.png)
https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.1-17.009
Kiklewicz Aleksander,
Doctor habil., professor
Faculty of Humanities, Institute of Journalism and Social Communication
University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn (Poland)
(Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie)
e-mail: akiklewicz@gmail.com
The subject of this article is a theoretical analysis of the main problem of modern anthropological linguistics, i.e. description of so named language world view. The author presents the main points of this area of linguistics, showing its limitations and contradictions. One of the objects of reflection is ambivalent linguis-tic Edward Sapir’s theory; Sapir, on the one hand, was a supporter of using linguistic data in sociological and anthropological research, but, on the other hand, was an opponent of the use of anthropological approach to linguistics. The author examines the phenomenon fact determination in the relationship between language and culture, showing the impossibility of the unambiguous culturological interpretation of linguistic facts in the field of phonetics, morphology, word derivation, vocabulary and syntax. The author considers six arguments in favor of the fact that the cultural interpretation of the linguistic data is unfounded without reference to the data of sociology and historical, as well as contrastive anthropology.
Keywords: anthropological linguistics, linguoculturology, ethnolinguistics, language world view, language vs. Culture.
References
1. Karasik, V. Yazykovye klyuchi. Moscow: Gnozis, 2009, 406 p.
2. Sepir, E. Izbrannye trudy po yazykoznaniyu i kul'turologii. Moscow: Progress, 1993, 654 p.
3. Kiklewicz, A. Edward Sapir kontra lingwistyka kulturowa. O granicach metody antropologicznej w językoznawstwie. Z. Nowożenowa (Ed.). Tekst jako kultura — kultura jako tekst. Gdańsk, 2011, pp. 330–341.
4. Kiklewicz, A. V kakom smysle yazyk determinirovan kul'turoy? O predmete i granitsakh lingvokul'turologii (II). Przegląd Rusycystyczny, 2016, 1 (153), pp. 81–109.
5. Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.J. Kultury i organizacje. Zaprogramowanie umysłu. Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne, 2007, 408 p.
6. Zaretskiy, E.V. Bezlichnye konstruktsii v russkom yazyke: kul'turologicheskie i tipologicheskie aspekty (v sravnenii s angliyskim i drugimi indoevropeyskimi yazykami). Astrakhan': Publ. house “Astrakhanskiy university”, 2008, 564 p.
7. Bunchuk, T. Khoronit' po-repnomu: k etnolingvisticheskoy inter-pretatsii severnorusskoy frazeologicheskoy edinitsy. Antropologicheskiy forum, 2010, 13 (Online), pp. 183–190.
8. Ter-Minasova S.G. Yazyk i mezhkul'turnaya kommunikatsiya. Moscow: Publ. House “Moscow University”, 2004, 350 p.
9. Bosco, F.M. Cognitive Pragmatics / Brown, K. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam / Boston / Heidelberg etc., 2006, pp. 546–552.
10. Vereshchagin, E.M., Kostomarov, V.G. Lingvostranovedcheskaya teoriya slova. Moscow: Russkiy yazyk, 1980, 320 p.
11. Pavlova, A.V. Mozhno li sudit' o kul'ture naroda po dannym ego yazyka? Antropologicheskiy forum, 2012, 16 (Online), pp. 3–60.
12. Kovshova, M.L. Lingvokul'turologicheskiy metod vo frazeologii. Moskva: URSS, 2013.
13. Shmelev, A.D. Yazyk i kul'tura: est' li tochki soprikosnoveniya? [URL]: http://www.ruslang.ru/doc/shmelev2013.pdf. – 2016 (access date 03.11.2014).
14. Pavlova, A.V. Lingvokul'turologiya v Rossii: “za” & “protiv”. Przegląd Wschodnioeuropejski, 2015, VII/2, pp. 201–221.