Who is the hero of a literary work? Literary work character
Language arises, develops and exists as social phenomenon. Its main purpose is to serve the needs of human society and, above all, to ensure communication between members of a certain social group. The concept of society is one of the most difficult to define. Society- this is not just a set of human individuals, but a system of diverse relationships between people belonging to one or another social, professional, gender and age, ethnic, ethnographic, religious groups, where each individual occupies his own specific place and because of this acts as a bearer of a certain social status, social functions and roles. An individual as a member of society can be identified on the basis of large quantity relationships that connect him with other individuals. The peculiarities of an individual’s linguistic behavior and his behavior in general are largely determined by social factors. The question of the connection between language and society still remains controversial in science. However, the most widespread point of view is that The connection between language and society is two-way. Language as a social phenomenon takes its own special place among others social phenomena and has its own specific features. What language has in common with other social phenomena is that language is necessary condition existence and development of human society and that, being an element of spiritual culture, language, like all other social phenomena, is unthinkable in isolation from materiality. So, language acts as universal remedy communication of the people. It preserves the unity of the people in the historical change of generations and social formations, despite social barriers, thereby uniting the people in time, in geographical and social space.. Language is capable of reflecting changes in the life of society in all its spheres, which significantly distinguishes it from all other social phenomena. Language cannot be indifferent to the fundamentally social divisions that arise within the society served by a given language. “Where separate classes and groups are distinguished in the structure of society,” writes R. Shor in this regard, “serving various production purposes, the language of this society breaks down into corresponding social dialects. Wherever there is a division of labor (and such a division is observed everywhere, coinciding among the peoples of primitive culture with the differentiation of the sexes, from where the emergence of special “ female languages"), each branch of production is forced to create its own special stock of “technical terms” - names of tools and work processes related to its role in production and incomprehensible to members of another production group." detailed characteristics language as a social phenomenon and identifying its specificity in this regard, it is necessary to consider language in the following aspects: 1) the specificity of language service to society, 2) the dependence of language development on the development and state of society, 3) the role of society in the creation and formation of language. Language cannot be indifferent to the fundamentally social divisions that arise within the society served by a given language.
Linguistic phenomena generated by social differentiation of society are divided into the following three groups: 1 social and special use of languages;
2.creation of special “languages”; 3. social and professional differentiation of the national language. Don't underestimate the influence general culture on the development and functioning of language. The development of the productive forces of society, technology, science and general culture is usually associated with the emergence of a large number of new concepts requiring linguistic expression. The influx of new terminology is at the same time accompanied by the disappearance or pushing to the periphery of some terms that no longer reflect modern level development of sciences.
It has long been known that language is far from socially uniform. Linguistic research, taking into account the dependence of linguistic phenomena on social phenomena, began to be carried out with greater or less intensity already at the beginning this century in France, Russia, Czech Republic. In 1952 American sociologist G. Curry introduced into scientific circulation the term "sociolinguistics".“Since language is possible only in human society, - wrote I. A . Baudouin de Courtenay, - then, except mental side, we must always note the social side in him. Linguistics should be based not only on individual psychology, but also on sociology.” Such outstanding scientists of the first half of the 20th century, like I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay, E. D. Polivanov, L. P. Yakubinsky, V. M. Zhirmunsky, B. A. Larin, A. M. Selishchev, G. O . Vinokur in Russia, F. Bruno, A. Meillet, P. Lafargue, M. Cohen in France, C. Bally and A. Seschee in Switzerland, J. Vandries in Belgium, B. Havranek, A. Mathesius in Czechoslovakia and others have a number of ideas without which modern sociolinguistics could not exist. This, for example, is the idea that all means of language are distributed among spheres of communication, and the division of communication into spheres has a significant impact social conditioning(S. Bally); One of the founders of modern sociolinguistics
American explorer William Labov defines sociolinguistics as the science that studies “language in its social context.” If we decipher this definition, we must say that the attention of sociolinguists is drawn not to the language itself, not to its internal structure, but to how the people who make up this or that society use the language. In this case, all factors that can influence the use of language are taken into account - from various characteristics the speakers themselves (their age, gender, level of education and culture, type of profession, etc.) to the characteristics of a specific speech act. In contrast to generative linguistics, presented, for example, in the works of N. Chomsky , sociolinguistics deals not with an ideal native speaker who produces only correct statements in a given language, but with real people who in their speech can violate norms, make mistakes, mix different language styles and so on. It is important to understand what explains all such features of the actual use of language. So, the object of sociolinguistics is language in its functioning
. And since language functions in a society that has a certain social structure, insofar as one can say about sociolinguistics as a science that studies language in a social context.
Sociolinguistics studies various influences social environment on the language and speech behavior of people.
General linguistics analyzes the linguistic sign itself: its sound and written form, its meaning, compatibility with other signs, its changes over time. Sociolinguistics focuses on how people use a linguistic sign - all the same or differently, depending on their age, gender, social status, level and nature of education, on the level of general culture.
Let's take for example the word production. Describing it from the point of view of general linguistics, the following must be indicated: noun female, I declension, inanimate, not used in the plural form, three syllables, with emphasis on the second syllable in all case forms, denotes action on a verb mine (coal mining) or the result of an action (Production amounted to one thousand tons or, in another meaning: The hunters returned with rich booty).Sociolinguist will also note the following properties of this noun: in the language of miners it has stress on the first syllable: production and is used both in singular and in plural: several loots. People of the same profession or the same narrow social circle often form rather closed groups that develop their own language. In the old days, the jargon of the ofeni was known - itinerant traders, who, with their incomprehensible manner of speech to the uninitiated, seemed to fence themselves off from the rest of the world, keeping the secrets of their trade secret. Nowadays, the language of programmers and all those who professionally deal with computers has also turned into a kind of jargon: they call a monitor an eye, a disk - pancakes, a user - a user, etc. Every language has various shapes addressing the interlocutor. There are two main forms in the Russian language: “ty” and “you”. An unfamiliar or unfamiliar adult should be addressed as “you” (the same applies to older people, even acquaintances), and addressing them with “you” is a sign of a closer, cordial relationship. Studying social conditions, influencing the choice of forms of personal address (and, in addition, greetings, apologies, requests, farewells, etc.) is also an area of interest in sociolinguistics. Sociolinguists also set themselves the following task: to regulate the development and functioning of language (languages), without relying entirely on the spontaneous flow of linguistic life.
Linguistics
(Aglyamova)
Noting the uniqueness of language as a social phenomenon, we can say that language is not similar to anything what other science about society? Language differs from all social phenomena in a number of significant ways, such as:
a) a necessary condition for the existence of society throughout the history of mankind is language. The existence of any social phenomenon temporally limited: it is not originally in human society and is not eternal. In contrast to non-primary and/or transitory phenomena public life, language is primordial and exists as long as society exists;
b) a necessary condition for material and spiritual existence in all spheres of social space is the presence of language. Being the most important and basic means of communication, language is inseparable from any manifestations of human social existence;
c) language is dependent and independent of society. The globality of language, its universality, its inclusion in all forms of social existence and social consciousness give rise to its supra-group character. However, this does not mean that he is non-social;
d) language is a phenomenon of the spiritual culture of humanity, one of the forms of social consciousness (along with ordinary consciousness, morality and law, religious consciousness and art, ideology, politics, science). It is a means of communication, a semantic shell of social consciousness. Through language it is carried out specifically human form transfer of social experience ( cultural norms and traditions, natural science and technological knowledge);
e) language development regardless of social history society, although it is conditioned and directed precisely by social history. The connection between the history of language and the history of society is obvious: there are features of language and linguistic situations that correspond to certain stages of ethnic and social history. Thus, we can talk about the uniqueness of languages or linguistic situations in primitive societies, in the Middle Ages, in modern times. Language preserves the unity of the people in the historical change of generations and social formations, despite social barriers, uniting the people in time, in geographical and social space;
f) the role and position of language in human society is the source of its duality (stability and mobility, statics and dynamics). Adapting to the new needs of society, language changes. On the other hand, all changes must be socially motivated and not violate mutual understanding.
The essence of language, its nature, purpose and social predilection the purpose of the manifestation of vegofunctions. Depending on the background of which external factor the nature of language is considered, the functions it performs are also distinguished. We can talk about functions such as:
Communicative (function of a means of communication), carried out in acts of communication between people, consisting in the transmission and receipt of messages in the form of linguistic / verbal statements, in the exchange of information between people - communicants as participants in acts of linguistic communication. On the communicative purpose of language in in general terms They guessed, of course, even in ancient times. In particular, the ancient Greek philosopher Plato (c. 428-348 BC), describing the extreme general model speech act “someone tells someone something by means of language” places language in it, while pointing out its role as a means in transmitting information. The very need for communication in society was explained in general view only in the 19th century, and was explained in detail in the late 80s of the 20th century. Then it was believed that the urgent need for communication was historically caused by two circumstances: a) rather complex labor activity(Ludwig Noiret “The Origin of Language” - 1877) and b) the phenomenon of apprenticeship, which involves the transfer of experience and knowledge from one being to another. The need for communication is thus considered as a factor that brought to life its technical solution - language. A thorough study of language as a means of communication subsequently showed that, in principle, language can and does satisfy a wide variety of communication goals determined by cultural and historical factors. Thus, the communicative function of language has an extensive system in which it realizes its needs.
Expressive, consisting in the expression of thoughts (according to V. Avrorin). Sometimes it is called cognitive, educational, epistemological, which consists in the processing and storage of knowledge in the memory of the individual and society, in the formation of a picture of the world. This function is revealed as a conceptual, or thought-formative function. This means that the language in a certain way associated with human consciousness and thinking. The basic units of consciousness and thinking are ideas, concepts, judgments and inferences. The cognitive function is directly related to such a category of consciousness as a concept, and indirectly, implicitly implies its correlation with other forms of mental operations. The largest linguist and thinker of the first half of the 19th century. Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767-1835) called language “the formative organ of thought.” Therefore, in addition to the term “cognitive function,” there is also another, namely, “thought-formative function.” Nevertheless, there is complete certainty in the definition of the cognitive function of language, which considers language as an instrument of cognition, as a means of mastering knowledge and socio-historical experience, and as a way of expressing the activity of consciousness. This function of language is clearly and directly related to research, the search for truth.
Constructive, which consists in the formation of thoughts. In the most general form, the constructive function of language can be imagined as a thought-forming function: linguistic units, linguistic categories, as well as the types of operations with them, “provided for” by the language system, are the matter and the form in which human thought itself flows. In order for an elementary thought to take place about some fragment of reality, we must first segment this reality into at least two “parts”: what will serve as the subject of our thought, and what we will think about this object (and then report) . In this case, the segmentation of reality is carried out in parallel with the process of naming, naming, nominating it.
Accumulative, which consists in a person’s reflection of the surrounding world, which occurs through thinking, when information is formed, generated and stored. The entire store of human knowledge, as a rule, is recorded, stored and distributed in written and book forms: scientific articles, monographs, dissertations, encyclopedias, reference books, as well as educational literature. The ability of language to serve as a means of information is presented as its accumulative function - the function of accumulating and storing information. Without this function of language, humanity would always have to start from scratch in everything, cognitive activity humanity would not be so rapid, since comprehension of the world presupposes mandatory reliance on what has already been discovered, already known and tested. Without the accumulative function of language, it would be impossible to accumulate, store, and then transmit socially important information: humanity would not have and would not know its history. Without the cumulative function of language, the formation and development of civilizations would not have occurred. LES adds emotional and metalinguistic functions to the two basic functions of language - communicative and cognitive (expressive - V.Kh.), which are attributed by many, like the others discussed below, to the secondary functions of language.
Emotional or emotive (expressive) function. Linguistic means (morphological, lexical and intonation) can and are the form in which a variety of human emotional states are expressed - joy, delight, anger, surprise, annoyance, disappointment, fear, irritation, etc. Thus, in many languages, a special class of words has developed - the class of interjections - specializing in the expression of emotions - expressions of regret, disappointment, fatigue, surprise, doubt, mistrust, as well as words with emotionally expressive connotations. It should be noted that the expression of emotions in language is historically and ethnically determined. The culture itself and the “scenarios” of verbal experiences of emotions in different nations are different (as Polish researcher Anna Wierzbicka points out in one of her studies). That's why the arsenal linguistic means, intended to express feelings, varies among different peoples both in its volume and in its quality. Certain ethnic groups experience certain emotions in verbally restrained forms (Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, Scandinavians), others - in more “uninhibited” forms (Americans, Russians, Spaniards, Italians). For example, among Russians there is a hypertrophy of swearing as a means of expressing emotions - and not even always negative ones. Such a “tradition”, naturally, cannot decorate speech and language. This problem is especially acute these days. It is no coincidence that they write about the pejorative dominant of Russian emotionality as a serious sociolinguistic problem. There are actually lexical means, focused on the representation of emotions in speech. For example, pejorative or abusive language is one of the ways of expressing negative emotions; Beneficial, or complimentary-enthusiastic vocabulary conveys a wide range of positive experiences of a person. The most powerful remedy explications emotional states intonation stands out. Studies have shown that phonoprosodic (intonation-accentological) patterns of a particular language allow a person even in early childhood recognize the emotive type of speech addressed to him. The emotive function of language (which is partly “mixed” with the function of influence) realizes itself in such speech genres as scolding, cursing, reproach, admiration, praise, verbal thanks, and mimicking.
Metalinguistic function (explanatory), which is also considered secondary from communicative function, has as its main content a speech commentary of speech - an explanation, interpretation, description of something in the language itself or in the extra-linguistic world by means of the language itself. A metalanguage is a language in which some other language is described, in this case called an objective language or an object language. So, if the grammar in English is written in Russian, then the language-object in such a description will be English, and the metalanguage will be Russian. Of course, the object language and the metalanguage can coincide (for example, English grammar in English). Apparently, languages can differ in the nature and variety of their metalinguistic means. The ability to think and speak about language using its own lexical and grammatical means (i.e., the reflectivity of language) is one of the characteristics of language development that distinguishes the language of people from the language of animals. In ontogeny modern man facts of metalinguistic reflection are possible in the third or fourth year of life and are common starting from the fifth or sixth. This attention to language is manifested in the comparison of words, correction of someone else’s and one’s speech, in language games, in commenting on the speech. The use of language in a metalinguistic function is usually associated with some difficulties in verbal communication - for example, when talking with a child, a foreigner who is not fully proficient in a given language or style. Hearing an unfamiliar word modem, a person may ask: What does modem mean? Let's say his interlocutor answers: This is a computer attachment that can send messages. IN in this case the question about the word modem and the explanation in response are specific manifestations of the metalinguistic function of language. As a means of interpretation, language manifests itself in such speech genres as dictionary definitions, commentary on any document or work fiction. This function of language is also demonstrated literary criticism and the genre of explanation of new material in educational communications. There are special programs in the media that interpret, explain and clarify certain political steps, decisions, declarations, statements, etc. a wide variety of political figures, parties, organizations or governments. Such programs are called analytical or information-analytical.
The epistemic function of language is one of the varieties of the basic expressive (cognitive) function. When they say that language performs an epistemic function, then, first of all, they mean that the content of its units, categories and intralingual divisions has a reflective nature, since thinking, i.e. A person’s reflection of the world around him is carried out mainly in linguistic form. Thus, the verbal units of language in their content reflect all aspects of the objective world in which a person lives, as well as the most diverse aspects of his social and internal, spiritual
existence: - this is also the space of its habitat (cf.: continents, continents, countries, plains, mountains, rivers, lakes, seas, oceans, cities, villages, countryside, auls, palaces, houses, huts, huts, plagues, yurts, huts, apartments, rooms, kitchens, etc.); - these are time slices human existence(cf.: antiquity, the Middle Ages, Renaissance, modernity, yesterday, today, tomorrow, past, future, present, etc.), each of which entails a number of words that have a pstoric-temporal marking (cf.: turmoil, boyars, oprichnina; or: tax in kind, surplus appropriation, collectivization, electrification, industrialization, etc.); - these include social class, caste, ethnic, religious, etc. divisions in society (cf.: elite - plebs; presidents, governments-people, citizens, subjects; boyars - nobles - philistines; Christians-Muslims, etc.; Africans - Europeans - Asian-Americans, etc.); - these are also forms of organization of society (tyranny, despotism, monarchy, democracy, anarchy, theocracy, etc.); ― this is the world of all living things in which man exists (all nominations related to flora and fauna); - this is the world material life and the spiritual existence of a person (cf.: the names of food, drink, household items; the name of the spiritual values and passions by which a person lives; the name of his blood and spiritual ties with other members of the community, etc.). Grammatical categories also have a reflective nature: they reflect the relationships that exist in objective world . For example, the grammatical category of number reflects the relations of singularity and plurality in the world of things (cf.: table - tables, tree - trees, lake - lakes, etc.), the category of degrees of comparison reflects the relations of graduality that exist in the world of signs (cf. : sweet - sweeter - the sweetest), etc. So, we can be convinced that the content of linguistic signs, categories and various intralingual divisions is of a reflective nature. In other words, the language system takes on the function of reflection. However, this is not a direct, dispassionate reflection of reality. All linguistic reflections are “scrolled” in a person’s mind from his point of view. And when they want to say that language does not simply reflect the world in its content, a certain point of view on the world, they say that language performs an epistemic function. The reflection itself, “attached” to one or another linguistic form, is formed from one point of view or another. “Viewing angle” in linguistics is designated by the term episteme. The world interpreted by a person is reflected by him as already comprehended and interpreted. He models the outside world, reflecting it using the means of his psyche. The fact that a person reflects the world he has interpreted is explained by the fact that linguistic reflections are anthropocentric: a person masters and comprehends this world from a human point of view and interprets it from the point of view of his time, his culture, his knowledge. In ontogenesis, i.e. individual development, a person acquires knowledge about the world, about external reality - he reflects external reality to a very large extent not directly, but “through” language. Let's give a textbook example: the emission and absorption spectrum of light waves, which determines color, is, of course, the same everywhere, and the physiological abilities of representatives of different ethnic groups for color perception do not differ; however, it is known that some peoples have, for example, three colors, while others have seven, etc. It is natural to ask the question: why, say, every African Sango (the Ubangi group of languages of the Niger-Congo family) learns to distinguish exactly four primary colors, no more and no less? Obviously, because in his language there are names for these four colors. Here, therefore, language acts as a ready-made tool for one or another structuring of reality when it is reflected by man. Thus, when the question arises why in a given language there are so many names of colors, types of snow, etc. , then the answer to it is that the Russians, French, Indians, Nenets, etc. for their practical activities During the previous centuries (perhaps millennia), roughly speaking, it was “necessary” to distinguish precisely the varieties of the corresponding objects, which was reflected in the language. Another question is: why does each member of a linguistic community distinguish so many colors? Here the answer is that this or that way of perceiving external reality is to a certain extent “imposed” on a specific individual by his language, which in this regard is nothing more than crystallized social experience of a given people. From this point of view, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, according to which a person’s thinking is determined by the language he speaks and cannot go beyond this language, is quite reasonable. One more example. For example, such an animal as a horse was not known to the aborigines of Melanesia, and when the Europeans brought the horse there, they saw it and called it a “ridable pig.” In different ethnic groups, the understanding of the same pig turns out to be different. For a Russian, it is an animal kept for meat, but for a Tatar, Turk, or Uzbek, it is an unclean animal and its meat cannot be eaten. The above, of course, does not mean in any way that a person is generally incapable of cognizing something for which there is no designation in his language, which is what B. Whorf was inclined to believe. The entire experience of the development of various peoples and their languages shows that when the production and cognitive evolution of society creates the need to introduce a new concept, the language never prevents this - to denote a new concept, either an already existing word is used with a certain change in semantics, or a new one is formed according to the laws of this language. Without this, in particular, it would be impossible to imagine the development of science. This is what happened with the word “horse” in the neo-Melanesian Tok Pisin language: it was borrowed from English and entered the Tok Pisin dictionary as “hos” (English horse).
Contact-making or phatic function (<лат. fateri «выказывать»), заключающаяся в установлении и поддержании коммуникативного взаимодействия. Иногда общение как бы бесцельно: коммуникантам не важна та информация, которую они сообщают друг другу, они не стремятся выразить свои эмоции или воздействовать друг на друга. Пока им важен только контакт, который подготовит дальнейшее более содержательное общение. В таких случаях язык выступает в своей фатической функции (ассоциативная функция, функция контакта), как например, англичане в разговоре о погоде. Фатическая функция является основной в приветствиях, поздравлениях, в дежурных разговорах о городском транспорте и других общеизвестных вещах. При этом собеседники как бы чувствуют своего рода нормы допустимой глубины или остроты таких разговоров: например, упоминание о вчерашней телевизионной передаче не перерастает в разговор по существу содержания или художественного решения программы. Иными словами, общение идет ради общения, оно сознательно или обычно неосознанно направлено на установление или поддержание контакта. Содержание и форма контактоустанавливающего общения варьируются в зависимости от пола, возраста, социального положения, взаимоотношений говорящих, однако в целом такие речи стандартны и минимально информативны. Ср. клишированность поздравлений, начальных и конечных фраз в письмах, избыточность обращений по имени при разговоре двоих и вообще высокую предсказуемость текстов, выполняющих фатическую функцию. Однако информативная недостаточность таких разговоров отнюдь не означает, что эти разговоры не нужны или не важны людям и обществу в целом. Сама стандартность, поверхностность, легкость фатических разговоров помогает устанавливать контакты между людьми, преодолевать разобщенность и некоммуникабельность. Характерно, что детская речь в общении и с родителями и с ровесниками выполняет вначале именно фатическую функцию, т.к. дети стремятся к контакту, не зная еще что бы такое им сказать или услышать друг от друга.
The magical or “spellcasting” function of the tongue is used in religious ritual, in the practice of spellcasters, psychics, etc. Manifestations of the magical function include taboos, taboo substitutions, and vows of silence in some religious traditions; conspiracies, prayers, oaths, including deification and oath; in religions, the Scriptures are sacred texts, that is, texts to which a divine origin is attributed: they may be considered, for example, to have been inspired, dictated or written by a higher power. A common feature of the attitude towards a word as a magical force is the unconventional interpretation of a linguistic sign, i.e. the idea that a word is not a conventional designation of some object, but a part of it, therefore, for example, pronouncing a ritual name can evoke the presence of someone who it is named, and to make a mistake in a verbal ritual is to offend, anger or harm higher powers. Often the name acted as a talisman, i.e. as an amulet or spell that protects against misfortune. In ancient times, when choosing a name for a born child, a person often seemed to play hide and seek with the spirits: then he kept the “real” name secret (and the child grew up under a different, not “secret” name); then they named the children the names of animals, fish, plants; then they gave it a “bad name” so that evil spirits would not see its bearer as valuable prey. The future prophet, founder of Zoroastrianism Zarathushtra (Zarathustra) received this amulet name at birth: in the Avestan language the word Zarathustra meant “old camel.”
The aesthetic function of language is a function of aesthetic influence, an aesthetic attitude towards language. This means that speech (namely the speech itself, and not what is being communicated) can be perceived as beautiful or ugly, i.e. as an aesthetic object. The aesthetic function of language is most noticeable in literary texts, but the scope of its manifestations is wider. An aesthetic attitude to language is possible in colloquial speech, friendly letters, in journalistic, oratorical, popular scientific speech - to the extent that for speakers speech ceases to be only a form, only a shell of content, but receives independent aesthetic value. In Chekhov’s story “Men”, a woman reads the Gospel every day and does not understand much, “but the holy words touched her to tears, and she uttered words such as “asche” and “dondezhe” with a sweet sinking heart.” The aesthetic function of language is usually associated with an organization of text that in some way updates and transforms the usual usage of words and thereby disrupts the automatism of everyday speech (colloquial, business, newspaper). The transformation may affect lexical and grammatical semantics (metaphor, metonymy and other types of figurative use of words and forms); further, the syntactic structure of utterances can be updated. The aesthetic function of language expands the world of human aesthetic relations. At the same time, speech transformations that can make a text aesthetically significant disrupt the automatism and erasure of speech, renew it and thereby open up new expressive possibilities in the language. Sometimes the functions of language are divided into social functions and intrastructural ones, which are a manifestation of the essence and nature of language. The latter include the nominative function, determined by the ability of a word to serve as a means of naming objects and phenomena. The name of a thing becomes its sign, which allows you to operate with the thought of a thing: to derive concepts about objects, reflect their essential properties, and build judgments and conclusions. There is also a division of the functions of language into two leading ones - communicative with its private representations and significative, or cognitive also with its private representations (N.V. Solonik). As can be seen from the characteristics of the functions of language, many of them are in one way or another connected with thinking. For example, the cognitive function connects language with human mental activity; the structure and dynamics of thought are materialized in units of language. F. de Saussure compares language to a sheet of paper, where thought is its front side and sound is its back. You cannot cut the front side without cutting the back. In the same way, in language it is impossible to separate thought from the sounds of speech, which are the natural material side of language. The study of the problem of the relationship between language and thinking in science takes place from different points of view and this problem is solved in different ways. The only thing that can be considered generally accepted to one degree or another is that language and thinking do not form an identity or unity, but are relatively independent phenomena that are connected by complex dialectical relationships. These relationships manifest themselves when considering this problem from genetic, psychophysiological and epistemological points of view. Thus, the leading function of language - communicative (communication function) - follows from the social nature of language, cognitive, constructive and accumulative - from the connection of language with thinking, nominative - from the connection of language with the surrounding reality.
Agafonova
Linguistics Ticket No. 2
·Language is the most important means of human communication. Language is a necessary condition for the existence and development of human society. The main function of language is to be a means of communication.
·Language serves society in absolutely all spheres of human activity. Therefore, it cannot be identified with any other social phenomenon. Language is neither a form of culture, nor the ideology of a particular class, nor a superstructure in the broadest sense of the word. This feature of the language follows entirely from the features of its main function - be a means of communication.
· An essential feature of language as social phenomenon his ability stands out reflect and express public consciousness.
· When characterizing language as a social phenomenon, one should also take into account its dependence on changes in the state of human society. Language is capable of reflecting changes in the life of society in all its spheres, which significantly distinguishes it from all other social phenomena.
· Language depends on the nature of economic formations and the form of the state. For example, the era of feudalism was characterized by the disintegration of countries into many small cells. Each feud and monastery with its surrounding villages represented the state in miniature. This structure of society contributed to the emergence of small territorial dialects. Local territorial dialects were the main form of language existence in feudal society.
· Differences in the social organization of society in the past may be reflected in the state of dialects existing at the present time. P. S. Kuznetsov notes that in the territory of our old southern provinces (Central Black Earth Strip), where landownership was especially developed, a large number of small local dialects have been preserved.
· Each socio-economic formation creates a certain way of life of society, which is manifested not in one particular phenomenon, but in a whole complex of mutually determined and interconnected phenomena. Of course, this unique way of life is reflected in the language.
· Human society does not represent an absolutely homogeneous group. There is differentiation caused by various reasons. This may be differentiation along class, estate, property and professional grounds, which is naturally reflected in language.
· Along with specific professional vocabulary associated with the needs of a particular industry, special vocabulary appears, typical of various argots, jargons, etc., cf., for example, student, thief, soldier, and other jargons.
· Social differentiation of language usually affects only the area of vocabulary. There are, however, isolated cases when it also covers the area of the grammatical structure of the language.
· Class differentiation of society can be the reason for the creation of significant differences between languages, or rather, styles of languages.
·Demographic changes can also be reflected in language in certain ways. For example, the influx of rural populations into cities due to the development of industry had a certain impact on the literary language. Researchers of the history of the Russian literary language note that in the 50-60s there was some looseness in the verbal use of non-literary words and phrases and, in particular, elements of vernacular.
·A demographic factor such as high or low population density can facilitate or hinder the spread of phonetic changes, grammatical innovations, new words, etc.
· Population movement, expressed in relocation to new places, can contribute to the mixing of dialects or increased dialect fragmentation.
·The invasion of large masses of conquerors and the seizure of territories with a foreign-speaking population can also be the cause of language changes. Intensive colonization of various countries around the world greatly contributed to the spread of languages such as English and Spanish.
· Mass penetration of a foreign-speaking population into territory occupied by another people can lead to the loss of the aboriginal language. The history of various peoples provides numerous examples of such cases, cf., for example, the disappearance of the Gauls in France, the Celtiberians in Spain.
· Various social movements and views have a noticeable influence on the nature of the language. During the years of the revolution, a conscious appeal to jargon and argot was cultivated as the “language of the proletariat,” as opposed to the old “bourgeois intelligentsia language.” A wide stream of various jargons, argotisms and provincialisms poured into the literary speech of the first post-revolutionary years. These layers of vocabulary also penetrated into fiction.
·Many outstanding writers, playwrights, and artists played an important role in the development of one or another literary language. This is, for example, the role of Pushkin and a whole galaxy of classics of Russian literature in Russia, the role of Dante in Italy, Cervantes in Spain, Chaucer and Shakespeare in England, etc.
· The growth of culture contributes to an increase in the functions of the literary language. The expansion of the functions of the literary language and its dissemination among the broad masses of the population necessitates the establishment of uniform spelling and grammatical norms.
·Among the most characteristic features of the language as a social phenomenon also applies the fact that society creates language, controls what has been created and consolidates it in the system of communication means.
· Every word and every form is created first by some individual. This happens because the creation of a certain word or form requires the manifestation of initiative, which, due to a number of psychological reasons, cannot be demonstrated by all members of a given society. However, the initiative of an individual is not alien to other members of society. Therefore, what is created by an individual can either be accepted and approved, or rejected by society.
· Despite the huge variety of intralinguistic and external linguistic factors that determine the fate of a newly emerged word or form, which cannot even be described in detail within the framework of this section, the decisive role always belongs to society. Society creates and shapes language in the true sense of the word. Language is a product of society. For this reason, more than any other phenomenon serving society, it deserves the name of a social phenomenon.
Question 12. Language and thinking
Language, being a tool of communication, is also a means of exchanging thoughts; the question naturally arises about the relationship between language and thinking.
Regarding this issue, there are two opposing and equally incorrect trends: 1) the separation of language from thinking and thinking from language and 2) the identification of language and thinking.
Language is the property of the collective; it communicates between members of the collective and allows them to communicate and store the necessary information about any phenomena in the material and spiritual life of a person. And language as a collective property has been evolving and existing for centuries.
Thinking develops and is updated much faster than language, but without language thinking is only a “thing for itself,” and a thought not expressed in language is not that clear, distinct thought that helps a person comprehend the phenomena of reality, develop and improve science. This is, rather, some kind of foresight, and not actual vision, this is not knowledge in the exact sense of the word.
A person can always use ready-made language material (words, sentences) as “formulas” or “matrices” not only for the known, but also for the new. The Greek philosopher Plato once spoke about this ( IV century BC e.). “It seems funny to me, Hermogenes, that things become clear if you depict them through letters and syllables; however, this is inevitably so” (“Cratylus”) ¹.
If thinking cannot do without language, then language without thinking is impossible. We speak and write while thinking, and we try to express our thoughts more accurately and clearly in language. It would seem that in those cases when the words in speech do not belong to the speaker, when, for example, a reciter reads someone’s work or an actor plays a role, then where is the thinking? But it is hardly possible to imagine actors, readers, even announcers as parrots and starlings who pronounce but do not speak. Not only artists and readers, but also everyone who “speaks someone else’s text” interprets it in their own way and presents it to the listener. The same applies to quotes, the use of proverbs and sayings in ordinary speech: they are convenient because they are successful and laconic, but their choice and the meaning embedded in them are a trace and consequence of the speaker’s thoughts. In general, our ordinary speech is a set of quotations from a language known to us, the words and expressions of which we usually use in our speech (not to mention the sound system and grammar, where “new” cannot be invented).
When we think and want to convey to someone what we have realized, we put our thoughts into the form of language.
Thus, thoughts are born on the basis of language and are fixed in it. However, this does not mean at all that language and thinking are identical.
The laws of thinking are studied by logic. Logic distinguishes concepts with their characteristics, propositions with their members and conclusions with their forms. There are other significant units in the language: morphemes, words, sentences, which do not coincide with the indicated logical division.
Many grammarians and logicians of the 19th and 20th centuries. tried to establish parallelism between concepts and words, between judgments and sentences. However, it is easy to see that not all words express concepts (for example, interjections express feelings and desires, but not concepts; pronouns only indicate, and do not name or express the concepts themselves; proper names do not express concepts, etc.) and not all sentences express judgments (for example, interrogative and imperative sentences). In addition, the members of the judgment do not coincide with the members of the sentence.
The laws of logic are universal laws, since people all think the same way, but express these thoughts in different languages in different ways. The national characteristics of languages have nothing to do with the logical content of a statement; the same applies to the lexical, grammatical and phonetic form of an utterance in the same language; it can be varied in the language, but correspond to the same logical unit, for example: This is a huge success And This is a huge success. This is their home And This is their home, I wave the flag And I'm waving the flag and so on.
With regard to the connection between language and thinking, one of the main issues is the type of abstraction that permeates the entire language, but is different in its structural tiers, lexical, grammatical and phonetic, which determines the specificity of vocabulary, grammar and phonetics and the special qualitative difference between their units and the relationships between them.
Language and thinking form a unity, since without thinking there can be no language and thinking without language is impossible. Language and thinking arose historically simultaneously in the process of human labor development.
