Referential encoding of cult symbols in the paroemias of language systems featuring different structures and belonging to eastern linguocultures

The study focuses on linguocultural and psycho-linguistic analysis of mechanisms employed to encode archetypal images within the process of verbal representation. The most representative in this case are considered paroemiological units containing cult components or mythologems, which are the result of the top level of categorization and associative abstraction. For a case of typical languages featuring different structures employed to present various bases of reflexive reality categorization, we have opted for Turkic and Sino-Tibetan (Kazakh and Chinese) languages. The relevance of the article relies on an attempt taken in order to fill the gap in the comparative study of verbalization processes for archetypal cult semantemes in linguocultures that are based on nature-, anthropo-, as well as sociocentric positions of mythologization.

The basis of a consistent interlanguage linguocultural comparison involving Chinese and Kazakh paroemias, helps reveal the interdependence of referential encoding based on the figurative and emotive aspects of metaphorical transference, as well as the initial historical-cultural, areal and existential components of the worldview. The aim of this study is to determine the typological similarity and ethno-cultural specifics of the actualization mechanisms for cult and mythological components in language systems of different structures.The authors conclude that the specific morphotype of  Sino-Tibetan  languages  determines  socio  and anthropocentric models of encoding cult and mythological components, whereas the dissected type of categorizing

The paroemiological units were selected subject to a stratified sampling in the corpus of national languages, in view of the frequency and accentuation criterion of the structure mythonymic elements. The comprehensive methodology of the study, including comparative structural, typological, historical and etymological methods, is enhanced through separate operations of hermeneutic and interpretive analysis, which contributes to the disclosure of consituative associates.

The authors conclude that the specific morphotype of Sino-Tibetan languages determines socio- and anthropocentric models of encoding cult and mythological components, whereas the dissected type of categorizing agglutinative Turkic languages points at the primacy of nature-centric models of metaphorization, despite the historical, cultural and existential similarity.

1. Алексеев В. М. В старом Китае: Дневники путешествия 1907 г. М.: Изд-во восточной литературы, 1958. 312 с.

2. Бредихин С.Н. Особенности порождения и декодирования концептуализируемых понятий в иероглифических лингвокультурах // Медиаи межкультурная коммуникация в европейском контексте. Ставрополь: СКФУ, 2014. С. 269–272.

3. Бредихин С. Н., Пелевина Н. А. Лингвокогнитивные механизмы актуализации и концептуализации идиокомпонентов картины мира. Ставрополь: Параграф, 2021. 172 с.

4. Валиханов Ч. Ч. Избранные произведения. Алма-Ата: Казгослитиздат, 1958. 643 с.

5. Гумилёв Л. Н. Древние тюрки. Москва: Айрис-пресс, 2002. 555 с.

6. Кожахметова Х. К., Жайсакова Р. Е., Кожахметова Ш. О. Казахско-русский фразеологический словарь. Алма-Ата: Мектеп, 1988. 219 с.

7. Кондратбаев А. Казахский эпос и тюркология. Алма-Ата: Наука, 1987. 364 с.

8. Ошанин И. М. Большой китайско-русский словарь в 4 томах. Т. 1. М.: Наука, 1983. 551 с.

9. Рысбаева Г. К. Этнолингвистические исследования культовых фразеологизмов в тюркских языках (по материалам на казахском и киргизском языках): автореф. дис. ... д-ра филол. наук. Бишкек, 2017. 42 с.

10. Ю-лань Ф. Краткая история китайской философии. Санкт-Петербург: Евразия, 1998. 373 с.