very rich or well educated;

Riffraff - worthless people, people of a lower social class;

Ragtag - the common people, rabble; consisting of various types of people whose clothing, equipment, and skills are not very good;

Mob - a riotous or disorderly crowd of people, dangerous or difficult to;

Rabble - a noisy or violent crowd of people; people of a lower social class than you are [1].

It is possible to notice, that in the meanings of names of the foregoing sets the differential seme «the characteristic of people within the framework of certain set», namely "disorder", is on the foreground. In this connection, we can mark out such cognitive classifiers as:

1. Spontaneous self-organization of people in frameworks of some assemblage;

2. Self-organization of people with identical (as a rule, low) social status within the framework of some set;

3. Aggressive, revolting character of behaviour of objects belonged to some collection;

Other considered terms apart, there are some cases of obviously metaphorical, figurative using of names of groups that already exist. Figurative meanings of names of groups can also be assigned to certain classes of referents. For example, lexemes, verbalized in language such concepts-frames as drove, herd, pack, swarm, flock, designated assemblages of animals, can signify groups of people as well. However, these meanings are closely connected with initial ones, and there is figurativeness-analogy to certain animals that is frequently fixed with dictionaries [2, p. 60].

Herd - people moved as a group from one place to another - crowd conducted by somebody from a place on a place;

Flock - a large group of people - crowd of people [3].

It would be interesting to note, that in case of metaphorical carry some additional cognitive classifiers describing such concepts-frames as herd (flock) of people are brought to light:

4. The artificial organization of people within framework of certain assemblage;

5. The qualifier of "condition" which is represented by the seme “passive character of behaviour of members of certain assemblage”.

Let's illustrate the given statement with an example:

“...Предчувствуя это, оттого-то и грозил Филофей, оттого и избивал словесным бичом кроткое обреченное стадо.”

“... And it was precisely this foreknowledge that impelled Philothei to crack his verbal lash over the submissive, doomed flock. ” [4].

In conclusion it would be desirable to add, that the analysis of such assemblage of people as "crowd" does not allow to pick up a united, integrated cognitive classifier. Between different types of classifiers there are rather strict, precise borders. We shall notice, that practically identical use of the examined cognitive attributes in Russian and English languages points out big resemblance of Russian and English-speaking linguistic cultures.

References

1. Abbyy Lingvо Dictionary 12. - Microsoft Corporation, 2007.

2. Samarin A.V. Classifiers of assemblages of animals in the system of Russian language. Their use for development of children’s thinking. The Intercultural Communications / Materials of International Theoretical and Practical Conference. Omsk: publishing house OmSU, 2002.- pp. 59-62.

3. Brewer E. C. The Dictionary of Phrase and Fable. Galley Press, London, 1987. - 1324р.

4. Leonov L.M. The Sot. - M.: the Contemporary, 1974.