DICHOTOMOUS DYADS OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS AS A MEANS TO EXTEND KEY VALUES OF THE MILITARY SUBCULTURE
https://doi.org/10.24833/2410-2423-2020-1-21-34-40
Abstract
This paper dwells on the worldview specifics of the military subculture representatives as reflected by dichotomous dyads of phraseological units. Given the phraseological fund is the main material for analysis of a national mindset specifics, the authors emphasize that ethnic phraseology and socially-marked military phraseology have a great deal in common. Phraseological imagery makes it possible to consider peculiarities of the military personnel’s worldview, to reveal moral attitudes and values of the military.
Contemporary linguistics stresses out the need for a comprehensive study of the military subculture mentality as an integral part of the national culture. This issue has defined the authors’ aspiration to record the system of spiritual and moral dominants of the military ethos on the basis of socially-marked dichotomous dyads of phraseology. The cognitive field of “War” military idiomatics includes phrases reflecting ideals and anti-samples of military subculture, the spectrum of approved and reprehensible behavior, as well as military lore singularities.
The national language phraseological units, extending key values of the military subculture as a nuclear component of the military society, register professional dominants and obvious anti-values of the military milieu. This article concludes that socially-marked phraseological units with special symbolic potential possess explicit evaluation and expression, and reflect stereotypes of mass linguistic consciousness.
Contemporary linguistics stresses out the need for a comprehensive study of the military subculture mentality as an integral part of the national culture. This issue has defined the authors’ aspiration to record the system of spiritual and moral dominants of the military ethos on the basis of socially-marked dichotomous dyads of phraseology. The cognitive field of “War” military idiomatics includes phrases reflecting ideals and anti-samples of military subculture, the spectrum of approved and reprehensible behavior, as well as military lore singularities.
The national language phraseological units, extending key values of the military subculture as a nuclear component of the military society, register professional dominants and obvious anti-values of the military milieu. This article concludes that socially-marked phraseological units with special symbolic potential possess explicit evaluation and expression, and reflect stereotypes of mass linguistic consciousness.
About the Authors
A. S. Romanov
Military University of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Aleksander S. Romanov − PhD in Philology, English Department assistant professor, Military University of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation (Moscow, Russia). Spheres of research and professional interest: sociolinguistics, linguoculturology, psycholinguistics, cognitive linguistics.
14 B. Sadovaya Street, Moscow, Russia, 123001
Y. V. Lupanova
Military University of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Yekaterina V. Lupanova − PhD in Philology, English Department lecturer, Military University of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation (Moscow, Russia). Spheres of research and professional interest: linguoculturology, English phraseology, psycholinguistics, ethnolinguistics.
14 B. Sadovaya Street, Moscow, Russia, 123001
References
1. Arnol’d I.V. 2010, Stilistika. Sovremenny angliisky iazyk: uchebnik dlia vuzov [Stylistics. Modern English: textbook for universities]. 10th edition, Moscow, Flinta: Nauka, 384 p.
2. Kornilov O.A. 2003, Iazykovye kartiny mira kak proizvodnye natsionalnykh mentalitetov [Language pictures of the world as derivatives of national mentality], Moscow, CHeRo, 349 p.
3. Lupanova YE.V. Frazeologizmy voennoy tematiki kak sredstvo sozdaniia otritsatelnogo obraza predstavitelia anglo-amerikanskogo armeyskogo sotsiuma [Military phraseological units as a means for creating a negative image of the British-American military society representative]. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. N.I. Lobachevskogo, 2018. No 4. pp. 201-205 (in Russian).
4. Maslova V.A. 2001, Lingvokulturologiia: ucheb. Posobie dlia stud. vyssh. ucheb. zavedeniy [Linguoculturology: textbook for students of higher education], Moscow, Akademiya, 208 p.
5. Romanov A.S. 2017, Etnicheskie stereotypy armeyskoy subkul’turnoy sredy SSHA v znakakh iazyka i kultury [Ethnic stereotypes of the U.S. military subcultural environment in language and culture signs], Moscow, Voenny universitet, 231 p.
6. Sudzilovsky G.A. 1973, Sleng – chto eto takoe? Angliyskaia prostorechnaia voennaia leksika [Slang, what is it? English vernacular military vocabulary], Moscow, Voyenizdat, 182 p.
7. Teliia V.N. 1998, Konnotatsiia // YAzykoznanie. Bolshoy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar’ [Connotation // Linguistics. Large Encyclopedic Dictionary], Moscow, Bolshaia Rossiyskaia entsiklopediia, 685 p.
8. Teliia V.N. 1996, Russkaia frazeologiia. Semanticheskiy, pragmaticheskiy i lingvokulturologicheskiy aspekty [Russian phraseology. Semantic, pragmatic and linguistic-cultural aspects], Moscow, Iazyki russkoy kul’tury, 288 p.
9. Teliia V.N. 1981, Tipy iazykovykh znacheniy. Sviazannoe znachenie slova v iazyke [Types of language values. The associated meaning of a word in a language], Moscow, Nauka, 269 p.
10. Shevchuk V.N. 1980, Leksikologiia I frazeologiia angliyskogo iazyka: kurs lektsiy [Lexicology and Phraseology of English: course of lectures], Moscow, Voennyy Krasnoznamenny Institut, 172 p.
11. Ammer C. The American Heritage dictionary of idioms. 1st ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1997. 1191 p.
12. Ammer C. The Facts On File dictionary of clichés. 2nd ed. N.Y.: Infobase Publishing, 2006. 534 p.
13. Dickson P. War Slang: America fighting words and phrases since the Civil War. 2nd ed. Dulles, Virginia: Brassey’sInc, 2003. 428 p.
14. Fergusson R. Shorter Dictionary of Catch Phrases. From the work of Eric Partridge and Paul Beale / ed. by R. Fergusson. New York, NY: Routledge, 1994. 176 p.
15. Spears A.R. Dictionary of American Idioms and Phrasal Verbs. McGraw-Hill’s Companies, 2005. 1080 p.
16. Sgt Brandi. Available at: http://www.sgtbrandi.com (accessed 21 August 2019).
Review
For citations:
Romanov A.S., Lupanova Y.V. DICHOTOMOUS DYADS OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS AS A MEANS TO EXTEND KEY VALUES OF THE MILITARY SUBCULTURE. Linguistics & Polyglot Studies. 2020;21(1):34-40. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24833/2410-2423-2020-1-21-34-40
Views:
740
Email this article 