.png)
UDC 81:1
https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.2-23.003
Pashkov Sergey M.,
Candidate of Philology, Docent,
Associate Professor of Humanities, Education and Educational
Technologies Department
Herzen Russian State Pedagogical University (Volkhov Branch)
e-mail: s.p.n1980@mail.ru
The article accentuates the importance of anthropocentrism and holism as basic methodological principles of modern linguistics and instrumental in studying language functions. They are considered in the context of essential human characteristics. Their correlation is viewed as a common ground for language function modeling, that is language functions identification, nomenclature, hierarchy etc. In Modern science and philosophy religiosity in its broad sense (a system of ideals) is regarded as an intrinsic human characteristic. Taking this approach into account the author of the article substantiates the presence of the religious language function that is defined as an essential language property to represent varied religious reality and provide personality fundamental self-affirmation in eternity. The attempted is taken to compare the religious language function with cognitive, communicative, and interpretative ones. The etymology of the lexeme ‘function’ given, the author states that man is constituted (via cognition, communication and interpretation) and completed in language (via religion). It is shown that religious language function is in correlation with the teleological aspect of anthropocentrism.
Keywords: anthropocentrism, holism, language, language function, man, religion.
References
1. Kubryakova E.S. Evoliutsiia lingvisticheskikh idei vo vtoroi polovine XX veka: (opyt paradigmal’nogo analiza) // Iazyk i nauka kontsa XX veka / pod red. Yu.S. Stepanova. Moscow: RGGU, 1995. S. 144–238.
2. Benveniste E. Obshchaia lingvistika. Moscow: Progress, 1974. 444 s.
3. Bally Ch. Iazyk i zhizn’. Moscow: Editorial URSS, 2018. 230 s.
4. Guillaume G. Printsipy teoreticheskoi lingvistiki. Moscow: Progress, 1992. 224 s.
5. Knyazeva E.N. Transdistsiplinarnye strategii issledovanii // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta. 2011. No. 10 (112). S. 193–201.
6. Ebzeeva Y.N. QS subject focus summit 2020 on modern languages and linguistics: Languages and migration in a globalized world // Russian Journal of Linguistics. 2021. Vol. 25. No. 2. P. 299–316. URL: https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-2021-25-2-299-316.
7. Boldyrev N.N. Antropotsentricheskaia sushchnost’ iazyka v ego funktsiiakh, edinitsakh i kategoriiakh // Voprosy kognitivnoi lingvistiki. 2015. No. 1 (42). S. 5–12.
8. Ramishvili G.V. Iazykoznanie v krugu nauk o cheloveke // Voprosy filosofii. 1981. No. 6. S. 104–110.
9. Shakhovsky V.I. Dissonans ekologichnosti v kommunikativnom kruge: chelovek, iazyk, emotsii: monografiia. Volgograd: IP Polikarpov I.L., 2016. 504 s.
10. Slyusareva N.A. Problemy funktsional’nogo sintaksisa sovremennogo angliiskogo iazyka. Moscow: Nauka, 1981. 205 s.
11. Kubryakova E.S. V poiskakh sushchnosti iazyka: kognitivnye issledovaniia. Moscow: Znak, 2012. 208 s.
12. Boldyrev N.N. Kontseptual’noe prostranstvo kognitivnoi lingvistiki // Voprosy kognitivnoi lingvistiki. 2004. No. 1. S. 18–36.
13. Naidenova N.S. Sovremennaia lingvistika v postsekuliarnoi perspektive // Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. 2018. T. 22. No. 4. S. 998–1000. DOI 10.22363/2312-9182-2018-22-4-988-1000.
14. Nikolesсu B. The hidden third and the multiple splendor of being // Transdistsiplinarnost’ v filosofii i nauke: podkhody, problemy, perspektivy / pod red. V. Bazhanova, R.V. Sholtsa. Moscow: Navigator, 2015. S. 62–79.
15. Osnovy religiovedeniia: uchebnik / Yu.F. Borunkov, I.N. Yablokov, K.I. Nikonov i dr.; pod red. I.N. Yablokova. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola, 2005. 508 s.
16. Ilyin I.A. Aksiomy religioznogo opyta. Moscow: ACT, 2002. 586 s.
17. Ukhtomsky A.A. Intuitsiia sovesti: pis’ma. Zapisnye knizhki. Zametki na poliakh. St. Petersburg: Peterburgskii pisatel’, 1996. 528 s.
18. Ukhtomsky A.A. Dominanta. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2002. 448 s.
19. Losev Α.F. Dialektika mifa / sost., podgot. teksta, obshch. red. A.A. Takho-Godi, V.P. Troitskogo. Moscow: Mysl’, 2001. 558 s.
20. Postovalova V.I. Nauka o iazyke v svete ideala tsel’nogo znaniia: v poiskakh integral’nykh paradigm. Moscow: LENAND, 2016. 272 s.
21. Benveniste E. Slovar’ indoevropeiskikh sotsial’nykh terminov. Moscow: Progress-Univers, 1995. 456 s.
22. Bibikhin V.V. Mir. Iazyk filosofii. St. Petersburg: Azbuka, 2020. 448 s.
23. Yakobson R. Lingvistika i poetika // Strukturalizm: “za” i “protiv”. Moscow: Progress, 1975. S. 193–230.
24. Vargina E.I. Nauchnyi tekst i ego vozdeistvie: (na materiale angliiskogo iazyka). St. Petersburg: Izd-vo St. Peterburg. gos. un-ta, 2004. 212 s.
25. Humboldt W. von. O razlichenii organizmov chelovecheskogo iazyka i o vliianii etogo razlichiia na umstvennoe razvitie chelovecheskogo roda: vvedenie vo vseobshchee iazykoznanie. Moscow: Librokom, 2019. 376 s.
26. Karasik V.I. Iazykovye kliuchi. Moscow: Gnozis, 2009. 406 s.
27. Boldyrev N.N. K voprosu ob integrativnoi teorii reprezentatsii znanii v iazyke // Kognitivnye issledovaniia iazyka. 2012. No. 12. S. 33–43.
28. Chernigovskaya T.V. Cheshirskaia ulybka kota Shredingera: iazyk i soznanie. Moscow: Iazyki slavianskoi kul’tury, 2013. 448 s.
29. Vorkachev S.G. Liubov’ kak lingvokul’turnyi kontsept. Moscow: Gnozis, 2007. 284 s.